Talk:Hurricane Katrina/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Did FEMA plan for city evacuation

I am guessing, but after looking for information on the supposed bus evacuation plan for New Orleans, I have found none other than those that call for moving people to the Dome, and other shelters in schools. Without a destination, it makes no sense to load up buses. Due to the varying weather conditions, chosing a destinatin might depend on the storm track. However, most important is the availability of shelter of sufficient size to accommodate large numbers of people. I'm guessing that the silence from FEMA and lack of action was due FEMA scrambling to figure out where to move the many people needing, not just 24-48 hour shelter from a storm, but shelter for a month or more, and with that many services requiring thousands of staff and professionals. I was reminded of the duck-and-cover drills on the 50s and 60s, with all the shelter signs with the capacity and type of shelter for each designated on that familar sign (if you are old enough). I recall in the training film strips and stuff that some shelters protected against the blast, while others provided shelter for day against radiation by stocking water and food. I also recall plans for recovery afterward. To a kid, it didn't seem like it would work, but I was a kid, though in the 60s I recall some skeptical discussion and the gradual disappearance of the stacks of supplies and then the signs. My guess is that if FEMA had ever considered the need to shelter New Orleans, the idea seemed insurmountable and as the demographics of the region changed, impossible without an inordinate amount of planning, and trying to convince people outside the area to care about New Orleans. Mulp 06:38, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Because of many people pointing fingers at various government agencies' (e.g. FEMA) failure to do something that might not even have been their job (disaster planning is a LOCAL responsibility), perhaps there should be a section identifying what level of government and private industry has what responsibility (e.g. shared) for what levels of disaster preparedness (e.g. food, water, police protection at shelters) for people without transportation, invalids, hospitalized, etc.

AlMac|(talk) 07:22, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Sounds like that might be something more appropriate for an article on Disaster planning than an article about any particular disaster. Peyna 16:31, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Before creating that new article, have a look at Disaster and Category:Disaster and Category:Disaster preparation. That article and category look at general stuff about disasters. For specific disasters, see Category:Disasters. 194.200.237.219 10:34, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
This is not FEMA's responsibility; it's a state and local responsibility.

Banking, credit card, cell phone issues

A number of banks were wiped out and with them went the ability to use ATMs to get cash and also the use of bank affiliated credit cards. This has created problems for those with cars who left all over the gulf coast and for those who were evacuated after the storm hit. While I have seen numerous reports, they have been annecdotal and not quantitative. I did see a report or two stating that the data records must be keep in a remote secure location, but without disaster plan that is based on a backup location several hundred miles away, and without planning for entire area codes being completely non-functional, days are required to restore the ability to do transactions.

Related is the limitations of the cell phone call routing architecture which often locates the primary routing control inside the cell phone's primary calling area.

While both of these are communications related and might be covered in that section, I think specific mention should be made of their impact on the primary evacuation. Without cash or credit card capability it is difficult to buy gas, rent shelter and such. And without cell phones, it is very difficult to coordinate with family and friends on longer term provisions for shelter or knowing of each others safety. Mulp 07:08, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Banking

There are requirements to keep data in secure locations, such as off-site backup, but this is the data, like financial records. This is a separate issue from making the data available to other organizations, such as on-line access to verify financial accounts. Thus, many businesses in the storm hit area will be able to rebuild thanks to insurance and access to backup copies of computer records. They just not functioning during the aftermath of the disaster.
In the USA, Banks are required by law to inform their customers what accounts are covered by what Insurance. Thus, the fact that a bank was physically wiped out is irrelevant when you are using an account with that bank that has a form of government insurance. Checks written on accounts of banks, that got wiped out, are still legal tender, because of the government insurance, such as FDIC.
The ability to use credit cards and ATM machines is dependent on the finanancial infrastructure where a person wishes to use them. In other words, if the communications infrastructure to the ATM, or credit approval process, is wiped out, then it does not matter if you have money in the account, or your credit is Ok, because the local infrastructure cannot check that.
A major impact for poor people in the USA, who are living from pay check to paycheck, or other check to check, is that various social benefits arrive on the first of the month, so that towards the end of the month, people are financially tapped out. For example, elderly people, retired people, those on some kind of disability income ... they get their monthly installments at the beginning of them month. Thus, the fact that the storm arrived at the end of August meant many poor people had depleted their monthly incomes, and did not have reserves to buy gasoline in advance of the storm.
AlMac|(talk) 23:59, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Telephone Communications

Traditional Land Line Telephones do have needs which can be disrupted by widespread storms, power outages, phone lines under water.
Cell Phones need to intercommunicate using relay towers, which got knocked out by Katrina. You may recall during 9/11 where cell phone communications were disrupted because the WTC served a function of being relay towers for cell phone communication.
Police Radio similarly dependent on relay towers, which got knocked out by the storm.
Satellite Phones work fine when land lines are broken, or cell phone relay towers knocked out, except during a time of solar flares, they too can be disrupted.
Local authorities did not have backup communications for when the primary went down, because they did not anticipate this problem.
What was needed until local communications repaired, was for the military to provide in the sky something equivalent to a relay tower for cell phones and police radio.
However, the military only did what they were asked to do, so if local state government does not think to ask for something, it does not get done.

AlMac|(talk) 00:09, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Global Warming (again!)

I'm constantly stunned how quickly the two words global warming dissappear from this page. Here is some evidence that the term should appear on the page:

  • A google search "global warming katrina" yields 2.390.000 pages!
  • Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott of GB recently made the link between Kyoto, global warming, sea temperatures and Katrina [1].

People are clearly making the link between global warming and Katrina. But they get no backgound information whatsoever from this article. Each time somebody adds information it dissapears magically after a few hours, no matter how cautious one formulates. I strongly suggest to add a sentence to "Political effects" > "Environmental issues" along the line

Katrina has caused a renewed interest in global warming and whether it is responsible for stronger hurricanes observed in recent years. See here for some information on the current state of discussion.

Thanks. MH 14:26, 10 September 2005 (UTC)


Reply:

While global warming has been heavily politicized, Katrina is *certainly* going to generate significant discussion from the scientific community. (Particularly since the question of *rebuilding* is going to need careful scrutiny.)

The amount of energy in Katrina is going to need serious examination (more than, say, Ellen DeGeneres). Science is de facto NPOV, and by that time this page will not be such a popular target. In the meantime there'll continue to be lots of *facts* about the *human response* to digest!

-- Twang

Race Issues (finding/looting)

The account of the controversey over the two photos concludes with the line 'But according to the photographers, the person described as "looting" was seen taking the items from a store, and those described as "finding" found items in the water.' The 'finding' photographer is quoted in the Snopes articles, but does anyone have a source for the 'looting' photographer making any such statement?--The Bruce 04:52, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

The Snopes article quotes Salon.com, which says:

Jack Stokes, AP's director of media relations, confirmed today that Martin says he witnessed the people in his images looting a grocery store. "He saw the person go into the shop and take the goods," Stokes said, "and that's why he wrote 'looting' in the caption." Maurreen (talk) 05:57, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks - I missed the Salon quote.--The Bruce 06:17, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm... Those explanations don't really adequately explain pictures like this: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050830/480/ladm11608301734

> The Bruce: The photographer probably saw the woman heading toward the store and then leave with stolen goods. The store itself may have been just outside of the camera frame. There is a ridiculous assumption underlying all this criticism that readers have more or the same amount of information as the photographers at the scene. The photographer is there, watching before and after and taking dozens and dozens of photographs discarded in favor of the one best shot. I'd give the shooter the benefit of the doubt.

Did anyone see the CNN "reporter" at the Houston reception point for buses grilling a guy for being on a bus that was not really from the Dome, they just joined the caravan, and the CNN guy - Shane -is grilling him for "proof" he really was INSIDE the dome. It was DEPLORABLE Cnn journalism. Fortunately the host lady tried to keep saying was it really important where he came from, but the clown in Houston just would not stop. I hope this Shane guy stays a stringer.Kyle Andrew Brown 15:31, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

San Antonio Columnist Cary Clack (Express News) concludes: "it's inexcusable and unconscionable that in the United States of America, in what may be this nation's greatest tragedy, there are elderly, children, sick and poor people who believe that their government has abandoned them to a fate unimaginable in the most prosperous and most technologically advanced country in history." Is that linkable?"Kyle Andrew Brown 19:03, 4 September 2005 (UTC)


I think this topic is much too narrow. The implications of the Hurricane Katrina tragedy in regard to race and class are much more broad than the controversy over the photographs and Kanye West. As for the photographs, I did not find the photographer's explanation convincing. He seems to be trying to rationalize his tendency not to hold white people accountable for behavior he would be critical of if a black person had done the same thing.

I have read the longer piece on 'race and Katrina' and it struck me as having been written by someone who did not grasp the topic he was trying to address. For example, the person never stated why African-American organizations objected to the use of the word 'refugee.' Instead, he cited a dictionary, ignoring the people who were most insightful about the issue. Indeed, the entire tone of the piece was one of clueless didactism and dismissal of the black population's concerns. I would hope that such material would be criticized sooner. I've added some additional information, and clarified why the critics were upset, but the article still needs more work. A helpful addition would be poll data comparing the opinions of Americans about the tragedy according to age, race, gender, political party, etc.67.100.45.220 16:02, 27 September 2005 (UTC)MD

Externals / Support groups

Who are the Nazis who keep erasing any external links? I lived in New Orleans and clarified and forecast many of facts about levee problems, timing, and weakness, as well as added much commentary on the multiple failures of leadership on my extensive blog entry, with many valuable links. Katrina Drowns Big Easy. You instantly delete my listing, but leave up the racist Conservative Citizens Council link for a week, which lists criminals from everywhere, as long as they are black. Obviously external links don't have to have the same neutral viewpoint strictures- so why is this the only entry that doesn't have a general list?

The Support Groups area of the External Links & Resources area keeps getting reverted. One of the reverters is calling 3RR on me, but whatever. I contend that the Support Group section is a relevant and helpful resource for the Katrina disaster and the people affected by it. The fact that I started the site is irrelevant. It's non-commercial and a directly-related, beneficial public service. Having the section there and an 11th External does not a link farm make. What's most disappointing is that some people here are more interested in counting links than helping people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.5.29 (talk • contribs) 07:08, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

It should be noted that Jacob above has a history of adding externals Wikipedia with sites he operates which other editors just remove. I say this not to imply that his edits are in bad faith, but rather that he is misunderstanding why we have externals on Wikipedia at all. The link he has been pushing in Katrina is directed to a mostly empty message forum he operates and it has been removed by multiple editors (including a couple of times by me). I am glad that Jacob has at least been respectful enough of our process to stop adding the link himself after I pointed out he was in violation of our rules... But it still doesn't make it an appropriate link in light of WP:NOT. --24.165.233.150 07:08, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Fixing History and Summary of Breakdown of Law and Order in New Orleans

The section: History and Summary of Breakdown of Law and Order in New Orleans originally had:

The breaching of two levees protecting New Orleans caused water to flow unabated into the city. Many homes are underwater in New Orleans and it is expected to take months to pump all the water out of the city. There remains a humanitarian disaster, with many people stranded due to flooding. Lawlessness persisted until September 3, 2005. [2] The federal disaster area was been placed under the control of FEMA (under Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff) and the National Guard on September 2, 2005.
A breakdown in command and communications among the local and state government first responders after Hurricane Katrina and subsequent levee failure and flooding in New Orleans on August 29, 2005 led to local civil problems and a desperate situation in await of secondary and tertiary national responders and NGO's. New Orleans' Mayor Ray Nagin called for federal response in a "desperate SOS" put out in the media August 31, 2005 following his city's inability to control or put down looting, rape and murder[3] jumping the gun on the state's governor Kathleen Blanco and acting beyond his power in the Posse Comitatus Act which prevents presidential direction of the National Guard without state level (Governor's) request for assistance. As mayor, Nagin was not in a position to request the federal assistance officially. The lawlessness had kept Red Cross and Salvation Army at bay unable to provide charitable relief during the crisis. Louisiana Governor Blanco eventually declared a state of emergency authorizing local law enforcement and state assigned National Guard special powers in putting down looters on September 1, 2005 four days after Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour had declared martial law in his state and well after lawlessness had set into the city of New Orleans. Blanco requested help from President Bush September 2, 2005 in a meeting along with Mayor Nagin aboard Air Force 1 at the New Orleans Louis Armstrong International Airport in Kenner, Louisiana[4]. The lawlessness was essentially ended the next day, September 3, 2005, by the federal responders under the control of President George W. Bush who had temporarily federalized state National Guard troops as requested by Blanco, Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff and Joint Task Force Katrina Commander Lt. General Russel Honore (National Guard ).

This is CLEARLY wrong on many counts. First of all, the section CLEARLY tries to blame local jurisdictions, and ends with federal system "heroically" fixing everything that was clearly a local problem. (See the first section) It just plain lacks NPOV. Even worse, it gets many things factually wrong and the whole section regarding the Posse Comitatus Act is completely ridiculous. The whole tone of the section is that it is LAYING BLAME, when this is supposed to be a history and summary of the breakdown of law and order. It's also weird for something like this to be on the front. It should be sorted by either importance or chronologically, of which "History and Summary of Breakdown of Law and Order in New Orleans" and "Declaration of State of Emergency versus Martial Law" should not be placed first. I've made significant corrections to the paragraph and moved the sections.

Further, the whole part about the Posse Comitatus Act IS NOT VALID. The page says that "The President of the United States can waive this law in an emergency;"

In addition, the later portion tries to lay blame the Blanco was late. Not true, assistance requests were made as early as the 28th of August. [5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.142.28.90 (talk • contribs) 4 September 2005

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to…) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. 4.232.105.59 09:16, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi. I put in the bit about "Breaching of the levees protecting New Orleans caused water to flow unabated into the city.", and you removed it citing POV. If this is POV, then tell me how can I put in NPOV? If there is another POV, then how did all the water get into New Orleans? Leistung 10:56, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

In addition, these sections should not have been added to the main article, but belong in Effects of Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans, and I have relocated them both there. The original submitter should have noticed that there is prominent subarticle indicated by the main article link. Lexor|Talk 11:14, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Good work!. Invites the question as to what should be in the main article. Is it just a summary, witrh pointers to the meaty bits? In which case, all lengthy detail in it should be removed to the "sub-articles". This detail is probably duplicated anyway. Leistung 06:30, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
Invites the question. (SEWilco 06:34, 5 September 2005 (UTC))
OK. I changed it! Leistung 17:04, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Any idea how to relate the documented repeated shooting of guns by police at people trying to walk out of New Orleans to Gretna? How distant would these shots be heard? How could anyone tell that the shots were not signs of disorder, but "signal" - don't come here - shots? Mulp 17:09, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

There are clearly several opposing stories here.

  1. The police chief of Gretna has been interviewed on TV regarding this. His deputies had been ordered by him to block the bridge and not let anyone from New Orleans into Gretna because his city had been evacuated and his job was to protect the city from alleged looters from New Orleans. There were no busses in Gretna waiting to evacuate these people.
  2. Several of the people, who were turned back, were interviewed. They say they were told by New Orleans police that they could cross the bridge, where on the other side there would be busses to evacuate them.
    1. There are in fact multiple stories of victims being told to go various places where there would be busses to evacuate them, but there were not. This may be related to the fact that New Orleans had a disaster plan involving the use of buses to evacuate people, but that part of the plan was never implemented, so police officers who knew about the plan, but had no communications working, might not have known that the bus evacuation had been cancelled.
  3. So here are these people saying that the Gretna police told them to go back, fired guns in the air, pointed guns at them, and forceably confiscated food and water from them, some of which had been stolen by looters then shared with people in wheel chairs, elderly, etc. who had been without food or water for several days due to the speed with which the water had risen in their homes.
There needs to be addressed some place the issue of people without food or water, for whatever reasons, does this justify looting to get some, or are you supposed to starve and hydrate to death? AlMac|(talk) 16:27, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism to be on the lookout for:

Someone has been occasionally rolling back the externals section to twoish day old version using a mix of dynamic IPs and open proxies. They are unresponsive to communication and make no other edits. (some examples of the dynamic ips include [6] [7] [8]) I am not sure why they keep doing this, but I have observed that a couple of the links being reinserted were ones which we removed because our consensus on avoiding fradulant donation sites causes us to only link to large/mainstream sites for donations. In any case, these edits should be reverted as soon as they are seen. It is not really possible to block this user because they have come from so many IPs. Thanks for your help. --24.165.233.150 09:40, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Katrina vs. 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake

Since I've seen several quotes from Gulf Coast residents and politicians saying this is "their tsunami", an article comparing the two natural disasters, including timelines for humanitarian aid, would be informative. 4.232.105.59 09:12, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't think you can really compare. For one thing, the U.S. has not accepted any of the aid offered (as far as I know). For another, the tsunami affected a lot more people over a much wider geographical area. Any comparisons are likely to be misleading. --220.238.233.226 10:58, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
In both cases there was a warning. It could be argued that the warnings were messed up one way or another.
Tsunamic warnings were sent by e-mail in all capitalization, which some anti-spam software falsely flagged as spam and rejected. Warnings were sent other ways than e-mail, such as radio and telephone from an air base in India that was now under water, but the people who had not yet been hit, were unable to mentally digest what they were being told, and warn their respective populations.
Katrina warnings were obvious to anyone who watches weather forecasts. There had been many less destructive hurricanes where people not realize how bad category 5 is, and thought they could ride it out.
Risk of breach of levees had been forecast by numerous scientific studies and simulations, let alone risk of terrorists blowing them up. There were plans in the works to deal with that, but those plans can take decades to be approved, funded, implemented. Nature does not wait on Man.
AlMac|(talk) 22:03, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
You cannot compare a Tsunami with a Hurricane. The Tsunami is usually much more dangerous, with deaths running into the tens of thousands plus. See Krakatoa which happened in 1883 and the Tsunami caused major damage. Leistung 11:08, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
TO be fair, the effects of the storm surge that accompanies a hurricane CAN be compared to the effects of a tsunami. This may partially explain the quotes that this is "their tsunami". Also, I agree that the Indian Ocean tsunami was a much bigger event, but I do think that Hurricane Katrina and the Indian Ocean tsunami have this in common: they were both massive natural disasters that overwhelmed and devastated the communities affected. But not much more than that. Carcharoth 12:02, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
Senator Frist points out that in some ways this was worse than the tsunami. The water receded after the tsunami, so it was over, and one just needed to assist the survivors, much as in the aftermath of Katrina on the MS and AL coasts. However, with N.O. below sea level, the water did not recede, in fact, there were levee breaches that were increasing the number of people in severe danger, and also unlike the tsunami, the people were still in attics to escape the water, and dying as the sun baked those attics to 120 to 140 degrees F.--Silverback 16:18, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
A tsunami is much worse in that there is no warning. It's as if a hurricane storm surge arrived without any winds to warn people of the impending danger.
I think that the New Orleans Levee breach that occured in the middle of the night on Monday occured without warning while people were sleeping and that it is a fair comparison - certainly Katrina caused more financial damage while the Indian Ocean Tsunami caused a great death toll.

