EISPIRATEN

This fire looks pretty bad. They are evacuating parts of Burbank now.

This was shot Saturday morning from my home in Shadow Hills. We are ok and our house survived and it's all due to people like the crew of the 735. Thank you!

Thanks for posting that video. I was watching TV, and it looked like the fire might descend onto whole neighborhoods. The crews did an amazing job saving those houses. I guess it got pretty desperate so that they even broke out the special glasses to make night time water drops.

Can you confirm that there are some fresh firebreaks on the south ridges of Verdugo Peak? I think I saw them from the 134 yesterday.

Sean wrote: Thanks for posting that video. I was watching TV, and it looked like the fire might descend onto whole neighborhoods. The crews did an amazing job saving those houses. I guess it got pretty desperate so that they even broke out the special glasses to make night time water drops.

Yeah, the fire dept got away with it again. The local media is so pathetic.
You got the entire place burnt and they call it a success...it would be unbelievable if it werent 2017.

AW wrote:Yeah, the fire dept got away with it again. The local media is so pathetic.
You got the entire place burnt and they call it a success...it would be unbelievable if it werent 2017.

I take it you're not a fan of the "confine and let burn out" policy?

Sean wrote:
I take it you're not a fan of the "confine and let burn out" policy?

Prescribed burns are one thing...this is the whole other story of the modern hiker environmentalists.
If this is what success is, and the policy remaining from the Station Fire....convert the Verdugos to mansions....excuse me 'ordinary homes' the rest of us dont have to bail out.
The policy of forcing insurers to increase premiums 10000%.
The policy of firefighting having no cost(at least no one is asking).

The story of 'confine and burn so we dont have to deal with it for the near-term'...its nothing new for the area. But when its Griffith Park or Hollywood Hills, oh....thats where some special democrats live, so of course that will be taken out in 5 mins or less. There could be the angle it was allowed to burn for the state declaration of emergency....which could be the way things work in govt. There was something weird in the mutual aid that probably will never be told. What was requested and when....LA county asked that same question for the Station Fire. No defense of the ridge late Friday night....even with wide dirt roads in condition.

Oh...did anyone else notice the forest was not closed? Was someone hoping a spark would happen there and no defense would be on the way?

AW wrote:

Sean wrote:
I take it you're not a fan of the "confine and let burn out" policy?

Prescribed burns are one thing...this is the whole other story of the modern hiker environmentalists.
If this is what success is, and the policy remaining from the Station Fire....convert the Verdugos to mansions....excuse me 'ordinary homes' the rest of us dont have to bail out.
The policy of forcing insurers to increase premiums 10000%.
The policy of firefighting having no cost(at least no one is asking).

The story of 'confine and burn so we dont have to deal with it for the near-term'...its nothing new for the area. But when its Griffith Park or Hollywood Hills, oh....thats where some special democrats live, so of course that will be taken out in 5 mins or less. There could be the angle it was allowed to burn for the state declaration of emergency....which could be the way things work in govt. There was something weird in the mutual aid that probably will never be told. What was requested and when....LA county asked that same question for the Station Fire. No defense of the ridge late Friday night....even with wide dirt roads in condition.

Oh...did anyone else notice the forest was not closed? Was someone hoping a spark would happen there and no defense would be on the way?

That's quite the conspiracy theory you have going there. I think there is a bit more at play here, including 8,000 acres of chaparral that have not burned in over 40 years, a prolonged drought followed by a wet winter and finally, an unrelenting heat wave and a sea of humanity out of which one person couldn't resist throwing a cigarette butt out their window.

I would qualify the firefighting efforts a success. A huge success. I don't know what you think their purpose is, but it is to protect life and property, and at that they were wildly successful. Is it unfortunate the Verdugos burned? Hell yeah! The trail I hiked on Friday morning behind my house, was toast by Saturday morning, and the house I live in almost toast as well. I watched from my yard the amazing work of the air crews and how deft and precise their maneuvers were in the worst of conditions. I live in a fairly "ordinary" home. Sorry you had to bail me out. Look at it this way; YOUR tax dollars are going to the next warhead or boarder wall. Someone ELSE's tax dollars went to fight the La Tuna fire. Feel better? You know, a lot of "special republicans" got hit pretty hard in Texas and a bunch more in Florida are about to get walloped by what is being called "the most powerful Atlantic hurricane in recorded history" (I know, a bunch of liberal hyperbole, Fake News). At what level should the disaster relief for these folks be capped? After all, Rush Limbaugh built his mansion and Donald Trump his golf resort in an area known for hurricane and tropical storm activity.

Your rant is so scattered and contradictory, I will end my rebuttal here, with a big THANK YOU to the numerous agencies and personnel who bravely fought this fire and successfully saved the homes of thousands of people, from all walks of life and political persuasions. God bless you.

AW wrote:If this is what success is, and the policy remaining from the Station Fire....convert the Verdugos to mansions....excuse me 'ordinary homes' the rest of us dont have to bail out.
The policy of forcing insurers to increase premiums 10000%.
The policy of firefighting having no cost(at least no one is asking).

I'm having trouble following your line of thought. Could you link to articles about the insurance premiums and costs of firefighting? I think I get what you mean about bailing out homeowners, though I'm in favor of using tax dollars for emergency services like protecting cities from fires. Using tax revenues to help rebuild someone's uninsured house, however, is a different matter.

The story of 'confine and burn so we dont have to deal with it for the near-term'...its nothing new for the area. But when its Griffith Park or Hollywood Hills, oh....thats where some special democrats live, so of course that will be taken out in 5 mins or less.

I doubt it has much if anything to do with special Democrats. Griffith Park has some of the city's best cultural resources within or along its borders. Just to name a few from looking at my map: the zoo, the merry-go-round, Greek Theatre, Griffith Observatory, the Hollywood Sign, Travel Town, and the Autry Museum. Plus there are the golf courses and all the recreational and industrial structures scattered throughout the park. All of this stuff benefits the whole city, members of all political parties alike, even the communists and nazis bent on reforming the American way of life. Thus, the fire department simply can't let any part of Griffith Park burn and risk letting the fire get out of control and damage such cultural and industrial infrastructure.

A similar case could be made for the Hollywood Hills in general, though they are admittedly packed with more private residences, not being a public park and all. Still, you're talking about a significant, highly developed area of the city. Authorities simply can't let fires burn there and risk extreme, monumental losses.

No defense of the ridge late Friday night....even with wide dirt roads in condition.

Remember that they were battling two fronts on either side of the road, plus they couldn't fly the big planes at night. Also, it might not have been safe to put hand crews on that ridge above the fire. The blaze was moving upward very aggressively on day one. I get the impression they chose to focus on property protection and, in terms of the ridgeline, stopping the spread eastward toward the towers.

I'm more inclined to criticize the lack of preventative measures. For example would a regular regimen of controlled burns have been better than letting that area go unburned for decades? Even the fire captains admitted they got lucky with the mild wind. If this had happened during a Santa Ana wind event, those embers might have been devastating to foothill communities. Shouldn't the nearby ridges and slopes be routinely burned or cleared?

Sean wrote: I'm having trouble following your line of thought. Could you link to articles about the insurance premiums and costs of firefighting? I think I get what you mean about bailing out homeowners, though I'm in favor of using tax dollars for emergency services like protecting cities from fires. Using tax revenues to help rebuild someone's uninsured house, however, is a different matter.

From what I read, wildfire premiums are set by common sense...i.e. what is the community strategy for dealing with fires? If its let em burn and risk a lot more than needs to be, it'll be way higher premiums.
Its not legislated that they believe that the area hasnt burned in decades. They go with reality in which this area in particular has had several fires 'failures' recently. Everyone getting a participation trophy doesnt lower risk.
Neither does praising firefighters on one hand, and declaring they wont pay for the service with the other. They see the actual decision...less firefighters over time. No plan. No one cares, someone else will pay....thereby its priced accordingly.
I dont like to opine about ecology, because I dont believe the Verdugos are thought of as nature/forestry. Its just a pile of dirt, invasive plants, and lots of coyotes spruce it up until the next fire....#globalwarming. Which Id assume this 'permanent forest' vision will remain the same. The tax dollars are automatic.