Hazard mitigation for flooding is essentially to not be there on a flood plain when the water comes.

Sure, some might take a Queensland Australia approach and build houses on stilts for the water to run under. Some locations might benefit from water diversion.

In general, though, there's too much dirt to shift, to much water to pump, etc. to realistically do anything other than be flooded or be elsewhere.

New Orleans flooded despite having an army build levees.

Fire hazards are generally easier to mitigate - enforce fire breaks, enforce fuel load reduction schemes, etc.

Give this time - where I live the moisture content levels of the forest floors are at an all time low in recorded history - the fire hazard is rising and the suitability of adjacent land for cropping is falling.

As that trend continues I'd expect to see some state or federal assistence toward relocating productive agriculture to regions formally too wet and boggy to crop.

> Our new national maps of who relocates and where they go after a flood show that most Americans who move from buyout areas stay local. However, we also found that the majority of them — including thousands across Harris, Brazoria, Fort Bend and Galveston counties — give up their home to someone else, either selling it or leaving a rental home, rather than taking a government buyout offer. That transfers the risk to a new resident, leaving the community still facing future costly risks.