200K 911 calls!

[TechWife]

11 hours ago, Scarlett said:

I think i was envisioning people on the coast who have expensive properties.

I understand,  the news outlets tend to show coastline more and those images are often what we remember. Keep in mind, though, that most Floridians don’t live in beachfront property. In addition, large parts of Florida are rural in nature. There’s also a fairly wide income spread as well.  

[TechWife]

14 hours ago, Scarlett said:

 

Edited September 30, 2022 by TechWife
Dupe

[73349]

I would add, the geography of Florida makes it *much* harder to evacuate than some places, because it is narrow (no getting far inland unless you go north) and fairly low and flat (water spreads, and you can't just go uphill). FL has a high coast-to-high-ground ratio. It looks significantly easier to evacuate from eastern NC, which is another place that typically gets hit by these storms.

Coastal NC: A moderate-sized population can travel 2-5 hours west--admittedly, a few people need to use a ferry first, and the first section of road will be slow going with congestion--and reach metro areas (Triangle, Triad) with higher populations, hotel rooms, etc. From the northern part of the coast, Richmond is also an option. Now they are both inland and on high ground, yet can easily still receive news from home (e.g., local TV will show live cams from the beach).

Coastal FL: I guess a couple million people could all spend all day driving all the way to rural southwest Georgia, where they will... ?

 

I never want to live in Florida. I don't think it's possible to resolve the difficulty of evacuating a large population from that geography both logistically and economically.

Now I did see in the news somebody in the Naples area saying he had underestimated the storm and chose not to stock up or board up, and that's a poor choice on his part when the National Weather Service near him was using the word "catastrophic." But even if he had then needed to call 911, the death penalty for being unprepared is harsh.

Edited September 30, 2022 by 73349

[Kassia]

17 hours ago, Kassia said:

I don't know...some people might not be able to afford to evacuate or maybe can't due to physical/mental issues.  I'd hate to judge. 

My dad used to live in South Florida and refused to evacuate just because he was a stubborn old man who thought he was invincible.  It really scared me.  He was fortunate and wasn't ever in a direct hit. 

 

Quoting myself to add that my father didn't drive (I forgot about this when I posted earlier and only realized it after reading other replies).  My great aunt who lived in FL also didn't drive.  I imagine there are a lot of elderly people in FL who don't drive and wouldn't have a way to evacuate even if they were willing to do so.  My father could have gone to a shelter when he was alive but chose not to.  

[Murphy101]

32 minutes ago, 73349 said:

Now I did see in the news somebody in the Naples area saying he had underestimated the storm and chose not to stock up or board up, and that's a poor choice on his part when the National Weather Service near him was using the word "catastrophic." But even if he had then needed to call 911, the death penalty for being unprepared is harsh.

And again I know to some degree we have to take people at what they say even though we KNOW what they say may not be accurate - but I wonder how many people who can’t afford to stock up convince themselves that it probably won’t be that bad anyways.  I mean if you can’t, you can’t and it hard to live under constant stress even without a storm, so they tell themselves they are just going to keep on keeping on and it’ll probably be okay. And the truth is that mental strategy gets them through most of their days so why would they discard it this week?

[pitterpatter]

I haven't read all the posts, but I can imagine DH's work pressuring him not to evacuate, if THEY didn't want to. He's in an upper management job. He would be horribly conflicted and worried about losing his job, which he must have for health insurance.

[Bootsie]

I haven't seen a report of the 200,000 911 calls; any news reports I see have "thousands".  But, with 240 million 911 calls in the US per year, that averages out to 657,500 per day in the US.  If those calls are proportionate to population, that would mean that Florida would average over 42,000 per day.  It wouldn't be hard to believe that a number less than 5 times of what occurs in a typical day would be occurring during a hurricane.  People trying to evacuate get into accidents; people who thought they were in a safe location (and did not face mandatory evacuation) end up flooded; someone who has to stay because they provide an essential service sees a tree on an electrical line or a fire; the pregnant woman who did not evacuate goes into labor and her husband can't drive her to the hospital--each of those possibilities gets magnified in a storm.  I also wonder if there are some automatic calls as electricity goes out and alarm systems fail.  