If it really was a tsunami, the entire Gulf Coast from the Florida Keys to the tip of the Yucatan, plus much of the Caribbean, would have been affected. CrazyC83 22:43, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Nobody's arguing that it actually was a tsunami. The question was about comparing the two disasters and their effects, including social effects. That said, I don't see that we need an article on this topic. A mention somewhere, perhaps. --Dhartung | Talk 09:18, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
Both destroy a lot of buildings. In the case of this hurricane, you have a lot of homeless. In the case of 2004 tsunami, you

have a lot of people dead so there is not as much need for rebuilding houses. A sad fact in either case.

FREEZE EDITING

PEOPLE ARE PUUTING PUKING GROSS PICTURES ON THIS SITE.

Ordinarily we have to weather the storm. One more revert and it goes to admin for block procedure request. Don't spend ANY energy in dialog with the individual, it feeds their psychological need for attention.Kyle Andrew Brown 15:23, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

216.194.7.238

one more revert and off to Admin report/violation 3RR.

Keep eye on the storm this vandal is up to.Kyle Andrew Brown 15:22, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Difficulty editing (again)

I have difficulty editing, because every time I try to edit, someone has edited a section title into

===Section Title===

or

=== Section Title ===

Now, I looked up from the help pages that the correct way to make section titles in code was by actually separating equations and a section title with spaces. Whilst I thought otherwise, I was trying to 'fix' this by removing spaces, which in fact seemed to work. Now I have trouble editing a page, because once I attempt to edit this, I might accidentally remove a section [because someone seemed to code a section in a (seemingly) wrong way] and then also get into an editing conflict. - Mardus 17:19, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Sidebar

"Some were told they were going to Texas. When one gentleman exited the plane, he looked around and said, 'This doesn't look like Houston, but it will do,' " Frandsen said. "One of the women was 100 years old and insisted on walking off the plane herself."

Again, their destination was kept a secret. National Guard officials asked reporters not to identify their news organization or tell the people where the plane was headed. Officials explained that some on earlier flights complained loudly when told where they were going."

From Salt Lake Tribune. Does anybody else find that funny? That a person would rather stay in a flooded out city than live in Utah? 71.32.199.15 18:18, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Talk pages are not a discussion forum... Unless you're going to propose to put that text in the article, you should probably remove this section. Iff you do, feel free to remove this comment with it. --24.165.233.150 18:23, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, Mr. Rules. :) What do you think? Should we include something? 71.32.199.15 18:25, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Sounds to me like it's an emergency management method. I don't know whether it was created now or if it is a standard method for reducing evacuation problems. You might remember that a few days ago a there was a fatal bus crash when the driver was attacked by a passenger who was upset about something. (SEWilco 00:53, 5 September 2005 (UTC))
Actually I found the content informative, especially if it can be attributed. While not appropriate likely for article it gives editors a heads up on water cooler talk and is insightful. Oh, and if all non-going-into the article stuff was banned from TALK at this article we would all have to take a Wikivacation. So let's make this a SIDEBAR which is when people talk to the judge outside the presence of the jury, which has jurisprudence. Sometimes the judge turns on the noise machine in Galveston courtrooms "Here comes the fog rollling in off the Gulf" he says to the Court. So if you don't want to hear the sidebars, then scroll quickly past the Sidebars...Kyle Andrew Brown 03:35, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Lessons learned from Disasters

the anecdotes about people not being told destination and why are important lessons for future disaster planning. If people are boxes to be moved to safety, then where they get shipped is of no matter, but if a family is evacuation in stages - triage - sick first, kids second, old folk last, then a family unit can be widely dispersed at an emotionally trying time. There were lessons learned from Ivan in the prior season and some important changes made, and here is another lesson, and the failure of all comm early in the disaster is another lesson. Maybe there should be a section on lessons learned and not learned, or something? wikipedia has far more useful information because it includes the details that considered irrelevant at the high level and edited out, but that are critical when dealing with specific applications of the information. I don't know where it goes in wikipedia, but I think it important. Mulp 18:46, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
  1. This topic is larger than Katrina.
  2. From every disaster aftermath, various organizations learn things. Many have a process to incorporate lessons learned into future disaster planning. Many do not.
  3. Many organizations have no corporate memory. All memory is in the heads of the employees. When they leave and there is personnel turnover, the new people do not have access to lessons learned from the past of the organization.
  4. Sometimes the larger world learns from the disasters of others.
    1. There is an earthquanke ... ask the victims afterwards about computer backups and continuation of business.
    2. Backups to off-site get stolen ... ask about encryption or other better protection.
    3. There is a flood ... ask about valuables in the refrigerator, and what ought to be stored in the attic.

Key links

Computer Infrastructure Co-dependency implications
Disaster planning for home owners and renters and small business like nursing homes
Disaster recovery planning for business
GAO http://www.gao.gov/index.html is the US agency whose job it is, on behalf of Congress, to investigate government agencies and the private sector readiness to deal with all sorts of topics. Here is their website directory of investigations they have conducted into disaster preparedness in general. Several reports by the US Government Accountability Office were into US Corps of Engineers work to protect the city of New Orleans from hurricanes, flooding, etc. A lesson learned might be what they focused on, such as rules for travel expenses for employees, as opposed to what they should have focused on, obvious only in retrospect.
Google's katrina Resource Rirectory
FEMA's Are you Ready? guide for individual, family, and community preparedness for anything.
Most computer users have heard of the concept of user friendly, well FEMA seems to have a talent for user hostile.
Homeland Security gudiance on personal disaster planning, such as the notion that you can protect your home with duct tape.
NGA USA's National Governor's Association
OMB (USA gov's Office of Management and Budget) listed inadequacies in FEMA's Disaster Response Preparedness such as in response times to Hurricane Isabel in 2003.
OMB is to US Administration what GAO is to Congress. While GAO investigates US Gov agencies on behalf of Congress, through the rose colored glasses (distorted vision) of whatever gripe they were told to investigate, so that they can miss what in retrospect is more important, OMB spoon feeds Congress as a gate keeper (agencies that testify to Congress must clear their info with OMB censorship, which is why the give and take questions on C-Span are so critical ... they can elicit info that OMB did not know to censor) for what the Administration thinks it is important for Congress to know, heavily influenced by the President's philosophy on government. Yeah, I know POV needs reweirte before using this some place on the main pages.

AlMac|(talk) 16:36, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi Mulp and Mac. How very true. As the song goes "When will they ever learn". The mistakes made in Katrina will happen again, somewhere, no necessarily in the US. Your reasoning is set out very well set out, and is would be good to add a new section. As for POV, there are so many POVs in these articles, that it would appear they cancel one another out, making it (hopefully) NPOV. Leistung 06:32, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Very Sad info in the TV news.
  • FEMA had been very slow to respond to past Hurricanes, experienced storms of protest not quite as intense as in aftermath of Katrina, this led to the agency figuring out how to fix responses in future disasters, and there was clear evidence they doing a better job, then in the reorganization into DHS, the priorities changed, such that it was no longer important to be prepared to protect against the giant natural disasters, but to look good in the fight against terrorism, and to do pork all over the USA in minor disasters.
  • There is a federal law about shredding old documents in which "old" means from the last administration, so that when new people elected as leaders they can do what they were elected to do, and totally ignore whatever was learned under previously elected people from other political party.

AlMac|(talk) 18:00, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Church and Celebrity Listings?

Could we create a list of churches and celebrities who are helping?--HistoricalPisces 18:13, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

There is a list of companies donating on another page already, have you seen that? One of the challenges is what qualifies helping? Should we list every blogger who writes about the storm or only people who already have wikipedia articles for other reasons? :) --24.165.233.150 19:14, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorta thinking the main article page is an ongoing record more than a place for seeking assistance. It's probably appropriate in links to direct folks to Wiki style organizations, but the article is more of a record, in keeping with its encylcopedic purpose.
Also, the editors here are really not in a position to evaluate organizations and activities providing aid. To go beyond content that explains there are organizations and what that are doing in an overall sense is different that specifying what individual organizations are doing which is the purpose of a blog or newspaper or radio media.
Also, the article should avoid appearing to endorse an organization because then it will be asked why it is not endorsing another - - and then we get a big political battle going.
So far, the editors here have done a terrific job of keeping things low key. It's great our "battles" are more about where to put content, rather than what the content is.Kyle Andrew Brown 22:51, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Combining all survivor/missing person info into one PeopleFinder

I am a volunteer on a http://192.122.183.218/wiki/index.php/PeopleFinderVolunteer wiki an attempt to combine all missing person info message boards, using volunteer time to enter each missing/found person into the neworleansnetwork.org database. With everyone's help, the New Orleans Network's PeopleFinder will be a comprehensive list of missing persons, so that the search and connection efforts will be easier.

One of the message boards that is helping us by sending us data in the proper format is Craiglist, which is linked to in the external links. Each person that goes and posts on Craiglist then also will probably post on 15 other missing person links, and we will be working by hand to re-enter the info into the PeopleFinder. It would be of great service to survivors and their loved ones, and also to people looking to volunteer time (NOT money), if our PeopleFinder and the accompanying volunter project were linked along with Craigslist.

Please let me know if this is possible!!! (I tried linking, but I see now that it was in violation of the rules.) We're trying to get massive amounts of work done and, quite frankly, there are dozens and dozens of missing person lists currently on the net, it seems ridiculous to only list 4.

Eeblet 21:08, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I think linking to New Orleans Network and to the KatrinaHelp info wiki PeopleFinder section seems a good idea... as an aggregator it's arguably a better choice than any single missing persons DB for inclusion. NOTE, though, that as of right now, the NON DB machine is down due to high traffic, as I understand it, and people can't help transcribe so it may make more sense to postpone putting a link in. See [9] ++Lar 22:14, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
The database has found a home, but the searchability is not currently up. The PeopleFinderVolunteer wiki has been wildly succesful, and work is close to done. I hope that when the database has enough hosting to support it, that Wiki editors are willing to leave up an external link to PeopleFinder -- the craigslists boards will just be a subset of it, so it really doesn't make sense to have craigslist and not PeopleFinder. Eeblet 16:33, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Katrina victims wiki

Here is a Wired News story about an effort by one Katrina victim to let people geographically locate their homes on a Google map of the region.

AlMac|(talk) 21:14, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Tracking Other Web Changes

This may be talk-filter; if so, my apologies. I'd like to suggest that people archive any copies they have of government and aide agency websites, and to be on the lookout for changes to those websites. Already, we have seen IEM remove some of their press releases, in which they boast about themselves, out of fear that in the aftermath of all this, they'll be held responsible; much the same applies to what FEMA's been up to on their website.

This wikipedia may be the only authoratative, true source of factual information once the coverup begins. And you *know* it's going to be one helluva coverup. Don't let the bastards get away with it!

That's a job that's more for places like cryptome.org. Wikipedia also is not in the role of being the exposer of cover-ups, due to the Neutral point of view policy. Also, there are many, many sources of factual information besides Wikipedia, and Wikipedia is not always 100% reliable either. Don't oversell what we do here. --Dhartung | Talk 08:59, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
As an editor I would clearly refrain from commenting on "coverups". This is not a blog, a newspaper or a place for TALKING KEYBOARDERS.Kyle Andrew Brown 03:38, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Disaster relief response

Anyone explain what MRE-s are? Meal, Ready-to-Eat?

Yes. —Cryptic (talk) 21:52, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Intensity At Louisiana Landfall

I have corrected the landfall intensity at Grand Isle, LA to 140 mph, based on this statement from the NHC:

000 WTNT62 KNHC 291116 TCUAT2 HURRICANE KATRINA TROPICAL CYCLONE UPDATE NWS TPC/NATIONAL HURRICANE CENTER MIAMI FL 610 AM CDT MON AUG 29 2005

...KATRINA MAKES LANDFALL IN SOUTHEASTERN LOUISIANA...

AT 610 AM CDT...1110Z...HURRICANE KATRINA HAS MADE LANDFALL IN SOUTHERN PLAQUEMINES PARISH LOUISIANA...JUST SOUTH OF BURAS...AS A CATEGORY FOUR HURRICANE. MAXIMUM WINDS ARE ESTIMATED AT 140 MPH TO THE EAST OF THE CENTER.

FORECASTER PASCH

Additional confirmation of the number from NOAA [10] (I couldn't find the advisory above in the archive). The 145 figure is probably coming from the 6:00 AM advisory, which was shortly before it actually made landfall. Peyna 04:58, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I believe this information should be taken with a grain of salt for now. I would expect that, just judging by the absolute devestation over such a large area, the intensity was greater than estimated at the time of landfall, both in LA and MS.

My doubt as to the accuracy of intensity estimates is that they were made by radar and satellite data, which take place high up in the storm. For several hours leading up to landfall, there was no National Hurricane Center aircraft within the hurricane, and as such no way to measure the surface winds. Although hurricanes normally have higher winds aloft as opposed to near the surface, as seen with Hurricane Mitch in 1998 (another extremely intense storm), they can weaken from the top down. (see http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutwindprofile.shtml#fig2)

The NHC will conduct it's own investigation, and release a Tropical Cyclone Report after the end of the hurricane season, containing comprehensive information on the storm "including synoptic history, meteorological statistics, casualties and damages, and the post-analysis best track (six-hourly positions and intensities)".

At the very least, it would be wise to put an asterisk on the wind speed for now. Hope this helps you guys!

Death toll table readability

Should the table lines be made more visible? Florida is centered in its cell stretching across only 3 entries, while Louisiana has many more entries such that many counties (like Jefferson) look closer to Florida than Louisiana, and thus I thought those tolls were part of the Florida impact. Perhaps align the state names at the top of their cells somehow? AySz88^-^ 05:06, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Can we ensure that the table is accurate. It pays to be a the conservate side, and not put in guestimates put forward by a "spokeman" etc. If say 50 have been verified dead, and "a source" says based on what I am seeing there could be "1000s" dead, then the figure 50 should entered, not 1000. The figure can then be revised later, when more details come in. Leistung 06:38, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
Most of the numbers actually look pretty good, except for Jefferson Parish which has a round "200", which is odd. When an official says "obvious that death tolls are in the thousands" I think it's safe to say "1000+" though. I'm pretty sure everyone's been trying not to put up an overestimated number. AySz88^-^ 07:14, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
I think that we need to stick to official confirmed deaths in our table. When the mayor says, that "thousands" are dead, that doesn't mean a literal "1000-9999". Yes, most are way underreported, but I think we should wait in artificially raising the numbers based on supposition. The alternative is to have an artificially high number, which may be right, but will likely go down. If a death toll decreases, it can't mean that people suddenly revived, it means that somewhere along the line, incorrect information was presented. Let's try not to fall into that trap. --Twigboy 14:50, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Hello, I am new to Wikipedia. I use Mozilla.org's firefox webbrowser. I like to increase the font size by one step to help me read. The paragraphs about death toll run into the chart. Hopefully there is a way to edit formatting in wiki. - William Sharkey @ g ma il dot com


Where are all the Kentucky and Ohio fatalities coming from? There are no fatalities in either state according to any news site I have seen--and definitely not hundreds dead in Kentucky

HOW YOU CAN HELP

Scott 00:29:44, 2005-09-06 (UTC)

Should this be added?

www.scipionus.com

Its an colaborative map of the affected area, with information on flood level, power and water statuas and general damage assessments made by the site visitors (much like a wiki). Dont you guys think it would be a nice addition? 146.164.26.85 13:55, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

The map is a fun toy but it is so cumbersome and it will only get worse...--Robin 06:18, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Excuse for a power grab

"Far from deferring to state or local officials, FEMA asserted its authority and made things worse, Mr. Broussard complained on Meet the Press. When Wal-Mart sent three trailer trucks loaded with water, FEMA officials turned them away, he said. Agency workers prevented the Coast Guard from delivering 1,000 gallons of diesel fuel, and on Saturday they cut the parish's emergency communications line, leading the sheriff to restore it and post armed guards to protect it from FEMA, Mr. Broussard said. One sign of the continuing battle over who was in charge was Governor Blanco's refusal to sign an agreement proposed by the White House to share control of National Guard forces with the federal authorities." New York Times WAS 4.250 15:44, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

