Preparing for the worst

In New Orleans, dealing with the aftermath of the devastating 2005 hurricanes is about equal parts restoring the city and lives of its inhabitants and preparing for the next round of major storms.

Restoration in a flood-prone city below sea level and protected by breachable levees raises its own set of peculiar options. Preparation for equally destructive storms has already involved decades and billions of dollars, and the reality is that the time and cost of such efforts may well be prohibitive.

The record of disaster planning and response along the Gulf Coast presents major concerns for local, state and federal authorities. It now appears much of the human plight -- which continues months after the hurricanes -- could have been eased with better planning, communication and coordination.

The Gulf Coast isn't the only area of the United States susceptible to natural disasters. Recent history offers a grim list of earthquakes, wildfires and even tsunamis.

And in Southeast Missouri, much of the focus of disaster preparedness is on the Big Earthquake scientists say could potentially occur at any time. But Mississippi River flooding and mega-tornadoes are a real concern too.

In the wake of 2005's disasters, a good deal more attention is being paid to the possibility of catastrophic events in our area. Last month, a congressional field hearing on government readiness to handle natural disasters was held in St. Louis. Earthquakes were on everyone's mind.

There is little that can be done to prevent most major disasters. But there is a great deal that can be done to effectively deal with the consequences of events that would bring our daily lives to a halt and would make survival the order of the day.

There are lessons to be learned from the way government at every level responded to last year's hurricanes. It can be hoped those lessons can be applied to saving lives and restoring order in the future.

One thing seems clear: Having a good plan that includes swift action to meet the highest priorities first would result in the least human suffering.