Why Do People Build Homes in Tornado Prone Areas?

Recently, news about a significant tornado outbreak in the United States has garnered attention. Despite the frequent occurrence of tornadoes across the country, ranging from minor to major, people continue to build and live in areas prone to these dangerous weather phenomena. This article explores the reasons behind this decision and the actual risks associated with living in tornado-prone regions.

The Widespread Nature of Tornadoes

Tornadoes are not confined to any single region; they can occur in all 50 states of the United States. However, the frequency and intensity vary. For instance, states like Oklahoma experience a higher incidence of major tornadoes. Even so, residents of tornado-prone areas typically do not face continuous doom and gloom. The state of Oklahoma, where I live, has seen several major tornadoes, but we generally manage to avoid direct impact or mitigate its effects. This week, we've had multiple storms, and more are expected. Nevertheless, our local weather experts keep us informed, and we respond accordingly.

Comparing Tornado Risks to Other Natural Hazards

While tornadoes are a significant risk, they are not the only natural hazard affecting different regions. Flood risks from rivers, for example, are more localized and can be avoided by simply relocating to an area a few miles away from the riverbanks. This is in stark contrast to hurricane risks, which can impact inland areas even at higher elevations. While moving away from a river may prevent flooding, it does not guarantee safety from hurricanes due to storm surge and inland flooding.

Historical Resilience of Residences

Though homes like mine, built in 1893, may seem vulnerable, many have withstood multiple tornadoes. My house, for instance, has survived every tornado to hit the state since its construction, including two that directly hit this town. This testament to the resilience and design of older homes can offer reassurance to those considering building in tornado-prone areas.

Understanding the Actual Tornado Risk

According to a pioneering study conducted by Joseph Schafer and Donald Kelly in the 1980s, the highest tornado risk within a 1-degree latitude and 1-degree longitude grid box, approximately 69 miles wide by 53 miles wide, was found in central Oklahoma. This grid box has a yearly risk of about 0.06. Statistics such as these help quantify the actual danger, providing a basis for informed decision-making.

Addressing Other Critical Issues

While the risks of living in tornado-prone areas cannot be ignored, it is essential to discuss and address other pressing issues facing the United States, such as gun violence. The United States has a significant problem with individual gun ownership, which leads to incessant violence and serious social security concerns. For example, firearm homicides in the United States can exceed the combined annual totals for Western Europe. The firearm homicide rate reached its highest level since 1994 during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

According to a survey by the Giffords Law Center, 32 out of the 50 largest cities in the United States saw a notable increase in firearm homicides in 2021. The publication The Guardian reported that every 16 hours, a woman in the United States is fatally shot by her partner. The proliferation of firearms has not only led to an increase in homicides but also in suicides among those with mental health issues. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that firearm-related casualties surged to 85,584 in 2021 from 34,231 in 2014. Among the nearly 95,000 homicides between 2015 and 2019, about 74 percent were committed with firearms. In 2020, firearm-related deaths reached 45,222, an average of 124 per day. These statistics highlight the severity of the issue compared to tornadoes.

Conclusion

While it is crucial to understand and mitigate the risks of living in tornado-prone areas, the issue of gun violence presents a more pressing and critical problem. Deciding where to build homes should be based on a comprehensive evaluation of all potential risks, not just natural disasters.