Letting fires burn

User avatar
brentville
Fledgling
Posts: 150
Joined: Oct 14th, 2008, 4:25 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by brentville »

Here ya go folks:

https://www.pentictonwesternnews.com/news/current-forest-fires-bring-back-memories-of-2003-wildfire-in-kelowna/

"Zimmermann said he is not trying to be critical of any current decision, but said the Good Creek fire currently burning in Okanagan Mountain Park is eerily similar to the early stages of the 2003 fire. Both started with lightening strikes and were allowed to burn for days before they became a serious threat."

If the 2003 fire was attacked immediately, as some of you claim, what would Zimmermann gain by saying they were ignored?

He also says, “Hit it hard right away regardless of jurisdiction or cost. Figure all that out later.”
No sh^t Sherlock, what kind of lunacy is BC Wildfire Services practicing by ignoring an interface fire till it's out of control?
Are they that ignorant that they thought no one would notice?
Was someone key to the operation missing?
Just who made the decision to ignore this fire?
I want answers and the Ministry responsible doesn't seem to want to reply to my email...I wonder why?
User avatar
WalterWhite
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3838
Joined: Jan 31st, 2017, 3:56 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by WalterWhite »

Can you imagine the uproar if they’d dispatched resources to a fire that was not at the time an imminent threat to structures, while structures in the Peachland fire were lost? A judgement call was made to put resources where they were most crucially needed at the time, and considering no major property losses have been incurred in the Peachland fire, I’d say they made the right decisions. There is not an endless supply of resources available to be thrown at every single puff of smoke - it’s just not feasible.
ShannonG
Board Meister
Posts: 426
Joined: Mar 29th, 2006, 1:04 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by ShannonG »

brentville wrote:
edit:
In keeping with stopping future bull from getting flung around like this....
What date/time did the 1st helicopter dump water on the Brent Road fire?

PS: If BC Wildfire Services did nothing wrong in 2003, why does their report avoid the cause of the destruction of 239 homes and the largest evacuation in Canadian history, like the plague?...

Page 20 of "2003 Firestorm": "People can do very little about these forces of nature. Rather than dwell on causes beyond anyone's control, the Review Team focused on how the province, its communities and emergency response systems dealt with the disaster."


The 'cause' they are referring to is the fact that it was a lightning-CAUSED fire.
KeepingItReal
Posts: 7
Joined: Jun 5th, 2014, 9:47 am

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by KeepingItReal »

brentville » Today, 4:09 pm wrote:
“If you have the helicopter logs then please PM me with the helicopter pilot and co-pilot names or contact info, that initially buzzed the site at about 6am”

I am totally convinced that there is no changing of your opinion that resources were on the fire that first day. It wouldn’t matter what information I sent you, it wouldn’t change your mind. I realize that I am wasting my time in discussing the well documented facts that there were resources on the fire on the first day. The best of the day to you ‘Brentville’, I wish you the best of luck in the future.
User avatar
tsayta
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3687
Joined: Feb 1st, 2006, 8:25 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by tsayta »

Ok ok ok I've lost track. What exactly are we arguing about here?
I have learned that to be with those I like is enough.
WW
jwdc
Posts: 1
Joined: Jul 25th, 2018, 10:53 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by jwdc »

Getting aircraft in the air early is a necessity especially helicopters a few degrees cooler in the am increases lift and only since sunday have they been in the air early. Had the Fire boss hit the few close in lightning strikes wednesday last in the am there would not have been 2000 hectare Mt Aeneas and the same n OK Mtn Park. The fire in the park is directly outside my living room and the entire west side of the mountain has been aflame for the last 3 days. The response is pitiful both for the environment [where are the pipeline protesters as these fires are truly environmental wrecks] health and tourism. Had there been quick decisive action as not much equipment was required last Wednesday am the outcome would be much less. Decision makers heads should roll and there should be a public inquiry. I have lived in the Evacuation zone for a week now so I am acquainted with the issue.
User avatar
brentville
Fledgling
Posts: 150
Joined: Oct 14th, 2008, 4:25 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by brentville »

KeepingItReal wrote:brentville » Today, 4:09 pm wrote:
“If you have the helicopter logs then please PM me with the helicopter pilot and co-pilot names or contact info, that initially buzzed the site at about 6am”

I am totally convinced that there is no changing of your opinion that resources were on the fire that first day. It wouldn’t matter what information I sent you, it wouldn’t change your mind. I realize that I am wasting my time in discussing the well documented facts that there were resources on the fire on the first day. The best of the day to you ‘Brentville’, I wish you the best of luck in the future.


