« Something to Cheer Me Up (and You Too) | Main | Exhausted - On Hiatus »

Friday, September 23, 2005

Evacuation and Hysteria

Okay, I've been thinking this, but Dean Esmay said it. I've been wondering how necessary it is to evacuate Houston. Galveston I can understand because it's built on a barrier island. The whole purpose of a barrier island is to take the brunt of a hurricane for the mainland.

But Houston is pretty well inland. And it's a huge city with a lot of people sitting practically still in traffic while Rita clips along at about 11 MPH or so. And they may be still sitting there when the storm hits. This almost happened here in Pensacola with Hurricane Opal ten years ago. It strengthened overnight to, I think, a very strong Category 4 storm. People went into hysterics (thanks to radio DJs and such screeching, "This is the big one!") and with the storm very close they attempted to flee and clogged the roads. Fortunately, the storm weakened before making landfall and went slightly to the east of Pensacola. But if that had not happened, there would have been a lot of people stranded on the road with a Category 4 hurricane bearing down on them.

Here is my opinion on evacuation. Unless you live below sea level (like in New Orleans), live near enough to the water that storm surge and flooding is a threat, live in a trailer or unsound house or have medical issues that make loss of power or water life threatening, you should probably stay put. This is why I stay put...because none of the above applies to me. If a Category 5 storm were to ever threaten the area, I would certainly consider evacuating. But the thing is, these storms usually don't maintain that strength for very long and can weaken considerably before landfall (like Opal did then and Rita is doing now). But then you have hurricanes like Camille, Katrina and Andrew, which did not weaken. It's a tough call, but if you decide to evacuate, you can't decide at the last minute because then it's too late. You have to make that decision days ahead of time.

Update: I thought it fitting that I should highlight the post that Dean linked to on BeldarBlog. Perhaps I've done a poor job expressing my point here. Perhaps my use of the word "hysteria" was unnecessarily offensive. So here are some excerpts from Beldar's post explaining why he stayed rather than getting stuck in gridlocked traffic:

IMHO, local media have done a very bad job of distinguishing between "mandatory evacuation" areas (truly coastal counties, storm-surge areas) and elsewhere. Some of the adjacent coastal county officials are already bitching (publicly and unproductively) at Houston/Harris County officials for "ignoring the plan," which was to get the coastal zones evac'd first. Since so many Houstonians are also on the road ("early," in the view of those adjacent county folks), congestion is much worse for everyone. But I think the "fault" for that, if fault there be, can be laid more at the feet of the breathless media rather than Houston/Harris County officials. And ordinary folks are hyper-receptive to the hype because of Katrina.

If folks have actually LISTENED to what Mayor Bill White has been saying on TV, he's only been twisting arms for the mandatory evac zone folks to leave, plus those otherwise at high risk (e.g., hospital/nursing homes, those in mobile homes, those in houses repeatedly flooded by bayous in past storms). But I'm inferring that Mayor White — a friend of mine from law school, who'd probably like to be Sen. or Gov. White someday if a Democrat can ever get elected again in a state-wide Texas race — doesn't want to DISCOURAGE rank-and-file Houstonians from evacuating either. So neither he nor the Harris County officials have been explicitly calling for high-ground Houstonians to sit tight for now. And thus, when amplified by the media megaphones and imprecision in the media's reporting, Mayor White saying anything at all about evacuation by anyone comes across to most people like "RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!" [...]

There's essentially nothing on the local media to remind folks that, for example, Houston isn't dependent on vulnerable levies, below sea level, and in between a huge lake and the Mississippi. The man-on-the-street interviews with those planning to stay are always spun to make them look crazy.[...]

I've seen three major hurricanes since I moved to Houston, plus a buncha lesser but still impressive tropical storms, and I *DO* respect Mother Nature. But I'd rather be emailing you from my living room right now than out-of-gas on a gridlocked interstate, and I think I have a rational basis for concluding that I'm also safer here.

