BRANCACCIO:
Welcome to NOW.
We're here to talk about floods and the damage they can do. Behind me is the mighty Mississippi River, largely contained by levees. But here's the thing, more than one half of America's population lives within 50 miles of a coastline.
Now after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina there are new questions about the government's role in setting policies that may, in fact, encourage people to build on land so vulnerable to the kind of destruction folks here have been living through on The Gulf Coast.
And now Hurricane Rita is yet another reminder how destructive these storms are for sensitive coastlines.
William Brangham produced our report.
Dauphin Island — as far south as you can get in Alabama. This is the where the outer edge of Hurricane Katrina came ashore.
As you drive down the west end of this barrier island, its clean up crews who own the roads. Trying to push back the thousands of tons of sand that Katrina put here. Its like the aftermath of some surreal sub-tropical blizzard.
It gets stranger.
That an oil rig?
That oil rig has no business there.
But further down, it's the houses where you really grasp what's happened. There used to be over 900 homes. About 300 got trashed. But another 200 more have just vanished — memorialized only by their wooden pilings.
The West end of Dauphin Island is pretty much a sand bar sitting exposed in the Gulf of Mexico. Its been a magnet for hurricanes for decades. Yet people tend to be rational. So why are they living here?
One answer to that starts here: every hurricane is followed by cleanup. Millions of dollars in cleanup and reconstruction. Paid for in large part by the federal government.
The feds have spent hundreds of millions of dollars over the years keeping Dauphin Island afloat. It's an arrangement that in a real way encourages people to build in these remarkably exposed places. And now in the wake of Katrina and Hurricane Rita many are asking if we should be pouring so much money into rebuilding places that could soon be swept away again?
OLIVER HOUCK, TULANE UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL:
The tragic take home from Katrina is the extent to which we funded that disaster and I think the hope is that at this cross roads, we can stop that funding and start funding something entirely different.
DAVID BRANCACCIO:
So, Mary, this was your property?
MARY LOWERY:
Yes, it was…it belonged to my family for, since 1960.
BRANCACCIO: Mary Lowery has been coming To Dauphin Island since she was a child. The beach house her parents owned had made it through more than ten hurricanes. It took its share of knocks, but nothing like what Katrina did.
MARY LOWERY:
Yes, the sun deck was right here, but as you can tell, there's not even any pilings anymore where the-- where the sun deck used to be. The pilings don't even exist anymore. They're not even sticking out of the ground or anything. So-
DAVID BRANCACCIO:
The house is gone…where? Who knows. Mary's looked all over but can't find a single item from the house beyond the pilings, half a concrete slab, and some electrical wiring.
MARY LOWERY:
I mean I took my first steps in this house as a baby. I learned how to ride a bike over here on the beach. You know, it's been in my family all these years, and it's meant a lot.
DAVID BRANCACCIO:
The Lowery family were pioneers. When they bought their property on the West end in 1960, they were among only a handful who had put up houses on the shifting sand. It used to be dunes, crabs and sandpipers, and not much in the way of people.
But in recent decades, Dauphin Island has been swept up in one of the biggest demographic shifts in modern America: the headlong rush toward the beach.
And it's not just Dauphin Island: Americans are migrating to the coast in historic numbers. Forty-one million people live in counties along the water. And it's been an major economic boom, as well. We've built two trillion dollars worth of buildings along the shore, and an enormous boost to local economies that otherwise might have been backwaters.
But consider this: weather experts say we're entering a period where big hurricanes are likely to come more often. No kidding, given what we've been through in the last month. If this trend is borne out, it means more storms striking a growing number of buildings.
DENNIS MILETI, NATURAL HAZARDS CENTER, UNIV. OF COLORADO AT BOULDER:
We're actually making decisions in this country that are the cause of our natural disasters becoming larger and larger and larger. Not the natural event itself but the impact of those natural events.
BRANCACCIO: Dennis Mileti is one of America's top disaster prevention experts. He says the coastal building boom is putting lots of people right in harms way. The result, he fears, will be terrible costs both in lives and money.
DENNIS MILETI:
It's unheard of that a natural disaster could cost several hundred billion dollars. You go back ten years it was unheard of that a natural disaster would cost $40 billion. You can go back prior to that and the increase in the scope and size of these events are increasing geometrically.
BRANCACCIO:
Every time a hurricane hits the US coastline, scientist Rob Young flies out to survey the damage. He's a researcher who studies coastal hazards and has been surveying Dauphin Island for years.
