Forest Fire Evacuation Local Emergency

[Speckle55]

keeping you informed

http://mdgreenview.ab.ca/blog/2014/0...cal-emergency/

David

[Wild&Free]

Make sure firearms are properly stored if being left behind.

[Red Bullets]

Here is the smoke forecast for western canada on an active map.

http://www.bcairquality.ca/bluesky/west/

If it gets too smoky and ashy take a drive out of it.

[Zulu9er]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

Make sure firearms are properly stored if being left behind.

Leave large red arrows painted on cardboard pointing to "latched, not locked" door, so the mounties don't have to pay for the boot mark that busts your door down in an orgasmic frenzy of gun grabbing

I want to add that those affected, are able to get away from the area safely, and that property losses are zero.

[elkhunter11]

Take your firearms with you, and leave your door propped open, so the RCMP doesn't smash it down.

[Dog hunter]

Set some legholds before you leave, lots of legholds

[twofifty]

What is the legal basis for these evacuation orders?
Can they be enforced to the point that a citizen would be forcibly removed from their home, arrested and charged?

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by twofifty

What is the legal basis for these evacuation orders?
Can they be enforced to the point that a citizen would be forcibly removed from their home, arrested and charged?

Think back to HR. people under an evac order still stayed and were not forcibly removed, arrested and charged.

I think the order is more to inform you that the crap is almost at the fan so get out because we( rescue services ) won't be able to help if it does.

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by twofifty

What is the legal basis for these evacuation orders?
Can they be enforced to the point that a citizen would be forcibly removed from their home, arrested and charged?

They cannot forcibly remove you, but if your life is emperiled and it's not safe to come back for you, then you're on your own.

If you have kids, they will remove them from your care if you refuse to evac.

If they deem you mentally unfit/infirm, they can forcefully remove you.

Otherwise...

[6tmile]

We were told to evacuate yesterday at 4:00 pm. We didnt have time to pack anything. Forestry landed with a chopper and said "get out now". Our camp is at km 10145 on the Narraway road. It has made it to the Two Lakes Road now from what we have heard. That is 31 kms apart. Its moving fast. Our forman told us the front of the fire is estimated at 2 miles wide. Havnt heard if the Shell Chinook plant made it or not.

[Fisherpeak]

They just gave the evac call to Hudson Hope.Not the warning,the get out of town NOW.

[Battle Rat]

Originally Posted by twofifty

What is the legal basis for these evacuation orders?
Can they be enforced to the point that a citizen would be forcibly removed from their home, arrested and charged?

They can by law arrest you but generally the resources required to do so are not available.
If a person is stupid enough to ignore an evacuation order that's their problem.
Just ask them for a contact of their next of kin.

[qwert]

Originally Posted by Battle Rat

They can by law arrest you but generally the resources required to do so are not available.
If a person is stupid enough to ignore an evacuation order that's their problem.
Just ask them for a contact of their next of kin.

I object quite strongly to your judgement of persons who choose to reject a general evacuation order as stupid.

AFAIK many of the homes in High River were quite unaffected by high water and their owners were far more significantly victimized by accepting evacuation. In particular the actions of the authorities in unreasonably delaying the return of those whose property was unaffected caused increased losses and unreasonable and unnecessary disruption.

IMHO the authorities were far less interested in the welfare of the victims and far more interested in imposing their will and for their own benefit. I am reminded of the terrifying words, 'I'm from the government and I am here to help you'.

The reality of the situation is that the authorities will do everything they can to compel compliance by turning off all utilities as well as using all the disinformation and bullying tactics available. You will be unable to walk for any supplies as you will be prevented from return, and once you have been refused return your property can expect 'special attention'. When one is planning for personal survival we must realize that not only will we not be getting any help from authority but that they will be doing everything they can to make life harder for those who are prepared and choose to shelter in place. I suspect that if more people refused evacuation that remediation would have progressed much more rapidly and with reduced impact on those affected.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by qwert

I object quite strongly to your judgement of persons who choose to reject a general evacuation order as stupid.

AFAIK many of the homes in High River were quite unaffected by high water and their owners were far more significantly victimized by accepting evacuation. In particular the actions of the authorities in unreasonably delaying the return of those whose property was unaffected caused increased losses and unreasonable and unnecessary disruption.

IMHO the authorities were far less interested in the welfare of the victims and far more interested in imposing their will and for their own benefit. I am reminded of the terrifying words, 'I'm from the government and I am here to help you'.