I apologize if the tone of this post has offended those who evacuated. I'm just expressing my opinion here based on my own experiences.

Trackback Pings

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Evacuation and Hysteria:

>>Just in Case You Have a Time Machine from Thinklings
Bill, et. al. — Y’all shouldn’t have evacuated. Don’t forget you have to hit at least 88mph for the flux capacitor to kick in. ... [Read More]

Tracked on September 24, 2005 6:48 PM

Comments

Well, it's not just rain that hurricanes bring, but wind. And at 124mph, that's a bit like getting bombarded by tornados nonstop. If you live, like a lot of folks in the outlying areas of Houston, you probably have lots of trees in the area. And if your home isn't brick or is old or . . .
You get the picture.

I think it's sort of weird that we just saw all that destruction in New Orleans and now we're second guessing people wanting to evacuate Texas when the officials are saying "This is a very big storm."
Better safe than sorry. I'd rather Monday Morning Quarterback it after the storm has passed. I do hope they've all evacuated for no reason. But if they hadn't and the storm does the damage expected, everyone would be saying "Well, why didn't they get out when they were told to?"

Posted on September 23, 2005 at 9:30 PM

Hi Jared,

I understand what you mean. I hunkered down during Ivan and it was one of the longest, most frightening nights of my life. I live in a brick house, but I was mainly scared of the windows being blown out (which is why I'm getting hurricane shutters).

New Orleans definitely needed to evacuate because they are below sea level. Anyone who lives close to the water needs to evacuate. And anyone in a trailer or an old house needs to evacuate. But I just don't think everyone necessarily needs to evacuate. It depends on the situation.

Don't get me wrong...I'm not opposed to people evacuating. I just think people should think carefully about the necessity of it and make sure they don't all flee at the last minute. I guess this is one of those things everyone has to decide for themselves.

Posted on September 23, 2005 at 9:51 PM

Suppose you are in a new, brick house in a non-flooded area. Now suppose your electricity is blown out and you are trapped because the roads out of town are in flooded areas.

I just think it's a little odd to be talking about hysteria when we're still talking about lives that could have been saved if people had evacuated before Katrina hit.

My friend Rob T. lives in NW Houston, which did not receive the brunt of the storm. But his gate was blown off. My in-laws's in the same area have trees down all over their property. That's a powerful wind. There are lots of trees in NW Houston that can slam through even brick homes and windows. Roofs can be torn off of even strong homes. Electricity can be down and stay down for weeks if a storm like Rita was predicted to be hits hard.

The millions of Houstonians who evacuated may have done so pointlessly. But it wasn't hysteria. It was because this storm was supposed to be bigger than Katrina and everyone saw what Katrina did. Even the places that didn't flood in Mississipi and Louisiana had tremendous devastation.

And if the people hadn't left and Rita tore Houston up, everybody would be blogging about how nobody learned their lesson.

Posted on September 24, 2005 at 12:22 PM

Jared,

Suppose you are in a new, brick house in a non-flooded area. Now suppose your electricity is blown out and you are trapped because the roads out of town are in flooded areas.

Been there, done that, got the t-shirt (literally). Hurricane Ivan blew my gate down and most of my back fence. My roof was damaged and I had water damage to the ceilings and walls in the living room, dining room and kitchen. I had to get a new roof, a new back fence and a new gate. I went for a week without power and was not able to go back to work for two weeks. I know two people who lived near the water and lost their homes. One of those people had evacuated, the other did not, thinking she and her husband would be okay (and I would say that they should have evacuated, since they were close to the water). The water flooded their house waste-deep and, from the last I heard from them, the were still living in a FEMA trailer on their property.

A section of the I-10 bridge across Escambia Bay was taken out (killing a truck driver who apparently didn't know the bridge was out until it was too late). Trees were down in all the roads and power was out in about 99% of the area. The National Guard (who that ignoramous Cindy Sheehan would accuse of "occupying" Pensacola) moved the trees out of the way and directed traffic. They also handed out water, ice and MREs.

