# "You cannot depend on a sandbag dike to save your life



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

*Residents in the flood plains of North Dakota need to flee to high ground because "you cannot depend on a sandbag dike to save your life," said Lt. Gen. Russel Honore.*

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/03/27/ho ... index.html

*(CNN) *-- Residents in the flood plains of North Dakota need to flee to high ground because "you cannot depend on a sandbag dike to save your life," said Lt. Gen. Russel Honore.Honore, who led the military response to hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2007, said his biggest concern is the frigid temperatures of the water in North Dakota and the potential of people freezing to death.










"If you get caught in that floodwater, you will not be able to last very long," he said.

Honore is now retired from the military and speaks about emergency preparedness. He also is a CNN contributor. He spoke about the North Dakota floods earlier Friday.

*CNN:* How do you evacuate an entire town, especially when you're talking about tens of thousands of people?

*Honore:* The first thing you do is start with the most vulnerable population and get people to start moving now. The dilemma the local folks in Fargo and Bismarck have is that much of the population is involved with the sandbagging operation, which is good. But there comes a point in time where you need to start getting people to move, especially the most vulnerable people and animals that could get caught in the water. The problem in North Dakota is compounded by the temperature of the water.

If you recall last year, when we had the flooding in the Midwest, the water was warm. People could walk in there and they could walk out from small boats. But in this cold water, you can go into hypothermia quickly. If you get caught in that floodwater, you will not be able to last very long. If you're in there for a half hour, your body will start to deteriorate.

Early evacuations and getting people out and getting animals out is critical right now. And the long-term plan is how do we mitigate that and not have nursing homes inside a flood plain.

*CNN:* What are your biggest concerns at this point?

*Honore: *Getting people moving. You cannot depend on a sandbag dike to save your life. You put it up to try to save your property. Once you put it up, you need to leave, because that sandbag dike could break at any given time. The effectiveness of the sandbags deteriorates with the cold water because they don't hold the water in. They start leaking, and a leak turns into a flow, and a flow turns into a break.

So the effectiveness of the sandbag dikes is going to be questionable in that cold water.

*CNN: *How imperative is it for people to heed the warnings of local officials?

*Honore:* They need to move now if you're in the flood plains. If you have a break in the dike, it will start slow, but it will immediately burst through and you'll have a wall of water going down streets. And it'll be too late for people to get out.

And so anybody who is vulnerable at this point in time in low-lying areas ... needs to be evacuated. They need to start going door to door now and start seeking out the elderly and the disabled to make sure they have gotten all of them out of town. And then if there are any animals left behind they need to get those out, because if they get in that cold water they're going to have a tough time surviving.

*CNN: *Where do evacuations sometimes go wrong?

*Honore:* People get mixed messages. My thing on levees and dikes you put up is they're good to give you early warning and they're good to protect your property. But they're not good at saving your life, because they're too subject to break. The power of Mother Nature will break those levees and dikes, and it can break those sandbags.

It's a noble effort going on with the leadership and the volunteers to put up those sandbags. And you've got to praise the amount of time working people have put in. But that being said, you should not depend on that to save your life. Once you get those sandbags up, you need to move to high ground. And they need to get all of the evacuations done in the flood plains. The maps they have are very effective in showing where a flood plain is. Anybody sleeping overnight waiting for a horn to go off to tell them a levee has broken -- it's going to be too late to move.

People need to move now. Move their animals, move their property, any construction equipment, trucks, precious papers in their homes. All of that needs to be moved to high ground.

*CNN:* When you're dealing with the possibility of several different levee breaks, how does that affect evacuation plans?

*Honore:* It causes stress. Everybody who has a car is not an issue. The issue is with the elderly, the disabled and the poor who may not have vehicles. Get them all collected up now and move them to shelters. That's a very important thing to happen.

But people get mixed messages: 'We've got the dike up and we're confident it's going to hold.' Well, there's no confidence that a dike is going to hold. There's no confidence that a levee is going to hold. All of them over time we've seen can be overmatched by water.