I kinda say not in its current form. It reads like a newspaper article, and its can be shot at with slings and arrows as provocative on this site, however true it may be. I recommend not placing it.Kyle Andrew Brown 16:39, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
I agree with "not in its current form". The paragraph could be rewritten in a more and diplomatic way. I'm sure that most people would agree that these actions by FEMA seem strange. They would certainly annoy Wal-Mart executives. There does seem to be a lot of disorganization, with some egos getting in the way. Looks like some of the chiefs need a good sleep. Leistung 06:31, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
See Political_effects_of_Hurricane_Katrina#FEMA_interference_with_local_efforts. --Dhartung | Talk 20:58, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
This statement about FEMA is difficult to believe. Why? Because FEMA has no police or soldiers. Just how could they stop anyone?
Isn't that sematic - even with a gun, you can't shot a target, the gun does the shooting. FEMA has the responsibility for coordinating resources which include the military forces assigned by Rumsfeld's executive order the saturday before landfall. Or if not FEMA, then homeland defense - the Fed reorg sure confused the command structure. Mulp 19:01, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Ways to help section

This article, or one of its immediate siblings, needs a 'ways to help the relief effort' section. See the tsunami articles for a style guide... +sj + 23:44, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Wild Death Toll Estimates

The figures listed in this article are ridiculous. The is no official estimate yet. Wikipedia is not the place for random guessing. 1,000 have not been confirmed dead. Roughly 250 people have. See here: [11]. 10,000 estimated dead was only the mayor's wild guess. Here are his exact words: "...10,000 [dead] would not be unreasonable." I don't know where all of this wild guessing came from but I am changing it right now to what we know for sure is true.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 00:44, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Absolutely agree. It pays to be very conserative when reporting statistics. They can be increased, as I fear they probably will, as more details come in. Leistung 06:36, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
The figures further down in the article are more reasonable now. I'm going to change the figures in the infobox, which I already did but some moron reverted it.
E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:59, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
It is difficult to keep track of all the edits on the death-toll figures by so many users. Suggestion: Move the death-toll table to a template page, so that edit is done on the template-page instead of the Hurricane Katrina page. In this way, we can better keep track of all the edits on the table, and could revert unverified inputs more easily. The same could be done for the infobox as well. What do you guys think? --Vsion 22:53, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
It's a great suggestion, long overdue. RattBoy 23:30, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
Someone has put it up Template:Hurricane Katrina death toll, Great! --Vsion 03:16, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
Everyone please, when adjusting the Death Toll in the top InfoBox, please use the numbers reported in the death toll list below. It's hardly encyclopedic for one section to have numbers that disagree wildly with another section's; more importantly, perhaps, those reported in the Template are verifiable and carefully edited. The data reported there is the best info available, and it should be used accordingly.--RattBoy 09:29, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Need for More Graphic Images

There should be more pictures here! There are barely any pictures of the massive damage it caused. There should be more. bob rulz 05:44, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Go take some! ... or if you're not in the effected area, please go find some photographers that are ... and convince them to submit their work under the GFDL or CC-BY-SA licenses (or the public domain) to the wikimedia commons. Wikipedia doesn't write itself and we always need more photographers! --Gmaxwell 06:00, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Pictures that are free license are available at several U.S. government sites: including the White House, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard. They place them in archives, releases on the disaster typ.le places. If you find a photo and do not know how to upload it into Wiki Commons, paste the link here and I will upload it for you and provide the name/location in WikiCommons.Kyle Andrew Brown 12:57, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if the photos here are usable, but you might be able to contact interdictor and get permission to use them if they aren't. This is a huge collection of images from the middle of the city. Pmaccabe 06:08, 08 September 2005 (UTC)

Questionable facts

The article starts out "Hurricane Katrina, one of the worst natural disasters in U.S. history." This fact is purely emotional and should be removed. It is still way to early to determine whether this is one of the worst natural disasters in US history.--Gephart 15:41, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I think that the "historical context" section provides enough corroboration for this assertion. Also, the total damage is expressed as "likely to be the most expensive Atlantic hurricane of all time." --Twigboy 16:00, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
I think its OK to show a little emotion occasionally in an Encylopedia. Otherwise it would make very dry reading. Most people would agree that this is one of the worst natural disasters in US history. There aren't too many others that I can think of of that magnitude. Leistung 19:58, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
There's no question that sentence is correct. --Dhartung | Talk 20:55, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Didn't Bush himself say this? That alone must make it true surely... :)--Robin 06:22, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

I really don't see how to argue against that it's one of the worst disasters. With the devastation of a whole city (not seen except in San Francisco 1908), I'd have to say that it definitely belongs as one of the worst. It may not be the worst, but it's high enough for note. Ekarderif 19:25, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, it's definitely "one of" the worst, although a previous wording caused it the worst, which I think is arguable considering that the Galveston Hurricane of 1900 likely killed more people. --Delirium 00:26, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

Infobox

Winds: the info box shows maximum winds at 175 mph, but the right term is maximum sustaind winds, as it was published at several meterological sites during the storm. I think this should be corrected. Also gusts of 215 mph have been reportet and should be added to the info box. For reference http://modis-atmos.gsfc.nasa.gov/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.216.227.142 (talk • contribs) 06/09/2005 18:23

signed :)) Peter Walther (Wilhelm.peter 19:25, 6 September 2005 (UTC))

I'll add "sustained" to it but I'm hesitant to add a section for gusts; most older storms, I don't think, have that data. It's also not as important, IMO, but I could be wrong. --Golbez 19:31, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

thanks for the first step :).

Right often the gusts are not published, but i a storm extreme like this one the data gathered by meterologists and the hurrican hunter planes should find a way into the page, anyone with a other opinion? (Wilhelm.peter 19:43, 6 September 2005 (UTC))

have just checked it with a lot of the others like andrew, gusts are often published, for andrew as example under the header statistics, so again i think katarinas gusts of 215 mph should be added, if not in the info box where else, anyone with a opinion? (Wilhelm.peter 19:57, 6 September 2005 (UTC))

Gusts are not considered relevant for the categorization of a hurricane, so IMO the sustained wind speed is appropriate for the infobox, and the gust data is appropriate for the article where it can be put into context. Plus, it makes it inconsistent with other hurricane articles, where the 215 number might be used as the definitive measure of peak wind, when 175 would be the basis for comparison. --Twigboy 20:21, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Also, "maximum sustained winds" are typically an estimate. If you look at Hurricane Andrew, the max officially recorded gust (after the fact, of course) was one mile per hour slower than the maximum sustained winds. In fact, once you get that fast, EVERYTHING is an estimate, because wind monitoring equipment tends to be destroyed by such things. (It's like trying to measure 5000 degree heat with a glass thermometer - it will melt long before it gives you a useful reading) There's n no problem mentioning gusts in statistics, but it crowds the infobox. --Golbez 20:25, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

I, have added the gusts to the context, hope i found a place all can agree,,,, :) (Wilhelm.peter 20:42, 6 September 2005 (UTC))

footer for the picture, changed by thewikipedian from 160 mph to 257 km/h - 160 mph, IMO this should be changed to 160 mph (257 km/h), I am european, but as much as I preffer the metric system, I dislike to have a converted value first. 160 mph looks to me rounded, the 257 suggests a precise reading other opinions?

(Wilhelm.peter 21:47, 6 September 2005 (UTC))

Actually, the reverse is probably true. The wind readings are always estimates, because it's just impossible to know what the wind really is at any given point in the hurricane at any given time. Since most of the data comes from NOAA, and NOAA uses imperial mmeasurements, I would defer to the 160 mph as being the "precise" reading, and the 257 being the converted reading (in which case, someone needs to learn significant digits). Peyna 22:23, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

thats what I meant, the 160 mph was a reading estimate and rounded and the 257 km/h only sugest a more precise reading as it was calculated from the 160 mph --> IMO it should be changed to 160 mph (257km/h) right? (Wilhelm.peter 22:35, 6 September 2005 (UTC))

Since the 160 was rounded, the 257 should also be rounded; so actually 260 km/h would be an appropriate conversion. Peyna 22:39, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Rubbish. That would just be confusing. Unless you explain, by quoting your number of significant figures, then people would think the two figures of 160 mph and 260 kph were equivalent, which is grossly misleading. Also, just 160 mph on its own does not imply it was a rounded figure (though in this case the background information shows that it is). How do you distinguish between 160 mph as being rounded up or down, and a precise reading of 160 mph? The answer is that you have to say what the accuracy of the reading is. If you use 'significant figures rounding' to round 158 mph to 160 mph, then you can express the accuracy as 160 mph +/- 5mph, which is equivalent to saying that 160 mph is quoted to 2 significant figures. Compare with 160 mph +/- 0.5 mph, which is equivalent to quoting to 3 significant figures. 194.200.237.219 11:52, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

I wonder who has changed again to highest winds instead of highest sustaind winds as it was agreed here, can administration please take care to reverse? (Wilhelm.peter 05:05, 7 September 2005 (UTC))

Not sure what happened, but it looks broken now Peyna 05:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


I tried to change back to "highest sustained winds" as agreed here and executed by Golbez and it broke, therefore admin needs to take care again. If somone feels it is out of order with the info field of the other hurricanes, it should be changed there too, as "maximum sustaine winds" is the right and valid therm sustained "winds would do", IMO "highest sustained winds" would also be aceptable but "highest winds" is definitly wrong see [12] or [13] or 1000 other pages for reference.

(Wilhelm.peter 05:41, 7 September 2005 (UTC))

  • I won't get involved in the debate on what the language should be, but if you go HERE, then you can see how to edit the template, which affects what is displayed on the page. Do you still need help, or do you got it under control?--GordonWattsDotCom 20:12, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Reason for Existence of Lake, Considering the possibilities to protect New Orleans

Are there any reasons for not drying and filling up Lake Pontchartrain? It would create new land on which to build and definitely eliminate the threat it composes. The threat from the sea could then be countered similarly, through the widening of the marshland by slowing the Mississippi. To date it seems that there are just the two major plans: building higher levees or abandoning major parts of the city.

It's a big lake. It's also a shipping lane, it links directly to the Gulf of Mexico, and canals link the lake to the river. --Golbez 18:47, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
Where are you going to divert the various rivers that I assume are feeding it? ~~ N (t/c) 19:02, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

You could divert the rivers into the Mississippi or the sea through or around the area with the then former lake. If the canals between Mississippi and lake and between lake and sea are vitally needed, you can fill up the lake around the canal, deepen the canal and reenforce the edges of the canal. Then the Mississippi would still remain connected to the Gulf. The area which was once a lake would then be normal flat land with rivers and canals dividing it.

A more realistic approach is a storm surge barrier similar to the Thames Barrier at the entrance to the lake. Previously Joseph Suhayda and others have proposed modifying the I-10 causeway to provide a storm barrier. As for resilting the wetlands, that has been something that has been sought since the 1960s, often with opposition from shipping interests and others that did not want the Mississippi modified for non-business reasons. It has only been 15 years since the substantial slowing of wetland loss, but it had not been reversed by 2005 by any means. This gives you an idea of the vast political minefield involved. In any event, please see a site such as [14], which is devoted to these problems. Talk pages are not for general chatter about a topic; they should be used only for discussion relevant to improving the article. Thanks! --Dhartung | Talk 20:52, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Congress approved a tidal surge barrier in 1977 but it was blocked by an environmental law suit. [15] Alan 01:22, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Comparison Section

It seems like the comparison section is getting out of control. Is it really necessary to provide that many comparisons to grasp what this storm was in its own right? There are plenty of ways to describe the storm, but resorting to comparing it against every other disaster on the face of the earth seems a bit much. One paragraph should suffice. Any suggestions? Peyna 22:32, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Offering perspective is one thing, but comparing this to as many disasters as it's being compared to seems pretty unnecessary.

Move Section

I suggest moving 7 above 6: Disaster Relief above Economic Effects.

The article's first strength of content was Economics but we have punched up Disaster Relief and it is growing in emphasis.Kyle Andrew Brown 01:01, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

time line?

can we work on a timeline? My understanding is that either 40% or 60% of the LA Guard is in Iraq. and that Bush didn't Nationalize guard units from other states for four days. I'm not sure this is right though. I found the timeline but it needs some work I recomend CNN. 132.241.245.49

Not sure what you have in mind for a timeline but I suggest being careful to construct a timeline without a bias towards trying to prove a political point.Kyle Andrew Brown 02:54, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm sure the original poster will learn the meaning of "nationalize" before contributing. (SEWilco 03:54, 7 September 2005 (UTC))
A timeline has been started here: Timeline of Hurricane Katrina --noösfractal 03:33, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Altho I have not closely looked at the entrys, the Timeline is TERRIFIC!Kyle Andrew Brown 01:58, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

FEMA and other relief aids/government

Can we get some type of real stuff that's happened with the aid in New Orleans and Mississippi. I think it was TWO DAYS before Bush even responded to this disaster and FEMA certainly was not helping people. How about mention that other organizations were really doing the work? I'm pretty sure World Vision and Compassion International volunteers were there. I'm sure other religious organizations as well. This page certainly glorifies the Federal Aid and Government about this situation and those things certainly aren't true. KagomeShuko 03:15, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


Presentation of the "Bus Picture"

I believe given recent online controversy, the conjectured nature of the "school bus" topic and the culpability implications of the imfamous "school bus pictures," that they ought not be contained within a NPOV article. Their very presence is meant to imply blame for Nagin and I believe their inclusion is the work of a partisan author. In reality, Nagin may have failed evacuation but the presentation of the shelter of last resort means that he did technically provide his citizens with an opportunity to not drown in their homes.

Regardless, a link to culpability ramifications may be appropriate within this article but something so major as a picture implying culpability does not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Br0d (talk • contribs) 00:35, 7 September 2005

I'd have to agree with that; right now we have a picture that someone took of a bunch of buses in water parked somewhere. There are many possible reasons why they were not used, but to simply take a picture of a large group of unused vehicles and then suggest that they could have been used to help evacuations when they weren't is quite a stretch.

Plus, people are refusing to leave now, even when there is nothing left to stay for; so I think it's likely that a good number of people would have refused to leave then, making any number of transportation vehicles useless if you don't have people to fill them. Freedom of travel includes freedom of staying put. Peyna 04:47, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

That picture certainly made an impact on me. It should be shown as it is a good one. As to showing culpabilty, best to just show the picture, and then let the reader make up his/her mind.
Why is it in any disaster, things that can be of use are not moved out of the way. There is nothing unique about Hurricane Katrina in this regard. What seems so obvious after the event seems to elude everyone before it. Maybe its the "someone else will take care of it" scenario. Leistung 06:11, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

I believe the bus picture is appropriate for the article.

There was extensive discusssion across all media that the buses were not used. It was put in the context that the local government did not use the buses as a pre-planned strategy to evacuate people in case of a flood. It also speaks to the lack of planning to protect an expensive public property. To me the bus pictures speaks volumes about the actions of the local government in planning for a disaster, for the actions of the government when the need to evacuate was apparent. BTW I heard a tape of the Mayor saying to folks he wanted the residents to evacuate and in the short clip it is very mildly and without any sense of urgency delievered, but I will admit it was just a clip.Kyle Andrew Brown 01:50, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

I believe this demonstrates incredible bias and should not be included. As previously mentioned, it lays responsibility on the Mayor and local governments without actual factual implications or context given of the flooded school bus pictures. Add to the fact that this "school bus conspiracy" has literally been the target of NPOV flooding and revert wars in the Ray Nagin article and that it is a largely inconsequential and unsubstantiated detail that doesn't even belong in an article like this. Catsonmars 11:09, 8 September 2005 (UTC)Catsonmars

I think it is very odd to say that it is wrong to lay responsibilty on the mayor and local governments, when, in fact, they were responsible for evacuation planning. They had a plan. Unfortunately, for many who died it did not include the use of those buses.

This photo (and there other bus lot photos) should by all means included. (http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/special/05/katrina/3344347) The issue of using school buses in an evacuation plan had been discussed at a New Orleans Board of Education Meeting in June 2005, also by New Orleans and Louisiana authorities before Katrina. The attitude and mindset of Mayor Nagin is clearly depicted in his belated call for 500 "Greyhound" buses. ("Where are the goddamn 500 greyhound buses ect. There nothing happening!!!") 84.190.235.198 11:47, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

The photo should stay. Those who don't learn from past mistakes are condemned to repeat them. It is factual and not a point of view.

I have looked high and low and I can't find ANY REFERENCE to the use of buses to evacuate the city with buses, only the use of buses to move people within the city. These uses of the buses give the destination, the schools, Dome, convention center. If all the school buses were filled with people before the storm, where would the 10,000 to 20,000 people be bused where they would be as safe as in the Dome and other building that were judged able to withstand 100MPH winds and higher? WHAT WAS THE SUPPOSED DESTINATION??? Baton Rouge is stated to have 100,000 in shelters before those in New Orleans without transport were moved out. I have asked the question over and over of those who claim there was a plan for evacuating, but not one has responded with a DESTINATION. Mulp 05:58, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
The official evacuation plan is at http://www.ohsep.louisiana.gov/plans/EOPSupplement1a.pdf and, yes, it does refer to the use of school buses to aid in the evacuation. It would be stupid to have fixed destinations in the plan, because the storm track could vary quite a bit, and the safest direction to travel would certainly be affected by individual track. Also, the photo should stay. Pollinator 06:18, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
I noted the need to adapt the destination into the multistate area in one of my other comments. My issue is who is reasonably responsible for coordinating INTERSTATE resources: a mayor, a governor, a federal emergency manager? And what of the reports of long lines of buses with drivers idling outside New Orleans, was the delay in sending them to the Dome the uncertainty where to send them? I don't know, but given the choice of "no where to send them" versus "just punishing the poor", I will assume good will and go with the former and not the latter. And if Democrats were showing bias they would argue that the evacuation was delayed to ensure that the poor residents were as widely dispersed as possible by not using the buses so the rebuilt city can be resettled by Republicans. After all, Nagin is a DINO.  ;-) Mulp 16:22, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Pressure units

Any reason kPa's are being used for an article about a Hurricane that primarily affected the United States? Almost all of the weather information for other such hurricanes is going to be in Millibars, especially since that is the unit that NOAA uses. Peyna 05:35, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

It does seem Millibars would be the preferred unit of measure. Johntex\talk 20:50, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
The rest of the world uses SI, the US is behind the times.
kPa's are not used in meterology, meterologists worldwide use (hPa) as 1 (hPa)= 1 Millibar, so they could stick to the Millibar values and obey to the international system (SI) , i have added (hPa), i think thats the best compromise. Therefore, meteorologists use hectopascals (hPa)today for air pressure, while similar pressures are given in kilopascals in practically all other fields, where the hecto prefix is hardly ever used.