So my point is that I'm not ignorant of the kind of situation that exists after a major hurricane moves through.

However, in my own situation, I'm glad I did not evacuate, because my nerves would have been even more fried doing that than they would have been dealing with the Ivan aftermath. Considering that my car and the Jeep both have a tendency to run hot when idling in heavy traffic, we may very well have gotten stranded.

Look, I knew my opinion on this would offend people, but if Dean Esmay and the guy he linked (whose post I'm going to highlight in an update to this one) could speak up, I figured I could speak up too.

If the Houstonians who evacuated were in mandatory evacuation zones, then no, it was not hysteria. However, if they were not, then perhaps it was unnecessary for them to evacuate and perhaps it was irresponsible for the media to make them think they needed to.

Posted on September 24, 2005 at 4:00 PM

It's not a contest, and I'm not offended.
You can say whatever you want regardless of who says it first, second, or afterwards.

I'm just saying it's, well, weird to say the evacuations were overreactions. It's also easy to say after the fact. Nobody's saying everyone needed to evacuate. But it's completely understandable that they did, and I will say again that if they hadn't and the storm had done what was predicted, Dean and Co. would all be blogging about how they were too stubborn or stupid to obey the recommendations to evacuate.

In that sense, this is Monday Morning Quarterbacking, and I think it's a little rude considering the ordeals many went through only out of concern for their families.

Posted on September 24, 2005 at 6:43 PM

Jared,

I apologize if I came off rude in my initial post and in my responses here. I know people have been through a lot. Whatever you decide to do -- evacuate or hunker down -- dealing with a hurricane is rough. It was just upsetting to me to see people stuck in traffic with a hurricane approaching. Also the bus fire killing all those elderly people was heartbreaking. My first thought upon hearing about that was that they'd probably still be alive if they would have stayed put. But then again it may have been medically necessary to evacuate them.

Posted on September 24, 2005 at 7:14 PM
ProfBenny Gravatar.com

Re: Stormy Weather

Although much of the conversation regarding the dilemma of "to evacuate or not to evacuate" is interesting in its diagnosis of media hysteria, I find that the traffic jams that Susan worries about inform me of a greater impending problem. Al-Qaida and other terrorist groups that might wish to attack U.S. targets in the homeland have been able to form a very good idea of how unprepared we are on EVERY LEVEL to contend with an emergency evacuation. Will we continue to blame the media or shall we initiate change by giving a voice to this concern? In light of the chaos and incompetance made evident by Katrina and Rita, I believe the Department of Homeland Security needs a serious overhaul. One of our most serious weaknesses has been revealed to our enemies, and I see our government simply doing damage control on the Bush Machine image rather than addressing the problem. If Homeland Security can't come up with better evacuation plans for FEMA to enact, then perhaps hysteria is a good thing that will insure that at least a few will live when that other shoe drops on our heads.

ProfBenny

Posted on September 25, 2005 at 12:51 PM

Hi Sis,

But the thing is, it is usually the local governments (state, county, city) that handle evacuation plans for hurricanes and such. New Orleans had a plan that they didn't follow. The Louisiana Governor put off bringing the Feds in as long as possible. (Personally, I wish Bush would have told her to stuff it and brought them in anyway, but can you imagine the flack he would have gotten from that?)

My understanding is the Homeland Security is meant to cover terroristic threats and such, not natural disasters. Can it be improved? Of course. But do we really want the federal government, which is already unwieldy and inefficient (probably by nature) responsible for evacuation plans for natural disasters too? Aren't those things better handled by local governments? (Unless they are incompetent like the infamously corrupt Louisiana/ New Orleans governments.)

If you don't believe there was an awful lot of local government incompetence involved in the response to Katrina, take a look at this pictorial analysis of the situation.

(Sis, I hope you don't mind but I changed your name on your comment to Prof Benny. One reason for this is that the original name is a little long for my display. The other is that I'm trying to maintain at least a semi-anonymity on this blog for various reasons.)