ROB YOUNG:
Here we are in the developed section again — notice that not only is most of the homes are missing — but the beach front is missing, utilities are exposed, the road has been torn up,
BRANCACCIO:
Young says That Dauphin Island is doing what all barrier islands do naturally - they move.
Here's a stretch of Dauphin Island a year ago...
And then, right after Katrina hit seen through computer enhanced radar.
Dauphin Island is on the move.
Just look at the pilings the remains of homes that used to look out on the gulf are now in the gulf.
And homes that used to be right on the bay, are now hundreds of feet from the bay.
ROB YOUNG:
We should all be able to agree that building on a place that is so narrow and so low elevation just doesn't make sense. This section of shoreline right here, there should be no debate.
Does this look like good real estate to you?
It's important to keep in mind that more often than not, hurricanes like Katrina are not natural disasters. They're human disasters. And most of the damage comes because we've built in a place where we shouldn't be building.
BRANCACCIO:
Back on the ground — if not exactly terra firma — Dauphin Island's Mayor Jeff Collier is fully aware he's living in a risky spot. His town's been hit by a who's who of big storms.
MAYOR JEFF COLLIER:
Unfortunately, we've had five storms within one calendar year starting with Ivan last year and then we had Arlene, Cindy, Dennis and then Katrina. So we've had five events in less than one calendar year this year.
BRANCACCIO: He's showing me the official flood map of the island. The gray shaded parts indicate land that's likely to flood when a storm comes. And look at that: its almost all shaded grey.
DAVID BRANCACCIO:
Does it make sense to encourage development in a place like this? 'Cause you're gonna get-- you just got flooded-- you're gonna get flooded again someday.
MAYOR JEFF COLLIER:
Well, you are. And I think, it is a very not only delicate, but it's a difficult issue as well. And I don't know what the final answer is. From a local standpoint, from our standpoint here on Dauphin Island, we intend at this point to make the island whole again.
BRANCACCIO: But making this island 'whole' again is going to cost a lot of money. The city doesn't have the funds, so the federal government will pick up roughly three quarters of the tab. Everything from building back the roads to replumbing the sewers. Not to mention getting rid of all that sand.
None of this is new: for decades, U.S. taxpayers have been paying the lion's share of repairs on Dauphin Island. When Hurricane Frederick knocked out the old bridge to the island, it cost $32 million dollars to build this nice new one. There was $9 million dollars for a sewage treatment plant. There's been nearly $15 million in payouts over the years from federal flood insurance. $1.2 million for a big sand dune to protect homes on the beach.
DAVID BRANCACCIO:
A lot of the money that goes to fixing what this hurricane damaged is taxpayer money from all over the country. Is it unreasonable for taxpayers in places very far away from here to wonder if that's money well spent?
MAYOR JEFF COLLIER:
Well, I think in one respect it is, you know, we could say the same thing about earthquakes in California or snowstorms in the Midwest or, you know, you name it. We all have to live with and within Mother Nature. As long as I'm the mayor of this community and as long as we have, we are eligible to receive those type of funds to assist with our community, I'm not too proud to take it.
BRANCACCIO: To critics like Tulane University's Oliver Houck, every time the federal government agrees to rebuild a place like Dauphin Island, it is just encouraging more people to build in harms way.
OLIVER HOUCK:
The closer to the coast, the more money you get. You get federal bridges, federal highways, public sewage treatment, water lines. You get Corps levees, and jetties and this and that, none 'em work. But, you get 'em free. And, above that you get disaster relief when the storm comes. And, above that you get federal flood insurance. I mean, these are huge incentives. You'd be a fool not to build on the beach.
BRANCACCIO: Those incentives, Houck argues, shield people from the real costs of living in dangerous places. One possible solution? Painful though it might be: dial back those incentives.
OLIVER HOUCK:
I mean, there just ought not to be flood insurance within a mile of the beach anywhere on any coast. You build, you eat it. You wanna take the risk? Take it.
ROB YOUNG:
If these coastal areas are so economically strong, and so economically vital to a state or a region, then they oughta be able to pay for themselves.
BRANCACCIO: There have been cases where the federal government has shepherded people away from away from danger:
Remember that huge flood in the midwest along the Mississippi back in 1993…the one that caused $3 billion in damage? When the water receded, FEMA bought out thousands of acres of flood prone land, and helped relocate people to safer ground. The savings since then have been impressive:
For example: St. Charles County Missouri suffered $26 million dollars in damage from that flood. But a similar flood that came after the buyout did just $300,000 in damage.
