Lower North Fork Fire & Prescribed Fire Review

Anopheles gambiae wrote: Ann Appel's Husband: "When You Talk About Losing Everything, We Did"
Scott Appel Remembers His Wife Of 22 Years
Marshall Zelinger, 7NEWS Content Producer/Presenter
POSTED: 9:04 pm MDT April 29, 2012
UPDATED: 12:39 am MDT April 30, 2012

After speaking with a 911 dispatcher on Monday afternoon, Ann called her husband again.

"I talked to her later on in the afternoon and she just said, 'It's getting more and more windy, we've got the same smoke that we had before.' And so I said, 'Just get things ready and just leave," said Scott. "I know that she was getting ready to go because we talked about that. Unfortunately I wasn't here, (but) she was plenty capable of doing anything on her own. That was not an issue at all."

Fire crews finally called for reverse notifications at 4:57 p.m. The Appel household never got one. The notification company had their home mapped in the wrong area. Neighbors told Scott, by the time the call went out, they believe the Appel property was on fire

.

Oh, and one more thing. I was listening to the scanner and heard something about evacs being likely. ( you can go look at the records in the scanner thread) This was before 3PM. It took another 2 hours? I don't know, from where I sit and the things I was hearing, there was something really strange about that two hour difference.

I may be wrong, but I don't believe dispatchers have, or should have, the authority to tell someone to evacuate in a wildfire situation, until that decision has been made by the Incident Commander.

At 1434 the dispatcher passed along the latest information she had, which was that the fire was 5 acres and growing, and crews were on the way.

One of the biggest questions that has not yet been addressed by review is how the Incident Command was handled in this incident, and why it was handled that way.

I think that the new 3 level evacuation procedure is a good idea, and should help in the future. And I agree that it needs to be made clear that the final decision regarding evacuation, and the responsibility for that decision, is up to the resident.

Of course a dispatcher should be able to tell a resident to evacuate if the order is in place. And if the county has decided that the residents should be making that decision then they should say that too. Communication about what a resident should be thinking about is always appropriate.

Once again, i have a different perspective from where I sit. If you look at the history on the fire on 285b thread, we reported they were talking about evacs before it was official because we knew it was possibility and I believe that could have saved people precious moments. Why shouldn't a dispatcher give the same info? They most likely are the residents only info on what is going on. That is why our post on the possible evacs went before 3PM. We made it clear it was not official but a possibility. Why would a dispatcher not do the same thing.?

It is a precarious thing deciding between unnecessary evacs and saving people's lives by getting them out of there, but talking about it with a dispatcher is not a bad thing. JMHO.

I agree with jf1acai that dispatch shouldn't be telling people to evacuate unless it has been authorized. Their role is to relay info to the appropriate parties - sheriff's dept, fire dept. and have them respond to the Reporting Party.

In the Hi Meadow first reporting parties knew where the fire was and told dispatch how to access. One even told dispatch that they could use his jeep trail down the mountain to access. The information never got to the fire dept. Valuable information that could have possibly saved the wildfire from exploding and taking off several hours later over to Pine.

The problem becomes, since there are many reporting, whether the fire dept will use its regular approach and respond to the Reporting Party who might have the info. When f.d. arrived on one of the Reporting Parties road, he recommended they hike down the mountain from his place. Because of distance and other factors they didn't. Little did they know that another person on another road have a better access because they never responded to him.

Another example is when there was a fire from target practice over in the national forest near Miller Gulch. They were having a hard time finding where it was. A person called dispatch and told them precisely how to access because they could see the flames from their location and they were familiar with the area. The information never made it from dispatch to the fire dept personnel.

What I think would be helpful when there are many calling is for dispatch to take the information and give to the appropriate party, especially if they are not going to go to the Reporting Party. Have an appointed firefighter person who job is to take this information and sort through and provide to the Incident Commander or other appropriate party.

What dispatch should be able to say now that we have levels, what level it is or if no levels have been established. But also take the info that they are providing because RP's are generally closer to the scene and are usually providing first hand information.

Came back to add and never have dispatch tell them to stop calling.

Not optimistic about this one.

Bill to pay Colo. wildfire victims gets hearing - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/politics/ci_2 ... ts-hearing

To provide a somewhat different perspective on the LNFF situation (comments from firefighters regarding a different fire):

The fact is when things like this happen firefighters lose. First they become reluctant to employee a useful tool, they become unsure of themselves and their leadership, and worst case they just get out of wildland fire altogether.

In this day and time litigation has become one of the watch-outs that we often overlook in our attempts to control a fire. At the end of the day we as wildland firefighters hope we have done all we can to protect people,their property, and the affected resources.

Full article, read comments at the end

I have seen no evidence that anyone involved in the LNFF deliberately, negligently, wantonly or willfully did anything to cause or exacerbate the situation.

If evidence surfaces that such did in fact occur, it should be prosecuted accordingly.

