California:
A Natural Disaster
By Mary Jo Wagner
"And Now This"
was the headline of an article that appeared in the Jan.
23, 1995 issue of TIME magazine. A most fitting three-word
caption to sum up Californian's plight over the last four
years - the "this" referring to the January
flooding of both Northern and Southern California. To the
horror of residents, that headline would have still been
valid had it appeared in a late March '95 issue, given
that torrential rains hit again just two months later,
bringing the declared county disaster toll to 39 of the
state's 58 counties.
The Golden State has seen
it all. But these last four years have been particularly
brutal: wildfires in Oakland in 1991; L.A. riots provoking
fires in 1992; more brush fires in Southern California in
1993; the Northridge earthquake in 1994; and now flooding
and landslides in 1995. Each disaster has brought millions
of dollars of damage, and seems to surpass the magnitude
and extent of the previous one.
The "California
Comeback" as Gov. Pete Wilson termed the state's
ability to regain its footing after each bout with Mother
Nature, has been an all too familiar phenomenon for quite
some time. But somehow, Californians never fail to find
optimism amidst the rubble, ashes or mudcaked belongings
that lie at their feet.
In light of being the most
favored state for natural disasters, disaster preparedness
has become a forced way of life for not only the citizens,
but most urgently for those people whom everyone looks to,
and depends on, during emergencies such as the local,
state and federal agencies responsible for emergency
relief. In the state of California, that would be the
California Office of Emergency Services (OES) as well as
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
With 528,000 square miles
of land and 58 counties to think about, OES has a
tremendous amount of responsibility. They are the basic
contact for the single resident, to the media, to the
National Guard when disaster strikes. The management of an
information and coordination network of that magnitude
cannot be effectively handled using push-pins on a map. So
five years ago they started building their efficient
management tool: a geographic information system (GIS).
Five years and 300
databases later, Dave Kehrlein, OES GIS coordinator and
architect of the GIS, says that this system is not perfect
by any means but it has allowed them to do more than what
would be possible using conventional means to handle
emergencies.
Kehrlein obtained statewide
digitized map bases from both industry and local agencies
to start constructing the GIS using ARC/Info, MapInfo and
Atlas software.
"Despite what the
public may think, California is not well-mapped,"
said Kehrlein. "California has grown extremely
rapidly over the past 15 years and there has been very
little funding to do mapping. Probably 20 percent of the
roads in the state are not mapped."
But with each disaster or
new mapping project implemented, more and more information
has trickled, sometimes, flooded in, giving Kehrlein the
material desired to update and improve the GIS. He credits
the catastrophic Northridge earthquake of Jan. 17, 1994
for making the GIS as comprehensive as it is. After that
event, they went out and collected every bit of available
information relative to the earthquake and mapped it all
for the first time. Now there are maps for practically
every occasion: flood maps generated by FEMA and OES;
fault line maps from the USGS and the Southern California
Earthquake Center; shaking intensity models by OES; ground
acceleration maximum probability maps; and fire risk maps
just to name a few. Updates and new additions are being
made constantly to try and fill in the gaps that are still
missing.
In addition to the GIS
center at OES's headquarters in the state's capitol,
Sacramento, Kehrlein has also personally assisted in
establishing other GIS centers statewide in order to help
expediate relief efforts and give support to the
headquarters.
So when disaster struck
last January 10, and then again exactly two short months
later, OES was ready.
While the floods were
attacking both Northern and Southern California, the OES
was busy calling in their emergency "hires," or
recruits to help handle the situation. Mariana Sharp, a
consultant, was one of them.
As a public information
officer, her main responsibilities are to inform and
coordinate. She is the media's lifeline and hence, a
communication support to people who've had to evacuate
their homes or apartments, by letting them know where Red
Cross or other shelters are.
Sharp employs another set
of technology to help her do that. Called the Emergency
Digital Information System (EDIS), Sharp uses this network
to send press releases, news items and information and
weather updates to the newsrooms statewide. EDIS is also
used to inform the National Guard and other emergency
relief units of current and changing situations and for
rescue mission requests.
While Sharp was busy
keeping everyone informed and lending support to
coordinating rescue missions, Kehrlein was glued to the
GIS. As the floods were turning numerous towns into ponds
and leaving thousands of people homeless, Kehrlein and
colleagues tried to discover the extent and magnitude of
the disaster to understand what they were up against.
