helicopper

I hope everyone remembers this sentiment when there's a body recovery assignment and people are running around as though it was a brother or sister to be rescued. Risk/benefit analysis. Yes, it was a dog. Had this been training it would have been a mannequin. My point is that we very often go on "good intent" calls or other jobs where the risk may be higher than benefit but we do it anyway. Chief Flynn brings up some great points about making the hard decisions and I'm sure that the Chiefs in LA did the same thing before commencing the operation. We're not talking about a knee jerk decision with inadequate resources. We're talking about a FULL response with a swift water rescue assignment (alot of resources). As for the dropping a guy out of a helicopter, A. he wasn't dropped. B. That's his job. and C. they do this stuff all the time. That was a rescue equipped Bell 412 twin engine helicopter with a crew that probably has more experience than any comparable crew anywhere in the country. They perform rescues and other missions all the time be it a rain swollen river or narrow canyon or ocean or rooftop. Anyone on that crew could have decided to say "no-go" but they did a risk analysis and this was well within their capabilities so they did it. If it was your call or your crew you could say no and maybe this incident will cause some more discussions about some of the more unusual rescue type calls we get here in our area. Another positive outcome. Why do you go into burning vacant buildings? To save a building? You can't give me the argument that there COULD be someone in a vacant building because that's the same rationale that was used in this case. If the FD didn't get the dog, someone else would have and then they would have had a real rescue on their hands. So, why go into the building? Because that's the job, right? As I said in my first post, they're probably discussing how to handle animal cases in the future so nobody does get bitten.

efdcapt, my initial reaction was the same as yours - all these resources and risk for a dog? But after considering the statement that they would rather rescue a dog on their terms and in the best possible conditions than return to the location to rescue a good samaritan under unknown conditions I backed off my position a bit. We all know that someone would have gone in there to rescue the dog. Remember someone once jumped off the Tappan Zee Bridge to "rescue" a jumper. Then the FD would have been criticized for not taking action. The bleeding hearts would also condemn the FD for their insensitivity to that "poor, poor drowning dog" (remember LA is almost as liberal as NY). As for the use of a helicopter, as efd said, in the LA basin it is standard practice and they consider it just another resource. They don't sensationalize it as is done on this side of the country. Why the large response of FF and equipment? It would seem that it is the standard swift water rescue response, many of those resources were already pre-deployed due to the "river rescue preparedness state". I think the west coast has a much more structured, much more organized response of appropriate resources than we do. All in all, it was a good training exercise and I bet they're discussing how to safely extricate a dog in the future so a rescuer isn't bitten. Positive outcome. Good PR. Positive outcome. Dog is out of the water. Positive outcome. I'm sure that the Chiefs in the LAFD do a risk/benefit analysis and they must have considered all the possible outcomes before deciding to rescue a canine. There is always a risk analysis when employing a helicopter - for any operation - and if we always said "What would critics be saying if the helo had a tragic accident during the rescue attempt", we'd never leave the airport. It is about managing the risk and all helicopter crews do that. Think about all the funds that are going into special shelters that will accommodate pets in a disaster - why? Because some people place an extraordinary value on their pets and won't leave them behind. This is not that much different. The cost for this entire operation was probably negligible as almost all the resources were on-duty so the cost is a minor issue. Just another perspective.

Might be a prudent marketing idea to change the name of that light these days, huh?

Dual department responses and automatic mutual aid are bandaid fixes for an endemic problem. The reality is there can be many improvements in virtually every area including cost savings and improvements in ISO ratings and thereby further cost savings to our constituents and employers - the public! Like it or not, admit it or not, the public is our employer. The problem is most people want to turn a blind eye to the problem and maintain the status quo. This is only going to get someone hurt or killed one of these days and the time is ripe for these things to be done on our terms with an inside perspective rather than waiting and waiting and ultimately having change inflicted on you by others. If you haven't been paying attention, the state is virtually bankrupt and is going to raise taxes again and institute all kinds of new taxes and fees in an effort to keep the state afloat. The Governor already proposed mergers and consolidations of state agencies, the County has already started similar discussions so you're being naive if you don't think it will eventually happen to you. There's even grant money available for regionalization/consolidation so you could have help with the process. We have two choices, take advantage of the opportunity and lead or continue to ignore the problems and wait until the solutions are decided for you. Unfortuately, I see the writing on the wall... it says "200 years of tradition unimpeded by progress".

What works and what doesn't work... http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/01/19/frum.aid.risks.benefits/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn Some snippets from the article: Another case study: http://www.ifrc.org/publicat/wdr2005/chapter4.asp

An interesting question. I think it will depend on how the entity is incorporated and whether or not they provide a public/government service. I'd be very interested to hear the opinion of any lawyers or others knowledgeable on the subject.

