Menu
What's new

Rant of the Day

Agree with you, Vaughn. Sadly, we have created this mentality by too often using public money to correct what the homeowner could have avoided in the first place.
We have subdivisions in my area that are low lying and occasionally flood. Just looking around can tell (most) reasonable intelligent adults that water will flow downhill. Unfortunately, after much whining and bellyaching the cities, or counties will pay for storm sewer installation and redirecting of the natural run-off streams.
Methinks the contractors should be restricted from building in low areas and held responsible after the fact. I know that is almost impossible. Most build then move away.
 
Kevin Reid said:
What about the idiocy of rebuilding New Orleans?
Click to expand...

New Orleans has been a major city where she sits for almost or over 200 years.. it was only after the corp of engineers built all the levee's and dams then allowed people to build on the dry side, knowing that they could break.. it's a little like building a house on the river bank below the Hoover dam.. the dam may stand for a 1000 years, but if it breaks, there's a lot of water going down river. Parts of New Orleans are high and dry, it's those places below the levees and on the bayous that are the danger.

New Orleans is one of the more prominent sea ports along the Gulf coast.. probably second only to Houston... With the levees properly built and maintained, the city will be safe... Look at The Netherlands... fully half of that country is below sea level.. true they don't get hurricanes there, but I understand the North Seas can put up some pretty good storms.
 
Kevin Reid said:
What about the idiocy of rebuilding New Orleans?
Click to expand...
I was born in NO and lived there until I finished college. Still have a lot of family there. It would be tough to abandon NO - there's an awful lot of infrastructure built there that would be difficult and expensive to put some place else. It is possible to have a vibrant economy in a flood prone area, as demonstrated by the Dutch.

But given that, there is idiocy in rebuilding in the area below NO. The lower ninth ward, for example, flooded completely in Betsy (1965), and then was completely destroyed in Katrina. Same for most of Plaquemines parish and St. Bernard parish. It's an absolute certainty that those areas will flood again. Why they're allowing people to rebuild in those area is just beyond me.

Mike

[Just a comment. The flooding did not come from the river and it's unlikely that NO will flood from the river. The Corps has so many flood control structures on the river that it's pretty well under control. The flooding came primarily from Lake Pontchartrain which was in very high water due to storm surge. It's the levees along the lake and along the Industrial Canal that are the problem. It's essentially impossible to get storm surge up the river to NO - the river is too narrow and it's too far. When I worked out in the gulf, that's one of the things we used to joke about. When we hit the mouth of the river (going home) a new guy would go down and shower and change into his shore clothes. Then it was hours before we would get to our docks. We called it "channel fever".]
 
Last edited:
Kevin Reid said:
I agree with you Chuck but I believe the land is actually sinking. Not a great place to plan a re-development.
Click to expand...

You're probably right... they need to move parts of the city inland away from the coast and onto dryer ground...

They rebuilt Galveston after the 1900 hurricane and it's been hit pretty hard a couple of other times... Galveston at it's highest point is only about 8 feet above sea level.... Parts of Houston, though it's inland and has some shielding closer to the bay, is also below sea level.

I like to think I'm a relatively practical person, I wouldn't build on the side of a hill with my house hanging out over the edge, I wouldn't want to be in a flood plain (I don't swim that well and don't want to get in deep water).
My house does sit at the bottom of a hill, the back side of my lot is actually higher than the peak of the roof. And we get a bit of water down off that hill, but the house is up on pilings about 3 feet, the water flows around me pretty well. Plus the hill is covered in a good growth of grass and pretty stable.
 
Mother Nature always wins . One of my favorites are the sink holes in Florida. I don't know how you plan for those. They can just open up and swallow your house. The other one is the environmentalist's who don't want anyone touching the forests and especially NO LOGGING! Of course when all the under-story builds up and there are no fire trails or logging trails for fire crews the fires get right out of control and do way more damage. I guess they are good with natural damage. Frankly the whole sustainable forestry perception seems ignorant sometimes, A properly MANAGED forest can work quite well for everyone. Sure, set aside virgin forest areas so we can appreciate them for as long as possible, but to tie up millions of acres is looking for big fires...........OK........ I am ranting.........
 
I can't try to say what I want to and remain CoC compliant. There are two many politicians, on ALL LEVELS of government willing to hand over tax money in situations like this. It's one thing to provide food and shelter or humanitarian help, but it is another to start giving people money for the loss or to rebuild when a NATURAL disaster takes place.

As a buddy of mine so eloquently put it, "If a Tornado comes through and destroys Jeff's house does (any level of) government owe me anything at all? Of course not. So why is it any different if it is 100 houses or a 1,000 houses or more? Why does any government agency owe them for their loss?"
 
Paul Downes said:
Mother Nature always wins . One of my favorites are the sink holes in Florida. I don't know how you plan for those. They can just open up and swallow your house. The other one is the environmentalist's who don't want anyone touching the forests and especially NO LOGGING! Of course when all the under-story builds up and there are no fire trails or logging trails for fire crews the fires get right out of control and do way more damage. I guess they are good with natural damage. Frankly the whole sustainable forestry perception seems ignorant sometimes, A properly MANAGED forest can work quite well for everyone. Sure, set aside virgin forest areas so we can appreciate them for as long as possible, but to tie up millions of acres is looking for big fires...........OK........ I am ranting.........
Click to expand...
I'm with you 100% on the forest. We've been managing the forest in the eastern US for centuries and those forest are still doing fine, producing the domestic hardwood that all of us use.

I've flown over Canadian forest and I see the logged tracts. They seem to manage their forest just fine. To me, trees are just another agricultural product - it just takes many years to produce a crop, instead of a few months, like corn.

Mike
 
All the same Mike, I sure would have liked to see some of the virgin timber that was logged off Michigan lands. There are a few preserves and they are worth a visit. I worked logging for a time and we had a controversy going were the environmentalist crazies were spiking trees. I even got called a land rapist. Funny thing was we had a great reputation for doing careful timber stand improvement. We cut 3 40's for the forester who at one time was the #2 guy in the US forestry department under President Carter. He was real pleased with our work practices. He even video taped us felling the biggest soft maple he had ever seen. He thought it would be a pulp log but it ended up being veneer!
 
Lot of talk about New Orleans. For logical and practical reasons, it probably should be left to wash away.
But, NO has just too much history and colorful culture to let die. We have visited NO many times and love our visits. The people are wonderful. The food is incredible. The natural resources amazing. And the city, itself a wonder to visit.
All that said, yes, crime, poverty, welfare abuse, corrupt police and gub'mint officials are legendary, mosquitoes, sinking houses, etc. can make it all seem like something that should be washed out to sea.
But, it is still a special part of America. I hope Katrina was Nature's way of forcing renewal and a new beginning.
 
Great thread. I respect the various opinions on New Orleans expressed my folks who have plenty of experience there. My bonehead idea is not to rebuild until - after the entire US of A sends all the stuff going into our landfills there. For a couple of years or more. After NO is quite a bit above sea level, then rebuild.
 
ken werner said:
Great thread. I respect the various opinions on New Orleans expressed my folks who have plenty of experience there. My bonehead idea is not to rebuild until - after the entire US of A sends all the stuff going into our landfills there. For a couple of years or more. After NO is quite a bit above sea level, then rebuild.
Click to expand...

Ken, of course, that will never happen.
When we took our cruise last year, I was on the top deck of the big ship as we left dock and went down river. From there the view showing just how far the river was above[/B ] :eek: city level was a very dramatic reminder of simply how illogical a location this was for a city.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top