2008 Woodie Awards
Gustav: a disaster in disguise
Nicholas O'Malley, Collegain columnist
Issue date: 9/5/08 Section: Editorial / Opinion
Now, the same government is in a similar position with a lower-profile disaster that has raised little controversy. Why would a government that delayed relief during Katrina rush to help this time around?
As if that weren't enough, there is the issue that the city's levees barely held. According to some officials, if Gustav had been a direct hit, the results may have differed.
With the levees even in question after a Category 2 storm not directly hitting the city, how could the city's safety be assured in another Katrina?
But with the popular belief that the levees are sufficient, will enough be done to prevent another disaster for New Orleans? Many headlines are portraying the city's preparation as a complete success. The number of evacuees during Gustav dwarfed the Katrina numbers. Many residents are attempting to return already with businesses eagerly waiting.
New Orleans believes that it is ready to return to normal. Its walls passed the test of Gustav. Will the city and its residents start to believe that the changes made after Katrina have safeguarded the city and put a stop on the efforts that have brought them so far?
Whether or not you believe in global warming or how much impact it may have, hurricanes are becoming stronger and more frequent. The events of three years ago should serve as a reminder of that. A sense of complacency towards the city's protection will only lead the city to repeat the mistakes of Katrina.
The levees of New Orleans, the organization of evacuations, and relief efforts have sufficed so far this year. However, Gustav was not New Orleans' true test. It may take months, or even years, but the chances of a storm of Katrina's caliber hitting New Orleans is far too great to remove the city's protection as one of the government's major concerns.
So while the city may have held strong against Gustav, the efforts to safeguard the city after Katrina are not yet where they need to be.
Nicholas O'Malley is a Collegian columnist. He can be reached at nomalley@student.umass.edu.
As if that weren't enough, there is the issue that the city's levees barely held. According to some officials, if Gustav had been a direct hit, the results may have differed.
With the levees even in question after a Category 2 storm not directly hitting the city, how could the city's safety be assured in another Katrina?
But with the popular belief that the levees are sufficient, will enough be done to prevent another disaster for New Orleans? Many headlines are portraying the city's preparation as a complete success. The number of evacuees during Gustav dwarfed the Katrina numbers. Many residents are attempting to return already with businesses eagerly waiting.
New Orleans believes that it is ready to return to normal. Its walls passed the test of Gustav. Will the city and its residents start to believe that the changes made after Katrina have safeguarded the city and put a stop on the efforts that have brought them so far?
Whether or not you believe in global warming or how much impact it may have, hurricanes are becoming stronger and more frequent. The events of three years ago should serve as a reminder of that. A sense of complacency towards the city's protection will only lead the city to repeat the mistakes of Katrina.
The levees of New Orleans, the organization of evacuations, and relief efforts have sufficed so far this year. However, Gustav was not New Orleans' true test. It may take months, or even years, but the chances of a storm of Katrina's caliber hitting New Orleans is far too great to remove the city's protection as one of the government's major concerns.
So while the city may have held strong against Gustav, the efforts to safeguard the city after Katrina are not yet where they need to be.
Nicholas O'Malley is a Collegian columnist. He can be reached at nomalley@student.umass.edu.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Ed Cutting
posted 9/06/08 @ 12:18 AM EST
1: What kind of idiot builds/lives BELOW sea level? Where I am from, we consider any building less than 40/50 ABOVE the flood high tide line to be expendable. (Continued…)
Sean
posted 9/06/08 @ 2:48 PM EST
Ed Cutting has no life. This guy has been responding to every article in a COLLEGE newspaper since the beginning of time.
No one's blaming the disaster(s) on Bush, more the response to Katrina. (Continued…)
Post a Comment