One of the first tasks OES
does is set up application centers for people to register
for FEMA aid and send out field teams to inspect the
damage. FEMA has developed a telephone registration system
whereby people can register for assistance over the phone.
Using the first registration calls that come over the
system, OES can geocode those on their digital base maps
in the GIS to map out where the locations of the
applicants are. Kehrlein is then in a position to inform
the field teams of where they need to go. For these
floods, they had a lot of area to cover: about 100,000 sq.
miles.
Locations of application
centers or field personnel can also be pinpointed through
addresses they receive or other pieces of information,
which can be fed into the database. GIS connects the
address to its geographic location. That area then appears
on the screen allowing them to locate residences, roads,
buildings and other types of important information.
"It's a very complex
environment because you've got all the various local,
state and federal agencies coming together on these
massive operations," he continued. "And the main
core of the emergency management services is not
automated." The main core being agencies such as the
National Guard, the Red Cross and the Salvation Army. That
means that OES has a lot of people depending on them.
The National Guard for
example takes all of their orders from OES during
emergencies. Having no kind of database management system
at their facilities, they respond solely to requests.
According to Deirdre Allingham, a public affairs officer
at the National Guard, the ability of OES to respond
quickly to emergency situations has helped build a strong
relationship between them.
"We have a liaison
officer at OES headquarters so that whatever they need
from the Guard, they can go right to that officer and the
officer can call us, and boom, we're out there
helping."
And helping they all were:
OES, the Red Cross, the Salvation Army, FEMA, the National
Guard and individual volunteers. But the damage was
inevitable. Eleven people were killed. Both the Napa and
Russian River valleys were hit, but fortunately for the
wine business, the former was not wiped out, which cannot
be said for the latter area. The regions around Sacramento
and Malibu in Southern California were also drenched. The
losses were the highest ever for floods in the state,
exceeding $1.3 billion, including $92.5 million
destruction to agriculture.
If that wasn't enough, no
sooner had houses been cleaned up and repairs gotten
underway then a second set of killer rains pounced on
Northern California - in particular on the Salinas Valley,
often referred to as the nation's salad bowl because
that's where half the U.S. vegetable production is grown.
For Santa Barbara residents, they witnessed their third
major flood of 1995. The Monterey Peninsula was cut off
for nearly 24 hours. A bridge washed out on I-5, near
Coalinga, California's main north-south artery. Entire
crops were wiped out including artichokes and strawberries
and there was serious tree loss in Sacramento. Losses in
crop damage surpassed the January floods.
OES naturally responded to
this second round of floods just as they did in January.
In fact, it was basically just a continuation of their
work already in progress. The emergency hires had not been
sent home yet. Public information officers were still in
the field, speaking with victims and attending community
meetings. All of the emergency relief units were still
on-guard. Now they all are working closely together to get
things back to normal. This then leads to another
question.
"Why," as
Allingham commented, "is California never prepared
for an emergency?"
"I don't think we're
always caught off-guard," answered Kehrlein.
"But we could be a lot better prepared. No question
about it."
Many problems come into
play and each natural disaster has its own special
characteristics and considerations. Even though these past
floods have been linked to the ever-monitored El Nino, a
semi-periodic warming of equatorial Pacific waters that
triggers major weather changes around the world, nobody,
not even forecasters, saw it coming. Not even OES's
capability to track storms through weather satellite
imagery on Internet was sufficient. They hit so fast,
there was no time for any kind of preparation.
In addition, California is
laced with places programmed for flooding. In the northern
part of the state there are miles and miles of rice fields
and large bypass areas begging to be flooded.
Earthquakes are still
impossible to predict so those will continue to cause the
most shock, damage and chaos. Brush fires are a little bit
easier to prepare for but vegetation, an important factor
to consider for creating fire risk maps, is not easy to
map and call for extensive field surveys. Nonetheless,
progress is being made and some mitigation projects are in
place.
"Great strides are
being made in earthquake preparedness in terms of what to
do when one hits," said Kehrlein. "Nobody has
been able to predict an earthquake so the reality is one
minute you don't have one and the next minute you do.
