Introduction
The events of Hurricane Katrina that hit the Gulf Coast in August of 2005 are best described as the most devastating. Lives were lost, homes were destroyed and property worth millions ruined in this natural catastrophe which is described as the worst ever in America’s history. The few who were lucky to survive lost all they owned and this started a tough recovery journey that saw some move on while others lacked the strength to try (CNN 1).
Hurricane Katrina, according to investigations, resulted from global warming, a phenomenon linked to extreme events such as this. Temperatures at sea surface have continued to rise thus leading to the occurrence of typhoons and hurricanes. People are paying little attention to hurricane prone zones and end up settling there. This exposes them to natural calamities since tropical cyclones have a tendency of striking both land and sea (Young 1-3). This paper explores the events of Hurricane Katrina in regard to the arguments for and against rebuilding along the shorelines.
Arguments for rebuilding along the shorelines
Despite the destruction that came with Hurricane Katrina, the survivors were eager to embark on a reconstruction process to reclaim their livelihoods. Those who lived close to the beach lost their homes while those that lived far off suffered flooded and roofless houses. Their possessions were swept away and they now formed a ridge that divided the shoreline into two leaving a huge pile of debris (Pilkey and Young 2).
Natural disasters cannot be controlled since they strike when least expected in known and unknown zones. The answer thus lies in reconstructing the damaged buildings and ensuring that the latest technology is used to produce strong structures that can stand the hurricanes. The argument is that life has to continue anyway since no one is immune to natural disasters. The gulf has been home to many with facilities that include schools, hospitals, recreational facilities, as well as infrastructure. This is the reason why it must be rebuilt to give the survivors their life back.
Arguments against rebuilding along the shorelines
Attempting to reconstruct the damaged shorelines is unacceptable bearing in mind that natural calamities always recur without notice. Rebuilding will therefore remain a vicious cycle where more lives will be lost and more infrastructures damaged. The migration of the survivors will become habitual and this is more reason why people should be relocated to other disaster-free areas to curb this. Letting these vulnerable people live in disaster prone areas like the New Orleans City is comparable to sacrificing them in the name of making the shorelines more habitable. The Hurricane Katrina’s impact has intensified over the years and these occurrences cannot be wished away. Dealing with massive deaths and destruction is not only depressing but also expensive bearing in mind that such disasters may happen again (Oliver 2-4).
Conclusion
The devastation left behind by Hurricane Katrina is described as the worst ever to strike the gulf. Many lives were lost and property worth millions destroyed with thousands of people being left homeless. There have been various arguments for and against rebuilding the shorelines as depicted in this paper and each one of them stands strongly. Those for reconstruction argue that it is only sane to give the survivors their life back since this is the only home they have known for the longest time. Those against this cite that reconstructing the gulf is synonymous with gambling since natural calamities such as Hurricane Katrina cannot be controlled and are bound to strike again.
References
CNN. Voices from the gulf Coast. Special Report. 2005.
Oliver, Anthony. “Disasters and forced migration in the 21st century.” Understanding Katrina 4(2006): 3. Print.
Pilkey, Orrin and Young, Robert. “Will Hurricane Katrina impact shoreline management? Here’s why it should.” Journal of Coastal Research 21.6(2005): iii– x. Print.
Young, Emma. Climate myths: Hurricane Katrina was caused by global warming. New Scientist, Reed Business Information Ltd. 2007.