They should be happy their home is still standing!
8 Likes
They definitely are, but these people did what they are required to do on a yearly basis now they are having to deal with brush that didn’t even come their properties. A lot them don’t have means to get a wood chipper or have a tree service remove it.
5 Likes
where are these piles and how many are there?
These piles are on properties along auberry rd and on acorn road. My count was 15 of medium size not related to utility work so not a lot, there’s more in and around meadow lakes but spoke with an agency rep today and they are going to be burned or chipped soon.
3 Likes
A lot of work to do this winter and knowing the FKU guys and gals, it’ll get handled.
7 Likes
yeah , sound like day projects for the hand crews to chip or burn it. Been there , done that.
3 Likes
I am by no means Monday morning quarterbacking the decisions that were made here. My intention is get people to begin to recognize that each and every decision we make has a lot of downstream consequences. And I also recognize there is many differences in agency policies and thought processes along with few resources available at the time. All of that said, here is my question: Given what we now know about this fire, it’s behavior, the damage to the forest ecosystems & watersheds, the destruction of 856 structures and the life safety events which occurred on this fire, would the outcome have been changed if SNF E331 had been allowed to attempt to engage the fire when it was approximately 3 acres on the 1st day?
I ask this question because I think we have to start thinking about what might lie ahead in these small fires. It also occurs to me that there are many similarities in some of these fires. Storm King was small and troops were held back, then it got big, ugly and fatal; The Yarnell Hill Fire was small and troops were held back, then it got big, ugly and fatal; The Creek Fire was small and troops were held back, then it got very big, very ugly and extremely close to being fatal for both firefighters and civilians.
8 Likes
I agree, if you let the monster do its thing…it will eventually do its thing!
Maybe I missed something. Do you have an article or facts abut the IA?
2 Likes
There is a video interview with E331 Capt Juan Yberra on the SNF Facebook page. Here is the link: https://www.facebook.com/SierraNF/videos/373501573906221/
4 Likes
This is a very short sided way of thinking. The tree mortality is a HUGE problem, specifically in the Big Creek drainage. Since 2015, any fire that got established on the Sierra was a true nightmare! I have first hand experience with the scary reality of the current conditions in the western Sierras. Monday morning quarterbacking is not productive! During historical normal conditions a fire could be picked up with relatively limited resistant to control. But the western slopes of the Sierra have seen abrormal fire conditions. The area of Big Creek has always been a scary place to have a fire, then you add today’s challenges and it magnifies it ten fold!
1 Like
I will restate what I said in the 1st statement, I am not intending to MMQB the decisions that were made. There is a difference between saying that someone made a wrong decision vs. questioning if the outcome could have been changed. We have a very bad fuel loading issue in this State and if we don’t ask questions about what can change the outcomes, we are going to have repeated years like this one. Taking suppressive action on a 2-3 acre fire has infinitely less risk than a fire that runs 10 miles and 36,000 acres in the first 22 hours. Your statement about there a huge tree mortality condition is exactly why we have to look towards getting these fires when they are small and not well established. I have no interest in casting dispersion on the decision to not put the engine in play however, the necessity of looking at reducing the life safety risks, reducing the impacts to the forest ecosystems, the economic impacts and the civilian property losses remains, and that is the root of what I am suggesting that we have to look at.
15 Likes
“Land Ownership Matter”
That is a phrase I now hear frequently, especially with what has been FS 2020. The feds own over 47 million acres in California(approx 47% of total lands) The state(Calfire) is responsible for protecting over 31 million acres of privately held lands in California. Between these 2 agencies that is just under 80% of the total acreage in this state. Yet, the 2 agencies ARE LIGHTYEARS apart in management, strategy & tactics. These FACTS have to be the starting point of this discussion.
