'Handcuffed by policy': Fire crews watch man die

[rockl3 1]

what if they whet teenagers who went too far for a swim or grade schooler who wandered out too far do u still stand and watch?

[NJMedic 96]

You'd think that the coast guard would have a greater range of available assets at such a prominent location.

I can't believe the Coast Guard doesn't have a rescue aircraft ready to go, pre-flighted and fueled, at an active Coast Guard Station. I really thought they were a first response agency but this sounds like they make no provisions for a rapid response. Definitely not what I've seen from the USCG on this side of the country.

Well said!

Why is so hard to think the the USCG doesn't have assets readily available. Love the Coast Guard but where is the nearst USCG Air Station to the NYC area? Atlantic City, 90 miles south of NYC. Although I think their have a aircraft seasonal out on Long Island. I believe NYPD has an MOU and at least an informal agreement to do water rescue in the area. NYPD flies daily to rescues over the Jersey Shore. If a USCG helicopter is on a mission its going to take a while. Even a launch with a ready crew sometimes takes 15-20 to get off the ground.

On a related matter I received this in the mail this morning. In responds to someone elses questios a medic who know works in the area rpovided more feed back.....

First the facts:

The Alameda Fire Dept. had a thriving rescue swimmer program and boat program, two necessary programs for an island community.

3 years ago, a new chief was brought in, because of the downturn in the economy, to bring the budget and costs into alignment.

Decisions were made, that were not popular. As an example one was to suspend all community CPR training programs. We did 4 community CPR training programs a year, where we would train the general public in CPR. These were popular programs, but due to budgetary concerns, they were suspended.

The other issue was to suspend the boat program. Alameda is an island community, with a Coast Guard station next to Alameda, and the City of Oakland and the Alameda County Sheriff also having water rescue craft (although they are not stationed on the island).

I was the EMS Coordinator for AFD at the time, and myself and several of the duty chief's voiced objections to getting rid of the boats, to no avail.

Then the rescue swimmer program came up. Rescue swimmer encompassed training for select members of the department who became certified as lifeguards, open water rescue, etc. They also received special equipment to SAFELY effect a water rescue, to include wet-suits, tow boards, water rescue surfboards, etc.

There were members trained on every shift, and enough members to safely initiate a water rescue.

Training is paramount for this type of duty, and these men and women trained EVERY month.

The chief decided to cut the program.

As with the boat program, he said we could get resources from Oakland Fire Dept or the Coast Guard. This was unacceptable, but our pleas fell on deaf ears. It was reviewed by the City manager and the chief financial officer for the city and the budget changes were approved.

NOW, over the course of three years since the cancellation of the program, every day is an accident waiting to happen. Prior to the cancellation of the program we had had several rescues that were needed to be effected, some successful, others that weren't, but we were prepared.

The COMMUNITY was lucky in the 3 years after the program was cancelled that a child did not need the service...

In that 3 years, up to ONE THIRD of the department retired. New staff members were hired...new members who had NO EXPERIENCE, or NO TRAINING with rescue swimmer...wet suits were gone...the other equipment was sold...

Now the day of the drowning, most of the members on duty, no experience with water rescue, and the rest of them had not been in the water in 3 years (please not, the rescue swimmer program was a VOLUNTARY program, so only 25 members were every fully trained at any time)...no equipment...54 degree water...a suicidal individual, one who will fight you...

What would you do? If it was a house fire, with a suicidal individual inside, someone who would fight you, would you go in, without protective gear, and struggle with them? Without training?

I provide this information, because if you are going to offer an opinion, it should be an informed opinion. I know the men and women of the Alameda Fire Dept, I served next to them for 5 years, they are brave, honorable people. Trust me, they are besides themselves over this. But they are also people like you, with families...they would gladly give their lives to protect you, but at the same time they need the tools and training in order to be able to do the job.

EMS Operations Officer/Oakland Fire Department

Former EMS Coordinator - Alameda City Fire Department

Edited June 3, 2011 by NJMedic

[rockl3 1]

reguardless of policy the command staff must be incompatent being a community by a body of water and no water rescue program and no iap or mutual aid agreement with the surrounding agencies that is just unacceptable.