The reality of the situation is that the authorities will do everything they can to compel compliance by turning off all utilities as well as using all the disinformation and bullying tactics available. You will be unable to walk for any supplies as you will be prevented from return, and once you have been refused return your property can expect 'special attention'. When one is planning for personal survival we must realize that not only will we not be getting any help from authority but that they will be doing everything they can to make life harder for those who are prepared and choose to shelter in place. I suspect that if more people refused evacuation that remediation would have progressed much more rapidly and with reduced impact on those affected.

awesome idea useing one incident to show you know better. Look up some past evac orders , numerous fires in BC , floods in Quebec and other points east. They dont just call a state of emergency ho hum, but they do anticipate on the side of safety. So you house may not be affected by the calamity flood , fire wind ect however when you neighbors house falls over , catches fire , explodes your SOL .
You of course have every right to chose to stay , then again you probabilities of being correct are very very small. Good luck with that.

[Matt L.]

This is a lot different scenario than a flood. Don't stay. Unless you're a really really big fan of barbeque.

[qwert]

Originally Posted by Matt L.

This is a lot different scenario than a flood.

I agree that all situations are unique and all must be judged individually. However it seems that abandon and evacuate is our authorities solution for everything.

I have never been to Australia but know that they have some big fire problems and have read that their fire management is quite different than ours. AFAIK they have a stay and fight culture which evacuates young and old then organizes the rest to fight effectively.

I had trouble understanding how bulldozers could burn up in a town beside a lake, that was full of able bodied bush and rig workers, but they did manage to control the guns and ammo.

IMHO we should be demanding that organizational emergency planning be about more than just abandon and evacuate.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by qwert

I agree that all situations are unique and all must be judged individually. However it seems that abandon and evacuate is our authorities solution for everything.

I have never been to Australia but know that they have some big fire problems and have read that their fire management is quite different than ours. AFAIK they have a stay and fight culture which evacuates young and old then organizes the rest to fight effectively.

I had trouble understanding how bulldozers could burn up in a town beside a lake, that was full of able bodied bush and rig workers, but they did manage to control the guns and ammo.

IMHO we should be demanding that organizational emergency planning be about more than just abandon and evacuate.

the scale, terrain and population would be huge factors. last I looked the fire west of rocky is 17000 Acers ,the might of albertas fire resources are failing to gain control as of this morning. What makes you think 10 -20-30 blokes and a handful of equipment will make one iota at the risk of loss of life. Ever been on a fire , pis can ,mattock ,30lb of gear. up hill and down dale in 30º+ ambient air temp with temps skyrocketing . Flame fronts moving at 60mph+. now that I think ,how many died in Aus a few yrs ago. With fire your playing a loosing game against chance . Ma nature cannot be stopped. nudged maybe for a short while. Calgary is a city of one million how did they fare with stopping that flood.....

[twofifty]

Originally Posted by Matt L.

This is a lot different scenario than a flood. Don't stay. Unless you're a really really big fan of barbeque.

Thanks Matt. There is no fire threat in my area, at least till the end of the week. We had several very heavy rain storms in the last 2 days, each lasting several hours. Air temps are not crazy hot either, just very low 30s.

The question was hypothetical and more to do with a flood evac order, where someone's home is secure on high ground well above the forecasted high water mark.

[silverdoctor]

Fire will be worse than water for sure. Stay safe folks, get out if you have to

[fish gunner]

This thread needs a musical interlude. http://m.pitchfork.com/news/55916-we...in-foil-video/ .

[Matt L.]

Originally Posted by twofifty

Thanks Matt. There is no fire threat in my area, at least till the end of the week. We had several very heavy rain storms in the last 2 days, each lasting several hours. Air temps are not crazy hot either, just very low 30s.

The question was hypothetical and more to do with a flood evac order, where someone's home is secure on high ground well above the forecasted high water mark.

I was responding to some of the other responses. Wasn't making assumptions on your situation.

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

the scale, terrain and population would be huge factors. last I looked the fire west of rocky is 17000 Acers ,the might of albertas fire resources are failing to gain control as of this morning. .

Actually I believe they have control, but are using it as a "prescribed" burn

[Battle Rat]

Originally Posted by qwert

I object quite strongly to your judgement of persons who choose to reject a general evacuation order as stupid.

