Milton

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Greetings,
What sorta surprised me about "Milty" was it lingered, for what seemed the longest time, in the gulf and then bazoom, it was across the state and out to sea. I don't have any long term observations or memories of hurricane "births" but it also seems more are developing IN the Gulf as opposed to off the coast of Africa.

We live in the Ottawa, Canada area and the incidence of tornadoes and other extreme weather events appears to have increased over the last several years. I vaguely recall hearing that continental weather patterns have shifted eastward thus causing the unnatural occurrences around here.
 
I just finished beer and a slice of pizza with a friend whose house was flooded similar to mine except their house is on the water and they completed a 6-figure renovation a year or so ago. Nice house. Nice renovation. Their house is on the water with a 7-figure boat behind it (which survived the storms just fine).

Mentally, they are totally toast by Helene and Milton. Ready to move anywhere that's not Florida. Cheryll and I on the other hand are much more sanguine about the loss even though we, unlike them, are woefully underinsured (intentional) and will do most of the repairs ourselves.

My takeaway is if you have too much of your net worth tied up in a single asset which is at-risk, you are susceptible to extreme disappointment. Frankly, it's part of the reason we own an old Willard 36 vs some flavor of Defever/Nordhavn/KK/etc. I guess it's called diversification but for ud it was unintentional. Just did what felt comfortable to us. Modest house. Modest boat.

We will take a decent whack in terms of time and money due to the storms. But we're diversified and didn't stretch for either boat or house. So we still wear a smile even when we grab Advil to soothe the aches.

My dearly departed father used to say "don't let your possessions posess you." I think we're doing okay.

Peter
 
Last edited:
My buddy in Largo txt'ed. Said his house is ok, although the power is out. Sure hope we're done with this for the season. I'm tired of seeing crashed boats and flooded towns.
 
mvweebles said:
I just finished beer and a slice of pizza with a friend whose house was flooded similar to mine except their house is on the water and they completed a 6-figure renovation a year or so ago. Nice house. Nice renovation. Their house is on the water with a 7-figure boat behind it (which survived the storms just fine).

Mentally, they are totally toast by Helene and Milton. Ready to move anywhere that's not Florida. Cheryll and I on the other hand are much more sanguine about the loss even though we, unlike them, are woefully underinsured (intentional) and will do most of the repairs ourselves.

My takeaway is if you have too much of your net worth tied up in a single asset which is at-risk, you are susceptible to extreme disappointment. Frankly, it's part of the reason we own an old Willard 36 vs some flavor of Defever/Nordhavn/KK/etc. I guess it's called diversification but for it was unintentional. Just did what felt comfortable to us. Modest house. Modest boat.

We will take a decent whack in terms of time and money due to the storms. But we're diversified and didn't stretch for either boat or house. So we still wear a smile even when we grab Advil to soothe the aches.

My dearly departed father used to say "don't let your possessions posess you." I think we're doing okay.

Peter
Click to expand...
A lot of advice from really well to do people (that actually stay well off for their whole lives....like Warren Buffet) suggest living below your means can bring everlasting wealth and way less stress/happiness.

Talking with several bankers, they have seconded that in that they repossess enormous amounts of "toys" like boats, airplanes, expensive cars, etc. Many USA residents live to the edge which when disaster hits, puts them in a bad place. It's the American way it seems.
 
A friends house in Punta Gorda got six inches of water in it. His boat, a 25 ft Aquasport came off the lift and is upside down in the canal. Electricity is back on and the air conditioner works!
 

Attachments

  • Resized_20241010_130047_1728579709760.jpeg
    Resized_20241010_130047_1728579709760.jpeg
    211.1 KB · Views: 27
But this thread is about boating.
Climate change is of interest because it has impact on boating. I got married on a beach in Sanibel. Have friends who are natives and others with houses in Fl. Wife’s parents owned in the Villages. Ive repetitively rented both flats boats to flyfish for bonefish or Spanish mackerel and such along the south west coast of Florida or CCs for other game on both coasts. Was planning on going this winter as we’ve done in the past. I like Florida. Before the last two storms was talking with the bride about doing the usual. Rent a condo and a boat for a few weeks. Now she says give it a year. Think others have made the same calculus. It’s gotten very expensive and you don’t know what will be left of your destination in the winter after the storms of summer and fall.


