Initially contained at the beginning of August, one of these large fires in the Salmon River breaks country of central Idaho came back to life after strong winds fanned smoldering fuels. On an afternoon in late August, many factors were coming together to create strong potential for extreme fire behavior: rugged terrain, low fuel moisture, gusty winds, low relative humidity, and high temperatures.
After working with their crews on the fire for two days, three hotshot crew leaders watched warily as these adverse conditions unfolded. They developed a series of trigger points and plans to make sure they were several steps ahead of any impending disaster.
They first relayed their concerns to the Branch Director and the Division Supervisor, making sure the Incident Management Team (IMT) was aware of conditions on the ground.
All three leaders made a pact to communicate frequently, keeping one another apprised of changes in the fire and making sure everyone on their crews had a high degree of situation awareness.
Two of the three leaders agreed that they would keep their crews together. They determined that the safety zones that dozers had cut along the line were likely inadequate and that the “real” safety zone was a clear-cut area above them.
They tied a trigger point to the relative humidity: if it dropped below 20 percent, they would get completely out of the timber and into the clear-cut area. On the two previous days, they had observed the fire activity increase rapidly when the relative humidity dropped below 20 percent.
The leaders kept a close watch on smoke columns from two separate drainages. They observed a spot fire that quickly created a third column. Before long, the original two columns drew in the third to become a wall of fire—200-foot flames, resembling a gaseous rolling ball. Along with the intense fire behavior, the wind shifted and increased in speed to 45 miles per hour. The relative humidity dropped to 16 percent.
The two leaders hurried their crews into the clear-cut area. They radioed a warning to the third leader, “Whatever you’ve got over there, it’s not going to be enough.” The third leader made a quick decision to go downhill and successfully moved his crew below the fire.
As the fire blew by the crews in the clear-cut area, it picked up sizeable debris and embers, scattering them high in the air. The Air Attack Supervisor, flying in a helicopter overhead, commented that he could not believe that the wind could move that kind of material that fast.
Because of the leader’s keen attention to the changing elements and contingency planning, no one in any of the three crews sustained any injuries during the blow-up. Further, no crew members had to deploy a fire shelter because all were either below the fire or well within a clear-cut area.
The leaders’ bias for action ensured the safety of their people and serves as an example of how taking the initiative can avert potential tragedy, even in the most dangerous situations.
[Click here to download a copy of Leading in the Wildland Fire Service.]
No comments:
Post a Comment
********
The WFLDP seeks to build and support an online community in which wildland fire professionals can interact.
We invite respectful discussion; however, the realities of online culture is such that anonymous posts and posts from children under the age of 13 are not accepted.
All comments are monitored by our editorial staff for appropriateness in meeting the mission of the WFLDP prior to posting to the blog. We do not discriminate against any views, but we reserve the right not to post comments.
Individuals posting comments are fully responsible for everything that they submit.
Comments submitted after hours and on holidays/weekends will be reviewed as early as possible the next business day.
Our complete blog policy can be found at http://www.fireleadership.gov/committee/reports/Blog_Policy_Jan2010.pdf.
A yellow box will appear after you submit your comment notifying you that your comment will be reviewed.