Is it legal to shut down major highways during emergencies

[ckroll 101]

There needs to be some middle ground here. Cars plowing into accidents are moving too fast and that may be corrected by more aggressive flaring and longer warning tracks. Short story is that drivers are idiots and shutting down traffic increases the odds of secondary accidents and the classic open gates and let 'em run accidents.

Hold people in traffic for an hour and many will drive like lunatics when you open it back up. I think too many egos make for poor emergency planning. Asking who's top gorilla doesn't solve the problem. Finding a way to slow traffic to reasonable speeds will solve more problems and save more lives, both civilian and responders.

Closing a major highway solves one problem at the expense of others. Let's brainstorm this. If troopers want the lane open, they need to guarantee our safety. Why not arrange a sit down and hash out a plan that makes the SP happy and lets us do our job. Can troopers send a second car so that one can handle the accident and the second can slow traffic? Should we be deploying more fire fighters to slow traffic farther out and stop each car if only for a second before it passes the accident scene? Fines are doubled in work zones. How about a well publicized program that excessive speed in an accident zone will get big fines? How about troopers arresting a few people? That will make the news.

The troopers are not the problem, the drivers are. And it's not all drivers. We need a way to control traffic reasonably without punishing overmuch the rest of the population.

[helicopper 1,050]

You all do realize that we're on the same team, don't you? Instead of looking at this strictly from your perspective try to break the tunnel vision. You're all looking at this from the point of view that the fire chief is the IC. Well, the police have responsibility at the scene, are an agency having jurisdiction, and are just as much the IC as the fire chief. In fact, on the Thruway, aren't you essentially dealing with private property? The Thruway has more rules than other state highways and is "owned and operated" by the New York State Thruway Authority.

Your closing the road also makes it difficult if not impossible for other emergency vehicles, tow trucks, plows, etc. to get there and help make the whole problem go away.

As for the flares nd haz-mat anecdote, that is a funny one but how many times are we dealing with an overturned tanker leaking flammable liquids? That's the exception rather than the rule. In fact, injury accidents occur far less frequently than property damage ones and the FD doesn't respond to those at all. Yet the PD and tow trucks and everyone else manage to resolve those without road closures and all this bickering.

Perhaps unified command would be a better option than these petty pissing matches. Then the two agencies having jurisdiction can determine the best course of action together. Maybe negotiating the closure of the road for 10-15 minutes to prevent a closure of 4-6 hours later when the simple PIAA becomes an AI job.

If the trooper was on scene before the FD, isn't HE the IC unless/until a transfer of command occurs?

Closing any portion of the Thruway has far reaching ramifications. The Thruway is a major component of interstate commerce and the trucks that use it will be pushed off onto local roads - many not suited to trucks of that size/weight. Remember the bridge closures due to wind and overturned trucks last year? Traffic was a nightmare.

If traffic is going too fast through your scene, slow it down. Stop it until it backs up enough to prevent speeding and then reopen it. There's seldom a need to close a major highway from the time you arrive until the time you depart.

We can all point to that one case out of a thousand that was a problem but instead of all the negatives, why don't we talk about some of the positives.

[EFFDCO4 0]

We have had two very close calls on I84 and the TSP where our members have almost been hit. One recently, a month ago when a vehicle lost control on black ice and slammed into the back of the engine. We had two members stowing gear and the engine was minutes from leaving. THANK GOD, they were paying attention and got out of the way.

Although the idea is to keep traffic moving on the highways, safety of the on-scene emergency personnel and patients is first and foremost the top priority. SAFETY is what is preached everyday in my district when apparatus and personnel are responding to incidents on our local highways - it's that simple. If the highway needs to be shut down, so be it; the IC understands that traffic needs to keep moving, but if the situation warrants it, shut it down. Take it from me, you don't want to have a errant Dodge Durango plow into the back of your blocking Engine on a norrow and windy parkway when your guys are stowing equipment. It's not a good feeling.