(Wilhelm.peter 08:20, 8 September 2005 (UTC))

Assuming Geraldo is telling the truth who locked them in?

http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2678976

Assuming Geraldo is telling the truth who locked them in?

damage in US $

IMO it should now not start with 90 billion, as the insurance estimates are at round about 30 and US Government is sending 60 into FEMA (no doubt they will be spend, i hope better than for forms to fill), other opinions?

(Wilhelm.peter 20:13, 7 September 2005 (UTC))

More, not less, is probably more accurate. Insurance estimates are intially low for various reasons (legal, politics, dragging feet, full picture not yet known, whatever.) I believe the infobox says 100-200 and that may well change for the worse. Just now we're getting images in from remote areas that have been literally wiped off the map. --Southpaw018 19:38, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
Insurance estimates are low because not every thing that is damaged was insured. Peyna 16:29, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

These numbers that are being put up there are not damages proper. I am a real estate appraiser. When your home is destroyed in a disaster, fire, etc., the actual damages are the lesser of the depreciated cost of the home or the market value of the home, period. The figures being cited are reproduction costs, which are much higher than damages. Twice the insurance loss estimates would normally give you a close figure, but this is a special case, because the affected population as a whole was drastically uninsured (way to go on those flood maps, FEMA). --Mm35173 08:53, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Private (non-government) insurers do not cover flooding in any case, an issue which may need to be clarified when defining "insurance loss"? Government flood insurance programmes don't cover things like loss of use which are covered for non-flood damages by private insurers. --carlb 13:42, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Minor Vandalism

151.199.117.57 added "I am stupid" and some gibberish to the beginning of the article, which I removed. --Dd42 22:24, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Levee Failure Timeline

As currently written, the article states that all levee failures occurred on August 30th. The first levee failure actually occurred during the storm on August 29th, when the Eastern wall of the Industrial Canal levee was breached. This resulted in the sudden and devastating flooding of the Ninth Ward of New Orleans and areas to the East (St. Bernard Parish and New Orleans East).

209.214.104.155 01:24, 8 September 2005 (UTC)David

See here [16] for a more accurate timeline. Some of the summary sections need to be rewritten as the side articles are improved and updated. 194.200.237.219 09:54, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
IMO should the levee failure timeline be removed here and refered to page: [17] as it does not make sense to have it done twice and as staded above the one her it is perfectly wrong by what is known today.

(Wilhelm.peter 13:33, 8 September 2005 (UTC))


This is confusing. I understand the following to mean that no levees were breeched, only concrete floodwalls. Or are earthen levees the same as concrete floodwalls? Can it be that the flooding of New Orleans is completely misunderstood? "One of the central mysteries emerging in the Hurricane Katrina disaster is why concrete floodwalls in three canals breached during the storm, causing much of the catastrophic flooding, while earthen hurricane levees surrounding the city remained intact. (...) If the water did not top the levees, the breaches could prove more mysterious. Typically, the pounding of wave action would be the most likely way to cause a breach, scientists say. But there isn't much wave action in canals." (By John McQuaid, Staff writer) http://www.nola.com/newslogs/tporleans/index.ssf?/mtlogs/nola_tporleans/archives/2005_09.html Whyerd 13:28, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

More on floodwall breeches at [18] I am not a scientist, however I think future investigations will be revealing a better understanding of what really happened. Whyerd 15:09, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

More on floodwall failure: "In the weeks since Katrina drowned this low-lying city, there has been an intense focus on the chaotic government response to the flood. But Ivor van Heerden, the Hurricane Center's deputy director, said the real scandal of Katrina is the "catastrophic structural failure" of barriers that should have handled the hurricane with relative ease." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/20/AR2005092001894.html Whyerd 12:57, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

The [[lede] is getting *awfully* editorial

"It is important..."? Could someone rewrite that?  :-)
--Baylink 02:45, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Images

This rather excellent gallery of photos is released under {{cc-by-sa-2.0}} so they're good for Wikipedia, people working on this series should have a look.--nixie 04:12, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

NPOV-check - anon edit of 02:25, 8 September 2005-09-08

Because I'm jumping in an article that's rapidly changing, I'm going to hold off on fixing a POV injection from the 02:25 edit from Sept. 8 by IP address 70.119.19.24 (contribs). Instead I'm going to mark this as a NPOV-check and hope that those who've been working with this article can smooth out some of these kinks. Clearly this edit was intended to discredit the state and local authorities in N.O. and, to the extent that it adds content, it should be rewritten for NPOV. (For additional discussion from the admittedly POV DailyKos, see here.) Cheers, PhilipR 04:49, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

I went ahead and marked the section as a pov dispute rather than the whole article... hope that's ok with you (if not please revert) Ryan Norton T | @ | C 05:00, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
I appreciate the suggestion of the section tag (which I forget about), but in this case one problem is in the lead paragraph:
It's important to recognize the lack of planning by the city and state despite their own admission that they had complained to the Federal government that levee's needed to be upgraded. As reported in the local paper on July 24, the Mayor, Ray Nagin, was working on a presentation letting the city's citizens know that should a major hurricane come their way that they would be left on their own.
So I'm going to either put back the pov-check or add the sectional one on top as well. -- PhilipR 05:05, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi there! You can use {{POV-intro}} for the intro and the section template I used for the sections you want - its generally better to use section templates like that instead of a whole article thing because its more specific and informs readers better. Its up to you though :). Ryan Norton T | @ | C 05:07, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
Ah, thanks -- I'm learning about all sorts of useful tags. Will change to pov-intro. Thanks for the suggestion. -- PhilipR 05:11, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
I'll put POV-intro at the top. The introduction is somewhat POV. mrholybrain 11:39, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
I modified sections of this article dealing with the culpability of Louisiana state and local officials to show that their point of view neutrality is disputed. The information that has been submitted so far is extremely one-sided, to the point of being misleading in nature. Because neither state or Federal response has been investigated and we are in the middle of the disaster scenario now, it seems to me that presenting a lop-sized culpability case resting on the shoulders of Blanco and Nagin is a bit premature and reflects a lack of neutrality in this part of the article.
good point, but one must also consider that some events can't be planned for, but even more important, events that can't be planned for because of politics. If the New Orleans being flooded scenerio called for moving all of New Orleans poor and aged to "pick a state" by a line of 1000 buses, that would cause a firestorm. One might expect the rumor of that event resulting in citizens of the state throwing up barracades at the state line, with tacit approval of the governor. The next question is does that unstated problem have a place in wikipedia? Mulp 19:23, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Global Warming issue resolution attempt

The statement on global warming has been involved in a bit of an edit war of late. This is an attempt at a resolution.

The original text read something like this.


Many scientists have stated that global warming was a factor responsible for the rise in ocean surface temperatures that may have caused Katrina to go from a tropical storm to a devastating hurricane as it crossed the Gulf of Mexico between south Florida and New Orleans.[19][20] [21] Other scientists acknowledge the possible long term effects of global warming on cyclonogenesis, but attribute the strength of Hurricane Katrina to a 12 year cycle. [22] [23]


User Peyna and I Fluxaviator came to this tentative compromise.


Global warming has been suggested by some studies as being a factor for the influx of increasingly stronger hurricanes, including Katrina. [24][25] [26] Other scientists acknowledge the possible long term effects of global warming on cyclonogenesis, but attribute the strength of Hurricane Katrina to a 12 year cycle. [27] [28]


User 24.165.233.150 has deleted both but in discussion has suggested this instead.

The remarkable intensity of recent tropical cyclones such as Katrina has renewed public interest in global warming as a factor in global climatic change, this is discussed in Tropical cyclone#Long_term_trends_in_cyclone_activity.

I think we can come to a happy medium. --Fluxaviator 04:54, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

The "renewed public interest" claim would need some backing up; as far as I know "public interest" regarding global warming didn't jump incredibly just because of a few hurricanes. Also the "remarkable intensity" claim is pretty broad. We've had more intense hurricanes in the past; what's "remarkable" is that we're having more of them more frequently. What "remarkable intensity of recent" suggests is that they are more intense than ever before. So, in my opinion, there isn't much salvageable from the latest suggestion.

What we have is a group of scientific studies that say that the current trend in hurricane activity may be attributable to global warming; and another group of scientific studies that say that the current trend is nothing more than a continuation of a cycle.

Take that statement, make it more encyclopedic and readable, and tack on some citations, and I think we've got our "happy NPOV medium." Peyna 17:53, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

The subject is covered in depth (from a more political angle) in the Alleged causes of Hurricane Katrina and in depth (from a more general scientific angle) in Tropical cyclone. The versions which stand in each of these articles have undergone extensive editing from people of many views, and also reflect expert input. A third version of this information could not hope to achieve the oversight that the material in the other two articles has had, and would serve no special purpose. I propose that if global warming must be mentioned at all, that it should be mentioned only to link to the Alleged causes article. If the alleed causes article should happen to be deleted, I propose that the text from global warming either be merged directly, or dropped entirely leaving only a link to the scientific discussion in Tropical Cyclone. Any other course of action will result in factually incorrect material being added to the article yet again, for example the claim that there has been any study which shows Katrina was caused by global warming. --Gmaxwell 21:47, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
On the public interest claim, which BTW was never suggested for this article, is no longer the prefered wording... But the fact that interest in the subject has increased can be directly demonstrated by a list of media links, and as much was directly claimed in the CNN article. I haven't seen anyone argue otherwise, and NOR doesn't require us to provide cites when stating the obvious. :) --Gmaxwell 21:54, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

POV Deletion

The long standing introduction to this article was prepared by numerous editors over several days. It correctly states the genesis of the storm.

The content removed is not necessarily inappropriate content for the article. In fact, the content is generally mirrored throughout the article. The removal of the content, therefore, does not imply that it is necessariy inappropriate for the content to be reflected in the article, as I said, it always has been deliberated on by numerous editors and certain placements have been made.

It is not the role of this article to bring out in the introduction of the article the political and social controverys of the storm. It is very very true that those controverys exist. However, in an encylcopedia article the content objectives are different from those of a newspaper or blog article. The way the article has been crafted into sections enables the placement of the differing views of the storm. However, the introduction to the article must remain neutral in its presentation. That is an absolute WIKI requirement.

The deleted content will cause this article to become the dart board of controversy were it to remain. It is easily vulnerable to POV questions from many perspectives. The editors of this article have endeavored - I would say successfully - to keep this article free of revert wars and controversy.

That said, again, I reinforce that just because the content is not included in the introduction does not necessarily mean that the content does not have a place in the article. My goal in the deletion as an introductory content was to ensure that the article remains free from being vulnerable to POV conflict.

If there is strong feeling about the content being included in various form in subsections below the introduction, my recommendation is to bring those content elements to TALK and work it out.

However, I join with the editors of long standing here in retaining the integrity of the neutrality of the introduction. In fact, that neutrality in the Introduction actually enables and enhances the ability to reflect the deleted content later in the article.

The earlier marking of the Introduction with a banner that it is contested underscores the difficulty with the content. It is the first notice that was placed on the article and it was a notice directly related to the content that was deleted. That speaks to the difficulty with the content which was deleted.

Finally, just because this is a long explanation for the deletion of the content should not be taken as being an adverse statement about those who contributed to the deleted content. Length does not mean personal intensity to those contributors. It just take more than a few words to be clear of the editorial factors that support my conclusion that in the best interests of the article the deleted content is removed and the suggestion is made that it may be appropriate elsewhere.Kyle Andrew Brown 05:39, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Considering the number of people contributing to these articles, the content is very good and largely free of bias. Keep up the good work! Leistung 07:28, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
One problem: the article should lead with the most important information. Right now, it begins with its genesis as a tropical depression, but its notoriety is obviously elsewhere. I referred to the Hurricane Camille entry for guidance, which I feel is an appropriate lead-in:
"Hurricane Camille was a Category 5 hurricane that struck the Mississippi Gulf Coast region on August 17 and August 18, 1969."
--Twigboy 14:18, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

press censorship issues

There's been a number claims of censorship of the press on some influential blogs, some of them actually documentable, some clearly bunk. I got ticked off at the misinformation so I decided to document what can be confirmed here Hurricane_Katrina#Claims_of_restrictions_on_the_media. It's important because censorship was a big deal in the Iraq invasion (media embedding and the coffin photos controversy). Sbwoodside 06:28, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

You bet! Show and tell! Leistung 10:23, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

User:66.207.192.193 added copy-and-paste copyright violation text so I just removed it. Also, User:Common Wealth added three paragraphs of quotations on the political impact of censorship which I removed and copied over to Talk:Political_effects_of_Hurricane_Katrina#quotations_removed_from_main_Katrina_page_.28press_censorship_claims.29 (I don't have the time to integrate it into that article, sorry). Sbwoodside 04:24, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

copy-and-paste copyright LOL

Google's censorship of Katrina related images: Google image searches: "Hurricane Katrina", "New Orleans", "hurricane katrina dead". Compare to yahoo: "hurricane katrina", "New Orleans", "hurricane katrina dead".

It's well-known that Google only updates the image search index periodically. It's very poor at current events. This has been brought up before in connection with Iraq. --Dhartung | Talk 18:08, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Image in death toll section has no caption or copyright information

The image is Image:R1422419068.jpg Ryan Norton T | @ | C 08:02, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

NPOV dispute in "Health concerns" section?

Why is there a {POV-section} tag in the Health concerns section? I can't find any evidence of a dispute regarding that section on this talk page. I removed the tag. sɪzlæk [ +t, +c, +m ] 08:14, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

Look above you at the section NPOV-check - anon edit of 02:25, 8 September 2005-09-08 please Ryan Norton T | @ | C 08:41, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Oh, OK, I see. The discussion in that section didn't explicitly refer to the "Health effects" POV tag as far as I could tell. I'd like to see some discussion about the marked section from those who dispute its neutrality, because I can't see where the problem is as it stands. sɪzlæk [ +t, +c, +m ] 09:03, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
If anyone thinks this section is biased, then change the bit that you think is biased to make it "neutral". I cannot see the point of putting up a biased tag anyway, as we all have to guess at which part is biased. There are definitely health concerns, so the section itself should stay. Leistung 10:21, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Oridnarilly the tags are put on articles after controversy has erupted in TALK. It is not helpful to the article, or to the sense of consensus for tags to be thrown on articles at whim. It really detracts from the article's credibility with readers and may incorrectly show that the contributors are squabbling over content. That has not been the case in this article.

We are working very hard to present this article to the WIKI community as a great example of consensus editing of an ongoing social/political/historical event. Placing tags on the article misidentifies these efforts if the issues are not first resolved in TALK. TALK is for the reaching of consensus. TAGS may mark an article as having developed considerable concerns by contributors. That has not been the case in this article.Kyle Andrew Brown 13:20, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

God Outdoes Terrorists Yet Again

The Onion made me laugh: [29] --Wonderfool t(c) 14:08, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Something is fishy about that article. It contains a photo insert (this one) which clearly shows a Mil Mi-8 or (Mi-17) type helicopter, which is a very soviet design. You don't see such russkie craft flying over America... Thus the picture is most unlikely to be a scene from N.O. It's probably a third world photo, although the houses are too good for a banana republic?
Well, since the Onion is known as an impeccable source of news, this is really surprising!--Stephan Schulz 11:09, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Ahh satire... too bad its effect is lost on so many. Peyna 13:37, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Inappropriate, yet funny.Twilight Realm 00:30, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Please keep these sections summaries! Push detail to subarticles

Folks, please look at Wikipedia:Summary style, don't add large chunks with long quotes or citations or political effects in this article, please include those in the relevant subarticles. That's the purpose of the Main article: link

  • Hurricane Katrina disaster relief: should contain the what, how, etc. facts about the disaster relief, information on when troops or food were delivered to whom and by who is appropriate, not speculation for why they didn't happen fast enough or who was to blame should not be in this article, except to note that it is covered in:

Thanks. Lexor|Talk 15:21, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

I spent about 30 minutes the other day cleaning up one of the sections to make it more of a summary and moving the detailed information to the other article. I came back a day later and it was in worse shape that before I started. I gave up trying. It's going to be a losing battle until this thing settle downs in a few weeks. Peyna 17:56, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Please keep Federal, state, local, international, and non-governmental sections

This is a logical breakdown. Just having distant states and international seems unbalanced. Remember it is against wikipedia policy to delete, but it is nice to add to a section. -Thanks

It's also against Wikipedia policy to have gigantic articles covering every possible minute detail about a subject, but we don't seem to follow that here either. Peyna 03:46, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

It's a pain to donate time to Wikipedia just to see some vandal delete it. It sure seems that Democrats are hiding the lack of planning of the City of New Orleans to use buses to evacuate and deleting any references to lack of local planning. Why don't you rename Wikipedia something like Democrat-pedia?

Sorry, but I'm having a hard time accepting a city having the resources to find shelter for 100,000 people throughout a five-ten State region. Where would you have a bus caravan deliver 30 groups of 1,000 people or 6 groups of 5,000 people? Isn't such a mass interstate evacuation a matter for federal government? Mulp 15:59, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Why not have a donation link for salvation army?

You've got one for the red cross and I personally like the salvation army better.

