Flood Threat

[Little Gifts]

I used to have to do community recovery here in QLD and one of the most heartbreaking things I remember was out at the Charleville floods many years ago. This elderly gentleman loved his chooks and he had them in a bird aviary in his back yard. The water rose so high the chooks were drowned and stuck in debris right at the roof level of the aviary. He was inconsolable when he was able to return to his house and saw how they fared.

In a true emergency the emergency services staff have to focus on getting the skin people to safety, despite how much they might also love animals themselves. My sister was an SES team leader for many years so based on our collective experiences doing disaster work we have a few strategies in place. Firstly we keep some camping gear and water together in the shed, as well as some spare doggy stuff (leashes, fold up bowls) both in the shed and on the front verandah (in case of a house fire we keep spare leashes out the front), and this year I upgraded my car to to a wagon. If there is a threat of flood or fire (or whatever) in our little town then instead of staying till being advised to evacuate we plan on packing the car with some camping gear, the dogs and the parents and leaving town and heading in the safest direction as soon as possible. We will not be waiting for the threat to escalate and a formal evacuation to be announced. Might sound dumb to some but in a few hours we would know if we did the right thing or if it was safe to return. Best case scenario all we lose is some time. And at that early stage we would not have problems getting through on roads and getting accom somewhere for all of us.

I know that transport can be an issue for some people but if you have ever experienced a disaster then I truly never understand why some people choose to stay at home and defend their property. This excludes farms/large properties and remote communities of course. I am more talking about people who live in the suburbs. The risk to life is just too great, even if the threat has never amounted to much before that doesn't mean one time it wont be much worse. Let the house go.

Does anyone remember all that footage of New Orleans with all those people stranded in and out of that sports stadium? I remember so many of them said that because the levee had never broken its banks before they stayed in their homes and then got stuck. What they experienced after that was life altering.

[Noelle]

Living where I do, every summer it is a huge bushfire worry. I am not young but, where I go, so do my dogs.

[megan_]

I would like to think that I've risk adversive and after what happened in Vic I would have evacuated before things go to that point.

I would always plan to take my dogs. However, I wouldn't expect authorities to save my dogs. Mine are small and I could carry them under my arms, so I can't invisage a situation where I would have to leave them or stay and possibly die with them - it isn't a scenario that I think I'd ever land up in (touch wood).

However, if it did come to that, I wouldn't stick around to die with my dogs. I love them like nothing else but I have commitments to people too and a family to think about (not kids, but family none the less). In the end, I believe that the life of a person is worth more than the life of a dog. I don't think people always knowlingly risk their lives to stay behind (they think they'll be okay), but the reality is when you stay behind in an evacuation zone then there is a very real risk that you will lose your life (and we can't expect others to risk their lives to save ours when we've made those decisions).

All of that said, we would have left before it got to that point and the dogs would be safe!

[MolassesLass]

I'm a rescuers worst nightmare - I would always refuse to go without or even before my dogs. And if someone tries to remove me by force, I will have no qualms in biting, punching and kicking to prevent it. I'd rather die trying to save them myself then live knowing how they'd died.

Floods aren't really as issue, not like bushfire. In the case of bushfire, I'd be leaving as soon as it is even suggested - no attachment to buildings. But a flood I'd probably ride out. Neither is an issue where I live now though.

[Meea]

I have given this a lot of thought and my rule is not to have more than I can evacuate myself. Frankly I would like ten more dogs, but house rules say max is 4 cos 4 (+2 cats and a bird) is how many I can transport. I don't want to have to make the decision about who stays behind. We all run together!

[Genabee]

I would like to think that I've risk adversive and after what happened in Vic I would have evacuated before things go to that point.

I would always plan to take my dogs. However, I wouldn't expect authorities to save my dogs. Mine are small and I could carry them under my arms, so I can't invisage a situation where I would have to leave them or stay and possibly die with them - it isn't a scenario that I think I'd ever land up in (touch wood).

