Disaster grads

НазваниеDisaster grads
Дата конвертации03.02.2013
Размер0.84 Mb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   15
Selected comments on Hurricane Katrina (August 2005) from email lists

Compiled by Ilan Kelman (dated 7 September 2005)

disaster_grads 1

Hazardmit 41

Other Email Lists 48

SwiftH2O-News and PSDivers-PublicSafetyDiversForum 78

Other Articles 91

See also:

JISCMail archives http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/natural-hazards-disasters.html

Radix archives http://www.ecie.org/mailman/listinfo/radix

GDN archives http://listserv.tamu.edu/archives/gender-and-disaster-network.html


(all messages)

From : Courtney Flint

Reply-To : cflint@uiuc.edu

Sent : September 2, 2005 1:58:52 PM

To : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Katrina

Hello all,

I've been surprised by the lack of dialogue on our listserve about the tradegies occurring in the Gulf States. Seems like this should be a forum for putting together a collective set of ideas about what went horribly wrong in managing this event, where we go from here, and how the disaster field of practitioners and researchers can respond. Any thoughts?


Courtney G. Flint

Univ of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Dept of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences

1023 Plant Sciences Laboratory

1201 South Dorner Drive

Urbana, IL 61801-4778

Telephone: 217-244-1840

Fax: 217-244-3469

Cell: 217-714-6012

EMail: cflint@uiuc.edu

From :

Reply-To : cstalber@mitigation.com

Sent : September 2, 2005 2:29:09 PM

To : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: Katrina

I can say the same thing about the Hazardmit list (see http://www.mitigation.com/mailman/listinfo/hazardmit). Hurricane Katrina should be a wake up call for re-emphasis of hazard mitigation and most specifically hazard avoidance. Are we going to fund yet another rebuilding initiative in the high hazard zone? The once 'cornerstone of emergency management' has falled by the wayside. Why? The war on terror? Or is it that we have reversed course and returned to the notion that we can both control and predict nature? Should we permit the USACE to strengthen and heighten all the levees around New Orleans? Where is the political will to bring about serious hazards avoidance? Will the US taxpayers not living in the high hazard zone be willing to once again subsidize the few who choose to live in the high hazard zone? The massive recontruction effort that follows major disasters is an unparalleled opportunity to redesign an otherwise vulnerable society in a sustainable manner, which ! includes hazards avoidance. Is anybody with any political clout going to advocate for the long view?

- Christian Stalberg, Hazardmit Moderator

From : Kathleen Oberst

Reply-To : Kathleen.Oberst@hc.msu.edu

Sent : September 2, 2005 2:37:46 PM

To : ,

Subject : RE: Katrina

Hi Courtney, My personal belief is that it is inappropriate to say that things went "horribly wrong" in managing at this point. It is easy to be an arm-chair emergency manager however we are not on the ground having to implement the plans that presumably existed and having to react to the ever changing environment. The media is likely not as interested in reporting on things that are working well since that will be less likely to draw in viewership so I don't believe we have complete stories. This situation is also far from over.

There is no doubt that this will be a tremendous learning experience that unfortunately will have a large human toll in terms of mortality, morbidity, displacement not to mention the remarkable economic and societal ramifications both on-site and in receiving areas of the country. This is and will continue to be a test of many systems that up to this point had seemed to be the best options on paper or even in exercise scenarious (which are still artificial and planned). I don't think disaster management will ever be an exact science and we do the best we can with what we have at the time and make notes for how to better the process for the future.

Just my personal opinion. I look forward to seeing how this impacts our field, especially 'mitigation' in the years to come. Thanks for the note.

Kathleen, RN, MS, PEM

From : Cheryl Chang

Reply-To : Cheryl Chang

Sent : September 2, 2005 2:45:14 PM

To : cflint@uiuc.edu, disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: Katrina

What do you mean by "what went horribly wrong in managing this event?"

Phrases like that are interesting in that sometimes they can serve as an indication of the expectations a person may have with regard to a situation. Obviously, I have absolutely no way of knowing what your expectations are and my reply is not an attempt to reveal and judge what those expectations are.

However, that phrase did inspire the following questions:

- how can we presume that we can "manage" such a widespread event? How realistic are our expectations?