The Salvation Army, The Red Cross, and Samaritan's Purse were three key agencies that did a lot of good work in south Florida after Hurricane Andrew. The United Methodist Church and the Mennonites were also highly significant. They had somewhat different areas of emphasis, and there was a lot of informal linking, where, if one agency could not accomplish something efficiently, another was called in. Pollinator 05:05, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
Given the ease with which people can set up donation scams, it is not a good idea for Wikipedia to permit an expansion of this type of area, which could quickly become a link-list (not encyclopedic) to dubious sites (anyone can add, but who's going to double-check the 501(c)(3) filings?). The American Red Cross is a Congressionally-chartered non-profit with specific responsibility for disaster relief, so its reputation is not in dispute. Adding anything else opens the list to POV problems and scams. --Dhartung | Talk 18:19, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
Isn't the Salvation Army doing a great job. I even saw on my TV a plug from President Bush. When asked by a lady as to who could help her. He said "Why don't you go to the Salvation Army". Maybe they should co-ordinate the rescue efforts! Leistung 19:58, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

How about link to GIVE.ORG

Perhaps there should be a link to a wiki article on [this http://www.give.org/reports/index.asp service] of USA's Better Business Bureau to list organizations that claim to be in the charity business, which of them are willing to have their financial statements audited by the Better Business Bureau, and which of them are able to show that they do in fact meet certain standards that we expect of a charity, like the donated money going to the victims, instead of most of it being used to send the fund collection administrators on a vacation in Bermuda, or wherever. AlMac|(talk) 21:38, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

The Intro Stinks

The introduction contains too much detail, and should be much more of a summary. It also contains multiple grammatical errors. I think that earlier versions were better (see this one, for example), and I suggest a merge of that older version with some updated info from the current version. Jpers36 12:54, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

I believe there are several ways to measure destructiveness:
  1. Number of people who died (the official figures are now a few hundred, although New Orleans Mayor is estimating 10,000 ... we can provide links to other disasters with more deaths, and comparable numbers of deaths.
  2. Number of people who had to be evacuated.
  3. Length of time until everything back to normal again, if ever.
  4. Immediate damage in terms of value, irrespective of whether it was insured or insurable. We can perhaps cite what the tax assessment and real estate values were prior to the disaster.
  5. Geographic area affected ... larger than Great Britain.
  6. Economy outside the immediate area which has been affected, like how much of US oil production goes through the refineries there, how much of US agriculture is exported through there.
  7. Amount of money needed in the aftermath.
  8. Amount of money that could have been spent in advance to significantly reduce the damage.
AlMac|(talk) 21:46, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
Not to mention that the current claim "most destructive in historic times" has nothing to back it up. How do you measure destructiveness? Did someone figure out the number of nails that were pulled out of wood or the number of bricks that fell off of walls? Peyna 20:57, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
That could be corrected with a simple "considered by some to be the most destructive...." modification. Such a claim is alway a judgement call anyway, but it will be made. Donovan Ravenhull 20:59, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi Jpers. If you think the intro stinks, and has errors, then you can change it yourself and make it better. Any relevent material from older versions should definitely be added back. If it gets too big again, then someone will "precis" it again. Leistung 07:06, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
When I wrote that, I didn't have the time to fix the problem myself, and I also wanted to hear reactions before making such a change. Since I haven't heard any negative response yet, I'll enact the changes as soon as I do have the time. Jpers36 11:45, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Update New Orleans death figure with official count?

The September 8th official death toll for New Orleans is 118 [30]. Should we update the death toll table with this information and remove the 1,000+ figure? In another news, Col. Terry Ebbert, the New Orleans's homeland security chief said that "Numbers so far are relatively minor as compared to the dire projections of 10,000.". [31]. --Vsion 22:50, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

YES! Do it! I love that somebody actually found a reliable estimate. I'm a little tired of being the Wild Estimate Nazi.
E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:07, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Moved from Talk:Hurricane Katrina (contents)

I've been listening and looking for information for evacuees, from Hurricane Katrina, who are being spread far and wide to other locations/states, that would tell them the status of their individual residences. Does their house/apartment, whatever; 1. still stand? 2. how bad is the damage? 3. is it possible or when is it possible to go back to their home and assess the damage themselves, or have someone else do it? 4. do they have to get permission (from whom) to go back to their home? 5. how do they get back to their home?

   a. who will pay for the travel expences?
   b. what transportation routes are open to their home?

These are the first things that come to mind. I am certain that there are probably many more questions evacuees may have in this regard.

Who is capable of putting this information together?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.105.128.95 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Check out

http://www.wired.com/news/hurricane/0,2904,68743,00.html

This article describes how one victim put Google map of the region into a wiki so that other victims could identify where they live, and see what kind of damage, without actually traveling there. AlMac|(talk) 21:50, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
Katrina evacuees in Texas are able to get free travel to meet their family, find a new home, go back home (etc) through the end of the year. This is done through a travel agency FEMA has contracted with, which means the federal government will pay for it. 172.193.178.196 03:22, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

help me (go on you no u want to)

hi i really need help here how many feet/meters were under water due to floods?:S

I saw on the news media where different parts of the City of New Orleans was under water by as much as 20 feet ... but another way you can figure this is pictures of the homes with porches to first floor a distance above ground ... the evacuated that to second floor, which also filled up with water ... they evacuated that to attic, which also flooded, then they broke the roof over attic to get even higher onto the roof ... so how many feet is it from ground to floor of first floor, thru that to second, thru that to attic, thru that. AlMac|(talk) 21:53, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
Do you mean depth or area? Twilight Realm 00:49, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
It has been widely reported in the news that 80% of the area of the city of New Orleans was under water at the high point of the disaster, while the city has now be dewatered to the point of now only having 50% under water. AlMac|(talk) 07:29, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Dates in intro

According to the intro, the hurricane hit on the 29th, and the levees broke early in the morning of the 29th. I see a problem here.Twilight Realm 00:35, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

See Effect_of_Hurricane_Katrina_on_New_Orleans#Levee_breaches. (SEWilco 00:54, 11 September 2005 (UTC))
It still seems confusing, both this intro and that link. It should be clarified, I think.
Fix it up, then. Don't be shy... Leistung 06:43, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Number of Displaced

I'd like to see a number for how many people were displaced by this event. I'm guessing a ballpark number of 2 million, since there were around 1.3 million in Metro New Orleans and additional people in Mississippi and Alabma, but I could be off the mark. Along the same lines, the last sentence in "Evacuation issues" reads:

This massive migration is the largest since the Dust Bowl of the 1930's sent about 300,000 people from the Great Plains States to other regions of the US, most notably California.

However, there is no source quoted for this, and CNN says that 2.5 million were displaced due to the Dust Bowl [32] , and this is the number I quoted on the Dust Bowl page.

--zandperl 05:33, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

I found this topic, an interview with James Gregory, an expert on the subject matter, which puts the estimate at 400000 displaced. This sounds reasonable, as many commentators put the figure for Oklahoma at 15-20 percent of the State's population around 2.3 million in the 30s. I changed the intro in the Dust Bowl article, as the original CNN article has now been removed from the internet. [33] Leistung 07:30, 11 September 2005 (UTC)


Oops, I wrote the CNN reference in bad wikiformat! It should be [34] -- I've corrected it above, and put a note in the Dust Bowl article. Anyway, I'm still wondering about how many were displaced by Katrina.
--zandperl 19:23, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
Great and thanks, zandper. Leistung 06:33, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Do we know how many people displaced by other major events in US history?
  • Other hurricanes forcing termporary evacuations of areas in their path.
  • Manhattan Project created new cities that could only be occupied by people working on the project ... prior residents forceably relocated
  • Hydro electric projects like TVA and Hoover Dam meant people had to evacuate where deliberate flooding coming.

AlMac|(talk) 07:02, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Intro 2

This text has found its way into the Intro:

"President Bush initially did not alter a schedule of vacationing and unrelated photo opportunities in the wake of the hurricane, but after journalists angrily confronted administration figures including Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff about the lack of food and water at designated evacuation shelters, the President finally began to schedule hurricane-related photo opportunites.

In the wake of the federal government's mismanagement, attempts were made to blame victims including nurses left to hand-pump respirators in darkness and nursing-home residents. These fell by the wayside as Time Magazine revealed that the director of FEMA, Mike Brown, appeared to have qualified for the position soully on the basis of his having been the roommate of the last director in college, and the last director's having had a position in the Bush campaign. At this writing, Mr. Brown has yet to be fired for either his incompetence or the falisfied resume he provided."

It should not be in the intro, but maybe elsewhere in the Article/Related Articles. The Intro should be very short and to the point. It should give the reader an overview. What it should not do is go into any depth as to what the "management" was doing or what they or others were thinking. Surely the fact that there was a Hurricane called Katrina, it broke the levees and destroyed New Orleans, or that 1 million people were evacuated is much more important than George Bush's photo oppurtunities, Mike Brown's being a mate of some big fish, or that journalists are angry. Leistung 07:00, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Agreed! prior to this edit the intro was short and sweet - very nice indeed. The intro should probably mention that there's controversy regarding the government's response though. But this text should possibly be in the political effects article. Sbwoodside 22:52, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Donations

There are plenty of donation sites out there that may be small and not mainstream but are legitimate. Why exclude them because a few idiots are taking advantage? xSTRIKEx6864 05:45, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

It's a good point, but there's a good answer. If there are some small but legit sites mentioned that no one recognizes, a scam site could easily be slipped in. Not a good thing. Twilight Realm 20:36, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

SILENCE ON THE "LOOTING & MAYHEM"

The only mention of the looting in the whole article is in respect to Shane West's comments. The mayhem has been completely hushed up. Widespread looting; when darkness came in the Superdome, there was robberies, rapes, and ever people were murdered. Rescuers were setup by gangs and then robbed. About 10% of the police deserted. Why is there zero mention of the mayhem in this article? All the accusations of "racism" are to cover the murder, rape that went on in the city. Unlike New York on 9/11 or their 2003 blackout, where New Yorkers helped each other, New Orleans decended into a hellhole. However, not a lick of mention on wikipedia. Barneygumble 18:05, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to…) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. --Golbez 18:33, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
Hi Barney. There is plenty of mention of this. And reference is made to many many newspaper articles in the Hurricane Katrina Wikipedia article and sub-articles. The newspaper articles go into extensive and graphic detail as to what happened, and if these things have been "hushed up", then it is strange that most people seem aware of what happened. These things often happen after major disaster, and certainly did after the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake. However, they are sometimes over-reported in the overall scheme of things. The looting etc has already ended. However, the misery of the hundreds of thousands of poor people displaced from their homes goes on. Many have lost their jobs, and are probably going through their savings very quickly. Imagine how you would feel... aboandoned? Also, spare a thought for all of the animals (pets) still locked up in houses, and slowly starving to death. I understand you can hear the howling miles from New Orleans. The owners thought they would be away for about three days!
However the article should definitely include the events you mention that happened immediately after the Hurricane. You are always free to add whatever you want to. Leistung 18:52, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
There are references in original news reports and among peoples' discussions, but none in the wiki article. That is what i am refering to. There is a huge section on the accussations of racism, but not one iota of the mayhem. There is lots of misery and my sympathy towards those displaced is great, but it is irrespective of writing a factually accurate nPOV article. Additionally, the historical context section should be moved to the end. Barneygumble 20:31, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Search the article. The word, "rape," appears three times--in the Superdome and Convention Center sections. There's also the following: By September 8 there were reports that the claims of rape and murder at the Convention Center and the Superdome could be false.[35]
Wikipedia is a great resource for collecting verified info, and discarding rumors, regardless of how widely, or hysterically, they're reported.--RattBoy 00:56, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Are you trying to say that black people were responsible for some of the "mayhem"? If so, it was probably a very small number of individuals, whom I'm sure that the black community would be very ashamed of. I'm sure some white people were "out of order" too. The media normally tries to be responsible, and tries to emphasis the good in the various communities, as a whole. It would be terrible and unfair to denigrate a whole community for the actions of a few. Unfortunately, if you mention that some individuals that do bad things are part of a particular community, the whole community often gets the blame, as far as the public are concerned. In the case of racism charges against the authorities, some journalists do go "over the top". There also may be bad individuals here too, but most authorities would be trying their best. Leistung 07:07, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm trying to say that PEOPLE were responsible for the mayhem and the mayhem needs to be included. Looting was widespread, not limited to "a small minority" nor were "only food and water" looted. It's not a race issue. However, the fact that a city disinteregrated so quickly into a "third world country" is an important story of the hurricane. You need not even mention race at all in the writings. Wikipedia is not supposed to "emphasize" the "good", but report the facts in a NPOV manner.Barneygumble 14:25, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
The general sense of various first-person accounts was that the "genral lawlessness" was greatly over-sensationalized by the mass media and that the "out of control" looting was limited to very few districts (chiefly Canal St and the uptown Wal-Mart) and did not last for very long. Sporadic violence persisted for a few days until the National Guard was deployed in force. Other stores were "looted" in a more orderly fashion, including pharmacies cleaned out by doctors and hospital staff with police escort. Order was generally maintained by NOPD in the CBD and French Quarter, though episodes of vandalism and attempted burglary were reported. There was no reporting on WIDE swaths of the city where rescuers went about their business and found mostly peace and gratitude. The actually verifiable events fall short of the general sense of violent anarchy portrayed in the media. It is neither factual nor NPOV to describe a city "disinteregrated (sic) into a 'third world country' ". Dystopos 16:36, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
It's certainly very possible that the media overexaggerated the looting, however, it DID happen to a reasonable degree and to have absolutely NO mention of it in the entire article is neither factual or NPOV either. Barneygumble 21:54, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Barney. We are all getting interested now. Please please add anything you think is missing from the articles. Leistung 06:26, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
okay, i've heard at least as many reports of survival motivated looting as the "anarchy & mayhem" type. i am therefore going to put a "neutrality" flag on that section, as it seems to emphasize the latter. --pfunk42 03:15, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
Is even calling it "anarchy" appropriate? Anarchy implies no authority at all; but there are also many reports of looters being arrested throughout the city;
Also, it is usually more appropriate to discuss the NPOV problems before slapping the NPOV tag up there. Peyna 03:30, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
For a lot of anarchists (like the ones setting up the Common Grounds clinic in New Orleans right now), anarchy implies way more than no authority, but rather a society where people don't force each other to do things, where all decisions are made by direct democracy instead of by appointed or elected leaders, and lots of anarchists stress (in theory as well as in actual working anarchist campaigns) peaceful means of conflict resolution through dialogue and mediation. So I renamed the section "Looting and Anarchy" to "Looting and Violence", because that's what it's really referring to. ((unsigned comment))
Correct as you may be, keep in mind there is a difference between Anarchy as a political movement and anarchy as a state of being. Peyna 16:55, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

It seems that the hyped-up MSM had grossly exaggerated the "crime and violence" in New Orleans during the flooding. I would like to suggest a sub chapter on the MSM and include the rumors and racism allegations into that chapter. Katrina Takes a Toll on Truth, News Accuracy 04:58, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

major deletion missed, reconstruction may be needed

This edit [36] by User:216.11.23.2 on 13:40, 12 September 2005 deleted more than 50% of the article. I restored it but there have been edits between then and my restoration (on 15:04, 12 September 2005). I don't have the time to try to restore those edits, but perhaps someone can go through them and try to see if there's anything that was lost (there were some rv's in that intervening period too...) Sbwoodside 19:15, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

The sad thing is that even after the unilateral deletion the article is still incredibly bloated. Peyna 21:24, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Too much trivia, large sections comparing it to other historical events to give "context". They all need to be moved or deleted as they have nothing to do with Katrina.Stbalbach 21:57, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
I agree. The extensive list of other disasters is unnecessary. That list would be better under a separate "natural disasters" entry to which Hurricane Katrina could be linked. Djeaux 01:41, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
I went ahead and deleted the entire section, this information is covered extensively elsewhere, i.e. List_of_major_natural_disasters_in_the_United_States. Peyna 03:42, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Comparison was made at the time to other events, as people are trying to guage the size of Katrina, as Stbalbach also mentioned. However as time moves on, people will get a sense of how big Katrina is. The most obvious similar size disaster is the 1906 Earthquake. It was not the biggest as far as magnitude on the Richter scale goes, in American history, but it sure did plenty of damage. In my experience, major events such as Katrina seem to grow in importance, so there is less need to compare things. I'm sure the articles on Katrina will trim down to what it important as time goes on. Leistung 06:24, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Vandals

Beware of vandales on Hurricane Katrina. Latley it is becoming overwelming...

Misery After the Storm

A desperate cry of "Don't forget us!" sweeps South Mississippi. And it should. New Orleans is getting 95% of the Katrina coverage, Biloxi and Gulfport only 4%, and the truely affected area- Bay St. Louis and Waveland is getting 1%. The news of my school- Pass Christian Middle School, a Camille survivor- reached me 2 weeks after the storm. All I could recognize were the old, creaky auditorium seats my classmates and I would sit in before school. The memories just in them! Mr. Storey yelling at us 6th graders last year- yea, those were the good times. I never realized how great just an air conditioning could be- until I didn't have one. No showers, no running water- all in the wonderfull 119°F heat index. My family still suffers down there, while I sit in the nice Stockton, Illinois weather. I feel sort of guilty- seeing as I still have a house and I'm in 75°F weather.


Please- if you're a Katrina survivor, write your name and town- and story, if you like- on this page. Thank you!


Also- PLEASE DO NOT MAKE ANY CHANGES! I only want to submit this account for the world.