[SKL]

I haven't lived in a place where folks need to evacuate (we just get tornadoes, which don't give you enough warning to go anywhere except maybe your basement).  So I'm not sure what I'd do, but I'm that stubborn type.  However, I gained some perspective in my CERT class (Community Emergency Response Team). 

Staying put just because you can endangers not only yourself (and your kids, pets, etc.), but also rescuers, and the folks the rescuers should be rescuing.  We all know there are some people who really can't evacuate, for so many reasons.  We need to let the rescuers help those people.  Maybe we should evacuate and come back and be rescuers ourselves, if we can.

[Faith-manor]

1 hour ago, Murphy101 said:

And again I know to some degree we have to take people at what they say even though we KNOW what they say may not be accurate - but I wonder how many people who can’t afford to stock up convince themselves that it probably won’t be that bad anyways.  I mean if you can’t, you can’t and it hard to live under constant stress even without a storm, so they tell themselves they are just going to keep on keeping on and it’ll probably be okay. And the truth is that mental strategy gets them through most of their days so why would they discard it this week?

This is a very astute point. As of June, an estimated 61% of Americans live pay check to pay check with no margin. I remember those days early in our marriage when I was still finishing up my degrees, paying tuition, and dh was new in his career and making not great money with a high medical deductible on our insurance. I stood in the produce section wondering if I could afford to buy more than two apples or if that would mean we didn't have enough tuna for the week. Ever possible scenario where a penny had to be spent that hadn't been anticipated was a practical panic attack for me. Frankly, had we lived in a hurricane zone, we would not have been able to evacuate. We lived far from family, would not have been able to pay for gas to drive very far from home. We would have gone to a shelter IF it was close by, and IF they were going to provide food for free. Otherwise, it would absolutely have been a shelter in place and hope for the best situation. So I absolutely do get how that kind of thinking helps continue keeping on when the outlook is bleak. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

I still want to know where the "200k 911 calls" claim came from.  Still can't find it in any search.  If this number isn't even remotely accurate then this is another case of misinformation being used to "make a point". 

[teachermom2834]

It just isn’t always that clear cut in advance as it looks after the fact. Of course those people right on the water is an obvious case but how do we know that’s what the bulk of those calls are? Those people in absolute dire straights probably can’t even call. The people a couple miles inland also got clobbered but probably weren’t told to evacuate. 
 

I mentioned my son in Sarasota. He was on the outer rings of the eye and had several hours of sustained high winds and it was pretty scary but he never lost power and he actually went to work today. Had he evacuated he could have had all kinds of problems in the evacuation process, caused complications for people actually needing to evacuate and first responders, and could be stuck somewhere unable to get back.  So, in hindsight, he made the right move. If Ian hit ten miles north and a tree fell through his roof and he called 911, it would have been “you knew a storm was coming why didn’t you just leave?”

Some of y’all are extremely harsh. I admit my nerves are frayed to the last edge but the science of storms and evacuation is far from perfect. Most of the people I see living out their misery right now don’t look like the rich and pampered but I’m not on TikTok. 

[kbutton]

17 hours ago, Mrs Tiggywinkle Again said:

There are also people calling 911 to have welfare checks done and people who call 911 multiple times. I’ve seen official Facebook posts by some affected counties asking people to call their non emergency number for welfare checks instead of 911.

I am fairly certain that when I called our non-emergency number, it was routed to 911 anyway, lol!!! 

