The Cajun Navy and the Vigilante Future of Disaster Relief(gq.com)
gq.com
The Cajun Navy and the Vigilante Future of Disaster Relief
https://www.gq.com/story/cajun-navy-and-the-future-of-vigilante-disaster-relief
80 comments
FWIW, I strongly encourage people to informally volunteer in disaster areas, it is an exceedingly rewarding and effective action you can take in your own and surrounding communities, and they always need the help. You can do a lot of good with a small investment in time and effort. There is no glory in it but you can make a real difference.
My first experience was as a trapped disaster victim, who volunteered because I literally had no way out so I opted to make the best of a terrible situation to the extent of my abilities. But it was such a positive experience that I've since volunteered to go into places I had no need to go. It is a very high leverage and much of the best disaster response comes from ordinary people, don't wait for the government to do something.
My first experience was as a trapped disaster victim, who volunteered because I literally had no way out so I opted to make the best of a terrible situation to the extent of my abilities. But it was such a positive experience that I've since volunteered to go into places I had no need to go. It is a very high leverage and much of the best disaster response comes from ordinary people, don't wait for the government to do something.
Volunteer organizations are also often there much longer than the government agencies. After Katrina, the Army Corp was done in about a year, but volunteer organizations continued to work in the affected areas for much longer.
Where did you see that?
I’ve been involved in a few disasters, including in places with strong unions. Never saw that happen.
I’ve been involved in a few disasters, including in places with strong unions. Never saw that happen.
California, in the 1990s. I thought it was surreal at the time, but I had more pressing concerns since I personally had life and property on the line; I was a victim trapped in the disaster area, doing what I could. There was a lot of stopping and starting work, and they had supervisors flying in to make sure everyone was following whatever their workplace SOP was. There was a memorable 1 hour work stoppage because someone complained that (in all seriousness) the tasks were not equitably distributed across genders -- the lead supervisor on site deftly squashed that but it kind of blew my mind that it took precedent over the task at hand. I have a lot of great "wtf?" stories from that experience.
Don't take it as anti-union, they just had a lot of rules and processes that made them relatively unproductive under the circumstances. There were 30-40 of us working together, an ad hoc organization of volunteers, working 16-hour shifts with almost no breaks that essentially did the bulk of the disaster mitigation work. It made for poor optics with the locals; they saw a bunch of ragtag out-of-towners trapped in the disaster with them working their asses off while the government employees stood around drinking coffee half the time. I understand how that happens but it wasn't a good look. And this is why communities love their volunteer disaster response. (And full credit to the local community, they took fantastic care of us the best they could.)
Don't take it as anti-union, they just had a lot of rules and processes that made them relatively unproductive under the circumstances. There were 30-40 of us working together, an ad hoc organization of volunteers, working 16-hour shifts with almost no breaks that essentially did the bulk of the disaster mitigation work. It made for poor optics with the locals; they saw a bunch of ragtag out-of-towners trapped in the disaster with them working their asses off while the government employees stood around drinking coffee half the time. I understand how that happens but it wasn't a good look. And this is why communities love their volunteer disaster response. (And full credit to the local community, they took fantastic care of us the best they could.)
That’s unbelievable. I’ve spent most of my work in New York.
I’ve seen my share of work to rule bullshit, but never anything like that. I cannot fathom what a toxic shitshow that agency must be.
I’ve seen my share of work to rule bullshit, but never anything like that. I cannot fathom what a toxic shitshow that agency must be.
America has a tradition of volunteers helping out in a disaster. I really disliked them being referred to as vigilantes in the headline. To me that implies that they're taking the law into their hands to get revenge. They see overwhelming need and are volunteering to assist local authorities, not to supersede or oppose them.
The headline is an authoritarian dogwhistle - any action to help one's fellow man not sanctioned by your "betters" is frowned upon at best.
“I had to beat the hell out of the nursing-home director” and "Do what you have to do... We’ll deal with the consequences later" sound like vigilantism to me
No, what he did had legal authority. Use of force against threats to life (and that is what it was deemed by officials both during and after the fact) is one of the natural rights the U.S. is officially constituted to protect.
Cowardice is not a civic duty, nor a virtue. Use of force by civilians in perceived service of the law is often justified. Going out looking for a fight is one thing, serving the public is another.
Ideally, the law can be upheld without force; when force is required to uphold the law, we could ideally rely on peace officers to be ready, willing, and able to take on that burden; but in the end, it is the responsibility of society as a whole to uphold the law and prevent suffering.