[antiquefirelt 994]

I doubt their "shall not enter the water" policy after the program was cut allowed for a case by case analysis. The crew was following a directive as ordered by the chief and made clear to the municipal leadership when the funding was cut. Water rescue services were cut. Would they have made an attempt and suffered the consequences? I'd think you'd want to truly be the hero of the day, because you might be in a lot of hot water. What if I'm pretty certain I can skip putting on my gear and SCBA and getting a faster search done? If I'm right I'm a hero, right? Forget the added risk I've assumed?

What should they have cut? I'm sure you and I on the opposite coast are much better at figuring out what they should have done, right? Maybe stopped responding to fires and keep the water rescue program? How many actual water rescue calls do they average compared to the other services they offer? My FD serves a large harbor with a significant tourist and commercial fishing presence. We're a designated Coast Guard City with a USCG Base and a State Marine Patrol post. I can tell you how many active water rescues I know of in the past 16 years: 2 out of maybe 35-40,000 emergency runs. It ain't Alameda, but I'm betting the call ratio isn't vastly different.

So when the cuts keep coming what do you give up?

Edited June 8, 2011 by helicopper

[FireMedic049 597]

Really? Have you not read any of the media coverage?

This is not a matter of the command staff being incompetent. The department HAD a water rescue program until it was defunded 3 years ago and much of their equipment was disposed of and training lapsed. The decision to defund it WAS NOT the decision of FD's command staff, it WAS the people that run the city! The command staff protested the decision and the city was warned of this very situation. The Fire Chief at the time gave an order that water rescue operations were not to be conducted.

As a result of this decision, contingency plans were made with other agencies for these types of incidents. At least one of which WAS quickly contacted and responded! Unfortunately, they responded with a water vessel that was too big and it took too long to get the helicopter on scene.

As far as an IAP goes, what do you suggest for an incident in which a large suicidal male is neck deep in non-stagnant water 150 yards from shore and the FD is not properly trained/equipped let alone authorized to perform water rescue, the PD (who's in charge of the incident) is preventing them from entering the water and an alternate water rescue agency has been notified? Just what action do you feel still needed planning?

[rockl3 1]

it should have been done long before incident happened. what resources do the surrounding areas have and hoe fast can i get them and i think 1 hr. is more than enough to get proper resources their.

[Bnechis 3,961]

So is command staff incompetent if they have confined spaces and no confined space rescue team? Tech rescue teams take to long to cover confined space, and every community in America has confined spaces and very few FD's have teams.

We saw last year what the cost of not having capabilities, but municipalities will roll the dice until they get away with it.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Authorities make changes after first responders watch man drown

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/06/01/california.drowning/index.html?iref=obinsite

[v85 212]

While I understand why they changed policy, wouldn't the better solution be to reconsider the budget situation and fund water rescue equipment/training again?

So, the policy now allows for "commander discretion". Discretion for what, getting his people hurt? If a situation was objectivley too dangerous to handle without special equipment and training one week, it will still be too dangerous next week. Or was it not that dangerous to begin with?

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

I think this editorial sums up a lot of our feeling about this incident.

America's long slide from 9/11 to Crown Beach

http://www.fireengineering.com/index/articles/Wire_News_Display/1430445478.html

"Surely they became firefighters because they wanted to be heroes. But somehow, in some sad way, they turned into bureaucrats."

[FireMedic049 597]

So what you are saying is that they should've done what they already did in 2009 - figure out who to call for water rescue incidents since they'd no longer be doing them and then call them when an incident occurs. This is your assessment of the situation, their command staff is incompetent because they did in 2009 what you think they should've done "long before (the) incident happened" and then followed that plan when this incident happened? Brilliant!!

[FireMedic049 597]

I think this editorial sums up a lot of our feeling about this incident.

America's long slide from 9/11 to Crown Beach

http://www.fireengineering.com/index/articles/Wire_News_Display/1430445478.html

"Surely they became firefighters because they wanted to be heroes. But somehow, in some sad way, they turned into bureaucrats."