Regarding @GoVanGogh's video reference...I think this is the video. It's heartbreaking. The poor woman is so clearly traumatized, and I just want to hold her hand and help all the adrenaline dissipate. 😢

2 hours ago, 73349 said:

I would add, the geography of Florida makes it *much* harder to evacuate than some places, because it is narrow (no getting far inland unless you go north) and fairly low and flat (water spreads, and you can't just go uphill). FL has a high coast-to-high-ground ratio. It looks significantly easier to evacuate from eastern NC, which is another place that typically gets hit by these storms.

 

I never want to live in Florida. I don't think it's possible to resolve the difficulty of evacuating a large population from that geography both logistically and economically.

Now I did see in the news somebody in the Naples area saying he had underestimated the storm and chose not to stock up or board up, and that's a poor choice on his part when the National Weather Service near him was using the word "catastrophic." But even if he had then needed to call 911, the death penalty for being unprepared is harsh.

For sure!

We have casual acquaintances in Punta Gorda. I don't know what they were told in the final hours where they made their decision, but I think it was originally supposed to hit farther north. Anyway, they are okay. Haven't seen a damage assessment. 

 

 

[Scarlett]

I heard the 200k in passing.  Probably cnn or cbs. Maybe I heard it wrong but I wasn’t trying to spread misinformation.

[kbutton]

I think people also forget that average intelligence is...average. And lots of people fall below that curve but don't qualify for services. Those who do qualify aren't necessarily going to have 1:1 help leaving--some live alone. Not all of them drive. 

It's really difficult for many (not all) people who are not neurotypical to initiate plans, make plans, troubleshoot etc.--not all of them are well ensconced in a family, and sometimes their family members have some of the same difficulties. 

[Katy]

2 hours ago, 73349 said:

 

Now I did see in the news somebody in the Naples area saying he had underestimated the storm and chose not to stock up or board up, and that's a poor choice on his part when the National Weather Service near him was using the word "catastrophic." But even if he had then needed to call 911, the death penalty for being unprepared is harsh.

To be fair, the NHC said the storm was going to weaken to a Cat 1 and hit somewhere in the Big Bend area. The time focused on Naples to Ft Meyers was short (maybe 24-36 hours), and most supplies were probably gone by then. 

If he didn’t have the budget because it’s the end of the month he may not have had the ability to do so even if he had the capacity to do so. 

I was always taught to make sure you had prepped for a hurricane the first day they announced a tropical depression forming. But that assumption is based on having money to do so. 

[Heartstrings]

11 hours ago, Melissa in Australia said:

ons. Some areas now have been zoned that they Cannot be rebuilt. So you bet that next time way more people will stay to defend their houses. 

How does one defend their home against a raging fire and smoke, or flooding from a hurricane?   I think a lot more people will die with this approach. It’s folly.  

[Terabith]

20 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

How does one defend their home against a raging fire and smoke, or flooding from a hurricane?   I think a lot more people will die with this approach. It’s folly.  

Of course they will.  But the fact is, with climate change, there are a ton of areas that shouldn’t be inhabited by humans.  They’ll be repeatedly destroyed, and it makes no sense to pay to rebuild there. But those are people’s homes, and people aren’t logical.  Frankly, most of New Orleans makes no sense to insure, but it’s a huge city and a strong cultural icon.  It’s not going to be abandoned just because rising oceans threaten its existence.  

[Heartstrings]

28 minutes ago, Terabith said:

Of course they will.  But the fact is, with climate change, there are a ton of areas that shouldn’t be inhabited by humans.  They’ll be repeatedly destroyed, and it makes no sense to pay to rebuild there. But those are people’s homes, and people aren’t logical.  Frankly, most of New Orleans makes no sense to insure, but it’s a huge city and a strong cultural icon.  It’s not going to be abandoned just because rising oceans threaten its existence.  

I fully agree that some areas shouldn’t be rebuilt.  I just don’t understand the thought process of “I’ll defend this structure against fire/hurricane”.   That’s different than desiring to rebuild.  Risking and sacrificing lives because of a misguided idea that Chad is going to Red Bull up and keep out the hurricane is crazy.  

[Faith-manor]

1 hour ago, Heartstrings said:

How does one defend their home against a raging fire and smoke, or flooding from a hurricane?   I think a lot more people will die with this approach. It’s folly.  

I agree. Joe loner is no match for the ever increasing horror of climate change. It is so scary! 200 + million is the estimate of climate refugees by 2050. Frankly, I think that is a conservative estimate. Too conservative. Many of these folks live in regions without the resources and technologies to do anything to mitigate the effects.

[katilac]

@Scarlett, do you think they should have chosen death instead? 

[Melissa in Australia]

2 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

How does one defend their home against a raging fire and smoke, or flooding from a hurricane?   I think a lot more people will die with this approach. It’s folly.  

Well the thing is the majority of  people who stayed and defended their home saved it.. Even in catastrophic fire conditions. They were also mostly able to save their neighbours house as well. Nearly every house that was  burned down had nobody there. Of course there were houses that had nobody there that survived as well. In a bushfire at least here most houses that are lost is because of embers, like a rain of embers, falling and igniting. If there is a person with an extremely good fire plan and the equipment they can put the embers out.

The standard approach  here in Australia for bushfires is to have a fire plan and know what you are going to do, stay and defend or evacuate.  And you need to do the fire plan and prep months before fire season. The only time we had big evacuation orders was the 2020 summer bushfires, and we followed our fire plan and evacuated to the closest big town, which ended up closer to the fire, in fact right on the very fire edge.

[Heartstrings]

1 hour ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Well the thing is the majority of  people who stayed and defended their home saved it.. Even in catastrophic fire conditions. They were also mostly able to save their neighbours house as well. Nearly every house that was  burned down had nobody there. Of course there were houses that had nobody there that survived as well. In a bushfire at least here most houses that are lost is because of embers, like a rain of embers, falling and igniting. If there is a person with an extremely good fire plan and the equipment they can put the embers out.

The standard approach  here in Australia for bushfires is to have a fire plan and know what you are going to do, stay and defend or evacuate.  And you need to do the fire plan and prep months before fire season. The only time we had big evacuation orders was the 2020 summer bushfires, and we followed our fire plan and evacuated to the closest big town, which ended up closer to the fire, in fact right on the very fire edge.

I guess I can see trying in a fire situation with the right equipment, but Americans are terrible at advanced planning.  A lot of people would end up defending their home with a water hose and flip flops.   
 

I don’t see a reasonable way to defend your home from a hurricane.  Like someone said up thread, you can’t hold the roof on and you aren’t going to keep out 2 or 3 feet of water.  

[Heartstrings]

2 hours ago, katilac said:

@Scarlett, do you think they should have chosen death instead? 

This feels a bit like the trolly question.  If I have chosen to stay out of hubris, should I ask other to risk death to save me.  Because calling for aid is not without risk to the rescuer.  I feel like it’s different for if you couldn’t evacuate.  
 

Am I wrong in thinking that communities open schools and such as shelters?  

[Rosie_0801]

4 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

How does one defend their home against a raging fire and smoke, or flooding from a hurricane?   I think a lot more people will die with this approach. It’s folly.  

One of the answers to fire is to burn country properly, but a enormous amount of work will need to happen to train the populace to be okay with that. Daughter and I raised one solution with one of our local do-gooders and even she was reluctant to pass it on to whoever holds sway because isn't what people want to hear.

[Faith-manor]

9 minutes ago, Rosie_0801 said:

One of the answers to fire is to burn country properly, but a enormous amount of work will need to happen to train the populace to be okay with that. Daughter and I raised one solution with one of our local do-gooders and even she was reluctant to pass it on to whoever holds sway because isn't what people want to hear.

Sigh. Ya. No one wants to here it! I am tired of the stick fingers in ears and scream la la la while doing nothing. The world is literally burning, and soon it will be flooding with hundreds of millions of displaced persons. Folks need to get on board.

