Slashdot Mirror


Federal Judge Says Corps of Engineers Liable For Katrina Damage

Hugh Pickens writes "The Christian Science Monitor reports that a federal judge has ruled that the Army Corps of Engineers — and thus the US government — is liable for a big chunk of the damage caused when hurricane Katrina pushed ashore on August 29, 2005 by failing to stop the natural widening of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet canal (aka Mr. Go) causing it to eventually bump up against the shore of Lake Borgne, on the city's east side. 'It is the court's opinion that the negligence of the corps, in this instance by failing to maintain the MR-GO properly, was not policy, but insouciance, myopia, and shortsightedness,' wrote US District Court Judge Stanwood Duval. Judge Duval said he believed it was the failure to shore up the outlet that 'doomed the channel to grow to two to three times its design width' allowing waves on Lake Borgne to enter the Mr. Go and travel into the east side of the city, battering the levees to a degree to which they were not designed. 'One of the greatest catastrophes in the history of the US' was both predictable and preventable, testified veteran Louisiana geologist Sherwood Gagliano, a former Corps consultant."

10 of 486 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What? by Walzmyn · · Score: 5, Informative

    While I agree that trying inhabit the New Orleans area is rather stupid, this ruling was pretty specific about this particular canal's design and maintenance. Apparently residents and city officials have been complaining about this thing since a 1965 hurricane that did a miniature version of what Katerina did and have been begging the Corp to change the canal to prevent exactly what happened.

    That's what I got from some extensive radio news coverage yesterday.

  2. Re:What? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well it's no accident that the 9th ward was hard hit; the whole ward didn't exist until it was dredged from the river. Basically it used to be a flood plain.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  3. Re:This was known for some time by rs232 · · Score: 3, Informative

    "While Katarina was ongoing, there were plenty of independent news outlets running video footage of professionals warning what would happen. It made the Bush mantra of "No one could have predicted..." out to be just as much of a joke as the "No one could have predicted..." 9-11 version. (And then the Aug 6th PDB title was released.)"

    Exactly, so how a Judge could belatedly blame the Army Corps of Engineers, defies logic. Of course he couldn't every state the real reasons. That the levees failed because of their flimsy construction and funding was denied to pay for Bushs war in Iraq. Not only that Bush was warned in advance about Katrina, but took no action.

    "President Bush is expected to shift $1.3 billion away from raising and armoring levees, installing floodgates and building permanent pumping in Southeast Louisiana in order to plug long-anticipated financial shortfalls in other hurricane-protection projects, a move Sen. David Vitter describes as a retreat from the president's commitment to protect the whole New Orleans area"

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com
  4. Re:Pay no attention! by Nadaka · · Score: 4, Informative

    Its paranoia, but partially justified paranoia. In 1927 they did blow the levee to prevent economic damage to New Orleans (and causing a flash flood that killed several people south of the city).

    They did it once? why not do it again? The circumstances were different, and it wouldn't work this time. And the water wouldn't have anywhere to go. The "rich" french quarter was "saved" by being the oldest part of the city, built on dry land before the levees and higher than the rest of the city. Its a ridiculous notion, and not correct, but sometimes ridiculous things happen.

  5. Re:This was known for some time by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Informative

    funding was denied to pay for Bushs war in Iraq

    Ah. So, back in the 1990's, when Clinton was running things, and the design wasn't any better and local engineers were saying the same things, that was different? I see. It's different because of your politics, not because of reality. The levees weren't built to withstand a Katrina. That reality goes back well before Bush. Of course you know that, and you're a troll.

    Your heros on the left could have spent money to change the levee construction for years and years before Katrina hit. Why didn't they? Well? Did they somehow know that years later, Bush would come into office with pre-existing, poorly built protections around a city that had spent decades making the problem worse - and they were somehow pre-blaming Bush for later political advantage? Sounds about right.

    Also, it's Bush's fault that your coffee wasn't very good this morning, and that the traffic lights in your area aren't synchronized very well.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  6. Re:What? by AlecC · · Score: 5, Informative

    Particularly, in the two years immediately before Katrina, a huge amount of the Corps budget ($2-300 milllion, IIRC) was switched to funding the occupation of Iraq because, since it was already Army money, it could be switched without permission of Congress. Which puts the blame squarely on the Adminstration, rather than the Corps of Engineers. And also shows how silly it is to have what is basically a civil job being done by the Army.

    --
    Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
  7. Re:Fuck Yeah! by HisOmniscience · · Score: 3, Informative

    Cause it's not the poors' fault that they decided to drop out of school, not use contraceptives, raise their children in single parent homes, and continue to rely on welfare.

    (Anecdote: my class had a 58% graduation rate... and that's normal for my area.)

  8. Re:What? by Buelldozer · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's because the ACoE DIDN'T fuck up. They'd been calling for upgrades since the 60's and couldn't ever get the funding! The secondary problem was the lack of maintenance. The dollars for maintaining the existing levies did exist but the LOCAL, as in not the ACoE, boards kept rejecting the maintenance requests and spending the money on other projects. Such as golf courses and on/off ramps.

    So in this case the analogy of roofs and rain, as presented, is broken. It's more like you told the roofing contractor you wanted a lightweight roof and the contractor said you should really have one made of tiles. You say you don't want to pay for that so build the cheap. The contractor builds the cheap one, tells you again that it's insufficient for the storms you get in your area and then keeps coming back to your house asking to do upgrades and repairs...which you refuse to allow even when the contractor is willing to pay for it.

  9. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storm_tides_of_the_North_Sea
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storm_surge

    Hurricanes don't flood costal areas; storm surges do.

  10. Re:What? by Coren22 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The army corps warned the state and local government in the 1960s that the levees were inadequate. The state and local governments ignored them.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?