AFAIK many of the homes in High River were quite unaffected by high water and their owners were far more significantly victimized by accepting evacuation. In particular the actions of the authorities in unreasonably delaying the return of those whose property was unaffected caused increased losses and unreasonable and unnecessary disruption.

IMHO the authorities were far less interested in the welfare of the victims and far more interested in imposing their will and for their own benefit. I am reminded of the terrifying words, 'I'm from the government and I am here to help you'.

The reality of the situation is that the authorities will do everything they can to compel compliance by turning off all utilities as well as using all the disinformation and bullying tactics available. You will be unable to walk for any supplies as you will be prevented from return, and once you have been refused return your property can expect 'special attention'. When one is planning for personal survival we must realize that not only will we not be getting any help from authority but that they will be doing everything they can to make life harder for those who are prepared and choose to shelter in place. I suspect that if more people refused evacuation that remediation would have progressed much more rapidly and with reduced impact on those affected.

Well if you ever get the chance to hold tight when a wild fire is closing in on your ass let me know how that worked for you and what a smart decision that was.
It's only a house, it can be replaced.
People that refuse to evacuate are stupid and create another problem for police, fire/rescue and EMS.
Don't put others at risk because you think you can stop your house from burning.

[chopperman]

Originally Posted by Battle Rat

Well if you ever get the chance to hold tight when a wild fire is closing in on your ass let me know how that worked for you and what a smart decision that was.
It's only a house, it can be replaced.
People that refuse to evacuate are stupid and create another problem for police, fire/rescue and EMS.
Don't put others at risk because you think you can stop your house from burning.

Having fought wildfires for 27 years I will strongly X2 the above comment!! Most people don't realize the intense heat produced by fire and the speed of which a fire travels. It's not only the head of the fire but the spotting sometimes kilometres ahead of the fire that can easily cut off your "planned" escape route!
If the professionals are telling you to "get out" then listen! Worst case scenario your possessions burn (I was working the fire the day it burned Slave Lake and my kids and ex wife lost their house and all their possessions) but you live! Or you come home days later to your place still standing and having been "put out/inconvenienced" for few days!!
It ain't worth it folks, listen to the pro's.

[qwert]

Originally Posted by chopperman

It ain't worth it folks, listen to the pro's.

'The pros' do not care about property rights and property owners are just an inconvenience to be managed by removing them from participation in crisis management or witnessing tactical failure and wonton disregard for personal property. Citizens are just an inconvenience for 'the pros'.

HIGH RIVER HAS TAUGHT US TO NEVER TRUST THE 'PROS'.

THE 'PROS' HAVE DESTROYED THEIR OWN CREDIBILITY.

I too have fought wildfires and am well aware of how dangerous and unpredictable they can be. IMHO fires are impossible to fight in the heat and wind but much easier in the winter and spring long before any fire starts.

IMHO the real problem is not tactical management during a crisis but the failure of 'the pros' to properly prepare for probable events long before they occur. IMHO mass evacuations are an admission of this failure to properly plan.

Fire is best controlled by fuel removal and the provision of emergency water pumping capacity. 'The pros' have lots of fancy and expensive trucks and fire halls and spend a lot of effort developing emergency evacuation plans but fail to organize fuel removal and firebreak construction in the interface zones. If citizens were made to feel like more of a part of the solution than just a problem to be kept out of the way, then they would be more understanding and supportive of the work that needs to be done to control fire risk and not just finding themselves in the situation where evacuation is the only choice. The bulldozers that burned up in Slave Lake could have been better used during breakup to construct fire breaks and removing fuel in the interface zones to be burned in the winter. Slave lake did not have a water shortage they had a pumping shortage. The only thing that police are capable of is manning roadblocks and forced entry, IMHO they were part of the problem and none of the solution.

Similarly the town mayors and councils demanding that people evacuate were the same ones that encouraged and permitted construction of residences on flood plains. Perhaps they should have noticed the name of the town when they were encouraging rapid growth on cheap real estate.

IMHO, We need more strategic planning not tactical crisis management.

[Redfrog]

" last I looked the fire west of rocky is 17000 Acers "
WOW! That's a lot of laptops.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

" last I looked the fire west of rocky is 17000 Acers "
WOW! That's a lot of laptops.

Lol yep they had charging issues.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by qwert

'The pros' do not care about property rights and property owners are just an inconvenience to be managed by removing them from participation in crisis management or witnessing tactical failure and wonton disregard for personal property. Citizens are just an inconvenience for 'the pros'.

