JFLYNN

Yes all the commissioners are volunteers. As far as I can remember (38years) there has never been an outsider as commissioner. Might be a good thing though.

Are there any career guys on here who would be interested in running? Or, does anyone know of someone who is not a volunteer who lives in the area who we might convince to run? Maybe a lot of us who care about this issue could get behind such an individual and support them?

It seems like the situation in Mohegan is the classic case of insiders running a Fire District for their own benefit and disregarding what is best for the public. I am willng to write letters, go to meetings and demonstations, whatever. I think a win on this issue in Mohegan would be a win for the fire service as a whole and the public we are sworn to protect.

And. BTW, it doesn't have to be a "bloody battle"...hopefully, if given the proper information, some of the volunteers who serve as Fire Commissioners, or their supporters, will see the light and make some immediate, concrete moves to both add more career staff as well as give the career staff the authority and respect they need to properly serve the public.

Hi everyone

I am a recent retiree from the Dist in question. You all know by my nickname, who I am. I have read the post on this subject and can agree with some and wonder about others.

I went to the Commissioners meeting last night and was surprised at the conversation that took place. Since this was a public meeting I can discuss what most of the meet was about. There are training problems here, the Commissioners have tried without success to train 100% of the volunteers FFs. They have tried for over 2 years to get everyone in sync with the state and federal standards. They have let FFs go and now they have the wolf at the door and must expel members and notify them by certified mail. These infractions are mostly for noncompliance(OSHA, Repritor test, bail-out, policy, Etc) The Commissioners discussed at length and were disappointed that not all volunteers made the grade after 2 years.

I can no longer make suggestions as a FF, but as a concerned citizen. I can only tell you how I feel and my experience with this district. As a CFF I did not like when Police Officers or Career firefighters from other Depts volunteered here and I knew that if I went to thier jobs to volunteer it would be a differant story. I was told by one career firefighter that he volunteered because he'll never make rank at his job, but could be a chief here. The one eyed man is king in the land of the blind. This CFF also had better benefits then I and better pay, but did not mind stepping on my toes when it came down to benefits for me and my family. Which made me very defensive of my job.

After speaking to some CFFs and VFFs I now know that there has been problem at most of the recent fires. The blame game is going around in circles. There was a shortage of FFs to launch an interior attack and the few VFFs that could respond at least you were there. I am not going to second guess any decissions that were made by IC because I was not there. He made decissions on what he had and what he seen.

Standard staffing at this time is:

2 CFFs @ HQ(L35,E25?,R32)

1 CFF @ Sta-2(R75,E253,L10)

1 CFF @ Sta-3 (R80,E254)

1 CFF @ Sta-4 (U11,U50,E25?)

There has been cutbacks and there has not been any CFFs hired in almost 7 years. Is this a sign of the times I don't think so. Times were good and they still refused to hire. Guys say here that CFFs shortages are a sign of the times, well stand back and think are you working more, maybe a second job, whatever, your availablity to respond is alot less. They'er 7 positions that should be covered 4 shifts and 3 vacation floaters. There used to be 3 till 60c took dispatch 1 was dropped from HQ. As CFFs retired or transfered to other depts vacation floaters were put in permenent posts all openings are now covered by OT. OT will probably be the next complaint that the CFFs make to much. We all know that we went into this career for love and not the money. The CFFs that work @ Sta 2,3,4 are alone for their entire shift. The work force is shifting from 20s thru 40s to late 30s thru 50s, this is a problem. Without that shot of young blood more injuries and more absenteeism will happen causing a financial problem for the district.

As a concerned citizen I would hope that the career ranks are returned to there full strenght. That the second Lieutenant position be replaced so that the strain of training 32 CFFs and 60 or so VFFs to standards could be accomplished in a timely manner. They are other concerns that I have but these seem to be the most pressing at this time. By bringing the training standards for VFFs up to regulated specks this would make a more harmonious fire district for everyone.