Additionally, without FD presence, there is no way the SP would be able to safely control a scene where a medic is working on a patient on one of our highways. Fire Police presence well ahead of the scene, proper apparatus blocking and positioning, and awareness are just some of the main priorities.

[nycemt728 49]

So I've read pretty much all the posts on this thread say shut down if necessary for as long as necessary. Ok so say you do shut it down and get no arguments from PD. How many of you will then actively work to treat the victims and then clear the road safely and expediently as opposed to extending the onscene time b/c you can, don't care or it's not your job?? (and before anyone jumps down my throat, I am not advocating shoddy patient care, safety or techniques in any way) I get the safety factor, but as a driver as well as an EMT I will honesty say that it annoys me to no end when a road is closed or down to one lane and there is no active work going on, ie PD is sitting in their cars and everyone else is talking to eachother on the side of the road.

CKROLL and Chris192 had it right, we're all on the same side and the effects of closing a road are long reaching and can also be dangerous.

Edited January 12, 2009 by nycemt728

[helicopper 1,050]

There needs to be some middle ground here. Cars plowing into accidents are moving too fast and that may be corrected by more aggressive flaring and longer warning tracks. Short story is that drivers are idiots and shutting down traffic increases the odds of secondary accidents and the classic open gates and let 'em run accidents.

Hold people in traffic for an hour and many will drive like lunatics when you open it back up. I think too many egos make for poor emergency planning. Asking who's top gorilla doesn't solve the problem. Finding a way to slow traffic to reasonable speeds will solve more problems and save more lives, both civilian and responders.

Closing a major highway solves one problem at the expense of others. Let's brainstorm this. If troopers want the lane open, they need to guarantee our safety. Why not arrange a sit down and hash out a plan that makes the SP happy and lets us do our job. Can troopers send a second car so that one can handle the accident and the second can slow traffic? Should we be deploying more fire fighters to slow traffic farther out and stop each car if only for a second before it passes the accident scene? Fines are doubled in work zones. How about a well publicized program that excessive speed in an accident zone will get big fines? How about troopers arresting a few people? That will make the news.

The troopers are not the problem, the drivers are. And it's not all drivers. We need a way to control traffic reasonably without punishing overmuch the rest of the population.

Well said!

[dadbo46 50]

When I was Chief and responded to incidents on I-84, upon arriving at the scene, I would always seek out the Trooper. I would tell him what we had (from the fire/EMS perspective), what we needed to do and approximately how long it would take.

Generally, in order to make a safe scene, I would shut down all lanes for as short a period of time as possible. I would deploy fire police to the preceeding exit to direct exiting traffic from the interstate. I would then use available equipment tand apparatus to close the traffic lanes including the shoulder of the road.

Once the scene was under control, I would again speak to the trooper, ask him to block the one lane closest to the incident and then open up one lane of traffic.

At the conclusion of the incident, ambulance aside, all FD apparatus and equipment would leave at the same time.

I never had a problem with a Trooper. I always found that communication was the best policy.

BTW - If it is going to be an extended operation, don't be afraid to ask the Trooper to have the Thruway Authority respond with maintenance trucks for blocking purposes. Generally they are more than happy to respond.

PS - The guys from Thruway Traffic Control are nuts. Don't ignore them, feel their pain, but explain to them what you need to do and an ETA as to when the highway can be reopened.

Edited January 12, 2009 by dadbo46

[jayhalsey 6]

So I've read pretty much all the posts on this thread say shut down if necessary for as long as necessary. Ok so say you do shut it down and get no arguments from PD. How many of you will then actively work to treat the victims and then clear the road safely and expediently as opposed to extending the onscene time b/c you can, don't care or it's not your job?? (and before anyone jumps down my throat, I am not advocating shoddy patient care, safety or techniques in any way) I get the safety factor, but as a driver as well as an EMT I will honesty say that it annoys me to no end when a road is closed or down to one lane and there is no active work going on, ie PD is sitting in their cars and everyone else is talking to eachother on the side of the road.

