Tips From Disaster Experts

https://www.sfgate.com/technology/b...er-experts-about-their-best-tips-13882774.php


Good afternoon all,

For a "warm" Saturday afternoon, ... the article tells of tips by disaster experts.

The Red Cross disaster preparedness expert Tom Heneghen suggests a 3 day kit ... The ARC has not updated their preparedness plans.

The article's 1 comment by "Cliff" mentions "drug zombies". He's the real disaster expert.

...

Stay hydrated !

 

I found it curious that Mr. Heneghen recommends 72 hours worth of food and water, but a weeks worth of medication. Why wouldn't they both be the same?

While I admittedly do not have the credentials they do, IMHO 72 hours is inadequate. 7-10 days should be the norm.

 

Good afternoon Morgan,

ROFL re ARC and their load out kit list.

You really did highlight the national "problem".

Credentials are by fiat. Much all of the public sector's disaster bureaucracy ... plus, many/most VOADs - Volunteer Organizations Active in Disasters - ... well, they're loaded with credentials.

Meanwhile, showplace D.C. recently flooded.

I doubt if Louis and Clark could qualify under today's fiat standards for even wilderness search and rescue (SAR).

 

Most of it was pretty acurate except for this...

''In a hurricane or tornado in which you are not able or not recommended to evacuate, you'll want to head to an underground shelter, basement, or safe room."

If you live ANYWHERE on the Gulf Coast the last place that you want to be when a hurricane is coming in is in a hole of any kind. that is what drowned a lot of people in New Orleans and imagine what Houston looked like after 5 feet of rain!! Hurricanes bring in storm tides and all holes fill up. The truth is that it isn't a problem here. We don't have cellers and basements in most of east and coastal parts of Texas.

 

Mr Henegan recommends 72 hours of food and water . That is ridiculous . I have been in two different storms that left the community without water and food for well over a month . One caused by a hurricane and one by a ice storm .

 

The 72-hour kit isn't really prepping or meant for survival in this case I don't think. It is intended to more or less keep you comfortable for three days at which point the government or somebody is going to come and take care of you. It is basically a mental thing (Security blanket) for the nonprepared to feel like they are safe and will be fine until FEMA or someone comes along.

If you don't have plans for after the three days you will be dead in the water. The similar kits that preppers and survivalists have are part of a plan. It is a get home kit or a get out of town kit. It isn't a sit there and wait for help kit.

 

Keith: You and Poltergeist are absolutely right. A minimum of a month's worth of food and water should be a minimum. I do not know why the so called "experts" seem to have a fixation on a 72 hour kit. You might not even be found in 72 hours.

I up the minimum to 7-10 days with the exact same philosophy that TexDanm just posted. This is the absolute minimum you need until some relief will get to you.

Maybe Pragmatist can weigh in on the obsession with a 72 Hour Kit. He seems to be in touch with a lot of the regulatory issues, and policy making.

 

In both instances I sited , I received zero outside help except I did find a water community system operational during the ice storm so I was able to fill my water jugs up on occasion . Depending on some government agency to save me is not part of my plan . In both instances all stores were without electricity and closed . I have always lived in remote locations and never in my life have I ever seen a rescue truck loaded with rescue items except on TV .

 

I suspect those so called experts are city folks that never experienced a community shut down that lasted over three days . They are just repeating what elected political people and agency headmasters tout .

 

Good morning Morgan 101 and all,

Just returned from a rewarding volunteer response in Appalachia section of Virginia. Learned much and updated my wilderness health care doctrines.

...

After WWII, the US was governed by the Civil Defense Act of 1950. This was a "top down" traditional approach to civil defense. It was administered by the Defense Civil Preparedness Agency of the Pentagon. The plans were to activate the standard plans: get the National Guard out to help, get the active duty forces out to help, and so forth. The 3 day supply rule was just traditional "until help arrives".

In 1988, the Stafford Act changed the Civil Defense Act. The states were obliged to set up their own emergency prep for their communities with the Feds helping when requested by a Governor's office.

Still, even with state obligations to work the emergency response portfolio, many large segments of the national population were on welfare of some sort from the Federal government. To increase the 3 day supply level really meant Washington, D.C. would have to fund the extra supplies. The deficits were already well known - and a national danger.

Above is the unofficial version from the responder community. I personally teach a 30 (thirty) supply.

I can't write much else on the web.

 

Thank you for the history lesson. At least we know the 72 hour concept came from somewhere. Now it is grandfathered for budgetary reasons. I guess it behooves us to spread the word that the bar should be set considerably higher.

 

The 3 day emergency kit idea was introduced to the Feds and by a group of EMS an Fire out of California. It was called CERT and was first taught, at the federal level, at The National Fire Academy in Emmitsburg, MD.
At the time I lived in bush Alaska and thought the idea rather useless as most of the population that I served had more food than that. Their communities being isolated for a week or more several times a year means that 3 days of food means going hungry. Many families made an annual food purchase of the essentials and subsisted on fish and game.