HIGH RIVER HAS TAUGHT US TO NEVER TRUST THE 'PROS'.

THE 'PROS' HAVE DESTROYED THEIR OWN CREDIBILITY.

I too have fought wildfires and am well aware of how dangerous and unpredictable they can be. IMHO fires are impossible to fight in the heat and wind but much easier in the winter and spring long before any fire starts.

IMHO the real problem is not tactical management during a crisis but the failure of 'the pros' to properly prepare for probable events long before they occur. IMHO mass evacuations are an admission of this failure to properly plan.

Fire is best controlled by fuel removal and the provision of emergency water pumping capacity. 'The pros' have lots of fancy and expensive trucks and fire halls and spend a lot of effort developing emergency evacuation plans but fail to organize fuel removal and firebreak construction in the interface zones. If citizens were made to feel like more of a part of the solution than just a problem to be kept out of the way, then they would be more understanding and supportive of the work that needs to be done to control fire risk and not just finding themselves in the situation where evacuation is the only choice. The bulldozers that burned up in Slave Lake could have been better used during breakup to construct fire breaks and removing fuel in the interface zones to be burned in the winter. Slave lake did not have a water shortage they had a pumping shortage. The only thing that police are capable of is manning roadblocks and forced entry, IMHO they were part of the problem and none of the solution.

Similarly the town mayors and councils demanding that people evacuate were the same ones that encouraged and permitted construction of residences on flood plains. Perhaps they should have noticed the name of the town when they were encouraging rapid growth on cheap real estate.

IMHO, We need more strategic planning not tactical crisis management.

after all these steps, fires have by passed breaks, jumped miles over water and every other planning step taken . Then what ?? Read some of the drastic steps countries , cities and individuals have taken and mother nature calls on murphy and blamo ...hooped. the tsunami in japan comes to mind they built a 5 meter wall around the city specifically for defence....so the tectonic plate sunk 3 meters ..whoopsy. new orleans similar outcome to the best laid plans of man.?? How about get out when asked , then help as opposed to hinder. Its not lile they make up reasons to call a state of emergency??

[Battle Rat]

Originally Posted by qwert

'The pros' do not care about property rights and property owners are just an inconvenience to be managed by removing them from participation in crisis management or witnessing tactical failure and wonton disregard for personal property. Citizens are just an inconvenience for 'the pros'.

HIGH RIVER HAS TAUGHT US TO NEVER TRUST THE 'PROS'.

THE 'PROS' HAVE DESTROYED THEIR OWN CREDIBILITY.

I too have fought wildfires and am well aware of how dangerous and unpredictable they can be. IMHO fires are impossible to fight in the heat and wind but much easier in the winter and spring long before any fire starts.

IMHO the real problem is not tactical management during a crisis but the failure of 'the pros' to properly prepare for probable events long before they occur. IMHO mass evacuations are an admission of this failure to properly plan.

Fire is best controlled by fuel removal and the provision of emergency water pumping capacity. 'The pros' have lots of fancy and expensive trucks and fire halls and spend a lot of effort developing emergency evacuation plans but fail to organize fuel removal and firebreak construction in the interface zones. If citizens were made to feel like more of a part of the solution than just a problem to be kept out of the way, then they would be more understanding and supportive of the work that needs to be done to control fire risk and not just finding themselves in the situation where evacuation is the only choice. The bulldozers that burned up in Slave Lake could have been better used during breakup to construct fire breaks and removing fuel in the interface zones to be burned in the winter. Slave lake did not have a water shortage they had a pumping shortage. The only thing that police are capable of is manning roadblocks and forced entry, IMHO they were part of the problem and none of the solution.

Similarly the town mayors and councils demanding that people evacuate were the same ones that encouraged and permitted construction of residences on flood plains. Perhaps they should have noticed the name of the town when they were encouraging rapid growth on cheap real estate.

IMHO, We need more strategic planning not tactical crisis management.

So if the "Pros" are as incompetent as you say, don't you think evacuation is your best chance of survival?
By the way you are derailing this by talking about flooding and lack of a fire smart program.
But even when a 4 foot wave is coming down the street sheltering in place would not have been the best decision to come out of the EOC.
But with any natural disaster you can only go by the information you have at hand and make the best decisions you can at the time.
Mistakes will be made, (even if you are there with your expertize) but you do the best you can to minimie the damage.