When you have a Cat 5 100 miles off your coast, heading right for you, you had better have supplies staged and a rescue plan in place, otherwise, you suffer the consequences.
And by you, do you mean you the individual citizen, you the city or the municipality, or you the federal gov’t?
I wish more people had been able to evacuate. But for whatever reason, they didn’t, and now they need help. Why New Orleans didn’t take more initiative I don’t understand. From what I’ve seen, there has been virtually no local response to this disaster, other than dispatching some police to stop looters. The rescue helicopters a few days ago…was that Coast Guard or local police?
You know, I have seen a lot of excuses in this thread. What is lacking is a “We messed up.”
DHS absorbed FEMA, and pretty much took away their ability to respond it seems.
We (for American Dopers) have a city under water and for 5 days the people charged with making us safer have done what? What? Yeah, that’s what I thought.
We were supposed to have plans for this. I pour my tax dollars into planning for just this type of situation.
I want my money back!
I’ve heard reports that a refugee showed up at FEMA and American Red Cross in Little Rock trying to get aid were told that they could only file for assistance from the area where the disaster occured.
All of this arguing about the federal response has really gotten my goat…
Lets really sit down and think about this.
Idea one: airdrop supplies. You cant do that without controlling the ground its being dropped on. Africa is a great example of this. Drop food in the middle of a bunch of hungry people with no order and you have a riot for the food that is there. The majority of it is likely to be destroyed, and only the strong will get what is remaining.
Beyond that, Helicopters simply don’t carry enough to make a serious difference.
The UH-60: Empty 11,516 Lbs
Mission gross weight - 20,250 lbs
Inside the helicopter it can carry 2640lbs. . It can crank up to 8000 on an external hook. (per army.mil)
8000 lbs of food, water, supplies. (if it can be mounted below the helicopter, only 2600 lbs otherwise) Water alone weighs 8.345404 a gallon. The aircraft can’t even lift 1000 gallons of water. Food and supplies can weigh even more. Also, helicopters are extremely expensive to operate and take a large amount of upkeep. They also do not have extended ranges (320nm). So any supplies they are going to deliver have to be close enough to be delivered. In the case of a disaster of this magnitude, we cant keep supplies close enough to helicopter them in.
The only real way to get a large amount of supplies into the region is via rail or truck.
Idea two: Have supplies pre-positioned. This too, is a bad idea. Nothing is expected to be anywhere near to coast to survive without extensive destruction. That’s why it was evacuated in the first place. What good does tons of supplies do you if they get ruined or swept away? Emergency personal are worthless without their supplies. Even more so, put those people in place before the emergency and they are just as likely to be injured. Now, instead of helping, they require help, compounding the situation.
You have to keep all aid out of the way of the storm until it passes.
Idea three: We should have been there the day after. Do you expect paramedics to arrive on the scene of a gang shooting before the police? I’m not going to get shot for anyone. Until the police are there to ensure it is safe, no one is getting medical attention. If there is civil unrest then rescue workers should not, and are not, expected to place themselves in harm’s way to help someone else. Until it is clear that it is reasonably safe to do so, there should be no expectation of aid. This is as much the fault of the refugees as the lack of the police effort/presence.
Idea four: people are getting in and out, so why are not supplies? This one isn’t quite so easy. But lets remember, moving a small car, SUV, or small boat over a less than perfect road is more easily done than a large truck loaded with supplies. Large trucks with supplies move more slowly, and need roads to move over, or they move even more slowly.
LMTV A1 Cargo MTV A1 Cargo
Payload: 5,000 lbs 10,000 lbs
Towed load: 12,000 lbs 21,000 lbs
Road speeds at max are appx 55mph. (clear road). If the road is not clear they have to slow down. They can’t ford major rivers, and even a few feet of water will slow them to almost a crawl. While we have a lot more trucks, and they carry a lot more than helicopters (which is why they are ideal) they are slow. They have to stop and refuel. Oh, and BTW, these trucks run on jet fuel, so they cant stop at the local giant station and get gas. With a range of appx 300 miles they are going to need fuel tankers to go anywhere. These tankers have to get the fuel from somewhere (Takes time) and need fuel themselves…
So are people able to get in and out, yes. But the trucks that are needed to get supplies in and out are slow, and need time.