There are facts and opinions in this post if you wish to call me out on any of these please do. I will try to answer your intelligent questions.

Great post! Thanks for the info. To the Mohegan career guys- hang in there! For clarification, noone is criticizing the efforts or tactics of anyone, career or volunteer who operated at this or mother recent fires (we're not complimenting them either, we just don't have enough info to speak on that issue one way or another and that is not the real issue anyway). The real issue is the chronically severe lack of an adequate number of qualified firefighters who are able to respond in a timely manner.

Where is the media on this?? I know many local reporters read this site. Where is the Mohegan Union? Again, I'm not being critical of the Mohegan Union- I just haven't heard anything publicly from you guys. Get the word out to the public and repeat is much as possible. Best case someone in charge will show true leadership and fix things before a real tragedy occurs. Worst case those in charge will be forced to fix things after a real tragedy occurs. However, if you don't go on the record publicly and repeatedly about the problems now, when a real tragedy occurs, the same old "we did the best we could" argument will be made, and nothing will change.

The first thought that comes to mind is; under your scenario, where is the money supposed to come from to pay for the hiring of more paid FF's? Remember we are in a recession; towns and villages are finding that monies they expected to collect are way off from projections in many cases. When it comes down to hire more FF's or keep taxes down, the average citizen will most likely choose the latter. ISO ratings notwithstanding, perhaps consolidation might be a temporary fix to the problem but again its a tough sell due to the "empire" syndrome that many Fire Districts suffer from.

That being said i'm a little perplexed about volunteers FF not liking that they are being restricted by the "laws that keep them safe". Are you making your statement based on discussions held with every single fire fighter who's a member of Lake Mohegan? Or did you just talk to a handful? And did you talk with every single paid FF or just a couple who felt they didn't get much respect from the volunteers? I'd find it very difficult to believe that "every" single volunteer firefighter felt that they were being restricted by the "laws that keep them safe".

Finally, as a resident of the Lake Mohegan Fire District you are certainly entitled to proper fire protection; I'd suggest, unless you've already done so, that you attend meetings of the Board and express your concerns to them so if for nothing else at least they know that there are citizens who are concerned about the quality of fire protection that they receive.

A fire Department is an ESSENTIAL service. It is not a luxury. If volunteers are able to get the job done for less money than it would cost to employ career Firefighters that is great for everone! However, I believe that we have already established that the situation in Mohegan and in many parts of the lower Hudson Valley is broken. This ESSENTIAL service is not being provided in an adequate or timely manner, and it is not being provided for less money even!

If any other ESSENTIAL service is not being provided to the citizenry in an adequate or timely manner, adjustments are made (this can be raising taxes, consolidation, regionalization, cutting in other areas and shifting financial resources to the area of need, etc.). In fact, this is done all the time for even non-essential services. The problem with many (not all) volunteer Fire Departments in this area is that they perpetuate an illusion that the public is being protected in an adequate and timely manner and this impedes the efforts of those who strive to truly improve the delivery of efficient fire, rescue, and emergency medical services.

This situation in Mohegan is a classic example. For the most part, the public believes what one of the initial posters on this thread purports...this was a "good stop", they "did the best they could", and sometimes bad things happen. In reality, the situation is far different as stated by bigyellowtaxi in a recent post...that is the true story and that kind of information needs to be continually gotten out to the public and members of the fire service in order for us to effect real change. Many of you on here can help in these efforts if you so choose.

Remember the old expression which I will tone down a bit as appropriate for this situation..."bad things happen when good men do nothing"...

This fire got a huge head start before anyone was ever aware of it- burning in the walls of an unoccupied home with rapid spread to the attic before any units arrived. Crews from Put. Valley, Yorktown, Peekskill and as I can personally attest, Buchanan, worked with Mohegan in an excellent and coordinated effort and kept the damage from being worse than it was eventually was. Should mutual aid departments be included on the initial dispatch? That is a question Mohegan should consider, at least during the daytime hours. We do it in the tri-village (Buchanan, Montrose and Verplanck)24/7/365 on all structure fire calls (even if it's an oven fire). The district with the fire is toned out immediately followed by the other two to man their stations. Works very well anytime of the day for all situations. Again- this fire was well involved before anyone even noticed and the crews did "make a good stop" considering what they faced. Not making excuses here Chief Flynn- just giving a little first-hand insight to what I experienced on scene.

I didn't say it wasn't a good stop...that was one of the troublemakers on here ( I know who he is and I can confirm that he is always up to no good) ...I'm nice remember??

I have no idea what actually happened at the fire. What members are questioning on here is a seemingly repetitive and systemic problem of being unable to provide an adequate and timely response of qualified firefighting personnel.

If it takes numerous departments to deal with even a private dwelling fire every time, why don't those departments just combine?

at 2:30 in the afternoon on a monday how many firefighter do you expect can show up??? try and factor in how many of these people are working , or dedicated to some other issue in their lives ??? THAT IS WHAT MUTUAL AID PLANS ARE DRAWN UP FOR give them a break. christ even my department had a lil bit of a hard time getting the engine out but we provided sufficient manpower to mohegan. Given the time of day and that no one was home we all (meaning all the dept.'s that responded) , and where the fire started and how it traveled made one hell of a stop on that house and to all the members of this site that are members of the departments that responded to that fire you/we made one good stop guys good job!!

You're telling us that we should expect the departments involved to maybe "have a lil bit of a hard time getting the engine out" and that we should "try to factor in how many of these people are working, or dedicated to some other issue in their lives" and that we should "give them a breaK"????

This was a private dwelling fire. right? So, if we should be understanding of an initial lack of manpower arriving in a timely manner at this fire, I guess we are going to need to be extremely understanding when there is a public assembly, multiple dwelling, or God forbid, a school fire in this area at 2:30 in the afternoon, and the people potentially trapped inside these aforementioned burning buildings and in need of rescue will need to be particularly understanding people as well I guess...

Why not just take an opportunity such as this to admit that there is a problem and try to fix it? Consolidation, regionalization, perhaps strategic use of career staffing...or, just cross your fingers and hope it all works out, and hope that everyone just "understands"...

Excellent article that appeared in the Janaury 2010 issues of Fire Rescue Magazine that kind of applies here, esprcially since criticism is such a hot topic on here to some people. I strongly encourage everyone to read it at the link below.

Take It Like A Firefighter--A 3 Step Process For Taking The Sting Out Of Criticism

By Ray Gayke

http://fire.epubxpre...2010/jan/72?s=0

Don't forget to turn the page....article continues on next page of the online reader.

105 views so far...I bet I can double that at least...

Bob, nice topic! Allright, I'll contribute...I wonder if I can manage to not get acccused of being a big, bad, bully???

First of all, my compliments to you all. A lot of great tips on this thread.

In no particular order:

When you can't see where you are about to put your foot due to somke or darkness you should be, you guessed it....CRAWLING...or, ok do the duckwalk if you're on the nob (nozzle)...I'm aware of two incidents in my own department during the last month where guys fell through a floor or down stairs and were injured. I have no idea if they were crawling and I don't know for sure if it would have made a difference but I'd be willing to make a bet (see? now I've even most likely pissed off guys on my own job...I don't just pick on defenseless women, children, sneior citizens, etc.)

When raising a ground ladder to the roof, just raise (extend) it all the way every time- saves time looking up and trying to figure whether or not you've raised it enough to have 3 or 4 rungs above the roof line, and then possibly having to raise it all over again if you come up short once you drop it onto the roof...who cares if you ahve 5 or 6 rungs above the roof instead of 3 or 4?

Before entering a room for a search in low or "zero" visibility, put your head right on the floor and turn your head sideways to get as low as possible...in pretty much every room, even those which seem to have "zero" visibility, there will be a couple of inches at least at the bottom of the room of fresh air and thus visibility...if you take the time to do this, you may be able to make out furniture, doorways, drop down fire, or even victims, giving you valuable clues to aid your search, or even to help you make the decision whether to begin a left or right handed seacrh.

