Almost had a fatality from the fire.

I found out today the real reason the Cats sent into my land didn't stay long. Some idiot without the proper authority sent them in. Never even asked me about where to go. He sent them right into the heavier bush and the fire caught them. One Cat didn't have a cab and the operator thought he was going to die when the flames went right over the canopy! The supervisor figures that if the MX track wasn't there and it was all bush, the operator wouldn't have made it out. He said they need to talk to landowners more because they know the property the best. Too many big shots that don't want to listen. This supervisor was totally awesome though. He drove around with me so I could show him everything including a pond they could pump from. He also said he's going to do a bunch of work to fix my place up since the heavy equipment is coming in tomorrow to get the hot spots. Why can't the other people in charge have the same kind of common sense? Dave

Unfortunately, Common sense ain't real common these days.. Be thankful that one higher- up does show some good sense.

i have seen many times when their unsure what to do they use their authority to the max.instead of discussing and coming up with a sensible solution. this damper weather should be benefiting them now.

Why would they ask you where to go? Their responsibility is to fight the fire, generally from the flanks in such a way that they can retreat if necessary. If they didn't do that it's their own stupid fault. For that matter, going near a fast moving fire with a slow moving cat is not all that bright, period...
When things get to that size they're either going to bomb them or basically wait until it burns itself out...

Rod

I have a MX track on my property and a bunch of dug outs and other obstacles. I also know where everything is. The guy that sent the cats in has never been there before. That's why it's good to talk to the land owner. The fire was moving real fast and the cats were still coming down the road. If the cats had been there in the first place could have made all the difference. The fire jumped a firebreak and they obviously didn't consider that happening. I don't think it's a bad idea to have a backup firebreak for an out of control forest fire.
Had a bit of rain last night and today and the SRD guys are working hard trying to stop all the hot spots in the peat moss. They said the fire at Bruderheim from a year ago flared up because it was about 4 feet or so underground. Dave

They're big boys, or should be. Should look after themselves around a fire....

Your post pretty well outlines your opinion on the subject and that's why they normally stay clear of the owner. Their priority may be different than yours and in that business their priority is the only one that counts. Unless AB is different than here, fire service has the authority to do what it needs to do with regard to extinguishing fire...
I haven't paid much attention to that on the news the last couple days but last I heard it was basically of such a size that bombing it was really the only viable option to slow it until it rains.

Rod

So in heavy, choking smoke, it's good to send cats in blind where there have no idea of the terrain? I have holes and drainage trenches that could get a D10 stuck. Like the supervisor said, peoples safety is the number one priority above all else and that includes the fire fighters. I was spraying water around my 5th wheel and couldn't keep my eyes open at times it was that bad! The only reason I didn't leave was because a gust of wind would clear the smoke for a minute and I didn't want to lose the trailer if I could help it. Everywhere else where they made a fire break was in grass or open fields, not right through the tall tree's. The guy that directed the cats screwed up plain and simple. They got there too late and should have never gone in at all. Spending 30 seconds to get my opinion wouldn't have been a bad idea. The fire covered 30,000 square kilometers! They figure they could be spending 3 weeks to a month putting out hot spots, maybe more. Dave

If conditions were that bad they should not have been there at all...
They have to be able to work safely at all times... and most times they're not going to have anyone around to point out hazards, so every situation needs to be treated as an unknown. If you can't see or work safely in that situation, get out. Smoke alone would dictate that they leave in that situation or at least have air packs on if they had to be there.
Honestly, most times having the owner around is not going to do anything but cause trouble. BT/DT.
Their orders come from the fire boss and most times they're simply told to ignore all else. Your orders don't change unless you're contacted by the officer that gave them and he changes them...

Rod

I think maybe this guy was trying to be kind of a hero, so to say, and might have been if the cats had already been there. They were still coming down the road and didn't get there till about 10 minutes later. The cats weren't driving full speed either. I'm guessing they were going slower so they don't wear the undercarriage out real fast driving miles during a fire call. I understand what you're saying about the owners causing more trouble. In my case I might have been able to help prevent the incident from happening. I walked down the cut line and saw the fire in the near distance. It was coming fast! The smoke wasn't bad when this guy said I needed to leave. It was bad though when the cats finally arrived. I was in an open area and had lots of water. The cats didn't have any water with them. If it was bad enough to tell me to leave, what the heck was he doing sending the cats in when the smoke was bad? The cats could have stopped in my parking lot when they realized the fire was coming too fast. They only went about 100 ft. into the tree's when the fire caught them. Had they got any further mostly likely would have had a worse incident. I heard that even that guy what was lucky to get out on his quad. He just wasn't thinking! Dave

That's just plain stupid getting in front of a fire like that. It's not going to stop at a dozer track anyway. Fires like that make their own wind and run on the tree tops, embers jumping ahead hundreds of feet at a time. Bombing is the only way to slow it.
Normally a ground crew would approach that on the flanks, upwind, with the goal of narrowing the front. You're generally fairly safe on black ground... then you just narrow it up and hopefully overcome it at some point. You just don't get in front of it... approach from the sides at the front.

Rod

It was stupid for sure. If the Cat operator wouldn't have made it, I bet my track would have been blamed and all the investigations and BS would have closed me down for who knows how long. Dave

No, you would not have been blamed. It's their scene; they're in control of it and they're responsible for it until they hand it off to you... at least in terms of a structural fire. What you may not realize is that their authority as a fire agency supercedes your rights as a land owner so far as it is necessary to extinguish the fire. I don't think that point really gets pushed too much unless it really becomes necessary tho.
That would probably not be followed too strictly with grass/brush/forest fires but when it comes to structural fires it's followed very strictly.
If you lost a building, particularly an insured building, and the origin of the fire was unknown... or even a relatively minor fire... that scene would be locked down and security placed on scene until such time as the investigation can be completed. They would need to retain control to maintain continuity of the evidence. If that chain of custody is not followed then the fire service has no way to protect itself against lawsuits down the road. Someone could always say that evidence was tampered with...
There are several ongoing lawsuits in this area right now with various volunteer departments where they put out mabey a relatively minor fire only to be called back 3 hours later to cool the ashes down and inspect the basement... Naturally, the insurance companies and the owners want to insist that the fire wasn't out or rekindled. In all likelyhood, the second instance was no different than the first instance... where the fire had 'help'... and if insurance sees an oppertunity to sue the fire department/municipality to recover their loss, then they sue.
In many cases it can no more be proven that the fire was set than it can be proven that it rekindled... but after these things drag on in court and lawyers argue back and forth... it generally gets settled rather than keep the battle up.
So... at least around here, we've become very, very serious about maintaining control of a scene... and if need be the owner is told to sit tight until such time...

Rod