Fire Rant

Fire-related topics

Re: Fire Rant

Postby tsayta » Aug 29th, 2015, 11:39 am

Finally. Tinder stricken from the seasonal vocab
I have learned that to be with those I like is enough.
WW
User avatar
tsayta
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3138
Likes: 1306 posts
Liked in: 1666 posts
Joined: Feb 1st, 2006, 9:25 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Fire Rant

Postby mexi cali » Aug 29th, 2015, 2:48 pm

Can't believe we're talking about how well burned wood burns.
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition

tsayta likes this post.
User avatar
mexi cali
Guru
 
Posts: 5799
Likes: 2613 posts
Liked in: 3927 posts
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 2:48 pm

Re: Fire Rant

Postby tsayta » Aug 29th, 2015, 3:27 pm

mexicalidreamer wrote:Can't believe we're talking about how well burned wood burns.



Bahaha... Now that's a good rant!
I have learned that to be with those I like is enough.
WW
User avatar
tsayta
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3138
Likes: 1306 posts
Liked in: 1666 posts
Joined: Feb 1st, 2006, 9:25 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Fire Rant

Postby KeepingItReal » Sep 4th, 2015, 9:20 am

‘mexicalidreame’r wrote:
“The 2003 fire raged out of control while officials stood around at the beginning trying to determine whose responsibility it was.”


Here we go again. Another false statement by someone who was probably not any closer to this fire than his armchair.

Here are the facts as taken from the public record: The OK Mountain fire was first reported at 01:55 am, with the second report at 02:06. A Forestry official responded at 03:00 am. The fire was burning in steep rocky terrain, no road access, it was night time. Responding to this fire at night time would be too dangerous for crews and aircraft do not fight fires in the dark. At 04:38 Forestry officials initiated a plan to action the fire with both crews and aircraft as soon as it turned daylight. By 0600 crews were starting to make their way to the fire. By 06:35 a helicopter was bucketing the fire: by 06:47 a Forestry Official was in another helicopter assessing this fire and others in the area. By 07:00 the fire had grown to 15 hectares in size. CL 415 scoopers worked the fire as soon as it was safe for them to do so. They continued to drop water on the fire that first day until they had to return for fuel. Around noon on that first day, winds were so strong there were white caps on Okanagan Lake. This fire was located on Squally Point, an exposed ridge known for its erratic winds. Despite the effort of three scoopers, two helicopters bucketing the fire and 21 firefighters on the ground they could not hold this fire. Airtankers, scoopers and crews worked hard from the very first day and all the days after that. As new retardant lines were established, the winds would simply push the fire through or over them. As noted in the independent review that was done on this fire, the wind, heat and dry conditions were huge factors on the efforts of the retardant, water bombers and crews on this fire.

Over the following days, the resources put on the Okanagan Park Fire would include: over 60 fire departments from across B.C., over 1,000 forestry fire fighters, contractors and loggers as well as 1,400 members of the Canadian armed forces; and 1078 pieces of heavy equipment.

It was pretty clear with all the aircraft in the sky, crews on the ground on that first day and the days to follow that “Officials did not stand around at the beginning” as you suggest. Perhaps too many tequillas were drank at breakfast that day.

sobrohusfat likes this post.
KeepingItReal
 
Posts: 7
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 11 posts
Joined: Jun 5th, 2014, 9:47 am

Re: Fire Rant

Postby LTD » Sep 4th, 2015, 11:58 am

That couldn't be any further from the truth NOTHING was done for at least 24 hours allowing the fire to get out of control and yes I was there and one of the ones who reported it but I guess its easy to quote what fire officials have written for the general public
LTD
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 4301
Likes: 3014 posts
Liked in: 3411 posts
Joined: Mar 31st, 2010, 3:34 pm

Re: Fire Rant

Postby rookie314 » Sep 4th, 2015, 2:55 pm

Prove it. Prove that they did nothing.
rookie314
Übergod
 
Posts: 1510
Likes: 562 posts
Liked in: 424 posts
Joined: Jun 11th, 2005, 10:00 am

Re: Fire Rant

Postby LTD » Sep 4th, 2015, 4:45 pm

watched it escalate with my own two eyes reported it multiple times and nothing I would think the 238 homes lost would be proof enough sadly it took that fire and loss of homes for them to take it more seriously
LTD
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 4301
Likes: 3014 posts
Liked in: 3411 posts
Joined: Mar 31st, 2010, 3:34 pm

Re: Fire Rant

Postby Fancy » Sep 4th, 2015, 5:04 pm

Fancy this, Fancy that and by the way, T*t for Tat

KeepingItReal likes this post.
User avatar
Fancy
Grand Pilgrim
 
Posts: 48175
Likes: 1363 posts
Liked in: 7172 posts
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 6:23 pm

Re: Fire Rant

Postby watchkat » Sep 4th, 2015, 5:31 pm

Fancy wrote:http://bcwildfire.ca/History/ReportsandReviews/2003/Okanagan_Fire_Review_K50628.pdf



We were driving south that morning and saw it at approximately 10am looking across from Greata Ranch area to the fire on the point. It was more like a bonfire at that point. I find all this information in the report confusing as there was no one trying to put it out as we drove south.

In the page 11 of who was involved there is NO mention of Peachland fire and rescue or City of Peachland at all. I find that strange as they were going to be one of the first responders that morning and were told to stand down and not allowed to suppress it. edited to add Peachland had a rescue boat that was going to go across the lake with firefighters.
It was a battle of controls back then.

A very comprehensive report, but it sure seems to lack much of the information of the time regarding the egos that seemed to want glory of putting it out, but failed and disaster resulted.

IMO.
Last edited by watchkat on Sep 4th, 2015, 7:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

LTD likes this post.
User avatar
watchkat
Übergod
 
Posts: 1304
Likes: 287 posts
Liked in: 201 posts
Joined: Jun 4th, 2005, 9:24 am

Re: Fire Rant

Postby trapp » Sep 4th, 2015, 6:21 pm

KeepingItReal you have your facts straight. I was personally involved on this fire from day 1 but not directly on the fireline. Over time there have been so many rumors and blame cast everywhere. There was no room for equipment access to this fire, it was a hand crew and air battle from the first morning. The only access in the night would have been by boat.

Tell me how did the Testalinden Creek fire get to 4,375 with almost immediate action by fire departments, forestry crew and air tankers? I would ask the same of the Rock Creek fire. Lets listen to the rumors and innuendos in ten years time.
"It's what you learn after you know it all that really counts."

2 people like this post.
User avatar
trapp
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 996
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 400 posts
Joined: May 13th, 2007, 7:16 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Fire Rant

Postby tsayta » Sep 4th, 2015, 7:13 pm

Perhaps the way fires are fought in BC were forever changed by this 2003 fire. What was learned from it forms the basis of our modern strategy and protocols
I have learned that to be with those I like is enough.
WW
User avatar
tsayta
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3138
Likes: 1306 posts
Liked in: 1666 posts
Joined: Feb 1st, 2006, 9:25 pm
Location: Kelowna

Re: Fire Rant

Postby Always Sunny » Sep 4th, 2015, 7:31 pm

Farmmaa wrote:...People have all lost sight of one very important thing - forest fires are a good thing in the log run.
They are nature's way of refreshing and renewing the land. We have species of trees which need fire to reproduce.
Fire naturally clears the forests of years worth of debris, dead wood and pine needles.
We've been our own worst enemies as far as the entire fire cycle goes. Way before we started building buildings and inhabiting the land, all fires were natural. They burned, they regenerated the land, and then the cycle started over. By stopping fires in their tracks we're helping the forests to build up layers of fuels many times thicker than what nature intends

So, instead of wasting resources on a fire that is posing no threat to structures or development....why not allow it to do what it is meant to do ?
I'm not talking about letting it rage totally out of control....but why not just let it burn the excess fuel and control any front that threatens to move towards civilization ?
Lots of fires are allowed to burn. Back when I worked fire in Ontario those were called "BOB fires" or "being observed". Lots and lots of those far north ones were left to do their thing, provided no structures, industry, or human life were threatened. If you look at the current CIFFC report, the NWT have 1/7th the number of fires BC did this year, but over twice the hectares burned. The problem with a large number of BC wildfires is that regardless of their cause, there's a far greater chance of being interface fires.
User avatar
Always Sunny
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2367
Likes: 1147 posts
Liked in: 1248 posts
Joined: Oct 24th, 2009, 7:00 pm

Re: Fire Rant

Postby KeepingItReal » Sep 5th, 2015, 9:25 am

‘LTD’ wrote
That couldn't be any further from the truth NOTHING was done for at least 24 hours allowing the fire to get out of control

The facts speak for themselves and the chronology of events couldn't be any clearer. That you can’t accept those facts and have continued to spread non-truths for the past 12 years is nothing but a slap in the face to the hard working firefighters who put their lives on the line each day they went out there and fought that fire. I suggest you take some time and read the reports on line about this fire. It simply did not occur as you have been saying for the past 12 years.

To suggest that forestry officials would simply stand around and “allow the fire to get out of control” is the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard in my life. With all due respect you sound like a person who is carrying a grudge against forestry. What I don’t understand is if you could see the smoke and were watching it for some time then why couldn’t you see the bright yellow scoopers pulling water out of Okanagan Lake, the helicopters bucketing the fire or the airtankers that worked continuously until grounding time that first day. The hundreds of people who were lined up on highway 97 and the Coquihalla Connector on that first day, saw them.

‘LTD’ wrote
but I guess its easy to quote what fire officials have written for the general public

The reports that I have read and shared in this forum were all done by independent (non-forestry) people. Once again, you are simply trying to whitewash all the hard work that was done by the many many people who worked on this fire.

‘LTD’ wrote:
watched it escalate with my own two eyes reported it multiple times and nothing I would think the 238 homes lost would be proof enough sadly it took that fire and loss of homes for them to take it more seriously

As the chronology shows forestry took this fire very seriously from the very beginning. Those homes weren’t lost due to a lack of effort from forestry or the fire departments involved. Those people fought hard and risk their lives trying to save all the homes. The conditions of the day is what drove that fire. Prior to the summer of 2003 BC had gone through its driest three year period on record. That summer (of 2003), Kelowna recorded the driest June-July-August period since records began in 1899 plus they set a record of 44 consecutive days without rain. When the Okanagan Mountain fire started, most of the southern half of the province was in extreme fire danger. The drought, the hot & dry conditions, the fuel conditions on the ground and the winds, all combined to create the ‘perfect storm’ for this fire.
KeepingItReal
 
Posts: 7
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 11 posts
Joined: Jun 5th, 2014, 9:47 am

Re: Fire Rant

Postby Drip_Torch » Sep 5th, 2015, 2:59 pm

Tell me how did the Testalinden Creek fire get to 4,375 with almost immediate action by fire departments, forestry crew and air tankers?


I'm going go with "the pursuit of technical containment".

If you'd have asked, how did the Testalinden Creek fire achieved 1560 ha in the first burn period? I would have a completely different answer for you.

How 'bout we revisit this topic in a few weeks. When there isn't still properties under an evacuation alert and there isn't air tankers in the air above them?
Drip Torch - an upright and steadfast keeper of the flame, but when tilted sideways the contents spill and then our destiny is in the wind...
User avatar
Drip_Torch
Übergod
 
Posts: 1742
Likes: 438 posts
Liked in: 1093 posts
Joined: Aug 16th, 2012, 10:56 am

Re: Fire Rant

Postby trapp » Sep 5th, 2015, 5:05 pm

Drip-Tourch I am writing that in the context than sometimes no matter what initial action we take fires blow up in the initial stages. What makes a fire spread very rapidly are the hazard conditions leading up to the event and prevailing conditions of that fire at time of ignition, time of day, weather, wind, slope, fuel, access, etc.

Only posting part of the post puts it out of context for most, but I do think I know what you are getting at.

Incidentally fire history comes from detailed notes made by the Incident Commander,crew bosses and fire fighters on the ground, logs at the zone and district offices, and sometimes thousands of pages of radio logs to do with that particular file. Everything from the IFR (Initial Fire Report) to the last hot spot extinguished and last patrol of the fire. It did not come from someone sitting down at a word processor and hypothesizing about what might have happened. In cases of fires like the Okanagan Mountain fire they are done by an independent review committee who gather every piece of information pertaining to the fire from start to finish.
"It's what you learn after you know it all that really counts."
User avatar
trapp
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 996
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 400 posts
Joined: May 13th, 2007, 7:16 pm
Location: Kelowna

PreviousNext

Return to Fire Watch 2015

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests