A tragic lesson on why evacuation orders should always be heeded...

One person has died and another is seriously injured after refusing to obey an evacuation order due to a wildfire in B.C.'s Cariboo region.

The two people who refused to leave a fire zone near Meldrum Creek, west of Williams Lake, were involved in two separate accidents on Sunday.

Officials with the Cariboo Regional District have released few details, but say the two people ignored an evacuation order.

"These people were still within the evacuation area," said Shelly Burich, who speaks for the Cariboo Regional District emergency operations centre.

"When there is an evacuation order in place, there is limited access to emergency vehicles and emergency services. When they're under an evacuation order, those roads are closed, so that doesn't allow anybody to come in and be able to help them."

I see the Darwin Awards are accepting candidates.

HJ

Why do the people on this forum have an overwhelming compulsion to immediately pounce (once again) on the "Darwin Awards" band wagon? It makes me wish I never posted the link. I thought that with posting here it would promote intelligent and perhaps, thought provoking conversation...guess I wrong again. I very seldom see this type of behavior on other forums I frequent and post the same or similar links.

I would not immediately evacuate just because someone told me to. I would look at their warnings/recommendations, look at the situation, use my best judgement and decide for myself. In this case it might have been a mistake not to evacuate (but we don't know the details so we can't judge). But in other cases, I'm sure more harm has come DUE to evacuating. An uncontrolled fire near your property is a pretty good reason to evacuate, but again, we don't know the specific details of the situation.

Hikin'Jim,You should read the comments section of this published Tragedy in Teslinhiker's post,For there lies the truth!I believe an Apology is in order here,Don't You?

Bro, I apolgize. Didn't mean to offend. Perhaps I rushed to judgement or made assumptions that I shouldn't have.

Usually, in my area, the people who defy orders really don't have any idea of what they're getting into and wind up putting firefighters who have to rescue them at risk. I consider that a poor choice.

HJ

The story itself is kind of an odd one, since the fatality had nothing to do with the either the fire or the evacuation order. The news org. presented it rather poorly IMO.

As for the evacuation order itself: basically, it's the authorities saying "understand this clearly: you could be cut off, and if that happens we cannot and will not come in to help you."

There are situations where someone might choose, if they were very well-informed and well-equipped, to stay.

But most people haven't seen a wind-driven fire in action, and that means they could make a very wrong choice. I've fought a couple of wind-driven grass fires and boy do those things move. My response to a crowning forest fire is simple and unequivocal: get me the h*ll out of here!

All the authorities can do is issue the warnings and give the advice to leave. That drops it in the lap of the prospective evacuees. If they don't leave, fine...

BUT if they decide not to leave, they shouldn't be able to cry for help when the fire or hurricane is ten feet from their door, putting prospective rescuers in danger.

You pays your money and you takes your chances. People want to make their own decisions, so let them live with them. Or die with them. There's no point to arguing and fighting with them.

Sue

Doug is saying it right. The story is misleading.
Sometimes the reporting just leaves you shaking your head.

Here's a better story:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nati...article1659537/

There's also a segway regarding the two water bomber pilots that lost their lives. These guys were real fliers, not content to 'drive the bus,' and I have immense respect for them. Condolences to the families.

My nephew is on his third season on a Helitack (HAC1R) team in Northern Alberta and was actually supposed to be in BC to lend assistance but didn't make it down to Edmonton for his flight out. He is waiting for the call to join them. These young men have to be under 180 lbs due to helicopter weight restrictions with their 50# of gear. He must be just barely under that limit... These guys don't make a whole pile of money, they do it because of the thrill and adrenalin rush of being the first in to a fire and rappelling down (Alberta doesn't use parajumpers anymore). This is definitely not a safe profession to be in but he wanted to be a Calgary city firefighter - I told him to get some seasoning by getting in the forest fire side. Hope I don't regret my advice to him.

I have been on the fire line in about a dozen wildfires and close to many others over the years. Wildfire is nothing to mess around with. In bad conditions, they spread with unbelievable speed.

If a mandatory evacuation order is issued, staying in your home is a very bad call. Some do and survive. Others don't.

My home in Southern Cal has been seriously threatened by fire on two occasions. Both times I have had the car loaded up and ready to drive away, all of this before the any voluntary or mandatory notices. We have a priority check list which does allow us to get the important items loaded. The rest is just "stuff" and can be replaced. The house is insured and can be rebuilt. Saving the lives of my loved ones and our pets ranks way ahead of any of the material loot we have accumulated.

"Segway" is the one person self-balancing vehicle. "Segue" (pronounced exactly the same) is a transition from one story to another. The name of the vehicle is a pun on the "transition" meaning of segue.

(Proofreading is part of my job, and I apologize for any offense.)

And that is a better article.

Bloody 'eck, you caught me! You're exactly right.

... and I just learned something new. I have never heard the word "segue". I guessed what it meant by context, even though it was misspelled as that two-wheeled rolling vehicle.

The board meeting for the 2 wheeled contraption must have been hilarious.

'Lets call it Seque.'

'What the hell is Seque.'

'Well its seque, the transition from one story to another, its a perfect allegory for this revolutionary form of human transportation for those that can't be bothered or too lazy to walk'

'But folks won't understand!'

'Hmm, lets call it Segway instead'

'Great, that's settled then!'

The traditional method of naming high technology products has moved on a little.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK6pPw1pGEE

I may be a little slow, but what's the lesson here?

Did anyone else besides Doug actually read the article? The guy's death had nothing to do with the evacuation, I'm not even sure why it was mentioned. The title of the article would have been slightly more accurate if it had read "1 dead after heeding evacuation orders". From the way it sounds you could pick any number or random events and tie it to his death, it could have been called "1 dead after drinking his morning coffee". Seems like it was just a freak accident which just happened to coincide with an evacuation order at the time.

Yes, I noticed that, too.

Maybe the lesson is, if it's important enough to evacuate the area, maybe it's important enough not to stop to cut firewood on the way out.

I was responding more to the other 50 people in the area who thought standing in the way of a wildfire was a good idea.

Sue

I'm too lazy this morning to go back and read it again. Does it even say whether they were still within the evac area when they stopped to cut wood?

Yes. Emergency crews had to go into the evac area to pull them out. (Gives head a shake.)

In my view, this tragedy was connected to the fire and evacuation order, albeit indirectly.

And no, I'm not remotely suggesting the man should've paid with his life for having made a questionable decision. We're intelligent people here, but we've all exercised questionable judgment, often with consequences. Examining the facts surrounding a tragedy doesn't automatically imply the victim somehow 'deserved' his fate.

No, he didn't 'ignore' the evacuation order. He left his property. Did he comply with the order? No. He stopped within the evacuation zone to engage in a non-essential activity. BTW, one account I read (haven't independently verified) says the accident location was within one kilometer of the active blaze.

It wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that because of proximity to the fire, the victim was rushing his tree-felling activity to stay ahead of the fire, and in doing so, failed to observe safe practices. Hence, the tree falling on him.

So, the lesson(s) here? One might be that in a survival situation -- and this was a survival situation -- consequences of decisions are often greatly magnified, and need to be carefully considered before acting.

I apologize also. Today after seeing a person who I respect narrowly miss a freak workplace accident (less then 3 feet from me) that could of easily killed him, it really puts into perspective that the little petty things really do not matter. The things that really matter is he was able to go home to his family today...

Teslinhiker.

Thanks.