I hope that isnt how your agency works. I personally dont want to spend any mroe time standing on the highway, than I absolutely have to. Whether it is closed or not.

I agree with you that it is very annoying to see the road closed, and no active work going on. Here in fiarfield county, it seems that they are always workign on I95. They also seem to like to shut down two of thr4ee lanes about two miles before you see the first work crew.

[27east 19]

95 & 87 (dont know about 287 & 84) are part of troop "T" which is funded by the thruway authority, but they answer like all other troops up thru the NYSP.

287 are 84 are T.

[JFLYNN 681]

You all do realize that we're on the same team, don't you? Instead of looking at this strictly from your perspective try to break the tunnel vision. You're all looking at this from the point of view that the fire chief is the IC. Well, the police have responsibility at the scene, are an agency having jurisdiction, and are just as much the IC as the fire chief. In fact, on the Thruway, aren't you essentially dealing with private property? The Thruway has more rules than other state highways and is "owned and operated" by the New York State Thruway Authority.

Your closing the road also makes it difficult if not impossible for other emergency vehicles, tow trucks, plows, etc. to get there and help make the whole problem go away.

As for the flares nd haz-mat anecdote, that is a funny one but how many times are we dealing with an overturned tanker leaking flammable liquids? That's the exception rather than the rule. In fact, injury accidents occur far less frequently than property damage ones and the FD doesn't respond to those at all. Yet the PD and tow trucks and everyone else manage to resolve those without road closures and all this bickering.

Perhaps unified command would be a better option than these petty pissing matches. Then the two agencies having jurisdiction can determine the best course of action together. Maybe negotiating the closure of the road for 10-15 minutes to prevent a closure of 4-6 hours later when the simple PIAA becomes an AI job.

If the trooper was on scene before the FD, isn't HE the IC unless/until a transfer of command occurs?

Closing any portion of the Thruway has far reaching ramifications. The Thruway is a major component of interstate commerce and the trucks that use it will be pushed off onto local roads - many not suited to trucks of that size/weight. Remember the bridge closures due to wind and overturned trucks last year? Traffic was a nightmare.

If traffic is going too fast through your scene, slow it down. Stop it until it backs up enough to prevent speeding and then reopen it. There's seldom a need to close a major highway from the time you arrive until the time you depart.

We can all point to that one case out of a thousand that was a problem but instead of all the negatives, why don't we talk about some of the positives.

Well said Chris...there seem to be too many egos involved here...remember, qtip, this is business not personal guys...the Troopers have a job to do, a big part of which is to keep traffic flowing. There are many reasons why it is critically important for society to keep traffic flowing on major roadways.

Maybe shutting down the Thruway "for as long as necessary" may cause traffic delays which are unseen to you but result in causing deaths or injuries or major economic damage elsewhere.

Stage the apparatus appropriately for scene safety. Close the road completely when absolutely necessary only. Get picked up and on your way as soon as you safely are able to do so.

Most importantly, cops and firemen out there, don't get so hung up on who is in charge...talk to each other and try to smile when you do so...explain your perspective and try to understand the other agency's perspective...say please and thank you...you might be surprised how it all works out

P.S. I noticed that one of the previous posters who had a problem with NYSP when he was the "fire officer in charge" listed his age as 21-24 years old...the reality of this situation is that you need to accept the fact due to your age you are going to have a credibility problem with most Police Officers / Troopers...your people skills are going to need to be extra special if you are going to get your way in these type situations...maybe the bigger question should be, how is a 21-24 year old the Officer in Charge at an accident on a major roadway anyway?

[firecapt32 282]

Chief Flynn makes good points--having dealt with NYS Tropers on a major highway for years, please and thank you go a long way so does Command presence. Act like a commanding officer-- Introduce your self to them --with your rank or position respect the police officers rank--they are called Trooper. We all have jobs to do out there. If we all act in a professional manner and understand each others position things will get accomplished in a orderly and safe fashion.

If you have a problem--have a meeting with the agency in that area, sit and talk,work things out. Explain your side--what you do. how you do it. what apparatus you need . what ambulance you use. what towing service. what manpower you need. how they are getting there. Understanding each others job might make it easier in an emergency situation.