How did I know you'd provide Jack?
User avatar
brentville
Fledgling
Posts: 150
Joined: Oct 14th, 2008, 4:25 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by brentville »

ShannonG wrote:The 'cause' they are referring to is the fact that it was a lightning-CAUSED fire.


NO. The party responsible authored this bogus report and you somehow think they'll just admit, "We f^cked up. Sorry folks!"
Can we say, "GULLIBLE"? lmao Maybe a dash of suspicion isn't a bad thing now and then...I don't like having the wool pulled over my eyes so I examine the too good to be true details.

Some of these SOB's will lie through their teeth to save their reputations, positions, jobs and pensions...yet you believe it because you saw it in a Government Report or someone said it on the news huh?

BREAKING NEWS:
In 2017 Shaun Reimer told Global News that Federal Fisheries told him to keep the lake level high to protect fish stocks even though a flood was eminent. The Feds told him to do it so that lets him off the hook, right?

https://globalnews.ca/news/3517301/okanagan-lake-wasnt-lowered-sooner-to-protect-fish-stock/

WRONG! After being put on the spot with irrefutable evidence....here is what he had to say...

"I looked at the Global link you provided. I don’t recall that DFO specifically asked for me to wait to increase flows in any formal manner which is suggested in the news clip. During a conference call with DFO, I discussed the fish emergence and raising flows. These type of conversations are typical and we have them every year. Based on the fact that the modelling showed that potential lake levels were manageable based on the known conditions at the time, I decided to wait until April 24th. Whether waiting was something that was asked for or something I offered up as part of the discussion, I am not sure. Not waiting those four days would have resulted in a difference to the (ultimately-reached) lake level of approximately three to four centimetres.
Regards…

Shaun Reimer, P.Eng."


I sent the emails/replies to Global....they could have cared less and retracted nothing.
Everyone, including YOU, were deliberately lied to by Reimer to protect his azz!
Then he ordered a report that never asked the same question I ask here, WHAT WAS THE CAUSE?
If you'd like to say the cause was snow, rain, weather, fish, your dog or lightening....that isn't quite the whole truth is it?

The following is 2017 Okanagan Lake flood truth...
A higher lake level will obviously exacerbate flooding.
The more water, the more time is needed to drain it off.
The Ministry raised the lake some 480mm above normal in 2017 before starting to release it.
The Ministry used weather forecast data known to be suspect then blamed the flood on unforeseen weather.
If the Ministry had not raised the lake level in 2017, there likely wouldn't have been any flooding at all!

1. The 2003 fire storm was caused by BC Wildfire Service ignoring the initial fire.
2. The 2017 flooding was caused by acting upon program results, known to be suspect, as if they were "written in stone”.
3. The 2018 Mt. Eneas fire was caused by BC Wildfire Service ignoring the initial fire.

#1 & 3 will remain the truth until someone shows me a logical excuse for not putting these fires out immediately.

Don't believe the suspect data part of #2?....read what Kim Hyatt, the co-author of the Inflow Program used by the Ministry, had to say about the use of his program in 2017...

"Yes! The operations team engaged in their usual consultations to compare and contrast decision support model outputs in order to arrive at consensus based decisions re: storage and spill at Okanagan Dams. The issue with water management this year in particular comes down to limitations on River Forecast Centre abilities to accurately predict rapidly changing water supply conditions pertaining to late winter snowpack and melt as well as Environment Canada’s limited “skill” in forecasting future weather (i.e. 3-5 day forecasts are good; 10-day forecasts are often barely useable and certainly are not reliable).
Kim"
User avatar
brentville
Fledgling
Posts: 150
Joined: Oct 14th, 2008, 4:25 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by brentville »

tsayta wrote:Ok ok ok I've lost track. What exactly are we arguing about here?