- how can we live in the context of these naturally-occuring events so that we can mitigate negative effects in the future?

- how are we labeling what happened?

- what are our individual definitions of "manage?"

- what are our ideologies/values/world views around our relationships to weather, climate, etc.?

To me, it's important to ask and answer questions such as these because, whether we realize it or not, the values that we hold and the meanings we attach to words and events very much influence what actions we take in reponse to these words and events.

Cheryl Chang

Rockledge, Florida

From : Earl Lee

Reply-To : leee7@rpi.edu

Sent : September 2, 2005 3:13:03 PM

To : ,

Subject : RE: Katrina

Courtney and all,

You use of the phrase "went horribly wrong" is exactly what this forum isn't for. What this forum serves best is the needs and knowledge transfer among academics and many other organizations in first of all learning from this. I do apologize if this seems poorly worded or organized but your post deserves an immediate response.

We should be looking at what went right - the courage of the mayor in declaring the evacuation - how big of a political scapegoat would he be if people had left and nothing happened.

What about the long view - who has ever written the plan for the long term evacuation of a major American city? Who will be there for the cleanup? Who will re-inhabit the homes and businesses? What are the long term health effects from the flooding - what heavy metals, fecal material, chemicals, etc now permeate the structural materials of the remaining buildings? What about emergency management - the response to the chemical plant fire and explosion this morning was in police boats. What will fire and other emergency response be in the weeks and months ahead? How much of the city could be lost due to fire during restoration when power comes back yet firefighting resources and water may still be in short supply.

Courtney - I have to say this is the first time and hopefully the last that I see that phrase in this forum. What are we doing? We are doing what we do best. We are preparing proposals to fund the research to learn and assist with this horrible event. We are supporting the efforts of those at the scene with our hopes, prayers and donations. This forum will serve as the sharing point for information in the weeks and months ahead.

The forum for the arm chair quarterbacks that point fingers is found elsewhere..

I apologize to all for the emotion in this ...but it had to be said...

Earl Rusty Lee

Decision Sciences and Engineering Systems

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

110 Eighth St. CII 5107

Troy, NY 12180

(518) 276 2759

From : Runte, Eduardo Frederico Augusto

Reply-To : o681j@unb.ca

Sent : September 2, 2005 3:17:51 PM

To : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: Katrina

Hello folks,

I agree with the comments you all made so far. I do not think something went "horribly wrong" in the New Orleans area. First, it is a region prone to hurricanes, it is not the first one, and certainly not the last one. So, this is in line with the question raised by Christian Stalberg: "Are we going to fund yet another rebuilding initiative in the high hazard zone?". Unfortunately, I think the answer is yes. Why? Because hazard is just one of the things in people's minds. After all, the area in which New Orleans is located is a beautiful spot.

The other point was raised by Kathleen: what are our expectations? The dams were built to stand a hurricane 3 - just as the World Trade Center towers were built to stand a small airplane collision - but if that threshold is surpassed, well, there's not much we can do.

The one thing I see wrong with much of the US disaster planning in general is the over reliance on the military, and when all eyes and troops are directed to Iraq and Afganisthan, there is not much manpower left to take care of domestic situations.

I was also displeased to see the use of the superdome as a shelter - it is too big and poses serious management problems. With the capacity of hosting over 30k people, it is like a small city, with all the problems of a small city.

The disaster tells something about ourselves as well. If you read Pres. Bush's talks about the whole situation, "maintaining the law" (which translates as "securing property") is often mentioned before "taking care of people". Should the government be spending money at all with trying to control gangs invading houses when there Are people dying of starvation?



Eduardo Frederico Augusto Runte

MA Candidate - Department of Sociology

University of New Brunswick

ICQ: 31826219

MSN: efarunte@hotmail.com

From : Tim Hundsdorfer

Reply-To : timh@ucar.edu

Sent : September 2, 2005 3:27:20 PM

To :

Subject : RE: Katrina

You people are sick. Blame the victims. Don't accuse the incompetent swine that have let Black New Orleans suffer for FIVE DAYS without an attempt to re-establish order or get them food and water, that would be unfair. Ignore the fact that Congress had cut funding for levees for the past four years. Instead, let's talk about how the victims (1/3rd of whom live in poverty) didn't evacuate or live in high risk places.


From : Ilan Kelman

Reply-To : ilan_kelman@hotmail.com

Sent : September 2, 2005 3:30:23 PM

To : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: Katrina

What do you mean by "what went horribly wrong in managing this event?"

Where to begin? I give a few examples:

1. Emergency responders from different jurisdictions could not communicate due to different equipment. Have you read the 9/11 report?

2. Hundreds of water rescue specialists were attending a conference in New Orleans last week and were told to evacuate on Friday. A major hurricane is about to strike a low-lying city and you tell the experts with the equipment, training, and experience to get out?

3. People have been working for ten years (or more) to get specialist water rescue as a core part of flood emergency response and, in particular, to get them to pre-deploy (safetly) to the crisis area. You don't need a PhD to work that one out, yet it has not happened. 48 hours after impact, one water rescue team was told to drive for two days to get to New Orleans while on-site rescuers were short of boats which were sitting in a warehouse in Boise. Why was there no pre-deployment? Why were there apparently minimal thought that flood rescue would be needed?

4. On Friday, most major airlines cancelled flights from New Orleans leaving people stranded. They then flew their aircraft and crews to safety--completely empty of passengers.

5. Academics and practitioners have been warning for years that New Orleans was vulnerable to this event and explaining what to do about it. Plans were not prepared properly, were not updated, and did not factor in the issues that people were warning about. Do a literature search and look at who was talking to the practitioners and the authorities. The amount of work which was going on at an operational level and which was ignored is frightening.

6. Plenty of literature and operational plans exist regarding pets in disasters. The lessons are not apparent from New Orleans.

7. Plenty of literature and operational plans exist regarding shelter after disaster. Every single rule has been broken--in a developed, affluent, industrialised country.

8. Hurricane Andrew taught emergency managers significant lessons regarding post-hurricane operations. Few were implemented in New Orleans. I append below someone else's message to another listserve.

9. Someone asks "who has ever written the plan for the long term evacuation of a major American city?". What have the past four years of DHS and counterterrorism been about? Are you trying to tell me that in planning for dirty bombs and mini-nukes, no one considered that a major city might be unihabitable for weeks?

10. Someone else wrote: "The dams were built to stand a hurricane 3". Hurricane categories refer to wind speed. Factors such as atmospheric pressure, wind fetch, and coincidence with high tide are better correlated with storm surge height than wind speed. If the dams were indeed built with a view that they might blow away in the wind, it is no wonder that they failed under water pressure.

I have barely scratched the surface. There is plenty more that I could write. This is not about armchair emergency management. This is about the operational reality from those with field experience: what was known, what could have been done, and what was not done. This listserve is about both good and bad practice, about the people who died because of incompetence, and about what we should be doing to avoid making the same mistakes for the fifth or fourteenth time.

Let us admit what happened and what did not happen. Let us admit the mistakes which were made and the good practice which was witnessed. This time, let us turn "lessons learned" into "lessons applied".



Having been an emergency manager in Florida for the last 20 years. None of these problems are new. None of them could not be expected. All of them were lessons learned from as far back as Hugo, and Andrew. The lack of communications, the lack of food and water are well understood. The lawlessness was seen after Andrew. What has happened is a lack of understanding those lessons learned and then building operational systems capable of responding to those problems. This is not a planning issue or a legislative issue it is an operational issue.

There was a long piece on the news about police officers not knowing what to do when their radios went out. That happened in Andrew and can be planned for and then carried out. I created for my old jurisdiction for multi-departmental task forces around the city that included fire, police, EMS, public works and public utilities vehicles and personnel. When the winds stop without orders from anyone these task forces begin to move down the streets toward the center of the city clearing streets and dealing with problems as they move. This was not my idea someone else had already thought of it.

If you have ever seen a shelter during a hurricane you could have predicted the problems in the Superdome. It was too many people with too few shelter managers, law enforcement, EMS, medical personnel and National Guard to support it. Regardless of the flooding or any of the other problems there should have been help to them by now. It is about operational command and control. The running of an EOC during these events can be chaotic if good command and control procedures are not implemented to grab control the chaos. With a good Incident Action Plan priorities can be set and then accomplished. We have got to get better as a profession at operations if we are ever going to avoid the problems we are facing in New Orleans in the next big disaster. You can write all the plans you want but unless you can carry them out and adjust to rapidly changing conditions not in the plan the plans become useless.

Roger C. Huder CEM

From : Bryan J. Boruff

Reply-To : boruffb@sc.edu

Sent : September 2, 2005 3:48:39 PM

To : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Ridiculous

Thank you "Ridiculous". There is nothing more to say.

Bryan J. Boruff, Ph.D.

Hazards Research Lab

Department of Geography

University of South Carolina


From : Ana Maria Cruz, Ph.D.

Reply-To : anamaria@drs.dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp

Sent : September 2, 2005 3:52:43 PM

To : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: Katrina

I received this message today, think it is quite appropriate at this time. My son is a New Orleans resident (and I also lived there for over 7 years) and it breaks my heart to see the poorest people of New Orleans still trapped in the city on the 5th day after the storm........a scene from a 4th world country.... we definitely need to ask questions! Tim, I am with you!

"I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees."

by Hunter Thu Sep 1st, 2005 at 10:28:22 PDT

George W. Bush was once known as the C.E.O. President, a term his handlers eagerly coined in order to convey that the country would from now on be run like a business. That quickly evolved into the less flattering Enron President... then the War President... now it's looking like we can all finally settle on one. George W. Bush: the Disaster President.

"I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees."

He honestly said that.

The administration specifically cut the funds to fix these specific levees, in order to specifically divert that Corps money to Iraq, despite urgent warnings and predictions of catastrophic disaster if the levees were breeched. The administration specifically cancelled the Clinton-backed flood control program to preserve and restore the wetlands between New Orleans and the gulf, instead specifically opening parts of that buffer zone for development.

Nobody anticipated this disaster? It was identified by FEMA as one of the top three likeliest major disasters to strike America. (That link, one of countless stories, was from 2001, by the way.) It has been a major disaster scenario for years. Everybody anticipated it, which makes this single statement by George W. Bush possibly the most dishonest, lying, craptacularly false thing he has ever said in his presidency -- even surpassing his now-infamous State of the Union Address. Truly, this is President Bush's blue-dress moment.

Below is a history of funding for the Lake Pontchartrain and Vincinity Hurricane Protection project. (Note: This was the levee system that broke. Due to lack of funding, major construction stopped in 2004 - the first such stoppage in 37 years.)


Army Corps request: $11 million [Link]

Bush request: $3 million [Link]

Approved by Congress: $5.5 million [Link]


Army Corps request: $22.5 million [Link]

Bush request: $3.9 million [Link]

Approved by Congress: $5.7 million [Link]


Bush request: $2.9 million [Link]

Today, Scott McClellan claimed that "flood control has been a priority of this administration from day one." The figures show that the administration has consistently budgeted far less than the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has requested for flood control in Louisiana. And over the last several years, the gap between what the Corps requested and what the administration budgeted has increased.

From : reggie mccarn

Reply-To : rlmccarn@hotmail.com

Sent : September 2, 2005 3:58:32 PM

To : boruffb@sc.edu, disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : RE: Ridiculous

Thank you ridiculous! But absurd should be used as well!!

From : Danny de Vries

Reply-To : devries@email.unc.edu

Sent : September 2, 2005 3:59:48 PM

To : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: Katrina


Is there an agreement that this forum is not for expression of our opinion or concerns? It seems entirely inappropriate to me to want to censure others for having their opinion, even if you disagree about the premise. The point was to start a dialogue and that is a good point. Apparently also very needed. If there is a concern among some on this listserv (all doing similar work) then let us discuss our points of view. If you want to learn lets at least try to have an open mind.

Also, we are talking about different things here: response, recovery, mitigation, etc. They all have their own political histories with different "rights" and "wrongs."

I have been doing mitigation research in Jefferson and St Tammany Parishes and have spoken at length with local mitigation managers and homeowners. The homes of my informants are under water. It is clear to me that mitigation funds were diverted away from Louisiana partly for political reasons, partly because of inefficiencies within the FEMA bureaucracy, and a host of other reasons. I conclude something did go horribly wrong there.

Danny de Vries

Department of Anthropology

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

From : Lively, Wendi

Reply-To : wlively@spartanburgcounty.org

Sent : September 2, 2005 4:02:15 PM

To :

Subject : RE: Katrina

I agree taking care of people should be the priority but I don't think it was looting President Bush was referring to in his statement. Instead I think he meant controlling those persons who are harming other people in their desperation more than the looting element. If you can't land medical and evacuation helicopters because they are being shot at you can't help the people without first bringing about some semblance of law and order. I agree with you about the superdome as a shelter it was too large and has incorporated all the problems of a city as you stated. I also believe New Orleans will be rebuilt, not only is it a beautiful area but has become a historical attraction as well as an art and cultural attraction with sentimental attachments in the minds of many Americans, not just those who live there. For these reasons alone I think it will be rebuilt regardless of the disaster risks in the area.

Wendi J. Lively

From :

Reply-To : AdventureErik@aol.com

Sent : September 2, 2005 4:16:21 PM

To : timh@ucar.edu, disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: Katrina

Hello to everyone, I am writing this from South Louisiana. I am in my last month of medical school and am a masters student in Complex Emergencies at Tulane. I am currently working at a hospital helping evacuees. Having sat in on many of the LA Dept of Emergency Planning meetings and assisting in evacuation plans of two hospitals in New Orleans, I can say that this is no surprise. I became involved with hurricane response plans in South Louisiana about 2 years ago and from the beginning I was told that the city would be underwater, there would be looting and evacuation problems. Further, a time frame of 10 months was given for clean-up. I can only speak for the small window of the response that I am involved in, but the hospital I am at is fully operational and receiving patients. We are getting restocked with supplies and have power. That is quite impressive to me. I am seeing a difficulty with transportation. Critical patients are getting airlifted and sub-critical people are being bussed. However, there are a lot of people that are still waiting for transport to a hospital. I am looking toward the next stage, disease prevention. Does anyone here work on transportation issues post-disaster? I'd be interested in reading some work on that matter. Thanks!



From : grv@sfu.ca

Reply-To : "grv@sfu.ca"

Sent : September 2, 2005 4:17:31 PM

To : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: katrina

I have to agree with Ilan. The danger inherent in New Orleans has been prevalent for a long time, with dykes, previous instances, etc. If people choose to ignore the warnings and stick their heads in the sand regarding preparedness then that is their prerogative. I'm not surprised at what has happened in terms of looting, rape, assault, etc. Human society ahs broken down in New Orleans and underscores the fact that peopple CANNOT rely on the government to take care of their every need.

I think that this will be a focal point for addressing future emergency management and preparedness. It serves as a prime example of what will happen when the next terror attack happens, or the next hurricane/tornado/earthquake hits. hopefully it motivates individuals and community-level groups to seek the information on how to protect themselves, how to organize effectively, etc. There will obviously be fallout at the local, state and federal levels over who screwed what up; the best thing that can be done is to take the results of this disaster and learn from it. Do the research on what went wrong, who should have made decisions; take the

time to prepare yourself with a 72 hour kit, fill up your gas tank, have an escape route planned.


From :

Reply-To : AdventureErik@aol.com

Sent : September 2, 2005 4:24:58 PM

To : wlively@spartanburgcounty.org, disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: Katrina

Hello again...I believe that people not evacuating was a major factor. Now,. poverty and an inability to flee was the main reason that people stayed. Again, as in my last post, I mentioned transportation issues post-disaster being a problem I see now. I know that NOLA did offer free bus rides out of town and pick-up for rides to the shelters. I think that there were just not enough busses. I believe that adequate transportation is a bigger factor than I had previously believed. I have focused much of my study on treatment of patients and protection of the hospital facilities. All this is for nothing if the people can't get a ride. I hope I can find some people doing some work on transportation and they can advise some literature to read on this! Thanks!



From : Shane Townsend

Reply-To : shane.townsend@gmail.com

Sent : September 2, 2005 4:25:30 PM

To : anamaria@drs.dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp

CC : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: Katrina

"One who knows the Mississippi will promptly aver - not aloud, but to himself that ten thousand River Commissions, with the minds of the world at their back, cannot tame that lawless stream, cannot curb it or confine it, cannot say to it, go here, or go there, and make it obey; cannot save a shore which it has sentenced; cannot bar its path with an obstruction which it will not tear down, dance over, and laugh at."

