The Choice

Three of the most destructive California wildfires, in terms of structures destroyed, occurred in the decade of the '90s.

As with any statistics, there is some room for haggling about precise numbers and criteria for inclusion in the list. And there is room for debate about whether or why wildfires are getting worse even as more resources are put into suppressing them. But the fact is clear. And the implication is also--if you live in an area such as Topanga for as long as ten years, you are highly likely to be confronted with an immediate choice between scooping what you hold dearest into your car and clearing out, or staying behind to protect your home.

Staying behind to battle the flames, protecting your hearth, has great appeal. Some will tell you that you can and should. Some will tell you it would be dangerous at best, and potentially the last foolish thing you will ever do.

The purpose of this booklet is not to advise you which course to take. You are responsible for that decision. Rather, we have tried to assemble here the basic information you need to make that decision reasonably, after due consideration of the uniqueness of your situation.

Firefighters trained to deal with wildfires are injured and killed every year--hundreds over the past decade--despite their training, equipment and support organization. Not one of those victims was unaware of the dangers, and not one of them took what he thought was a heroic risk. Yet wildfire is a phenomenon so complex and so fast changing that well trained and highly skilled firefighters are trapped, and some die.

Figure 2: Firefighter Fatalities 1990-1998

Nevertheless, many who live here are determined to protect themselves, their families and property. Many who have stayed behind during a wildfire have made a contribution to saving their homes. Nitpickers may argue that these folks were seldom as crucial as they thought. One scientist, a specialist in fire behavior, makes the point that the heat being generated by a wildfire dwarfs anything that humans can do to cool it. In the aggregate he is right. Once the fire has gotten a start, and as long as the wind is blowing and humidity is low, there is not much that hoses or even Super Scoopers can do about the main front.

But a wildfire is not a unitary phenomenon. It speeds up and slows down, it skips ahead, it creates its own local weather, it burns hotter or cooler depending on the fuel and the humidity. It is intense in some places and much less so in others. It is this variability that creates the possibility for people to take a hand in protecting their own property. But--a big but--only as long as they are prepared and sensitive to these vagaries and able to respond appropriately to them.

Like all important choices, this one is not as clear-cut as we might like to think. There are at least three frameworks within which to think about this choice--in terms of technical fixes, in terms of time, and in terms of people.

Preparation may be reduced to a "to do" list. It is very attractive to take this approach. One can check items off one at a time. One can list vulnerabilities and mitigate them one at a time. The feeling of accomplishment as each item is crossed off the list is real-the feeling of being prepared each time one looks around and sees concrete results of the work is real and worthy. But, preparedness is not only the sum of all individual fixes.

One must think in terms of time--the time it will take to get the brush clearance done correctly before the next fire. Or, how much time it would take--once a fire had gotten started--to get your pump and water and hose all connected and functioning, and to compare that to the amount of time likely to be available to respond. A fire of greater than 500 acres occurs in Topanga Canyon twice or three times in a decade. (Source: OES maps of Topanga fires.) The last such major fire, however, was over seven years ago. There may not be years available to do the long-term things required to prepare.

The technical requirements are pretty much the same across the Canyon. That is, the factors to be considered are the same regardless of where your house is located or when the evaluation is done. But there are areas of the Canyon where homes are more likely to be threatened earlier, or more directly, than in other areas. We will suggest where these differences may be important.

Perhaps, however, the people equation is the most important. Who is going to protect your home--you? Your wife and kids? Your nanny? The day laborers from the center of town? Where do you work? How would you hear of a fire in Topanga? How long would it take you to get home? Who is most likely to be available? Look deep inside--how much risk and stress are you willing to accept? How much are you willing to put on your family?

The fundamental choice must be made well before a wildfire threatens. It is the choice of what measures will be taken to mitigate the vulnerabilities of your family and home to wildfire. Many of these measures will have to have been undertaken years in advance and, if faithfully maintained in the five years or ten years or decades between fires, might do much to protect your home even if no one is there to defend it. Such measures involve brush clearance and the planting and cultivation of fire resistant vegetation around your home. They certainly involve making a family fire emergency plan and rehearsing it so that your children and non-English-speaking nannies and maintenance workers as well as family adults know what to do and where to go.

There may be much to learn about the local history of fires and the quirks of local terrain, alternative routes of access, and the situation of neighbors as sources of help or people who may need your help.

After all the above has been thought through, plans drawn, resources allocated, agreement reached with spouse and other family members, it should be clear that no one should try to cope with a wildfire alone. Probably the leading cause of firefighter death in wildfires is failure to respond in time to a sudden change in the fire's behavior and resultant entrapment--this despite the cardinal rule of work in hazardous situations that at least one member of the work party must watch out for the safety of the group. Those fighting the fire inevitably become preoccupied with the task at hand. They cannot also be expected to watch the fire beyond their immediate front. There must be someone to watch the fire who can give warning of a dangerous change. That is the most important job of all, and it may be the hardest. The tendency to want to be involved--to help--is natural.

So the choice is, am I willing to commit to doing what is necessary to safely and rationally deal with a life-threatening situation? Or, having taken reasonable mitigation action beforehand, is it more sensible for me and mine to depart quickly?