So if you're behind there and you're depending on it to save your life, you should not. You should move now. They really need to start moving people now. It's mandatory evacuations, because sometimes you really gotta force people to leave. Now, they will tell you they have a constitutional right to stay in their home. But if you have a mobility issues with the elderly, I'm of the opinion you should have the authority to move them. If they stay in there and that levee breaks, again this will not be paddling around in waist deep 80 or 90 degree water; this water is 30 or 40 degrees. It will kill you.

This has the potential to be a lot worse than the last flooding they saw in the area.

*CNN: *Would that be your biggest concern that first responders and volunteers are doing all this hard work and they could rest on their laurels thinking they've made these areas safe?

*Honore:* That's right ...

There can be a sense of insurance that we've worked hard and we've put the dikes up. But I would not sleep behind those dikes. I would move people to high ground now, and that's what they need to be doing in North Dakota and Iowa.

I praise the first responders for the work they've done, but their priority now should be to get people out of the flood plains.

[Dikes and levees] are designed to save property, but they're not designed to save lives. People need to move.

*CNN:* What's your final message for residents in the region?

*Honore:* Get out of there. Leave some report folks to monitor what's going on. But get the people out of there. That should be the No. 1 priority. The Red Cross and FEMA have moved assets in there. Shelters are set up. The government has done a good job, from what I'm seeing, in giving early warning and being on top of the situation. But now is the time to get people evacuated.

And you know what? If they move and nothing happens, that's a good thing. If they stay and those bags break, it's going to be devastating on those people who get caught in that cold water.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Is he right?

:huh:

Now that the dikes have been finished, should Mayor Walaker evacuate the *entire* city for 3-5 days, save for a few National Guard and police to monitor the dikes and maintain security?

Thoughts?


----------



## mallard (Mar 27, 2002)

It sounds like a great plan, but how would you enforce it? In order to keep looting and crime down in a area the size of Fargo Moorhead you would have to completely evacuate both cities and have the military take over.
I do believe that most elderly, nursing home residents, and hospitals in the flood prone areas are allready evacuated. Most of the west side of Moorhead is evacuated right now.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

mallard said:


> It sounds like a great plan, but how would you enforce it? In order to keep looting and crime down in a area the size of Fargo Moorhead you would have to completely evacuate both cities and have the military take over.
> I do believe that most elderly, nursing home residents, and hospitals in the flood prone areas are allready evacuated. Most of the west side of Moorhead is evacuated right now.


Basically I gather he is implying that everyone should go. If this were enacted, it would probably include mandatory 24 hour curfew, with the National Guard providing checkpoints and force to push everyone out beyond a certain area.

They would setup checkpoints at every Interstate exit, and major arterial, and give everyone a deadline of being out by 12 PM noon. Granted it would be "orderly" chaos, and similar to the evacuation of New Orleans, all Interstates would be one way only out of town.

It wouldn't be hard to enforce and get the majority of the population out really.. yes it would be a traffic nightmare, but so many folks have already left, and if the media were to drop a rumor about the possibility of it, more folks would also exit early, leaving fewer yet to get out of Dodge...

I dunno.. it was his idea and this is all speculation.


----------



## goosebusters (Jan 12, 2006)

What is wrong with monitoring these sandbag dikes and putting more sandbags on the leaks before they become "flows"? I think that just leaving them is a terrible idea, then they will definitely break, if not just the leaks alone will flood the houses making it pointless to make it in the first place.


----------



## fargodawg (Sep 20, 2005)

if they go house to house to kick us.... I will be hiding in my basement, I cant keep my sump running from casselton. good luck to us all..
my dad is getting encouraged to leave his place, but they wont make him go until Drain 27 breaks, then we will be there bailing if need be in our chest waders.

my uncle could have saved his house in GF last year had he not been 
'ordered" to leave. once they clear the neighborhood and are sure all are out they cut power and the sumps filled and the houses went, as soon as his ability to fight it was taken....it was over

I'll have beer in the garage for anybody who is being moved out. email me [email protected]


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

fargodawg said:


> if they go house to house to kick us.... I will be hiding in my basement, I cant keep my sump running from casselton.
> 
> my uncle could have saved his house in GF last year had he not been
> 'ordered" to leave. once they clear the neighborhood and are sure all are out they cut power and the sumps filled and the houses went, as soon as his ability to fight it was taken....it was over


Those two statements are a large part of why it is not a great idea.

