oops.... FEMA forgot to give planes, trucks and boats missions after katrina hit

alonzomourning23

CAGiversary!
Feedback
26 (100%)
WASHINGTON - Hundreds of available trucks, boats, planes and federal officers were unused in search and rescue efforts immediately after Hurricane Katrina hit because FEMA failed to give them missions, new documents show.

Additionally, the Federal Emergency Management Agency called off its search and rescue operations in Louisiana three days after the Aug. 29 storm because of security issues, according to an internal FEMA e-mail given to Senate investigators.

The documents, released by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, are further evidence of lapses in FEMA's response to Katrina. They also detail breakdowns in carrying out the National Response Plan, which was issued a year ago specifically to coordinate response efforts during disasters.

A spokesman for the Homeland Security Department, which includes FEMA, did not dispute the documents. Katrina "pushed our capabilities and resources to the limit _ and then some," said spokesman Russ Knocke.

Responding to a questionnaire posed by investigators, Interior Department Assistant Secretary P. Lynn Scarlett said her agency offered to supply FEMA with 300 dump trucks and other vehicles, 300 boats, 11 aircraft and 400 law enforcement officers to help search and rescue efforts.

"Although the department possesses significant resources that could have improved initial and ongoing response, many of these resources were not effectively incorporated into the federal response to Hurricane Katrina," Scarlett wrote in the response, dated Nov. 7.

Scarlett added: "Although we attempted to provide these assets through the process established by the NRP, we were unable to efficiently integrate and deploy those resources."

At one point, Scarlett's letter said, FEMA asked U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services to help with search and rescue in New Orleans, St. Bernard Parish and St. Tammany Parish but that the rescuers "never received task assignments." The agency, a branch of the Interior Department, apparently went ahead anyway, according to the letter, which said that Fish and Wildlife helped rescue 4,500 people in the first week after Katrina.

Other Interior Department resources that were offered, but unused, included flat-bottom boats for shallow-water rescues. "Clearly these assets and skills were precisely relevant in the post-Katrina environment," Scarlett wrote.

Knocke, the Homeland Security spokesman, said up to 60,000 federal employees were sent to the Gulf Coast to response to Katrina. However, "experience has shown that FEMA was not equipped with 21st century capabilities, and that is what (Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff) has committed as one of our top priorities going forward," he said.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, head of the Senate committee that released the documents, called them "the most candid assessment that we've received from any federal agency." Her panel, which is investigating the government's response to Katrina, is scheduled to question a FEMA operations official Monday at a hearing focusing on search and rescue efforts.

"Here we have another federal department offering skilled personnel and the exact kinds of assets that were so desperately needed in the Gulf region in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, and there was no response that we can discern from FEMA," Collins said in an interview Sunday. "That is incredible to me."

Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the panel, said the Interior documents underscore "an outrage on top of an outrage."

Lieberman and Collins both said they also were dismayed by an internal FEMA e-mail, dated Sept. 1, calling a halt to search and rescue task force efforts in Louisiana.

"All assets have ceased operation until National Guard can assist TFs (task forces) with security," said the e-mail, sent from FEMA headquarters.

Knocke said the halt was likely the result of looting, rioting and other security concerns in New Orleans in the days after Katrina hit. It could not be determined Sunday whether FEMA suspended its search and rescue missions indefinitely or just temporarily on Sept. 1.

Knocke said he did not know and that the answer would be determined in the department's own review of the response.

But Lieberman said the e-mail suggests FEMA "left early," noting that personnel from the Coast Guard, and other federal, state and local agencies continued looking for storm victims for days after.

"This is shocking and without explanation," he said.

The documents were among 800,000 pages of memos, e-mails, plans and other papers gathered by investigators for the Senate committee, which plans to issue a report of its findings in March.

Lieberman charged last week that the White House was hindering the inquiry by barring some staffers from answering investigators' questions.

White House counselor Dan Bartlett maintained Sunday that the Bush administration would not give up specific internal documents or information from top presidential advisers.

"We're making sure that they have all the information necessary while we also protect the separation of government," Bartlett said on CNN's "Late Edition." "That's something that everybody recognizes and I think everybody at the end of the day can be satisfied."

Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday that the federal government will spend "well over $100 billion" to help rebuild the still-reeling Gulf Coast. The government has so far committed about $85 billion, including $67 billion in direct spending approved by Congress.

http://www.dailyinterlake.com/articles/2006/01/29/ap/headlines/d8fenvko1.txt
 
you know what else is shocking? Shooting at rescue helicopters.

This was for all of louisiana, and that does not explain not even attempting to utilize equipment, or why equipment was left sitting there before security became an issue. They didn't call off help to areas that were dangerous, they simply didn't even attempt to utilize them. Though it would seem like a perfect time to use the 400 law enforcement officers that were just left sitting there without a mission.

oh yeah, something else that comes as a shock: Trying to issue an assignment to a dump truck in 12 foot flood waters.

