Chapter 2

Coping With Natural Disasters

2.1 Chapter Summary

Mitigation activities work to eliminate or reduce the occurrence of future disasters. From an urban forestry perspective, mitigation activities are efforts to prevent or minimize damage or loss of trees affected by natural disasters.

Natural disaster activities consist of three chronological phases: preparation, response and recovery. Morentz et al. (1982) has identified eleven mitigation categories that are key to those involved in natural disasters. These categories are: management, public participation, rules, economics, monitoring, planning, research, structural, assessment, influence, and professional training.

2.2 Chapter Outline

     I. Mitigation Defined
     II. Mitigation Action Categories
          A. Management
          B. Public Participation
          C. Rules
          D. Economics
          E. Monitoring
          F. Planning
          G. Research
          H. Structural
          I. Assessment
          J. Influence
          K. Professional Training
     III. For More Information

2.3 Mitigation Defined

The term "mitigation" refers to "activities which eliminate or reduce the occurrence of future disasters." Mitigation consists of efforts undertaken in an orderly and planned fashion to accomplish the long-term preventive avoidance of the impacts of hazards on society (Morentz et al. 1982). Mitigation can be interpreted by an urban forester as efforts to prevent or minimize damage or loss of trees affected by natural disasters. Examples of mitigation activities related to urban forestry include: removal of hazardous trees; pruning trees properly to maintain health and structural integrity; planting trees appropriate to a communities' hardiness zone; and minimizing damage to the roots during construction activities.

2.4 Mitigation Categories

Emergency action for a natural disaster consists of three chronological phases:

Preparation--disaster planning and warning activities. Examples of activities include: the identification of an early warning system for severe weather, development of a disaster response plan, identification of roles of various individuals and municipal departments during disasters, and identification of groups or communities to contact for additional assistance when necessary.
Response--immediate activity during and after the disaster. Examples of activities include: tree damage clean up, clearance, identification of methods of communication from the field to the office, determination of debris disposal options, and use of efficient record-keeping methods.
Recovery--activities after the disaster that attempt to restore conditions prior to the disaster. Examples of activities include: public and private tree planting and care, training, tree planting awareness events and celebrations, and recognition activities for volunteers, citizens, municipal workers, and others involved.

Eleven mitigation action categories have been identified that relate to natural disasters (Morentz et al. 1982). All categories would be of use to municipal leaders and others involved in natural disasters. These eleven categories link directly to the three emergency action phases and are listed below by importance:

     Mitigation Action Categories
          Management
          Public Participation
          Rules
          Economics
          Monitoring
          Planning
          Research
          Structural
          Assessment
          Influence
          Professional Training

A. Management

In practice, management includes sound administration of people and resources as well as coordination and liaison between government agencies, the public and the private sector. Strong management begins at the lowest possible grass-roots level. This approach tends to generate continuing and wise management as the mitigation process ascends through higher levels.

Good management means a smooth flow of essential communication and efficient alignment of personnel and other resources. Total chaos can and will occur during and after a natural disaster. Downed telephone lines, loss of electricity, and a sudden influx of people and agencies wanting to provide assistance all add to the confusion. Local people who have knowledge of the area impacted should be available to help coordinate activities and keep the lines of communication open.
A management style that incorporates open communication and flexibility can achieve a close working relationship among all agencies. It also allows close coordination, information and resource sharing (equipment, personnel, money and technology) in an unrestrained, facilitative environment. Management styles may vary among different agencies and organizations involved. For example, law enforcement officials and the military have a very structured, authoritative style which may lead to conflicts in how decisions are made. These problems should be recognized and anticipated, if possible.
Management should be located at the lowest feasible level, closest to the hazard problem. Key decision makers should be identified before any disaster ever occurs. These individuals are critical in obtaining approval and initiating efforts.
A committee of local residents should be established to serve as "user representatives" and as a helpful sounding board for project management. Public needs and concerns should be recognized. Organized civic groups such as tree boards should be involved, rather than establishing new groups.
Public participation opportunities, such as town meetings, should be available to allow citizens to participate in planning and recovery efforts.
Mitigation efforts must be based on local and regional guidelines, and must be consistently stated in guidelines produced at all levels.
A key to guaranteeing sufficient public involvement and support is media cooperation and publicity. It is very important to keep the public up-to-date on activities, new initiatives, advancement, and successes--utilize the media to accomplish this.
Preplanning efforts should involve continually updating technical information and identification of technical resource people that can be called upon to provide advice and information. This information must be assembled and available when the disaster strikes. During the response phase, this information must be easily obtained--there won't be time available to search and develop information.

B. Public Participation

At par with management, public participation enhanced by public information programs is essential to the mitigation process. At the user or consumer level, both the array of government levels as well as the private natural resource sector, should use public information campaigns. These should be geared to timely, consumer oriented urban forest enhancement and rehabilitation topics.

Public information and education campaigns promoted by the government or interest groups tend to result in consistent support of mitigation because the message to the public is directed and controlled by these recognized agencies.
Timing of public information and education programs is important. Have public service announcements written in advance. Programs are most effective immediately after the occurrence of a hazardous event, but in addition, frequent messages about the benefits of disaster planning are influential.
Information and educational programs need to assess current levels of information held by the public in order to design the proper technique for communicating mitigation messages.
Inconsistency in media reporting on mitigation have led mitigators to develop carefully considered media contacts and working relationships with them. This helps prevent misleading or sensational media coverage.
The issue of credibility stems from the need to keep the confidence of the public with well-executed public information and education efforts.
Credibility is enhanced by using communication methods which provide direct contact with the public. Simple messages are more understandable and are received as more credible.
Public information may, in itself, become a primary instrument for disaster mitigation.

C. Rules

Cohesion of mitigation opportunities is assured through rules and regulations. In dealing with government agencies, rules are a part of the process that must be accepted and understood. Government laws and measures including codes, ordinances and statutes, as well as non-government agreements and covenants, are components of the rules dimension. Also, legislation, as well as litigation, enforce or support mitigation.

Rules contain the philosophy, goals and criteria of disaster mitigation. All of these must be understandable to the public in order to promote citizen participation.
Mitigation rules minimize interpretation and contain all administrative procedures for regulation. This includes roles, exceptions and applications.
As experience is gained with mitigation rules and as research presents new knowledge, mitigation directions can be updated. This process is expedited if rules are designed in two parts. The first part is the rule itself. The second part details acceptable standards of performance. Rule changes require governing body approval: standard changes can be done administratively.
Among the most important rules are building codes, land use plans, zoning ordinances, and for this discussion--a city or county tree ordinance. A tree ordinance is critical. Therefore, if a community does not have a tree ordinance, one should be adopted.
State mitigation agencies are well designed for hazards with statewide, county-wide, and even local implications.
Agencies at the state government level have a wide perspective to develop model ordinances which local governments may use to mitigate disasters.
In addition to possible incentives for local mitigation, some states require these activities through their community development and planning legislation.
At the state level, State Emergency Management Agency (SEMA) offices are available to assist local communities after a natural disaster.
The Federal Management Agency (FEMA) provides technical standards, guidelines and fiscal assistance relating to federally declared emergencies or natural disasters. FEMA's recognition and support of trees and urban forest management activities continues to evolve and expand.
Finally, some states also help local municipalities to mitigate disasters by centralizing the administration of federal assistance programs in a state office.

D. Economics

Without sound and well thought out economic planning, many mitigation opportunities are wasted. Financial rewards, adequate funding and related fund raising campaigns to gain hard dollars, in-kind services, and matching grants are necessary to meet mitigation goals and objectives. Response and recovery to a natural disaster can strain a community's financial resources. Additional funds for these activities may be available from FEMA, SEMA, federal, state, county or local government, civic and volunteer organizations, and professional organizations. (Refer to Appendix B, How to Fund Community Forestry" in Chapter 5 for additional funding recommendations.)

Fundraising is a worthwhile endeavor that requires a thoughtful and professional approach if it is to be successful.
Public funding does not usually cover efforts involving tree replacement, pruning and removal on private property.
Both community activities and media support are essential to the success for fund raising.
Local funds are available in municipal, township and county general funds if there is sufficient lead time to create a tax or bond base for mitigation activities. Other sources for local fund raising are grants-in-aid, tax levies and foundation grants.
The receipt of public funding may not be immediate. Therefore, communities may wish to seek funding from private sources for more immediate efforts and needs.
Forming a local group of agencies can lead to consortium funding, special solicitations and appeals for assistance.
States which seem willing to take sole responsibility for financing mitigation do so primarily for remedial measures. Long-range preventive solutions are often left for more complex financial arrangements. Therefore, communities at the local level must recognize the financial commitment involved to plant and manage municipal trees.
States often provide a variety of financial assistance including low-interest loans for partial financing of mitigation projects. State government can also help to fund projects which are not eligible for federal assistance.
Most state and private grants require a cost-share or funding match in the form of cash or in-kind services.
Government and private enterprise may have numerous formulas for cost sharing.

E. Monitoring

Mitigation is often confounded by conflicts of interest. Monitoring reduces these conflicts by providing compliance, enforcement and inspection methodologies. Monitoring also requires the coordination and goodwill among all agencies and organizations involved in the mitigation process.

Local agencies have the responsibility to monitor localized events such as floodplain inundation from a single site or land use controls in a valley. However, they frequently lack the technical expertise to detect new or unexpected hazards.
State agencies monitor events which have potentially broad state impact, but sometimes fail to recognize that hazards extend across neighboring states.
Federal agencies monitor hazards with regional impact and those involving the national interest. Federal monitoring experience is inconsistent from a local vantage point since techniques for monitoring differ.
Whatever the level of enforcement, monitoring requires coordination among numerous agencies and organizations.
When different levels of government have similar goals, they can share resources. Such sharing of resources and responsibilities can lead to improved efficiency and intergovernmental rapport.
New missions and goals are sometimes established by one level of government and are simply relayed to another unit without new resources, personnel, or funds for implementation. This creates intergovernmental tensions and unenforceable rules.
It is common for more than one level of government to have corresponding laws and regulations, largely because of the initiative of federal rule makers. Gaps exist in coordinating federal rule-making with that of state and local government.
The public has a role in the enforcement of all hazard rules, because the rules are a definition of the risks the community is willing to take.
In order to have intelligent public cooperation, it is necessary for the rules to be clearly understood and the hazard sufficiently visible, to detect violation of the rules.
Public knowledge and concern can provide significant pressure to force compliance by violators and insure enforcement by authorities.
If the public is well informed of hazard rules, they can monitor compliance and, in limited cases, enforce rules.

F. Planning

According to Morentz et al. (1982), "Planning is a process of anticipating future needs and programming resource expenditures in light of expected hazardous conditions and human vulnerabilities."

A wide range of agencies, individuals, users, and affected parties is involved in planning.
A core group is needed to sort out the diverse interests in planning outcomes. This may be a government agency, quasi-public organization or private group. Members of a core group for an urban forestry mitigation plan may include representatives from the Forestry Department, Department of Public Works, Parks Department, Police and Fire Departments, utility companies, local arboricultural firms, neighboring communities, media, nurseries, a climatological consulting firm, or local civic groups.
Planning helps participants to agree on goals, assumptions, purposes, and resources.
Planning must be coordinated with all levels of government.
Mitigation planning must be coordinated with other types of plans (for example, the plans used by the fire or police departments or utility company).
Approval of the final plan, by all participants, allows administrative responsibility to be assigned.
A good plan has four major characteristics: local relevance, public participation, technical information, and cyclical monitoring evaluation.
Technical quality and clarity are essential to the plan.
Ratification of the plan can be built into the planning process itself.
Review and updating procedures of the plan are required. Annually review contact names and telephone numbers.
The public media are key to gaining and maintaining public interest, involvement and support of the disaster mitigation planning effort.
Thoughtful planning should help counter the crises-seeking attitude of the media. Planners must anticipate this conflict. They must strongly encourage the media to use properly phrased information and demand that the media be responsive to the entire planning process.

G. Research

Both basic and applied (practical) research is of interest to three major groups: 1. legislators; 2. mitigation planners; and, 3. opponents to mitigation, who seek support of their opinions. On the whole, research provides an endorsement for positive mitigation options.

Research involves scientific investigations into the prevention or mitigation of disasters and the cause of hazards. it includes applied research or demonstrations which illustrate the feasibility of implementing new techniques or findings on mitigation.
The mitigation manager should create a "user group" to advise on appropriate aspects of research. A user group should be concerned with user research needs and variations for affected parties. They should not be concerned in research designs or other technical content.
The manager should develop public information and education advisory groups, to enhance dissemination opportunities and to improve the use of research findings.
The manager should obtain commitments from government that research results will be given full consideration.
The manager should keep interested groups involved throughout the research project.
A fundamental dilemma exists between basic mitigation research and its application, due to the difficulty in distinguishing one from the other. This dilemma is reflected in the continuing frustration of mitigation practitioners with mitigation research.
Effective mitigation requires that researchers and users work together to resolve these tensions.

H. Structural

Structural mitigation solutions encompass actual engineering and mechanical devices or methodologies which enhance mitigation. Examples include anti-hurricane structures, avalanche control, community protective tornado shelters, flood diversion measures, more reliable siren warning systems, prescribed burning of forests to reduce combustible matter, seeding thunderstorm clouds with silver iodide crystals, stream bank stabilization, and windbreak restoration.

I. Assessment

Numerous bits of essential data are available but need to be collected, sometimes processed, and often interpreted to solve the majority of assessment needs. Potential assessment questions to be asked include:

Which mitigation measures provide the best cost-benefit ratio?
Where is it safe to develop new homes and communities?
What remedial measures are required?
How effective would the mitigation strategy be?

In addition, assessments require many considerations which make the process an expensive proposition.

J. Influence

Lobbying for influence is a fact of life in the mitigation scenario. Further, electoral activities promoting candidates, issues or actions are common to mitigation efforts. Referenda, which the voting public endorses, can enhance or negate mitigation practices.

In order to compete successfully with well funded industry interests, mitigation issues must be translated into clear statements of benefit compared to hazard risks.
The public, in both behind-the-scenes lobbying and more up-front politics, often is in competition with industry for the attentions of elected officials.
Timing is critical; events and attention are allies of influence.
Credibility must be established. Solid technical facts are influential.
Professionalism is the key to a team approach for a quality mitigation product.
Build in a role for the media. If political or other sensitive issues develop, established media contacts are useful.

K. Professional Training

Professional training incorporates technical instruction to enhance the skills of workers, managers and administrators concerned with natural disaster mitigation. Professional training involves the transfer of information and technology included within all of the previous ten mitigation categories. In essence, professional training is the keystone which supports the arch of successful mitigation.

Training can be viewed as a two-step process; technical information is exchanged with a group of technical experts (architects, building inspectors, city planners, engineers, science editors, and urban foresters) which is responsible for the formulation of standards of performance, conduct and knowledge. This group then filters less technical information to a second group (builders, contractors, educated public, elected municipal leaders, and teachers) which is involved in implementing the standards or policies which concern them.
Media possibilities are extensive, but need to be appropriate for both the content and the audience of mitigation training.
Content for mitigation technical training is extremely varied and must be adapted to each of the identified primary audiences.
There is a training role for the private sector, especially in the mitigation of man-made disasters as well as for natural disasters.
Local emergency personnel, such as local police or fire and utility representatives, should train local volunteers.
State officials should train local officials and private-sector emergency personnel.
The federal government and pertinent national professional organizations are excellent sources for training materials for national mitigation programs.

2.5 For More Information

Contact the local state forestry office, regional FEMA office, or state offices responsible for disaster operations. Addresses and telephone numbers are listed in Chapter 9, Sections 9.5, 9.6, and 9.7.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1990. Disaster assistance programs: A guide to Federal aid in natural disasters. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Washington, D.C. 20472.

Flanagan, J. Successful Fundraising: A Complete Handbook for Volunteers and Professionals. Contemporary Books, Chicago, IL.

Foster, H. D. 1980. Disaster planning. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Gibilsco, S. 1984. Violent weather: hurricanes, tornadoes, and storms. Blue Ridge Summit: Tab Books Inc.

Morentz, J. W. et al. 1982. Practical mitigation. Rockville, Maryland: Research Alternatives, Inc.

Nalivkin. D. V. 1982. Hurricanes, storms and tornadoes. New Delhi: Amerind Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.

Obermeyer, R. 1989. Planning for high-wind disasters: tornadoes, hurricanes, and severe storms, a partially annotated bibliography. CPL Bibliography 236. Council of Planning Librarians.

Rubin, C. B. et al. 1985. Community recovery from a major natural disaster. Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado.

Return to: Table of Contents