Roundybout Posted July 12 Posted July 12 1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Again, agreed, but a 25’ rise in 45 minutes seems apocalyptic. I struggle with the planning that can be put in place to eliminate the threat of that sort of issue in that short a time frame, beyond “You can’t camp/live here.” Obviously, more will come out and maybe that will be incorrect, but after watching homes destroyed/rebuilt/destroyed in tornado prone areas like Tornado Alley, I think this kind of thing is going to happen. Very sad. I’m baffled that the camp had multiple cabins built in the designated severe flood zone, with seemingly no precautions or procedures to deal with situations like this. 3
Andy1 Posted July 12 Posted July 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Again, agreed, but a 25’ rise in 45 minutes seems apocalyptic. I struggle with the planning that can be put in place to eliminate the threat of that sort of issue in that short a time frame, beyond “You can’t camp/live here.” Obviously, more will come out and maybe that will be incorrect, but after watching homes destroyed/rebuilt/destroyed in tornado prone areas like Tornado Alley, I think this kind of thing is going to happen. Very sad. A lot of it is people not understanding the danger of building in certain areas. Or if you are going to live in these high hazard places, responsible government needs to spend extra on mitigation/safety. This applies to those people living in the fire prone hills of CA, tsunami areas, flash flood zones etc. This isn’t the 1800s or some third world country where the government is clueless. Tornados are very local and unpredictable where they will hit. Aside from building a bunker for personal safety, there is not much one can do. Dangerous flash flood areas are known based upon local climate and the geography/geology of the area. This river is known for dangerous flash floods. “Oh well… thoughts and prayers” is not a recipe to prevent future loss of life. If engineers took this approach, bridges would be collapsing all over the place. Edited July 12 by Andy1 2
The Frankish Reich Posted July 12 Posted July 12 3 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Again, agreed, but a 25’ rise in 45 minutes seems apocalyptic. I struggle with the planning that can be put in place to eliminate the threat of that sort of issue in that short a time frame, beyond “You can’t camp/live here.” Obviously, more will come out and maybe that will be incorrect, but after watching homes destroyed/rebuilt/destroyed in tornado prone areas like Tornado Alley, I think this kind of thing is going to happen. Very sad. All true. I'm sticking to this specific case of the campground dorms. There was time to warn, and time to get the kids to slightly higher ground outside of the floodplain. It would require a flood evacuation drill ahead of time. Probably they don't do that because they don't want to spook the parents and because people prefer not to think about the potential for disaster. There are sensible things we can do that are low tech/low cost. My guess: just like in 1987, we won't do them after this one either. Instead, the campground simply won't be rebuilt, which is probably an overreaction. 1
The Frankish Reich Posted July 12 Posted July 12 37 minutes ago, Albwan said: trump is responsible .....he drinks water!!! River of Diet Coke will take you out!
T master Posted July 12 Posted July 12 On 7/8/2025 at 7:30 PM, 4th&long said: This tragedy needs its own thread to discuss it. This has to be one of the saddest Tragedies I can remember. Very sad watching what's going on! Hopefully it's a thread with no bickering, the loss of life is just too sad. Every time I see that they have found another one of the girls from Camp Mystic it just breaks my heart !! To think they never had a chance to try and save them selves because of the waters rising so fast and in the middle of the night when they were asleep . I wish hugs could take away some of the parents pain and I will continue to send up prayers for all that were effected by this tragic event . 🙏 1 1
Andy1 Posted July 13 Posted July 13 Here is a good article addressing the role of government in Texas flood management. Texas is well behind other states in how they manage flood risk. https://www.texastribune.org/2025/07/09/texas-floods-growth-kerr-county-camp-mystic/
CoudyBills Posted July 13 Posted July 13 12 hours ago, Roundybout said: I’m baffled that the camp had multiple cabins built in the designated severe flood zone, with seemingly no precautions or procedures to deal with situations like this. And didn't evacuate immediately. Perhaps their was a reason, I have not kept up with the stories.
Andy1 Posted July 13 Posted July 13 It looks like Texas is allergic to disaster preparation. At all levels of government, the approach to preparing for future severe weather events is “hear nothing, see nothing, speak nothing”. To spend money on climate preparedness would be to admit climate change is real. They would rather do “thoughts and prayers”, and take the “we can’t believe this happened, there is nothing we could have done” approach to planning. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/13/texas-disaster-weather-preparations-us 2
T master Posted July 14 Posted July 14 On 7/12/2025 at 8:56 AM, Andy1 said: A lot of it is people not understanding the danger of building in certain areas. Or if you are going to live in these high hazard places, responsible government needs to spend extra on mitigation/safety. This applies to those people living in the fire prone hills of CA, tsunami areas, flash flood zones etc. This isn’t the 1800s or some third world country where the government is clueless. Tornados are very local and unpredictable where they will hit. Aside from building a bunker for personal safety, there is not much one can do. Dangerous flash flood areas are known based upon local climate and the geography/geology of the area. This river is known for dangerous flash floods. “Oh well… thoughts and prayers” is not a recipe to prevent future loss of life. If engineers took this approach, bridges would be collapsing all over the place. So then because someone makes a decision to live in a area that may be known to be a higher risk area for what ever the reason is it should be the gov't responsibility to spend the extra to keep them safe from their bad decision ?? That's ALMOST like saying if you invest in a bad company that doesn't conduct business the correct or profitable way and the business fails the gov't should be there to bail you out because the business failed knowing that there was a higher chance of failure . 1
Andy1 Posted July 14 Posted July 14 9 hours ago, T master said: So then because someone makes a decision to live in a area that may be known to be a higher risk area for what ever the reason is it should be the gov't responsibility to spend the extra to keep them safe from their bad decision ?? That's ALMOST like saying if you invest in a bad company that doesn't conduct business the correct or profitable way and the business fails the gov't should be there to bail you out because the business failed knowing that there was a higher chance of failure . This gets to the fundamental question of “What is the purpose of government?” At its most minimal, basic level, most would say that government should help ensure public safety. That is why we have police, fire departments, departments of health, building codes, licensing for jobs that could impact public safety, car inspections, OSHA, pollution laws, waste water laws, etc, etc….. Trump continually says he needs to take extreme measures to protect public safety from all those dangerous immigrants, so he needs a gajillion dollars to do it. It all costs something to protect people. Your question suggests that people know the risk levels when they buy property. That is a dumb assumption as most are clueless, and that is why government should take a role in managing public risk from such events. Governments all over do that already with flood plain management projects to minimize flood impacts. Another issue is that flood prone areas are typically owned by the poor in society so the wealthy may not see spending government resources on those areas as a priority. In 2024 alone, extreme weather caused 568 deaths in the US. That is why, prior to Trump, the Defense Department had for many years considered climate change to be a national threat. If 568 people died from terrorists, you know the government would spend a bajillion dollars fighting the enemy. The problem in TX seems to be that their government is in the pockets of the fossil fuel industry and any proposals to address and mitigate future climate impacts are a taboo subject, lest government has to raise taxes.
Big Blitz Posted Thursday at 06:16 PM Posted Thursday at 06:16 PM We got a Texas flood story bump omg. #BigBalls
B-Man Posted Thursday at 06:17 PM Posted Thursday at 06:17 PM Just now, Big Blitz said: We got a Texas flood story bump omg. #BigBalls You know why. .
Recommended Posts