|
<br />viii
<br />
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />
<br />LIST OF FIGURES
<br />
<br />Figure 5-1. Estimated flood damage in California counties in the 1998 El Nino disaster,
<br />compared with actual costs as of June 1,2001:
<br />(a) Initial damage estimate ...,.................,......................,............,.,.................,.........,..,28
<br />(b) Preliminary damage assessment.,....,.......,......,......,.......................,.......,....,.....,......29
<br />
<br />Figure 5-2. Comparison of National Weather Service flood damage estimates with
<br />estimates obtained from five states:
<br />(a) California, 1955-1977 ,......,.."..,...."..,......,.,....,.......,........,..............'..,..'..............,.34
<br />(b) California, 1978-1998 ,..........,....,.." ............, .,...... ,. ..,..,..... ..,...., ......' ..........'... ......,.35
<br />
<br />(c) Colorado, 1955-1998 ...".',. ,...... .."""""""" """ "'" ""...."" """"""" "",.."" """..".36
<br />(d) Michigan, 1975-1998 ,...,.."",..""..", """"'" """"""",..,.."""""""""""""""",'.,",37
<br />(e) Virginia, 1977-1998 ,......."""."", ."" """ """"",..", ""..,..'"..""""""..""",..""" ".,,38
<br />(f) Wisconsin, 1973-1993".,..", """",.""""" """""" .."""..,'.."....'"""""""" "'" "",...,,39
<br />
<br />Figure 5-3. Scatterplot of National Weather Service flood damage estimates versus
<br />estimates obtained from five states, in millions of 1995 dollars..,......,........,.........,......4I
<br />
<br />Figure 6-1. Frequency distributions of annual state flood damages (1995 dollars),
<br />1955- 1978 and 1983-1999, ........... ....,............., ............., ........, ............, .............., ..,..:.. ,44
<br />
<br />Figure 6-2. States ranked by estimated total damage during
<br />1955- I 978 and 1983-1999,.., .....,....,.......,.....................................,....... .......................46
<br />
<br />Figure 6-3. Historical flood damage in states representing different levels of vulnerability:
<br />(a) High vulnerability, California ..........,.................,................,.................................,51
<br />(b) Medium vulnerability, Alabama ....,............,............................,..,....,...."....,......,..,52
<br />(c) Low vulnerability, Maine ..,......,....,...,.........,......,..........,......,.............,...........,.......53
<br />
<br />Figure 7-1. Estimated annual flood damage in the United States, 1934-1999:
<br />
<br />(a) Total flood damage "",..,..""""".. """""""",...'""".."",...""..",."."....",,..,..,.,.,..",56
<br />(b) Flood damage per capita ....,...................................................,..........,..........,.........57
<br />(c) Flood damage per million dollars of tangible wealth. ..,..................................,.......58
<br />
<br />Figure 7-2. States ranked based on total flood damage
<br />
<br />(a) during 1955- I 978""""""..""""""....",..."".",.."""""""""""..",..""..,.""",..""", .60
<br />(b) during 1983-1999, .., ,......,....,.." ..,..,...., ......, ....,...... ,......., ..,.........,... ......................, ,61
<br />
<br />Figure 7-3. States ranked based on average annual flood damage per capita,
<br />
<br />1983-1999""",.,...",.,.""..,."""."""""""""""""""""",....,..",..."..,...,.""""", ,..",..,." ,62
<br />
|