Similarly I’m upset underwriting other’s decisions to live in high risk places. I do this with my boat insurance and home insurance as well. It’s not only limited to the south. In neighboring towns (Marshfield, scituate and others) houses get wiped out near annually. They are on barrier peninsulas or beaches. Insurance is set up so I underwrite part of their losses year after year. It’s worse with boat insurance. Cities like Hoboken and decades in the past New Bedford spent huge money hardening their harbors and infrastructure and vulnerability of housing. Florida has not. Continuing to build on the flood plan and putting in canals so everyone can have a boat in their backyard. Fine go for it but I’m sick of subsidizing it. At least in my area between insurance and town rules rebuilding has become more difficult and there is a slight trend to decrease density. Unfortunately the ultra rich buy several of these properties and build mega mansions that are hardened to get around restrictions.

When I first started to go to Florida (single digits-maternal grandparents had a Miami apartment when I was a kid) much of the shore line had vegetation to at least partially mitigate storm effects. Density of boats in the water and housing at risk was a fraction of what it is now. Justice suggests your decision to boat and live in the high risk regions in Florida should not be my problem. If you can underwrite your risk and losses god bless. But that’s not the case.

We’ve decided to downsize and stay above 39-40N. A good part of the reason was the downstream impacts of climate change. Resultant expenses and inability to make secure plans. Limiting ourselves to mid November to April there means the same money for travel with less payoff time. You need to do your arrangements months and months in advance. You’re insecure about what will be there when you get there.

This all isn’t a new problem. Even predates the current bugaboo about climate change. To get an earlier perspective and still valid and have an excellent fun read pick up some John D. MacDonald as mentioned earlier.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hippocampus said:
Similarly I’m upset underwriting other’s decisions to live in high risk places. I do this with my boat insurance and home insurance as well. It’s not only limited to the south. In neighboring towns (Marshfield, scituate and others) houses get wiped out near annually. They are on barrier peninsulas or beaches. Insurance is set up so I underwrite part of their losses year after year.
Click to expand...

The nature of insurance is to syndicate risk. If you want to only underwrite your own risk, don't get insurance. It's a choice and risk.

My wife and I talked as driving to our house to work this morning. We lived and worked all over the country. I had long-term assignments in almost every corner. NYC, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Charlotte, Houston, Detroit, Denver, and a bunch of smaller assignments elsewhere. What we both love about Florida compared to all the other places is the constant sunshine. Ive heard it called Kodachrome. The blues are so blue, the greens are so green. When I worked in Texas, everything was a shade of brown. NYC and Detroit, grey. The only place that rises near Florida is Colorado, or perhaps northern New Mexico.

We just made our first home cooked meal - breakfast sandwiches with chibata rolls toasted on the Weber Q. Small victory but a meaningful one for us. Progress in very small steps.

Peter
 
mvweebles said:
The nature of insurance is to syndicate risk. If you want to only underwrite your own risk, don't get insurance. It's a choice and risk.

My wife and I talked as driving to our house to work this morning. We lived and worked all over the country. I had long-term assignments in almost every corner. NYC, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Charlotte, Houston, Detroit, Denver, and a bunch of smaller assignments elsewhere. What we both love about Florida compared to all the other places is the constant sunshine. Ive heard it called Kodachrome. The blues are so blue, the greens are so green. When I worked in Texas, everything was a shade of brown. NYC and Detroit, grey. The only place that rises near Florida is Colorado, or perhaps northern New Mexico.

We just made our first home cooked meal - breakfast sandwiches with chibata rolls toasted on the Weber Q. Small victory but a meaningful one for us. Progress in very small steps.

Peter
Click to expand...
Know what you are talking about.

Since I was a kid... the palms over white beaches, sunsets, gigantic thunderheads at the horizon illuminated by flickering lightning, clear waters and on and on.

The USCG was kind enough to let me live (not visit) several places NJ to FL to AK and sightsee almost every inch of coastline between all those points at a gret viewing height. People asked me which was my favorite place to live and I always responded... "they all were great"...looking for the good, every place had merits and detractors. I never focused on the detractors.