However, if it did come to that, I wouldn't stick around to die with my dogs. I love them like nothing else but I have commitments to people too and a family to think about (not kids, but family none the less). In the end, I believe that the life of a person is worth more than the life of a dog. I don't think people always knowlingly risk their lives to stay behind (they think they'll be okay), but the reality is when you stay behind in an evacuation zone then there is a very real risk that you will lose your life (and we can't expect others to risk their lives to save ours when we've made those decisions).

All of that said, we would have left before it got to that point and the dogs would be safe!

I'm with you I think...

Though I would try squashing her into a backpack first.

[Jodi1981]

I would like to think that I've risk adversive and after what happened in Vic I would have evacuated before things go to that point.

I would always plan to take my dogs. However, I wouldn't expect authorities to save my dogs. Mine are small and I could carry them under my arms, so I can't invisage a situation where I would have to leave them or stay and possibly die with them - it isn't a scenario that I think I'd ever land up in (touch wood).

However, if it did come to that, I wouldn't stick around to die with my dogs. I love them like nothing else but I have commitments to people too and a family to think about (not kids, but family none the less). In the end, I believe that the life of a person is worth more than the life of a dog. I don't think people always knowlingly risk their lives to stay behind (they think they'll be okay), but the reality is when you stay behind in an evacuation zone then there is a very real risk that you will lose your life (and we can't expect others to risk their lives to save ours when we've made those decisions).

All of that said, we would have left before it got to that point and the dogs would be safe!

I'm with you I think...

Though I would try squashing her into a backpack first.

Me too, although dunno how I would fair trying to stuff a Labrador in a back pack, the Cavalier would be fine though, LOL

[mac'ella]

I used to have to do community recovery here in QLD and one of the most heartbreaking things I remember was out at the Charleville floods many years ago. This elderly gentleman loved his chooks and he had them in a bird aviary in his back yard. The water rose so high the chooks were drowned and stuck in debris right at the roof level of the aviary. He was inconsolable when he was able to return to his house and saw how they fared.

In a true emergency the emergency services staff have to focus on getting the skin people to safety, despite how much they might also love animals themselves. My sister was an SES team leader for many years so based on our collective experiences doing disaster work we have a few strategies in place. Firstly we keep some camping gear and water together in the shed, as well as some spare doggy stuff (leashes, fold up bowls) both in the shed and on the front verandah (in case of a house fire we keep spare leashes out the front), and this year I upgraded my car to to a wagon. If there is a threat of flood or fire (or whatever) in our little town then instead of staying till being advised to evacuate we plan on packing the car with some camping gear, the dogs and the parents and leaving town and heading in the safest direction as soon as possible. We will not be waiting for the threat to escalate and a formal evacuation to be announced. Might sound dumb to some but in a few hours we would know if we did the right thing or if it was safe to return. Best case scenario all we lose is some time. And at that early stage we would not have problems getting through on roads and getting accom somewhere for all of us.

I know that transport can be an issue for some people but if you have ever experienced a disaster then I truly never understand why some people choose to stay at home and defend their property. This excludes farms/large properties and remote communities of course. I am more talking about people who live in the suburbs. The risk to life is just too great, even if the threat has never amounted to much before that doesn't mean one time it wont be much worse. Let the house go.

Does anyone remember all that footage of New Orleans with all those people stranded in and out of that sports stadium? I remember so many of them said that because the levee had never broken its banks before they stayed in their homes and then got stuck. What they experienced after that was life altering.

Too right

I am an SES member and trained for floodboat and swiftwater I think there is a big difference between being isolated and riding it out or being in danger of drowning, people can make irrational decisions in an emergency as in the case of housefires where they have gone into a house to save their pets and died while the pet has escaped anyway.The same goes with floods, predicting how high they will rise is always a guesstimate and we have copped flack previously for evacuating early then when the water didnt reach that high the critics came out in force.

I can still remember listening to a terrified family who had stayed and were trapped in their roof cavity at night it was too dangerous to take floodboats or the helicopter in and only by good fortune were they rescued by an RFS tanker which had a brief window of opportunity to get them out.

Its a lot easier alround to think early with a clear head than at the last minute.so as a lot of people say that they would die for their dogs, why not if they love them so much not put them in danger in the 1st place get them to a safe place before the decision is taken out of your hands.