Doesn't sum up my feelings about the incident in any fashion.

The Fire Department was set up to fail by their City Administration! It happened and like usual, the ones most responsible for this "system failure" are not the ones taking heat for it and the Firefighters are painted as the "unreasonable" ones because they want to be properly funded to provide the services their community expects from them.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

I gotta say..that thank god I don't work under some of you in the IMS. Then again..what some of you say...you wouldn't tell me crap as my knowledge supercedes anyone's authority.

Either that or because the manufacturer heavy committee sees an angle to make more money. Most FD's don't even come close to meeting all of NFPA's rules. Like so many other things, mostly we pick and choose what to follow, some truly are of great benefit to us, others not so much. Most are written with good intention, though you know where that paved road leads... There are not nearly as many legal cases as have been purported where NFPA was used to to prove guilt on the part of the FD, fire officer or firefighter. So while they should not be ignored, they must be weighed against many other factors.

1 court case is enough..and here in NY that precedent has been set when NFPA 1403 was cited in the trial of the Asst. Chief involved in the Lairdsville incident. Most departments can comply with the majority of the standards with minimal to no cost. The largest majority are out of their hands without having to sign a waiver for apparatus, equipment manufacturing standards. Whoever said that NFPA standards are crippling...you need a reality check...as most are born out of idiots doing stupid crap...that killed one or many of us.

As far as some of the other comments. I crack up at how so many of you are so willing to actually discuss this matter when we truly don't know many of the details that are needed to come close to some of the comments your making. There are 3 incident priorities...1. Life Safety and we often talk about them being 1A...us....1B them. Right here is there a life safety issue...yes..but as JJB said this was a distraught individual whom brought more risk to the 1A side. Face down or not...and those "teenagers" on cape code...are trained and certified to do what they do...and they also have equipment they carry to do so.

As far as "Commander discretion"...isn't that every incident in all reality?

Remember one thing...there is a real fine line between "heroism" and "stupidity." Heroism often is nothing more then a ridiculously stupid act that just happened to work out. Think about how many people have died doing something that we all know didn't make any sense...but the ones that actually do make it..we call a hero.

I'd live to hear what some of you would have to say if some brothers went into the water..and one didn't come out. Give me a break. Do I think things more then likely should have gone a little better...yes

[antiquefirelt 994]

While I understand why they changed policy, wouldn't the better solution be to reconsider the budget situation and fund water rescue equipment/training again?

So, the policy now allows for "commander discretion". Discretion for what, getting his people hurt? If a situation was objectivley too dangerous to handle without special equipment and training one week, it will still be too dangerous next week. Or was it not that dangerous to begin with?

Now the heat is off the politicians and on the IC!

[antiquefirelt 994]

1 court case is enough..and here in NY that precedent has been set when NFPA 1403 was cited in the trial of the Asst. Chief involved in the Lairdsville incident. Most departments can comply with the majority of the standards with minimal to no cost. The largest majority are out of their hands without having to sign a waiver for apparatus, equipment manufacturing standards. Whoever said that NFPA standards are crippling...you need a reality check...as most are born out of idiots doing stupid crap...that killed one or many of us.

That is the one significant case where we can say a court has used NFPA in a criminal proceeding. In fact it's the only one I know of and I truly believe it is a tragic joke. It completely ignores command responsibility as their were other higher ranking and senior experienced officers present whom skated from their true responsibilities. Clearly, that one case did not send too clear a message to everyone, considering other flagrant NFPA violations that have resulted in fatalities, with no criminal charges being lodged.

That being said, I'm not condoning ignoring NFPA, but as with all things that are rules, not law, we must do what we can. If you (not ALS in particular) think you're meeting all NFPA guidelines you're flat out wrong! You may be meeting those that are convenient, maybe a few that aren't, but all of them? No way. I'm pretty confident that 90% of US FD's cannot/do not comply with NFPA 1710/1720, yet fewer other standards would come nearly as close to ensuring a reduction in LODD's and injuries to firefighters. So as we've done for many years, we'll continue to follow what we can/choose.