When the kids grew up so all of a sudden, choosing a place to live became complicated. My solution(s) boats and RVs, no permanent place to hold me so I can enjoy the best of all states and visit family/friends at will.

But my heart still beats best in the area those dreams as a kid I had....the tropics but still in the USA. I am just the type to not risk a lot that can be flooded, blown down, shook to pieces, burnt to an ash, buried in mud/snow/rocks etc.... etc. so not owning a home is my answer. Don't like the weather? Travel. Don't like the neighbors? Move. Don't like anything...well the flexibility is great.

Everyone can like what they like, but weighting opinions to convince others seems SO typical these days from so many directions.

Enjoy what you have or resolve your displeasure....doesn't mean others have to follow your dreams or fears.

As far as insurance risks.... I just came back from a 3.5 month FL to Seattle and back RV trip. It's laughable to think there is many places in the USA that may never see mother nature's disasters. True there are REALLY bad places to build a home...and those people who chose to live in those areas should realize that and accept what may come. I realize that many aren't in positions to choose alternatives and my heart goes out to them...but in a world of grief, they are just a tiny part of all misery. Some people should never own a boat either, but we all help insure them. Beat life, don't let it beat you is the only answer.
 
Last edited:
Folks, talking about storm surge, one needs to project the tidal state. East coast high tide is about 2ft above 0 and low tide, about -2 ft below 0. Surge hit at low tide, take the projected surge and subtract 2ft. Hits at high hide it will be surge +2ft. This year, the TV stations made no mention of the.

In the Aventura area, (south of Hollywood), basically, no effect at all. Water level was lower than a ‘king tide’. Little bit of wind, more rain than usual.

The overall damage was caused by the included tornadoes.
End of hurricane season is generally over, the end of November.
 
Hippocampus said:
But this thread is about boating.
Climate change is of interest because it has impact on boating. I got married on a beach in Sanibel. Have friends who are natives and others with houses in Fl. Wife’s parents owned in the Villages. Ive repetitively rented both flats boats to flyfish for bonefish or Spanish mackerel and such along the south west coast of Florida or CCs for other game on both coasts. Was planning on going this winter as we’ve done in the past. I like Florida. Before the last two storms was talking with the bride about doing the usual. Rent a condo and a boat for a few weeks. Now she says give it a year. Think others have made the same calculus. It’s gotten very expensive and you don’t know what will be left of your destination in the winter after the storms of summer and fall.


Similarly I’m upset underwriting other’s decisions to live in high risk places. I do this with my boat insurance and home insurance as well. It’s not only limited to the south. In neighboring towns (Marshfield, scituate and others) houses get wiped out near annually. They are on barrier peninsulas or beaches. Insurance is set up so I underwrite part of their losses year after year. It’s worse with boat insurance. Cities like Hoboken and decades in the past New Bedford spent huge money hardening their harbors and infrastructure and vulnerability of housing. Florida has not. Continuing to build on the flood plan and putting in canals so everyone can have a boat in their backyard. Fine go for it but I’m sick of subsidizing it. At least in my area between insurance and town rules rebuilding has become more difficult and there is a slight trend to decrease density. Unfortunately the ultra rich buy several of these properties and build mega mansions that are hardened to get around restrictions.

When I first started to go to Florida (single digits-maternal grandparents had a Miami apartment when I was a kid) much of the shore line had vegetation to at least partially mitigate storm effects. Density of boats in the water and housing at risk was a fraction of what it is now. Justice suggests your decision to boat and live in the high risk regions in Florida should not be my problem. If you can underwrite your risk and losses god bless. But that’s not the case.

We’ve decided to downsize and stay above 39-40N. A good part of the reason was the downstream impacts of climate change. Resultant expenses and inability to make secure plans. Limiting ourselves to mid November to April there means the same money for travel with less payoff time. You need to do your arrangements months and months in advance. You’re insecure about what will be there when you get there.