Right there with you.

We have had troubles with neighbors because we have a wildflowers and milkweed. We greatly increased the number of pollinators in the area. Even they admit that.The wild patch looks very pretty. BUT, they just want grass and think there should be township ordinances against our patch. Like, do they live under a freaking rock???? So they not know we have a crisis of vegetable/fruit production due to lack of bees and butterflies??? I don't get it. And compared to wildfires and hurricanes, this issue is just a nothing practically against the bigger issues of climate change. I don't even know how to deal with people of this mentality.

People get mad when the farmers here cut the grass in the ditches and burn. But the thing is, we had a terrible bush fire here several years ago, and it took the whole town turning out along with three fire departments to keep it from getting to town and homes. 200+ people. The ditches had become overgrown on that road because all of the whining about cutting and burning, and taking down diseased, dead, rotting trees. Trimming low branches. The result? Bush fire. It is so hard to get people to accept that this kind of maintenance clearing and burning saves lives, prevents pain and suffering.

[stephanier.1765]

33 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

This feels a bit like the trolly question.  If I have chosen to stay out of hubris, should I ask other to risk death to save me.  Because calling for aid is not without risk to the rescuer.  I feel like it’s different for if you couldn’t evacuate.  
 

Am I wrong in thinking that communities open schools and such as shelters?  

Yes, they do. There are schools that allow for pets and there are volunteers and churches who will help people get there.

[Rosie_0801]

5 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

Bush fire. It is so hard to get people to accept that this kind of maintenance clearing and burning saves lives, prevents pain and suffering.

I think it is erroneous ideas of the past. There is no concept that the environment co-evolved with human management. Prehistoric humans weren't wandering around counting their lucky stars that something edible was there when they wanted it. They were managing the landscape. Even ants farm. Even birds use fire stick farming. 

Well, unless we teach this stuff in school, how will people know? But we can't because it'd be too controversial and we can't have that.

[Faith-manor]

39 minutes ago, Rosie_0801 said:

I think it is erroneous ideas of the past. There is no concept that the environment co-evolved with human management. Prehistoric humans weren't wandering around counting their lucky stars that something edible was there when they wanted it. They were managing the landscape. Even ants farm. Even birds use fire stick farming. 

Well, unless we teach this stuff in school, how will people know? But we can't because it'd be too controversial and we can't have that.

Agreed! 100%. 

[Brittany1116]

7 hours ago, kbutton said:

 

It's really difficult for many (not all) people who are not neurotypical to initiate plans, make plans, troubleshoot etc.--not all of them are well ensconced in a family, and sometimes their family members have some of the same difficulties. 

This. But not just nonNT folks. There is a huge percentage of the population who would not have been able to deal with evac process and aftermath I experienced without a solid plan, a reliable car and phone and GPS, a full tank of gas, hundreds of dollars for gas/food/lodging, a job they were willing to lose if they left it without permission or didn't report back by a certain time. A lot of people in S FL who didn't have mandatory evac orders found themselves many states away for days and days longer than planned, eating granola bars and fast food, with no clear way home, and short on funds. So when they see cones and spaghetti models and figure they're out of the path or it will drop categories over land or they've lived somewhere 50 years and never been hit AND they don't have the means to leave... they stay. 

FWIW, we only ever really see the negatives spotlighted. There are tons of people in FL, and no one talks about how many did follow the orders. 

[Scarlett]

4 hours ago, katilac said:

@Scarlett, do you think they should have chosen death instead? 

Ugh I feel like I am being misunderstood…..or maybe I don’t understand myself.  I just th7nk when one is told to evacuate, amd that if they don’t evacuate that emergency service will not be available to them during the storm…..that it would take a lot for me to then attempt to access those emergency services.  I know there are all sorts of outliers but we also know there are many people who just did not want to leave who,actuallly could have left.

I saw a couple on the morning news who did not evacuate and who almost died….and while she was talking to Nora McDonald her daughter showed up……if you have a daughter why did you not drive to her house instead of almost dying.

[Heartstrings]

6 minutes ago, Brittany1116 said:

job they were willing to lose if they left it without permission or didn't report back by a certain time.

I’d love to see legislation on this, similar to rules against price gouging in a disaster.  Something a governor could put in place around disaster declarations protecting jobs.  Seems like a no brained.  Of course people could still work but not be required. Kohls will be fine if it stays closed or works a skeleton crew for a week after a hurricane.  Capitalism will not collapse.  

[katilac]

7 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

 I don’t see a reasonable way to defend your home from a hurricane.  Like someone said up thread, you can’t hold the roof on and you aren’t going to keep out 2 or 3 feet of water.  

But you can repair or block a hole in the roof in the aftermath of a hurricane, which can make a tremendous amount of difference. You can sweep out rain water, pull out carpet, cut out drywall. Quick repairs can make the difference between having a house to live in and not having a house to live in, and you cannot make quick repairs if you are kept from returning to your house. 

We've never personally failed to evacuate for that reason, but I can understand the temptation. 

7 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

This feels a bit like the trolly question.  If I have chosen to stay out of hubris, should I ask other to risk death to save me.  Because calling for aid is not without risk to the rescuer.  I feel like it’s different for if you couldn’t evacuate.  

Am I wrong in thinking that communities open schools and such as shelters?  

Nope, legit question in response to what Scarlett said. If people never did stupid things, 911 wouldn't be half so busy. Yes, it is putting other people in danger, but do we really expect people to say, hmm, I really made the wrong call on this evacuation thing, guess I'll just die instead of calling for help. Scarlett said she can't imagine what it would take for her to have the nerve to call 911 after not evacuating, but I can imagine it easily: the danger of dying would give anyone the nerve to call. You will call for your loved ones if you don't call for yourself. 

People drive into high water, they go hiking without sufficient experience and supplies, they swim past the flags, they fail to evacuate from hurricanes, they don't prepare for snow storms, and a myriad of other stupid things. I wish they didn't, and I hope I never do anything stupid that requires rescuing, but of course people are going to call for help when they might die otherwise. While there's still danger in any rescue, they're not dispatching in the midst of a major weather event. They don't go out until things reach a certain level of safety. 

Do you mean local schools and such? Not for dangerous hurricanes, it's not a safe option, When push comes to shove, they will announce a last resort refuge. These don't have food, water, bedding, security, or such; they are just county emergency buildings that can probably keep you alive for the duration of the storm (a very welcome option at that point, I'm sure). Speaking for my county but I think it's pretty common. 

 

4 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Ugh I feel like I am being misunderstood…..or maybe I don’t understand myself.  I just th7nk when one is told to evacuate, amd that if they don’t evacuate that emergency service will not be available to them during the storm…..that it would take a lot for me to then attempt to access those emergency services.  I know there are all sorts of outliers but we also know there are many people who just did not want to leave who,actuallly could have left.

I saw a couple on the morning news who did not evacuate and who almost died….and while she was talking to Nora McDonald her daughter showed up……if you have a daughter why did you not drive to her house instead of almost dying.

I'm not saying that people don't do stupid things (or that I've never remarked on the stupidity; believe me, I have!). I'm just saying that calling for help when you're afraid for your life is a pretty human thing to do, even when you caused the emergency. 

[Carrie12345]

1 hour ago, katilac said:

But you can repair or block a hole in the roof in the aftermath of a hurricane, which can make a tremendous amount of difference. You can sweep out rain water, pull out carpet, cut out drywall. Quick repairs can make the difference between having a house to live in and not having a house to live in, and you cannot make quick repairs if you are kept from returning to your house. 

In theory, and occasionally in practice, you’re correct about early remediation. In reality, the methods needed to adequately remove/prevent mold and rot require infrastructure.

