On Tuesday afternoon the Colorado State Forest Service released a statement that contributes to the theory that one of their prescribed fires that escaped control may have started the Lower North Fork fire, which as of Tuesday afternoon has burned 4,500 acres and destroyed or damaged 23 homes. An elderly couple was found dead in the burn area, but a cause of death has not been released. The Denver Post earlier on Tuesday quoted Jacki Kelley, a Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office spokeswoman, as saying the fire originated from a controlled burn conducted by the Colorado Forest Service on March 19.
Below is the statement from the Colorado State Forest Service:
========================================================
“Preliminary reports indicate that on the fourth day of mop-up operations, following a prescribed burn, extremely strong wind appears to have reignited the fire by fanning embers and blowing them into an unburned area outside the containment line. Crews patrolling the area immediately began fighting the fire.
Last Wednesday (3/21), Colorado State Forest Service initiated a controlled burn on Denver Water Board property. The 35-acre prescribed burn was part of ongoing fuels management activities in the Lower North Fork area as part of a service agreement with Denver Water. On Wednesday, March 21, crews built a containment line around the fire area. The actual prescribed fire was carried out and completed on Thursday, with mop-up operations beginning on Friday.
On Monday afternoon (3/26), during the fourth day of mop-up work, a patrol crew reported windy conditions, but no smoke or fire activity as they circled the burn area several times. The crew reported a sudden, significant increase in wind and then reported seeing blowing embers carried across the containment line, over a road, and into unburned fuels. The crew immediately requested additional resources and began aggressively fighting the fire.
As the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office further investigates the cause of the current wildfire, Colorado State Forest Service will also be conducting a simultaneous review of the prescribed burn. Conducting a prescribed burn involves a considerable amount of planning, research and oversight by fire professionals who carefully consider current and future weather forecasts, fuel conditions, and other factors before initiating a prescribed burn. On preliminary review CSFS officials say fire crews followed all procedures and safety protocols in conducting the prescribed burn. An independent panel will now fully review the prescribed burn and the procedures surrounding it.
Joseph A. Duda
Deputy State Forester
Colorado State Forest Service”
=======================================================
More information about the Lower North Fork Fire, from March 29.
I feel the people running this control burn did not have the neccesary experience to know when he was over his head. He had too little equipment to mitigate the escape. Sometimes we put people into positions they have no business being in. You are either a fireman or not and too many are not.
Easy there QBB
SOME of us still took the S234 courses and the S290/390 series and actually participated in some of those RX burns
We could start pointing fingers at the wonderful shenanigans on the airtanker program…but I will yield
Proper professional training? You mean both Steve, Chris, and I recieved no professional training in our degree programs and employment we may have actually worked?
WOW QBB!!
In the end this was a huge blunder at a small scale over a 35 acre project.
When it comes out…..there will be more folks rethinking things and I would venture to guess alot more folks will be gettin PLI to “to touch on off.”
WE not pointing fingers directly, but you of all people, QBB, ought to know there are alot of pointing fingers over this one…ask the constituency of the North Lower Fork neighborhood!!
Every mission comes with risk…but no one, I mean no one needs to lose their life/lives over a KNOWN Red Flag Week, no matter the “goals of an agency.”
When the agencies start paying for these losses out of their pocket, rather than self insure as the Gov operates, we may see a different tune.
Some of these current RX (last 10-15 yrs) fire losses have FAAAR exceeded the costs of a shared Rx / mechanical fuels reduction projects
We here commenting may not have your quals there QBB, but we DO hold some insights to your mission
By the way, I HAVE put plenty of matches to the ground
You may know me, and I may know you through our travels. There are plenty of NR folks pointing fingers and firing folks, contractually, like the airtanker program, that really do not know much about aviation and safety to be running those programs.. Finger pointing can go both ways!!
Out here, Mister!
As a federal agency burn boss I would like to comment. You are both right and wrong If a controlled fire escapes the line after 4 full days of mop up (such as this) that means there is holdover heat remaining, an obvious sign of drought conditions in the heavy fuels and duff layer. This is a condition that can occur during any season. RX burning during the spring and fall both have their benefits if done under close measure of fuel moistures. Your professor is wrong by saying fall is safer to burn. Dry conditions can occur in the fall after your burn, and lots of rain can occur after you burn in the spring. it is easy to point fingers when you don’t have the proper professional training, accountability, liability, and experience to actually put a match to the ground yourself. You have not earned the credentials to point fingers.
Well Chris
I have to disagree…I do not think this was anything about rangeland ecology.
Appears to me a RX burn for a Denver Water Board “fuels reduction” project.
In this case I agree with Mr Thompson….
If it was a RX burn for cool warm season grasses and a rangeland project, I may tend to agree with you.
At this juncture and with loss of 3 lives during a problematic season so far east of the Divide…sorry bro…not buying this argument
When I was a forestry student at Colorado State University many years ago, I distinctly remember my silviculture professor saying (about prescribed burning) that “burning should be done when you have to keep the fire burning, not when you have to fight put it out.” Prescribed burning in the Rocky Mountain West should be done in the fall, when winter and cold, wet conditions are coming up, not in the spring, when the big blowup season is just around the corner. When will this lesson be learned? This tragic fire has given the otherwise good practice of prescribed burning a black eye from which it may not soon recover, at least in Colorado. It should never have happened.
Michael C. Thompson
B.S., Forest Science, CSU
NC Registered Forester No.764
I disagree. Spring fires are done during a time when soil moisture is relatively high, reducing the threat of soil heating, reduces organic matter consumption, reduces smoldering combustion and smoke output, and reduces spread through the duff. It is a good way to apply a relatively low severity fire on the landscape.
On top of that, an early spring fire can damage and inhibit cool season grasses while a later spring can inhibit warm season grasses. A useful tool when selecting against some invasive species.
A fall burn does have the advantage of cold wet conditions in the near future, but you are also coming out of summer where the herbaceous biomass has dried out which can increase the rate of spread. More problematic, the moisture content of the down woody debris is at its lowest which means that even the 1000-hr fuels will easily light. That’s a recipe for a high severity fire and any escape has the potential to be much more catastrophic than a spring burn.
That’s not to say that fall fires don’t have their place. It depends on management goals and the crews working the landscape.
Accidents happen, and its unfortunate when they do, but any prescribed fire has the potential to escape. Season want stop that. It is said that there are only two types of burn bosses. Those who have lost a prescribed fire, and those who will lose a prescribed fire. Sometimes the best made plans wont be enough and a fire will escape.
Christopher Bernau
Masters of Rangeland Ecology
Can you say why there is no info about this fire on Inciweb? Thanks for your reports on this fire in Colorado.
Grassfarmer, I don’t know why the Type 3 IMTeam did not put any information on Inciweb. But after the Type 1 IMTeam arrived it appeared there.
Given the weather conditions here, I really don’t think this prescribed burn was well-timed or planned. This is the driest March since 1908, and will almost certainly break that record. It’s also been very windy, not only this month, but all winter. I think other methods of fire mitigation may have been a better option during such a windy, dry winter.