English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

In the spring and summer of 1993, one of the worst regional floods in U.S. history inundated many lowlying areas of the central U.S. In some cases, entire communities were submerged for weeks. Many people relocated, but many others rebuilt in the same locations. Why would people choose to live in flood-prone areas?

2007-10-15 02:27:18 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Weather

5 answers

Because we love it here. People don't really seem to care about those kind of factors, and flooding rarely occurs. By the way, this is coming from a South Dakotan- we're the state that took the brunt of that. I'm from the Sioux Falls, SD, area, and we weren't affected (that much, the Big Sioux River doesn't flood much), but I've heard from quite a few people who were, and they said they still wouldn't move. It's a beautiful state, but most people that live along the major and minor rivers didn't have flood insurance and were forced to start anew. God bless Bill Clinton, the President who came to our aid (though he did lie a little on the intimate side). That's the only thing we'll remember him for besides healthcare and certain reforms. It's all in our state history books now, and all the affected areas were rebuilt several years later; believe it not, most loved their area enough to stay! They just lived wherever they could until they rebuilt. Anyhow, that was quite the disaster. I remember being 5 and hearing that BIll Clinton was coming to the state to show his support for the disaster relief fund... but it still wasn't quite enough, and some had to rebuild with their own money. While that may have been one hell of a disaster, the main reason people live in these parts is because they were born and raised here and have nowhere else they'd rather be. It's a sort of psychological effect. You either love South Dakota (or any other state) for its beauty or you hate it because it's too small for your tastes (many of the younger generation have decided in the end to move to bigger cities once they were older, such as Aberdeen, SIoux Falls, and Rapid City. Today's society doesn't appreciate farmers and the heritage they brought nearly enough. If it weren't for the Louisiana purchase and opening stakes of the Oklahoma territory in the first place and the Dakota territory (which later became North Dakota and South Dakota in the early 20th century) later, most of the brunt of what we Americans call the midwest simply wouldn't be as it is. Fact is, most people in those areas are, in fact, farmers as aforementioned, and don't know much of anything else. So small towns sprung up, and nor did they know of much else. The truth is, they're sort of trapped there. They can leave if they want to, but where the heck would they go?

2007-10-15 03:01:15 · answer #1 · answered by Brian H 3 · 0 0

Many of the flooded towns you speak of have existed since colonial times and longer, more than 200 years. As you said, the floods were the worst in history, meaning most of those people never thought something like that could happen because there was no record of it ever happening before. They continue to live there because it's home and always will be. There are many industries that rely on the Mississippi River and other rivers that feed into it, and there have to be towns along the way to support those industries. You would feel a huge impact in your life without it, from not being able to find certain goods, or paying an extremely high price for them if they had to get to you through other channels.

We are the same way here in the Katrina zone on the Gulf Coast. Did you know that something like 75 - 80% of the bananas in this country come through the Mississippi State Port at Gulfport, Mississippi? That's a lot of bananas, and a lot of jobs, without even considering the tons of other goods that come through there. They leave the port on trains and trucks to those of you further inland. They would cost you 4 or 5 times more if they came in by air so no one had had to be in a flood prone area. The river system is the same way, it's the lifeblood of the country.

2007-10-15 09:39:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Because there are some ppl who just have to live on the water or near it....and they are willing to take that risk. Then there are others, like the flood here locally in 2006, who were in a 100 year flood plain and had never flooded before and lost everything...not once, but twice in one year... Weather is a very unpredictable thing, no matter how much technology.

2007-10-15 13:47:28 · answer #3 · answered by Termite 3 · 0 0

Because some people feel that is their home, the place where they already have many memories and friends, etc. So they decide to just rebuild. It probably makes them feel stronger.

2007-10-15 09:36:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

People want waterfront property

and

Its called Denial.

It will never happen to me.

2007-10-15 09:31:29 · answer #5 · answered by Fuzzybutt 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers