Author Topic: Tree on the road. (Read 32034 times)

PF_ · « **Reply #25 on:** February 08, 2006, 02:51:31 PM »

Cyber I know we all do the same job.

With the CFS/MFS switching around my post about a house fire I know that both can do it but I was focusing specifically on MFS. if there is a CFs in an area or SES give them the tree. My post has been taken the wrong I think, but thats okay. To re-iterate if there is a CFs or SES or even council in the area give them the tree job. I am not trying to under esitmate CFS by giving them a tree cause we all do the same job (

) but, that smy opinion anyway. If there was a tree in the Adleiade Parklands that fell on one of the city ring roads or a tree in suburban adelaide backyard then you can send out MFS but in an area where all operate then give it to CFS or SES.

medevac · « **Reply #26 on:** February 08, 2006, 03:17:52 PM »

righto.... i think your extremely wrong,
since tree downs are (in theory) an SES tasking then yes... definitely give it to them... in reality the only reason CFS/MFS actually attend tree down jobs is becasue occasionally they come through on a CFS or MFS line, instead of SES...

now, in regards to sending a CFS appliance to a tree job to keep an MFS appliance available.. i pose this question...

"what the hell are you thinking???"

i actually had a friend come up to me yesterday and say "so you guys (CFS)actually go to house fires???" P_F if you have the same perspective of some of the public that we (the CFS) only do little jobs and leave the "serious" firefighting to the MFS... then what the hell kind of chance do we have. get real... the CFS is THE FIRE SERVICE that covers a helluva lot of the state.

kat · « **Reply #27 on:** February 08, 2006, 03:44:33 PM »

Quote from: medevac on February 08, 2006, 03:17:52 PM

since tree downs are (in theory) an SES tasking then yes... definitely give it to them... in reality the only reason CFS/MFS actually attend tree down jobs is becasue occasionally they come through on a CFS or MFS line, instead of SES...

Er, challenge.

CFS has far more units covering a much greater area.

CFS attend tree down jobs in many areas because there is no SES
coverage or the nearest unit is 200kms away.

PF_ · « **Reply #28 on:** February 08, 2006, 03:53:13 PM »

I am fully aware that we all do exactly the same job's as the MFS and we are both the fire service.

About sending CFS to a job instead of MFS has been mis-understood. In an area that both are covered I believe that the SES or CFS should take it.

IN the town a house fire is sent to MFS first, we come in as a back up team. (if there is dual coverage) CFS are more than cpable of handling a tree, I just think we should take it instead of the MFS. Really do no see the harm in that statement. Dont think tree's in dual area's are really the MFS domain.

medevac · « **Reply #29 on:** February 08, 2006, 04:01:02 PM »

Quote from: kat on February 08, 2006, 03:44:33 PM

Er, challenge.

CFS has far more units covering a much greater area.

CFS attend tree down jobs in many areas because there is no SES
coverage or the nearest unit is 200kms away.

it is stillan SES role though kat... thus why it should be sent to SES units, regardless of the distance from them...

SES units actually carry a number of differant tools for tree jobs, not just the basic chainsaw CFS trucks carry...

kat · « **Reply #30 on:** February 08, 2006, 04:13:19 PM »

Agree. But surely makes sense to send a chainsaw equipped CFS Brigade to a threatening "tree down" situation as a primary response when the nearest SES unit is over an hour away.

68 SES units in SA, 400+ fire stations.

PF_ · « **Reply #31 on:** February 08, 2006, 06:16:05 PM »

Quote from: Firefrog on February 08, 2006, 07:30:34 AM

When SAMFS have big jobs CFS brigades do COQ to MFS stations.

So if there was a massive fire in Adleiade or surrounding area's, Im talkin 4th alarm big one! Then CFS crews would move into the MFS stations and stay there covering that area until the MFS come back?

Edit: found a COQ thread in Incident operations, Ill put my question in there

canman · « **Reply #32 on:** February 08, 2006, 06:42:53 PM »

There has been some genuine passionate replies to this thread and all have been interesting. Me personally, I think it should be SES or an emergency response from the local council that deal with these types of calls. And as for the debate over MFS/CFS responding, if the job's in your patch then your it.
I have just noticed an increase of these type of calls over the years, especially with a couple of brigades in my group. Some of which have also responded to horses or cows on the road (now theres a can of worms for ya). Soon we'll be responding to water on the road...lol.
I just hope it isn't the "we pay the emergency service levy so we can respond you to what we want" syndrome. Or maybe it's the local brigade receiving the call via ALERTS and can't say no factor.

K

ps Assisting SES during multiple calls like storm damage i don't have a problem with. Good to get together every now and then.

PF_ · « **Reply #33 on:** February 08, 2006, 06:46:23 PM »

ON the pager site he other day there was to page about a koala on the SE Freeway.....

canman · « **Reply #34 on:** February 08, 2006, 06:57:55 PM »

Yeah saw that one......

Didn't they respond Smokey to entice it off the road??

k

Laska · « **Reply #35 on:** February 08, 2006, 08:17:44 PM »

Quote from: canman on February 08, 2006, 06:42:53 PM

There has been some genuine passionate replies to this thread and all have been interesting. Me personally, I think it should be SES or an emergency response from the local council that deal with these types of calls. And as for the debate over MFS/CFS responding, if the job's in your patch then your it.
I have just noticed an increase of these type of calls over the years, especially with a couple of brigades in my group. Some of which have also responded to horses or cows on the road (now theres a can of worms for ya). Soon we'll be responding to water on the road...lol.
I just hope it isn't the "we pay the emergency service levy so we can respond you to what we want" syndrome. Or maybe it's the local brigade receiving the call via ALERTS and can't say no factor.

K

ps Assisting SES during multiple calls like storm damage i don't have a problem with. Good to get together every now and then.

What's your thoughts on the fact that it would take quite alot longer to remove a tree which has the potential to cause vehicle accidents? Do you still think it should be the SES/councils job?

I agree totally about the "we pay the emergency service levy so we can respond you to what we want" syndrome.. I have been at callout's where we've had people have trees fall across their driveway or fence though, which doesn't cause any immediate danger.. and they have a go at us for telling them to call a tree logger or something.. Some people think that because they pay their levy then we have to do that type of stuff.

LOL at the Smokey comment hehe

canman · « **Reply #36 on:** February 08, 2006, 08:40:13 PM »

Quote from: Laska on February 08, 2006, 08:17:44 PM

What's your thoughts on the fact that it would take quite alot longer to remove a tree which has the potential to cause vehicle accidents? Do you still think it should be the SES/councils job?

Yes.

Maybe we should respond CFS to everything SES go to because we can get there quicker in most cases (sarcasm).

Laska · « **Reply #37 on:** February 08, 2006, 08:52:38 PM »

Quote from: canman on February 08, 2006, 08:40:13 PM

Yes.

Maybe we should respond CFS to everything SES go to because we can get there quicker in most cases (sarcasm).

Isn't speed important when it has a potential to harm what we're supposed to protect.. with Life being one of them? If we can remove a tree on a busy country road in 10 minutes, which would take the SES 60 minutes to get to, then we're reducing the chance of a bad car accident by a multiple of 6..

However.. to each their own.. Not everyone will agree on everything..

calspec · « **Reply #38 on:** February 08, 2006, 10:44:12 PM »

In further response to P.F's comments. My optinion only

Both MFS and CFS have a job to do, wether it be as a professional paid service or as a volunteer service. Both services respond to the same nature of incidents, within limits of equipment and training capabilities. Any one incident/call/page is and should be treated with the same urgency. Be it a tree down in Unley, a house fire in Wudinna, or anything in between. The nearest and most practical service should be responded. No legitimate call to any fire service should be passed to another service on the principle of "what if something bigger comes along". As previously mentioned, if another call does comes along that is deemed to be of greater urgency, then the current incident would be made safe and crews responded asap to the next job. Taking into account COQ, the next job may already be adequately covered anyway. If a tree down is considered to be hazardous, then the nearest service, or the service that can respond the quickest, should be sent. Be it MFS, CFS or SES. In areas that are covered by both CFS and MFS, mostly referred to as EMA areas (Enhanced Mutual Aid), both services will be responded equally to most incidents, including house fires. My limited experience would suggest it is the task of the MFS Comcen call taker to determine wether a tree down in a
EMA area best be attended by CFS, MFS or SES. There could be a number of different criteria taken into account to make that decision, including risk, urgency, location, availability of services etc etc

The notion that MFS are the big boys, and the CFS are the smaller brother who asks if he can play, is ignorant. Just because CFS is volly based, doesn't mean that they should leave the urban responses to the Mets, and vica versa for the Mets with trees down etc. They do carry chainsaws too.

I get the impression that PF feels that the term "Metropolitan" and "Country" in the titles of the services determines the type of tasking each should undertake. I know CFS means "Country" Fire Service, but that dosn't mean that a tree down is automatically their task, and that Mets should leave it. In a EMA area, either could respond.

that my 2 cents anyway (actually, more like 22 cents!)

I am a CFS Volly.

Cheers

Sorry about the long winded response.

PF_ · « **Reply #39 on:** February 09, 2006, 05:58:53 AM »

I agree with that calspec, but what said about more dangerous jobs for the MFS has been blown out a bit, I didnt specifically mean it as they are not worthy of cutting up a tree. Originally this topic was about CFS doing it so we were happy for them to do it and suddenyl it seems wrong... I have no problem with MFS dealing with a tree, they had to deal with a busted hydrant yesterday.

Now for some more coments that might land me in hot water.
I think MFS are a more highly trained and skilled brigade. It is a lot harder to get into MFS than CFS and the training you do once in the MFS (after passing the recruitment process) is I would assume a lot harder than BFF1. I know they are the same as a fire service but the MFS are different from the CFS. I am in the CFS and I love it, am in no way wishing to downgrade the CFS as we do do the same as the MFS, but I just dont really think they can be made out ot be the same. I hope to be in the MFS one-day and work with both teams, maybe cut up a few trees.

medevac · « **Reply #40 on:** February 09, 2006, 06:52:33 AM »

Quote from: P F on February 09, 2006, 05:58:53 AM

Now for some more coments that might land me in hot water.
I think MFS are a more highly trained and skilled brigade.

you are a nob.

backburn · « **Reply #41 on:** February 09, 2006, 07:10:03 AM »

It also depends on part of the state you come from. Here its MFS do it in there area CFS in there SES any where council said its not there job if its across the road or after hours.

medevac · « **Reply #42 on:** February 09, 2006, 07:40:27 AM »

If the call comes on fire service line, then MFS for MFS area, CFS for CFS area... if call on SES line then SES regardless of where it is, they sort out wether its council job or not (which it is if it is a council tree... thats why they have an after hours emergency number)

Mike · « **Reply #43 on:** February 09, 2006, 08:16:44 AM »

Ok lots of things comming out in this thread....

PF

Quote

Now for some more coments that might land me in hot water.
I think MFS are a more highly trained and skilled brigade.

With the advent of nationally accredited training and the push for CFS to be a professional service, this seems like a very un-enlightened comment. I can only hope that as you get more experience in this service that those opinions will change. just remember there are a lot of people that are striving to make this service one of the best in the world, and that particular comment is a kick in the guts to them.

Get out there get some more time under your belt, and look at this thread in a couple of years time. See if you still agree with your previous comments

------------------------------------
Ive said before that I am proudly a member of both services (CFS and SES), and quite frankly, if I dont have to drive an hour to get to a tree because a CFS brigade is closer, then Im quite happy for them to do a tree job. No skin off my nose at all. After all it removes an immediate threat why is it being questioned.
**this specifically relates to trees on roads**

trees in back yards etc, well if there is no specific threat and we dont need extra hands then, leave it to the SES. They will quite happily assess weather its a job for them or not.

In the end its the same for any incident.
you respond the closest available resource that has the ability to sufficiently deal with the problem at the time..... it cascades from there....

bajdas · « **Reply #44 on:** February 09, 2006, 08:22:17 AM »

Quote from: Laska on February 08, 2006, 08:52:38 PM

Isn't speed important when it has a potential to harm what we're supposed to protect.. with Life being one of them? If we can remove a tree on a busy country road in 10 minutes, which would take the SES 60 minutes to get to, then we're reducing the chance of a bad car accident by a multiple of 6..

However.. to each their own.. Not everyone will agree on everything..

During the past 12 months plus all SES Units are reviewing response times. Majority of SES Units will now have a vehicle on the road within an average of 10 minutes. Especially the RCR crews.

In the past I believe SES Units were very bad in response times. But I believe majority of SES Units are equal to other organisations now.

Some SES Units still have a looooong response time and they are known to operations staff. This problem is specially during working day-time & is actively being addressed by SHQ & Central Region staff.

If it is deemed a life threat situation, then the quickest response to 'make the situation safe' is requested.

In metropolitan Adelaide this is normally SAPOL who assess and secure the site with lights and cones.

In the country areas the closest & quickest emergency service will be despatched to the scene to make the situation safe. Then additional resources will be despatched to resolve the problem safely.

Interesting reading this thread & fantastic to know we work together as a team of trained professionals.

canman · « **Reply #45 on:** February 09, 2006, 08:23:57 AM »

Quote from: calspec on February 08, 2006, 10:44:12 PM

In further response to P.F's comments. My optinion only

Both MFS and CFS have a job to do, wether it be as a professional paid service or as a volunteer service.

You did mean to say : Both MFS and CFS have a job to do, wether it be as a professional paid service or as a professional volunteer service. Didn't you??

Quote from: calspec on February 08, 2006, 10:44:12 PM

I know CFS means "Country" Fire Service, but that doesn't mean that a tree down is automatically their task,

Couldn't agree more.

The very reason we respond priority 2 to these types of incidents would indicate to me there or no real urgency to get to these jobs. We could list a number of scenarios that have potential to escalate but it doesn't mean the fire service should be called upon for all of them. Unfortunately all calls aren't received in one dept (eg MFS 000), if they were someone could have better control over what service went to what job.

k

bajdas · « **Reply #46 on:** February 09, 2006, 08:37:54 AM »

.....Unfortunately all calls aren't received in one dept (eg MFS 000), if they were someone could have better control over what service went to what job.

k
---------------------------------
This will be interesting for near metropolitan Adelaide after 20th March 2006. This is the latest announced date when MFS Comm Centre will take over 'day to day' call receipt & dispatch for SES.

If a large event or risk, then SES will take-over own 132500 calls in the new SES SCC. Otherwise MFS will process call.

So for the first time 000 calls can be directed to SES without a third-party involved...and one Comms Centre will take near metro Adelaide calls for CFS, SES & MFS.

Personally I think this will be a test for the SACAD project idea. Will be interesting to monitor the results.

Alan (Big Al) · « **Reply #47 on:** February 09, 2006, 09:03:48 AM »

Quote from: bajdas on February 09, 2006, 08:22:17 AM

During the past 12 months plus all SES Units are reviewing response times. Majority of SES Units will now have a vehicle on the road within an average of 10 minutes. Especially the RCR crews.

In the past I believe SES Units were very bad in response times. But I believe majority of SES Units are equal to other organisations now.

Our local SES are an RCR unit and i can tell you their response times are shocking!! We've been called to a job with them seven minutes after they were called and we were on scene 15 minutes before them their response time was 36 minutes for an MVA.

This crew has found a way around the default plan, we were called recently to another MVA where they defaulted as we were driving out the door we were stopped because they were mobile. 20 minutes after this stop, one of our members was going to work near this accident and as he drove into port elliot the SES were only just driving out for the accident.
When it came over their pagers they had been defaulted to us they came up on air to SHQ that they were mobile.

This seems to be the norm for this unit, the first person comes up on air to SHQ and says South Coast 410 on air and responding, thus all communications are done through their unit. By doing this within the 6-7 minutes from page they negate being defaulted and roll a truck whenever they get enough crew which can take anything up to 25-30 minutes and then if they are called to back us up and are stop called they stil rock up with all the bells and whistles and state that they can't be stop called by CFS and that they are rescue, personally if they want to make fools of themselves then thats their problem but to respond the way they do will endanger peoples lives!

Sorry for going off the tree topic but SES down here act as a law unto themselves and it's bullcrap!!

bajdas · « **Reply #48 on:** February 09, 2006, 09:08:08 AM »

Ahhh sometimes the perfect example falls in your lap..

From the GRN pager website.

10:23:22 09-02-06 INFO:MTB: 09 Feb 10:23 Crew required for tree at Crafers - call DO on

10:19:20 09-02-06 SHQ: URGMSG ADELAIDE HILLS RESPOND TREE DOWN (PRIVATE PROPERTY) - - CFS HAVE ATTENDED; TREE TOO LARGE FOR THERE EQUIPMENT; THEY ARE LEAVING SCENE

10:01:40 09-02-06 MFS: RESPOND Tree Down 09/02/06 10:01,13 STACEY ST,CRAFERS, MAP 145 J 6 ,,,9019*CFSRES:

The closest emergency service responded to recce/assess/make safe, then followed with specialised resource.

bajdas · « **Reply #49 on:** February 09, 2006, 09:12:27 AM »

MUNDCFS, hopefully SES Central Region and SES SHQ staff have heard about this and are resolving the problem.

Author Topic: Tree on the road. (Read 32034 times)

PF_

PF_

PF_

PF_

PF_