"
If we had a Kobe level
earthquake (referring to the January '95 quake in Japan),
in terms of damage and destruction incident right now, we
don't have all the information systems in place to respond
effectively," he continued. "Northridge was just
below the threshold of our breakdown point." That
could be why getting better prepared and establishing more
information systems is a pet project right now for
Kehrlein and his colleagues.
Prevention in any
way, shape or form is one of the key factors to minimizing
the extent and magnitude of natural disasters. And it is
in the area of prevention where a GIS can be a major asset
- whether it be for OES, the governor's office or local
authorities.
"Some uses of the GIS
are wonderful and very helpful in showing at a glance
where disaster areas are," commented Sharp. "We
can use it to find out which regions we need to respond to
so in this sense it is a monitoring tool. It is very
useful for devising prevention measures for the future and
identifying risk areas."
Being able to locate areas
of towns or cities that have repeatedly been hit from
flooding, fires or earthquakes through GIS-created maps
can help decision-makers better update zoning ordinances.
Insurance companies can be aided in trying to sort out
claims. The GIS can be useful for deciding the best
prevention measures to take, whether it be more levees or
a catch basin. Both Sharp and Kehrlein say that the maps
they have supplied have indeed been used to identify risk
areas and devise efficient ways to combat the repeat
damage "syndrome."
"The maps are getting
put to better and better use all the time," said
Kehrlein. "One reason is because we have far more
complete data now so that we know what happened and we can
map what happened for real and not just a summation of
what happened. Another reason is, we can get site specific
very easily so the level of sophistication is much higher.
We think prevention wise, GIS is going to pay for itself a
hundred times over very easily because it can get people
focused."
Focused indeed. After the
Northridge earthquake for example, OES could produce a map
showing how many refrigerators were lost, television sets
lost or how many cinder block fences fell. They can get as
detailed as having maps of just bridges that were damaged
or came down. This kind of specificity is extremely useful
to mitigation authorities.
Although remote sensing
data, especially radar data during storms, has been noted
as a viable support tool for monitoring disasters and
damage assessments, OES does not utilize it. They have
studied it as an option but so far have concluded that it
is not useful for them.
FEMA on the other hand
utilizes NOAA/AVHRR data from the optical TIROS satellite
in their normal work operations. With its 1-km resolution,
AVHRR data can be used to show the general maximum extent
of a disaster such as flooding. This data, coupled with
airborne data can indicate the actual extent of the event.
Maps can then be made with FEMA's GIS network. However the
TIROS satellite is hampered by cloud-cover and therefore
not always a useful source of information.
"We have not been able
to use it for the California floods because they occurred
when there was cloud-cover," said Paul Bryant, a GIS
coordinator for FEMA. "We have used it for prior
floods."
One of those prior floods
was the drenching of Albany, Ga. last summer. Bryant
explains. "During the floods, we downloaded one of
the TIROS passes and analyzed it for flood/non-flood
areas. We have a database of all the sewage treatment
plants and all the public water supplies. So after doing
the classification, using ARC/Info, we overlayed the TIROS
image with the sewage treatment plants and public water
supplies. From that it appeared that sewage was running
into the public water supply." Their hunch was right.
They called the appropriate
authorities and indeed the sewage was contaminating the
water supply.
"FEMA initiated
sending 700,000 gallons of water per day to the people so
that no one got sick drinking sewage contaminated
water," he concluded. That same problem also occurred
in California but the clouds got in the way. FEMA was not
able to apply the same technology.
However, FEMA did use
radar airborne imagery to gather data from some of the
flooded California regions in January. That imagery was
presented to OES. FEMA also produced flood maps from that
data and the GIS and supplied it to the state.
OES also employs Global
Positioning Systems technology as well which they have
used for past events, particularly the firestorms of last
year. "We use it a lot on fires. Somebody flies the
fire with GPS and then they download the files so we can
integrate them in the GIS," said Kehrlein. "We
GPS'd the fires, in terms of the actual specific damage
points. We even GPS'd the riots. We've been using GPS
since 1991."
Given all of the technology
and methods OES has at their fingertips, it's no surprise
that they have big plans for their GIS and related
mitigation programs. Hopefully through their hard efforts,
the California Comeback will be a thing of the past.
About the Author:
Mary Jo Wagner is a freelance writer/editor who
specializes in writing about GIS and remote sensing. She
can be reached at 715-235-7422 or through e-mail:
[email protected]
Back
|