by rain!
Katrina was considerably worse
they are the same because they both have to do with water troubling an area
by the floods or by to much water
One positive effect of floods in floodplains is that they can replenish nutrients in the soil by depositing sediment, which can enrich the land and support plant growth. Additionally, floodwaters can create diverse habitats for a variety of aquatic and terrestrial species, contributing to overall ecosystem biodiversity.
Floods can introduce excess freshwater and sediment into the oceans, leading to changes in salinity levels, decreased water clarity, and disruption to marine ecosystems. This can impact marine life by altering habitats, damaging coral reefs, and affecting the distribution of species. Floods can also introduce pollutants and debris into the oceans, further endangering marine organisms.
Floods can destroy their homes, environment, and food.
The difference(s) between floods in the UK and Bangladesh are in Bangladesh, the dirty and clean water mixes together and contributes to the formation of diseases in the water. This also happens in the UK; however, the UK can afford to buy clean water for drinking in these cases.
Deep
its stupid
in Carpatho-Ukraine
is 30,000
The UK has drains and the also have sewers where the flooding water may be maintained. They also have this flooding controlled agency which gets money form the government to help the UK in the time of the floods.
No. Floods usuually only occur in well documented areas.
killing them and that shizzle
houses are destroyed
the uk floods were caused by heavy rain and the river banks burst and the pakistan floods were caused by monsoon rain
if the flood is strong enough it can