|
|
Institute for Crisis, Disaster, and Risk Management Crisis and Emergency Management Newsletter Website |
|
| |
March
2006
Volume
10 - Number 2 |
|
There is certainly a preponderance of media coverage focus in the weeks immediately following a large scale disaster. There is also usually a large body of research evaluating the overall response and long term recovery from such events. I have not experienced a large scale natural disaster firsthand. But in February 2006, I took part in a relief mission to the Biloxi, MS area. Nearly six months after Hurricanes Katrina ravaged the Gulf coast, the immediacy of the situation had quelled and long term recovery plans had not taken hold. The following observations may not be unique to this timeframe, but reflect the first-hand impressions of an unskilled volunteer with some basic emergency management education. My initial impression upon viewing the impacted area was much as I expected. I witnessed the well publicized destruction in the casino district of Biloxi, with enormous barges carried over four lane highways, entire developments reduced to slab foundations, and what I can only describe as a debris orchard. These fields of large, resilient oak trees had loads of trash hanging where it had floated and come to rest—in the highest limbs. Even more astounding was the magnitude of effects extending further inland than expected. Moreover, many homes appeared livable from the outside, but further inspection revealed catastrophic structural damage, mud residue, and mold problems. The perspective provided by television and media reports fails to capture the true scope of the devastation and certainly promotes a misperception of total damage based on cursory visual inspection. I gained the most perspective on the issues surrounding volunteer relief and how such assets can best be employed. First, I was astounded by the sheer influx of volunteer manpower, an issue in itself. It was reported that the gulf coasts population was currently augmented by 30,000 volunteers from across the country. This became relevant as I learned of the manpower-intensive nature of initial recovery. Second, the importance of an experienced volunteer coordinator cannot be understated. Our coordinator provided specific instructions to effectively utilize several teams and alleviated a common concern for hasty volunteer recovery efforts—the quality of volunteer workmanship and avoiding the requirement to redo shoddy work. There were also issues regarding priorities for volunteer attention. Our group was being hosted by a local church, but it seemed wrong that prioritization was based more on church affiliation than need. Moreover, it proved difficult, and somewhat frustrating, to ensure hurricane related work was the focus, rather than unrelated home improvement. Our work in restoring residential homes also allowed some interaction with victims. The most common complaints were insurance underpayments, significant delays of FEMA trailers, and the lack of and overcharging by contractors. It became apparent that, at least in that community, the loss of life was minimal. It seemed that this community had a different mentality than many in New Orleans in heeding well-timed evacuation orders. Of course there were some noteworthy anecdotal accounts as well. There were the brothers who worked as boiler technicians at a hospital in Biloxi. Their duties in restoring hospital systems kept them for two days before they could get away to assess the devastation that had occurred in their own homes. Then there was the neighbor who decided not to evacuate only to have his toilet explode due to tidal surge in the sewer system. As the water rose in his riverfront home, he and his dog climbed on top of the kitchen cabinets. He then witnessed a fight to the death as his dog fiercely defended their refuge from a huge rat-like creature that had washed in and was attempting to share their high ground. I certainly took these images and a few noteworthy concepts away from this experience. |