Federal officials estimate that these types of programs save lives and save money -- two dollars in disaster relief for every one they spent buying up and condemning the land.
OLIVER HOUCK:
We make a lot of purchases of private property in our country for no end of things. We condemn land for all kinds of purposes. And, that's accepted. How about condemning land to save peoples' lives? Why is that different? Why is that less? Why is that less important?
BRANCACCIO: But still, that program is a relatively small and voluntary one. Getting people to leave a flood plain in the midwest is one thing, but getting people to willingly part with all that coveted coastal property would be a whole different matter.
DENNIS MILETI:
It's unholy to say, "Let's not develop places where millions and billions of dollars can be made, where business is being developed, where tourism is high because of a hurricane might one day hit,
BRANCACCIO: Paul Wesch makes his living building in places where hurricanes hit. He works for The Mitchell Company - a development firm based in Mobile. His latest project is on Dauphin Island: 144 beachfront condos all under one roof.
PAUL WESCH:
Yes. There'll be an outdoor pool, an indoor pool, fitness room, sauna, steam room, club room and-
BRANCACCIO: Wesch says moving development away from the coastline isn't necessary - since folks clearly want to live at the beach, The solution is to make the dwellings industrial-strength.
PAUL WESCH:
And if you want that building to be permanent use-- deep concrete piling, concrete frames, concrete walls, concrete roof, the best windows and doors you can find. And, you will withstand virtually any hurricane.
DAVID BRANCACCIO: I mean, all this poured concrete and robust construction, I mean, is it gonna look all right? I mean, it's not gonna look like some sort of apartment building in Soviet Armenia, or something is it?
PAUL WESCH:
No. No. It's really not. It's-- going to be fairly attractive this is going to be a vacation home not an office building.
BRANCACCIO:
Wesch says these structures will stand up to big storms…but he says you don't have to take his word for it. He says go look in Gulfport, Mississippi, a town really savaged by Katrina. His company had two condo towers there - one on the left was under construction, the one on the right was finished - both took a near-direct hit and did fine.
But scientists like Rob Young argue that safer buildings along the coast still only address part of the problem: the federal government is still on the hook for protecting everything around that building.
ROB YOUNG:
Because we know the shoreline is eroding. We know the shoreline is retreating. And immediately these people are gonna cry for beach replenishment.
Cause otherwise those buildings are just gonna go to sea, as sea level rises and the barrier island tries to migrate.
BRANCACCIO:
Whether or not to rebuild is a central question For Mary Lowery these days. Was the storm a sign to get out for good? Or is her late father's handwriting in the remaining concrete a message to rebuild?
Her federal flood insurance payout would be around $100,000. She says the decision should be hers, not some policymaker's.
DAVID BRANCACCIO:
There is a conversation already, a very difficult one for people about should we allow some of those communities that are so beneath sea level to even rebuild. And it's--
MARY LOWERY:
Yes, I'm gonna say. Yes, absolutely. That's their home. But when people make that comment, I say, you know, does that mean that you shouldn't build in California, because it's on a fault line? You know, I mean, you know, you can look at that. Should you not build in tornado alley. I mean, you can really go a long way with this.
You know, I don't think it should be the government's decision as to what the individual does. And if the individual decides that they want to build back, that should be the individual's decision, not the government's.
BRANCACCIO: But like it or not, the decision on whether to rebuild may not be left only to Lowery, or other homeowners in her tough spot.
A national debate has begun about the way the government pays to fix disasters. Just this week, THE WASHINGTON POST joined a growing chorus calling for reform of the federal flood insurance law.
Even though his constituents have received over $378 million dollars in federal flood money over the years, Alabama Senator Richard Shelby says its time to rethink some of this.
SEN. RICHARD SHELBY:
And the question is; should we have a policy that encourages people, for example, to build in flood-prone areas? Or earthquake areas. You can go on and on. I should-- if they build in those areas, should they bear more of an insurance premium. You know they take more of a risk. Or how should we handle that? How do we manage risk here?
We should not repeat our mistakes. If we're building in an area that's below sea level, we know something's gonna happen. And we're aidin' and abettin' our own destruction.
BRANCACCIO: All that will become even more pressing as the costs of rebuilding from the latest savage storm — Hurricane Rita - begin to be added up in the days ahead.
| 