When force is necessary, and when peace officers aren't around, a person who uses the necessary degree of force to rescue old people from a drone who would rather watch them wade naked in their own faeces until they go hypothermic or fall ill, than violate a workplace policy is not a vigilante, but an upstanding citizen.
It's natural to scrutinize and question the motivations of somebody who has used force, but it is a disservice to us all to hold common people to a higher standard of conduct than the police.
Cowardice is not a civic duty, nor a virtue. Use of force by civilians in perceived service of the law is often justified. Going out looking for a fight is one thing, serving the public is another.
Ideally, the law can be upheld without force; when force is required to uphold the law, we could ideally rely on peace officers to be ready, willing, and able to take on that burden; but in the end, it is the responsibility of society as a whole to uphold the law and prevent suffering.
When force is necessary, and when peace officers aren't around, a person who uses the necessary degree of force to rescue old people from a drone who would rather watch them wade naked in their own faeces until they go hypothermic or fall ill, than violate a workplace policy is not a vigilante, but an upstanding citizen.
It's natural to scrutinize and question the motivations of somebody who has used force, but it is a disservice to us all to hold common people to a higher standard of conduct than the police.
Yeah; there's really no legal difference between what a private citizen can do to protect the life of an innocent vs. what a police officer can do, at least as far as deadly force goes. In situations other than immediate/unavoidable threat to the life of an innocent, police are allowed to overmatch force for compliance, vs. some situations where non-police are supposed to use similar force, but once you hit a situation which allows deadly force, it's basically the same. (This is common law, and was settled well before the US Constitution; the law on homicide is remarkably static. The only interesting change has been the fleeing felon stuff in the US.)
The legal questions which are a lot more interesting around this kind of rescue operation are property damage, unintentional harms, incompetence, liability, etc. (like, if volunteers direct people to a shelter which is itself unsafe, or if people get harmed during rescues. Government agents have a lot of immunity there, relative to private citizens.)
The legal questions which are a lot more interesting around this kind of rescue operation are property damage, unintentional harms, incompetence, liability, etc. (like, if volunteers direct people to a shelter which is itself unsafe, or if people get harmed during rescues. Government agents have a lot of immunity there, relative to private citizens.)
At what point is drawing a gun on an unarmed person justified?
When that person is endangering lives by holding several helpless people in lethal conditions.
You didn't cite any statue; your use of "constituted" was as a regular verb ie not referring to the capital-c Consitution. Therefore, your comment appears to be an opinion
Are there places in the world where this "opinion" isn't considered the way the world works? Is vigilantism during a disaster frowned upon in other parts of the world? Because I'd think self-regulation under times of stress would be a good thing.
statute
It's always hilarious when the grammar nazi has a spelling mistake in his grammar nazi post.
To be honest, it's a spelling mistake, not a grammar mistake.
The misspelling of a word does not destroy the sentence structure.
The misspelling of a word does not destroy the sentence structure.
No it doesn't destroy the sentence structure but it does destroy his argument, especially given that the "mistake" he was pointing out was very far fetched and not really a mistake at all.
fleitz(3)
Texas is an expanded stand your ground state. You can use deadly force to defend yourself. You don't have to retreat or run away. You can also defend others when you believe that their lives are threatened.
Does it have to be an immediate threat (e.g. a home invasion or active shooter situation)? It sounds like these people were in danger, but not immediate danger. They could've probably lasted several more hours in that water.
I don't know about Texas, but in my state it has to be immediate. However, there's no way you could wait to the last minute and then suddenly get all those people to safety, so I think the meaning of "immediate" needs some context.
Apparently the cops thought it was immediate enough, since they showed up shortly afterwards and sided with the "vigilante."
Apparently the cops thought it was immediate enough, since they showed up shortly afterwards and sided with the "vigilante."
Considering it probably took many hours to evacuate them, that does sound pretty last-minute to me! If they had waited until the actual 'last-minute', the people might have died or gotten injured or sick being evacuated.
So you're saying the director could have stood his ground against the cajun navy person
I wonder if those were literal or figurative words... It could certainly been handled better.
But if your residents are "knee deep in sewage" that's pretty gross.
But if your residents are "knee deep in sewage" that's pretty gross.
The article also says the guy who administered the beating ended up with a black eye, and that at one point he drew a gun. So it appears to be literal.
But when the police showed up shortly afterwards, it was the nursing home director they detained.