If its a major accident the police agency will be taking command from you for any investigation that might ensue, offer your help, the use of lights any manpower they might need, use of the fire station for their command post. coffee donuts

just my thoughts

[Guest EFFP411]

P.S. I noticed that one of the previous posters who had a problem with NYSP when he was the "fire officer in charge" listed his age as 21-24 years old...the reality of this situation is that you need to accept the fact due to your age you are going to have a credibility problem with most Police Officers / Troopers...your people skills are going to need to be extra special if you are going to get your way in these type situations...maybe the bigger question should be, how is a 21-24 year old the Officer in Charge at an accident on a major roadway anyway?

I'm sorry, but it should not matter how old someone is in regards to whether or not they should be in charge of any incident whether its a backroad fender bender, or an MCI on a major roadway. As long as their training and knowledge of their job makes them capable of doing so, just as well as any othe officer or Chief. It has already been stated by numerous people here, our District CHIEF included have had problems with a Trooper here and there, and when I say we tried everything to mediate the situation and find a happy medium with no success I mean it. I understand how much of a mess closing a road causes, and believe me we try as hard as we can to get what needs to be done done and over with and get off the road. More often than not we can both do our jobs effectively with no issues, and there are no "my way or the highway" arguements. But as stated, now and again, these problems arise and become very frustrating very quickly for all involved. You can only do so much with someone when the first thing they do when arriving on scene is start hollering about a backup in traffic, and that there's no need for all of us to be here...... And I don't want to hear that it doesn't happen because i have whitnessed it with my own two eyes and ears!

[JFLYNN 681]

I'm sorry, but it should not matter how old someone is in regards to whether or not they should be in charge of any incident whether its a backroad fender bender, or an MCI on a major roadway. As long as their training and knowledge of their job makes them capable of doing so, just as well as any othe officer or Chief. It has already been stated by numerous people here, our District CHIEF included have had problems with a Trooper here and there, and when I say we tried everything to mediate the situation and find a happy medium with no success I mean it. I understand how much of a mess closing a road causes, and believe me we try as hard as we can to get what needs to be done done and over with and get off the road. More often than not we can both do our jobs effectively with no issues, and there are no "my way or the highway" arguements. But as stated, now and again, these problems arise and become very frustrating very quickly for all involved. You can only do so much with someone when the first thing they do when arriving on scene is start hollering about a backup in traffic, and that there's no need for all of us to be here...... And I don't want to hear that it doesn't happen because i have whitnessed it with my own two eyes and ears!

How did you witness it with your ears????

[JFLYNN 681]

I'm sorry, but it should not matter how old someone is in regards to whether or not they should be in charge of any incident whether its a backroad fender bender, or an MCI on a major roadway. As long as their training and knowledge of their job makes them capable of doing so, just as well as any othe officer or Chief. It has already been stated by numerous people here, our District CHIEF included have had problems with a Trooper here and there, and when I say we tried everything to mediate the situation and find a happy medium with no success I mean it. I understand how much of a mess closing a road causes, and believe me we try as hard as we can to get what needs to be done done and over with and get off the road. More often than not we can both do our jobs effectively with no issues, and there are no "my way or the highway" arguements. But as stated, now and again, these problems arise and become very frustrating very quickly for all involved. You can only do so much with someone when the first thing they do when arriving on scene is start hollering about a backup in traffic, and that there's no need for all of us to be here...... And I don't want to hear that it doesn't happen because i have whitnessed it with my own two eyes and ears!

Tip- don't start sentences with "I'm sorry" unless you really are sorry...

Regarding your age, the point here is that it would be very rare indeed for a 21-24 year old volunteer firefighter to have the "training and knowledge", or experience, to be trusted by a Trooper (or anyone in emergency services, i.e. me) to be credible and competent as the Officer in charge of anything...if you are the exception to the rule, good for you, but you will have to accept the fact that others won't initially see it that way and you will need to work harder to prove yourself.

