Why Some People Who Need to Evacuate Don't

[VeniceInlet]

I've heard a few folks ask recently why certain people don't evacuate in storms like Ike when now we know they should have. Being a former evacuee myself, I thought I'd offer my thoughts.

1. Because a close family member, often an elder parent, refuses to. My 83 year old mother refused to evacuate during Charley and it was only a miracle of a few miles that our area wasn't affected and her home destroyed. I could not bodily pick her up and put her in the car, though I would have liked to. Some husbands have a "macho" attitude and think they are invulnerable. My ex-husband lives in Kendall. He did not evacuate his family (pregnant wife with four kids) in Andrew and their home was destroyed when big pine trees fell on it. Luckily nobody was killed, they all huddled in an inner closet and survived. (Oh, and the husband was out of town when it happened, told his wife to stay put.)

2. Multiple Pets. Officials say it's OK to evacuate with pets and that pets are accepted in certain shelters, but some people have a lot of pets and don't have a way to relocate them all. I have a parrot, and birds aren't even allowed in shelters here.

3. Fear of looting. Many people are afraid they will find out after the storm that they didn't need to evacuate anyway, and will only return to a looted home. Many want to stay and protect their possessions. I used to live in Houston and no offense to anyone there, but it was a city with a lot of home and car burglaries. My family and friends and I were almost all victims at some point.

4. Basing decisions on irrelevant past experience. The "I've lived through it before and came out fine" syndrome. Many people in TX said they lived through Alicia and came through fine, so Ike would be "no big deal." What they failed to take into account is that a gigantic cat 2 storm with a cat 4 surge can be lots worse than a small cat 3 storm with minimal surge. For this reason, I believe something needs to be done to tweak the accepted SS scale to give people a better idea of what is to come and what to expect. I moved to Florida 11 years ago and have lived here on and off my whole life, and it was only in the last few years (post-Katrina) that I've come to understand how bad storm surge really was, how it could affect my area, and what incredible harm it could do. I am far more educated about what to do now than I was five or six year ago.

Also under this category falls, "It's not going to come here, it never does," or "It won't be as bad as they say, it never is." All they have to do is see this come true once or twice and it can put people in an ongoing state of denial.

5. Finances/job worries. This is a big one and it's somewhat understandable. Employers need to give their employees a break when it comes to life-threatening conditions. People shouldn't have to stay and risk death because they're afraid to lose their jobs. I'm not much for government intervention but in a matter like this I think non-emergency employers should be required to let their employees off at a certain time before a storm is scheduled to hit so they can get out.

6. Uncertainty about when you can return. This is a big one now, I think, with people who have already evacuated and who have had to wait days or even weeks to go back.

7. Evacuation fatigue. Too many times within too short a period will make some people just decide to risk it the next time.

8. Lack of education or direct experience. Not understanding what it really means to go through one of these storms and what could happen. Those people bringing their kids to watch the storm crash over the Galveston seawall fit into this category. "The storm won't come in this far." "We'll be safe here in this two-story home," etc.

[Jessie]

You're right - the elderly (especially with Alzheimers) won't leave. My mom won't get into the car to go to the doctor or anywhere unless we tell her that we are going on a trip to Daytona Beach (her home town ). Then when we get to the doctors office we have to tell her we are there to buy her a bathing suit before she'll get out.

[Sihara]

VeniceInlet, you are so right. It's been unreal to think of people not evacuating from Ike given the dire warnings. But then a lot of them probably were in circumstances you describe. It's true about the elderly; often they don't understand the situation and the stress of it makes them even more unwilling to leave.

Very true about employers. Essentially, I'm not in favor of having government over-regulating either, but in this case there have been too many instances where employers force their workers to choose between safety and job (which includes their health care!) This happened to a city worker in Largo who needed to evac a family member and because he did, he was fired. That is unconscionable.

But the guys who risk their families' safety - like the husband who told his wife to stay put - that's very hard to understand. I feel sorry for their families, I really do.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

When I was told to evacuate during Charley I was very reluctant.
Why? I felt I had to be at my house to guard it and help it hold up.
I looked at the house and contemplated that it could be destroyed,
that August 12, 2004 night before. I decided to evacuate the following
morning instead of the day before...and went to an inland hotel location
in Saint Petersburg at a higher elevation.
Charley hit Punta Gorda, as a strong category 4, we dodged that bullet...
but that day was scary still.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

But of course, it is inexcusable to endanger others. If you're by yourself
guarding your house that's one thing but if you endanger others with you,
well that is selfish.

[alicia83]

And then there's that certain element in society that stays behind to loot from those who left.

[VeniceInlet]

That's right, alicia83, and there's also an element who wants to stay to "experience" the storm.

I think though that the purpose of my post is really to illustrate the most common and persistent reasons for the majority not to go. Some of these things can perhaps be overcome with better education and with better systems for shelter and evacuation.

I know that ever since the '04 and '05 seasons I've come to really examine my lifestyle here. My family has owned homes here near or right on the water since the early '50s and we have never experienced anything other than minor damage from fringe storms. I consider myself a smart person but it never really occurred to me until a few years ago that I could be wiped out a la Katrina or Ike, but I'm living in a place that would be gone if something with a storm surge like that were to hit here. I love my home and environment here and would hate to leave it but I wonder sometimes whether it's so wise to have so much on the line year after year. And with rising insurance premiums it's really becoming difficult to justify being here in the long term. It's sad, really. I love my home and my lifestyle here but it's almost not worth the stress of worrying about losing it year after year or wondering if I'll be able to afford it as I get older.

