One morning while cruising through the fire service internet world, I discovered an interesting discussion taking place. The folks partaking in the discussion are all proven fire officers and I have a lot respect for them. However, with the exception of a few, I think these folks may be delivering the wrong message this time.
I know, I know. Who am I to question the word of folks who have been in the fire service longer than I’ve been alive? I can answer that pretty quickly by stating I’m a constant student of the trade and someone who puts a lot of time and effort into the fire service. With that said, I have had the opportunity to learn/see/do a lot of things that do work well and some things that didn't work very well. One thing I’ve learned along the way is that blanket statements generally don’t have a place in the fire service.
Anyways, back to the original discussion taking place in the internet world. The topic of discussion was vacant building fires. Now, this seems to be a pretty hot topic in the fire service and there are a lot of folks out there preaching that we should not go into these buildings. In certain instances they are correct. However, making blanket statements indicating an alleged vacant building should be extinguished from the exterior everytime is crazy! Fire officers should be making decisions based on observation of the “big picture” and not just one part of the picture. Effective size-up should dictate whether or not interior fire suppression operations are appropriate, not simply whether a building isallegedly or assumed to be vacant. There are numerous instances where buildings thought to be vacant or unoccupied actually had occupants that either had to be rescued or were killed from fires. The fire started somehow and if conditions permit, a primary search coupled with coordinated fire attack and ventilation should occur. With that said, there are instances where an interior fire attack is not appropriate and hopefully company officers are able to look at the “big picture” and determine this as well. I don’t think anyone with a good head on their shoulders is advocating running blindly into fires. Instead I think we are advocating making decisions based on conditions, observations, training, and experience. Making blanket statements indicating exterior fire attack is the solution to vacant building fires is inaccurate and breeds robots instead of decision makers.
Now that I’ve finished my rant, I will leave you with this: My father was the Fire Chief of the Niagara Falls (NY) Fire Department for 4 years. Anybody who has ever been to Niagara Falls, NY knows the condition of the city and knows that they get plenty of fire duty. Shortly after he left the NFFD and returned to Virginia, the NFFD responded to a fire in avacant house. This not untypical for the NFFD and I have observed the NFFD make many successful interior fire attacks in vacant buildings. From all accounts of the fire, the fire in the house was too far progressed to allow an interior attack initially. However once crews were able to start making some headway and got inside, they discovered the body of an 8 year old boy. This vacant house had been vacant for years, how could this boy have ended up in there? He was in there because that is where he and his friends liked to play and one day they decided to light a fire. Unfortunately he was unable to make it out with the rest of his friends.
Now put yourselves in their shoes. If conditions were different and an interior attack had been indicated but because it’s vacant we choose to attack from the exterior, what kind of chance would we give this kid? No chance. Why? Because we didn’t make a decision based on the “big picture”. Just because a building is thought to be vacant doesn’t mean it is and certainly doesn’t automatically make it an exterior fire suppression operation.
These are just my 2 cents on the matter. It doesn't mean I'm right and it doesn't mean that someone else is wrong. For whatever reason, I felt it neccessary to put some thoughts into text.
No comments:
Post a Comment