It may also be very helpful to you if you remember to qtip.

[xfirefighter484x 234]

Tip- don't start sentences with "I'm sorry" unless you really are sorry...

Regarding your age, the point here is that it would be very rare indeed for a 21-24 year old volunteer firefighter to have the "training and knowledge", or experience, to be trusted by a Trooper (or anyone in emergency services, i.e. me) to be credible and competent as the Officer in charge of anything...if you are the exception to the rule, good for you, but you will have to accept the fact that others won't initially see it that way and you will need to work harder to prove yourself.

It may also be very helpful to you if you remember to qtip.

Chief, if you are referring to my post, I highly recommend you re-read it. Nowhere in there did I say I had any issues at all with the NYSP. Every incident I have ever run, or personally dealt with the troopers, there was always an understanding.

http://www.emtbravo.net/index.php?s=&s...st&p=166313

[Tapout 42]

JFLYNN is correct on many fronts. First and foremost, and this applies both on the job and in life.... saying "Sorry, BUT..." negates any iota of remorse on the part of the speaker.

Second, the training and qualifications of a 20yr old as compared to those of a 40yr old in the same line of work may be equal but do NOT make those 2 men equals and deserving of the same level of peer respect. The life experience of the latter will make that man exude a level of confidence and security the 20yr old has not learned yet.

And yes, young man, QTIP, most definitely. We're not smarter- we're just older, wiser and a bit more battle-hardened. We want to impart our wisdom on those who haven't made as many stupid mistakes as we have (yet). We've earned that right.

Chris192 summed it all up perfectly -- "We're all on the same team! So can't we all just get along?"-- and for such an instigator as HIM to want us all to get along, maybe his perspective is one we should ALL be taking right about now...

[NWFDMedic 58]

Well everything went off topic when we started talking about the age of an officer who might be in command of an incident. In my experience, it all depends upon the person. I've been to a number of scenes where I've looked at the Trooper who is in charge and quite frankly wondered when they started putting Jr. High School kids through the Academy. In each, the fire or police representative may have more experience dealing with the incident. They need to talk, discuss their concerns and go from there.

I love the idea of slowing traffic enough a long distance from the scene so that they will not be as much of a danger when they get to you. Last week I responded to a medical incident as the result of an MVA on the Parkway and EFFD responded with a Fire Police unit and the NYSDOT responded with a plow vehicle. Both positioned themselves within sight of the accident, but also in a position that they could be seen around the prior hill/turn so motorists had plenty of warning to slow down. As the first arriving "command" type unit, all I had to do was tell 39-98 to make the scene more evident and they knew what to do, great job.

However, I have seen incidents go the other way, where a complete disregard to traffic flow is evident. I can remember my old FD used to allow us to respond direct to calls on the Interstate (15+ years ago) and I really can't think of a good reason for that. Traffic is bad enough then add personnel with blue or green lights trying to push their way through and then having to add unnecessary vehicles to the scene. I can also remember a department that would shut down the opposite lane of an interstate and work across the median rather than going up the road a half mile to a turnaround and coming back (and there was no issue getting to the scene in the opposite direction). That caused not only both lanes of the accident scene to be closed when they generally only needed one lane closed, but now also a lane in the opposite direction.

Sure it's simple to just close down the road and ask questions later, but is it always appropriate? There is a huge impact when you shut down an interstate highway and while you should not risk personnel or patients becuase of that impact, you should also not disregard it completely. If you're on a NYSTA road and you can't come up with an amicable resolution with the Trooper, you can always request a Zone Sergeant to the scene. The NYSTA also has safety managers who will respond out to these scenes on request. Believe me on this one, the NYSTA safety managers have all the authority you will need to mitigate a problem between your FD/EMS agency and the NYSP.