Sarah Nazaretian

Long Beach

I appreciate your call for concern; however, a Wikipedia article about the Hurricane and its talk page are not the place for these kinds of things (endless personal accounts, etc.) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Not a blog. Peyna 03:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Just to add to what I said earlier, you do bring up a good point, which is also evidenced in the Wikipedia article, and that is the extensive focus on the situation in New Orleans. Of course, part of the reason is places like Waveland, MS were home to about 6,000 people, where as New Orleans was home to almost 500,000 people. Peyna 03:47, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
There is maybe too much focus on New Orleans. Other areas have been devastated too. Please add anything that you feel is relevant or important to the Hurricane related articles. You could add "a personal account". For example, here is one about the San Francisco Earthquake. [37] These are very important in a historical context. Leistung 06:32, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
I agree with the need for information from more areas, but please remember to keep all enteries encyclopedic! I know that this is a very personal and emotional subject, especially for anyone who was directly affected by it, but please bear in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a blog. -Loren 07:08, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
As a person who is "on the scene" in South Mississippi, I find it somewhat disturbing that the media have focussed on New Orleans. The plight of isolated rural families is very desperate even now nearly 2 weeks after the storm. We are talking about people who are just as poor as those in New Orleans & who are currently cut off by impassable roads, lacking adequate healthcare, food & water supplies. In that regard, New Orleans enjoys much better distribution channels & thanks to the media, is getting a lot more attention. However, I also recognize that I feel too strongly about this particular subject to write NPOV material here. Djeaux 20:14, 13 September 2005 (UTC)


CONFIRMED DEATH TOLL IS 423 in LA

NEW ORLEANS - Hurricane Katrina's death toll in Louisiana climbed to 423 Tuesday, up from 279 a day before, the state Health Department said.

Why On earth didn't Bush do this for any Parishes on the Gulf?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20050827-1.html

Why On earth didn't Bush do this for any Parishes on the Gulf?

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/econdev/maps/edplbcla.gif

signed CD

I'm a bit skeptical of this, it looks like something similar to this has been added to the article as well, but it seems like it could be entirely out of context. Perhaps the coastal parishes were not included in the original announcement for some other reasons? (Were they covered separately under a more severe category?) Also, not long after the hurricane struck, all parishes were included. I think more information is needed instead of speculation based on one government announcement being taken out of context. Peyna 16:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

skepticism is good.

from what I've been told (by very bias sources) those areas weren't decalred disaster zones because they didn't want people to stay there (sounds like a BS reason to me). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.241.245.49 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 14 September 2005

Get your facts straight. Bush did not decide which parishes to include in the disaster declaration. The federal government will include whatever areas the *governor* requests to be included. It's not up to the federal government to make those determinations.

It has become overwhelmingly obvious that most people don't understand that disaster prepardness and response is primarily a state and local issue. The federal government (incl. FEMA) can only come in and respond when requested to by the governor.

"The purpose of this subchapter is to provide a system of emergency preparedness for the protection of life and property in the United States from hazards and to vest responsibility for emergency preparedness jointly in the Federal Government and the States and their political subdivisions." 42 USC 5195, Congress clearly placed responsibility on FEMA and the States jointly. FEMA has a ton of money for disaster preparedness which they are supposed to help the states use.
"(a) Readiness of Federal agencies to issue warnings to State and local officials

The President shall insure that all appropriate Federal agencies are prepared to issue warnings of disasters to State and local officials.

(b) Technical assistance to State and local governments for effective warnings

The President shall direct appropriate Federal agencies to provide technical assistance to State and local governments to insure that timely and effective disaster warning is provided." 42 USC 5132.

"In any major disaster, the President may--

(1) direct any Federal agency, with or without reimbursement, to utilize its authorities and the resources granted to it under Federal law (including personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, and managerial, technical, and advisory services) in support of State and local assistance efforts; (2) coordinate all disaster relief assistance (including voluntary assistance) provided by Federal agencies, private organizations, and State and local governments; (3) provide technical and advisory assistance to affected State and local governments for-- (A) the performance of essential community services; (B) issuance of warnings of risks and hazards; (C) public health and safety information, including dissemination of such information; (D) provision of health and safety measures; and (E) management, control, and reduction of immediate threats to public health and safety; and (4) assist State and local governments in the distribution of medicine, food, and other consumable supplies, and emergency assistance. " 42 USC 5170a.

As you can see, the federal government has a lot of power and responsibility in emergency situations; the Governer of the State has the responsibility to request that the President declare a disaster area, but the President has wide latitude in what he can do. Peyna 16:08, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Katrina timeline disappeared, restore it?

A timeline of the Katrina disaster seems invaluable, it seems to have disappeared off the article where I claim it is very appropriate. I speak of this link: Timeline_of_Hurricane_Katrina, should we not add it back? User:GreatAlfredini

Much of what is covered in the timeline is covered elsewhere; a timeline can be valuable to help the reader understand the chronologic order of events when it is significant to their understanding, but in this instance, it is arguably not that valuable aside from being trivia. Peyna 04:11, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
It's linked from the Katrina template. It may not need a specific reference in-article; perhaps in See also --Dhartung | Talk 23:14, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
If someone thinks the time line is trivia then it needs to be fixed. Some kind of time line is essential to deal with allegations that people were given adequate notice to evacuate, that assistance to the people who could not get out got to them in a reasonable time period, how many days food they supposed to store, where rising waters could not get to it, and when they were given that specific warning, to store food so rising waters not get to it, because some people not think warnings given in sufficient time. AlMac|(talk) 06:35, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Image issues

The plethora of images down the left side of the article seem to be causing a lot of page formatting issues (the numerous subsections cause similar problems); I removed some of the ones I considered to be surplus to try to correct this, but it could still use some work. The page is slowly becoming more and more sloppy because of information being haphazardly added. Peyna 05:05, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

hurricane Katrina death toll double speak

I don't understand this whatsoever, in the death toll summary, it says there are 659 confirmed dead, then on the right hand side it lists close to a 1000. The right hand side should match the written text, should it not.

(Please sign edits to talk pages.) The numbers should agree, but when they are in separate locations they often get out of synch as editors don't realize they have to change it in two places. --Dhartung | Talk 23:16, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Well I thank you very much for your quick and timely response, I still see the numbers aren't matching up(795 to 895+). I will edit this from now on, confirmed death toll should mean just that. Perphaps someone could add a third catergory to the template, such as "possible deaths" or maybe "unconfirmed deaths".69.198.1.191 13:22, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

I give up, some moron keeps on changing my edit. If the officials say that the confirmed death toll is 816(as of today) how can it be 857+. Whomever keeps on editing the template in regards to confirmed death toll, needs to have his/her head examined.69.198.1.191 01:04, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

NPOV tag

Why is there a NPOV tag on the "Advance weather forecasts" section? Rmhermen 12:48, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Reclassification speculation

The last paragraph of the Hurricane Path section states:

"According to reports from The Weather Channel, as of September 14, 2005, the National Hurricane Center is considering a reclassification of Hurricane Katrina on the Saffir-Simpson scale to a Category 5 storm at landfall. The reclassification would be based on the storm surge and central pressure data of the storm at landfall."

While I wouldn't put such a statement beyond the Weather Channel (and won't doubt the author heard it), the factual accuracy of Weather Channel's report is suspect. I have read many blogs and boards speculating on reclassification of Katrina based on central pressure and storm surge comparisons to hurricanes Andrew and Camille. However, from http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshs.shtml we have...

"Wind speed is the determining factor in the scale, as storm surge values are highly dependent on the slope of the continental shelf and the shape of the coastline, in the landfall region."

So, reclassification would only occur based on a recalculation of wind speed. (As was the case with Andrew.) I wouldn't doubt some reviewing of the numbers has occured at the NHC, but TWC's report seems highly speculative and sensationlist. Does it really belong in wikipedia?

Rshepard 23:30, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

No. If the NHC (or some other part of NOAA) says something on the subject, that'd be worth mentioning. But as it is, it's a third-hand statement. -- Cyrius|✎ 01:45, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
I submitted a question related to this at http://answers.noaa.gov. Their response:

Response (Howard) - 09/19/2005 09:02 PM It is possible; Andrew was upgraded from a 4 to a 5, but that took 10 years of reanalysis; I am sure that Katrina's data will be looked at, but it will take some time.

Customer - 09/19/2005 06:55 PM I've seen and heard that Katrina's Saffir-Simpson category at landfall may be revised. Is this true?

Cited: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hurricane_Katrina

-- Howard J. Diamond, Program Manager U.S. Global Climate Observing System NOAA/National Climatic Data Center Silver Spring Maryland answers@noaa.gov http://answers.noaa.gov

Urban Legends

There are enough phony stories circulating that it might be worth a section in the external links identifying what's wrong, for future reference, since some people may try to edit additions here, unaware that these stories are false. AlMac|(talk) 17:02, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Bush Bashing

Here's an urban legend link on some of the phony pictures going around about what the President was allegedly doing while the disaster unfolded. AlMac|(talk) 16:56, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

The photos are clearly a joke. Although Bush supporters seem to think that he's the first president that anyone's ever treated with any disrespect, making fun of the president is a time-honored American tradition (Thomas Nast, e.g., skewered Andrew Johnson with regularity). I wouldn't waste a lot of space or time on the "phony pictures."--RattBoy 11:39, 17 September 2005 (UTC)


I read on the Hour (montreal newspaper) and there was an article <http://hour.ca/columns/3dollarbill.aspx?iIDArticle=7151> saying that homosexuals were blamed by a group of fundamenlist Christians and that Katrina was "God's wrath" against New Orlean's tolerance of gay men.

I assume that since it was published in this paper that it's true does anyone have more info on this? Tszkin

Gov & Mayor Bashing

Here's an urban legend link on a phony story about Gov & Mayor allegedly refusing to declare Katrina as an emergency. AlMac|(talk) 17:02, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Damage estimates

Ok, enough of this. $200 billion is the estimated cost of reconstruction. This includes: wreckage clearing, building reconstruction, levee boosting, swamp restoring, relief costs, temporary housing costs, electricity in the shelters, and on and on and on. That is why reconstruction is never included in the total storm cost. Hasn't ever been in the past and it should be included now because it would exaggerate comparison with other storms. Current insured damages are estimated at $43 billion. That was the last I heard. That would put total damages around $86 billion.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 20:46, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

The NHC will release the damage estimates at the end of the season. --tomf688<TALK> 02:28, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Re-organization of Article

This article could definitely benefit from a re-orgnization of subheadings. As it is, we're going in about 4 different directions.

Major headings could include:

  • Intro
  • Pre-Landfall events (including storm formation, preparatory orders, etc.)
  • Immediate effects (damage as a direct result of the storm, maybe broken down geographically)
  • Short-term effects (New Orleans flooding, effects with impact only 1-2 weeks following the storm)
  • Long-term effects

Now, under those categories, some of the other things we have might fit; but part of the reason for the excessive bulk of non-encyclopedic information is because we've got way more categories than are needed. Some of them might be worth of their own article, but they aren't worth more than a mention here. Peyna 22:09, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

185 mph?

According to this article, teh maximum windspeed was 185 mph. However, as far as I know, the highest confirmed sustained wind readings were only 175 mph. Where did 185 mph come from? bob rulz 02:40, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure - although I did read that Slidell Airport had a 176 mph sustained wind (according to the mayor of the city), so I expect that Katrina will be officially declared Category 5 at landfall at 180 mph (the pressure and surge are more in line with Cat-5 storms). In addition, the 125 mph landfall at the LA-MS line, I think, will be reclassified at about 155 mph as a strong Category 4 (pressure at the time was 925 mb and the storm surge was still enormous). CrazyC83 03:42, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
I trust the NHC/NOAA a lot more than distant word of mouth; the speed at initial landfall in LA was around 140; 140-176 is a HUGE difference; and generally hurricanes don't get stronger after they move inland. The 175 mph winds were on Sunday while Katrina was still out at sea. Storm surge is more than a factor of wind; the sea floor and land structures play a huge impact in it, so it is not a reliable determination of hurricane intensity. Peyna 04:17, 19 September 2005 (UTC):::
The Slidell report seems to be another rumor turned "official" report, as with the Weather Channel report of reclassification. The mayor of Slidell did indeed issue on Sept 10 an announcement referencing 176mph sustained winds which attributed the Slidell NWS office as the source. However, the last [Katrina Post Storm Report] from the same office mentions nothing of such high winds in Slidell. All other NWS and NHC information points to 140mph at first landfall. This also agrees with the current NHC analysis. Noting that the mayor's announcement matches an earlier NWS/NHC report of Katrina prior to landfall and after a little searching on the web, I suspect that the mayor was propogating misinformation that originated with WWL news reports. I suppose there would be something reassuring about knowing that Katrina was a Cat 5 at landfall, but the cruel reality is that even a lesser storm on the Saffir-Simpson scale can pack tremendous energy. Rshepard 00:07, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
The highest sustained wind speed I can find in the NHC advisory archives is 150 KT (~ 173 mph). In the NHC analysis information I thought I saw a 155 KT (~ 178 mph) recalculation, but I can't put my fingers on the source right now. Maximum gusts reported in the advisories was 185 KT (~ 213 mph). Maybe that's where someone got the 185 mph...albeit mistranslated and misapplied.Rshepard 01:37, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Katrina Government Statistics Update

I got this in a forwarded e-mail & plan to mine the "original sources" for any data factoids not yet in the article. There may be some copyright issues here, so by going to "original sources" and re-writing the facts, that may cover it. AlMac|(talk) 02:26, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

  • From: "Merle S. Robinson"
  • To: "Al Mac"
  • Subject: FW: Katrina stats

All,

Hurricane Katrina recovery is receiving an unprecedented amount of attention and support from the entire Federal Government apparatus. I truly did not understand how much before scanning the report below. It is NOT just a DHS problem as most of the client agencies with CIVSEG are engaged. Just FYI.

http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/katrina.htm

I finally found some government statistics... no death toll, but just about everything else...

You know it's bad when the PIOs from the government agencies are referring people to the news media for these numbers, which is what has happened to me today! Like, er, um, WHERE is the media coming up with these numbers if not through government agencies? Death toll numbers below, compliments of the NY Times, which I hope has had more success than I have today in tracking this info from reliable, sound sources.

Nancy

What Government is Doing (as of September 15, 2005)

Areas Affected & Deployment #s

  • Federal disaster declarations are covering 90,000 square miles of affected areas.
  • National Response Plan mobilizes resources of the entire federal government to support response and recovery.
  • 71,100 unified federal personnel have been deployed
  • More than 48,500 lives have been saved and rescued
  • 122,000 people are currently housed in shelters throughout all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
  • 509,000 households have received $1.1 billion in disaster assistance.
  • Commodities delivered to date include:
    • 23.3 million MREs
    • 58.8 million liters of water
    • 1.7 million pounds of ice
    • 32 tons of basic first aid supplies
    • More than 600 buses to transport evacuees
  • The United States Coast Guard rescued more than 23,800 lives in the wake of Katrina.
  • More than 30,000 volunteer medical personnel have registered with Health and Human Services to assist in recovery.
  • The American Red Cross, in coordination with the Southern Baptist Convention, has served more than 7.6 million hot meals and more than 6.6 million snacks to survivors of Hurricane Katrina.
  • 43,000 National Guard are on the ground in three states.
  • 15 Disaster Recovery Centers open in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas to gain assistance from recovery specialists of local, state, federal and volunteer agencies.
  • List of Government Waivers and Dispensations Authorized for Hurricane Katrina Response

DHS National Response Plan

http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/editorial/editorial_0566.xml AlMac|(talk) 03:07, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Government Exceptions

http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/editorial/editorial_0718.xml AlMac|(talk) 03:08, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

FEMA

FEMA - FEMA has distributed nearly $965.8 million in federal aid to more than 430,000 households. Families temporarily residing in all 50 states and the District of Columbia are receiving assistance in a streamlined process to urgently expedite these payments of $2,000 per household to help pay for the emergency needs of food, shelter, clothing, personal necessities and medical needs.

FEMA has thousands of phone operators taking registrations on its 24-hour phone bank. Callers may register faster by calling during the off hours of 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. Those registering should be ready, if able, to provide their Social Security number, insurance information, financial information, contact information and their direct deposit information. Registration will remain open for many months to ensure that all citizens eligible for assistance have had the opportunity to apply.

FEMA has deployed more than 87 National Disaster Medical System Teams and 28 urban search and rescue teams with nearly 7,000 personnel to save lives and render medical assistance. Teams have rescued more than 350 hurricane victims.

FEMA has moved millions of commodities of water, ice, and meals ready to eat (MRE). FEMA also supplied generators and thousands of cots and blankets.

FEMA established a Housing Area Command to oversee all temporary housing operations across the Hurricane Katrina impacted areas of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. Housing Strike Teams are being readied for deployment into each state to begin the process of quantifying temporary housing needs.

Individuals in declared counties can register online for disaster assistance at www.fema.gov or call FEMA's toll free registration line at 1-800-621-FEMA (3362).

US Coast Guard

Coast Guard - Thousands of Coast Guard men and women from around the nation continue conducting search, rescue, response, waterway reconstitution and environmental impact assessment operations from Florida to Louisiana with other federal, state and local agencies.

The Coast Guard, the Environmental Protection Agency and the state of Louisiana are working together with local industries to recover spilled oil and mitigate further environmental damage in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

The numbers of rescues have decreased significantly in the last few days. The number of people rescued to date is more than 23,909 people. People who are still in need of rescue or know of someone in need, can submit information at http://homeport.uscg.mil. People should also contact their state emergency operation centers are (225) 925-7707 or 7709 or 3511 or 7412.

The Coast Guard is conducting port surveys and moving assets into these ports to restore buoys, lights, and aids-to-navigation, thus allowing maritime traffic to safely navigate.

Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement

U.S. Customs and Border Protection(CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) trucks delivered several thousand items of clothing to Hurricane Katrina evacuees in Jackson, Miss., Houston and San Antonio, Texas. The clothing, seized in violations of U.S. trademark laws is worth estimated at over $17 million.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement's - Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVIS) has received numerous questions regarding international students who have been impacted by Hurricane Katrina. ICE has established a toll free number (800-961-5294) for students who are attending a school that is affected by Hurricane Katrina and are unable to contact their Designated School official. Students can also email SEVIS at SEVIS.Source@dhs.gov.

