Laserfiche WebLink
<br />24 <br /> <br />One finding which this study does not support is that examined by <br />the University of Oklahoma (1953) and Mack and Baker (1961). They found <br />that peer groups were most likely to take no action and family groups <br />were most likely to take action. The opposite was true in the Big Thompson <br />Canyon, where those in peer groups were more likely to have climbed the <br />canyon wall than were families. Families were more likely to have done <br />nothing adaptive. This may be due to the relatively younger ages of the <br />peer groups than family groups. <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> <br />The Big Thompson flood has heightened the concern of some officials <br />and residents in other Front Range canyons over the tremendous hazards <br />of living in a canyon. It would be ideal if we could count on advance pre- <br />diction fron the National Weather Service disseminated over the radio and <br />TV, as well as substantial environmental cues to lend support to a warning <br />to evacuate in case of flood, but these are factors we cannot count on. <br />However, the points may help other Front Range communities to plan more <br />effective warning systems. <br />1. The best action to take in the event of a flash flood warning, <br />a heavy rain or a rising river is to climb to higher ground. Cars are seen <br />as a haven or a source of power; when threatened with a flood, people tend <br />to get in their cars and try to escape the water by driving out of the <br />canyon. For many people in the Big Thompson and in other flash floods <br />this action was fatal. Had people abandoned their cars and climbed 25 <br />feet up the canyon wall, they might still be alive today. Though some <br />people drove out of the canyon and survived, they took an unneccessary <br />risk; they were very lucky. <br />