This all isn’t a new problem. Even predates the current bugaboo about climate change. To get an earlier perspective and still valid and have an excellent fun read pick up some John D. MacDonald as mentioned earlier.
Click to expand...
Sorry, you don't get to pick and choose which natural disasters the government pays for. New England has had their share of torrential rain floods, ice storms, and hurricanes.

Ted
 
O C Diver said:
Sorry, you don't get to pick and choose which natural disasters the government pays for. New England has had their share of torrential rain floods, ice storms, and hurricanes.
Click to expand...
That is true. I think the concern is the impression that many folks in some areas don't take the risks into account when planning. Out West, this would include the folks that build typical stick homes in areas with known wildfire risk. On the East coast and Gulf this would be the folks that build homes on barrier islands or on the coast in known hurricane areas. Trailer park in the mid-West? Where I live we now know that eventually we will experience a truly huge and devastating earthquake. There all over the county are folks that are building in known flood areas.

Very slowly, the communities have established building codes to mitigate some of these risks. However, all too often the risks they are trying to mitigate against are the 100 year events, be it fire, flood, or storm. Unfortunately, things are changing and these "100 year" events are more common. We seem to prepare for the likelihood of past events, not prepare for likely future events. Look at the flooding from Helene and Milton. Much of the SE are seeing things that simply haven't been seen before. North Carolina had no reasonable expectation of such a rain event. Going forward, they should and plan accordingly.

Many of us watching from the wings would be much happier if communities would require that both personal property and infrastructure are rebuilt to survive the event that just happened rather than to simply rebuild to let it be destroyed again. However, that is expensive for the persons and municipalities involved. Again, the impression that gives us observers is that the folks involved would rather continue to take the risk knowing that others will help bear the costs after the next event.
 
We actually got an email from our trailer insurance company telling us to move our travel trailer because we live in an A zone. Even though they don't really know where the trailer is stored.
 
All I am saying outside of Milton the hurricane is.... almost every severe disaster this decade has been seen before to some degree.

Yes, more frequent, more intense...not my words but from others.

West coast quakes and fires, mid-west tornadoes, Rockies blizzards, Appalachian to Adirondak/Vermont floods, Northeast canes and nor'easters, Southeast canes...... are all too common everyplace every so often. 100/1000 year storms/fires/canes/tornados are just raising the bar a bit here and there...but they have been killing people in the USA for centuries.

How much of a genius do we have to be to think they don't happen on a regular basis and apply risk management to our lives? Building more roads, destroying natural barriers, still living in unsafe type dwellings...wow, who woulda thunk people are gonna die and lose their homes every year.

Insurance companies get it and they are letting us know just how dumb many of us are when our premiums roll around.

Dhays.... on a note of rebuilding...MANY homeowners in NJ after Sandy got bad news... something about if the home wasn't a total loss, no help with rebuilding unless the home is raised up. If the home wasn't raised, the insurance companies wouldn't insure which meant the mortgage was screwed, the home couldn't be sold as is because it was near worthless, especially with the canal out back now unnavigable from silt in a "lagoon community" (and no dredging in sight. So now you owned an unsellable house, with no hope of selling. Rebuilding was out of the question without help and raising it up cost so much the average person couldn't afford it and couldn't get a loan as it couldn't/didn't have insurance. The really good news for these folks was they still owed their taxes on the property they couldn't get rid of.

I feel for them as this is a bureaucratic nightmare, that could be resolved/at least streamlined somehow...only some of the issue is really on their shoulders in my view.
 
Last edited:
Is there hurricane proof house construction? Guess not. It was sad to see one woman on TV lost it all as insurance was too steep to buy
 
dhays said:
That is true. I think the concern is the impression that many folks in some areas don't take the risks into account when planning. Out West, this would include the folks that build typical stick homes in areas with known wildfire risk. On the East coast and Gulf this would be the folks that build homes on barrier islands or on the coast in known hurricane areas. Trailer park in the mid-West? Where I live we now know that eventually we will experience a truly huge and devastating earthquake. There all over the county are folks that are building in known flood areas.

Very slowly, the communities have established building codes to mitigate some of these risks. However, all too often the risks they are trying to mitigate against are the 100 year events, be it fire, flood, or storm. Unfortunately, things are changing and these "100 year" events are more common. We seem to prepare for the likelihood of past events, not prepare for likely future events. Look at the flooding from Helene and Milton. Much of the SE are seeing things that simply haven't been seen before. North Carolina had no reasonable expectation of such a rain event. Going forward, they should and plan accordingly.