[adt12 0]

I am a trooper though I work in western nys and don't do much interstate work. But I will say this, more often than not it is the individuals trooper's ego or attitute that causes these sorts of problems. I for one have never argued with a fire service or IC about opening a road back up. I would gladly have the road remain closed until it is safe to re-open. Not to mention I am incredibly appreciative of the rigs and manpower provided by the FD to handle traffic control and scene safety. I have never had a problem with any FD and I have been to thousands of incidents. I guess all I am saying is don't let a few bad apples spoil the bunch because we are not all like this hothead.

[DCJPells 29]

I am a trooper though I work in western nys and don't do much interstate work. But I will say this, more often than not it is the individuals trooper's ego or attitute that causes these sorts of problems. I for one have never argued with a fire service or IC about opening a road back up. I would gladly have the road remain closed until it is safe to re-open. Not to mention I am incredibly appreciative of the rigs and manpower provided by the FD to handle traffic control and scene safety. I have never had a problem with any FD and I have been to thousands of incidents. I guess all I am saying is don't let a few bad apples spoil the bunch because we are not all like this hothead.

I think you hit it right on the head. Most of the times it is ego or attitude and not just on the PD side. Though I have never dealt with NYSP, we have had town PD members with this attitude and simply working with them has always worked. Also knowing the Chief of Police helps.

[50-65 205]

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/...1005&Ref=PH

This is using T-Way trucks to close lanes. At our fatal on Thruway yesterday.

[Guest]

The statute you provided is the one which causes the most controversy, seeing as how it all states that a fire chief is in control if there is the presence of FIRE anywhere... but a general auto accident, with no fire is not mentioned anywhere in there. This is why it becomes such an issue. They feel that since there is no actual FIRE , that the police have complete control over the scene. This is understandable, but we have the responsibility for the safety of ALL presonnel working, including the Troopers, and I just don't think they see that....

It states that this applies while "responding to or operating at a fire, service call, or other emergency"

[Ex-2114 7]

I'm sorry, but it should not matter how old someone is in regards to whether or not they should be in charge of any incident whether its a backroad fender bender, or an MCI on a major roadway. As long as their training and knowledge of their job makes them capable of doing so, just as well as any othe officer or Chief. It has already been stated by numerous people here, our District CHIEF included have had problems with a Trooper here and there, and when I say we tried everything to mediate the situation and find a happy medium with no success I mean it. I understand how much of a mess closing a road causes, and believe me we try as hard as we can to get what needs to be done done and over with and get off the road. More often than not we can both do our jobs effectively with no issues, and there are no "my way or the highway" arguements. But as stated, now and again, these problems arise and become very frustrating very quickly for all involved. You can only do so much with someone when the first thing they do when arriving on scene is start hollering about a backup in traffic, and that there's no need for all of us to be here...... And I don't want to hear that it doesn't happen because i have whitnessed it with my own two eyes and ears!

Let me preface my response with this: I have to agree with Chief JFLYNN... It doesn't happen much, but he is 100% correct about the age thing.

Now I'll explain.....

I started in the officer's ranks between 21 and 24 years old... I had my training - ICS, Officer's Training, EMT, CPR, and all that makes for a great firefighter and officer - with one thing missing.... EXPERIENCE. You can never gain enough experience in how to manage many people with varrying skills and personalities while trying to manage a constantly changing incident.

It took me several years to learn about experience thing... you can learn tactics from a book and a class... you can learn about other's experiences from books, classes, and shooting the crap at the firehouse... but you have to live it to get the experience.

20 years ago, when I first got into the FD, someone told me something that I despised at the time but look back at the brilliance now: "watch, learn, and keep your mouth shut. You're way too new to have an opinion." Unfortunately I can't remember who specifically told me that, but it was dead on balls accurate.

That all being said...

If you ARE in the 21-24 age group, AND you find yourself to be the IC of an incident... be careful with what you say, what you do, and who you may piss off. Take a deep breath, size up the situation completely, and do what needs to be done. If there are some 'senior' members on scene (I don't mean elderly) that have been around the block once or twice, pull one of them by your side for the duration of the incident - don't be afraid to ask for advice.

Most importantly.... DON'T LET THE RANK GO TO YOUR HEAD. It's a pain in the neck to be a Chief (or other officer) without any Indians.

Who sees more MVAs than anyone??? COPS!!! If you're not 110% comfortable in making your command decisions, talk to the cop - be it local or SP - and see what he/she wants to do... a simple "I'm concerned about the safety of my crew - can we............?"...... this will go a lot farther that "I need you to close the entire roadway completely until further notice!!".

Take this all for what it's worth.

[Guest EFFP411]

How did you witness it with your ears????

Because i saw him get out of the car like a nut, and HEARD him screaming about traffic and so on and so forth, i suppose i should have been slightly more specific for you Chief....

And ADT12 made a good point, it may very well just be an accumulation of attitudes that we keep incurring, on BOTH sides.

Edited January 13, 2009 by EFFP411

[Just a guy 493]

When I worked in patrol I never had a problem closing a road, no matter where it was. It's safer for all involved , victims and responders if the road is closed. The fact of the matter is that most road closures are short lived anyway except at a serious incident so mast times its a non issue.

[ckroll 101]

Ok, I have to tell a couple of stories.

First, It's the parkway, middle of the night and the call is a head on. I live around the corner and am on scene right away in street clothes. There is this kid, can't be 16, in a ratty plaid shirt telling me to get away from the car. I ignore him and he yells at me, so I yell back who in hell does he think he is and he says 'I'm an off duty trooper, who in hell are you?" and I reply 'captain of the ambulance corps.' And we stand nose to nose snarling for a moment until we recognise we have matching dirty plaid shirts on. Then we laugh and get to work. So, yeah, if you don't look the part, then assume you're going to have to explain yourself. Put the patient first and get over it quickly.

Second, and this is 15 years old so everyone involved is moved away or dead or both. Back before medics, a rollover accident, badly injured person and the responding ambulance parks in traffic and the trooper blows a gasket, gets grief from on scene personnel, gives it back, writes a ticket, captain of the ambulance tries to throw a punch and next thing I know, I'm halfway through an extrication all by myself because everyone is either in or watching the cat fight. Court dates got set and changed, as did venues and everyone got so twisted it took weeks to iron out. There was plenty of shame to go around, all of it unnecessary. There were hard feelings for years. Put the patient first and get over it quickly.

I think absolutely everyone will agree that getting a patient off scene as quickly as possible is key to traffic control and scene safety...oh, and patient care. Absent significant extrication, 10 minutes the the max on scene time. Put the pateint first and get off scene quickly. Then it doesn't matter who's in charge. Cut the troopers as much slack as you can whenever you can and then when you're jammed up, they'll listen to you.

[jayhalsey 6]

How did you witness it with your ears????

I am assuming that he heard the trooper yelling. That is usually how one witnesses something with his/her ears.

Edited January 13, 2009 by jayhalsey

[FIRECHIEF63 55]

Good job, do what is necessary to protect your people, you are in charge of them and responsible for them....

Maybe next time remind the Trooper of his (2) fellow Troopers that were hit on I84 not more than a couple months ago and 1 even serious enough to be flown out to a Trauma center, then maybe he/she will think differently.

Be Safe, Stay Safe and of course keep your People Safe.....

Edited January 13, 2009 by FIRECHIEF63

[Goose 188]

There seems like an awful lot of animosity towards the NYSP here and thats kind of sad. You would think the same hot headed ego tripping trooper responded to each accident referenced to again and again cross all three pages. We know thats not the case. In the 4 years i've been in the field i have never once had a bad experience with the NYSP - they have always been more than accommodating and always ensured scene safety. No question that there are bad apples across all of our ranks and all of us have bad days. I guess i just have a hard time believing that troopers (whomever they may be) referenced in this thread are the central or only problem with these scenes.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Goose, I do not see any animosity towards to troopers...I think we are seeing animosity towards the troopers attitude towards closing the road. I think that anyone who has posted on here has nothing but the highest respect and admiration for someone whose job could be defined by some as laying their life down in the line of fire to protect the innocent and the weak. What causes the problems is the attitude of those involved, not the trooper specifically. But then again what the hell do I know, I have never heard or seen of amy problems before coming here.