[Heartstrings]

5 hours ago, katilac said:

ope, legit question in response to what Scarlett said. If people never did stupid things, 911 wouldn't be half so busy. 

I didn’t mean troll, I meant trolley. Proper spelling helps in communication, so that’s my fault. I’m terrible at spelling on my phone.   I was referring to…
 

The trolley problem is a series of thought experiments in ethics and psychology, involving stylized ethical dilemmas of whether to sacrifice one person to save a larger number. The series usually begins with a scenario in which a runaway tram or trolley is on course to collide with and kill a number of people (traditionally five) down the track, but a driver or bystander can intervene and divert the vehicle to kill just one person on a different track.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

 

Philosophically, if I’ve put myself in a dangerous situation willfully and knowingly, out of hubris, do I risk the life of another to save my own.  I don’t know. I have a feeling the wife and children of a rescuer who dies saving me would have a different opinion, especially if someone forwards them my TikTok account where I’m bragging about staying.  

Edited October 1, 2022 by Heartstrings

[Katy]

11 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Ugh I feel like I am being misunderstood…..or maybe I don’t understand myself.  I just th7nk when one is told to evacuate, amd that if they don’t evacuate that emergency service will not be available to them during the storm…..that it would take a lot for me to then attempt to access those emergency services.  I know there are all sorts of outliers but we also know there are many people who just did not want to leave who,actuallly could have left.

I saw a couple on the morning news who did not evacuate and who almost died….and while she was talking to Nora McDonald her daughter showed up……if you have a daughter why did you not drive to her house instead of almost dying.

The people who call know no one is showing up in a storm. They’ll be put on a list to be checked on when the wind is below 45 mph. They know they may die. But there will be a record of what happened so someone might rescue them. Or maybe a record for their relatives after they die. Or maybe they’re so stressed they aren’t thinking at all and simply call 911 they way they have been drilled to do in Florida for about 38 years.

I have no good answer for not going to a child’s house instead, assuming they’re in a flood zone and she isn’t.

[Bootsie]

12 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Ugh I feel like I am being misunderstood…..or maybe I don’t understand myself.  I just th7nk when one is told to evacuate, amd that if they don’t evacuate that emergency service will not be available to them during the storm…..that it would take a lot for me to then attempt to access those emergency services.  I know there are all sorts of outliers but we also know there are many people who just did not want to leave who,actuallly could have left.

I saw a couple on the morning news who did not evacuate and who almost died….and while she was talking to Nora McDonald her daughter showed up……if you have a daughter why did you not drive to her house instead of almost dying.

I don't know the particulars of this woman and her daughters, but the decision to evacuate is often complex.  Did this woman have a car and drive?  Was she is an a mandatory evacuation area?  Was there a high probabilty of alife or death situation occurring at her residence, given the projected storm path, probability of flooding, etc?  Was the probability of a life or death situation at occurring at her daughter's house that much less? 

If her daughter was able to get to her that quickly in those conditions, it does not sound as if her daughter is very far away.  The problem with hurricanes is you don't know exactly where to go; things can change quickly and what appeared to be the safe place to go could end up being a more dangerous place than you left.  I have had family members in south Lousiana evacuate, moving further inland to areas which are not in a suggested evacuation zone, only to have a tree fall on the house they have evacuated to because of the tornadoes spawned by the hurricane (but the house they left was unharmed).  Or, a storm can stall and there can be torrential rain and flooding a couple of houndred miles inland rather than where the landfall of the hurricane is.  

[QueenCat]

On 9/30/2022 at 12:49 PM, pitterpatter said:

I haven't read all the posts, but I can imagine DH's work pressuring him not to evacuate, if THEY didn't want to. He's in an upper management job. He would be horribly conflicted and worried about losing his job, which he must have for health insurance.