In the mean time, I believe that we should concentrate on learning all we can about the true facts, and on determining better approaches, in order to reduce as best we can the results of future situations.

I am also in favor of helping the victims of the LNFF in whatever way we reasonably can. Nothing we can do now can bring back the lost lives, property, etc. But I believe we can do more than has been done to date to help the victims. How to best do that at this point I do not know, but I think that open discussion is good.

I believe that we owe it to those involved to learn all we can about the situation, so that all involved can perform/respond better in the future.

And has been said before tell that to the people involved.

http://www.9news.com/news/local/article ... -committee

Bill to pay Colo. wildfire victims passes House committee
"My neighbors and my family did nothing wrong. The state cannot say the same," Scott Appel, who lost his wife Ann Appel to the fire, said. "One phone call letting Ann and others know what was really coming at them and there would have been no deaths. I'm convinced of that."

jf1acai wrote: To provide a somewhat different perspective on the LNFF situation (comments from firefighters regarding a different fire):

The fact is when things like this happen firefighters lose. First they become reluctant to employee a useful tool, they become unsure of themselves and their leadership, and worst case they just get out of wildland fire altogether.

In this day and time litigation has become one of the watch-outs that we often overlook in our attempts to control a fire. At the end of the day we as wildland firefighters hope we have done all we can to protect people,their property, and the affected resources.

Full article, read comments at the end

jf1acai so many thoughts.

Firefighters are under the direction of a command and follow that command. If they burn out or have difficulty following procedures then it is time for them to get out.

The ones who stay are very well trained. If you look at the Type 3 teams, they are extremely well trained, years of experience, and learn how to handle stress and all kinds of difficult situations as well as know how to survive on their own if push comes to shove. And yes even some of them decide it is time to get out.

Sorry for so many separate posts. I have found that when I write long, I lose the content some how and am tired of rewriting.

The homeowner who lost his home in the LNNF came over later in the day to check on and feed his animals. I was there giving my mom an update on my aunt's new backfill for her deck and to do some drills. It gave us a chance to talk. I had recommended this website to him and in particular this and some other threads. He says he reads some of it but isn't ready to come on talk about stuff as he is still angry about things and some of what he reads makes him angry. So he will wait. But he and others are reading it!

While there the homeowner's children engaged in some drills that we have set up for nieces and nephews and the rest of the family. Trying to make it fun and interesting while giving them enough practice so that it becomes automatic. Working as a team is important, but more important is to teach them that if Grandma (or someone else) is injured and can't be dragged with the fireman's pull (shirt and shoulders) they have to leave her and save him/herself. Hopefully they will never have to deal with a fire or other emergency but if they should better they know how to handle. So we will keep doing different scenarios.

Any thoughts?

jf1acai wrote: I have seen no evidence that anyone involved in the LNFF deliberately, negligently, wantonly or willfully did anything to cause or exacerbate the situation.

If evidence surfaces that such did in fact occur, it should be prosecuted accordingly.

In the mean time, I believe that we should concentrate on learning all we can about the true facts, and on determining better approaches, in order to reduce as best we can the results of future situations.

I am also in favor of helping the victims of the LNFF in whatever way we reasonably can. Nothing we can do now can bring back the lost lives, property, etc. But I believe we can do more than has been done to date to help the victims. How to best do that at this point I do not know, but I think that open discussion is good.

I believe that we owe it to those involved to learn all we can about the situation, so that all involved can perform/respond better in the future.

And some people are just plain blind. Ask some of the people from the fire who would like to tell you where to shove it. Apparently one has. There's a whole lot more who would like to. And another insensitive ID10T.

Evidence has surfaced and attorneys are filing claims on behalf of their clients. More to come.

I think that is what we have been doing jf -finding the true facts and determining better approaches.

I would hope most would take it a step further and contact the appropriate parties, e.g. governor, csfs, fire dept., etc. as we can talk about this until we are blue in the face.

Please jf, step in at any time and talk about approaches or whatever seems appropriate instead of parroting the same old I am going to wait until there are more facts. That certainly is your choice to wait. So like one homeowner said ST*U or say something useful.

What would you like to do to help the affected homeowners? BTW they don't like to be called victims.

I think what would be most helpful is to sign up with Mountain Resource Center if you have time to volunteer now or in the future, (specify how you would like to volunteer or what specifically your skills are that would be useful), or items to donate (take in pix of big items). Most aren't in a position to use many of the donations right now because they don't have anywhere to put them. For some it might be two years before they will be able to use the donations. For others who will be renting but are still staying with friends, family or hotel, the time will be sooner.

I have also learned that some of the homeowners are very particular about what they want to replace what they had. They want something specific that is like what they had before to remind them of home. So while offers are appreciated, it is still very hard for some to just take anything that is offered and some don't want to have to say no. That is why Mountain Resource Center would be a good choice.