Posted on September 25, 2005 at 1:46 PM
ProfBenny Gravatar.com

I find your argument engaging, but deeply flawed. I have emailed you a copy of Governor Blanco's letter requesting troops,

http://gov.louisiana.gov/Disaster%20Relief%20Request.pdf

which was dated Sunday. Regarding your wish for a negative response from the Commander in Chief, well, I think you got your wish. Furthermore, this link to DOD Directive #3025.1

Link

may be of some use to you. Apparently, it is the federal government's job to assist, and since these directives are supposed to be enacted by FEMA, which was grandfathered into the Dept.of Homeland Security for the specific purpose of handling natural and man-made catastrophes, it may be difficult to do the GOP spin.

Finally, as I said, I am engaged by your argument, but despite my disagreement with you on matters of execution surrounding the Katrina catastrophe, you have dismissed my concern about a terrorist attack by saying it was not Homeland Security's job to handle a natural catastrophe as if that will make me feel better about a man-made one that hits without warning. Will you say it's not Chertoff's job then??? My concern is the evacuation of those who survive the next terrorist attack, if there are any. Do you actually think the "unwieldy" federal government will be able to handle that or do you think they will spin it to blame local authorities then?

I hope we can agree to disagree cordially and intelligently.

Posted on September 25, 2005 at 6:45 PM

Hi again Sis,

First of all, I'm sorry your comment didn't post right away. It went into the moderation queue because, I think, there was more than one link in the post. It's an anti-spam measure. Perhaps I need to tweak the settings a bit.

Of course we can agree to disagree cordially and intelligently. And I appreciate the fact that you are backing your contentions up.

Look, I'm not being partisan in saying that Blanco and Nagin were incompetent. I'd say the same thing if they had an R next to their names rather than a D. The local government is first and foremost responsible for preparing for natural disasters. I'm not saying the Feds were perfect here, either. I'm just saying blaming only the Feds and letting the local government off the hook is the wrong approach.

As far as FEMA and Homeland Security goes, yes all this has not inspired confidence in their ability to handle a terrorist attack. I realize that FEMA has been stretched awfully thin with all the hurricanes, but this means they need to streamline their operations and become more efficient. They are constantly doing this with the military (which is why they have BRACs and reorgs and stuff), so maybe they need to take the same approach with various federal agencies.

I will respond to your other points a little later (maybe by tomorrow evening or so). I need to do some research, plus, to be honest, I've been very mentally fatigued lately. (Which is why my blog is on semi-hiatus.)

If anyone else wants to chime in and address Benny's points before I do, feel free. Just be polite about it, because Benny is my sister and I will not tolerate any rudeness to her.

Posted on September 25, 2005 at 7:51 PM

Nice blog.I like this.
Nick
http://www.yahoo.com

Posted on October 3, 2005 at 5:39 AM

Benny,

I am closing up some old threads and I realized I forgot to expand upon my earlier comments. So here's just one more thing I want to point out, then I'll close this thread:

From this article -- Washington Post: The Steady Buildup to a City's Chaos on page 4:

In fact, while the last regularly scheduled train out of town had left a few hours earlier, Amtrak had decided to run a "dead-head" train that evening to move equipment out of the city. It was headed for high ground in Macomb, Miss., and it had room for several hundred passengers. "We offered the city the opportunity to take evacuees out of harm's way," said Amtrak spokesman Cliff Black. "The city declined."

So the ghost train left New Orleans at 8:30 p.m., with no passengers on board.

Why didn't the mayor use this opportunity to get some people out of the city?

Again, nobody covered themselves with glory in the handling of Katrina. But local and state governments are the first responders. It just seems very partisan to me to want to blame the Bush Administration for everything when there is plenty of blame to go around. Trying to absolve the state and local governments of blame because they are Democrats is very biased.

Posted on October 29, 2005 at 9:48 PM



Copyright © 2002-2009 LilacRose.nu. All rights reserved.