I have been on a ground search and rescue team. I am required to take disaster training every year as a paramedic. Almost uniformly we are told to expect to be totally cut off for a week if we are the sight of a major disaster that destroys the local infrastructure. Bridges, roads, and railways are a necessity for mass movement of supplies. I guess that word didn’t get out to NO.
So is the organization of the rescue and re-supply effort in disarray, absolutely. Could it be done better, probably. But is it realistic to expect tones of supplies to be onsite one or two days later, not a chance.
Certainly sriticism is justified…and it deserves to be spread to every level of government.
Quit it with the cold, hard facts. This is the time for angry amateur speculation.
oops, sorry for the half baked post…
please read the second one…
Apropos of nothing, the Department of Homeland Security has designated September as National Preparedness Month.
And we all know how much federal agencies looove to cooperate with one another. Even if everything breaks down and investigations ensue, they’d still rather share the blame than share the glory.
The DHS is an agency constructed in a great big hurry for a basically ad hoc purpose. It’s meant to prevent man-made calamities, not respond to natural ones. As for Chertoff and Brown, they got their jobs first and foremost through patronage: experience was secondary.
“Dis de Big Easy, dahlin’!” –Dennis Quaid, taking an uptight East Coast policewoman down a peg in the movie The Big Easy
Let’s just say that efficient local government has never been a high priority in New Orleans. For one thing, their police force was long considered to be the most corrupt in the country.
Are people being unreasonale critizing the government’s response to Katrina?
It’s a good question - but, something that hasn’t been addressed so far in all the related Katina/response threads: While we elect our leaders to make decisions for us, they are also (some would argue) responsible for ensuring that they make the correct decisions.
For most politicians, what the correct decisions are generally hinge on what is politically expedient; for example whether to raise or lower taxes. Planning/anticipating for a catastrophic event such as Katrina doesn’t generate strong political interest if there is a small percentage that such an event would take place on the politician’s watch (how many of you think that improving the levees of New Orleans or establishing an effective distater response/recovery plan was a high priority and foremost in the minds of the politicians in Louisiana and Washington, DC when they were running for office?).
If there is such a small chance that such a scenario would take place, why would one be willing to spend precious “political capital” on something that may not provide any kind of political payoff? Much easier (and better from a political perspective) to focus on those issues that would have some sort of tangible and (somewhat immediate) political payoff. And also much easier to “gamble” that a catastrophic event won’t happen on one’s political watch.
In most cases, this type of strategy is probably sound. However, there is ALWAYS the outside chance that some sort of unforeseen or catastrophic event that can happen on a politician’s watch. While it may seem unfair that people would therefore blame the politician (for whatever reason), that is one of the downsides of our political system. If you are willing to “bet” that your decisions are the “correct” ones (and thereby garnering power, accolades, etc. that come with those decisions), then you should be willing to be subject to the consequences if your decisions are “wrong”.
I have a different slant on the issue. People look at the United States as a monolithic “anything’s possible” superpower. We built the first nuclear weapon at a point in history when steam locomotives were used to haul it around. We invented 3-axis controlled airplanes and 66 years later landed on the moon. Today, nobody notices that we are the only nation capable of a multi-vehicle accident on Mars. We have single submarines capable of destroying almost any nation on earth as well as the agricultural power to feed those same nations. We have both the power and the prestige of being top dog.
Hollywood has taken this idea and grown it to mythical proportions. We see the pictures of great accomplishments and forget about the years and years of planning and sweat that went into them. The Brooklyn bridge, Hoover Dam, and WTC were not constructed overnight yet they are monuments of achievement. To many people on this board the moon landing is a historical footnote, even though it cannot be duplicated without great effort.
For all the might and industry of the United States, we don’t have the capability of flying an airplane through the center of a thunderstorm which is the smallest example of Mother Nature’s power. Events like hurricanes release 5 times more energy than is produced by the entire human race in a year. We can’t stop it or effect it in any way. More importantly, the richest, most powerful nation on Earth cannot repair the damage in a timely manner. We’re probably talking about ¼ of a trillion dollars in damage and economic loss.