[jayhalsey 6]

While I understand why they changed policy, wouldn't the better solution be to reconsider the budget situation and fund water rescue equipment/training again?

So, the policy now allows for "commander discretion". Discretion for what, getting his people hurt? If a situation was objectivley too dangerous to handle without special equipment and training one week, it will still be too dangerous next week. Or was it not that dangerous to begin with?

"Commander discretion" makes me think, the powers that be are simply trying to take the "blame" off of themselves and shift it to the IC at the incident. "Well he chose not to effect a rescue". Quite simply, how do the citizens of this ISLAND let the powers that be do away with their WATER RESCUE program? I would hope they would have been up in arms about it before this happened, more so after this incident.

And to echo some of the comments made in this thread, it is always fascinating how many will post messages cutting down the responders that were at the scene without knowing all the facts. It came out very quickly that the water rescue training and equipment was discontinued years before this incident. Maybe there are alot of people here that are in the habit of putting untrained personnel into probable death causing situations.

[16fire5 693]

I think this editorial sums up a lot of our feeling about this incident.

America's long slide from 9/11 to Crown Beach

http://www.fireengineering.com/index/articles/Wire_News_Display/1430445478.html

"Surely they became firefighters because they wanted to be heroes. But somehow, in some sad way, they turned into bureaucrats."

I think the editorial sums up the thoughts of the Tea Party. How dare she compare the LODD in SF to this incident. I can see how your feelings as an 18-21 year old might be this. Some of us have responsibilities and as fire officers your number one job is to make sure your members go home.

I don't know how hard it is to comprehend 55 degree water, victim a football field away, weighted 300 pounds, suicidal, PD incident, no equipment.

Plus once the IC said no one enter I would expect a legitimate orginization to follow orders like these guys did. While tragic it could have been worse.

[mricorp 12]

I don't know of any "Policy", equipment or training needed to be a human being. I don't care what bureaucratic BS anyone wants to cite here the simple fact is that another human being was in trouble and having anyone stand around and watch them die simply makes me sick.

I know of 343 guys who I know felt the same way.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I don't know of any "Policy", equipment or training needed to be a human being. I don't care what bureaucratic BS anyone wants to cite here the simple fact is that another human being was in trouble and having anyone stand around and watch them die simply makes me sick.

Ok so the next time someone is trapped in a confined space, you should jump in unequipped to save them (note 60% of those that do this have died)

or

someone is trapped in an unshored trench, you should jump in to save them

or

a sniper is taking shots in an open lot, instead of waiting for properly trained and equipped LEO's you should run into the kill zone because you are a human (but not likely after the shooting stops).

or

a fully involved fire, no gear, no SCBA, because someone said my baby is in there (he was refering to his car or her cat.)

I am not saying we should not go in harms way, but we have policies to improve the chances of both the victim and the rescuers.

Without the training & equipment, your death does not help this victim or the next one. Some here have said we are no 1 and the victim is no 2, An instructor of mine many years ago said we were no 7.

No 1. is the rescuer

No 2. is his family (particularly his children)

No 3. is his partner or crew (some say #2 & 3 should flip flop)

No 4. is the dept. (which will be hurt by his death)

No 5. is the municipality or communicty (which will have to pay for the loss or litigation and thus will reduce service to the next victim)

No 6. is all the lawyers that will be litigating this case

No 7. is the idiot who most likely put himself into this position (and if rescued,will probable try again next week [even if the rescuers are killed in this attempt]).

I know of 343 guys who I know felt the same way.

How dare you speak for those hero's. They were well trained, well equipped, well staffed, following long established policies and the extremly well respected Operations officer (Ray Downey) stated shortly before the collapse and his death that the buildings would come down but he thought there was enough time to resuce many/most of the people inside and still pull out in time.

This is not the same, do not use 9-1-1 to put down others, their is no comparison. thank you.