Going above the fire in an interior stairwell? Keep your shoulder up against the outside wall. This will give you protection in the event that heat, smoke or fire vents up the stairs from below and will also minimize the chance of being struck by falling skylight glass in the event it is being vented as you ascend the stairs.

During overhaul when pulling walls or ceilings with a charged handline present, try to open up as much as possible before opening the nozzle. Once you start spraying water, we have to deal with all that steam which makes it not only more uncomfortable but much more difficult to see.

Don't crown the nozzleman! Give him and his Officer and/ or nozzleman room to work. If the line isn't advancing fast enough for you, go back down the line and help to dekink it and move it around corners as necessary.

When forcing a bulkhead door, pop off the top hinge so it won't close inadvertantly. Don't chock it. Take the hinge so it definitely will not close. It really sucks for the guys below to be operating on the firefloor or floors above with decent stairwell ventilation and then to have it go to s$#t because someone bumped into the already opened bulkhead door and knocked the chock out.

Please, please, please, DO NOT vent windows from the outside unless you have coordinated this action with an engine company which is advancing toward this window and there are no strong winds blowing in the direction of the window, or if you plan on entering the window for a search.

On the fireground, when it's really cold out, please don't say, "I hate the cold!" Same goes for the "man it's hot!" comments in the summer...we all know this already and you're just annoying us.

Did I mention, CRAWL?

And by far, most importantly, please QTIP.

Just so we're clear..... read my entire sentence. "Who knows who's right, and who cares?". As in, "who cares who's right?", not "who cares about response times". Honestly, it's great to engage in honest discourse over the topics of the day, including response times and staffing levels, but let's stop the nit-picking over what time each piece of equipment got out unless you have reliable information.

There is an awful lot of hearsay and misinformation that ends up being the topic of a two or three page thread on here. My point is that two people come forward with information from the same incident with dramatically different response times, not seconds apart, but minutes. Check the thread, how do you account for an 8 minute difference in what two people heard? And since there is such a discrepancy, how do you sit at a distance and feel qualified to opine on what should have been done with incomplete and imperfect information? Yes, seconds count, and yes, we should all strive to provide the highest level of service, at the safest, most efficient speed that conditions allow. What doesn't count is an endless barrage of criticism over every single incident.

Don't worry about my feelings Chief, I don't "TIP", just tired of the same old harangue every time there is a structure fire IA.

If two people disagree on something and you don't care who's right, wouldn't that infer that you don't care about the issue at all?

You mention that you are not happy certain things becoming "two or three page threads on here"...if something becomes a two or three page thread, wouldn't that infer that it is a topic of interest to at least several people?

Please show me where in my comments i "opined on what should have been done"??

Who made an "endless barrage of criticism over every single incident"??

I have questioned response times a few times in structure fire IA's and I have done so for a reason. To establish whether or not there is a real systemic problem, we need to investigate whether or not there is a pattern, and not just one or two isolated incidents. I'll tell you what...as soon as I feel comfortable that the fire service in Westchester County on a whole recogjnizes and begins to deal with this serious problem in a healthy way, I'll stop occassionally asking questions about response times and manning levels at certain incidents.

I have not opined on much on here, I ask questions or state facts usually. I will opine, however, that you are easily upset over the issue because it hits close to home and shines a light on something that makes you very uncomfortable. You are blaming the messenger and your desire to brush this problem under the rug puts you in a small minority on this site apparently (and thankfully).

As long as no one criticizes me or my posts, I'm fine with anything anyone has to say...

So there you go boys and girls,enough holes in the times to drive a tanker through. Did Banksville's tanker respond at 16:19 or 16:27? What arrived on scene at 16:28, E157, E158, or both? Read through this thread and see how different the times are from one person to the next. Who knows who's right, and who cares? Once again, a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking and commentary by people who were not involved whatsoever, speculating and criticizing with incomplete, inaccurate information. I fail to see what is gained by all of this. My two cents.