[Sihara]

But of course, it is inexcusable to endanger others. If you're by yourself
guarding your house that's one thing but if you endanger others with you,
well that is selfish.

That's true, but still your life is more important. If Charley had hit Tampa Bay.....

As much as you love your home, a major hurricane slamming Tampa Bay, you don't even want to think what will happen. When Charley approached, we should have left - because I could see this thing wasn't going to be any 1 or 2 (what the media was telling us, gahhh) - but we didn't leave either. The decision wasn't mine. That was a very frightening afternoon, until it made the right hook into Port Charlotte.

And then there's that certain element in society that stays behind to loot from those who left.

They are horrible, like vultures. Storms seem to bring out the best in some people and the very worst in others. Those would be the looters.

[gsgs]

there must also be a big distrust in the government.

When they tell you "certain death" or "storm of the century" , people don't believe it

[Steve]

All good points Venice. Each person's decision is nuanced by their own situation, understanding, risk aversion, finances, historical reference points, etc. But for my kids, I would have rode out both Katrina (and would have been fine until the next day) and Gustav. But at some point you have to look out for those who have needs and for whom you are responsible. I didn't leave for Dennis, Ivan or Georges though many from SELA did. I felt like I had a good handle on each of those storms and was glad to not be on the road for 12 hours to nowhere and robbing Peter to pay Paul (back then). Plus, "they all recurve before hitting SELA (last real system pre-Katrina was 1965's Hurricane Betsy. I was 1 and never wanted to hear it from the elders.).

I think for most people, it comes down to finances and aggravation. In our society, many people are up to their eyes in debt. Many also struggle to make ends meet and fend off collection calls daily. Luckily I'm not in that boat. There's the aggravation factor - "****. I don't want to drive all the way to Memphis/Nashville/Little Rock/Dallas/Houston" knowing full well it make take as long as 20 hours to get to any of those places (not including packing up the car/dog/kids/things). Chances are that storm "x" won't be particularly bad for point "y." You may lose a tree, power, cable and such but that might be preferable to dropping or charging $1,000 you don't already have.

One more I'd add are the hurricane partiers which goes with those who want to experience the storm. Having gone through a couple of higher end tropical storms and lower end hurricanes, it can be pretty exciting. I'm not going to lie and say that I wouldn't like to ride out a strong storm at some point. Whether that opportunity presents itself or not remains to be seen. At the same time, I'm not going to ride anything out on the shoreline or in a manner where I my chances of survival are suspect at best. I can see hunkering down for a big storm inland somewhere knowing that I may face a wind/flooding/tornado threat but not the immediate surge threat. There are other people who are more risk tolerant than I who don't really care one way or the other.

Steve

[weunice]

This quote from a NYT story says something as well ...

"They were saying there was going to be a surge when the storm hits, not 24 hours before the storm hit," Mr. Isaacks said.

I ranted about this to a very intelligent person I know and she told me that she didn't realize that landfall meant the eye until this year. I think residents of the gulf coast should be given extensive education on some historically relevant storms. Maybe even a semesters worth in high school. This is reality around here. Knowing what happened with Hurricane Audrey and the subsequent lawsuits would have prevented the type of ignorance in the above statement.

I am still floored that this statement was even made by a resident of the gulf coast ... I wish I had answers.

[Steve]

>>I am still floored that this statement was even made by a resident of the gulf coast...

Agreed. However, the peak surge usually comes with the eyewall. The best analogy I can come up with is one of those magnetic pens that pulls up the metal flakes/shards that you can draw with. The closer you get to the pen itself as you move those shards below the plastic, the higher the stack of magnetized metal there is. So the closer you get to the center of lowest pressure, the higher the water will be until it washes through and begins to recede. There is some advance increase in tides, but you typically don't deal with major surge issues until the few hours leading up to landfall IMHO.

So while it's kind of ignorant for someone who is from or lives here would think that you don't have any effects until landfall, obviously those effects increase up to the point of landfall.

They always taught us that you could have sustained TS winds 24 or more hours in advance of a system, so the longer you wait, the more in peril you may put yourself or your chance of actually getting out.

Steve

[smw1981]

One more I'd add are the hurricane partiers which goes with those who want to experience the storm. Having gone through a couple of higher end tropical storms and lower end hurricanes, it can be pretty exciting.
Steve

These people could go under the category of "idiots". (I would probably fall in that category because I have attended 1 or 2 hurricane parties in my life.)

Also, there are some jobs that have to stay open and operational, therefore making their employees stay. I used to work at a residential facility for mentally retarded, aggressive kids in Mobile, AL. We evacuated for Ivan and Dennis, but stayed for Katrina. After the last evacuation, we were pretty much told we couldn't evacuate anymore...imagine feces smearing on hotel walls, lots and lots of broken things, etc. Sooo, we cut down the trees around 10 of our group homes and dubbed them "safe homes". (And made lots of other preps in the case of a storm.) There really wasn't anything else we could do, and everything worked out pretty well during Katrina. But, because we stayed, we (obviously) had to have staff to work the 10 group homes. Therefore, we had a policy that during a hurricane, you had to report to work. It worked perfectly because with the power out, the kids could get really, really antsy, but we had three times the staff to entertain them (and most of the staff were safer at the group home then the were at their own home). Obviously this is not the ideal situation, but it seemed to be much easier on the kids (which in turn is much easier on the staff).

My point is, sometimes, there really are cases where people can't evacuate because of work.