The only practical thing a government can do to avoid such a human tragedy is to assist in avoiding the problem in the first place. Evacuation is the 1st and only option in this situation. Here lies the problem. Local disasters are dealt with on at least 4 levels of government: local (City), County, State, and Federal. It starts form the smallest agency and moves up as the need arises. It does not start with Federal aid, it ends with Federal aid. In a city the size of New Orleans, the City is the first responder. Since evacuation is the only tool at their disposal it would seem logical to mobilize the transportation system by redirecting both metro buses and school buses. To my knowledge, that wasn’t done. If that’s the case, the City of New Orleans failed in what would be their only chance to save lives. Their emergency plan revolved around the use of a sports stadium with no provisions. That failed and they went to Plan B (which was to yell for help).
Absent a plan to shuttle people out of the city the next best solution was to convince people to evacuate themselves. I had to track the storm at work because it affected the assets of my company so it was natural to watch a little more of the news. When I heard the weather warning it was clear to me this was a serious problem. The warning stated that all (not some, ALL) gable roofs would be torn off in the path of the hurricane. This is the type of information that public officials should communicate. They need to draw a picture that people (especially poor people) can understand. They need to know that gas lines will rupture and buildings will burn to the ground because fire departments can’t get to them.
If nothing else is learned from this it will be to explain (in advance) what’s NOT going to happen after the storm. There will be no electricity, water, or sewage treatment for at least a month and probably longer. Trucks are not capable of driving through 20 feet of water and helicopters were not designed to haul large quantities of anything. Trucks will move in as the water recedes and all available helicopters will be pressed into service to move the sick and injured (which is what is happening now).
Once the storm hit it became exponentially more difficult to deal with the situation. Roads were washed out or under water. The power grid was trashed which means no running water. Gas lines ruptured from flooding. Those who didn’t go to the stadium were left standing on their roof. Their only rescue would be from boat or helicopter and that is done piece-meal. The rescue process was bogged down by the need to evacuate at least 2 hospitals. Or put another way, the evacuation of the hospitals was bogged down by the people who WOULD NOT leave and a city that failed to move those who COULD NOT leave. A great deal of the situation was created on a local level and they are paying a terrible price for it. Fortunately, only 4 of the 13 levee districts failed. This could have been a lot worse.
And we’ve got ourselves a whole new joke:
Batman vs. the DHS? Batman, because the DHS is never prepared.
Responsibility for evacuation of a major U.S. city is left completely in the hands of municipal authorities? What and each small town is supposed to manage the evacuation of it’s people? I don’t think that’s right. If that’s the plan then something’s wrong with FEMA and DHS. My feeling is what’s going on is a classic case of pointing fingers. There’s no way you can expect municipal services to manage the type of disaster everyone knew New Orleans was potentially facing. The State should have been overseeing the city services, and FEMA should have been coordinating the state emergency management services and making sure they were adequately preparing as well as mobilizing all their available services. Nobody should have been waiting for the smaller fish to ask for help. That’s crazy talk.
Yes. Although actually it’s more like each citizen is responsible for evacuating himself, and the governments try to help out if they can.
When this is all over, feel free to go to Washington and explain to all the experts why the best solution is to have every bit of, say, wildfire fighting in California overseen by people in DC.
Two things here: First, many communities cannot afford such contingency plans without federal funds and other assistance. Secondly, organizations such as FEMA are meant to be expert at evacuations. While locals (ideally) understand how their town works, the plans have to be put in place by them with FEMA and others. Specifically, governmental incompetence came in cutting funds on projects to prepare the levees for such a flooding disaster in New Orleans to 20% over the last 3 years. It was common knowledge that NOLA was a potential disaster.
Oh, I forgot. We had to cut spending so that we could relieve the rich man’s tax burden so that our economic and job explosion could continue. Gotta love those surpluses. On a related note to levee funding, we’ve got terror on the run, and that costs a lot too. No incompetence there. :rolleyes:
Also in situations where there is time before a disaster occurs, such as a hurricane, there should be things that begin to go into motion every time the threat arises. I cannot understand how a hurricane bearing down anywhere near New Orleans did not immediately begin the movement of national guard or other troops of sufficient number to points within a day’s travel to coastal areas. These plans should have been modified to have included midwestern states as national guard troops are at reduced levels in all states.