[Sky_Mel]

I wouldn't be going anywhere without my pets (Dog and cats).

[lanabanana]

Like many others, I would hope that I got to safety with my dogs before it got to the point where me and the dogs had to be rescued.

However, if it came down to it, I don't think I could leave them. My OH is the opposite, he would leave them in a second. We also have a human child so I would probably encourage the OH to take her and go....although he owuld probably drag me kicking and screaming with him.

In saying that, our lab x is a fantastic swimmer and will follow us whereever we go so we could probably bolt with him running along with us (if we couldnt go via 4wd) and the pocket monster would be easy enough to chuck in a backpack or whatever else.

My mum really thinks something is going to happen in 2012 and she has requested that her 3 Aussie based children and their families come home for Xmas that year because if something did happen she wants us all together - so she knows her kids are all safe. I am the only one of the 3 aussie imports with pets and I have said that I wont be coming home for Xmas that year. I don't think that anything is going to happen but on the basis that my mum does (and her ideas can be a little convincing at times) I refuse to go just in case. She told me to put the dogs in a kennel and I couldn't because if something did happen, I would feel awful knowing I had left them behind with the "possibility" (said with a grain of salt) of knowing something may happen. Cheeky mum though said, well if oyu wont come can you at least send your daughter over. LMAO yea sure mum, Im gonna send her to be with you instead of us LMAO

I find it abit silly that a rescuer/whatever wouldnt allow a toy dog or any dog that is small enough to be carrie dby it's owner - it's not tlike they ar etaking up space a person could have. I kinda understand for a large dog though. If we got rescued by a boat (for eg) I could probably hide the wee dog in my sweater and then just call out to the big one so he followed behind if I was abosuletly forced to go LOL

Edited September 7, 2010 by lanabanana

[TsarsMum]

hmm my kids and my family need me more then anything. So i would go early if i had to and take the dog and cat. if it was too late then i was forced to make the call i would to leave them behind maybe try to do something to help them.

but humans are soo much more important then our fur babies. and i dont know how you could want to let your kids and hubby go and stay behind your child needs its mum and i dont think i could do that to my child. possiblely dieing to save a pet.

i love my animals but my family comes first as heart breaking as it would be

[~*Shell*~]

I couldn't leave Zero or Mow or the birds.

They are my family - i wouldn't leave if they couldn't.

[Rottsup]

I used to have to do community recovery here in QLD and one of the most heartbreaking things I remember was out at the Charleville floods many years ago. This elderly gentleman loved his chooks and he had them in a bird aviary in his back yard. The water rose so high the chooks were drowned and stuck in debris right at the roof level of the aviary. He was inconsolable when he was able to return to his house and saw how they fared.

In a true emergency the emergency services staff have to focus on getting the skin people to safety, despite how much they might also love animals themselves. My sister was an SES team leader for many years so based on our collective experiences doing disaster work we have a few strategies in place. Firstly we keep some camping gear and water together in the shed, as well as some spare doggy stuff (leashes, fold up bowls) both in the shed and on the front verandah (in case of a house fire we keep spare leashes out the front), and this year I upgraded my car to to a wagon. If there is a threat of flood or fire (or whatever) in our little town then instead of staying till being advised to evacuate we plan on packing the car with some camping gear, the dogs and the parents and leaving town and heading in the safest direction as soon as possible. We will not be waiting for the threat to escalate and a formal evacuation to be announced. Might sound dumb to some but in a few hours we would know if we did the right thing or if it was safe to return. Best case scenario all we lose is some time. And at that early stage we would not have problems getting through on roads and getting accom somewhere for all of us.

I know that transport can be an issue for some people but if you have ever experienced a disaster then I truly never understand why some people choose to stay at home and defend their property. This excludes farms/large properties and remote communities of course. I am more talking about people who live in the suburbs. The risk to life is just too great, even if the threat has never amounted to much before that doesn't mean one time it wont be much worse. Let the house go.