But when the police showed up shortly afterwards, it was the nursing home director they detained.
Absolutely wow. Over evacuating disabled people knee deep in poop.
I'm not sure if I described that clearly. The director who was detained was trying to keep the disabled people in the poop, because "corporate policy." The guy who beat him up, got a black eye in the process, and drew a gun was trying to get them out.
When the police arrived they sided with the guy trying to get the people out of the poop.
When the police arrived they sided with the guy trying to get the people out of the poop.
I understood it correctly. It's one of those stories we only have about 1/10th of the information needed to make an accurate judgment.... like how did the guy with the gun end up with a black eye exactly?
I assumed the director fought back rather than just standing there and taking the beating, and the guy drew the gun after that. Could be wrong, just seems the likely course of events.
The director was motivated to keep the depth to which he was defrauding Medicaid and criminally abusing helpless people.
"At one point during the altercation, Ben drew a gun. ... he still had a black eye from his showdown with the director."
[deleted]
I don't know what you're talking about.
The nursing-home director was preventing people from reaching aid. He was just a robot following orders, and in extreme circumstances sometimes you gotta break machines to save people.
Ass-beatings are not often justified, but when they are, boy they are.
The nursing-home director was preventing people from reaching aid. He was just a robot following orders, and in extreme circumstances sometimes you gotta break machines to save people.
Ass-beatings are not often justified, but when they are, boy they are.
[deleted]
I was first taken aback as well. However the Cajun Navy was hundreds of miles from their home, and apparently were using violence to enforce their moral beliefs on people who wouldn't comply with them (e.g. the nursing home director). Maybe this is pedantic since they were actually out there rescuing people. But when guys start pulling guns out on people who are ostensibly doing nothing illegal -- well that kind of is vigilante justice, even it they're the "good guys."
This is an important discussion to have. Hopefully it doesn't wind up hampering citizen disaster response. But there needs to be better ways of coordinating these things. Especially when the politicians who are on TV claiming they have the "the greatest disaster response ever" and brushing over real problems happening on the ground.
This is an important discussion to have. Hopefully it doesn't wind up hampering citizen disaster response. But there needs to be better ways of coordinating these things. Especially when the politicians who are on TV claiming they have the "the greatest disaster response ever" and brushing over real problems happening on the ground.
During the 2016 floods in the Baton Rouge area, I was part of this effort. Flooding disasters are fog of war. Victims are psychologically paralyzed with disbelief and loss, and there are others who prey on them. It's part of our Southern culture to help one another and get things done. If the CN helps protect the vulnerable while evacuating and saving lives, so be it. You can't sit around and wait for help that never arrives.
This is not totally new as many places have volunteer fire departments - this extends the concept.
Volunteers helping isn't new at all.
What's new or what's worse, is a huge "human needs" bureaucracy which fails entirely to actually meet those human needs despite soaking up a lot of money.
It varies in scale. Here in Santa Rosa, first responders actually did a good job in dealing with the fire. But in the post-fire situation, the effective emergency that those who lost their homes have at best a small chance to rebuild their lives isn't being dealt with - but then again it's just a more extreme symptom of the housing crisis, which isn't being dealt with 'cause that housing crisis is also a solution to the "how to we maintain financial markets" question.
But there you have a private-public complex everywhere that's taking up a lot of resources without giving backing enough or sometimes anything.
What's new or what's worse, is a huge "human needs" bureaucracy which fails entirely to actually meet those human needs despite soaking up a lot of money.
It varies in scale. Here in Santa Rosa, first responders actually did a good job in dealing with the fire. But in the post-fire situation, the effective emergency that those who lost their homes have at best a small chance to rebuild their lives isn't being dealt with - but then again it's just a more extreme symptom of the housing crisis, which isn't being dealt with 'cause that housing crisis is also a solution to the "how to we maintain financial markets" question.
But there you have a private-public complex everywhere that's taking up a lot of resources without giving backing enough or sometimes anything.
How is it organised in the US? In Australia/Vic while the are volunteer firefighters, they're working with the state organisation and are being put on the same level/block as the career ones in the structure: http://www.cfa.vic.gov.au/about/our-structure/
Where I grew up, there are no professional firefighters; it's all volunteer, just something people did as a hobby, basically. I think they might elect their own chief and officers, or it might be on the public ballot, with the dog catcher and other town positions. Usually, there's nobody on duty at the station, so when a call comes in from the 911 dispatch at county or wherever, their pagers or cellphones go off and they leave work to rush to the station, gear up, and go out.
