WHY does this scene play out during every hurriane?
WHY don’t folks evacuate?
Is it because of the traffic?
That was pointed out to me just before Katrina - that the traffic was so horrible that folks would run out of gas and be stranded trying to evacuate.
Maybe because like so many of the ‘experts’ on FR they decided that the storm was fake?
Moonachie is not on the coast and I’m pretty certain they didn’t have an evacuation order.
It would have been physically impossible to evacuate the entire NYC metro area.
It's because the main stream media, particulalry in the NYC area, over-hypes every weather hiccup, so that when the big storm really does bear down on the area, the people shrug their shoulders and yawn.
Plenty of people here yesterday saying it was over hyped.
I don’t think the town of Moonachie was under an evac order... until they were underwater.
They’re at an elevation of like 10’, as I recall.
There are large swathes of New Jersey’s coastline that are at low elevations above sea level, and a really large storm surge at high tide (which is what happened here) are going to make a bunch of the rivers and major streams in that area of NJ literally run backwards - which lots of people don’t expect or plan for.
So you’re a municipal official, thinking “Hey, we’re dozens of miles inland off the shore... we don’t have much to worry about except the drenching rain and the usual minor flooding we have every other year in the spring rains around here...”
Until the river or stream runs uphill, and you find out that, yes, there were reasons to be very worried.
Yes, and some turned back and headed home. My brother lives slightly north of Houston and he knew backroads to take and got out in record time.
Sandy looks devastating.
In a lot of cases you're better off staying where you are.
If you flee inland you don't know where the storm is headed, the storm can follow your path of flight so you have to stay ahead of the storm.
Small town don't have the infrastructure to handle the flood of people. Food, fuel, and shelter simply don't exist for all the people.
You may be inconvenienced but in most cases it's safer to let the storm pass over you than try to flee before it.
You are right about the traffic. With the massive number of people on the road you will not outrun the storm if you are in it's path.
People in an area that floods need to get out and go to an area that doesn't, but everyone trying to flee the storms path would result in more deaths.
I live in League City, TX. We evacuated for both Rita and Ike. In both cases my house took ZERO damage. (Well, not really. I broke a window putting up unneeded boards to protect the windows.)
We came back as soon as possible afterward, and it is a good thing we did. Power was out in my house for a week after we returned following Ike, and if we had not returned when we did, there would have been damage due to the lack of power. (Mainly due to thawing food in the appliances, but there was some other stuff, too.)
We got out early in Ike, and that was a good thing, because friends that left two hours after we did spent a day on the road due to morons in Houston evacuating and jamming the evacuation routes. I call these folks morons because their homes were in no danger of flooding (the real danger in a hurricane) and all they risked by staying was a little discomfort. Meanwhile people in the city of Galveston or Texas City — who were in peril if they remained — could not get out and risked getting caught in their cars trying to evacuate.
As it was, due to boneheaded policies by the City of Galveston following Ike, everyone who evacuated suffered substantial damage to their properties because they were not allowed to return in a timely manner. Those that ignored the orders were able to repair their homes and minimized damage. (Mind, there were areas of Galveston that did not flood, especially behind the seawall.)
Given that, how many of those who did evacuate following Ike are likely to evacuate next time - especially if their homes withstood Ike? I don't think that would be particularly smart, but I understand those who choose to stay.
As for me, I plan to leave any time the predicted storm surge comes within two feet of the elevation of my house, and remain otherwise. You are safer in a well-built home (mine is) than in a car evacuating, so long as your house does not flood.
Having ridden out four hurricanes in Houston (and evacuated for four others), I realize what a lot of newcomers do not — hurricanes are not atomic bombs. The damage they do is limited to coastal flooding and tornadoes — and you can get tornadoes well inland. (A shelter in Austin, TX that my wife and I fled to during one evacuation had its roof ripped off by a hurricane-spawned tornado. We would have been safer staying in Houston.)
Is riding though a hurricane uncomfortable? Yup. But riding it out — if your house does not flood — is safer than evacuating, with its attendant risks of accident or getting trapped on the road.
It could be because of economic reasons. Can they afford to stay at hotels? Or because home feels safe (even when it isn't). Or because inaction is the path of least resistance.
It makes sense to evacuate if you live in a flood zone. Someone made the point that water always wins. I agree.
While there may be many dummies there are a number who have reasons.
Once you go the authorities can make it difficult to get back in after the storm. Many fear looting of their property.
Waiting on the government to help them out of their dumb decision of not evacuating.
Waiting on the government to help them out of their dumb decision of not evacuating.