Lt Dan Harris from Memphis (TN) Rescue 3 sent in these pictures with an interesting description. Apparently Memphis Engine 27 ran a medical call to this address. This is in fact an occupied dwelling; the home owner simply did not have blinds for the windows. A couple scrap pieces of plywood will do the trick every time.
One of the many subjects that has a clear difference of opinion across the fire service is about when and when not to search. Many people would search this structure, while many others would not. This example should at least make those who normally would have not performed the search to think twice when making that decision. Every fire is different, and decisions on the fireground need to made with all situational awareness factors in mind. Having said that, the building is not clear until we say it’s clear.
A closing thought… We are the fire department, if we don’t search it, who will?
When I worked for a slower suburban FD, we would not enter a structure like the one pictured. Partly because we lacked the confidence that comes with heavy fire duty, but mostly because we knew our district, and we knew that our quiet residential neighborhood — with low crime and unemployment rates — would not be the sort of community where squatters would sneak into abandoned buildings, or where people would use “detroit glass (AKA plywood)” instead of curtains.
Moving up to the “big leagues”, and working on a busy truck in an economically depressed neighborhood in a large city, I was again reminded that knowing your district goes further than simply knowing where the major intersections are.
I found that squatters were common, that putting an addition on your house without any permits or basic construction knowledge was accepted behavior, and that just because that shed/house/van looks old and dilapidated does not mean that someone’s not living in it.
Even in a crap economy, people still need a place to put their weary head down at night. With increasing frequency, apparently vacant structures are becoming that place.
Any structure should be considered occupied, the question is can it be searched safely given the conditions encountered upon arrival.
A quick triage of what is covering the windows and how it is held in place should occur on any building that has been fortified/secured. Being that this is in Tn and not the Fla. hurricane alley, it would probably be simple for a crew to quickly remove the coverings with forcible entry tools or powered saws. Let the probablity of life safety and the ease at which you can provide secondary egress be the overall deciding factors. Also with the more frequent use of Hurricane Impact Glass for security reasons in non-hurricane areas, this to could be come a consideration.
When I worked EMS in the inner city, I OFTEN times found whole families in buildings that appeared to be abandoned…one time 2 women had more than a dozen children in a building I would have thought to be abandoned from the exterior. The writer above notes that his prior suburban jursidiction “would not be the sort of community where squatters would sneak into abandoned buildings…” Unfortunately, in the current economic times even that may not be the case. In the middle class suburbs where I currently reside the police are reporting squatters in many foreclosed homes. In my opinion, searches should be conducted with an eye toward risk vs. benefit. For example, the building in the picture APPEARS to be vacant therefore I would undertake only moderate risk to conduct a search, i.e. I would not search ahead of a hoseline if conditions were severe. However, I would try to vent the windows and probe inside with a hook (or maybe even enter if conditions weren’t too bad). (Most importantly, I would urge a fairly aggressive attack in an attempt to put the fire out and thus remove the hazard as rapidly as possible and thus allow for a safer search.) It strikes me that this is where experience comes into play. You have to be able to read the fire, determine the risk involved and the probability (as opposed to possibility) that a savable human life is present and that your actions could affect a successful outcome. In all buildings a search MUST be conducted…it’s just a matter of how much risk we should undertake given an unknown PROBABILITY that a savable person is trapped. It’s tough work…that’s why they called the FIRE DEPARTMENT!
(NOT debating the issue of search or not) This picture reminds me of a fire my crew and I had recently. Where the house was boarded up and a vehicle in the driveway. Single story single family occupancy smoke showin, But with this twist. The Occupants were Barricaded inside with many surprises which made our job harder. I believe in preplaning; but the point I want to make is never forget the unexpected and always use your tools both God given (Your head) and hand tools. Stay safe out there everyone.
Its not clear untill we say its clear. We need to search every structure we come to if it is at all possable. We never know what our clients are going to live in.
Man, I wish I could remember what city this happened in, but there is an episode of Cops that really sends this message home.
I think it was somewhere in the midwest (Indy? Columbus?). There was a boarded up house on fire. The truck crew rolled up, and began prying the boards off the windows. Inside team hops in, and comes out 10 seconds later carrying an unconscious victim.
I’ll keep poking around; I’ll post it if I find it.
First of all kudos to Rescue 3 for finding this. Being in a smaller department south of Memphis, we routinely listen to Memphis’s scanner. I’m always impressed with the Rescue companies up there.
Second, I agree in the importance of a search for all structures. I rode with a department that serves a local university. Due to the ever present and growing amount of false alarms in the dorms, many students would stay inside their room instead of going outside. On the rare occasion that there was a fire, all rooms had to be searched due to this fact. Just because everyone is supposed to evacuate doesn’t mean they will.
How would you feel as a seasoned company officer if you had to report to the chief or incident command that a body was found during your secondary search because you neglected to enter a room on your primary search because “everyone was supposed to be out.”
Complacency is a killer in the fire service. A killer for the ones we protect and for our brothers that rely on us. Treat every call as the real thing. Many would pull up to this type of dwelling and simply write it off from the beginning. Our clients, as an earlier post refers to them, depend on us to give it our best every time.
In my city we would have code enforcement notified and action taken to remove the boards before a fire. Also, if on the medical run we were to see children in these conditions we would be obligated to call the state dept of children and family services.
Based on fire conditions and clues we would search the building if these was a chance of survival for human life.
Based on these two pictures, a VES type operation may be safer than traveling through the building. Using windows may keep you closer to your exit and depending on conditions you may not have to enter the room to clear it.
Also, to me it appears the C side, specifically the B/C corner may reveal the basement having windows or doors. More than one brother has died in a building with an easily accessible basement that no one bothered to look for.
Always get a 360 on the building even if it has to be someone elses eyes that do it.
After sending these pics into VES I made a call to our Inspection Division to report this dwelling. I then purchased some black sheets and brought in my staple gun hoping to go by the house and pull the boards and put up the sheets. When we returned to the house we were met with a gentleman who only opened the door about an inch. He said he wanted no help in removing the wood and he would put up the sheets on his own, he was acting very funny so we just left and notified PD about the situation.
Something to note based on Dan’s last post. Meth labs around the country are another consideration when encountering this situation. Boarded up structures, especially those that appear to be occupied, may be that way to conceal “chemistry labs” so keep this in mind when removing the boards and performing VES. You could get more than you bargained for.
We have plenty of homes that look as abandoned as this one does. It’s a VERY economically depressed area. I know of an RV in our 1st due that has an address assigned to it. Sad, but true…
One easy way to determine if the structure is abandoned or in use would be to look at the meter as you do your 360. Even if you get off the truck with the intentions of writing this house off, the officer still needs to do his 360. If the meter is spinning, chances are the house is not abandoned, as power would be disconnected to an abandoned house for non payment of the power bill. While this method won’t specifically help you find out if the structure is occupied when you arrive, you will at least know that someone is more than likely living there and will put you in the mindset of the possibility that there is someone to be rescued. Be Safe.
Upon arrival the only real decision is whether or not conditions allow for aggressive strategies.
Any assumptions regarding the occupation of the structure should be made at the risk of losing a clear conscious and possibly a life.
Knowing your district is the key to this puzzle….nothing wrong with stopping by and knocking on the door and seeing if anyone lives there….I dont know if I work in the “big leauges” or not but I feel like I work in a very busy area with moderate fire duty and a middle to low income area.
While yes we are the fire department and it is our job to rescue people we have to also consider our safety in this aspect of the job. Lets take the fact of abandonded or occupied out of it for a second….even without the threat of fire what condition is this building in? Wether its occupied or not if the building can not support a search then we shouldnt go in.
