It's unlikely babies born after this point in the U.S. will be named Sandy.Eastern parts of the United States are still recovering this week, as are parts of Canada, after being hit by what has been referred to as Hurricane Sandy, Superstorm Sandy and Frankenstorm Sandy.It hit the city of New York and New Jersey especially hard, putting beaches where there should be streets and flooding homes and even the subway system.In Saskatchewan, we were unaffected by the storm. There was no sign here of flooding, or even increased wind. We were lucky. But I kept looking at what was happening in New York - thanks to the Internet, there was plenty of coverage that we were able to pick up here - and kept thinking, "What if this was happening in Saskatchewan?"First of all, the nature of the storm would be different. It wouldn't be a hurricane. But what if a blizzard to end all blizzards hit us - with high winds and lots of snow- would it be the same level of disaster here that it is there?Seven and a half million people were without power in Sandy's wake. That's seven and a half times the population of Saskatchewan. Would our power go out? How many of us would be without, and for how long?That's uncertain. I would hope we're prepared for that sort of thing, because of what we face every winter in regards to the weather. But I think there are certain things that definitely would not be as bad here as it is there.In the days following the storm, our highways would not be packed with commuters trying to get to work. In most rural communities, those who live and work in the same town could walk to work, if need be. We drive now because it's convenient to do so, but in a pinch, we could cover that distance with our own two feet. Things would be different in bigger centres like Saskatoon or Regina, but in Humboldt, most of us could get around under our own steam. Because we don't have a subway system that we'd have to do without. Neither do we have a public transit system (at least in rural Saskatchewan) that we would have to do without. Our population is so sparse and spread out that it's unlikely as many homes would be damaged by the worst of the storm as there were taken by Sandy. There would be plenty of room between houses for the wind to blow. And those people who would have their homes destroyed would likely be taken in by friends and neighbours immediately, not left to wander the streets, banging on doors, asking for help. Those who live on farms are used to planning to be without the rest of the world during a storm, so I think they'd be okay. They'd have their generators up and going before anyone could say boo, going about their daily business until the roads cleared enough to get into town. There wouldn't be basements flooding - at least not right away - because we'd be dealing with snow, not rain. There would be time to haul it where it would cause the least amount of damage in the spring.It's doubtful there would be as much media coverage out here as there is in New York, but I think, on the whole, things wouldn't be as bad. We're not as close to the edge on things here as they are in New York. The scale of the disaster wouldn't be nearly as bad, I believe. I may not be right, but at least believing that lets me sleep at night. And I hope we never get put to that test.
