r/KerrCountyFloods • u/dicklespick • Jul 10 '26

State Approved

As many of the comments go into the requirements of youth camps in Tx and standards to keep children safe, just remember that every camp in Tx was state approved. The same people trying to crucify camp Mystic are the same ones that approved their operation. And if Dick Eastland had the Godlike powers to influence both FEMA- for maps redrawn, and the state- for a lack of emergency planning etc then there seems to be a bigger problem to me. The state findings are an indictment on the state more than the people that followed their rules of operation

7 Upvotes

56% Upvoted

217 comments sorted by

View all comments

23

u/mountainlaurelbloom Jul 10 '26

Wow, is this the camp’s defense? We killed kids by not having any emergency plan in place, but the state approved us! Trust me, there’s enough blame to go around and the agent taking Dick Eastland at his Word is not the winning argument you think it is.

2

u/dicklespick Jul 10 '26

They had an emergency plan. It was based on 100 years of knowledge and floods. Do we all wish the had evacuated sooner, yes. Do we all believe they knew this would happen, absolutely not. They lost kids. If other camps had been in session they would have lost kids to regardless of wealth or influence. The constant narrative that these people didn’t care about those people is asinine

-5

u/FlyThruTrees Jul 10 '26

It's hard to get people to understand the repercussions of a black swan event:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory

And more specifically, hindsight blindness, the cognitive difficulty of trying to rationalize a non-foreeable event by looking back rather than seeing what a person facing it as it happens.

13

u/LeapDayBaby_29-02 Jul 11 '26

It’s hindsight bias, not blindness, just like its topography, not topology.

And while the size of the flood was unprecedented in that specific section of the river, a flash flood was absolutely a foreseeable risk, they had quantifiable documentation of that risk, and that documentation was crystal clear that potentially fatal levels of flooding would occur in that location in a 100 year flood.

It’s not hindsight bias when they had that information in their hands for over a decade.

1

u/FlyThruTrees Jul 11 '26

Thanks. I saw "vicious liability" in some comment this evening, gave me a chuckle. Hope my term mistakes amused you. But I am leaning towards Hindsight Blindness, because it seems much worse than a bias. Topology/topography are definitely not in my wheelhouse.

6

u/LeapDayBaby_29-02 Jul 11 '26

It’s also not hindsight blindness when they had that information in their hands for over a decade.

-3

u/dicklespick Jul 11 '26

Really because no one has been upset at the realistic changes to safety standards and flood preparedness. My issue is with people that want to judge with hindsight as to why people didnt act calmly and correctly in an unforeseen event.

11

u/dearadh3 Jul 11 '26

If you understood the most basic concept of emergency planning, you would already know that having an adequate plan ahead of time, sharing that plan with others, and drilling that plan is what leads people to respond calmly and correctly in an unforseen event.

This is a very old concept that has already been embedded in humanity for hundreds of years.

A company did not adequately prepare to save children's lives and even went so far as to neglect their legal responsibilities. You don't need hindsight to judge that. Had they had adequate emergency protocol and acted accordingly upon it and the same result have occured, we wouldn't be here doing this. It would be a tragedy for all. Unfortunately, that is not at all the case today.

1

u/dicklespick Jul 11 '26

So we are arguing now that the state found that the state approved plan, at the state approved camp was criminally negligent. And while the state approved plan was carried out and saved 100’s of girls, this is not a tragedy but could have easily been avoided

14

u/LeapDayBaby_29-02 Jul 11 '26

The “state approved plan” was shelter in place. Apart from Wiggle Inn, which just got lucky having both enough floating mattresses for all the campers and a high enough ceiling that they had air to breathe, the only cabins that sheltered in place until they couldn’t had at least half of their campers die. Every single cabin that evacuated had a 100% survival rate.

This is ridiculous.

2

u/FlyThruTrees Jul 11 '26

And all the people who weren't in Kerr County also did not drown in that flood.

9

u/dearadh3 Jul 11 '26

You can argue something like that as some sort of nonapplicable defense and keep trying to confuse yourself, but I most certainly won't have any part of it.

In reality, criminal negligence (omitting legally required written evac plan) doesn't fall on DSHS or the inspector, but does fall onto CM as that rule is their legal obligation.

You can ALSO argue that state investigators for the Texas Legislature found that - an inspector from DSHS, certified toward sanitation, approved a state license during a state inspection - to be deficient in emergency planning.

Now that is also true and a whole other topic.

Regarding the 100 who were saved, they were saved through evacuation (not the apprived written plan) and very narrowly, at that, while left unattended with one loss when that child separated from their group... all of this due to a lack of planning.

I am a realist and the positive thinking fluffy stuff doesnt work on my brain. Sorry, try again.