National Guard

National Guard - There are more than 46,000 National Guard members on state active duty in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida. Guardsmen are trained professionals and bring great expertise and sensitivity to their mission in support of local law enforcement.

National Guard soldiers flying helicopters from dawn to dusk are providing a critical air bridge to communities throughout the Mississippi Gulf Coast with much needed supplies of military rations, water and ice. Aircrews are flying four to 15 missions per day, depending on the distance of their drops from the busy Air National Guard Combat Readiness Training Center airfield.

The Mississippi Air National Guard has erected a transportable medical center on the grounds of the Hancock County Hospital - a stopgap until county medical organizations can operate again.

National Guard helicopters evacuated hundreds of sick and injured persons out of the devastated greater New Orleans area.

The Georgia National Guard's 48th Brigade Combat Team Rear Detachment mobilized its forces to aid the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Troop E 108th Cavalry and the 108th Armor performed the initial patrols of North Harrision County before shifting to the areas of the coast heavily impacted by the storm surge. The members of Task Force Bulldog rendered medical assistance to casualties, identified areas needing inspection, and delivered thousands of pounds of food, water, and ice, at points of distribution (PODS). Members of the 108th Armor spearheaded an effort to reconstruct Harrison Central High School by building and donating a new lunch area for the students.

US Department of Defense

The Defense Department is tailoring its 70,000-member force supporting hurricane relief operations as needed to provide the critical capabilities required by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and other federal agencies. The current military support force - 22,000 active-duty troops and more than 46,000 National Guardsmen - continue to provide critical security, logistical and other support.

Joint Task Force (JTF) Katrina, the military's on-scene command in support of FEMA, has shifted to the USS Iwo Jima, docked in New Orleans. The Navy amphibious assault ship allows commanders and their civilian counterparts to communicate with rescuers and assistance personnel across the region. Lt. Gen. Russel Honore, commander of the First Army in Fort Gillem, Ga., is the JTF-Commander.

Two C-130 Hercules aircraft from the Air Force Reserve's 910th Airlift Wing are preparing begin the first mosquito-spraying missions in the region today. The initial focus will be the New Orleans area, then outlying areas of Louisiana and Mississippi, if required.

The Department of Defense made available a fleet of approximately 50 helicopters to support FEMA's operations. Eight civilian swift water rescue teams were transferred from California to assist with recovery operations.

DOD has 789 beds available in field hospitals at Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport, the 14th Combat Support Hospital, and aboard USS Bataan, USS Iwo Jima, USS Tortuga and USS Shreveport.

DOD currently has 20 Navy ships on station in the region to provide medical support, humanitarian relief, and transportation.

DOD has delivered more than 24.2 million liters of water, 67 million pounds of ice, and 13.6 million individually packaged military rations to areas in Mississippi and Louisiana.

US Department of Agriculture

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has deployed 2,760 Forest Service employees who are trained in rescue and response to large-scale incidents to assist the Federal Emergency Management Agency. These teams have expertise in setting up logistics staging areas, distribution of food products and debris removal.

USDA is making more than $170 million in emergency assistance available to agricultural producers suffering from Hurricane Katrina. In addition, USDA's Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) is implementing immediate changes to its Marketing Assistance Loan Program due to the hurricane. These changes will allow producers to obtain loans for "on-farm" grain storage on the ground in addition to grain bins and other normally approved structures.

USDA has delivered or has on the way more than 300 trucks containing over 12 million pounds of food (canned vegetables, fruits, cheese and meats) and baby food and formula products, with truckloads of additional supplies being prepared for delivery to affected communities.

USDA has also authorized states to pre-load electronic food benefit cards with $50 to immediately purchase food even before application s have been processed to receive complete benefits. These cards can be used by displaced residents as they move from shelters to temporary housing.

USDA Rural Development will provide a six-month moratorium on payments for approximately 50,000 low-income residents who have Rural Development Single Family Housing Loans in the affected areas. USDA will also be taking an inventory of vacant USDA housing to help accommodate displaced residents."

US Department of Commerce

The Department of Commerce has established a toll-free number (1-888-4USADOC or 1-888-487-2362) to help private sector contributions reach those who are in need following Hurricane Katrina. Phone lines will be staffed by caseworkers from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. seven days a week. The caseworkers will help steer each contribution made by the businesses community through the federal government until it successfully reaches its destination.

Commerce has deployed three National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) response teams to survey priority channel and port locations. The survey products produced by these teams will help determine when ports can be reopened. NOAA will also be working to determine the impacts of the storm on living marine resources, including commercial and recreational fisheries that are economically important to the region.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), is working with FEMA to lend its technical expertise from the Building and Fire Research Laboratory to asses structural damage and provide assistance. NIST's Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) will review the impact of the hurricane on small manufacturers in those areas of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama affected by the storm.

The Economic Development Administration (EDA), is coordinating with FEMA and identifying resources to deploy. Up to $7 million in FY 2005 funds could be deployed to build new/improved infrastructure to aid in economic recovery.

The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), will utilize the Defence Priorities and Allocations System (DPAS), as needed, to prioritize procurement of goods and services for the restoration effort -- temporary housing and plastic sheeting are likely major requirements.

US Department of Education

The Department of Education has launched Hurricane Help for Schools, to help match schools with displaced students in need with companies, organizations, other schools and individuals willing to donate. In less than a week, more than 45 matches have already occurred between schools and organizations across the U.S.

The Department of Education has modified rules for providing Federal student aid to transfer students who transfer from a postsecondary educational institution that is not operating due to the hurricane to another institution.

The Department of Education has extended application filing dates for Federal student aid for students impacted by the hurricane and extended various reporting dates required of postsecondary educational institutions.

The Department of Education has also directed student loan holders to grant an automatic three-month forbearance to any borrower whose address is in a FEMA declared disaster county.

US Department of Energy

Department of Energy (DOE)Secretary Samuel Bodman has authorized the release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. DOE has also expanded their gas gouging reporting system to include a 1-800 telephone number of 1-800-244-3301or online at http://gaswatch.energy.gov/.

DOE's Office of Science has established a temporary program to match interested displaced students and faculty researchers -- who may be eligible regardless of current DOE funding status -- with research programs that currently receive grants from the Office of Science. The clearinghouse for the activity is the DOE Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, which will match hosts with those desiring to participate and will consider on a case basis modest supplemental funding to existing programs to facilitate this process. For further information, those interested may contact Christopher.Yetter@science.doe.gov or call (301) 903-4353. They may also gain additional information at the Oak Ridge web site at www.orau.gov/doeedrelief/.

US Department of Health and Human Services

The Department of Health and Human Services is offering streamlined access to benefits for Hurricane Katrina victims. As part of this streamlining process, states will be given the flexibility to enroll evacuees without requiring documents such as tax returns or proof of residency. Evacuees who have lost all identification and records should be able to give their address or other simple form of attestation to be eligible. The special evacuee status will apply to the full range of federal benefits administered by the states, including HHS programs that provide services through Medicaid, family assistance through Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), child care support, foster care assistance, mental health services and substance abuse treatment services.

HHS has declared a public health emergency for Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas . This action allows the Department to waive certain Medicare, Medicaid, State Child Health Insurance Program, and HIPAA requirements as well as make grants and enter into contracts more expeditiously during this emergency.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has adopted a series of emergency policy changes to accommodate the needs of thousands of displaced Medicaid and State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) beneficiaries who have fled Hurricane Katrina and need urgent medical attention in their new host states.

HHS is providing $15 million in emergency funding to assist Head Start and Early Head Start grantees in providing services to children and families displaced by Hurricane Katrina. These funds will enable Head Start and Early Head Start grantees to provide services to evacuee children and families until October 11, 2005. To receive services, a family must have been forced to leave their home because of Hurricane Katrina.

HHS announced the availability of a toll-free hotline for people in crisis in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. By dialing 1-800-273-TALK (1-800-273-8255), callers will be connected to a network of local crisis centers across the country that are committed to crisis counseling. Callers to the hotline will receive counseling from trained staff at the closest certified crisis center in the network. HHS also is providing $600,000 in emergency grants to Louisiana, Alabama, Texas and Mississippi to ensure that mental health assessment and crisis counseling are available in areas impacted by Hurricane Katrina.

The federal government will speed up the award of grants to establish 26 new health center sites in areas impacted by Hurricane Katrina. Approximately $2.3 million in fiscal year 2005 funds to these sites will get health care resources up and running quickly in disaster areas and neighboring states treating evacuees from the storm-ravaged Gulf Coast.

The Office of The Surgeon General and the Office of Public Health Emergency Preparedness to mobilize and identify healthcare professionals and relief personnel to assist in Hurricane Katrina relief efforts. They have registered over 30,000 medical volunteers to assist in recovery measures.

HHS continues to ship pallets of basic first aid materials and supplies to the area, and the Centers for Disease Control and Food and Drug Administration are augmenting state and local public health resources - including chemical and toxicology teams, sanitation and public health teams, epidemiology teams and food safety teams.

Health Care Professionals

https://volunteer.ccrf.hhs.gov/ AlMac|(talk) 03:12, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

US Department of Housing and Urban Development

The Department of Housing and Urban Development has established a single toll-free housing hotline, 1-888-297-8685, to assist the victims of Hurricane Katrina with all housing concerns. This number operates from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. CDT, seven days a week.

HUD has partnered with the U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) and the National Association of Counties (NACo) to identify thousands of available homes to temporarily house displaced families in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Initially, the Department identified nearly 5,000 vacant single-family HUD-owned properties in 11 states near the affected areas.

US Department of the Interior

The Department of the Interior has deployed 1,489 personnel in response to Hurricane Katrina. Emergency response activities include interagency assistance under the National Response Plan; assuring public safety on Departmental lands and providing mutual aid to surrounding communities; and restoring capability of offices in the disaster areas to execute essential functions.

United States Geological Survey employees are repairing and replacing damaged stream gauges throughout the region to restore flood warning capacity; coordinating with other federal agencies to provide geospatial information, maps, satellite images and scientific assessments to help response and recovery operations; and sampling and testing water pumped out of New Orleans and into Lake Pontchartrain.

US Department of Justice

Department of Justice has established the Hurricane Katrina Fraud Task Force, designed to deter, investigate and prosecute disaster-related federal crimes such as charity fraud and insurance fraud. Justice has also set up a page on how to protect against fraud.

The U.S. Department of Justice is working with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) to set up a national hotline to locate missing hurricane victims at 1-888-544-5475. http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=2077

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has obtained the authority to provide states access to the FBI's criminal history database for the purpose of conducting background checks on any volunteer, relief worker, or evacuee associated with Hurricane Katrina, who would have access to children. The FBI is waiving its $24.00 fee that is normally charged for fingerprint-based checks relating to employment, licensing, and suitability. This limited authority expires on November 7, 2005 and requires a state or federal statute authorizing a fingerprint-based criminal history background check for individuals with access to cildren.

Protection against Fraud

http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/SpecialReport-HurricaneKatrina.htm AlMac|(talk) 03:15, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

US Department of Labor

Department of Labor - has three programs to offer immediate income assistance to workers displaced by Hurricane Katrina 1) Unemployment Insurance for workers who lost their jobs because of Hurricane Katrina; 2) Disaster Unemployment Insurance for the newly employed and self-employed not normally eligible for unemployment insurance and, 3) Temporary jobs funded through National Emergency Grants.

For information on how to access these benefits, individuals can call DOL's national toll free number: 1-866-4-USA-DOL (1-866-487-2365). For those able to access the internet, information can also be found on DOL's website (www.dol.gov). DOL has also dispatched teams to all evacuee sites, and has staff canvassing neighborhoods, churches, parishes and hospitals to advertise these benefits. Mobile "One-Stop" vans have been deployed to FEMA sites, including one in the parking lot of the Houston Astrodome.

DOL has created the Katrina Recovery Job Connection [38], a new resource focused on supporting the transition back into employment for individuals impacted by Hurricane Katrina. The site's purpose is to connect job seekers with employers interested in hiring them for either new permanent employment or for jobs related to the cleanup, recovery and rebuilding process in hurricane-impacted areas. While the site is intended to complement the efforts at the state and local level to connect workers and jobs in the impacted areas, it is also intended to make individuals evacuated to other states aware of opportunities in their home state. Both employers and job seekers are encouraged to visit the site to post and view listings of available jobs.

US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has deployed safety and health professionals to Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama to provide technical assistance to recovery workers in their ongoing cleanup efforts along the Gulf Coast of the United States.

OSHA has been contacting major power companies in the affected areas to provide safety briefings to employees at power restoration staging areas.

OSHA has released public service announcements to inform workers about hazards related to restoration and cleanup.

OSHA has identified home supply and construction stores in the affected areas in order to distribute safety and health fact sheets and materials to these locations.

US Department of State

The Department of State advises concerned family members of foreign nationals residing or traveling in areas affected by Hurricane Katrina to try to reach their family members by phone, email, or other available means. If family member cannot be reached, the State Department recommends they contact their embassy in Washington, D.C. for assistance.

Reports from the region indicate that some phone lines are working but experiencing heavy call volume, so family members are encouraged to keep trying if lines are busy.

US Department of Transportation (DOT)

The Department of Transportation (DOT) is working closely with state and local authorities, federal partners, and private sector transportation service providers to assess damage to transportation infrastructure and assist in immediate recovery efforts.

Work on repairing the Twin Spans Bridge that carries traffic on Interstate-10 between New Orleans and Slidell, La., has begun following the September 9th award of a $31 million contract to Boh Brothers Construction of New Orleans. The eastbound span will be repaired first, providing one lane of traffic in each direction.The contract requires work to be completed within 45 days. The second phase of the work will result in repair of the westbound span which, along with the eastbound span, will provide two-lane traffic in each direction within 120 days.

The Department has secured more than 1,639 trucks to support the delivery of more than 3,731 truckloads of goods, including more than 25 million MREs (meals ready to eat), more than 31 million liters of water, 56,400 tarps, more than 19 million pounds of ice and 215,000 blankets.

DOT has also deployed teams from the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation Administration and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to help clear roads and inspect bridges, establish communications and increase operations at major airports, and to move generators to pipeline pumping stations to restore the flow of petroleum products to the southeast.

US Department of Treasury

Department of Treasury - The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced [39] special relief for taxpayers in the Presidential Disaster Areas struck by the hurricane. These taxpayers generally will have until October 31 to file tax returns and submit tax payments. The IRS will stop interest and any late filing or late payment penalties that would otherwise apply. This relief includes the September 15 due date for estimated taxes and for calendar-year corporate returns with automatic extensions.

Office of The Comptroller of the Currency - The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) is working with federal and state banking agencies and other organizations to support the operations and recovery of national banks in the affected region, to support citizens, and to ensure the safety and soundness of available banking resources. Questions regarding national bank issues can be directed to 1-800-613-6743, or by e-mail at: customer.assistance@occtreas.gov. Additional information for bankers and bank customers is available at http://www.occ.gov/katrina.htm.

The Office of Thrift Supervision has setup a toll-free hotline for thrift institutions and their customers affected by Hurricane Katrina. Call (1-800-958-0655) between the hours of 8:00am to 5:30pm CST, Monday to Friday. The Office of Thrift Supervision is the primary regulator of all federally chartered and many state-chartered thrift institutions, which includes savings banks and savings and loan associations.

US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has successfully evacuated the most critically ill patients from the VA medical center in New Orleans . V A officials are establishing procedures for family members to locate inpatients evacuated from the affected facilities. Officials are also finalizing procedures for veterans from the hurricane area to receive benefits checks and prescription drugs, and to ensure that VA employees continue to be paid.

Mobile clinics are now open in South Mississippi and Louisiana to provide medical treatment to veterans displaced by Hurricane Katrina. For more information about the mobile clinics, veterans can call 1-800-949-1009 ext. 6004. Veterans currently enrolled in a standing VA clinic that is operational should continue to seek treatment at that clinic.

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has temporarily waived standards for gasoline and diesel fuels in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida under the Clean Air Act. Waivers have also been sent to the Governors of the 46 remaining states and territories providing temporary relief from volatility and sulfur standards.

These waivers will ensure that fuel is available throughout the country to address public health issues and emergency vehicle supply needs. They will be effective through September 15 and only apply to volatility standards - the rate at which fuel evaporates - and the amount of sulfur in fuel.

EPA, in coordination with the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, is posting data from New Orleans flood water samples of chemical and biological analysis which was validated through a quality assurance process to ensure scientific accuracy. The results show the public and emergency responders should avoid contact with the standing water and are publicly available at the EPA website - http://www.epagov/katrina/testresults/index.html. Daily sampling is ongoing and EPA, in coordination with federal, state and local agencies, will release data as it becomes available.

EPA continues assessment of damage to local drinking systems and providing technical assistance to help restore service in Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana. Many systems were disabled or impaired by loss of electrical power, and some are now operating under boiled water notices. The total number of systems that remain affected is 1 in Alabama, 390 in Mississippi, and 468 in Louisiana. EPA has two mobile laboratories in Mississippi and two in Louisiana.

EPA emergency and response personnel are helping assess the damage and prepare to support cleanup in Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana. Teams are traveling to affected areas and conducting aerial assessments.

US Federal Communications Commission (FCC)

Federal Communications Commission is facilitating continuing service for customers of wireline carriers that are unable to provide service due to Hurricane Katrina. The Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau has adopted an order that temporarily waives certain carrier change requirements. This will allow affected carriers to temporarily transfer customers to those carriers with working facilities while restoration efforts are under way, with minimum inconvenience and burden on customers.

