Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tony P on November 28, 2008 at 1:06am

Bob, I'll try to answer all you've brought up. But firstly some background. We've always wondered about all the 'mandatory evacuations' we hear about from fire areas in the USA. Recently I found out, because I asked, that these aren't really 'mandatory', people can ignore them (so why not get rid of the name?). Here, we cannot order people to evacuate from their homes in a wildfire situation. Not us, not the police, nobody - it's the LAW that people may stay and defend their home. So no evacuation orders are given. We also don't want people getting into their cars when they see flames an trying to get away. That's how people have died here, leaving it until too late to leave. Unfortunately, that we can't stop.

Now, you have all that equipment etc and someone with knowledge/experience in wildfire. You wish to stay and defend your property. By all means, go ahead and do it - we'll thank you for it. But don't leave your property to fight the fire. Unlike us, a private individual has no right of access to another persons property, nor have they the right to enter state forests/National Parks. If you were working with a neighbour to try and save both properties, again, go for it. Leave those properties and you'd be, in the US term, 'freelancing', and the police are likely to get involved.

Different areas of responsibility? Much easier for us. All private land in the State comes under one of the two FRS's for fire prevention/suppression, all that land outside the State capitol is ours, the Country Fire Authority. All of the over 1200 individual local volunteer Fire Brigades in the State are part of that one organisation. National Parks and State Forests are under the one State organisation for fire prevention/suppression (they don't have a nice easy name like CalFire unfortunately). So when we get wildfires, there are only two organisations that work well with each other. If a fire is totally within the forest, then DSE handle it; they may call on us for assistance but they run the fire. If the fire leaves the forest then my organisation, the CFA, take over control of those areas. When we have a massive fire, then both organisations are involved closely in the incident management. Oh, that brings me to 'ICS' - yes, we stole the basic system from California and tailored it for our needs. But our system is close enough that CalFire have middle management people from here (and New Zealand) working with them on larger fires. As we ask for and get people from there to come and assist during our large fires. Everyone learns, everyone gains.

We've been lucky for some time that we've had no real bad fires impacting urban areas. It has happened in the past, and it will happen again. When it does, our system will cope with it. We'll all do our utmost, but properties will be lost. That is the nature of the urban interface dilemma. All of our fires impact settlements to some degree, but most of those areas are too small to be called 'urban', but they're towns with houses and residents and they get hurt by the fires. We try our damndest to keep fire away from houses. And that's where most of our resources will be in a fire, trying to keep the fire away. If towns look to be threatened, we'll send as many units as possible there for asset protection.


That 'freelancing agency capt' would be crucified by the Coroner here if he'd been working outside the system.

I think I've addressed everything Bob? If I haven't please ask for clarification, and I'll try to give it.

And a 'PS' for all. I do proof read, but still typos get through! Sorry about that...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony P on November 28, 2008 at 1:13am

So I was pretty close Luke? Good.

Of course, if people just set themselves up to do this sort of thing without gaining accreditation...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bob on November 28, 2008 at 1:18am

Sounds clear to me, I might of met some of your people this year on the Butte Complex fires? Talked to a Aussie for a few minutes on that one... Not sure if you need us or we need you but I guess the information exchange and good fellowship make it worthwhile...Thanks for coming out.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by lutan1 on November 28, 2008 at 1:29am

Here, we cannot order people to evacuate from their homes in a wildfire situation. Not us, not the police, nobody - it's the LAW that people may stay and defend their home.
Tony, to clarify, there is NO mandatory evacuation for any type of incident, not just fire. However this is only in Victoria- I'm 99% certain that other states to have mandatory if ordered.

In Vic, it is only in relation to residential properties and you have to have a pecuniary interest in that property- it gets a bit messy and I don't beleive it's ever been tested or challenged in the courts.

In other states, such as QLD, an Inspector (From Police- for those not familiar with our rank system) or above can declare an emergency zone (Not sure of the correct term used) and they can demand anything from evacuations, use of equipment, buildings, etc- no questions asked.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by lutan1 on November 28, 2008 at 1:32am

We know what training these people get, and if they come off of their own property they come under the control of my fire service, the Country Fire Authority. (At least this is my understanding, Lutan will correct me about the industrial Brigades if I'm wrong. For the timber industry Brigades I am correct)
I could be wrong, but I don't beleive ANY business in Victoria has an MOU with CFA where they can respond off their property. I know a few that have tried to get it, but to no avail. The timber industry that you reference, I would assume are still technically on their property- not in a national park????

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony P on November 28, 2008 at 1:35am

Yes, the 'pecuniary interest' could get messy. If the person has left their dirty laundry on the property, they could claim such an interest! I preferred to limit the evac order to wildfire, because when we get large structure fires, or Hazmat... Messy. I know that some States can still order evacuation, not sure if any have followed us by denying the Police that option.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony P on November 28, 2008 at 1:38am

You imported our Eucalypt trees, bad move - you need us ROFLMAO

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jenny Holderby on November 28, 2008 at 2:09am

Many industries have their own fire departments or fire brigades that are fully equiped to handle their own emergencies. There are private fire companies as well. What would/could/should stop the homeowners in this area from having their property/development or site set up as a seperate fire district? I read above where the Montecito Fire Chief said that he wouldn't send his people out to the area for fires. Why sholdn't they form and fund their own FD? They could probably fund a not-for-profit corporation by a subscription service which isn't uncommon or require each property owner to pay a tax to fund a fully paid department. I would assume that if the insurance companies are paying for private firefighters to provide fire service AND by CA State Codes & FED codes that the firefighters have to be certified if they are being paid.