As for the homeless I am quite sorry that they are homeless but if they are living in an occupancy illegally and it catches fire and there are no indications of someone living there then I cant help them. You take this same structure with the plywood windo peeled off then I would be more likely to search, but if they are determined to hide from us there is not much I or anyone can do.
Take a look at the stats as well…How many people do we succesfully rescue from abandodned structures vs how many firefighters we kill in them. NIOSH put ot there recommendations also stating that 96 firefighters have died in vacant structure fires typically with NO ONE IN THEM….we seem to be risking alot but benfiting nothing or at best very little from it.
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/review/public/141/pdfs/DraftAlertUnoccupiedStructures.pdf
NFPA Study on Vacant Building Fires
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//OS.VacantBuildings.pdf
A fire rarely starts in a vacant building. There either has to be electricity or people present outside of other known factors for a fire to start. Therefore all fires, even in “unoccupied” buildings, are the result of people being there until we prove otherwise by search and then investigation.
Y’all remember that time Bobby Bouche rlaljljffjnsdfghsjfhksdfhsdafkjdsafhfdsafhsdakhfdskjksdgfisauyewiorfalkjdewpwqioefjdwvrfgweuoif;pj?
We’re going in.
Seriously though,
We’ve already had this argument, and I was on the losing side. We do need to ensure that everyone is out of our fire buildings. It’s just a matter of what we are going to risk, just like any other fire. If something is on fire, life is first. It doesnt specify on what type of fire, just that life is first. TRUST ME, you do not want to find a body after returning to a fire scene hours later. I wont say how I know that.
I agree to both sides. We need to look at our history, like the Worcester Cold Storage fire, which if I remember correctly was started by some homeless people tying to get warm.
I wonder how Worcester FD has changed their policies on vacant buildings, the homeless, and searches?
I believe, like alot of people, that the building that we are presented with must dictate our actions when we arrive. We can not be driven by factors that are unknown such as occupancy. What we DO KNOW when we arrive is a couple of thins; first, we know if the building has the stability to withstand a search from structural stability to fire stability. Second, we know the victims survivability profile if inside. These known variables must be used to make a good decision when we are presented with the situation. All to often we are using our brothers because of a mentality that “we are the fire department” and “we MUST go inside” these are outdated philosophies that must be changed. Life safety comes first, it is definiately paramount, what we must remember that the life safety component also consists of our brothers and our sisters on the fireground…..we know they are salvagable when we arrive.
There was a comment refering to the ratio of occupants rescued vs. firefighter’s LODD within structures suspected to be vacant…there is no ratio because no one knows how many lives have been saved in these structures, because no one keeps data on that side. FD’s along the rust belt respond to fires in these buildings every day. The Toledo FD responds on average to 2 working fires everyday in vacant structures. Some days that total rises to 5-6-7-8 working fires in vacant structures. We currently have over 15,000 vacant residential structures and over 5,000 vacant commercial industrial buildings, including several high-rise buildings. We perform aggressive primary searches of these structures when the building is tenable for firefighter entry, normally once a handline is in position. We have never lost a firefighter performing interior firefighting operations in vacants to date. We have had suffered injuries and have experienced some close calls in these structures, but we take an intelligent approach with operations in vacants based on our experience coupled with constantly evolving tactics and procdures. Regardless who started or how the fire began does not change the fact that there can be a life hazard inside and we took an oath to make every feasable attempt to ensure their rescue. We do not pick and choose who we are going to attempt to rescue nor do we take an unreasonable risk when no person is savable. It comes down to a good risk-vs-benefit assessment to determine what type of operation we will undertake.
All good points. I personally don’t feel the fire service, at least from my perspective, has it’s eye on the prize any longer. We don’t train our people in safety and survival like we should. We don’t put our folks in enough situations during training that mimick the real deal. We don’t hold ourselves accountable for making sure that everyone is ready everyday for every fire. I believe the key to safety is through competency.
Take a look at this link. A boarded up dwelling. What do ya know there are people in there. That is why.
http://wjz.com/local/fire.west.Baltimore.2.1092499.html
People can be anywhere, they can live in a storage shed if they want to and I am not going to do an interior search when it is fully involved. My point is that if the building can’t handle a search then it doesn’t happen….it it can handle a search, it does. It is time for us to start putting us first so that we all go home alive.
Remember the 257 Elm Street fire in Atlanta, Thanksgiving night, November 23, 2006. RIP FF Steven Solomom.
When we are off duty, WE are THEM. Do you want your local dept to TRY and save your ass???? Or are you just happy that THEY put THEMSELVES first???
If I am in a situation that I am in a structure that for whatever reason can not handle a search (i.e. increased fire conditions, poor structural stability) and I am not able to self-evacuate then I guess it was just my time. I expect the guys to do what they are able to do, but I am not selfish enough to hope they try something foolish in what is probably a futile attempt anyway. If the structure is not good because of the fire conditions then my survivability profile would be nothing anyway.
Great point!
tsafe
If we were to follow all the recommendations of NIOSH, NFPA, OSHA, and whoever else has a say in things, then we would be standing behind a sheild 200 ft. away lobbing water on whatever is left of structures like this. The stats and studies that are thrown out like hardcore evidence are about as real as the tatoo out of a Cracker Jack box. You can make driving your car down the street sound like the scariest thing on earth, if you list all the stats and studies about MVA’s. The bottom line is we need to know our jobs, do our jobs, and listen to our intincts on all runs. Part of our instinct should be common sense. Read the conditions on arrival. If you aren’t confident in reading conditions, then train more. Watch videos, look at pics in trade magazines and books, whatever it takes to gain some knowledge and make yourself better and more confident. Has any fire ever been worth it when a firefighter dies? We do our best, and even then, things can still go wrong. Why is it worse if a FF dies in a vacant, as opposed to a home or building where no one was home? Vacant doesn’t always mean unoccupied. In my district kids enter vacants all the time to play and get into things. It’s not always druggies and squatters. Complacency and assumptions are what cause FF’s to get into bad situations. This is an “inherently dangerous” profession; at least thats what the tag inside my gear says. The risks we choose to take can not be measured or studied by the experts. Work hard, be aggressive, and use common sense. Being SAFE will come natural if you TRAIN appropriately. Like Scott said above if it is “just your time” there is not much any of us can do to change it.
Joe,
THANK YOU!. I get so pissed off with these “safety guys” I have to just get away from the source before I comment based on emotion. What you said illustrated what I was wanting to say..”TRAIN!!!!!!!!!” Don’t start with the defeatist attitude of “well the study said” if it is in fact YOU that are the weak link due to lack of experience or lack of training. Learn how to save your own ass, that will alllow you to become a better, aggressive firefighter and to PUT THE PUBLIC FIRST. I don’t recall anyone here saying to search it no matter what. Of course we are not going into a fully involved structure where life is not tenable. When I said ” were going in”, still meant an aggressive search and, now hold on to your panties…under fire and smoke conditions… but also a common sense approach as well. To sit in the yard and say “I quit” before you even get started…that I cannot stomach.
everybody stay safe, and remember….TSAFE
I dont think anyone is saying we are not gonna search….we however have to take a more thougrough assesment and take extra precautions when dealing with a vacant, derelict, boarded up structure.
We recently had a vacant building catch fire and had a report that someone might be inside…so we opened it up and what do you know….no floors. So even if someone was in there based on this fact we wrote the building off cause we had no way to tget to them…at this point the fire conditions would hav supported a search.
If we do decide to enter a boarded up buildign it is my opinion that prior to commiting interior crews we need to sufficently open up the building. We need to get the boards or ply wood off the windows, doors, etc in case there is a fire catastrohic fire event and the crews need to evac, this way they can exit through as they would in a normal fire versus having to compete with screwed, or nailed in boards that are difficult to defeat under the best circumstances not to mention low visibility and high heat.