--Mark Twain "Life on the Mississippi"

I guess we put much more faith in our "pro-growth" society than in either history or its storytellers, .........................or maybe our esteemed president just skipped American Lit that day.

Shane Townsend

From : David M Simpson

Reply-To : dave.simpson@louisville.edu

Sent : September 2, 2005 4:18:29 PM

To : ,

Subject : Re: Katrina

when people are dying from lack of resources (food, water, medical), and they are not even part of the search and rescue effort, but rather collected in a gathering place, something is still horribly wrong. I have been fielding numerous press inquiries about how effective the response has been. Initially I was willing to admit that this was unprecedented and something for which we don't necessarily drill. However, there has been time to take action- more than just fly over it, and say "golly." The response thus far is a failure. I'm sure we'll figure how and why things didn't work as time passes. I just hope we can devote the same effort to discovering how to make things work better for the next time (who knows, maybe next month).



David M. Simpson, PhD, AICP

Director, Center for Hazards Research and Policy Development

Associate Professor

University of Louisville

School of Urban & Public Affairs

426 West Bloom Street

Louisville, KY 40208

502-852-8019 voice

502-852-4558 fax



From : Runte, Eduardo Frederico Augusto

Reply-To : o681j@unb.ca

Sent : September 2, 2005 4:37:03 PM

To : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

CC : disaster_grads@lists.colorado.edu

Subject : Re: Katrina

I still defend we should not be using the adjective "horribly" when referring to what happened. By that I mean that none of the points Ilan mentioned bear anything extraordinaire about them to grant the adjective. Is it bad? Yes, it is very bad, it is very sad that people are losing their lives. But, lack of communication due to technological mismatch, that seems to be the rule rather than the exception. No care for pets? Same thing. Favouring engineering solutions? That's what we are all about, it seems.

One of the posts calls politicians "swines". Typical - yes, let's ignore the role of the politicians so engineers can rule the world. Ilan also makes a comment that relates to the strenght of the dams which concerns to me since I was the one who brought it up. Please read the following quote from www.newscientist.com:

"Although bolstered by rock and concrete walls, the levees are essentially dams of compacted earth. They are not intended to withstand water flowing over them, so the Corps built them high - 6 m along the Mississippi river and about 4.5 m along Lake Pontchatrain, which is normally lower than the river. They were designed to

weather a Category 3 hurricane, and in 1965 they survived Category 3 Hurricane Betsy."

If the report is wrong, then, my mistake. In any case my argument remains valid: engineering solutions are not permanent (in face I would argue that there are no permanent solutions), dams collapse, rivers overflow, airplanes fall, and so on.

I do have another question though. In the sociology of disasters there is a well established notion that says looting and anti-social behavior is very rare (even though they always say "but it can happen in a few situations). I wonder to which point this notion was carried out too far, if disaster managers assumed it would never happen.



Eduardo Frederico Augusto Runte

MA Candidate - Department of Sociology

University of New Brunswick

ICQ: 31826219

MSN: efarunte@hotmail.com

>Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2005 14:04:27 +0000

>From: "Ilan Kelman"
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   15

Добавить в свой блог или на сайт


Disaster grads iconPart 1: The Magical Disaster Tour: What I did and Didn’t Learn About Library Disaster Plans in the Aiken-Augusta Area

Disaster grads iconAn Economic and Ecological Disaster for the Whole Region?

Disaster grads icon3. Disaster Response- officer at Division 10-21

Disaster grads iconInteroperability as a Function of Disaster Response

Disaster grads iconAnd Disaster Preparedness and Recovery Manual

Disaster grads iconEnvironmental Disaster Threaten Humankind's Future

Disaster grads iconThe Political Ecology of Alcohol as “Disaster” in South Africa’s Western Cape

Disaster grads iconSocial Problem Perspectives, Disaster Research, and Emergency Management: Intellectual Contexts, Theoretical Extensions and Policy Implications

Disaster grads iconComments on Natural Disaster Insurance Review: Inquiry into Flood Insurance and Related Matters

Disaster grads iconEver since the disaster of Chernobyl hit the world’s scene in 1986, the rising popularity of nuclear energy came to an abrupt halt. The fear of more nuclear

Разместите кнопку на своём сайте:

База данных защищена авторским правом ©lib.convdocs.org 2012
обратиться к администрации
Главная страница