If the property owners & insurance companies are willing to pay for the service, why shouldn't they get it even if it means that the city build & operate a station in that area? That isn't anything uncommon either. When an area grows in size we put sub-stations in those areas for fire protection. It sounds like they might also need to upgrade access to the area and maybe install or upgrade the water supply. That is going on around here now, why shouldn't it happen there? Our area is growing, we have had new fire hydrants installed and the township finally passed an ordinance that makes the developer responsible for adequate water supply and hydrants to be installed.

The whole thing sounds like a matter of supply and demand to me. There isn't a big enough supply of fire protection for the current demand. That usually results in action of some type, in any business.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark Montgomery on November 28, 2008 at 2:10am

Hey Bob, I am sorry if you find what I have written as insulting or holier than thou, that was not my intention.

I saw the original item posted on the FireRescue site and found it thought provoking. When I posed the questions under the link to the item Is this fair? Why can't all citizens have this level of protection? I was seeking to have an robust and active debate, which is what I think we were having.

I am well aware that every major wildland fire in the States, Canada, Australia and here in New Zealand will have contractors working on them providing a wide range of services, from as you so aptly described the Map/GIS guy in a trailer, or the laundry lady cleaning out your shorts.

I have no problem with these people or the work they do and I am apologise if you believe that I was in anyway demeaning their work, but I would argue that they are NOT firefighters. Yes they are doing vital work to support us but that does not and will not make them firefighters, any more than being an aircraft technician in the Air Force will make you a pilot with wings and the salary to go with them. The Private Hand Crew cutting a hot line, on the otherhand I would consider to be firefighters. They are out on the fireline putting it where the risk is highest.

Bob, I get a real sense of anger from some of your comments, especially on some things I had not touched on, like Mandatory Evacuations.

Like you we do not get to retire at 50, and in fact as a volunteer I get no recognition apart from that of my peers - no pay, no pension, no sweet F A.

You said "First and last of all everyone is in it for the money!(Except me I would fight wildland fire for free if I was rich!)"
This is where a real difference exists between you and I Bob, I do fight wildland and other fires for free and have done so for over 30 years now!

I feel pain and a real sense of loss everytime I see another LODD notice, be it urban or wildland, aircrew or firefighter, driver or ems. I know what it is like like to lose a friend, a buddy, a mate - or a complete stranger who is still a brother or sister!

I have had members of my small Rural Fire Force who have given up 6 weeks of their lives to go fight wildland fires in Victoria, Australia. Yes these guys get paid for doing that, but that's no the real reason they go. They go because they are firefighters and because they get in 6 weeks, experience a lifetime of being a volunteer here may not provide.

Bob, please go back to the questions I posed and respond to those.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark Montgomery on November 28, 2008 at 2:36am

Hey Tony

Yes you are on the money with one of the issues I have identified regarding what, if any, qualifications these people might have.

Like you guys (both in Australia and the States) we have recognised training regimes and qualifications. many of the wildland qualifications I have a directly recognised by Australian agencies as yours would be here. That is why there are Australia, New Zealand, Canadian and US agreements for assisting with wildland fires.

We have several different levels of recognised firefighting delivery here in NZ:
We have the NZ Fire Service (working under the Fire Service Act) who undertake primarily urban fire fighting;
We have industrial fire brigades that operate under the same law as the NZ Fire Service, but are limited by and large to working within their places of work (with a few exceptions);
We have Defence Brigades who can work under both the Fire Service Act and the Forest and Rural Fires Act; and
We have the the Department of Conservation, similar to the Victorian DSE as well as Voluntary Rural Fire Forces such as the unit I am currently deputy Chief of.

We also have some private contractors who have some level of rural fire role, and who can operate trucks and crews under the laws in place.

We do have the usual companies that provide fire protection services, such as Wormalds along with the insurance industry who currently collect the Fire Service Levy and pass it onto the NZ Fire Service.

My primary concern after reading the item that triggered this discussion was having private, insurance company paid people running around doing whatever the hell they wanted while we are trying to manage a developing fire situation. This compounds to a really difficult issue if they are not adequately trained, do not have the right PPE, have no communications with the fire services, and only want to protect selected properties.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark Montgomery on November 28, 2008 at 2:45am

Ooh, now your getting nasty Tony.

The worst part is we have the bloody things here as well!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark Montgomery on November 28, 2008 at 2:48am

Hey Jenny

You asked Why shouldn't they form and fund their own FD?

Here in New Zealand, and from what I know of the Australian laws, this is simply not allowed under current laws.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page