In a nutshell...Why didn't BC Wildfire Services immediately attack both the 2003 and 2015 fires?
ShannonG
Board Meister
Posts: 426
Joined: Mar 29th, 2006, 1:04 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by ShannonG »

brentville wrote:
KeepingItReal wrote:brentville » Today, 4:09 pm wrote:
“If you have the helicopter logs then please PM me with the helicopter pilot and co-pilot names or contact info, that initially buzzed the site at about 6am”

I am totally convinced that there is no changing of your opinion that resources were on the fire that first day. It wouldn’t matter what information I sent you, it wouldn’t change your mind. I realize that I am wasting my time in discussing the well documented facts that there were resources on the fire on the first day. The best of the day to you ‘Brentville’, I wish you the best of luck in the future.


How did I know you'd provide Jack?


It is a complete and utter violation of those pilots' privacy for you to even ask for that information. Go find it yourself if you need to know so badly.
And please do so from the comfort of your home that was saved from fire, by the very people you are out to vilify. I understand you feel you are doing some sort of service to the public and spreading awareness somehow about how you feel BCWS is inept, but these organizations you reference are making decisions based on climate and weather. Are there two influences LESS easy to predict and control? The perfect decision is not always arrived at. To think that BCWS doesn't have the best interests of British Columbians at heart in the fire fighting decisions they make is, at best, one dimensional thinking. If one dimension is all you are capable of thinking in I am grateful that you are not in a decision making position within any of these emergency organizations.
*Edit: I have made a couple of statements on this thread about the 2003 Okanagan Mountain Park fire that were erroneous. My recollections were in error, and probably partly fueled by urban legend and collective consciousness. I won't delete them, as I find that makes threads hard to follow from the beginning, but I am not so full of ego that I can't acknowledge a teachable moment.
User avatar
brentville
Fledgling
Posts: 150
Joined: Oct 14th, 2008, 4:25 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by brentville »

ShannonG wrote:
It is a complete and utter violation of those pilots' privacy for you to even ask for that information. Go find it yourself if you need to know so badly.
And please do so from the comfort of your home that was saved from fire, by the very people you are out to vilify. I understand you feel you are doing some sort of service to the public and spreading awareness somehow about how you feel BCWS is inept, but these organizations you reference are making decisions based on climate and weather. Are there two influences LESS easy to predict and control? The perfect decision is not always arrived at. To think that BCWS doesn't have the best interests of British Columbians at heart in the fire fighting decisions they make is, at best, one dimensional thinking. If one dimension is all you are capable of thinking in I am grateful that you are not in a decision making position within any of these emergency organizations.
*Edit: I have made a couple of statements on this thread about the 2003 Okanagan Mountain Park fire that were erroneous. My recollections were in error, and probably partly fueled by urban legend and collective consciousness. I won't delete them, as I find that makes threads hard to follow from the beginning, but I am not so full of ego that I can't acknowledge a teachable moment.


I have the absolute greatest respect for the Firefighters, Pilots and Police that risk their lives and work tirelessly to save our lives and properties. They also pay for the results of poor decisions of the few on top calling the shots. In the Mt. Eneas Fire thread, I've commended their tireless efforts. These people are told where, when and how to respond....their input as to which fire to attack and when is non-existent!

PS: Did you read and understand the impact of Shaun Reimer's lie did to the situation? Most officials, including my Regional Director, are still under the impression that he was ordered to maintain lake levels by DFO. ...the devil is in the details.
ShannonG
Board Meister
Posts: 426
Joined: Mar 29th, 2006, 1:04 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by ShannonG »

brentville wrote:
I have the absolute greatest respect for the Firefighters, Pilots and Police that risk their lives and work tirelessly to save our lives and properties. They also pay for the results of poor decisions of the few on top calling the shots. In the Mt. Eneas Fire thread, I've commended their tireless efforts. These people are told where, when and how to respond....their input as to which fire to attack and when is non-existent!


You can't possibly think firefighters, pilots and other support crew should be consulted on how they would like best to fight forest fires as these situations unfold. Imagine the chaos.
As for them paying for the poor decisions, there has been exactly ONE fatality within the BCWS service and contractors in the last thirteen years.
source: https://www.ohscanada.com/tree-faller-i ... ildfire-2/
BCWS keeps their workers safe, which is miraculous considering the conditions they head into.
User avatar
Drip_Torch
Lord of the Board
Posts: 4023
Joined: Aug 16th, 2012, 10:56 am

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by Drip_Torch »

As for them paying for the poor decisions, there has been exactly ONE fatality within the BCWS service and contractors in the last thirteen years.


What? I don't know why you chose thirteen years, but what? Okay, I was going to stay silent and not give a damn this year, but this... argh, problem is people actually believe this stuff.

Transferring the risks does not mitigate the risks and sure as heck doesn't eliminate the risks. I'll say it again, for effect. Transferring risk is not an effective exercise in risk mitigation.

Check the facts, there's been a few more than one.
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
Woodenhead
Guru
Posts: 5188
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2009, 2:47 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by Woodenhead »

Drip_Torch wrote:Check the facts


I don't care about facts, I believe whatever I want to no matter what.

~ most Castanet posters
Wealth without work. Pleasure without conscience. Knowledge without character. Commerce without morality. Science without humanity. Politics without principle. Your bias suits you.
User avatar
brentville
Fledgling
Posts: 150
Joined: Oct 14th, 2008, 4:25 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by brentville »

ShannonG wrote:You can't possibly think firefighters, pilots and other support crew should be consulted on how they would like best to fight forest fires as these situations unfold. Imagine the chaos....


YES! Most seasoned Firefighters & Pilots know a hell of a lot more about fires than the idiot calling the shots last week...ask them!

BC Wildfire Service Mandate & Strategy:
The BC Wildfire Service is part of, and mandated by, the Government of British Columbia to:
1. Deliver effective wildfire management and emergency response support on behalf of the Government of British Columbia
2. Protect lives and values at risk
3. Encourage sustainable, healthy and resilient ecosystems
To meet this mandate, the BC Wildfire Service will:
3. Provide for the safety of its workers and the public
4. Deliver effective, innovative and cost-efficient wildfire management services
5. Provide emergency response support and services
6. Ensure strong and collaborative relationships with our partners and clients
The overall vision of the BC Wildfire Service is to achieve excellence in wildfire management and response services.


Nice words but most of it is rhetorical cr^p because nobody follows it. There is NO valid excuse for ignoring these fires. Brent Road was an interface fire, so what happened to rule #2? Resources busy elsewhere doesn't cut it! If you're stove catches fire and you don't have a fire extinguisher are you going to go to Homeless Depot to buy one or put the damn thing out any way you can? Use your head!

There are access roads within 1/2 km of both the Peachland lightening strikes. BCWS could have merely picked up the phone, called Peachland Fire Dept. and asked them to drive to these locations and stomp them out on Tuesday evening. Is that too difficult for these idiots? If the Peachland Fire Chief could speak freely, he'd unload both barrels on the BCWS too.

Maybe if they followed Kelowna Ex-Fire Chief Zimmermann's recommendation, “Hit it hard right away regardless of jurisdiction or cost.", just maybe the Provincial Fire Fighting budget wouldn't have been blown already. Read between the lines....just why do you think he mentioned "jurisdiction"?

As for who is actually calling the shots...In charge of BCWS is the Premier, then Mike Farnworth (Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General) followed by a multitude of subordinates. Then it flows to who the hell knows, someone's Nephew, to call the shots on the ground. Do you think for a millisecond that the top 10. from the Premier down, know Jack Sh^t about putting out fires? It's delegated down and quite frankly I'd rather see the Pilots and Fire Crews calling the shots over whatever Marx Bro. was in charge last week!

Return to “Fire Watch 2018”