Many of us watching from the wings would be much happier if communities would require that both personal property and infrastructure are rebuilt to survive the event that just happened rather than to simply rebuild to let it be destroyed again. However, that is expensive for the persons and municipalities involved. Again, the impression that gives us observers is that the folks involved would rather continue to take the risk knowing that others will help bear the costs after the next event.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm mistaken, but FEMA isn't paying to replace people's homes. Most of what they're doing is disaster response, some temporary housing, search and rescue.

As to the building standards, insurance handles that. You probably can't afford insurance on a mobile home in most of Florida. You probably can't afford the insurance on anything but a buttress roof. Concrete block construction with rebar every 24" and the blocks filled with concrete is pretty much a requirement for reasonable insurance. Are your roof trusses anchored to the walls? Are your doors, windows, and garage doors hurricane rated? Do you have storm shutters? Does your house sit high enough above the flood plain?

My buddy has a property with a mobile home on it near Crystal River. He's far enough inland that storm surge isn't an issue. His insurance through the state fund was twice mine through a private insurer. My house and property are 4 times the value of his. Needless to say, he only has liability insurance (no coverage for any kind of loss or damage). You can always repair an existing home. Doubt you will find many banks making loans or insurance companies writing policies for new construction in high risk areas.

Now if we could just get the insurance companies to not cover automobiles that get flooded in evacuation zones.

Ted
 
Totally agree with shared risk. Total agree as humans we must have compassion for our fellows. But living in a high risk area is a choice for most people.
I do not ask others to underwrite the consequences of my high risk choices. If I choose to engage in solo or double handed ocean races my insurance won’t cover me. I may or may not be able to get a rider to obtain supplemental insurance for that activity which I pay for. If I take a car and put it on a race track my base insurance doesn’t cover me. Sometimes my warranties are voided as well.
In my life several times my activities were prohibited. Before signing my residency contract I needed to sign a document i would not ride motorcycles, rock climb or race. My chairman was aware of prior injuries and periods of time I could not work while healing. He did not want to underwrite my engagement in high risk activities. Totally rational so I did so and followed those prohibitions.
Through out my life I’ve showed great compassion and worked as hard as I could to treat people who are sick or injured as a result of their high risk decisions. Feel morally there’s a hard line between compassion and doing what’s right and unproductive blame.
Still there’s external realities. These storms, fires, mud slides etc. are not the fault of the people affected. My heart goes out to my friends, neighbors and family who have been impacted. I continue to donate to the NGOs who mitigate these events. But at present the system is shewed in an irrational manner. Within 5 miles of my NE home there’s multimillion houses that have been rebuilt multiple times with costs underwritten by the general public either through tax dollars or raising the costs of private insurance. View this as not a Florida problem but national as 100 year events are no longer 100 year.
The risks are predictable.The risks have changed. The sharing of the risks isn’t congruent to reality. That’s true in the forests of California, beaches of NE and coastal plains of Florida. MMCC is a current reality. We can and should spend the billions required to help the people involved. But we also need to attribute risk in a manner that strongly disincentivizes people to subject themselves to death, illness, injury or financial collapse by placing themselves in harms way. To some extent that’s occurring but not in a comprehensive manner.
Believe too many are able to game the current system or are in denial of the change. They harken back to the joys of living where they do. That’s human nature. David Hume said there’s a constant battle between emotion and rational thought in us all. There’s huge money to be made appealing to emotion and tremendous economic disincentives to changing the systems. Especially for land and housing developers. But we must accept reality or there will be avoidable human consequences.
 
Last edited:
Hippocampus said:
Totally agree with shared risk. Total agree as humans we must have compassion for our fellows. But living in a high risk area is a choice for most people.
I do not ask others to underwrite the consequences of my high risk choices. If I choose to engage in solo or double handed ocean races my insurance won’t cover me. I may or may not be able to get a rider to obtain supplemental insurance for that activity which I pay for. If I take a car and put it on a race track my base insurance doesn’t cover me. Sometimes my warranties are voided as well.
In my life several times my activities were prohibited. Before signing my residency contract I needed to sign a document i would not ride motorcycles, rock climb or race. My chairman was aware of prior injuries and periods of time I could not work while healing. He did not want to underwrite my engagement in high risk activities. Totally rational so I did so and followed those prohibitions.
Through out my life I’ve showed great compassion and worked as hard as I could to treat people who are sick or injured as a result of their high risk decisions. Feel morally there’s a hard line between compassion and doing what’s right and unproductive blame.
Still there’s external realities. These storms, fires, mud slides etc. are not the fault of the people affected. My heart goes out to my friends, neighbors and family who have been impacted. I continue to donate to the NGOs who mitigate these events. But at present the system is shewed in an irrational manner. Within 5 miles of my NE home there’s multimillion houses that have been rebuilt multiple times with costs underwritten by the general public either through tax dollars or raising the costs of private insurance. View this as not a Florida problem but national as 100 year events are no longer 100 year.
The risks are predictable.The risks have changed. The sharing of the risks isn’t congruent to reality. That’s true in the forests of California, beaches of NE and coastal plains of Florida. MMCC is a current reality. We can and should spend the billions required to help the people involved. But we also need to attribute risk in a manner that strongly disincentivizes people to subject themselves to death, illness, injury or financial collapse by placing themselves in harms way. To some extent that’s occurring but not in a comprehensive manner.
Believe too many are able to game the current system or are in denial of the change. They harken back to the joys of living where they do. That’s human nature. David Hume said there’s a constant battle between emotion and rational thought in us all. There’s huge money to be made appealing to emotion and tremendous economic disincentives to changing the systems. Especially for land and housing developers. But we must accept reality or there will be avoidable human consequences.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the price of boat insurance vary by location and other key factors? I seem to recall a BoatUS statistic that the majority of their claims (by number) were freeze related so insurance on northern boats include those factors. I would think the legions of actuarials have this figured out and price risk factors accordingly.

What makes you think your insurance premium is subsidizing hurricane damage? I'm sure insurance agents use it as a quick answer to explain a rate increase, but do you really think insurance companies don't adjust price for risk?

Peter
 
Rereading Ted’s and Dhay’s post there’s an ethical dilemma. All to often where people live isn’t a choice.
I previously mentioned a prior crew who inherited a funeral home and house which his grandfather established near Atlantic City. He lost his house and business and was not made whole. House and business were not Sandy proof. Unreasonable to expect that. With each catastrophe I’m sure there’s similar. ?how to deal with this? It’s different than rebuilding on a coastal cliff
 
We own a 1950's slab on grade cottage in a neighborhood where new construction must adhere to new codes including elevated living spaces - stilt homes. The debris piles in front of those homes is a fraction of the size of homes like ours.

My wife and I discussed razing the house and building to modern codes. We won't - well repair and rent our house for a year or two.

My point is that we, like your friend who was hit by Sandy, have a choice. Decisions have consequences. He, like us, decided not to make the improvements necessary to survive a large storm. I don't blame him - Sandy was a bizarre event with incredibly low probability. But it's a risk factor that he accepted, perhaps unknowingly.

Frankly, as a mostly devout libertarian, FEMA and insurance contribute to Moral Hazard because they shield risk. I read a story of an Asheville business (Yoga Studio) who made a conscious decision not to carry flood insurance because it's $12k/year. Their business is gone. Who's fault is that? Why should FEMA make them whole?

Again. I'm speaking as a woefully underinsured property owner with a lot of storm damage. My money is where my mouth is (BTW - we'll end up well ahead of cost of insurance premiums, and our cost to repair will be much less than when insurance gets stuck with the bills).

Peter
 
Last edited:
Coastal areas from NJ to Maine are battered by nor'easters every year...even more than many Florida towns.

The damage may not be as widespread as hurricane damage but major losses still occur. Having flown FEMA reps over coastal NJ after several nor'easters and salvaging boats every year I worked when assistance towing...hard to say that people even up north shouldn't know better than living/building in low lying coastal areas....anyplace. Pople in NJ resisted rebuilding/building sand dunes because they "blocked their ocean view". Hope they are self insured....