I do think its worse if a firefighter dies in a vacant…while we should be trying to save property we should not be risking our lives for it….a life is only worht another life not your plasma screen tv.
No matter what or who is in it…if the building is unsafe due to construction features or fire involvement we dont go in period end of story. Look at the NIST studies in Phoenix (I know another flawed study Im sure) Fires in residential and commercial occupancies that are wood frame are collapsing within 16 minutes of the fire starting this also must be factored into your assesment of the buildings.
FitSsikS makes the point. As far as the “just my time” stuff. That’s just hero bullshit. Ive said it before and I’ll say it again…heart attacks and car wrecks. How many firemen are killed searching per year…like 2.
Amen DMAN. And to the crap about we should not risk our lives for property, what the hell do you do at work? Each time I enter a building, I risk my life. But I accept this risk and I TRAIN!!!!!
We recently had a large barn with a small apartment on fire. The fire was mainly in the apartment. Since we had the common sense to ask if everyone was out, we didn’t push ourselves harder than necessary. But due to our quick attack and our TRAINING, we saved over 30 stalls and the majority of the barn.
Like DMAN said, heart attacks and car wrecks. Let’s all get in shape and drive smarter and wear our seat belts.
The boarding up of windows if a very common practice here in the south in preparation for an incoming hurricane. It clearly has a major influence on fire behavior and life safety concerns. I know personally that I have drawed to conclusion that if a house has been boarded up due to a hurricane I also assume that a homeowner has probally stored a lot of gasoline as well. I have experienced working fires with both of the previous mentioned situations and what a detrimenal effect it has on fire suppression. Always assume the worst and work from there. Stay safe.
It’s interesting that over the past few months several stories like this have surfaced. Also remarkable was the fire in Houston from which four (I believe) civilians were pulled from a nightime fire in a commercial occupancy. Obviously an unlikely place to be “occupied” – but good thing they erred on the side of caution.
There has been a trend in the fire service today to make a “risk assessment” about the survivability of victims. I’M AGAINST THAT. There are too many factors for us to possibly correctly asusme that “anyone in there must be dead” or that “its vacant” – anything can happen.
Don’t take from this that I’m not into calculating risks… I think that what we need to ask ourselves upon arrival is:
1) Does the building’s structural stability support an interior attack
2) Do our current/arriving resources support an interior attack
If the answer to both of those is yes – GO IN, SEARCH, AND PUT THE FIRE OUT. If the answer to either of those is no you have a decision to make, that in the absence of obvious rescues, is probably “we’re not going in”.
If you must decide not go in, that’s fine. But the notion of assessing the likelihood of entrapment from a 360-degree lap doesn’t sit well with me. As another commenter said, you don’t know WHAT people are living in.
If it is safe to do so, it is our responsibility to enter, search, and extinguish. Not to say “no one’s in there” and then later “whoops…”
Nicholas A. Martin
nmartin@traditionstraining.com
As Nick was saying, to know if the building is even structurally sound enough for an interior attack/rescue to start with has to be an immediate priority. As many of you were saying, training and knowing your first due is also a top priority. Where I work, slow rural/turning suburban district, we have tried to do some agressive preplanning and began to identify our vacant buildings as to their structural stability. We have developed signage using the nationally recognized symbols for structurally safe when inspected; an open reflective box;structural or interior hazards exist enter with extreme caution, a box with a / symbol; and structural and interior hazards exist to the degree that exterior fire operations only enter for life safety only, a box with x inside. These are 24″ x 24″ and will be hung on the street side of the building.
You notice that none say vacant, stand back and hope no one is inside burning to death. Training life your life depends on it, because someones usually does.
That is train like your life depends on it, because someones usually does.
Sorry for the spelling error!
Hey Dan,
This has nothing to do with these photos, but I thought I would say hi and mention you forgot to update your NY timeline… it seems to be missing some info about the fun you had away from the guys.