[Guest EFFP411]

There seems like an awful lot of animosity towards the NYSP here and thats kind of sad. You would think the same hot headed ego tripping trooper responded to each accident referenced to again and again cross all three pages. We know thats not the case. In the 4 years i've been in the field i have never once had a bad experience with the NYSP - they have always been more than accommodating and always ensured scene safety. No question that there are bad apples across all of our ranks and all of us have bad days. I guess i just have a hard time believing that troopers (whomever they may be) referenced in this thread are the central or only problem with these scenes.

I understand where you are coming from Goose, I can see most people going through their entire lives and careers never once having an issue on scenes, and 99% of the time our Troop K troopers that we deal with NEVER give us any grief with lane or road closures, and will do whatever they can to help. We also try to do the same in return, It seems to me that the only problems we ever have emanate from a small number of Troop T personnel. I have the utmost respect for the NYSP, I have quite a few good friends in the NYSP as well, and they even get a look of shock when I tell them some of the problems we have run into. And it's not always just even about lane closures, either. We had an incident with a jack-knifed tractor-trailer not too long ago on interstate 84, the driver was not hurt, minus a cut on his nose from loose debris in his truck that went flying when his rig came to a sudden hault. It took us some time to get past the traffic back-up caused by the entire road being blocked by the truck. While assessing the situation, I noticed a siren blairing from the traffic, and looked up to see our rescue truck, moving quietly, code 1 down the shoulder of the road, with a NYSP Troop car lights, siren and horn blasting right behind the rescue truck. He kept on it all the way until the rescue moved off the shoulder and into the scene, and the troop car was right in front of me, not a foot away. I was trying to get him to stop, since there was really no place else for him to go, and he didn't shut his siren off until i walked up to his window and tapped on it, and explained to him that i thought it might be a good idea to stop here so we can try and figure out a goo way to move the truck blocking the road. After my ears stopped ringing from the siren, we aided the towing company in straightening out the truck and cleared the scene. I just kinda thought keeping the siren on until parked right at my feet was just a tiny bit excessive..... but this is of course, just my meaningless opinion.

I would really like for there to be a common ground, and understanding found so we do not inccur any more of these issues in the future.

Edited January 14, 2009 by EFFP411

[Bnechis 3,961]

There seems like an awful lot of animosity towards the NYSP here and thats kind of sad. You would think the same hot headed ego tripping trooper responded to each accident referenced to again and again cross all three pages. We know thats not the case...... I guess i just have a hard time believing that troopers (whomever they may be) referenced in this thread are the central or only problem with these scenes.

Since the posts have covered 20+ years of issues and multiple counties I pretty sure its not the same trooper. In twenty years, we have worked with many fine troopers and have gone for years without issue. We have also gone for periods with nothing but issues everytime we responded to I-95.

My most vivid image was as a newer FF. arriving at a fully involved vehicle fire in the left lane on a sharp curve and next to the jersey barrier (it probably was still a metal guard rail then) at 3am. My Lt. ordered the Left & Center lane blocked. The Trooper told him under no circumstances would he allow us to do that. So the LT. ordered us back on the rig & we left with the fire still ragging. We went to Exit 16 drove back down to Exit 15 via local streets and waited about 2 minutes till we were requested back. As we arrived a sargent pulled up and he was still yelling when we left.

This clearly clouded my image to the point that when a dozen years later and working a medic flycar in the opposite end of the county I was actually stunned to arrive at a man down in a Pvt dwelling, 2 troop cars in the driveway, and the Troopers were not sitting in their cars doing paperwork. I was even more stunned when I got inside and saw they were doing perfect CPR. I was so impressed I wrote a letter to the Troop HQ.

To this day I compare the 2 experiences and realize that there are excellent Troopers and there are ........., for some reason Troop T appears to have more of the latter over the years. Is there something different amout this Troop than the others?