But so many keep doing it..... and finally it seems insurance companies are squeezing a bit harder than in the past. From what I am hearing reported, it's because the density is higher in these high risk areas and the homes/possessions are more and more expensive in these areas every year.

So as long as there are even a few that want to remain...the towns grow because of support people that usually have to live close by because of "support jobs". Often these are the ones least likely to afford good insurance or homes in the "better/safer areas built to better standards.

No easy answers, so I can't really finger point no matter how much I would love to see most of the coastal areas that I remember as a kid going back to a natural look rather than look like ant colonies.
 
Hurricanes were worse back in the 50's and 60's but the population density was no where near as high, near the coast. People built small cottages in the flood plain because of lack of insurance. Also, the higher the density the greater the damage from flying debris.
Greater temperature differences cause more severe weather. I think we are returning to more hurricanes. For the first time since the early 80's I am seeing a return to the classic polar cell at the north pole. High pressure over the pole with low pressure in the 60-80 degree latitude If that holds, the artic should begin to cool again and the south pole should begin to warm. A return to big temperature differences between the mid latitudes and the tropics with more blizzards, tornados and hurricanes.
I ski so cold is good but I am finding I don't like the cold as much. I now make $ alpine skiing but next year I am taking a year off and heading south.
My brother and his wife moved to Ashville from Daytona after Francis destroyed their home. My brothers widow has decided to move back to Daytona, go figure.
For millennia, the Appalachian mountains have been prone to torrential killing flash floods on both the east and west sides all the way from the New Brunswick to Alabama with high loss of life. One look at FEMA flood maps would tell you the story. Each generation forgets.
 
Insurance companies don’t survive unless they price the risks they insure. Property insurance pricing varies greatly to reflect the estimated risks by location, property type and use. Pricing models are not nearly perfect but are constantly adjusted in pursuit of pricing that reflect risk.

I pay for a crazy amount of insurance for commercial properties, business insurance, residential, cars and boats in different locations. Every risk is priced differently and some types and locations are nearly impossible to insure. Despite decades of claim-free history, coverage is never easy or cheap.

Certainly shared risk is the nature of insurance, but only within similar risk category and location. Low risk customers subsidizing high-risk customers, if it occurs, is due to the uncertainties of risk assessment and nature, not by design or intent.

This is all referring to private insurance. FEMA is another ball game and I’ll let someone else try to figure that one out.
 
Hurricanes were worse back in the 50's and 60's

Please offer a citation. P. To my knowledge this is not true. Compare twenty year epochs if you want and still not true. Of course weather isn’t climate. And climate has changed. 1880-1900 has you beat. Still this is a weather data point not climate.

 
Last edited:
Hippocampus said:
Hurricanes were worse back in the 50's and 60's

Please offer a citation. P. To my knowledge this is not true. Compare twenty year epochs if you want and still not true. Of course weather isn’t climate. And climate has changed. 1880-1900 has you beat. Still this is a weather data point not climate.

Click to expand...
1941-1950 does stand out. The poster remembered the 60's perhaps? The 50's were also notable. 1941-1970 period had higher Cat4 tham recent years.
Thanks for sharing that summary.
 
I wonder if our ability to assess hurricanes in more recent times and the reporting of storms that didn't hit the US and make today's 24 HR weather channels slew the stats a bit.

Before hurricane hunters, satellites, radar (especially doppler), handheld anemometers, hurricane sailing drones, weather buoys....etc...etc.... hard to tell exactly (I haven't ever looked it up) what was the data collection that "accurately" cataloged old time canes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mvweebles
Hilary comes to Baja! (Pacific Hurricane)
2 3
Replies
71
Views
7K
Action
Action
High Wire
Another “I” storm for SWFL
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
O C Diver
O C Diver
J
Flopper stoppers
Replies
1
Views
405
ScottC
S
mvweebles
"Solar Generator" initial impressions.
Replies
21
Views
1K
Kaniksu
Kaniksu
HopCar
Check Valve with no moving parts
Replies
3
Views
756
OldDan1943
OldDan1943

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom