Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
But when you talk about stuff in the 100 year or 500 year flood plain, should the govt. buy that too? How much farm land would that involve that would make sense NOT to plant most years? I know nobody suggested that, but I just don't think we'll ever get to the level when we can completely anticipate and negate the relatively awesome power of natural forces.
|
I think that's the very reason why no one has suggested doing anything at all with 100- or 500-year floodplains (and really, the reason why we label them as such) - it's unpredictable and sometimes will go completely apeshit. No one is saying to clear out the 500-year floodplain, just the areas that are consistently in danger and would be cost-effective to purchase.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
I'm sure there could be levee improvements and top notch city planning, but considering the relatively low loss of human life, I'm not throwing in that this one was a governmental failure just yet, which was the tone that Byrd was developing and that I expect to see dominate some coverage.
|
At least from what I've seen and read, anyone who takes that tone is likely being disingenuous based on a preconceived agenda. The WV Representative that blamed this on Bush did so with absolutely no understanding of the situation.
I haven't heard a single person involved claim that governmental agencies did anything wrong, which is the most telling part. Unless further information comes to light, you have to simply think this was a once-in-500-years occurrence, and you can't plan for that sort of thing.