You cannot have an absent plan for shuttling out poor people. It wasn’t that many of them did not understand the threat in New Orleans, but they had no means of escaping. The poor may not have a vehicle, and if public transportation stops, they’re screwed. I heard a report by a couple on vacation who could not even find a rental car anywhere and were fortunate enough to have a couple hundred dollars and to find a taxi to take them to Baton Rouge. If you’ve got $30.00 left over at the end of the week, how do you move out your 6 kids and your grandmother who is infirm and can’t walk when even Amtrak and the busses stop running? What about earthquake zones, where there is no advance warning? Do we need transportation of some sort ready to go ahead of time?
I’m just playing devils advocate here…
Why on earth is the government responsible for my well being? The United States is founded on the principal that I am able to do what I want to, when I want to, where I want to (within accepted standards)
<hijack> A lack of personal responsibility is getting totally crazy in the US here recently. A lot of people don’t want to take responsibility for all sorts of their life. We’re blaming TV and music for our kids actions. It’s the school system and the teacher’s fault that our children are not learning. I don’t take care of myself or take any responsibility for my healthcare, but I expect the healthcare system to be at my immediate disposal. </hijack>
So I’m a little torn on this issue here. If you’re not responsible enough to prepare for disasters, and be ready to survive on your own for a few days, why should we (being the US as a whole) have to again be responsible for your lack of self responsibility. Especially when you can see it coming. If a tornado comes from the blue, destroys your house, and all of your disaster equipment with it, I have a bit more sympathy.
But then, being what we like to call and advanced and great civilization, isn’t part of being an advanced and great civilization taking care of those who didn’t take care of themselves, for whatever reason?
So in your professional opinion it is:
[ul]
[li]Impossible to position basic supplies anywhere in the landfall area and expect to have a useful amount survive the hurricane[/li][li]Impossible to get useful amounts of supplies to the area in less than 3-4 days[/li][/ul]
Oddly enough, I don’t recall this being raised as a major concern during the preparation for Katrina coming ashore. I would have thought that if it is beyond the ability of the US to either mount a reasonable mitigation effort or an immediate rescue, it would perhaps have been a good idea to publicise this as an added incentive to get people to leave?
Also, I’m not sure I actually buy either argument. Bottled water, MREs and first aid kits in plastic cases would seem to be reasonably durable, and if stashed in robust concrete buildings above sea level would survive in useful quantites to bridge the first few days.
Emergency personnel couldn’t be pre-positioned because they would be injured? I though the mayor or someone was on-site in a bunker throughout the whole event? There are a bloggers posting from an operational datacentre in there. Plenty of the locals seem to be in fine shape apart from not having any food or water. It’s not like a nuke went off.
Bridges, roads and railways SHOULD be useable - just because most of them were built too flimsily or there aren’t sufficient bulldozers/temporary bridges and so on to clear/repair does not mean it is inevitable that all communications will be severed for weeks. Anyhow, what about boats? Hovercraft? River barges? Ships pre-despatched in order to arrive there a day or so after this disaster which so predictably severed all other connections with the outside world?
I’m sure things will become clearer as time goes on, but at the moment it looks like everyone in charge of preparation and execution of the rescue effort left their common sense at home.
Yeah, because of course if the whole of California burst into flames simultanously, that would be well within the capabilities of the state to deal with. Similarly, it would have been perfectly OK for the entire US to leave Manhattan to deal with 9/11 on its own.
The whole point of organising humans into societies is to pool the available resources in order to deploy them more efficiently than the individual can.
Some events overwhelm locally available resources - in that case, aid needs to come from elsewhere, and it needs to be organised. Every man for himself leads to precisely the sort of thing now happening in NO, i.e. anarchy. Most definitely, the person most responsible for your own welfare is you, but if you happen to be a law-abiding tax-paying citizen you certainly have a right to expect your fellow citizens to mount an effort to assist you.
Do unto others, etc.
The race baiting from everyone is not only unwelcome, but off-putting. I try to put comments by the Ray Nagins and Jesse Jacksons aside and remember that its important to contribute to help people are trying to survive. They don’t have an agenda.
But frankly my Katrina fatigue is setting in. If people want to have a substantive discussion about how to prevent this in the future, I think it would be productive. If the talking heads choose to make this another discussion about how much everyone hates President Bush and how ‘White America’ is responsible for whats going on, then many folks will tune this out. And when they do, they will forget about the victims. That would be a shame.