[mricorp 12]

Ok so the next time someone is trapped in a confined space, you should jump in unequipped to save them (note 60% of those that do this have died)

or

someone is trapped in an unshored trench, you should jump in to save them

or

a sniper is taking shots in an open lot, instead of waiting for properly trained and equipped LEO's you should run into the kill zone because you are a human (but not likely after the shooting stops).

or

a fully involved fire, no gear, no SCBA, because someone said my baby is in there (he was refering to his car or her cat.)

I am not saying we should not go in harms way, but we have policies to improve the chances of both the victim and the rescuers.

Without the training & equipment, your death does not help this victim or the next one. Some here have said we are no 1 and the victim is no 2, An instructor of mine many years ago said we were no 7.

No 1. is the rescuer

No 2. is his family (particularly his children)

No 3. is his partner or crew (some say #2 & 3 should flip flop)

No 4. is the dept. (which will be hurt by his death)

No 5. is the municipality or communicty (which will have to pay for the loss or litigation and thus will reduce service to the next victim)

No 6. is all the lawyers that will be litigating this case

No 7. is the idiot who most likely put himself into this position (and if rescued,will probable try again next week [even if the rescuers are killed in this attempt]).

How dare you speak for those hero's. They were well trained, well equipped, well staffed, following long established policies and the extremly well respected Operations officer (Ray Downey) stated shortly before the collapse and his death that the buildings would come down but he thought there was enough time to resuce many/most of the people inside and still pull out in time.

This is not the same, do not use 9-1-1 to put down others, their is no comparison. thank you.

The answer is yes to all of the above. I don't spend my life prioritizing whose life is worth more than another's.

....and yes, I do dare because not one of those guys gave a s%*t about policy. They were selfless and gave their lives trying to save ANY other human they could. They DID NOT prioritize.

That is all I have to say about any of this.

[Bnechis 3,961]

bsaic water rescue is part of ff essentials

Since when?

firefighters handbook 2nd edition delmar pub

Ok so its in the book, is the material covered in class? Any hands on?

[Bnechis 3,961]

A number of years ago a local PD responded to a fire in an animal hospital. Arriving ahead of the FD, the PO made entry to search for an attendent. The firefighters found the PO down and draged him out, then went back and got the attendent. All his actions did was delay rescue. The irony is the dept. gave him a medal and when I went to clip the newspaper article I noticed that on the back side was an article the PESH had given the PD a fine for violating labor law and not have a policy to instruct their employees not to enter an area that they were not trained or equipped to enter.

[antiquefirelt 994]

....and yes, I do dare because not one of those guys gave a s%*t about policy. They were selfless and gave their lives trying to save ANY other human they could. They DID NOT prioritize.

Total BS! You should stop posting on the topic as your now becoming downright offensive. Are you trying to say FDNY had a policy against entering the towers? That the IC had ordered them not to? Considering the number of seasoned veterans and officers murdered on 9/11 I'm fairly confident they cared very much about policy. You don't think people die due to policies everyday all across this country? Go press your cape.

[antiquefirelt 994]

almost every week u hear about some cop who runs runs into a buring building to get people out with no training and no gear yet he is a hero police officers and firefighters stand and watch a man drown and they are follwing policy come on really

Well why not do your community a favor and tell them how the FD is wasting their tax dollars with silly training and equipment. A few heroic fellows such as yourself and MRI ought to be able to keep the community safe? Basically you're condemning firefighters for following policy regarding training and equipment to ensure their own safety. I suppose any policy other than "do whatever it takes to attempt to save a life" would be totally unnecessary?

[JohnnyOV 2]

The answer is yes to all of the above. I don't spend my life prioritizing whose life is worth more than another's.

....and yes, I do dare because not one of those guys gave a s%*t about policy. They were selfless and gave their lives trying to save ANY other human they could. They DID NOT prioritize.

That is all I have to say about any of this.

This suicidal attitude has no place in this line of work, and will end up as an LODD with which there is no glory, only sadness for your loved ones, your department brothers, your friends and anyone else your life has touched. Go find another place where policy really has 0 bearing, like rock skipping.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

The answer is yes to all of the above. I don't spend my life prioritizing whose life is worth more than another's.