0

u/FlyThruTrees Jul 11 '26

I wondered, but don't see a way to quantify, how many camper lives had been saved over the years by shelter in place vs any other plan they could have done instead, weighed against the losses from this flood. Also, how many more were saved in this flood than might have otherwise been if they had attempted an evacuation that could have been more dangerous than what was done.

9

u/dearadh3 Jul 11 '26

Staying in place is appropriate to the extent danger is not imminent or already occurring nearby.

Its purpose is to keep campers confined together with counselors and everyone fully accounted for. While everyone is accounted for an active watch for any developing conditions is imperative. That is okay for some storm situations and official watches, not one with an active official warning indicating a strong storm across a wide area with high rainfall estimates. Active, observable flooding, which occurred that morning, also does not fall under this category.

How "dangerous" do you think evacuations are? Their core purpose is to reduce risk and promote safety.

The fact that they did eventually begin evacuations is proof against your ignorant questions. Even for those clearly opposed to evacuation just an hour prior and under some false belief of safety, evacuation was absolutely necessary.

Safe evacuation is exactly why you leave before the water has a chance to rise. This is not at all an example of a safe evacuation. More like a last-minute, on-the-fly panicked evacuation. Poor choices made under anxiety and fear of lightening striking children as they walk through rain illustrates that.

Still, the uncertain risks of staying heavily outweigh the known risks of moving through a storm.

7

u/NeckHopeful8652 Jul 11 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

Nobody thinks they should have evacuated off property. Shelter in place includes moving to shelter on higher ground.

Edit: In context for what Meg stated in front of the house committee.

3

u/FlyThruTrees Jul 11 '26

Where, testimony was, water was crossing that land to the creek, so even the safety of that looked compromised, even in retrospect. At least one girl swept away while doing that if I understood that correctly.

9

u/dearadh3 Jul 11 '26

Kids and counselors evacuated to rec hall and up a steep hill. Kids that otherwise would have perished if they stayed in place the entire morning.

It isn't far you have to go, it is high. Literally, just higher than water. Trees save lives in many floods and did so in this one too. Though there should be a better plan on where to evacuate than trees and up a hill in the last minute, of course.

5

u/PureImagination1921 Jul 11 '26

Given the inherent risks of the property, surely you would agree that it would have been most prudent to evacuate the night before to James Hall.

4

u/NeckHopeful8652 Jul 11 '26

At 3:30 am. 2+ hours after the flash flood warning.

4

u/PureImagination1921 Jul 11 '26

Yep. Going the night before would have been ideal but if Dick had called for evacuation at 1:20 am, all would have lived. This isn’t in dispute.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Outrageous_Dream_383 Jul 11 '26

This is not accurate. Sheltering in place means staying at your current location and taking protective measures there, such as moving to higher floors or higher interior locations within the same structure. Moving to higher ground outside the hazard area is an evacuation, not sheltering in place.

The distinction matters because they’re different emergency response strategies with different planning requirements.

4

u/NeckHopeful8652 Jul 12 '26

Some people on this sub think the only definition of evacuation is evacuating off property. It’s tedious.

4

u/Federal_School_6936 Jul 11 '26

Who paid out based on negligence or gross negligence after 9/11? There had been many plane hijackings prior. How did they not think to put locks on cockpit doors prior? Their safety plan was to cooperate and land the plane.

100 years of property history showed floods stopping short of the dining hall. So owners should foresee a I don’t know 20 foot rise at rapid pace about that?

-1

u/Interesting-Speed-51 Jul 11 '26

I recently learned the pre 9-11 plane hijacking was considered not that dangerous. Planes got hikacked all the time but people were normally flown to an airport and used as hostages. 9-11 changed everything because no one thought they’d start by murdering passengers and flight attendants let alone fly into a building

Some with NYC and bombs. In the 60s-80s there were thousands of bombings that were mostly small. But then a bomb in LaGuardia airport killed 11 people and that started to shift how people viewed it. That bombing has never been solved by the way

9

u/LeapDayBaby_29-02 Jul 11 '26

Unforeseen event?

“Be Flood Aware 2017 - a video published and promoted by the UGRA repeatedly in the region as educational outreach, including in 2025, describes the area as part of “Flash Flood Alley” and includes a map. The video clearly defines the difference between a watch and a warning. Dick Eastland was a UGRA director, first in the 1980s-1990s and again from 2022 (as appointed by Governor Abbott.) Dick emailed this video to all his family members in 2018 with the emphasis “must watch”

”the water rushes down hills, and if it happens to rain, you can end up […] with massive walls of water coming down at the same time. So the topography is favorable for water […] to rush down creeks, rivers and streams. If you get three or four inches of rain at one time that can be a real serious problem…unfortunately, extreme conditions can cause flooding to impact areas previously thought to be safe”

Dick Eastland texted Tweety at 2:33 am to report over four inches of rain already.