Usually paid and volunteer firefighters don’t mix well.
Typically you have first responders, and a network of mutual aid for broad scope disasters. During a major disaster, state level emergency management, state police or other get involved.
The level of competence and resources varies between states when it comes time for escalation.
Typically you have first responders, and a network of mutual aid for broad scope disasters. During a major disaster, state level emergency management, state police or other get involved.
The level of competence and resources varies between states when it comes time for escalation.
not sure about any particulars in any one place but I am almost certain that this will vary by state, county and city.
I'm glad to hear they are organizing after the disasters, for the next one. It's easy to jump in, in the thick of it. But the training, preparation & organization can't be faked on the fly, and it's critical to getting the best outcomes.
If you've got the appetite, learn about ICS/NIMS. They are built on a history of mistakes & missteps due to weak organization. NIMS in particular was commissioned after preventable errors in interagency operations trapped & killed firefighters in the towers in 2001.
If you've got the appetite, learn about ICS/NIMS. They are built on a history of mistakes & missteps due to weak organization. NIMS in particular was commissioned after preventable errors in interagency operations trapped & killed firefighters in the towers in 2001.
I'd love to see the government (or just some kind of NGO) hand out radios and some kind of specific-to-this-community application to people who own boats or other specialty equipment. If there were an easier way to organize, they could be even more effective. Use GIS to let them do site surveys and maybe respond to low-risk rescues, letting professionals/government do the highest risk. Right now there are coordination issues.
(The other thing I'd like to see, which is done in some areas, is turning gas stations into disaster fortified base stations -- they have fuel tankage already, add generators to pump when the grid is down, and maybe store a connex or two full of bottled water and other disaster supplies on property, or in an underground tank type thing (which they already need to have installed for fuel, so whenever they upgrade from single to double wall or whatever, dig one extra vault). Putting a cell tower onsite, and maybe some kind of satcom backhaul, and some kind of data network which could work even in isolated mode, would help in situations like Puerto Rico. The incremental cost of funding this with tax money would be far lower than building up other community response sites.
(The other thing I'd like to see, which is done in some areas, is turning gas stations into disaster fortified base stations -- they have fuel tankage already, add generators to pump when the grid is down, and maybe store a connex or two full of bottled water and other disaster supplies on property, or in an underground tank type thing (which they already need to have installed for fuel, so whenever they upgrade from single to double wall or whatever, dig one extra vault). Putting a cell tower onsite, and maybe some kind of satcom backhaul, and some kind of data network which could work even in isolated mode, would help in situations like Puerto Rico. The incremental cost of funding this with tax money would be far lower than building up other community response sites.
The interesting thing is we self-organized. If you had a flat bottom boat and a truck, you helped your family first. Then there were twice as many people asking for help. It was easy to help because so many people needed help. I think technology would have been in the way, to be honest.
[deleted]
The truth is when it comes to life or death situations you cannot always wait for an official response to the incident. Especially in large scale disasters where the local government is not capable or disabled from responding with the speed or scale that is demanded to save lives.
[deleted]
You know, if the us federal government can’t get its stuff together, why not? It’s not a bad thing.
A member of the Cajun navy would be quite justified in taking the cost of boat, gas, safety equipment, etc out of any taxes owed to the government. Seeing as how he is doing their job and all.
That may be a bit of a stretch, but a per diem covering at least your running expenses would be reasonable.
While it appears there's room for improvement in US disaster response services, we should keep in mind that any major emergency is basically Nature pulling a DoS attack on us; it would be unreasonable to expect the government to be everywhere immediately. (Which, basically,is why they should reimburse private citizens coming in to help.)
While it appears there's room for improvement in US disaster response services, we should keep in mind that any major emergency is basically Nature pulling a DoS attack on us; it would be unreasonable to expect the government to be everywhere immediately. (Which, basically,is why they should reimburse private citizens coming in to help.)
We're not talking about the end-times here. Hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and wildfires are routine events with hundreds to thousands of prior examples. It's not at all unreasonable to expect organizations that are chartered to deal with them to be pretty good at it by now.
"Will there be an organized response to a disaster?" is right up there with "Do murders get routinely and professionally investigated?" in terms of whether or not we are living in a civilization.
Aiming no higher than reimbursing the ad-hoc vigilante efforts is such a dark worldview.
"Will there be an organized response to a disaster?" is right up there with "Do murders get routinely and professionally investigated?" in terms of whether or not we are living in a civilization.
Aiming no higher than reimbursing the ad-hoc vigilante efforts is such a dark worldview.
The recent flooding associated with the cajun navy is not a routine event. It was regarded as a "500 year flood." Local rivers (Amite River) that rarely have a problem with capacity overflowed into nearby cities (Baton Rouge, Denham Springs, etc.) Houses on land that did not require flood insurance were filled with water to the roof-level.
Not Normal: https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/2016/08/16/louisiana-f...
Video of devastation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZSXGin-zNA
Law enforcement would have been prepared to handle normal-scale hurricanes, flooding, etc. (They do) but were not prepared to handle this kind of uncommon disaster. And even though the disaster was unforeseen, the government still helped some - my parents were removed from their house via Coast Guard. (But many more in the same area were removed by locals with boats)
I do agree that it makes sense to reimburse cajun navy participants in some way but I'm not sure how
Not Normal: https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/2016/08/16/louisiana-f...
Video of devastation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZSXGin-zNA
Law enforcement would have been prepared to handle normal-scale hurricanes, flooding, etc. (They do) but were not prepared to handle this kind of uncommon disaster. And even though the disaster was unforeseen, the government still helped some - my parents were removed from their house via Coast Guard. (But many more in the same area were removed by locals with boats)
I do agree that it makes sense to reimburse cajun navy participants in some way but I'm not sure how
As opposed to non-emergencies, where humans are pulling a DoS attack against Nature.
Saw the fires cresting the hills from home this week. But what do people expect if they build a long string of homes into chaparral? The long urban-wildland boundary denies access to nature, until it is reclaimed by the fire.
It sucks having lots of friends lose their homes, but those homes never should have been built in the first place. When Venturans got a chance to vote on new houses in the hills, 85% of us rejected it. And thank goodness, because 100% of those homes would be ashes by now.
Saw the fires cresting the hills from home this week. But what do people expect if they build a long string of homes into chaparral? The long urban-wildland boundary denies access to nature, until it is reclaimed by the fire.
It sucks having lots of friends lose their homes, but those homes never should have been built in the first place. When Venturans got a chance to vote on new houses in the hills, 85% of us rejected it. And thank goodness, because 100% of those homes would be ashes by now.
> it would be unreasonable to expect the government to be everywhere immediately
eh, it really hinges on how much we want to pay. i'm not saying you can just throw money at problems to make them go away, but there are quite a few things we could do.
An obvious government organization that feed and clothe tens of thousands of people half way around the world at a moment's notice is the military. That of course costs ~$600 billion a year.
It's feasible to have caches of food and water and generators and mobile cell stations that can be trucked or airlifted with no notice. Mobile emergency rooms, kitchens and shelters aren't really that hard to put together. It would cost billions, but it's totally doable.
The other half is about people. Partly getting high skill people from around the country to where they're needed, when they're needed. Electricians for example. really important for recovery. Also, volunteer organization. There are effectively a ton of unskilled people that need to be fed and sheltered. And there's a ton of unskilled work that can be done. I'm not saying we should force people to work to get fed after a disaster. I'm saying lots of those people want to fix things, and we're not great at using their labor.
FEMA is what it is. it could be very good. but that ain't cheap.
eh, it really hinges on how much we want to pay. i'm not saying you can just throw money at problems to make them go away, but there are quite a few things we could do.
An obvious government organization that feed and clothe tens of thousands of people half way around the world at a moment's notice is the military. That of course costs ~$600 billion a year.
It's feasible to have caches of food and water and generators and mobile cell stations that can be trucked or airlifted with no notice. Mobile emergency rooms, kitchens and shelters aren't really that hard to put together. It would cost billions, but it's totally doable.
The other half is about people. Partly getting high skill people from around the country to where they're needed, when they're needed. Electricians for example. really important for recovery. Also, volunteer organization. There are effectively a ton of unskilled people that need to be fed and sheltered. And there's a ton of unskilled work that can be done. I'm not saying we should force people to work to get fed after a disaster. I'm saying lots of those people want to fix things, and we're not great at using their labor.
FEMA is what it is. it could be very good. but that ain't cheap.
Part of what makes the Cajun Navy far more efficient is that it is completely separate from the government, which has to worry about things like liability, legal hiring, risk analysis, proper management and dispatching, and legislators adding unnecessary red tape. If the Cajun Navy tries to interface with the government, all of those efficiencies would be lost in order to meet regulations and standards that the government would require.
