Letting fires burn

dle
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3328
Joined: Nov 14th, 2005, 12:29 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by dle »

ShannonG wrote:The OMP 2003 fire burned unchecked in heavy timber for at least a week before it went hairballs. To compare that event to this one isn't much of a comparison.


yet. From what I gather this Good Creek one had been burning unchecked for at least a couple of days before getting actioned at all....
dogspoiler
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 17606
Joined: Feb 20th, 2009, 3:32 am

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by dogspoiler »

gardengirl wrote:
I do have the utmost respect for Ex-Fire Chief Zimmerman, but I do find it a bit ironic that he is now playing armchair quarterback.


Actually GG, rather than armchair quarterback it is far more like he is no longer being muzzled by politicians.
Black Dogs Matter
User avatar
gardengirl
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 13599
Joined: Mar 23rd, 2006, 1:01 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by gardengirl »

gardengirl wrote:
I do have the utmost respect for Ex-Fire Chief Zimmerman, but I do find it a bit ironic that he is now playing armchair quarterback.

dogspoiler wrote:Actually GG, rather than armchair quarterback it is far more like he is no longer being muzzled by politicians.


He was not muzzled in 2003. He was very outspoken and quite politically incorrect, which I found refreshing.
However; that was 15 years ago. I doubt that he has all the up to date information on all the fires currently active in our region.
It is hypocritical that he is now doing what he said about other people in 2003.
Life is a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to death.
pentona
Übergod
Posts: 1634
Joined: Feb 21st, 2011, 4:38 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by pentona »

gardengirl wrote:
He was not muzzled in 2003. He was very outspoken and quite politically incorrect, which I found refreshing.
However; that was 15 years ago. I doubt that he has all the up to date information on all the fires currently active in our region.
It is hypocritical that he is now doing what he said about other people in 2003.


Personally, I think it is wrong for him to be criticizing Forest fire fighting techniques, especially after being away from the City Fire Service for so long; a lot has changed. It would be like a Forest Fire Senior Officer criticizing Structural/City fire fighting techniques. NIght and day differences.
voice of reason
Übergod
Posts: 1996
Joined: Feb 22nd, 2009, 11:40 am

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by voice of reason »

gardengirl wrote:
gardengirl wrote:
I do have the utmost respect for Ex-Fire Chief Zimmerman, but I do find it a bit ironic that he is now playing armchair quarterback.

dogspoiler wrote:Actually GG, rather than armchair quarterback it is far more like he is no longer being muzzled by politicians.


He was not muzzled in 2003. He was very outspoken and quite politically incorrect, which I found refreshing.
However; that was 15 years ago. I doubt that he has all the up to date information on all the fires currently active in our region.
It is hypocritical that he is now doing what he said about other people in 2003.

nobody was politically correct in 03
dle
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3328
Joined: Nov 14th, 2005, 12:29 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by dle »

pentona wrote:
gardengirl wrote:
He was not muzzled in 2003. He was very outspoken and quite politically incorrect, which I found refreshing.
However; that was 15 years ago. I doubt that he has all the up to date information on all the fires currently active in our region.
It is hypocritical that he is now doing what he said about other people in 2003.


Personally, I think it is wrong for him to be criticizing Forest fire fighting techniques, especially after being away from the City Fire Service for so long; a lot has changed. It would be like a Forest Fire Senior Officer criticizing Structural/City fire fighting techniques. NIght and day differences.


What has changed so drastically that would prevent him from commenting with his knowledge? Who better to critique fire fighting techniques than a former fire chief? Yes, there is certainly a difference between how one goes about fighting wild fires and city fires - but it's not unusual for them both to cross over into the other territory from time to time so I'm sure he has some expert opinion on it.

When you are the fire chief, or any other high-ranking position in a municipality, you are "muzzled" to a degree if you want to keep your job! There are liability issues for one thing. I think he went as far as he could - which is all you can ask of anyone - but he told it like it is while remaining respectful and without being disparaging - which is more than a lot of them do. They are too worried about ruffling feathers and trying to please everyone. I like me a good feather-ruffler for a good cause!
pentona
Übergod
Posts: 1634
Joined: Feb 21st, 2011, 4:38 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by pentona »

dle wrote:
Who better to critique fire fighting techniques than a former fire chief? Yes, there is certainly a difference between how one goes about fighting wild fires and city fires - but it's not unusual for them both to cross over into the other territory from time to time so I'm sure he has some expert opinion on it.


I would bet that most of the knowledge that a city fire chief has is in fighting structures. Sure they go beyond that but a wildfire is not his main area of expertise. I doubt that the Forest Service appreciates being criticized for what they know a lot more about than he ever would, just the same as Forestry wouldn't comment much on how to fight a house fire.
User avatar
Treblehook
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2143
Joined: Jan 17th, 2011, 1:10 am

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by Treblehook »

I have to wonder what motivated common_sense_guy to initiate this thread. He/she obviously wasn't certain of the veracity of the allegations made by his aviation mechanic friend[s], that water bombing of the fires was being delayed so that more money could be made by the contracted companies. There is no indication that he reported this to the police; and, most anyone would understand that putting property and perhaps lives at risk by delaying fire suppression activities [to increased profits] would amount to a serious criminal act. Again, one must wonder what was the motivation for posting such unsubstantiated, serious allegations knowing that doing so would [no pun intended] fan the flames of doubt and distrust about the firefighting effort, during this wildfire crisis. If the allegation was believed it should have been reported to the police; if not, it shouldn't have been reported on an open public forum. Doing so did a great disservice and injustice to the people who are doing the dangerous job of fighting these fires from the air in mountainous terrain.
rookie314
Übergod
Posts: 1657
Joined: Jun 11th, 2005, 10:00 am

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by rookie314 »

With all due respect. Give Mr Zimmerman 4 fire trucks and eight fires, which one do you hit hard? Your nearest support equipment is 300 miles away.
User avatar
ifwisheswerehorses
Übergod
Posts: 1059
Joined: Jul 14th, 2010, 1:58 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by ifwisheswerehorses »

zerograv wrote:
ShannonG wrote:The OMP 2003 fire burned unchecked in heavy timber for at least a week before it went hairballs. To compare that event to this one isn't much of a comparison.


that's not what happened at all.


They were 2 smaller fires that were burning in the park. They met up and exploded, then headed for Naramata, the winds pushed them back our way and all hell broke loose.
Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you’ll ever regret.
User avatar
alanjh595
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 21843
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 5:18 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by alanjh595 »

ShannonG wrote:The Caribou region had several First Nations and the provincial government trying to work together,which is almost never a happy ending.


It's too bad that relationship and co-operation could not continue for all of our common interests.
Bring back the LIKE button.
dle
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3328
Joined: Nov 14th, 2005, 12:29 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by dle »

pentona wrote:
dle wrote:
Who better to critique fire fighting techniques than a former fire chief? Yes, there is certainly a difference between how one goes about fighting wild fires and city fires - but it's not unusual for them both to cross over into the other territory from time to time so I'm sure he has some expert opinion on it.


I would bet that most of the knowledge that a city fire chief has is in fighting structures. Sure they go beyond that but a wildfire is not his main area of expertise. I doubt that the Forest Service appreciates being criticized for what they know a lot more about than he ever would, just the same as Forestry wouldn't comment much on how to fight a house fire.


For sure his wheelhouse is structural fires - no argument there. Still, I am going to assume that at some point a firefighter starts with basic training and branches out into specialized training from there. Meaning in the same instance that a vet deals with our furry friends if he were to come across a human who had been hit by a car, he would have some inkling of how to charge into action with at least some basics and get him breathing, stop the bleeding, CPR etc. He wouldn't back away because said human wasn't covered in fur with 4 legs. Same as I am guessing faced with flames either firefighter - structural or wild - would have a better idea where to start than say you or I with zero training or expertise - and all they'd want to do is get at it and start doing their firefighting stuff. I find it pretty ludicrous for anyone to suggest they would try to suppress actioning a fire "to make more money".....hello, what?? Leaving a fire way out in the wilderness with no chance of interface to burn itself - sure - that's not a bad plan - however, even those burns have been known to write their own ending.

He was there in 2003 front and centre - that gives him some pretty bad and vivid recollections & memories I am sure afterwards at briefings I will also assume that there was some back and forth between structural commanders and wildfire commanders and perhaps some ideas floated around on what MIGHT have done some good and what MIGHT have not been such a good plan. All the training in the world sometimes can't prepare you for Mother Nature taking the text book and throwing it into the fire with a great laugh so to speak. All these guys have to make snap decisions that just weren't covered in the manual.

So although Mr. Z isn't a wildfire specialist, I don't suppose too many of the wildfire fighters wouldn't have their own suggestions on things they might try differently to knock down a structural inferno that goes way bad if situations were reversed - they are all pros at "fire" stuff.

They are ALL heroes in my book and for the life of me I can't figure out why they would want to do either of the scenarios....then I guess I might have just answered my own question....."for the life of me".....and you and all the rest of us.
User avatar
Walking Wounded
Übergod
Posts: 1285
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2009, 11:25 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by Walking Wounded »

Any lightning caused fires should be left to burn, unless they would endanger lives or homes.
User avatar
tsayta
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3690
Joined: Feb 1st, 2006, 8:25 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by tsayta »

We need a forester, biologist, or wildland firefighter to weigh in here
I have learned that to be with those I like is enough.
WW
ShannonG
Board Meister
Posts: 426
Joined: Mar 29th, 2006, 1:04 pm

Re: Letting fires burn

Post by ShannonG »

tsayta wrote:We need a forester, biologist, or wildland firefighter to weigh in here


They're all busy, and they don't owe us nuffin.

Return to “Fire Watch 2018”