I don't post many diaries, but some of the stuff I've been seeing in the media and reading on this site is really starting to get on my nerves. A lot of people seem to think the fires in San Diego have been handled a lot better than Hurricane Katrina. Everyone is patting themselves on the back, saying how we are doing so much better. Unfortunately, the truth is the two situations are not even remotely the same, and I see little evidence that this disaster is being handled much better.
First let me explain how this current disaster is different from Katrina. As I personally live in the area, I have been following the fires for several days now, before national media really started covering it. From my viewpoint the two disasters could not be more different: they are like night and day.
Katrina was a hurricane. It blew in, and over the course of a few short hours the city of New Orleans was destroyed. The levees broke, and the city was flooded. Anyone who had not already evacuated was trapped as the streets were filled with water. No stores were open, and many were underwater.
In contrast, the fires in San Diego are a slow development. As fast as a fire might move, it is still very slow. It has taken many days for the fires to make it as far as they did, and as a result there was plenty of warning for each effected area. San Diego is still a functioning city. You can still travel on the roads and freeways. There are still stores that are open. People who want to donate can literally drive down to the grocery store and then drive their goods down to Qualcomm Stadium or another local shelter.
Right now in San Diego, besides those people who were in areas that have been evacuated or burned, everyone else can still go about their lives relatively normally. Some of my friends even came over to my house tonight and played some games. In New Orleans after Katrina, no one could have done that. Things were a complete and utter mess!
Furthermore, what I have seen of the disaster response leaves a hell of a lot to be desired. It took two days for reinforcements from other parts of California to get here. It took three days before Federal reinforcements arrived. The fires are still mostly un-contained.
The response time was so slow, that there is no doubt in my mind that had this disaster developed at the same speed as Katrina, things would have turned out just as badly, if not worse. If the stores were all closed and mostly destroyed, if the roads were impassable, how would this situation be any different than Katrina? The people down at Qualcomm and the other shelters would be stranded and no food or drinks would be available at the local stores.
Just like in New Orleans, no real plans were put in place for people who didn't have cars. There was an interview with a disaster coordinator on the news and they asked him what was being done for people who had no transportation: he had no response.
The point is, things are working out better this time because the situation is less demanding. When a disaster develops less quickly, a pretty poor response will manage to get the job done. If worse comes to worse, people can flee out into the streets while their houses burn, and they'll probably manage to survive. They can walk to the nearest shelter. They don't need a boat. The streets aren't flooded, the stores aren't closed. People can be evacuated incrementally rather than all at once... Frankly, I think it is insulting to the people of New Orleans to even mention the SD Fires and Katrina in the same breath, let alone acting like it proves we've learned our lesson.
Let us not make the mistake of thinking we've done a better job of responding to this disaster, because we really haven't. If anything we should be worried about the next Katrina-- a disaster that develops quickly and devastates all available infrastructure-- because this sort of half-assed response is just not going to get the job done.