"...and who cares?..." Lots of us do, apparently. In the fire service response times are crucial. That is why they are tracked and recorded. It's simply not good enough to say, "we do the best we can", or "these times aren't exact", "what's the big deal?", etc. It is a big deal. SECONDS COUNT. If we can improve response times, we will save lives and property. What is more important than that, someone's feelings?? QTIP.

The times for these transmissions are exact. Dispatcher gave the time upon acknowledgment:

1615hrs- Banksville toned out for a possible structure fire.

1623hrs- M/A Pound Ridge for Tanker 3 to scene. Banksville E-157 enroute.

1627hrs- Banksville Tanker 7 enroute.

1628hrs- Car 2582 on scene rpts light smoke showing, req. full 1st Alarm assignment. E-157 on location. M/A Bedford Engine 110, Armonk Tanker 9, Mount Kisco FAST U-13, Armonk EMS 51B2, 45M1.

1632hrs- Car 2582 rpts working fire in rear of the house, req. E-157 to back down driveway. T-7 on location

1634hrs- Op's on Fireground 5.

1637hrs- Pound Ridge Tanker 3 on location. M/A Mount Kisco E-106 to cover Banksville.

1638hrs- Car 2582 rpts interior crew rpts fire K/D, keeping all units responding.

Thanks Mike. I was pretty confident that the times were exact but I was waiting for you to confirm it. So....could someone please explain why the Banksville tanker was not enroute for a Banksville structure fire until 12 minutes after the initial alarm? None of this makes sense to me. Is this the norm???

While standing by outside a school as other members of his company investigated an activated alarm inside...

"313 to Yonkers you better send a lot of cops here I think there's a riot goin' on"

"10-4, 313, about how many students are involved?"

"How many does the school hold Yonkers?"

"OK, 313, we get it, Police are on the way"

OK, I know the IA times aren't always exact however I have a question regarding the Banksville Fire based on what was reported in the IA.

1615 initial alarm?

1623 MA Tanker requested?

1627 Banksville Tanker responding?

It would appear from reading this that the first due tanker didn't get out of the barn until 12 minutes after the alarm came in...since I don't know squat about this area or tankers maybe someone can enlighten me...how many Firefighters are necessary to get the tanker on the road, isn't it only one? I assume this area has no hydrants? If the IA times are correct, why did it take so long to get the tanker responding, especially on a Saturday afternoon when I would assume would be the most ideal time to hope for an adequate response from volunteer Firefighters?

PS, How far in miles is the closest firehouse from this home?

Thanks!

Whats with Mohegan? I know that they have cut their career numbers by 5 or 6 through attrition. They also have stopped certain (Rescue)apparatus from responding to structure fires.

Now every time I hear they have a structure they are screaming for manpower and mutual aid to the scene. Even when they call a FAS team they put them to work and call another Dept for FAST. Many times by the time the second FAST is established the fire is under control and salvage Ops are occurring.

If the information provided in the IA is accurate, or even close to accurate, that situation is a darn shame and is just one more in a long line of fires and emergencies in Westchester County recently which beg the cause of regionalization and consolidation.

Just out of curiosity, what would the "water rescue assignment" be here in our area - not necessarily for a known dog but for a water rescue.

That depends...and that's the problem...

I hope everyone remembers this sentiment when there's a body recovery assignment and people are running around as though it was a brother or sister to be rescued. Risk/benefit analysis.

Yes, it was a dog. Had this been training it would have been a mannequin. My point is that we very often go on "good intent" calls or other jobs where the risk may be higher than benefit but we do it anyway. Chief Flynn brings up some great points about making the hard decisions and I'm sure that the Chiefs in LA did the same thing before commencing the operation. We're not talking about a knee jerk decision with inadequate resources. We're talking about a FULL response with a swift water rescue assignment (alot of resources).

As for the dropping a guy out of a helicopter, A. he wasn't dropped. B. That's his job. and C. they do this stuff all the time. That was a rescue equipped Bell 412 twin engine helicopter with a crew that probably has more experience than any comparable crew anywhere in the country. They perform rescues and other missions all the time be it a rain swollen river or narrow canyon or ocean or rooftop. Anyone one on that crew could have decided to say "no-go" but they did a risk analysis and this was well within their capabilities so they did it. If it was your call or your crew you could say no and maybe this incident will cause some more discussions about some of the more unusual rescue type calls we get here in our area. Another positive outcome.

Why do you go into burning vacant buildings? To save a building? You can't give me the argument that there COULD be someone in a vacant building because that's the same rationale that was used in this case. If the FD didn't get the dog, someone else would have and then they would have had a real rescue on their hands. So, why go into the building? Because that's the job, right?

As I said in my first post, they're probably discussing how to handle animal cases in the future so nobody does get bitten.

Chris, great post...it's funny, after I made my earlier post I was out to dinner and me, being the buff that I am, couldn't stop thinking about this whole discussion. I also thought about the vacant building analogy and I was thinking too that most of us on this forum really can't make a judgement at all about how much risk was actually involved in this incident as, obviously, most of us have no real training or experience is helicopter or swiftwater ops. Much like outside observers may feel that it doesn't make any sense for us to make agressive interior attacks at vacant building fires because they don't have the same training or experience levels as we do, maybe we would look at this swiftwater operation in LA and think that it was actually riskier than it really was because we are not looking at it through the eyes of people highly experienced in this area.

I was also thinking that maybe I was overly simplistic thinking in my first post. We actually do take calculated risks to save PROPERTY all the time, even when we know there is no life in danger. The old analogy, risk a little to save a little, risk a lot to save a lot, risk nothing to save nothing...So, maybe it would be rational to take a calculated risk to save an animal.

As to the vacant buiding analogy, an area where I do have some training and experience...we don't make interior attacks in vacant buildings just because there COULD be someone in the building. Oftentimes, we complete our primary search and we continue to conduct interior operations, sometimes aggressive interior operations. The reasons we would do this are several...many times, vacant buildings are exposing nearby occupied buildings and the best way to protect the exposures is to agressively extinguish the fire in the vacant. Or, the vacant may still have some value and we do take some risks to save property. Last, it is usually a lot quicker to push in and put the fire out then to stand around all night and "surround and drown", which ties up fire department resources causing longer response times to other incidents. Of course, if the volume of fire or the condition of the building dictates an exterior attack / defensive operation, that is what we do, regardless.

The incident happened far enough away I thought we could hash it around a bit, without "offending" any of the members of this site; that's why I brought it up after the I.A. Kujo is based in San diego as I know it, so even he is not directly there. And he always does an excellent job reporting in from the West Coast. Hopefully we'll get more from him about this too.

Thankfully as Chris pointed out here, the outcome was positive, except for the injuries to the firefighter.

Similar to what I did with NIOSH fatality reports, giving an incident a good critique can be a great learning method, especially if none of us are directly involved, so no hurt feelings in the discussion.

The only guy that can reasonably take humbrage with any comments here would be the IC from that job, who could come on here if he likes and give a full explaination of the events and circumstances leading up to this rescue mission..... (oh no here we go with that again!)

This would be a tough call for an IC. We all, or most of us, love animals. Your people are chomping (no pun intended) at the bit to help the dog and use their training and equipment. If you pull it off, it is good PR. If you decide not to go for it, your own people as well as the public are probably all pretty pissed off at you. I will not Monday morning quarterback this incident because I wasn't there and I don't have all the details. However, if I were the IC at a similar incident, I would not place my members at any significant risk to save an animal.

Anyone who may at some point in their career be faced with a similar go or no go decision would be well advised to think now about what decision they might make, and to realize the pressure that will be put on you if you decide to stand by and do nothing. Sometimes, though, it takes the most courage to make the decision that you will do nothing. I'd rather stand by 1,000 times and watch animals die, than have to live with the fact that someone under my command was killed or suffered a serious injury attempting to save a non-human life.

Agreed... it is perfectly okay to ask questions to seek clarity on times, tactics, situations, etc. when done in the spirit of learning something. It is quite another to ask questions in an interrogatory tone that, when you read it, you just know that there is an agenda and an insinuation behind the questioning. We are all here to share and learn, not to raise the possibility that someone did something wrong or didn't get out of the barn fast enough. I'll refer to Post4031's thread of a few weeks ago, where he commented on about the same thing...... there are a few members who get their jollies out of picking on and picking apart whatever anyone else does. Come to think of it, not much different than the local firehouse.......

I'm sorry you feel this way but glad most others do not.

Yes, there is an agenda behind the question. I will again beat the drum here...I, and many others, believe that there is a serious problem in most parts of Westchester County with inadequate Fire and EMS coverage. For the most part, the public has no idea of this problem. I believe the problems can be solved through consolidation and regionalization. However, to solve this problem, we first need to educate both the public and many members of the Fire Service here in Westchester that there is in fact a serious problem. Questioning response times and manpower levels is part of this process. It is not personal, it is business. I do not "get my jollies from this", nor do I feel that I or my own department is perfect. I do realize that there are many (not most) who read this forum who are just chomping at the bit for an opportunity to criticize me personally or my department. Eventually you will have your opportunity I am sure. We all make mistakes and we all have areas in which we can improve.

SO, go for it when your opportunity arises...I won't cry, I promise...

I noticed in reading the IA on the Croton Falls Fire that it was dispatched at 1605 and at 1617 the Somers Ladder was "waiting for more manpower"...(12 minutes after the initial response) What does this mean exactly? Is this ladder part of the initial assignment? Were there other ladder companies responding? How long after 1617 did this ladder company actually respond and with how many personnel? This was on a weekend afternoon. I'm surprised that there would be any problem with manpower. Is there an issue with having an adequate number of responders in this area too?

Well I didn't mean ruffle any feathers but I just call em like I see them. Historically, any major, water borne emergency in Southern Westchester you have either the NYPD responding with their helicopters and esu guys or you have some FDNY/NYPD marine company going up there as well.

Several incidents that immediately come to mind are the car into the Sprain Brook Reservoir (NYPD divers) the overturned vehicle into the Bronx River (divers, helicopter and NYPD ESU/FDNY units) and the small plane that touched down in the Hudson a few years ago (again NYPD helicopter, diver, NYPD/FDNY marine response). All incidents in which either the NYPD/FDNY or both responded with manpower and resources not found in Southern Westchester.

Standing on shore with a pair of binoculars watching those guys "do the backstroke" wasn't gonna get them out of the water.

If I'm wrong please correct me and enlighten me as to what sort of response is in place for these sort of emergencies.

Bull (great name by the way),

No feathers ruffled here but thanks for your concern. Your original post I thought was rather trite and simplistic thinking. And, oh yeah, maybe disrespectful. There are approximately 40,000 Cops in NYC AND 11,000 Firefighters, right? You, a junior Firefighter, find it fitting to continually ctiticize experienced, senior Fire Service Professionals who are forced to manage with much less. You make assumptions about what our mindset is. Your statement would be similar to me saying, why in the heck doesn't FDNY have their own helicopter??? How in the world are the Police in NYC in charge of Haz Mat and not the Fire Department????? Why are Cops crawling all over every trench rescue and building collapse in NYC and basically conducting separate operations from Fire Department ops in the same space? This must be the FDNY Chiefs fault, right?? Of course it's not the FDNY Chiefs fault little brother...The FDNY Chiefs have complained about these things for years but have not have had the support of the politicians so it is what is is.

