The existence of negative externalities or tradeoffs does not inherently imply incompetence.

I remember reading that the USACE said the NOLA levees would not adequately protect against a category 5 hurricane but the powers that be didn’t think the added cost for a more robust design was worth the risk. If true, it doesn’t imply USACE was incompetent but that we live in an uncertain world with tough tradeoffs.

More specifically, tidal flow obeys Froude similarity, not Reynolds. Matching the model's Froude number to the real Bay's requires enough depth for gravity waves and tides to scale correctly, which the vertical exaggeration provides.

But the distortion makes the flow too efficient, so copper strips are added throughout to achieve the right frictional resistance.

- flood management is not easy to monetize so there is not much incentive for private industry. The timelines for design decisions (100 year, 500 year) often don’t mate well with private incentives

- it crosses many property boundaries which makes it hard to manage unless you have the rights of a government

- much of the work is still done by private companies but managed by the government, just like other infrastructure works like roads, bridges etc.

When I saw a demo, they had an easter egg of a Loch-Ness type monster in it.

There's also a topographical map of the harbour at St Ives showground but it's purely non-hydrographical. But it's almost disappeared now through neglect.