That makes me sad. About 20% of the company dh works for is in Orlando (we don't live there). It is company policy that if there are evacuation orders or recommended evacuation (wherever you live/work) that you should evacuate (unless you choose not to). And you won't be charged vacation time for the time off either. This part applies for other reasons. If there is a long power outage, you don't get charged for the time off. This company is a large-sized defense contractor but not in the top ten. 

As I think about it, dh has never been charged for vacation/pto time with any of the companies he's worked for if the base/post closed for weather/other reasons.

[Murphy101]

On 9/30/2022 at 2:14 PM, Heartstrings said:

How does one defend their home against a raging fire and smoke, or flooding from a hurricane?   I think a lot more people will die with this approach. It’s folly.  

Probably. But a lot of people are more terrified of being homeless than being dead.  They may not articulate it exactly like that, but that’s where their actions point. 

On 9/30/2022 at 2:37 PM, Terabith said:

Of course they will.  But the fact is, with climate change, there are a ton of areas that shouldn’t be inhabited by humans.  They’ll be repeatedly destroyed, and it makes no sense to pay to rebuild there. But those are people’s homes, and people aren’t logical.  Frankly, most of New Orleans makes no sense to insure, but it’s a huge city and a strong cultural icon.  It’s not going to be abandoned just because rising oceans threaten its existence.  

Except… much if it was abandoned after Katrina. Thousands that left and became homeless, still are gone and too many stayed homeless.  New Orleans was forever physically changed by Katrina.  And the areas that were eventually rebuilt took years and often not by the people who had previously lived there.  Eventually these cities will become affordable for the extremely wealthy and eventually after that even they will find they don’t want to live somewhere they can’t get low income labor. 

On 9/30/2022 at 3:08 PM, Heartstrings said:

I fully agree that some areas shouldn’t be rebuilt.  I just don’t understand the thought process of “I’ll defend this structure against fire/hurricane”.   That’s different than desiring to rebuild.  Risking and sacrificing lives because of a misguided idea that Chad is going to Red Bull up and keep out the hurricane is crazy.  

Yes and no. It depends how likely they really think the storm will be that bad and how home insecure they are.  If they have weathered many storms before and they know that if their home is truest destroyed they may never have another secure home again? It’s more a captain goes down with his ship mentality.

On 9/30/2022 at 3:47 PM, Faith-manor said:

I agree. Joe loner is no match for the ever increasing horror of climate change. It is so scary! 200 + million is the estimate of climate refugees by 2050. Frankly, I think that is a conservative estimate. Too conservative. Many of these folks live in regions without the resources and technologies to do anything to mitigate the effects.

Nah. If it gets that bad, there won’t be as many able-bodied humans as you might think. Cancers and low birth rates and disease will do more to reduce that number that you think.  Only those who win the generic and financial and dumb luck lottery will have the ability to even try to be a refuge.  That’s always been the case historically regardless of reason for the refuge situation. 

On 9/30/2022 at 9:21 PM, Scarlett said:

Ugh I feel like I am being misunderstood…..or maybe I don’t understand myself.  I just th7nk when one is told to evacuate, amd that if they don’t evacuate that emergency service will not be available to them during the storm…..that it would take a lot for me to then attempt to access those emergency services.  I know there are all sorts of outliers but we also know there are many people who just did not want to leave who,actuallly could have left.

I saw a couple on the morning news who did not evacuate and who almost died….and while she was talking to Nora McDonald her daughter showed up……if you have a daughter why did you not drive to her house instead of almost dying.

Because odds were just as likely her daughter could have been the one needing rescue. 

On 10/1/2022 at 4:54 AM, Carrie12345 said:

In theory, and occasionally in practice, you’re correct about early remediation. In reality, the methods needed to adequately remove/prevent mold and rot require infrastructure.

This.  Whether they stay or go, it can take months to get it all ripped out and hauled off and years to get it all repaired.  In the mean time, the various sicknesses that come with these living conditions can spread like wildfire.