灾害 · 美国西南部洪水

新墨西哥州四个社区在水坝险情后获准返回；林孔仍处于疏散状态

麦克劳德水坝一处小规模管涌故障据报已得到控制后，塞勒姆、加菲尔德、哈奇和普拉西塔斯获准返回。林孔的洪水情况以及水坝的最终状况仍未解决。

播出 文字 阅读需 7 分钟222 个来源HeyDay News Desk · About usWatch report
与 HeyDex 一起探索

通过 RSS 关注

原语言视频

文字实录 · 正在加载

译自英文原文。

新闻追踪第 6 天

1 篇报道108 家媒体222 个来源3 个视频

  • 暂无标注日期的事件
  1. 第 1 次更新新墨西哥州四个社区在水坝险情后获准返回；林孔仍处于疏散状态当前位置

周二深夜，在数小时来警告称附近一座水坝可能决口后，新墨西哥州四个社区的家庭获准回家。对林孔的居民来说，等待仍在继续：截至 9 月 30 日清晨可查到的夜间最新通报显示，积水和另一处决堤的堤坝使该社区继续处于疏散状态。20 110

2026 年 9 月 29 日晚些时候，随着天气好转，塞勒姆、加菲尔德、哈奇和普拉西塔斯获准返回。当晚早些时候，多尼亚安娜县报告称，麦克劳德水坝出现的一处小规模内部侵蚀问题已得到控制。这些都是影响重大的进展，但无论是获准返回，还是对水坝采取的干预措施，都不代表工程检查已最终确认安全。9 14

这一区别的影响不止一处山谷。美国西南部的洪水已迫使居民疏散并展开救援，而截至周三清晨的评估显示，得克萨斯州仍面临大量降雨威胁。眼下的局面是各地缓解情况不一：一些家庭可以返回，一个社区仍有居民流离失所，另一个地区则正为反复降雨做准备。

水坝情况有何变化

麦克劳德水坝在当地也称加菲尔德水坝，位于多尼亚安娜县西北部、加菲尔德附近的麦克劳德阿罗约河上。周二山地夏令时下午约 1:47 至 2:01 之间，运营方和县政府官员发出警告称水坝即将失效。哈奇谷的几座蓄水坝水位已接近满库，强劲径流加剧了下游危险。14 16 8

最初的山洪紧急警报覆盖加菲尔德和塞勒姆之间的乡村地区，包括 187 号和 390 号公路及灌溉排水渠。紧急通报称情况“特别危险”，并指示居民“立即转移至高处”。随后，警报范围扩大至塞拉县界与林孔之间的整个哈奇谷。16 8

周二下午，塞勒姆、加菲尔德和林孔的家庭被要求撤离；哈奇随后也被列入，晚上又增加了普拉西塔斯。县政府最初的通知强烈建议塞勒姆和加菲尔德居民立即撤离，并公布了两个接待点：拉迪姆斯普林斯社区资源中心（林德贝克路 12060 号）和多尼亚安娜社区资源中心（莱德斯马大道 5745 号）。红十字会已派员前往拉迪姆斯普林斯协助。5 4 18

当局敦促居民带上药品、少量必需品和宠物，沿 25 号州际公路前往较安全地点，并避开被淹道路和低水位涉水路段。塞勒姆和加菲尔德附近的 187 号公路因积水和杂物堵塞而封闭。居民必须在尚不清楚洪水是否会淹到家园时就离开——这正是紧急疏散的目的，也是其艰难之处。18 28

据《阿尔伯克基日报》报道，晚上约 8:30，县发言人阿里安娜·帕拉将情况描述为“一处非常小的管涌故障”，并称已得到控制。水泵正在运往现场，以降低水位和水压。14

目前没有水从水坝流出。

阿里安娜·帕拉，多尼亚安娜县发言人 14

管涌指水流穿过结构或从结构下方流过时发生的内部侵蚀。帕拉的说法并未证实水坝坝体已经完全决口。此前关于水漫过坝顶的描述，同样不能证明水坝已经溃决。后续降雨和再次漫顶仍令人担忧。14

林孔面临的是另一个问题：水厂附近的林孔阿罗约河堤发生决口，且有积水。这有助于解释为何即使麦克劳德水坝据报已控制险情，该地仍继续疏散。林孔的一处堤坝决口并不能证明麦克劳德水坝本身已经溃决。110 20

周二深夜，随着天气好转、短期内出现大量新增降雨的可能性降低，这四个社区获准返回。《拉斯克鲁塞斯太阳新闻报》称公告发布于晚上 10:20 左右；KTSM 则称公告发布于晚上 11 点前不久。具体时间尚未核实一致，但两种报道都确认了这一重大变化：四个社区可以返回，而林孔仍处于疏散状态。9 20

潮湿的美国西南部各地展开救援

与飓风波洛残余环流相关的热带水汽助长了该地区的洪水，此前已被雨水浸透的地面也加剧了径流。但无论是损失还是降雨量，都无法用一个覆盖整个美国西南部的数字准确呈现。68 66

周二上午，在凤凰城以西的托诺帕，一名男子站在一辆侧翻的银色丰田 Tacoma 皮卡车车顶上。车辆位于 327 街与萨洛姆公路附近的洪水中。马里科帕县警长办公室的航空队员乘直升机将他救出。对照当地 NBC 和 ABC 的报道可知，这是同一辆侧翻皮卡和同一次救援，并非两起不同的直升机救援。86 87

警长办公室报告称，当天上午在托诺帕和新河镇的被淹道路上共有三人获救：直升机救出的男子，以及两起新河镇车辆救援。托诺帕男子的医疗情况则不太明确。AZFamily 和 ABC15 在 9 月 29 日早些时候的报道提到他被送医或住院，但未说明其状况；12 News 当晚稍后的报道则称他安然无恙。后续报道更新了早前的不确定信息，但他是否住院或被诊断受伤，尚未得到核实统一。42 103 86

拉斯维加斯排水隧道救援涉及另一名男子、另一个机构和另一天。9 月 28 日星期一深夜，克拉克县消防员接报赶往特温大道与东大道附近。当时一名男子从桥上跌入湍急水流和隧道。绳袋救援尝试失败后，技术救援队使用高点绳索系统将他和一名救援技术员吊起。他在现场接受评估后获准离开。9 月 29 日是当地报道的发布日期，并非已确认的救援日期。49 52

实测降雨量也因地点和统计时间不同而异。位于布尔海德市东北方向 3.8 英里的志愿者雨量计，截至 9 月 29 日上午 7 时记录了 2.34 英寸降雨，统计时段约为此前 24 小时。在不同的拉夫林—布尔海德机场站点，按当地日历日统计的降雨量分别为 9 月 28 日 0.72 英寸、9 月 29 日 0.30 英寸。两者相加为 1.02 英寸，但这并非单独发布的官方风暴总降雨量，也不能与志愿者站点的读数直接比较。麦克劳德水坝的经核实累计降雨量目前尚不可得。125 124

全国范围的预警人数估算也需要谨慎解读。NBC 新闻在 9 月 29 日的广播节目中——节目于 9 月 30 日发布——报道称，从亚利桑那州到得克萨斯州和艾奥瓦州有 2500 万人处于洪水预警之下；ABC 新闻则报道称，从亚利桑那州到艾奥瓦州有超过 3000 万人处于范围更广的天气预警之下。预警类别、覆盖区域或统计时点不同，都可能导致数字不同。这些数字不能相加，也不能当作已经核实的增长幅度。1 2 3

得克萨斯州即将面临下一轮降雨考验

针对得克萨斯州中南部，美国国家气象局较为具体的预报称，降雨事件总量普遍为 2 至 4 英寸，局部最高约 8 英寸。洪水监视预警从中部夏令时 9 月 30 日星期三晚上 7 时持续至 10 月 2 日星期五晚上 7 时。最强降雨威胁时段为周三夜间至周五，尤其是周四及周四夜间；锋面和热带水汽可能导致反复降雨。141 114 82

NBC 此前的预报称，从周三开始，得克萨斯州中部部分地区降雨量可能高达 7 英寸。这并不意味着已经实测到 7 英寸降雨，也不表示所有降雨都会仅在周三落下。截至周三清晨的报道，尚无经核实的本次事件 7 英寸实测降雨量。强风或大风、冰雹仍是预报中的危险因素，尤其是在周三夜间至周五上午；这并非已确认正在发生的损失报告。1 59 112

从哈奇谷得到的实际教训，并不是大多数居民后来获准返回，就说明此前的警告没有必要。教训在于情况发生了变化，应对措施也随之调整。四个社区情况缓解，并不能消除林孔的洪水，不能证明水坝长期安全，也不能解决得克萨斯州仍在预报中的降雨问题。

已知

  • 9 月 29 日深夜，哈奇谷四个社区获准返回；林孔仍处于疏散状态。县政府报告称，麦克劳德水坝的一处小规模管涌故障已得到控制。 2014

未知

  • 目前尚无证据证实林孔后来取消了疏散令、水坝已完成最终检查、房屋财产损失已全面评估，或该地区的伤亡人数已有统计。

后续

  • 林孔的积水是否会退到足以让居民返回、检查能否确认水坝安全，以及持续至周五的得克萨斯州反复降雨是否会造成仍在预报中的洪水。
播出原貌 23 行
  1. Floodwater breached Rincon's levee, and residents still cannot return home. Four neighboring communities have permission to return after a dam-failure scare, but that does not establish that the dam is permanently secure. What has changed enough to let people return, and where does the danger remain?
  2. Four communities were cleared to return late September twenty-ninth: Salem, Garfield, Hatch and Placitas. Weather improved, and the immediate prospect of substantial additional rain diminished. Rincon's evacuation remained in effect in the overnight updates available early September thirtieth. The lifting announcement is placed around ten-twenty or shortly before eleven at night, but its exact minute is unresolved. An article's update time is not necessarily the time an evacuation order changed.
  3. A small piping failure at McLeod Dam was reported mitigated by about eight-thirty that evening. Pumps were on their way to lower the water level and pressure. That was a consequential change from the afternoon warning of imminent failure, not a final engineering verdict.
  4. Water was no longer exiting the dam at that point. Piping means internal erosion associated with water moving through or beneath a structure. It does not, by itself, establish a completed breach through the entire dam body. Earlier water coming over the top also did not prove that the dam had collapsed. More rain and renewed overtopping remained concerns.
  5. A separate levee breach near Rincon's water plant and standing floodwater helped keep that community evacuated. That levee is not McLeod Dam, and its breach is not evidence that the dam collapsed. McLeod, also called Garfield Dam locally, sits on McLeod Arroyo near Garfield in northwestern Doña Ana County. Its precise coordinates and official identification number remain unavailable. Several retention dams in the Hatch Valley were nearly full while intense runoff increased the downstream danger.
  6. Highway one-eighty-seven near Salem and Garfield closed because of water and debris. The initial flash-flood emergency covered rural ground between Garfield and Salem, including Highways one-eighty-seven and three-ninety and irrigation drains. It carried instructions to seek higher ground immediately and described a particularly dangerous situation. Coverage later extended through the Hatch Valley between the Sierra County line and Rincon.
  7. Families in Salem, Garfield and Rincon were told to leave during the afternoon; Hatch and then Placitas were added that evening. Hatch has approximately fifteen hundred to sixteen hundred residents. That is a population estimate, not the number who evacuated. No verified count establishes how many people left, used shelters or stayed home.
  8. The initial county notice strongly encouraged Salem and Garfield residents to evacuate immediately. It identified reception sites at the Radium Springs Community Resource Center, twelve thousand sixty Lindbeck Road, and the Doña Ana Community Resource Center, fifty-seven forty-five Ledesma Drive. The Red Cross was dispatched to Radium Springs. Residents were directed toward Interstate twenty-five and safer locations, avoiding flooded roads and low-water crossings, and urged to take medicines, limited essentials and pets rather than wait for conditions to worsen.
  9. The evening emergency warning also changed. At six-fifty-nine Mountain Daylight Time, the emergency for Hatch, Salem and Placitas was set to last until eight-forty-five. After that expiry, later warning coverage narrowed to Radium Springs and Rincon, first through eleven-thirty at night, then one-thirty in the morning. The earlier emergency is not a current warning, and none of those notices confirms a full dam breach.
  10. The national alert estimates span twenty-five million people under flood alerts and more than thirty million under weather alerts. Those are different categories, potentially covering different areas or moments. They cannot be added together, treated as a settled official census, or described as a verified increase. Weather alerts are broader than flood alerts; the two accounts have not been independently reconciled.
  11. A wider forecast put approximately thirty-three million people in Tuesday's Southwest and Central Plains flood-threat footprint, and one hundred fifty million across more than thirty states in the weeklong footprint. Those describe forecast exposure, not independently verified populations under active flood warnings. Likewise, the regional significant-flash-flood risk of level three on a four-level scale is a forecast assessment—not flood depth and not the probability that a particular dam will fail.
  12. Three people were rescued from flooded roads in Tonopah and New River that morning. The helicopter extraction involved one man in Tonopah, west of Phoenix—not inside western Phoenix city limits. The other two were New River vehicle assists. Multiple descriptions of the same helicopter extraction do not establish multiple rescues.
  13. The Tonopah man stood on the roof of a silver Toyota Tacoma lying on its side in floodwater, approximately thirty feet from shore, near three-hundred-twenty-seventh Avenue and Salome Highway. The road was also described as three-hundred-twenty-seventh Drive. The extraction happened around eight-thirty on September twenty-ninth, with another description placing it just after eight. A sheriff's aviation crew used a helicopter long-line or hoist; the crew included pilot Rich Dickner and hoist technician Lindsey Smith.
  14. The New River assists included a box-truck incident in a wash whose driver got out, and another stuck vehicle near nineteenth Avenue and Irvine. The Tonopah man's medical outcome remains unsettled: early descriptions said he was transported or hospitalized, with his condition unspecified; later descriptions said he was not hurt, was safe that evening or did not need a hospital. His rescue is established, but a hospital admission, injury diagnosis and reconciled medical outcome are not.
  15. A man rescued from a Las Vegas drainage tunnel was a different person, rescued by a different agency on a different day. Clark County firefighters responded late Monday, September twenty-eighth, near Twain and Eastern avenues after he fell from a bridge into fast-moving water and the tunnel. Initial rope-bag attempts failed. A technical rescue team used a high-point rope system to raise both the man and a rescue technician. He was assessed at the scene and released. The official response time was approximately ten-oh-four at night; another account placed it just after eleven. September twenty-ninth was the publication date, not the established rescue date.
  16. A volunteer gauge northeast of Bullhead City recorded two-point-three-four inches by seven in the morning September twenty-ninth, over roughly the preceding twenty-four hours. Its observer reported no flooding at that particular site. A different airport station recorded zero-point-seven-two inches on September twenty-eighth and zero-point-three-zero on September twenty-ninth, using local calendar days. Adding those gives one-point-zero-two inches, but that arithmetic is not a separately issued official storm total. Different locations and observation windows prevent a direct comparison without those qualifications.
  17. The three-point-nine-one-inch figure was a September monthly total at another volunteer station, not an established accumulation from this storm. A claimed one-point-nine-one-inch Bullhead City reading at twelve-fifteen in the morning September twenty-ninth was not established as an event measurement.
  18. The widespread one-to-three-inch figure, with locally more than five inches, was a northern New Mexico and mountain forecast—not measured rainfall at McLeod Dam or across Doña Ana County. That forecast discussion was updated at five-fifty-four Mountain Daylight Time, with key messages at five-fifty-one. A separate nine-forty morning precipitation report covered prior twenty-four-hour observations, including Albuquerque-area readings above one or two inches. It did not turn the later forecast into an observed total. A verified dam-area accumulation and measurement period remain unavailable.
  19. Previously wet ground increased runoff as tropical moisture associated with Hurricane Polo's remnants moved through the region. The next major exposure is Texas, where much of the rainfall threat still lay ahead in the early September thirtieth assessment.
  20. South-central Texas could receive widespread event totals of two to four inches, with isolated totals near eight inches. The flood watch runs from seven Wednesday evening, September thirtieth, through seven Friday evening, October second, Central Daylight Time. The heaviest threat is Wednesday night through Friday, especially Thursday and Thursday night, as a front and tropical moisture favor repeated rain. The exact claimed Tuesday morning issuance time has not been established.
  21. The earlier central Texas forecast allowed up to seven inches beginning Wednesday. It did not mean seven inches had fallen, or that all seven would fall Wednesday alone. No measured seven-inch total has been verified for this event. Damaging winds were also a forecast possibility, initially for Wednesday afternoon and evening; later discussion emphasizes strong or severe wind and hail with storms Wednesday night through Friday morning. That is not an established report of wind damage already occurring.
  22. Early Wednesday daytime forecasts give south or southeast winds of ten to fifteen miles an hour, gusting around twenty-five, along the Austin–San Antonio Interstate thirty-five corridor. Parts of the Hill Country and west-central area have fifteen-to-twenty-mile-an-hour winds, gusting around thirty. Those ordinary forecast winds are not interchangeable with a verified severe-thunderstorm damage report.
  23. The partial return answers the immediate question only in part: improved weather allowed four communities to return, while floodwater and a separate levee breach kept Rincon evacuated. A final engineering all-clear for McLeod Dam is not yet confirmed. There is no established later lifting of Rincon's order, complete property-damage assessment or regional casualty tally. Texas's isolated seven-to-eight-inch rainfall figures remain forecasts, with the watch extending through Friday evening.

来源

222 个来源106 家媒体3 个视频4 篇通稿

来源地图

追溯本篇报道的依据。图谱展示其关联；下方链接可打开本文引用的来源。

来源图谱将在您阅读时加载。

探索完整的新闻编辑室图谱 ↗

译文更新于

修订记录

  1. r1首次发布。