> which has to worry about things like liability, legal hiring, risk analysis, proper management and dispatching
Apart from official hiring issues, why do you think they're free from the other ones? They're all natural things you have to deal with one more than one person is involved.
Apart from official hiring issues, why do you think they're free from the other ones? They're all natural things you have to deal with one more than one person is involved.
If the fire department sent firefighters into danger with faulty breathing apparatus and they died because of it, you'd expect the fire department to have to compensate their families, right?
But if someone joins the Cajun Navy with faulty equipment and they die because of it, you wouldn't expect the Cajun Navy to be liable for that - if indeed the Cajun Navy is even an identifiable legal entity with any assets.
But if someone joins the Cajun Navy with faulty equipment and they die because of it, you wouldn't expect the Cajun Navy to be liable for that - if indeed the Cajun Navy is even an identifiable legal entity with any assets.
True, but also, recent disasters were "freak" ones. Flooding on this level has never really happened in these areas before. A lot of the homes destroyed didn't require flood insurance (homes in the standard flood planes / hurricane areas do require that the owner have flood insurance)
When your town looks like this, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZSXGin-zNA , and the fire department is fully underwater, the locals with boats win on quick response time. (Followed by disaster-specific response teams like the coast guard, etc.)
When your town looks like this, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZSXGin-zNA , and the fire department is fully underwater, the locals with boats win on quick response time. (Followed by disaster-specific response teams like the coast guard, etc.)
They're only freak incidents if you're looking from a narrow enough vantage point. Pretty much everyone in Louisiana has grown up hearing about the flood of 1927, for example.
After serving in Vidor, TX this year...I would love to see this made possible.
Further, FEMA has failed Louisiana too many times, and we're fed up with it. That name has become a "swear" in this part of the country.
Further, FEMA has failed Louisiana too many times, and we're fed up with it. That name has become a "swear" in this part of the country.
Heh. Ask the people in the Carolinas what they think about FEMA. While the agency eventually provided aid, it usually arrived too late, and was too encumbered with rules and regulations.
Maybe...
But such a system is open to very easy abuse. Let's say I fancy a nice 4x4 "so that I can tow people stuck in the snow in winter". Do I get to write off the cost of my 4x4 just because I tow people in snow two days a year?
But such a system is open to very easy abuse. Let's say I fancy a nice 4x4 "so that I can tow people stuck in the snow in winter". Do I get to write off the cost of my 4x4 just because I tow people in snow two days a year?
Great point. Not only that, but the level of disorganization during these operations is probably enough to dissuade this type of tax program.
Some level of deduction for equipment/depreciation/services rendered would be appropriate, or possibly a tax credit. Another option would be donating to a charity which then compensates people for expenditures during situations like this; the challenge is doing it after the fact. However, it's not like this is the last time the CN will respond, so it could also be done prospectively.
I've shown up at car accidents as a private individual and expended wool blankets (not taking one back after it's covered in blood), first aid supplies, water, etc. Maybe $300-500 lifetime total, which isn't a big deal for me, but it'd be nice to be able to get reimbursed/replaced.
I've shown up at car accidents as a private individual and expended wool blankets (not taking one back after it's covered in blood), first aid supplies, water, etc. Maybe $300-500 lifetime total, which isn't a big deal for me, but it'd be nice to be able to get reimbursed/replaced.
Honestly, those costs were the last thing anyone worried about. There were so many local donations of fuel, water, food, etc. Some of the folks I helped evacuate offered cash donations to cover those things, which we turned down because we didn't need it and knew they would.
I've lived through a few major natural disasters around the country. These ad hoc disaster organizations materialized out of the community and were effective every single time. The government will often step aside, and just act in a supporting role if the volunteers have a good ground organization. In one case where I was volunteering, we came up with a shopping list of things we could use immediately to mitigate the major problems, and the state government rooted through warehouses, found what we needed in other parts of the state, helicoptered it in, and just gave it to us to use as we saw fit. We had a plan and an ability to execute it much more quickly than the official agencies.
(As an aside, during my first major natural disaster, I discovered that union regulations limit the hours the government workers onsite can put in, the conditions they can operate in, and the kinds of things they can do without regard for if those things need to be done given the nature of the disaster. These volunteer organizations are unhindered by such rules and will work their ass off, whatever is necessary. Letting these volunteers run a lot of the relief efforts and supporting them instead taking point is a way for the government to work around its own structural lack of urgency.)