First, I was a firefighter, fire investigator, and Fire Chief for four jurisdictions over a 43 year career in Western Canada. In that time I saw the standards for fire protection across North America slowly attempt to adapt to changes in population density, structural design, high-rise technologies, water supply, fire infrastructure and municipal management standards.
However, the reality is that both the NFPA, National Fire Protection Association and particularly Insurance Companies react too slowly to accommodate and adjust to the changes that nature is imposing on municipalities, provinces, states and countries as a whole. Rather than municipalities taking the initiative, facing the facts and adjusting the requirements for building permits, in terms of where people and corporations can build, and how those buildings are to be constructed, they often ignore the necessity to change and bury their heads in the concrete of their municipal designs. At least that was my experience, as municipalities seeking to increase their tax base are averse to placing too many constraints on prospective developers and owners.
Very few jurisdictions have acted responsibly and taken action to ensure that in those areas where drought, wildfire, storm/tidal surge or rainfall amounts were creating conditions that existing infrastructure could not manage, stopped future construction or mandated new standards for construction. Instead they buried their heads, hired emergency planning consultants whom they ‘told’ what outcomes they desired, and then continued on as if nothing had changed. By doing so they can then place the blame on the consultants rather than the jurisdiction having authority.
In reality, when it comes to climate change, everything has changed, depending on the jurisdiction in question. Without creating an actual ‘book’ on the problems associated with the situation now faced by municipalities and larger jurisdictions in North America, it should be self-evident to any bureaucrat responsible for a jurisdiction, who is willing to actually investigate the risks, that wild land fire, drought, flooding and tidal/storm surges are impacting the known risks for all these related jurisdictions.
To ignore these risks and then blame as a consequence of extreme loss, firefighters and emergency services is unconscionable. For years Fire Chiefs inside jurisdictions containing wild land interface or subject to drought have been telling their municipal administrations that change is affecting risk, and that the risks to their jurisdictions has increased, in some cases, exponentially.
In response, Fire Chiefs, who are contracted, are often politely reminded that they are to deliver service, not make requests that the jurisdiction can either not afford or is unwilling to afford.
I can attest to the fact, that in the last jurisdiction I was responsible for in Alberta, Canada, which had a massive area of wild land interface and extreme geographic challenges including hills, canyons, mountainous terrain and massively forested areas, the jurisdiction did not take my recommendations seriously. A very affluent municipality, it ignored requests to thin the fire load throughout the endangered area where extreme risk existed and placed the responsibility for fire protection on the fire service, and the property owners, which was, and is, highly irresponsible.
There is no possibility of containing a fire in very heavily forested areas where deadfall from 150 years of accumulated fire load on the landscape exists. One particular valley in question, and adjacent valleys were surrounded with up to 45 degree slopes where firefighters and firefighting equipment could not and cannot traverse. In addition there were no areas in close proximity that had pressurized water supplies with fire hydrants and even though the jurisdiction had large fire tankers in each hall, the water supply in relation to the demand is and was unrealistic. Additionally, most of the terrain had no roads for access to an affected area.
Were a fire to start in the forested areas, and if the weather in the valley, which often has sustained high winds coming off the mountains which are 10,000 feet in altitude were in effect, there is no conceivable way that any fire department can effectively contain such a fire. Particularly one where very few fire stations exist, and where there is no access to most fires that would occur in these forested areas. In addition, these stations have to provide fire protection for a jurisdiction covering 1,600 square kilometres, as well as being responsible to contain fire in the wild land or the forested areas outside these towns.
Firefighters cannot place themselves and their $700,000 fire apparatus in front of an advancing forest fire where temperatures will exceed 1200F. To do so would destroy the apparatus and kill firefighters. Often in forested areas the flame front is as much as 200 feet in the air, traveling at 15-17 mph. Water sprayed from 2.5 inch fire hoses at 240 gpm actually vaporizes before making contact withe the fire front. This is where and when water bombers and fire retardant bombers become invaluable.
Yet, often while major adjacent lands to the jurisdiction are protected by Provincial Forestry assets including Air Tankers, helicopters and Wild land fire teams, their numbers are, and were, totally insufficient based on the scope of the risk, demonstrated by the loss of four major communities within the province over the last fifteen years.
The only protection that is rational, is for the jurisdiction having authority to not allow construction in those areas where the fire risk is beyond the capability of the jurisdiction to protect. I would imagine that this also applies to those jurisdictions that have storm surge, tidal surges, excessive rainfall and topographical features that lend itself to flash floods.
The public also have to take some personal responsibility. When one looks at the terrain for property to be built or bought, one should consult a reputable insurance carrier to determine what the risk for the property in question is. And, then consult the jurisdiction having authority and the jurisdiction to which they will pay property taxes to request a risk assessment for their specific property and whether the municipality takes responsibility for the issuance of either the properties land title and construction or occupancy permit.
If a jurisdiction will not provide the same or suggests you consult an insurance body for its recommendation, then if the recommendation is negative or the jurisdiction will not provide a letter of accepted risk, then move on and find another property.
As climate change will continue to worsen, it is essential that homeowners assess the risk to their properties after occupancy and to FireSmart their property and provide the necessary protection to enhance the properties survival. Non-combustible exteriors, roofing materials, fire shutters and fire shields, in addition to sprinkler connections on the exterior and roof will go a long way to enabling a property to survive radiant heat, embers and flame impingement.
Be wise. Your home is likely your greatest expense and lifetime’s acquisition. Don’t lose it to indifference, or ignorance, especially willful ignorance.
Ciao…
Leave a Reply