Excerpt:
Until the weekend’s fires, the stay and defend idea was “the most talked about strategy in the firefighting world,” according to the Los Angeles Times. Southern California wildland firefighting agencies were even in the process of adopting aspects of the approach. Land managers across the US West were also taking a shine to the idea, which includes heavy doses of prevention, education, and personal responsibility.
I looked up what is actually meant by stay and defend. Here is the official brochure that I found: http://www.fesa.wa.gov.au/internet/upload/shared/docs/Stay_Defend3.pdf
ReplyDeleteWhat I got from this is that it shifts a lot of the responsibility back to the home owner. I believe that the idea is that if a home owner is going to stay through a fire, then they will do what ever is necessary to protect themselves. The main function is to provide a fire break around your house (60 feet) that has minimal burnable material. After talking to one of my friends who is from Australia, she mentioned how serious people take this. They personally keep the fire break. This is different than some of the US who have trees, gardens, and other materials right up to the edge of their house. This seems to work well with the typical smoldering fires. It does not seem like the correct plan for the huge fires that they are having now. Those fires are too big and can easily jump the fire break. Strangely the program encourages individuals to stay in their homes if a fire comes and only leave after the main front has passed. As we have seen, this has lead to many deaths. There are some aspects (such as responsibility) that I like and others that I do not (stay in your home though the fire). Definitely a different way of thinking.