In 1868 (150 years ago) 31 people were killed in a landslide during a 7.9 earthquake on the Big Island. Some other people drowned when a tsunami swept over them. This was long before any tsunami warning sirens were installed on the island.
I was present for the 1975 7.2 earthquake. The whole town of Hilo shook violently, but damage to the town was minimal and no one died. On another part of the island, a camper was killed in a rock slide. Another person disappeared and the body was never found. Other parts of the island suffered a lot of property damage, but no other deaths were reported. Strict building codes are enforced on all new structures and virtually all of the older buildings and homes are low rise one story structures.
The fact is that over the last 149 years, only one person has been confirmed dead from an earthquake in Hawaii. I don’t see how any one can say, “Hawaii has deadly earthquakes”.
Landslides or building collapses or whatever - if the landslide is caused by the earthquake, the earthquake killed the people.
I mean you can say almost no one ever died in CA in a earthquake- it was the landslide or building collapse - few are actually swallowed whole by cracks.
California has a Mediterranean climate, a rare and small type of climate limited to parts of the Mediterranean, part of the coast of Chile, and part of the coast of South Africa. It is characterized by mild wet winters and long cool dry summers. California has the most extreme natural drought of any of mediterranean climate zones. What that means is that although it seems benign to humans who are busily mining the aquifers, they are blind to the limiting factor there, which is water. Things die of thirst there, not cold.
I lived there almost my whole life and came to hate all the people literally sucking the life out of the place.
Yeah, used to be a paradise before the Europeans showed up.
So what? That’s not really relevant, is it? The OP asked for places that experience NO problems from natural disasters. Your response made it sound like earthquakes are something Californians never have to worry about at all. That’s patently untrue.
Indeed, I am typing this sitting in a hotel room on vacation in a town hit by one of the strongest earthquakes ever recorded in California. If I want, I can walk about 1/2 mile up the highway to the graveyard in which most of the 27 victims are buried (56 people were injured). The only reason the totals were so low is that the earthquake hit in a very lightly populated area; an earthquake of approximately the same size 34 years later killed some 3000 people just a couple hundred miles away.
Statistically, earthquakes are a minor issue in CA, they are barely a blip. You are nearly 20 times more likely to be hit by lightning than killed in a CA earthquake.
People over worry about CA earthquakes.
Also, not counted as Earthquake deaths for some reason is the: *1946, a magnitude 8.1 earthquake on Unimak Island in Alaska triggered a tsunami that killed 159 people in Hawaii, five in Alaska and one in California. *
Over the last 149 years earthquakes in Hawaii have been responsible for one confirmed death and another person’s disappearance (the body was never found).
If an area has 2 deaths over a period of 149 years, I do not see how any one can state that area has deadly earthquakes. What are the odds? Millions of people have lived on and visited the islands over that period of time and TWO have died from an earthquake.
Does South Carolina (60 earthquake deaths) or Montana (32 earthquake deaths) qualify as areas that have “deadly earthquakes”? I would hate to have to tell a life long local resident of South Carolina or Montana that the area they live in is subject to deadly earthquakes. What are the odds?
Its like saying I wouldn’t go to Dodger Stadium because they have deadly baseball games there. In 1970 a young fan was killed by a line drive foul ball. One death in 45 years.
Just got back from Hawaii (Maui and Kawai) this morning. I would lean towards Maui. Spent a couple of days in Kula, a few days in Hana, and a few days in Lahaina (Ka’anopoli). I’d probably go with Kula, it’s a bit quieter than Lahaina and a lot closer to the “big city” services in Kahalui. In the rain shadow of Haleakala, it did OK through the recent hurricane and tropical storm. The logistics of living in Hana seem daunting to me (although if you have enough money it probably doesn’t matter).
Which brings me to the problem in paradise - it’s gonna cost a boatload of money to live there. Plus after talking with a fair number of locals I can see some sort of economic crisis coming - many of the locals are moving to the mainland (or their kids have) because they can’t afford to live in Hawaii anymore. At some point there will be no one to work in the service industry - home prices are like Silicon Valley, but unlike Silicon Valley there is no option of living a hundred miles away and commuting in.
Nope. Crocs and jellyfish are thousands of miles away. There will be snakes in bushland, but you’d have to go looking for them and they’ll run away if you find them. They hide under stuff, they don’t chase you about and try to eat your lunch.
Not particularly, AFAIK but I’m not a Drug Enforcement agent.
Being a large port there will be drugs traveling through the area, but that refers to ports the world over.
Try the area which gave its name to the climate in Southern Cali: the Mediterranean shores. While there are earthquakes, their intensity and frequency vary by location. Italy seems to get a lot bigger ones than other areas (they also have a lot of bad construction, which doesn’t help with the results). Most people in this area go through life without ever going through anything bigger than “uh? what was that?” and, later that night, a news report.
The Med does indeed have a lovely climate, and general absence of major natural disasters (although central Italy is subject to the odd earthquake). It isn’t year round though, you’ll need to head to the equator for that.
Southern Mediterranean fairs better for winter (Morocco, Eqypt etc). Boiling hot in the summer though.