In Westchester we have limited resources. Particularly in Yonkers, with the close proximity to NYC, for low frequency- high intensity events such as you have mentioned above, the logical choice is to call on your brothers who we are lucky to have available to us with their expertise and equipment. It would be ideal if we had all these resources available to us within our own departments, but we don't, which is why many of us have been working hard at consolidation / regionalization plans so we won't be FORCED to call on our wonderful brothers to the South.

Fortunately, though, for the most part, when we have had to call on NYC, the attitude we have experienced has been far more gracious and professional than the attitude you have repeatedly comported yourself with on this forum.

The short and realistic answer to your question is NOTHING! If something of this magnitude were to happen in Westchester the chiefs of both FD and PD would bank on the fact that the FDNY and NYPD will arise to the occasion and save the day yet again.

Until that "hear no evil, see no evil", "nothing is broken" mentality is fixed, NOTHING is going to happen other than a call out for mutual aid to the brothers down south.

And that's the way it is.

Hey Bull,

It is very comforting knowing that you and your brothers are right there ready, willing and able to rise to the occasion and save the day for us...thanks for explaining this complex situation so succinctly...the depth of your understanding of the dynamics of both NYC and Westchester County emergency services is quite evident in your post

I believe that when the Coast Guard left Floyd Bennett Field, the NYPD took over air-sea rescue in the NYC area to fill the void. I don't know if that was by design or by default but you're right, NYPD will perform air-sea rescue missions outside the city limits on a case by case basis. Maybe someone else on here knows the full history.

From your mouth to the responsible parties ears! NYC will almost always help but it's not their primary job to do ours for us.

How can you say that every department will get their boats out for an emergency on the river when most of the boats are winterized and out of the water? How long will it take to refuel, flush lines, remove shrink-wrap, etc.? I agree that everyone would want to get their boats out but if it's not possible today for the jumper, what suddenly makes it possible for the plane crash tomorrow?

As stated above, NYPD will respond to assist but it's not their responsibility to take care of our jumpers down (they have enough of their own). Air-sea rescue is just that, for rescue, so once it becomes a recovery we still need someone to get a boat in the water.

Bottom line, we're not ready and we really should be.

Chris, you make some excellent points here. I have nothing to do with water ops in Yonkers but from where I sit we are as guilty as anyone...everyone has to have their own boat and be in charge...if all of the police-fire agencies on both sides of the river got together and combined resources it seems to me that we could provide 24/7, 365 coverage with good response times, and trained personnel for less $ than everyone is spending now, and we wouldn't even have to pull over every poor slob with a jet ski to justify our existence...I was working the day the cessna went down off the Yonkers shore in November or whenever that was and it really sucked watching those two guys doing the backstroke in the middle of the river through binoculars until NYPD and the Coast Guard showed up and saved the day.

In my mind, this is definiely an area ripe for consolidation and regionalization, including Police and Fire, and perhaps even career and volunteer, as long as all the parties could agree to live up to the same training, medical, and physical fitness standards.

QTIP

HAHA

Speaking of traditions, don't forget good old fashioned ball breaking. To many thin skins these days.

I hope you weren't talking about me with that! I know who you are Frank! BTW, "too", not "to"

No its not "consolidated". The Westchester Special Operations Task Force (WSOTF)was designed to operate with multiple squad companies county wide. The original plans included departments from one end of the county to the other. A small group of very vocal individuals insisted that they would start there own volunteer team and they would have nothing to do with a consolidated team. We trained over 700 responders (FD,EMS & PD) for Hazmat/WMD to tech level then trained about 400 to technical rescue technicians, rope, confined space, trench & building collapse. The group that became the counties TRT was offered in a number of times, in fact we brought equipment to Yorktown and to Valhalla to meet with different depts to go over the concept of those department participating in WSOTF. They refused. That would have been a consolidated well equipped and trained team. If it was not for the fact that the County found the pot of gold (Syossit FD) Tech rescue vehicles on sale for 70% off, the "County TRT" would still not exist.

Thanks Barry. I knew you would bail me out with the details. I know you have more too...stop holding out on us