Are America’s cities ready for a disaster? I mean disasters other than what terrorists may be plotting? I’m referring to those disasters that may be caused by Mother Nature — for example, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, cyclones, or whatever she hatches.
In Seattle, for example, I’m referring to quakes in this Northwestern region that has seen many of them over the years. In this metropolis on Puget Sound, I have frequently asked the big question: Is it ready for a disaster? The answer in recent times has been “Yes and No.” Other cities should be interested in the question and the answer.
In Seattle and the Pacific Northwest, one answer is “Yes” for an accident involving 50 to 100 or so casualties, but it’s “No” for a major disaster involving hundreds or even thousands, as could happen in a quake, flood, volcanic eruption, or a tornado — as was the case with Katrina. Seattle and King County disaster teams are well equipped to handle contingencies, as are most cities. But many areas in the state are not.
Disaster experts concede that it’s impossible to prepare for every type of major catastrophe, but certain important precautions can be taken. For example: Fire, police, and medical teams are ready for almost anything, but the public is not aware of basic emergency needs and dangers.
A few schools, businesses, and industries provide emergency information booklets and drills. But most do not. The state’s Emergency Services Department has pamphlets anyone can have for the asking, but I don’t think that’s enough. Cities, counties, the state, schools, businesses, and industries should join in a collective program that would bring needed disaster information to every resident. And the information should be reviewed periodically.
At one time, I remember the Legislature committing a goof of major proportions when it shelved an important measure that would have required a survey of all buildings to make certain that they would be safe from such damage as a quake, for instance, could inflict.
Still needed in Washington State — and, I would presume, most other states — is a new, positive look at the need for a total disaster plan that goes beyond those plans that are already in place to ward off attacks by terrorists. I suggested many times that the state’s governor should join legislators in the process, because it’s truly a matter of life or death.
At the same time, I believe the newly established federal Homeland Security Department should broaden its outlook. It is already deeply involved in preparing the nation for emergencies related to possible terrorist actions. But it needs to consider the much broader outlook I have suggested here — an outlook that includes any type of disaster. We should expect no less.
Last year, San Francisco, which suffered a devastating earthquake back in 1906, marked the 100th anniversary of that deadly disaster. If any city should be prepared for the wrath of Mother Nature, it should be the city by the Golden Gate. But is it? I wonder.