So, what are the answers? For starters its not “One Size Fits All” and it has to bring ALL stakeholders together. Here is the problem. Each stakeholder has a different approach, specifically DIFFERENT FUNDING MECHANISM. By that I mean prevention & suppression expenses and funding sources. But I can say unequivocally it has to start with PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. By that I mean, the individual must accept the cause & effect of their own decisions(Positive & Negative) It is this unbalanced approach that has gotten us to where we are today. The person today that does not accept the consequences of their decisions, becomes the person tomorrow(County Planning member) that approved a policy or development without the mechanism & processes in place to mitigate risk. Which leads to a road being narrowed that is a major egress point for people when lives are at risk. Additionally, the attorney today, that tomorrow becomes Mayor, and eventually becomes a Senator has larger & larger decisions to make that effect a greater & greater number of people. Until we(society) can learn to(forced to) accept responsibility for our actions this won’t chance.
Simply put, the child today that learns to ride a bike with all of 2020 safety gear and never learned what it’s like to fall, get bruises & scrapes or the pain of those decisions. Becomes tomorrow’s leaders making decisions without the experience of the pain it took to get to their particular position of power.
Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!
13 Likes
I watched the video last night and a comment that I’m kinda stuck on even though it was deleted was apparently that crews wanted to engage with backpack pumps and put in a hose lay but were told to no. Unfortunately the initial attack I.C. was named in that post. Knowing the area and the location of the fire it wouldn’t have been a long walk or huge hose lay.
7 Likes
Been a lot of fires kept in check with back pumps and handline until resources could get to the fire. Especially night time or early morning fires .Don’t know if it would of made a difference on this fire, but sometimes you have to give it a try. If your not building line you have no perimeter control.
12 Likes
It didn’t seem to be doing much for about two hours which isn’t a big window but you can get get some guys in there and if I remember correctly some boots did get to the fires edge, this one seems like it did what the briceburg fire did, as we know with that fire things were looking good then a brush ignited well in the burn of the initial main fire. From what we saw on the meadow lakes camera something changed suddenly, maybe a burning tree fell or one torched off.
I don’t feel like the response was inadequate based on the conditions when crews arrived. Once this thing started to move they went to structure protection at Camp Sierra(10-11pm). When I got there at midnight it was 200 acres and moving towards shaver and no amount resources were going to make this fire flinch. I keep hearing about the wind at that time…there was no wind outside of maybe a very gentle breeze. That column was straight up and down with the top blowing off to the north at that time.
We had a number of things come together at the wrong time. unstable atmosphere, fire adjacent to a drainage, fire in thermal belt, 100 year old bed of heavy fuel, and a drought.
6 Likes
Two other fires along those same lanes. Station fire. AA launched out of Hemet-Ryan at 0630. Was over fire at 0655. Air Tankers were supposed to be ready to fly at 0700. None were up until 0815. Got a Helitanker and a type 2 copter up before 0800. LACoFD had flew the fire and dropped until about 0500. Fire had layed down by 0600. Would have made some great line if the air tankers that were promised were able to fly.
Cedar fire. Was at cut off time. San Diego County Sherriff with bambi bucket was willing to setup their bambi bucket, they were there and looking for the lost hiker. They were carded. But CF said no. Engine resources could not gain access to seat of fire. That scenario with SDSO copter had never presented it’s self before. 2200 hrs. the fire blew out.
Just two examples that lack of direct attack changed things or could it have. It just seems that some fire officers these days are awful gun shy. I totally understand safety with all the losses we have experienced the last 20 years but how do you juggle “Provide Safety First” with “Fight Fire Aggressively”. Is hard thing to manage these days it seems…
7 Likes
Lack of confidence brought on by a lack of experience brought on by an overabundance of safety.
“We can’t go direct…we don’t have any air support.” Crew Captain - Martin fire (CZU 2008?)
8 Likes
All,
As much as I appreciate the conversation you’re all having I feel as though you’re off topic and should bring this discussion to a new thread. Unless it’s directly related to the Creek fire, please refrain from adding to this post. Much appreciated!
6 Likes
All of the piles are gone!
6 Likes