US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is working cooperatively with all of the state and federal banking agencies and other organizations to determine the status of the financial institutions located in the affected areas and has established a 24-hour consumer hotline and a dedicated web page that includes bank branch information for FDIC-insured institutions in damaged areas. This and other information for consumers and bankers is available on the FDIC Web site (link above) or by calling the FDIC's toll-free Call Center at 1-877-ASK-FDIC (1-877-275-3342).

US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)

To aid restoration efforts, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has relaxed certain requirements for electric transmission providers affected by Hurricane Katrina. FERC's rules allow transmission providers to "take whatever steps are necessary to keep the system(s) in operation," notwithstanding any other requirements. FERC has extended filing deadlines in certain cases pending before it that involve energy companies affected by Hurricane Katrina. It has also waived certain Standards of Conduct record keeping requirements. FERC will also consider requests to extend those deadlines.

US General Services Administration] (GSA)

The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) has updated links to Web sites with useful information for victims of the hurricane and interested citizens on the federal government's official portal, www.FirstGov.gov and its Spanish-language counterpart, FirstGov.gov en Espanol .

GSA has also been providing supplies and services [40] to the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the interagency community in support of the relief effort for the victims of Hurricane Katrina.

GSA hotlines are available to federal customers 24/7 in the areas hardest hit by Hurricane Katrina allowing them to access information related to buildings, products, services, technology, or other relevant issues. For Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina and Kentucky the number is: (404) 224-2222; for Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma and New Mexico the number is: (817) 978-2210. Customers may also send an e-mail to actiongsa@gsa.gov.

US National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)

National Archives and Records Administration - is offering expedited services to provide federal civilian and military personnel affected by Hurricane Katrina with necessary copies of documents. [41]

NARA is also offering document recovery advice to federal agencies and courts in the region devastated by Hurricane Katrina. [42]

US Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) will establish an emergency leave transfer program to assist federal employees affected by Hurricane Katrina. OPM has also implemented expedited procedures for replacing monthly retirement annuity checks not received.

OPM has set up a new toll-free number for current and retired Federal employees and annuitants who have been impacted by Hurricane Katrina to answer questions about health insurance, life insurance, status on paychecks, retiree annuity payments, and disability issues. The toll-free number, 1-800-307-8298, is available between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. Central Time.

US Small Business Administration (SBA)

Small Business Administration - Homeowners may borrow up to $200,000 to repair or replace the primary residence. Loans of up to $40,000 are available to renters and homeowners to cover losses to personal property like clothing, appliances and furniture. The interest rate is 2.68 percent with 30 year terms and the loans are aimed at covering losses not fully covered by insurance.

Businesses of all sizes may apply for an SBA disaster loan of up to $1.5 million to cover damages to the property, machinery, inventory, etc. Economic injury disaster loans may be used to pay bills or meet operating expenses. The interest rate on both the SBA business disaster loans are 4 percent, with up to 30 year terms.

To qualify for any kind of federal assistance, residents and business owners in the disaster areas must contact FEMA first at 1-800-621-FEMA. For more information on SBA's disaster loan program call 1-800-659-2955 or vist the Web site at www.sba.gov/disaster.

US Social Security Administration (SSA)

The Social Security Administration has issued 30,000 checks to evacuees who are not able to receive their monthly benefits, whether by mail or direct deposit. Beneficiaries can go to any open Social Security office and receive an immediate payment by check that replaces the full amount of their Social Security or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payment.

Social Security is providing immediate payments and other vital services to the affected areas and to evacuees in other locations through temporary offices at evacuation centers, and FEMA Family Assistance Centers.

US Postal Service

The U.S. Postal Service continues to reconnect Gulf Coast residents with their mail, now providing full delivery service to some 82 percent of residents and businesses affected by Hurricane Katrina. More than 98,000 households of affected residents have filed a Change of Address. Also during the last week, the Postal Service has distributed more than 20,000 Social Security checks to residents at mobile locations in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama.

State Governments

Continuing with what I got in my e-mail sources. AlMac|(talk) 03:02, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

The states of Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana have established Hurricane Katrina hotlines to help coordinate public contributions of money, goods and services to assist victims. The following toll-free hotlines have been activated and are now receiving calls from around the nation and the world: Mississippi - 1-866-230-8903; Alabama - 1-877-273-5018 and Louisiana - 1-866-334-8305. These hotlines can coordinate donations of all types. A representative will take your name and contact information, as well as what type of goods and/or services you wish to donate.

Florida

The Florida Agency for Health Care Administration is providing health services to Medicaid participants who have evacuated to Florida from Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi. All hurricane evacuees from impacted counties who are eligible for those states' Medicaid programs will be given special evacuee status in Florida's Medicaid program, which will entitle them to services provided to Florida participants. To enroll, evacuees should contact the Florida Department of Children and Families' at 1-866-762-2237 or log on to the Department of Children and Families online enrollment website myflorida.com/accessflorida.

Non-Government Organizations (NGO's)

Continuing with what I got in my e-mail sources. AlMac|(talk) 03:02, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

American Red Cross - Shelters more than 250 American Red Cross shelters are open in nine states: Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Tennessee, Arkansas, Florida and Georgia, with more on standby.

More than 142,000 evacuees are being sheltered, not including the operation to transition evacuees from the Superdome in New Orleans to the Astrodome in Houston.

More than 485 Red Cross shelters have been opened in 18 states - including Ala., Ark., Fla., Ga., Ky., La., Md., Mo., Miss., N.C., Okla., SC., Texas, Tenn, Utah, Va. and W.Va. - with more on standby.

The Red Cross, with the worldwide Red Cross Movement, has launched a Web site and hotline to help reunite loved ones. Call toll-free 1-877-LOVED-1S (1-877-568-3317) or online at www.familylinks.icrc.org.

More than 5,640 Red Cross staff and volunteers across the country and from every part of the organization have deployed to the affected area are working around the clock to serve the public need.

More than 3.3 hot million meals and more than 3.9 million snacks have been served to-date by the Red Cross in coordination with the Southern Baptist Convention, the Adventists and Second Harvest. The Red Cross served more than 500,000 meals working closely with several partners, including the Southern Baptist Convention, the Adventists and Second Harvest to provide emergency food to survivors and responders. In coordination with the Southern Baptists, preparations are underway to serve nearly 500,000 hot meals each day.

Houston Astrodome Shelter - The Red Cross is supporting government officials in the relocation of more than 23,000 hurricane survivors from the Superdome in New Orleans to the Astrodome in Houston. The organization is mobilizing to provide blankets, cots and food for the evacuees.

The Red Cross relies on donations of the American people to do its work. Citizens can help by calling 1-800-HELP-NOW (1-800-435-7669) or by making an online contribution to the Disaster Relief Fund at www.redcross.org.

Because of logistical issues, the Red Cross cannot accept donations of food or clothing.

Death Toll Update

Continuing with what I got in my e-mail sources. AlMac|(talk) 03:03, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/17/national/nationalspecial/17bodies.html

AlMac|(talk) 02:29, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

  • I deleted the text due to GFDL compliance reasons. However, I've left the original link accessible, so no material was lost. Titoxd 03:41, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks ... I still have a lot to learn here at Wiki. AlMac|(talk) 06:17, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

How many children are missing? How many have died?

I'm wondering what the number is of children that have been seperated from their parents and guardians. I read somewhere on the web that even foster child centers had been devistated and many orphans fleed.

Does anyone have a source to back up their data?

--Cyberman 20:45, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

My main source on current events is the news media, but I try to check more than one such source.
  • TV interviews of families looking for their kids said stuff like "The helicopter came and had limited space, so our children were rescued, then 7 hours later came back for us, and no one had a clue where the children were evacuated to."
  • Many people were rescued with just the clothes on their back, whatever they could put on in middle of nite while waters rising, so few had current photos of the kids separated from them.

AlMac|(talk) 21:16, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

I hope the topic under me isn't my answer. Dumping a ton of links doesn't help! Might as well have told me to google it, which I have. If they don't know how many children are lost, haven't they counted up the children families are looking for? --Cyberman 23:22, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
By looking at this [link], does anyone think 2751 children lost is correct?
Given that there are tons of organizations trying to help the families get in touch with each other, such that different people at different places, something like a million people displaced, the evacuation very slow to get organized for the people who lacked resources to get out rapidly, the size of families of poor people, the numbers of illegals who not contacting authorities for fear of being evicted from the nation, I think around 3,000 is an understatement. You are asking a question that no one knows the answer to until a future time in history, or unless you use the kind of links I provided to see what all these organizations have listed, and study their lists to eliminate duplicates. AlMac|(talk) 00:11, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Children targeted by sexual predators

Now that evacuated kids have got to shelters, many have Internet access, and are being targeted by child predators. The state of Louisiana conducted a sting operation in chat rooms to catch criminals targeting children who said they were living in emergency shelters without their parents. These children are especially vulnerable to people claiming to be able to help them locate their parents. There are several news stories on this. [43] [44] AlMac|(talk) 06:19, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Eadl 14:49, 22 September 2005 (UTC)I think that this is useless considering that this is an encyclopedia, not a news page. At most I think that a brief mentioning abut the subject should be done.

Estimates

  • As of Sept 18, according to [45]
    • 2,000 kids missing
      • Immediately after the Katrina disaster, the number of missing kids was higher, but something like 700 have been found, so now the total is lower
    • 6,000 adults missing
      • In the immediate aftermath more had been reported missing, of which approx 1,000 have been found
    • 816 dead bodies found
  • As of Sept 20, according to these [46] [47] articles
    • 900 kids have been re-united with their parents
    • 2,400 kids are either missing, or have been found unaccompanied by family members and in need of being reunited with them

Some of the missing may have registered with the government, organizations such as the Red Cross, or www.missingkids.org AlMac|(talk) 06:20, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Families locating each other

I think most reliable statistics might come from the web sites that are working on getting the families back in touch with each other ... how many not yet reconnected. How many success stories.

Lots more links at Disasterhelp.Gov; Disaster Relief ideas evaluated; Bringing order to a Hurricane of Data; Hurricane Housing; to explore to find stuff that belongs in the main article(s) ... I have quite a backlog of possibilities.

AlMac|(talk) 21:06, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Huminitarian crisis...

"Over a million people were displaced — a humanitarian crisis on a scale unseen in the U.S. since the Great Depression."

I think it is best to mention the Great Depression as a clearly comparable/greater "humanitarian crisis". This affected millions of people in the US and all over the country. The so called "Dust Bowl" alone, which is only part of the effects could rival Hurricane Katrina. If we go back to the San Francisco Earthquake, then the Spanish Flu Pandemic of 1918 (more recent) becomes a problem. Clearly the 1918 Pandemic was much more serious than either Katrina or the San Francisco earthquake, as it killed 100s of thousands of people (mostly YOUNG PEOPLE) in the US alone, and around 30 million plus people worldwide, making it numbers wise a bigger disaster than WW1! There were more people killed in San Francisco by the flu than the earthquake! [51] If we go back all the way back to 1861 and the Civil War, then the effects on Native Americans could also be included. So the Great Depression seems to avoid these problems, and most people would agree that the Great Depression was a large event. Leistung 06:22, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

I think the major difference that might be fatal to the analogy is that the Great Depression was not as local in nature as Hurricane Katrina. I mean, sure Katrina has impacted the entire country in one way or another, but people in Maine and Washington did not lost their homes.

Katrina 2

Looks like Hurricane Rita is seeking to pile misery on misery. Is it part of the Aftermath? Leistung 06:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

There probably ought to be an article just on Hurricane Rita and something on the combination effect of other disasters occurring before recovery completed from previous.
In past hurricane seasons, Florida was trying to recover from one, when another shows up, and there was a whole string of them. Perhaps we need to review the Category:Atlantic hurricane seasonal articles on the hurricane seasons of individual years, and show what was noteworthy different from one year to the next.
  • Rarity of some city getting flooded.
  • Statistics on why various groups of people stay behind after being told to evacuate.
  • How often the forecasters get it right dead on the track of the storm, the severity of the storm, state of that art.
  • Is there evidence from storm damage (uprooted trees, buildings moved, how bad the storm must have been, independently of estimates of sustained wind speed?

AlMac|(talk) 18:09, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Latest Emergency Weather Info Links

Airport Closing and Delay Link

Severe Weather Map Link AlMac|(talk) 21:31, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Proposed merger of effects.

Given their closeness in time and location, it strikes me that it will soon become difficult to separate the respective economic, political, and social effects of Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita. How would my fellow editors feel about moving the articles covering these aspects to Economic effects of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, Political effects of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, and Social effects of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season? -- BD2412 talk 00:17, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps timeline also. AlMac|(talk) 00:21, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
Note: I've opened a centralized discussion on this question: Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/2005 Atlantic hurricane season effects. I've copied the above comment to that discussion. -- BD2412 talk 00:27, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
I think they should be separated. It would be too complicated to manage otherwise. Things will become more obvious over time, especially if there is large scale duplication. Hopefully the political effects will be the opposite, with Hurricane Rita, as they will do a wonderful job. I can't imagine there will be much looting this time... I do really think that the effects from Rita will be quite different to Katrina. The cavalry is already coming to the rescue. Leistung 18:09, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

General criticism of the page.

I see that the page about Katrina looks more like a pile of news articles. Whoever gets to access this like, in 2015, will not care about what John Doe, supervisor of whatever-the-heck of Department of don't-give-a-crap said about the Hurricane. The page is very extended and I think a lot of it could be cut off. Just my 2 cents eadl|(talk)

  • So do it. Deleting things that truly have little merit will be welcomed. Questionable deletions should probably be discussed here first. Good editing is always welcome. Dystopos 19:13, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

NPOV tag

This article will never be neutral. --Cy Ni Po 19:16, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

That's not a valid reason. Give a specific complaint and then put back the notice. --Golbez 19:18, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Political effects

This seems to be unsourced/POV:

As high profile news coverage has reported, the American public in general blames all levels of government in different proportions for failures to perform their responsibilities in hurricane preparedness, Hurricane Katrina planning, and Hurricane Katrina aftermath. That is, despite attempts by "highly placed White House sources" to blame local officials, far more Americans blame the Federal Government, national agencies, and President Bush.

Is there a way to rewrite this either to (1) remove the POV, or (2) source the claim? Jpers36 19:54, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I know there were Gallup polls done after the fact that had a rather high number of people blaming the government for slow response, but it was somewhere between 50 and 60 percent, and not "the public in general;" that's just a blanket statement. Mike H (Talking is hot) 03:14, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
The TIME article actually contains a poll (magazine subscription needed, I think) that says that, probably, slightly more people attributed "responsibility for what went wrong with the relief effort" to the state and local officials than the federal government (Bush 61% "some"/"great deal" responsibility, federal agencies 70%, state/local 73%). It's within the margin of error (3%). If the views changed over time, perhaps it should be noted in the article. The POV needs to be edited out, though.AySz88^-^ 04:42, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Wage Effects Section Incoherent

The wage effects section about suspending the wage requirements for federal contractors is incoherent.

It starts out talking about federal contractors then goes into something about credit card debt. I don't know enough about the subject to make an intelligent edit, but someone should clean it up.

Gigs 20:48, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Rebuilding contracts

The timeline is excellent. One important item missing is something one of the New Orleans parish presidents said on CNN. He said that four of the five major no-bid contracts to rebuild New Orleans were signed August 28th in Houston. 66.214.94.28 16:04, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

The governor of LA sent letters about the disaster to Texas, so that may be where the regional FEMA office is. (SEWilco 16:15, 27 September 2005 (UTC))

"Racial Bias"

Issues of racial bias in media coverage began to surface as Caucasian flood victims were portrayed in photos as "finding" supplies while African-Americans were engaged in "looting" [52].

Is it really fair to judge the entire media off of TWO pictures that they found on the Internet? I think what they're trying to do is blow a single comment way out of proportion and, even further down in the link that is provided, they provide evidence that seems pretty reasonable to me that it wasn't even racially biased at all, and that it came from two different sources. Just picking out two pictures, from two different sources, and comparing them to each other and saying it's racially biased is a completely unfair assumption that is exaggerated so that they can find every little thing in the media that even remotely resembles racism, and use it to criticize the media at every turn. It clearly states in the article that the white person photographed here found the bread floating in the water, while the black person that is photographed was clearly seen looting from a store. This is clearly signs not of racial bias, but of teh acts of individual people, both black and white. I really think that this is POV and should be removed or changed to say something along the lines of "some people believe that, based on these pictures" at the beginning of the sentence. bob rulz 04:50, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree to the above. One photo is even from a foreign source. If the photo descriptions were from or used by one news source, then one could suspect racial bias. An encyclopedia is not a collection of suspicions, although it is a topic in itself! Also, the part on Kayne West is out of proportion.

My suggestion is to sum up all the matters relating to the media in its own chapter with sub-chapters, i.e. suspicion (for lack of a better word) of racism (including K. West, photos), exaggerations and rumors (large number of deaths, corpse eating, looting and raping), accusations of media being blocked, media playing along with the blame game (Nagin flipping out, Interviews with evacuees at the Astrodome, etc).Whyerd 06:55, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

~Hurricane Katrina Info.~

~ Billions of dollars are being sent to where Katrina hit, To help out the people down there. ~ Some people think that congress has spent more than enough money on the people down in New Orleans. ~ Hurricanes don't hit the states that aren't on the coast because since the the hurricane comes from the atlantic, it wont hit the states in the middle.

Hurricane Gloria hit Long Island pretty hard. This year, Hurricane Ophelia brushed the East Coast. We've just been lucky so far. States in the interior don't get hurricanes, it's true, but you have to have a coast somewhere, and that's where your ports are. Simesa 13:48, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Highest Winds

66.61.68.137 changed the highest sustained winds from 185 mph to 175 mph - does anyone have an authoritative source for 185 mph? Otherwise we should leave it at 175. See "185 mph" above. Simesa 14:10, 2 October 2005 (UTC)