I lived along the river in Grand Forks in 1997 and had a sand bag dike that was 125' long and 8 feet high behind our house. It was still a foot short but I do know of whence I speak.

In 1997 a lot of the people in Grand Forks could have kept the water out of their basements or homes had they been able to stay and maintain sump pumps. Plus most of the people that elect to stay and continue are very well prepared and have a plan should thngs go awry.

It has been very gratifying to have been in Fargo helping people sandbag there homes. It was also very sad to be in the Oakport area helping when it became apparent that it just wasn't going to work. The sinking feeling and the tears that welled up were not far removed from those in 1997.

Good luck to Fargo, and the dikes holding,as they just announced the river has crested. A job well done by those that helped in any way.

Tomorrow we'll be sandbagging in the Burke addition just south of Grand Forks.


----------



## USAlx50 (Nov 30, 2004)

goosebusters said:


> What is wrong with monitoring these sandbag dikes and putting more sandbags on the leaks before they become "flows"? I think that just leaving them is a terrible idea, then they will definitely break, if not just the leaks alone will flood the houses making it pointless to make it in the first place.


 :withstupid:

Although I may have to "evacuate" sometime this week to SD since we don't have school next week either.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

what Gen Honore doesn't know that we all know is that we are a lot different people here.

We fight, we don't throw in the towel.
We don't ask for help, we just help each other out.
We don't blame each other, we work together.
We don't loot, we shoot.
We don't look at could be lost, we look at what we could save.
We put our community in front of ourselves.
We use our common sense.

This flood fight should answer the question of why anybody would want to live here.


----------



## NoDakGuy (Mar 29, 2009)

TK33...u stated it perfectly... He knows nothing about the people here. And by the way he was in charge of the military during katrina.. What happened at katrina???? Looting, shooting at authorities, fires, and total caios. So he dont know what hes talking about if you ask me. North Dakota will stand and fight till the end. Stay in washingtion colonel, we got it under control.


----------



## MRN (Apr 1, 2002)

The General can kiss my butt. Luckily in this country folks are free to make their own decisions and don't have to listen to Generals. I didn't vote for him.

Folks on the ground here and in Katrina/Rita can't help but tell us how different the two situations were/are.

Help us, or get the hell out of the way.

From behind the dike,
M.


----------



## Turner (Oct 7, 2005)

"you cannot depend on a sandbag dike to save your life," said Lt. Gen. Russel Honore.Honore, who led the military response to hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2007

This pretty much says it all. Good thing we do not have this "cut and run" General calling the shots here in Fargo.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Two things to understand. First, if faced with water that was 4-6-10ft deep or deeper that was to move through the city his observations are accurate. However other than a few homes directly next to the river, most of the water from this flood would have been three ft or less. People as Denny W said could have walked out to high ground if necessary.

In listening to the Press Conference they did not come out and say it but it sounded as if the order for a evacuation for Fargo was issued by Home Land Security.

Driving supplies out today to some folks who are in their homes but surround by water I watched him bring a canoe out with his chest waders in less than waist deep water.

So the observation of him not knowing the situation or the type of water we are dealing with shows why talking heads should be viewed as entertainers nothing more.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

TK33 said:


> what Gen Honore doesn't know that we all know is that we are a lot different people here.
> 
> We fight, we don't throw in the towel.
> We don't ask for help, we just help each other out.
> ...


excellent TK.

One thing the General has wrong is you have no where near 1/2 hour in ice water. I have taken some survival training and it's more like ten minutes. I know they pulled a kid from under the ice in Fargo and he lived, but that was the exception to the rule. 
The other thing I am curious about is the frozen sandbags. I understand that they are bad if placed while frozen because gaps can occur. However, if they freeze after being placed is that a problem. Heck if the weather was cold enough I would think spraying down the backside and locking everything in place would be a good thing.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

I dunno, what would 80,000 people maybe half of them children look like wading around in freezing cold water all at the same time. I'm thinking stampede and many people left helpless.

Myself I have been in the ice water before, it felt good and soothed my broken bones but it took three days for the hospital to get my core temp back to normal. It's not real pleasant believe me.

I just wish you all the best and hope you all don't go putting others lives in danger to save your own.


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

buckseye said:


> I dunno, what would 80,000 people maybe half of them children look like wading around in freezing cold water all at the same time. I'm thinking stampede and many people left helpless.
> 
> I just wish you all the best and hope you all don't go putting others lives in danger to save your own.


One must realize that because a dike breaches or fails does not mean that you have three feet of water instantaneously appear all over the city. It would take several days for the water to inundate the city. Plus there are areas of the city that will remain dry simply because there are areas higher than the water.

So the idea of 80,000 people wading around in several feet of water is ludicrous. Plus many of the vulnerable and children have already been moved out.

I know this to be true because I watched it happen 12 years ago in Grand Forks when the dikes were breached. The water breached the dike, flowed to the lowest levels, and then backed up to the level of the river.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> So the idea of 80,000 people wading around in several feet of water is ludicrous.


I bet you hope you are right! 

And besides that I'm not going to say nice things to you all just to make you feel better when I think your all nuts for investing in such a risky area. :beer:


----------



## startown (Nov 14, 2005)

I think the people of the Fargo/Moorhead area should be proud for beating the river. I think they have done what many that was impossible. This new storm could throw a wrench into things, but let's hope they can beat the river again! Stay safe!


----------



## Backwater Eddy (Jun 16, 2003)

TK33 said:


> what Gen Honore doesn't know that we all know is that we are a lot different people here.
> 
> We fight, we don't throw in the towel.
> We don't ask for help, we just help each other out.
> ...


BINGO.....this ain't New Orleans...and anything less then a series of dike failures would not move most folks out of there homes here.

EVEN..folks who are now between contingency dikes know the risk and the score, and they are OK with it...they are willing to fight tell it's lost then regroup and fight for the next guys home.

Evacuation is not an option at this point, yet they plan for it just in case needed....that is the wise thing to do.

I think they are doing a super job here, amazing really. We all know it ain't over for a long time down the line. In my unofficial guestimate..It will be June before we see a stable river, if then.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Someone posted this comment on an article about the Fargo flooding at
the Boston Globe website
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/0 ... oding.html

Just a personal observation...as I watched the news coverage of the
massive flooding in the Midwest with the levee's about to break in
Fargo, ND, what amazed me is not what we saw, but what we didn't see...
1. We don't see looting.
2. We don't see street violence.
3. We don't see people sitting on their rooftops waiting for the
government to come and save them.
4. We don't see people waiting on the government to do anything.
5. We don't see Hollywood organizing benefits to raise money for
people to rebuild.
6. We don't see people blaming President Obama. (Except for Don
Marchant, post #30)
7. We don't see people ignoring evacuation orders.
8. We don't see people blaming a government conspiracy to blow up
the levees as the reason some have not held.
9. We don't see the US Senators or the Governor of North Dakota crying
on TV.
10. We don't see the Mayors of any of these cities complaining about
the lack of state or federal response.
11. We don't see or hear reports of the police going around
confiscating personal firearms so only the criminal will be armed.
12. We don't see gangs of people going around and randomly shooting
at the rescue workers.
13. You don't see some leaders in this country blaming the bad
behavior of the North Dakota flood victims on "society" (of course
there is
no wide spread reports of lawlessness to require excuses).

Posted by Bill Baxten March 27, 09 01:56 PM


----------



## tumblebuck (Feb 17, 2004)

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/weather/03/3 ... index.html


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Wow nobody carries insurance over there either.. WOW!!!!!!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29957261/


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

Thanks for posting that 4Curl - There is a lot of interested reading there from people who understand that up here...things are indeed different.



4CurlRedleg said:


> Someone posted this comment on an article about the Fargo flooding at
> the Boston Globe website
> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/0 ... oding.html
> 
> ...


----------



## AdamFisk (Jan 30, 2005)

buckseye said:


> Wow nobody carries insurance over there either.. WOW!!!!!!
> 
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29957261/


My aunt is an insurance agent in a small town 180 miles away from Fargo. Her office has been flooded with people looking to insure their homes in Fargo. It's a bad deal when your house is surrounded by water and it takes 30 days to get flood coverage. Doesn't do a person much good at that point. It will be interesting to see that statistic next year compared to this year.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

buckseye said:


> Wow nobody carries insurance over there either.. WOW!!!!!!
> 
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29957261/


*The fact of the matter is that FEMA flood insurance sucks.*

I have flood insurance and unless my house floats away it more or less does me no good. It only covers the sheetrock not the tape, texture and paint. It only covers part of your furnace and hot water heater, and they pretty much pro rate that down to nothing. I know several people who had to jump through so many hurdles after the 97 flood that it took members of congress to actually step in and force FEMA to honor the agreement. FEMA likes to call everything sewer backup and try to pawn it off on home owners insurance. The insurance sucks, it is basically a rip-off, and it is such a headache that it simply isn't worth it. You will see more people buying flood insurance in the RRV because it will be forced onto us now after this flood.

I would rather see flood insurance done through the city or the state and the revenues used for flood protection and then the rest could fund disaster aid. Anything with FEMA is a waste.

Buckseye-
your comments indicate that we are the only city that has built on a river. You call it a dangerous area, if you look at the history of the Red you will see that there have been few major floods. Ironically they have come in groups. You would find that most major cities are built near a waterway for obvious historical reasons, the difference is that we continue to win our flood battles therefore we are put near the bottom when it comes to funding for flood protection/mitigation. There are a lot of complex road blocks that have slowed our flood plans here in Fargo. The fact is that no matter what we do you have to get two states, two counties, two cities, different water boards, etc on board for it to work. The threats of lawsuits have slowed the project, MN being in a defecit has slowed the project, people not wanting to leave their property, and on and on. There are several gov't and private entities who have worked full time on flood protection for years and have plans, obviously they should have been done years ago. The mayor of Fargo has already talked about moving ahead and it doesn't matter whose feelings get hurt. You say you are not saying things just to be nice but like all other pundits you are underinformed on the issue. Every monday morning quarterback needs to realize everything they have pointed out has been looked at or proven wrong. This is a political mess and needs to be squared away this year. What we have achieved in Fargo-Moorhead this year is amazing and should not be taken lightly, the efforts of everyone involved has saved taxpayers billions of dollars.


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

buckseye said:


> Wow nobody carries insurance over there either.. WOW!!!!!!
> 
> Wow, probably due to the limited coverage or lack of coverage in basements, provided by flood insurance, which many people learned in 1997. WOW!!!!
> 
> ...


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> What we have achieved in Fargo-Moorhead this year is amazing and should not be taken lightly, the efforts of everyone involved has saved taxpayers billions of dollars.


TK I agree with you and respect what you and all the others are doing to save Fargo. It's just upsetting you all have to go through this every year. To those I offended I'm sorry, good luck I hope it works out for you guys.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

buckseye said:


> > What we have achieved in Fargo-Moorhead this year is amazing and should not be taken lightly, the efforts of everyone involved has saved taxpayers billions of dollars.
> 
> 
> TK I agree with you and respect what you and all the others are doing to save Fargo. It's just upsetting you all have to go through this every year. To those I offended I'm sorry, good luck I hope it works out for you guys.


thanks, and I realize that you are not trying to offend anyone. There have been a lot of people on the talk radio, web, etc that have the train of thought that we just stood back and said "awe shucks, hope it don't happen again" after 97 but that is not the way it is. Like we are some dumb yokuls here or something. We are not done, as of today they are predicting a second crest of 37' that is not good. Most of the permanent levees are only at 38' in south fargo, 34-36' in others. The fight may only be half over. Hopefully we get a dose of luck and it only gets into the low 30's.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

All I know is this is rough on the whole state with Fargo being our largest city and center of commerce. This is a giant money sucking hole for our State that needs to be handled before the costs go any higher. I have a friend who has made millions in Fargo just replacing peoples flooring in their basements. You people have the clout over there please use it and demand something be done, do petitions and make laws if need be.

I'm back to at least start dredging the channel, without a doubt it has silted in quite a bit over time. Good luck.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

While I totally agree with a majority of the list of differences that compare the flooding in Fargo with Katrina in New Orleans. There are some totally different circumstances between disasters. One major differences is the size of New Orleans compared to Fargo. Katrina directly affected millions of people, Fargo thousands. Another is lead up time to the disaster. With lead up time, you can combat a flood. It is aweful hard to combat a hurricane, even if you do have a significant amount of lead time.

As far as waiting for the government, we will see what happens in Fargo over the coming months with the people who did not have proper flood insurance.

Again, while I totally agree there is a difference in work ethic and general expectations between the people of New Orleans and Fargo but you do have to look at some differences in situations and realize that in some cases you are comparing apples to oranges (as some of you have pointed out regarding the general's assessment of what needs to be done)


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Gooseguy10 said:


> While I totally agree with a majority of the list of differences that compare the flooding in Fargo with Katrina in New Orleans. There are some totally different circumstances between disasters. One major differences is the size of New Orleans compared to Fargo. Katrina directly affected millions of people, Fargo thousands. Another is lead up time to the disaster. With lead up time, you can combat a flood. It is aweful hard to combat a hurricane, even if you do have a significant amount of lead time.
> 
> As far as waiting for the government, we will see what happens in Fargo over the coming months with the people who did not have proper flood insurance.
> 
> Again, while I totally agree there is a difference in work ethic and general expectations between the people of New Orleans and Fargo but you do have to look at some differences in situations and realize that in some cases you are comparing apples to oranges (as some of you have pointed out regarding the general's assessment of what needs to be done)


Didn't the people in New Orleans have a five days notice to leave?


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

I am not sure of the exact timeline for Katrina, but evacuating a population such as New Orleans even with a lead time of five days would be a nightmare with logistics (ie number of people, lack of personal transportation, lack of alternative lodging...).

This is why I say that many things regarding Katrina and the flooding can not be compared.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

blhunter3 said:


> Gooseguy10 said:
> 
> 
> > While I totally agree with a majority of the list of differences that compare the flooding in Fargo with Katrina in New Orleans. There are some totally different circumstances between disasters. One major differences is the size of New Orleans compared to Fargo. Katrina directly affected millions of people, Fargo thousands. Another is lead up time to the disaster. With lead up time, you can combat a flood. It is aweful hard to combat a hurricane, even if you do have a significant amount of lead time.
> ...


Ya, but they couldnt loot from outside the city.

Night and day difference between Fargo and New Orleans. One is filled with hard working people that came together to fix a problem. The other is filled with d-bags bent on thievery and thinking only of themselves.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Plainsman said:


> One thing the General has wrong is you have no where near 1/2 hour in ice water. I have taken some survival training and it's more like ten minutes. I know they pulled a kid from under the ice in Fargo and he lived, but that was the exception to the rule.


In 41 degree water the average adult has about 15 minutes before the body starts to shut down in stage III hypothermia. Thats with full body immersion. Waist deep water, keeping your core dry, would give you substantially more time.

I pretty much disagree with everything the general said. Yes, its a good idea to get all "unnecessary" people out like kids and such. But after patrolling the dikes for the last 4 days, I can tell you, there would be ALOT more failed dikes had there not been people, city workers, guardsmen, and homeowners, patrolling and maintaining dikes and pumps. I know for sure we would have lost a main dike in my patrol area on Saturday morning had there not been people around keeping an eye on things. Seepage had undermined the base of the dike, water was "boiling" out from the base and running down the guys driveway. The dike was reinforced in that section, extra pumps were started, and the area was saved, again.


----------