EFD nailed it and the instructions in that policy statement are pretty clear. What the criminal record is will determine how extensive the investigation will be. It is possible to become an EMT with criminal convictions (including some felonies) but it isn't a guarantee. Whatever your friend decides, make sure he/she DOES NOT SIGN the course application unless he/she is absolutely sure that they can. If they sign, they're affirming that they're eligible for certification and that will be treated harshly when/if the record comes to light.

Yes, we are here to share and learn but we're also here to be advocates for our disciplines and the public. If there's an issue with personnel, response times, equipment, training, or other things it is entirely appropriate to discuss it in forums like this and hopefully in board rooms and meeting rooms across the County. It is only a matter of time before the public (or their insurance companies) starts holding us accountable for our budgets and our services and explaining why NFPA minimum standards for things like response times and personnel aren't being met. I think what's getting old is that the same issues are being raised time and time again and nothing is being done to correct deficiencies or improve the level of service provided. Everyone seems too comfortable with the status quo. As I've said time and time again, stick to fighting the issues not the critics. If the issues are resolved, the critics will have nothing to say. Well said. How about adding a ladder company on automatic mutual aid instead of waiting to get there to request it, especially if response times due to geography and staffing are an issue? There was a discussion about another department's "snow stand-by" not long ago. Do any other departments do that and how successful is it?

Then he should move to one of those countries and leave our kids alone! I'm astonished that anyone would play devil's advocate when it comes to a crime against a child. This is now the third time he's been arrested for the same thing, hopefully this time the video helps make the charges stick and he does some prison time for it. It is predatory behvaior and is even more disgusting when you consider that his daughters are the same age as this "victim".

It hsa been exactly one year since the "miracle on the Hudson" and Flight 1549's emergency landing in the river. At the time we discussed what would have happened if the plane had banked right instead of left and wound up off of Westchester County instead of New York County. My question is this... what have we done to improve our capabilities for a river emergency and are we ready for one? Just yesterday we couldn't get any boats out for a single jumper down from the TZB and I wonder what we'd do if we were confonted with a larger scale emergency. A few weeks ago the first boats to reach a "vessel in distress" in Westchester County were the FDNY and NYPD and that was even before ice had a chance to form. What have we done? What are we doing?

This is exactly my point. We've had a year to develop a plan, exercise it, plan some more, and call ourselves ready for a larger scale incident on the river. Instead, we sit here a year later and are at the same level of preparedness that we have been all along. The ferries were within sight of their respective piers for the US Airways incident. They don't run up and down the Hudson all that much anymore. In fact the Ossining-Haverstraw ferry may not be operating much longer due to $$$. They'd respond to an incident near the TZ for sure but they wouldn't get there for a long time. I'd also like to point out that a few improperly equipped boats becoming disabled during a "rescue" would only exacerbate the problem. Imagine having a boat or two taking on water because of hull damage? What would that do to the response? This is something that we should all be discussing formally and officially - not just here on Bravo.

I believe that when the Coast Guard left Floyd Bennett Field, the NYPD took over air-sea rescue in the NYC area to fill the void. I don't know if that was by design or by default but you're right, NYPD will perform air-sea rescue missions outside the city limits on a case by case basis. Maybe someone else on here knows the full history. From your mouth to the responsible parties ears! NYC will almost always help but it's not their primary job to do ours for us. How can you say that every department will get their boats out for an emergency on the river when most of the boats are winterized and out of the water? How long will it take to refuel, flush lines, remove shrink-wrap, etc.? I agree that everyone would want to get their boats out but if it's not possible today for the jumper, what suddenly makes it possible for the plane crash tomorrow? As stated above, NYPD will respond to assist but it's not their responsibility to take care of our jumpers down (they have enough of their own). Air-sea rescue is just that, for rescue, so once it becomes a recovery we still need someone to get a boat in the water. Bottom line, we're not ready and we really should be.

I think you're putting too much of the blame on the call-takers. Very often the callers don't know what direction a car is going and provide sketchy details about descriptions/plate info/etc. I've heard people queried "well, what's he doing that's suspicious" and they're told, "I don't know he just is". Not a lot to go on. Factor in hysteria, language barriers, multiple 911 lines ringing, etc. and that's why you're not getting more. Conversely there are cases where much more information could be obtained but because of apathy, complacency, inadequate training, inadequate supervision, or a combination of these factors, call-takers simply fail to ask the right questions. What can be done about it? Hmmm... Require the public to have common sense, be literate, carry a compass at all times, have instant recognition training on the make/model of all current vehicles, and communications skills so they effectively relay the information to the call-taker who will be adequately trained and supervised, compensated fairly for the importance of their job, and highly motivated. [/sarcasm] Before you blame the call-takers, spend a few tours in their shoes.

I believe that Rockland County personnel boarded the Thruway Authority tug boat and were able to deploy from that. To my knowledge, no fire/police boats were on the water, either due to ice or the fact they've already been winterized. The US Coast Guard is very thin and I don't believe that their auxiliary has any rescue capabilities. On the air side, they've got nothing between Atlantic City and Cape Cod. I don't know how many boats they've got but response times at this time of year will definitely be an issue. Westchester and Rockland Counties are two of the most affulent in the nation. You'd think we could put a plan and enough resources together for the river no matter what the weather.

Maybe this will be a lesson for City officials and they'll stop focusing their budget cuts in the PD (and FD).

Stewart's runway is over 10,000 feet long and C-5's and C-130's land there routinely. In fact, C-5's are based there. As for where the NYC USAR deploys from, don't forget JFK. The runways there can almost certainly accommodate them too.

Other have already alluded to the capabilities of one USAR Task Force and the current list of resources being sent to Haiti is already posted. The international use of our domestic assets is spelled out and VA-TF1 and LA-TF2 are the primary international assets as are IMATs on the medical side. I'd just like to add that despite the magnitude of the disaster, there has to be a reasoned response. There has to be some organization, some assessment of where and how resources will be deployed and managed, there has to be a plan for where these resources will be based, housed and plans made for their security. You can't just drop 10,000 rescuers onto the island and expect them to be effective. There has to be a PLAN! Also, we're not the only country sending aid and that international angle has to be coordinated as well. Security is also an issue and I'm interested to see what the plan is for the security of our personnel given the bruhaha that arose after Katrina with our USAR's.

I'm pretty sure that Yonkers Civil Defense is now a part of the Yonkers Office of Emergency Management. Greenburgh Civil Defense still exists to my knowledge but I don't know how busy they are these days...

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree about the term red herring in this context, my point is that there's a long history of exorbitant spending in the fire service for chief's vehicles (and to a lesser extent in police departments) but that is ignored/overlooked/accepted. I'm not trying to divert the discussion away from this vehicle, which we're all speculating about (myself included), but it's small potatoes compared to what we spend as a county or as a state on non-fire suppression vehicles. Just because some other government agencies waste money doesn't mean we should overlook the questionable spending in other services.

Big changes coming to Albany announced today. Here's the press release. Many state agencies are being merged to increase efficiency and save money. OFPC, SEMO, Homeland Security and others will all fall under one Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Services. http://www.state.ny.us/governor/press/press_01121001.html

It may be a little bit to the edge of the primary topic here but this line rang a bell that I want to respond to. First, there is no need for everyone on an ambulance to wear gloves for the entire duration of a call. I've seen families of smurf hands (when the gloves were all blue) get off an ambulance including the driver and attendant (aka aluminum patient care barrier bearer). Gloves are necessary to prevent contact with blood or bodily fluids. If you think that's likely then by all means gloves are indicated but if you're just taking a blood pressure, gloves are not absolutely essential (IMHO). Second, gloves should be changed frequently; EMT's shouldnt' be handling equipment/radios/cell phones/door handles/etc. while wearing gloves and at the very least they should be changed after any intervention where contact with BBP occurred or was likely. The notion that anyone in EMS is wearing gloves that are used on multiple patients all day is an indicator that OSHA BBP training is urgently required. Finally, simply establish a policy that the computer is not used by anyone wearing gloves and the problem is eliminated. Go wash your hands!!!! Good luck with it!

It is kind of funny that most of that money being spent on outfitting your own vehicle (not you specifically) is that the majority of the lights installed will be illegal as soon you flick them on. That's a waste of money but you're right, it's yours to waste! Not knowing who it's for or what it's used for how can you come to the conclusion that it's a waste of money? If it is the government and it's outfitted as it is to protect a high-ranking member of the cabinet or senior administration official, is that really a waste? If you want to discuss wasteful spending, how much do the taxpayer's spend on fire chief's vehicles in Westchester County? 50x3x50K is about 7.5 MILLION dollars. I'd say there are much more cost effective ways to accomplish the same thing and the savings could be put to training, staffing (where appropriate), new equipment, and other things that would actually benefit the taxpayer. On the police side it's probably about 2 MILLION dollars and savings could be realized there too. I personally think that's a waste of money.

It was a scheduled trip with permits, escorts, etc. so the explanation may lie is something like adverse weather as Jack mentioned or a change in something after the planning was done (different truck, placed on the truck differently, etc.). They've been hauling these things in to Grasslands for a while and they never had a problem before.

I guess the escort vehicle should re-calibrate it's tape measure!!!

The article is a little bit light on substance. What was traffic direction on secondary roads while traffic was being re-routed off Route 17 supposed to accomplish? I don't see any emergency that would require the fire police or police - the issue was, it appears, volume which all the direction in the world can't alleviate. There's got to be more to the story so, until then...