| Page 2 of 2 < |
Terrorism Study Drops a Bombshell on Boise

|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
This explains Boise's red reading. Despite good marks for socioeconomics and infrastructure, Boise has a "high geophysical risk factor," Piegorsch said. The property damage caused in the 1990s by wildfires and floods in the area help create that score, Piegorsch said, because it showed what can happen in the future should terrorists prey on the area's weaknesses. The city is just west of the Lucky Peak Reservoir, which holds nearly 10 billion gallons of water.
"If a terrorist were to harm the city, in a place like Boise they could try to do some flood damage," he said. "If the city is very vulnerable to wildfires, then one match is lit and you're all set."
San Francisco and Los Angeles got low ratings despite their frequent wildfires and earthquakes because they've grown adept at handling disasters, Piegorsch said.
"They know how to deal with it," he said. "They've got modern buildings. They've got really well-coordinated emergency response teams. They've got it all together."
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said he wasn't feeling as confident. "I'm not sleeping much better today being 66 out of 132 urban areas," he said, adding that he is concerned some cities might lose federal funds for preparedness based on such studies. "I don't think the twin towers would have come up in this quadrant."
"I'd like to say, 'Oh, it's great because we're remarkably so well prepared, but I don't think we are to the degree we need to be, and I don't think -- and I'm sure the authors would agree -- we should reduce our efforts or inhibit our disaster response program," he said.
Amy Kudwa, spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security, said the study will not be used to determine grants and is just one of many research projects.
"We don't have a monopoly on good ideas and so we facilitate research," said Kudwa, adding that she could not say how much DHS paid for the research. DHS gives approximately $4 million a year to a research center based at the University of South Carolina that, in turn, sponsored Piegorsch's project. Piegorsch said the study also received about $400,000 each from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Cancer Institute.
Henry Willis, a Rand Corp. risk analysis expert, called the study a "novel" look at vulnerability but said he had questions about its findings. "In this new measure of vulnerability, do they have the right set of factors? That's the unanswered research question," Willis said.
And just because Boise is vulnerable doesn't mean it faces greater risk than Los Angeles, San Francisco or other cities, Willis said. "Vulnerability is only one factor of risk, and risk is only one factor when considering how to allocate resources," he said.
At the Fancy Pants boutique in downtown Boise, sales associate Katie Bohannon said she wasn't feeling particularly vulnerable. "I'm less scared than I am confused," she said. "I don't really see why Boise would be on the top of that list."
Staff researcher Magda Jean-Louis contributed to this report.