But not all of louisiana was heavily flooded, hell people could even walk in areas of new orleans. And that would suggest an even stronger need to utilize boats and aircraft, which were left unused.
 
ok, I'd just like to point out a little inconsistency here:

Hundreds of available trucks, boats, planes and federal officers were unused in search and rescue efforts immediately after Hurricane Katrina hit because FEMA failed to give them missions, new documents show.

first of all, immediately after the hurricane, reconnaissance and assessments must be made, then a plan must be formulated based on the unique circumstances of events. Criticizing anyone for mot immediately going forth to help people isn't fair in the wake of such a large disaster. Just as a triage functions in medical emergencies, judgments must be made before action is taken to unitize resources to their fullest. Am I saying FEMA did a perfect job? No. Should we expect better performance? Of course we should, but placing blame really serves no purpose here except to advance some political agenda or commentary.

Additionally, the Federal Emergency Management Agency called off its search and rescue operations in Louisiana three days after the Aug. 29 storm because of security issues, according to an internal FEMA e-mail given to Senate investigators.

Okay, now FEMA does do something and they have to stop for security concerns (i.e., looting, armed conflicts, etc.) It's proof that they were performing their duties between the "immediately after" and "three days after" time period. But, according to the slanted article, they can't seem to win no matter what they were doing. It seems the author is hell bent on painting an evil picture of the Bush administration with the convenience of analysis and information after the fact.

Fema tried it's best to coordinate thousands of resources. Then the Dept. of interior wants to donate more resources and Fema gets bitchslapped by the article and everyone else demanding responsibility becuase they didn't stop what they were doing and re-formulate all their plans to incorporate the donated resources.


At one point, Scarlett's letter said, FEMA asked U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services to help with search and rescue in New Orleans, St. Bernard Parish and St. Tammany Parish but that the rescuers "never received task assignments." The agency, a branch of the Interior Department, apparently went ahead anyway, according to the letter, which said that Fish and Wildlife helped rescue 4,500 people in the first week after Katrina.

Help with search and resue at 2 parishes. Sounds like 2 task assignments to me. Perhaps the fish and wildlife services needs to be told how high to jump when told to jump. They seem to have gotten the job done without additional handholding, though. I have an idea, let's all point fingers when things go wrong instead of working together to come up with solutions. That way we don't get blamed when something bad happens.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Am I saying FEMA did a perfect job? No. Should we expect better performance? Of course we should, but placing blame really serves no purpose here except to advance some political agenda or commentary. [/QUOTE]

Placing blame is used to weed out the people that screwed up and make sure it doesn't happen again.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']ok, I'd just like to point out a little inconsistency here:



first of all, immediately after the hurricane, reconnaissance and assessments must be made, then a plan must be formulated based on the unique circumstances of events. Criticizing anyone for mot immediately going forth to help people isn't fair in the wake of such a large disaster. Just as a triage functions in medical emergencies, judgments must be made before action is taken to unitize resources to their fullest. Am I saying FEMA did a perfect job? No. Should we expect better performance? Of course we should, but placing blame really serves no purpose here except to advance some political agenda or commentary.



Okay, now FEMA does do something and they have to stop for security concerns (i.e., looting, armed conflicts, etc.) It's proof that they were performing their duties between the "immediately after" and "three days after" time period. But, according to the slanted article, they can't seem to win no matter what they were doing. It seems the author is hell bent on painting an evil picture of the Bush administration with the convenience of analysis and information after the fact.

Fema tried it's best to coordinate thousands of resources. Then the Dept. of interior wants to donate more resources and Fema gets bitchslapped by the article and everyone else demanding responsibility becuase they didn't stop what they were doing and re-formulate all their plans to incorporate the donated resources.




Help with search and resue at 2 parishes. Sounds like 2 task assignments to me. Perhaps the fish and wildlife services needs to be told how high to jump when told to jump. They seem to have gotten the job done without additional handholding, though. I have an idea, let's all point fingers when things go wrong instead of working together to come up with solutions. That way we don't get blamed when something bad happens.[/QUOTE]

You seem to love all or none assesments. There is a significant difference between doing nothing and not utilizing all that was available and should have been utilized. You're argument is because they did something that's inconsistent with the claim that they failed to give missions to some emergency equipment and workers, but in reality that's 2 different issues.

If I had $60 and donated it to charity and then someone says I kept $40, you wouldn't say that the claim that I kept $40 can't be true because I gave $60. That's what it appears you are doing.

Though I'd like to know how you come up with solutions without pointing out the problems that occured in the past.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']You seem to love all or none assesments. There is a significant difference between doing nothing and not utilizing all that was available and should have been utilized. You're argument is because they did something that's inconsistent with the claim that they failed to give missions to some emergency equipment and workers, but in reality that's 2 different issues.

If I had $60 and donated it to charity and then someone says I kept $40, you wouldn't say that the claim that I kept $40 can't be true because I gave $60. That's what it appears you are doing.

Though I'd like to know how you come up with solutions without pointing out the problems that occured in the past.[/QUOTE]

You're right, they ARE 2 different issues, but the article muddies the water and implies that Fema did not use their own resources effectively, but the resources they weren't using were the Interior department's resources.

You even got the issue confused. If you had budgeted the use of your $60 charity money and someone says "I've got another $40 here for you to tell me how to spend" and you hadn't made assesments to know how to spend that other person's $40 yet, you would get criticized for not spending that extra money fast enough. It's an unfair criticism.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']You're right, they ARE 2 different issues, but the article muddies the water and implies that Fema did not use their own resources effectively, but the resources they weren't using were the Interior department's resources.

You even got the issue confused. If you had budgeted the use of your $60 charity money and someone says "I've got another $40 here for you to tell me how to spend" and you hadn't made assesments to know how to spend that other person's $40 yet, you would get criticized for not spending that extra money fast enough. It's an unfair criticism.[/QUOTE]

I was working with 100 in my head, I screwed up a bit in the example. I meant to say had 100, gave 60 and kept 40. Didn't seem to make a difference in how you read it, but just figured I'd correct it.

But I think the expectation is different for FEMA since coordinating these things is their job. But there were issues in what was available for rescue work, it was not so much fitting them into an already fully mobilized rescue effort but sticking them into some of the gaping holes. They had areas that needed help (ie. get more rescue equipment and people into flooded areas) and help was waiting right there. Considering the article mentions that one group went ahead and did work even though they recieved no orders, I fail to see why FEMA wouldn't have been able to utilize them if they had been paying more attention.

At one point, Scarlett's letter said, FEMA asked U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services to help with search and rescue in New Orleans, St. Bernard Parish and St. Tammany Parish but that the rescuers "never received task assignments." The agency, a branch of the Interior Department, apparently went ahead anyway, according to the letter, which said that Fish and Wildlife helped rescue 4,500 people in the first week after Katrina.

It seems like there would have been little issue in getting a benefit out of them.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']But I think the expectation is different for FEMA since coordinating these things is their job. But there were issues in what was available for rescue work, it was not so much fitting them into an already fully mobilized rescue effort but sticking them into some of the gaping holes.[/QUOTE]
It's easy to determine the gaping holes after the fact, not as easy during the crisis, something conviniently left out in criticisms of this rescue effort. Was Fema told the details of the resources? Did they know the load capacity of the trucks, the displacement and passenger capacities of the boats, the number of people availible to pilot and drive these resources? Did they have the people to fill these positions? Did they have to buy the fuel, know where to expect delivery, have extra supplies to issue to rescue volunteers? Logistics are an important part of execution and no one seems to care about procedure, only empiracals. The article doesn't tell us, but is quick to leave us with the notion that resources weren't used effectively and Fema is to blame without even trying to analyze or present details.

They had areas that needed help (ie. get more rescue equipment and people into flooded areas) and help was waiting right there. Considering the article mentions that one group went ahead and did work even though they recieved no orders, I fail to see why FEMA wouldn't have been able to utilize them if they had been paying more attention.

It sounded like they got their orders - we need help rescuing at 2 specific parishes. Can it get more detailed than that? The interior department needs more specific details to complete rescue efforts but we expect Fema to do perform without these same kind of details? It's a double standard, it's applied unfairly, judged unfairly by the author and those like you, all for a political agenda.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']you know what else is shocking? Shooting at rescue helicopters.[/QUOTE]

You do know that was never substantiated? Just like the "hundreds" of dead and children raped in the Superdome and Convention Center. What's really telling is how ready so many were to believe any story from anyone as to these "facts" that supposedly poor black residents "couldn't help themselves." And to think these same folks had the temerity to levy the "racism" charge against rescue workers!
 
bus2.jpg

City school busses.... flooded.
bus1.jpg

City transit busses.... flooded.

Lots of things went unused by all branches of government.
 
Yes, they were flooded. Therefore they could not be used. FEMA's stuff was not flooded, and therefore could be used. I don't think I'm the only one who understands the difference.
 
The busses could have been used BEFORE the hurricane hit to evacuate people from NO. Threre was plenty of warning for that.

And FEMA's resources WERE used. It was the non use of the interior departments resources that were in question, so no, you still aren't getting it.
 
bread's done
Back
Top