Does anyone remember all that footage of New Orleans with all those people stranded in and out of that sports stadium? I remember so many of them said that because the levee had never broken its banks before they stayed in their homes and then got stuck. What they experienced after that was life altering.

Puppy Sniffer - totally agree with you, well said

[FionaC]

The thought of leaving Orbit behind, petrified and alone, kills me. So I would stay.

that's exactly what I first thought of when reading the OP ..... Morty, Archie and Talin would be with us either way

We had this situation in the Newcastle floods on the July long weekend a few years back - at the time it was just the OH, I and Talin (they boys hadn't joined us by that stage) - every house down the street to the left of us was under water, the road was flooded to 1m above the ground and water was lapping at the front door and the underside of the floor boards of our (on piers) home - everyone to the left had been evacuated to higher ground and we were about to go ourselves - so we had Talin in a crate with extra food and body harness and lead (just in case) along with a bag of spare clothing for us .... luckily the flood waters didn't get any higher and our house didn't go under like all our neighbours places did .... but Talin was the first thing we packed that night when we got our orders to get ready to go ....

Edited September 7, 2010 by FionaC

[mona]

I would never leave without our little girl .....

She is only 3kgs , so I'm sure i could sneak her in a bag , but she would definitely be coming with us .....

[lanabanana]

hmm my kids and my family need me more then anything. So i would go early if i had to and take the dog and cat. if it was too late then i was forced to make the call i would to leave them behind maybe try to do something to help them.

but humans are soo much more important then our fur babies. and i dont know how you could want to let your kids and hubby go and stay behind your child needs its mum and i dont think i could do that to my child. possiblely dieing to save a pet.

i love my animals but my family comes first as heart breaking as it would be

Understand totally what you are saying....but I value all life and don't believe that the life of a human is more important than the life of an animal. I just can't imagine ever leaving the dogs behind to fend for themselves in a horrid situation where they may not make it.

However, if I had to run into a burning building to save the dogs and my daughter, I would naturally save my daughter first as I gave birth to her...I would then likely die running back in to rescue my dogs.

It's probably good that my OH is at the other end of the spectrum as it balances things out a bit LOL

[Pointees]

Take them with me, there is no way I would leave them.

[B-Q]

We flooded when we lived in the NT in 2006. We were lucky that we had a friend on the dry side of town happy to take us in. He already had 2 dogs of his own, so they were tied around the front of his house. We had our big girl Sophie and Buster tied around the side of the house so we didn't have to deal with intro's etc because none of the dogs were overly lovey and it was a stressful time.

We also had puppy Mac so we kept her inside with us, along with the JRT another guy had that was staying with him for the flood aswell and our cat that we kept locked in the bedroom, we had 2 rabbits in seperate hutches that we took with us and another woman we had staying aswell had her budgie.

Not easy, but they were the first thing we packed up. We had a bag of clothes each and the computer in the car but we felt awful we couldn't take the fish from the back pond.

One thing that worries me now is that if we have an emergency now we have the horses to take care of aswell.

Edited September 8, 2010 by busterlove

[lanabanana]

We flooded when we lived in the NT in 2006. We were lucky that we had a friend on the dry side of town happy to take us in. He already had 2 dogs of his own, so they were tied around the front of his house. We had our big girl Sophie and Buster tied around the side of the house so we didn't have to deal with intro's etc because none of the dogs were overly lovey and it was a stressful time.

We also had puppy Mac so we kept her inside with us, along with the JRT another guy had that was staying with him for the flood aswell and our cat that we kept locked in the bedroom, we had 2 rabbits in seperate hutches that we took with us and another woman we had staying aswell had her budgie.

Not easy, but they were the first thing we packed up. We had a bag of clothes each and the computer in the car but we felt awful we couldn't take the fish from the back pond.

One thing that worries me now is that if we have an emergency now we have the horses to take care of aswell.

Yea thats a concern, probably not practical to cram them into a backpack or the back seat of the car.

[megan_]

I would never leave without our little girl .....

She is only 3kgs , so I'm sure i could sneak her in a bag , but she would definitely be coming with us .....

but that isn't eh choice? Teh only choice for this woman is to stay with her dogs or leave without them?