Laserfiche WebLink
<br />27 <br /> <br />that of an all volunteer network or an E'laborate automated system, it would <br />be better than no system at all. <br /> <br />POSSIBILITIES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH <br /> <br />This study suggests that further study is necessary in three main <br />areas: it would be helpful to examine more comprehensively some of the <br />findings of this study; more detailed knowledge of the actions of victims <br />is needed; and work should be done to ascertain whE~ther it is possible to <br />determine a threshold time, which indicates by location whethel" or not an <br />i ndi vi dua 1 or group has enough time to dri ve out of danger or co 11 ect <br />valuables before impact. <br />The results of this study are presented without in-depth examination. <br />One of the more interesting projects to pursue in future research might be <br />to study the increase in risk if a person is alone. From this might come <br />a recommendation that people should group with othE'r people if a warning <br />is received or a threat perceived. The size of the group appeared signifi- <br />cant in whether or not a group survived during the Big Thompson flood. Why <br />is it that groups of three to five people survived with qreater frequency <br />than larger or smaller groups? <br />One of the major questions that researchers and po'l icy makers have <br />raised in response to an earlier draft of this paper was how ma,ny people <br />died camping. Decision-makers are tryin<) to decide whether camping should <br />be allowed in the Bi g Thompson Canyon. I\n i nnovati ve approach wi 11 be <br />required to answer this with greater precision than was possible in this <br />study. It is not very difficult to narr'ow down who the campers in the <br />canyon were at the time of the flood, but it was impossible to know in <br />severa 1 cases whether or not the person or group was campi ng or whether <br />they were in a car or restaurant. It is difficult to determine whether <br />