Dave,

My point exactly. Man can try to hold back Mother Nature, by diverting
waters, building levees etc. and we can succeed for awhile, but in the long
run, Mother Nature will win.

For the past 30 yrs. people have been talking about NO being flooded, so no
one should have been surprised when it happened. We should have had a much
better evacuation plan and emergency relief plan in place.

All along the Mississippi there are breaks in the levee system, causing
flooding on a much greater magnitude than if we did not have the levees.



"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 11:57:27 -0400, "Starbuck's"
wrote:

Chuck,
The problem is not only upstream, but all the way along the Mississippi.

The area NO is built is part of the Mississippi Delta. NO and the
Mississippi Delta is supposed to flood. NO would flood even if no one
lived
upstream of NO.


wrote in message
roups.com...

Butch Davis wrote:
Interesting that 54% of Americans polled say don't rebuild the flooded
parts
of NO below sea level.

That makes good fiscal sense and good safety sense. Regardless of who
is
or
is not to blame for the progress of the life saving efforts in NO, I
believe
everyone can agree that the effort was made incredibly more difficult
by
the
flooding. If NO had been affected by wind rather than by flood the
rescue
efforts would have been vastly simplified.

I agree with the majority of Americans. Lets save the Quarter and the
hotels necessary to support the Quarter's tourist industry, but lets
not
perpetuate the gross mistake of building a major city below sea level.
It
would be unsafe and a horrible waste of the people's treasure.

Butch

I'd get busy and let the Dutch know about this new policy. They have
built below sea level for almost ever.

How fricking ridiculous for everybody upstream to screw up the
drainage, pave over all the soil, and then tell the folks downstream
they need to tear down their city because it can't withstand the flood
waters that have been artificially diverted there.

We all need to be responsible for our own environmental impacts, not
just shove the problem downstream and tell the folks that when it gets
too unbearable they need to tear down the city overwhelmed by the
impacts of somebody else's selfish land use.


Uh, if I am not mistaken the flood didn't come from the river, it came
from the Gulf - more specifically from a "lake" that is part of the
Gulf. The water certainly was not the result of too rapid of runoff
from areas upriver from NO. The Gulf side levee was breached by the
storm surge from the Gulf and allowed the Gulf, which is above the
level of the city, to flood in. If the rest of the Mississippi were
pristine the same level of flooding would have occured.

Tha Other Dave Hall


"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by
those who have not got it." -- G.B. Shaw