....and yes, I do dare because not one of those guys gave a s%*t about policy. They were selfless and gave their lives trying to save ANY other human they could. They DID NOT prioritize.

That is all I have to say about any of this.

Good luck with that pal. I'm surprised you didn't throw in the "you go...we go" comment as well. You can do whatever you like...but if your next to me...and you go...you'll go..there will be no "we" involved in it. Nothing like blunt admittance to freelancing. I don't know where you operate..but for many of us prioritizing life safety risk is a common occurrance...from who to get out of a window first...to who gets treated or transported from a scene first...etc. And for the record...they did priortize based on policy, experience and training. Hence they were trying to get to the fire floor to start from there. And if that building showed once iota of instability...they would have pulled...

JohnnyOV...big time applause on your last post brother.

Rockl3...not sure what you're talking about...but Essentials hasn't been taught in NY State since around 2000. Also its not covered in Firefighter 1...its briefly discussed in FF 2 but only as awareness with other rescue operations and no hands on...the state has specific courses for that.

[JohnnyOV 2]

Public safety water rescues have the highest LODD per call type then any other call for service. The ratio between rescuer death, and call volume is oustandingly high. And now, it all makes sense to me as to why. This exact attitude. "I dont need to call a water rescue team, I'm a big, strong, smart firefighter, I can do anything and nothing will every happen to me." Think again pal.

[FireMedic049 597]

ff1 ff2 ff essenttials all they same. it was a basic water rescue, wasent ice wasent swift wasent high seas simple boat with motor life vest uscg approved rescue rope simple. let me ask same question again if that were a kid would it still be ok. that y i say again poor command staff lack of training lack of cooperation with other agencies.

You are so full of sh!t!!!

A nearly 300 lb suicidal man in neck deep water while fully clothed and 150 yards from shore IS NOT "basic water rescue"!! Typically in a water rescue situation, the victim is highly interested in being rescued. There's really no guarantee or indication that this person would not have resisted the rescue attempt.

Sure, you can sit here and say that you just needed a boat, pfd & rope, but did they actually have access to all of these items?

You continue to make derogatory statements about their command staff and make baseless accusations about this situation. Yes, there was a lack of training, ONE THAT EXISTED BECAUSE THEIR CITY TOOK AWAY THEIR EQUIPMENT AND FUNDING FOR TRAINING IN WATER RESCUE!

What "lack of cooperation with other agencies" are you talking about? THEY QUICKLY CALLED FOR THE COAST GUARD TO RESPOND! If the Coast Guard would've been able to respond with a helicopter immediately and it arrived quickly and made the grab would you still be asserting a "lack of cooperation"?

I'll ask again even though you keep ignoring the question...............Exactly what should they have done that they didn't do under the circumstances they were under? They lacked the equipment and training necessary for the task at hand. They quickly contacted an agency who did. That agency responded. Don't give me any BS answers about how they should've been trained/equipped for water rescue, because we're all in agreement that they should've been. Exactly what else should they have done?!

[NurseMedic 15]

I'm not firematic by any means, nor would I ever claim to be - I would probably equate this to staging for an EDP, or at a structure fire, as others have said. I, my partner, and the other public safety professionals are going home at the end of the shift. I can be quite dumb at times (just ask my partners), but I'm not stupid enough to put myself in a situation that I am not adequately trained nor prepared for - especially when I have no recourse due to lack of policy. I don't need to be a hero, I take enough pride in the fact that I enjoy my job and would like to do it again the next day.

That being said, as entertaining as it is to read this thread, there is some obvious antagonism going on. As others have said, there might be some credibility if the posts were structured and thought out - not the case in this thread.

Don't feed the troll!

[Tanker 10eng 140]

YES, it really seems like the locals screwed this one up.... the lack of preplanning once their water rescue training was cut out of the budget, was a huge mistake.... I read the Firehouse article, and from this story, they blew it...

http://www.firehouse...ever-asked-help