| Join Our Mailing List! |
In the aftermath of the Colorado wildfires, dangers persist
|
||
|
On July 8, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper lifted the state-wide ban on fires. After containing most of the fires and receiving much-needed rain, the danger had largely passed. Well, dangers from fires, that is. After finally being contained on July 11, the fire in Waldo Canyon, whose firefighter fund FBB’s Humanist Crisis Response has been supporting, was named the most destructive fire in Colorado’s history. But the dollar figures that soar into the tens of millions for Waldo alone are only those caused by the fires themselves. Waldo Canyon and other areas are now receiving flash flood advisories instead of fire warnings. Barren hills left nude of trees whose roots kept the soil in place are now vulnerable to Colorado’s rainy season.
The Humanist Crisis Response has as its mission to do the most good they can. In Colorado this means helping to build “immediate support of seriously underfunded and understaffed first responders.” While “first” responders are long gone after the initial alarm over the fires has subsided, the current round of volunteers are in no less need of support. They face no lesser forces of destruction, and we face no fewer opportunities to “be good for goodness’ sake.” The fact that we selflessly come together and bring much needed relief when the sirens start to ring speaks well of humanity. But if our goal is good for goodness’ sake, we need to create our own energy, when the sirens die down. Paul Chiariello Donate to the Humanist Crisis Response Colorado Firefighter Fund (ends August 31) |
||

This guest post comes from Paul Chiariello of the Humanist Chaplaincy at Rutgers.
The picture to the left shows a pickup now completely submerged by a mudslide, which happened just days ago on U.S 24 west of Cascade in Waldo Canyon. Sandbags and other barriers that were previously being built to stave off fires are now being used to keep out floodwaters and mudslides. And even when the ground itself stays in place, the ashy layers on top run into streams, creating “an oily, black brew.”
But emergency aid is one of the worst uses of donations.
I am all for giving to charity - I give 50% of my income away. It warms my heart to see people donating, but it aches when I think of how much more good can be done if the money went to more cost-effective charities!
Unfortunately it seems to be the case that disaster relief is very expensive. People are people, and as much as we'd love to help those hurt by raging nature - ought we not help as many people as possible with the limited funds we have?
There is research out there, with a bit of research, we can make sure to have 10,000 times the positive impact with the same amount donated.
Why is emergency aid one of the worst uses of donations? http://blog.givewell.org/2008/08/29/the-case-against-disaster-relief/
Thank you for your input!
Thank you for your input! You raise some worthwhile points and these are some of the things we try to consider when determining where our funds will go. Because of the difficult nature of disaster relief, the main fundraising efforts (approximately 90%) of Foundation Beyond Belief are directed towards long-term, sustainable charitable projects.
However, we do feel that it is important to show a humanist presence when disasters arise, and because of this, we take care to respond to crises as carefully as possible - we take care to establish the most useful type of donations and the beneficiaries who will put these donations to the best use. In this case, the chosen beneficiary was not an aid organisation, but rather firefighting departments who would be able to use our donations to replenish and replace equipment even after the disaster had passed.
These are definitely concerns that we need to take into account when choosing Crisis Response beneficiaries, and the link you provided is an excellent discussion of potential pitfalls. Thank you for that; it will be very useful in assisting future selections.