The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Australian/SoCal connection?
There is and will be a lot of talk about whether Australia's Leave Early or Stay and Defend policy is to blame for the horrendous deaths from fire over the past several days. There's some excellent discussions taking place here on FF Nation and some good resources have been posted.
Something in an AP story caught my eye today and I wondered what others think about it:
"The scale of the disaster shocked a nation that endures deadly firestorms every few years. Officials said panic and the freight-train speed of the flames probably accounted for the unusually high death toll.
Some experts suggested the large number of deaths could also be partly due to a change in the makeup of the population in the areas blackened by the blazes.
There are more people living on the outskirts of cities like Melbourne who have no experience with wildfires, relying on the resources of the Country Fire Authority for help with the blazes, said Mark Adams of the Bushfire Cooperative Research Center. It used to be that families that lived in such areas were usually prepared with equipment to fight the fires themselves, Adams told ABC Television."
I don't want to make too much out of any one thing, and I certainly don't want to draw conclusions before investigations have their say, but this is really interesting to me. LEOSAD only works when people are prepared, educated, and willing to get involved. If they're not, they should be taught to leave early. If inexperience and lack of preparation was a factor in some of these deaths, it bears an immediate lesson for those trying to spread the LEOSAD program (full disclosure: in theory, I support LEOSAD; I live in San Diego) here in California.
Something in an AP story caught my eye today and I wondered what others think about it:
"The scale of the disaster shocked a nation that endures deadly firestorms every few years. Officials said panic and the freight-train speed of the flames probably accounted for the unusually high death toll.
Some experts suggested the large number of deaths could also be partly due to a change in the makeup of the population in the areas blackened by the blazes.
There are more people living on the outskirts of cities like Melbourne who have no experience with wildfires, relying on the resources of the Country Fire Authority for help with the blazes, said Mark Adams of the Bushfire Cooperative Research Center. It used to be that families that lived in such areas were usually prepared with equipment to fight the fires themselves, Adams told ABC Television."
I don't want to make too much out of any one thing, and I certainly don't want to draw conclusions before investigations have their say, but this is really interesting to me. LEOSAD only works when people are prepared, educated, and willing to get involved. If they're not, they should be taught to leave early. If inexperience and lack of preparation was a factor in some of these deaths, it bears an immediate lesson for those trying to spread the LEOSAD program (full disclosure: in theory, I support LEOSAD; I live in San Diego) here in California.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
You guys have really had it bad. I can't imagine fighting that kind of fire in 114 degrees F heat.
As bad as it was/is, I'm glad it wasn't any worse.
I hope there haven't been any serious FF injuries with the firestorms.
Ben
-
Permalink Reply by Ken O'Brian on
-
It is interesting that today our media is reporting along the lines of the following:
A family that successfully defended their home in the recent fires have been vindicated. Apparently when they moved to the area they broke local government regulations that prevented them from clearing native vegetation on their block. They cleared vegetation to make their home safe. Their neighbours complained, the family was sued/fined by the local government. The works cost the family $30,000. The fine was $50,000. Their legal costs were $20,000. Total bill for clearing their block was $100,000.
All six other homes in their street were razed to the ground. Their home is the only one left standing.
The concept of "leave early or stay and defend" clearly includes references to asking whether or not your property is capable of being defended, and also whether or not the person is capable of defending the property. If you have failed to prepare, then you should leave. If there is any doubt at all about your physical capability, you should leave. No questions, just leave. Pack your vehicle, take your pets, and get out before it gets hot.
As many have said, there is an apathy and general feeling that "it will never happen to me" amongst the population. Well, the truth is that there was such a feeling of apathy and "bullet-proofness". There is now a chance at breaking these societal trends - because we have just proved that fires in the urban fringe don't particularly care who you are, and it could be you next.
LEOSAD works. It always has, and it did in this case. Those who left early are alive. Those who stayed and defended are in many cases alive. (Note there are reports that the winds were so strong just before the fire front hit that roofs were being torn off homes. This may explain why many who did stay and defend died while taking refuge inside their homes as the front passed.)
We need to remember that while hundreds have died, thousands have lived.
-
Permalink Reply by Aussie_Wildfire on
-
Ken
I know two eighty yo's who had a 50 feet high crown fire comming straight at them. the flame was stopped dead by their fogging system they had on the house. if you can walk.you can defend.
-
Permalink Reply by Tony P on
-
"This may explain why many who did stay and defend died while taking refuge inside their homes as the front passed"
Though Ken, we don't really know if they were staying and drfending, or just attempting to take refuge in their houses but not actively defending. And we will possibly never know with many of the casualties.
I am a fervent believer in the concept we provide to the community. My eldest son intends to stay and defend, he lives on the north west flank of the Dandenongs, I encourage and help him in his plans. Is there risk? Of course there is. But he is intelligent and aware of the risks. He is prepared. He understands what is to be done. Just before leaving home to get on a pumper and go out to the fires on Saturday evening, I spoke to him and told him it was time to start his checks for ember attack.
-
Permalink Reply by lutan1 on
-
I too saw the article that Ken has quoted above- there's also a big difference between stay and defend as opposed to sheltering in place, with no vigilant watch, etc.
-
-
Hi guys.
Thanks for the comments.
Wildfire, I didn't intend to infer that because you were old you were unable to stay and defend. Your story of the two 80yo's simply emphasises my point that they were prepared, and they knew they were capable, and they therefore succeeded. I would add to your comment... "if you can walk... AND YOU HAVE PREPARED ACCORDINGLY... you can defend"
Tony/Lutan, I agree that there is a significant difference between sheltering (cowering?) inside a house compared to actively defending your property. My point was that the people who are arguing that the Stay and Defend system should be replaced seem to think that these people were following the Stay and Defend rule.
As firefighters we all know what it means to stay and defend, and have received a level of training that allows us to do so safely. Apparently the message still has not got through some of the general public's heads though - at 3.00pm today I heard a radio station broadcast the voice of a lady who was under direct ember attack near Healesville. She bluntly told the radio station jockey that she was going to "stay and defend until the fire is about half a kilometre away, and then I will leave early"...
Most of them seem to miss the "OR" in the middle of the statement.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
