Jump to content
This is the biggest news? I haven't even seen mention of the trailer fire these men and women fought on Father's Day. A fire that from what I heard sent a firefighter to the emergency room. The Daily Press needs new leadership, new direction and some level of dedication to bring us the news.
Well then it must be true! Thanks ranger520 I am sure those who are tasked with scheduling will be so relieved. Maybe they could go to Hayden once a month to train as a group and just put a notice in our fine paper. Craig Fire will be training tonight from 6-10 pm in Hayden. Please do not have a heart attack, wreck your vehicle or let your house catch fire during this time. Thanks.
I am curious Thefatguy what are your qualifications to judge the level of training of a firefighter? Are you one? Were you one? From your name I doubt it!
Can any of you who oppose this facility tell me if Hayden even follows NFPA regulations in the operation of their tower?
ranger520 have you seen the proposed tower besides the drawing shown in the paper? The college will have final say in the appearance of this tower just as they did the hospital. Do you believe they will allow an eyesore?
ranger520 it took me about a minute to Google this:
Here's a summary of the items ISO considers when reviewing a community’s training for firefighters.
Facilities and aids
Fire building (including smoke room)
(In areas where federal, state, or local officials prohibit the use of combustible-liquid pits, credit may be available for a video depicting extinguishment of flammable-liquid fires. )
Library and training manuals
Slide or overhead projectors
Movie projector or VCR
Half-day (3-hour) drills, 8 per year
Half-day (3-hour) multiple-company drills, 4 per year
Night drills (3-hour), 2 per year
Note: ISO may credit a single-company drill under the first and last of these items; ISO may credit multiple-company drills under all three.
FYI.....a total of four people attended the planning and zoning meeting in opposition of proposed training center. You heard me correctly four and no one from the surrounding neighborhood, college or hospital. Actions speak louder than words.
It was voted on 10 years ago for a huge training center not just a live fire building and tower. It was passed with wording to allow this in 2006. If they wanted to be deceitful why wait an additional 6 years after getting the increase to build it? Oh I know because it took 6 years to save for it and still maintain the plan they presented in 2006. Editorial board you are really reaching to say this is beyond the scope of the fire board and I would say maybe the newspapers ethics are in question here. Bryce we all know this is the papers personal platform. Three token communities members who are hand picked by you and your staff, yourself and two of your employees. I can only imagine how these meetings go. Stop using your Daily Rag to push your agendas I am not interested in the world according to you or your staff.
Roughly 50% of all firefighter fatalities are cardiac events. Live fire training is designed to be physically demanding and simulate you guessed it an actual structure fire. TMH sends an ambulance crew to every fire scene not only for victims and patients but for the firefighters themselves. They monitor blood pressures, heart rates whenever firefighters need their packs refilled. Why is this important when discussing the facility in Hayden? If an injury or cardiac event took place where is the nearest hospital that could provide care? Just up the hill from the proposed tower or roughly 20 miles from the Hayden facility. This is just one reason why this facility makes sense.
I can continue to make point after point using data and sound logic but I have yet to see a factual argument against the construction of this facility. I see some arguments based off an apparent axe to grind with a particular board member or the Chief. I see arguments that the tax payers were lied to when the wording in the mill increase ballot question clearly fits with the scope of this project. I see arguments on location but the nearest neighbor unanimously supports the project. I see the need for equipment and training questioned by people who I can only assume have never experienced what these men and women do. Please someone tell me how we can be so against a project diligently saved for while they maintained the capital replacement plan outline some 6 years ago?
I doubt that anyone who has directly been effected by the men and women who serve our community would doubt the honest or integrity. Even in today's paper a thank you letter commends them for what they do and the manner in which they do it. I would love to see those stories posted here. Maybe then we would as a community see that this facility is for everyone. This facility is for our community for you for your neighbors so that when needed they have the best trained department possible respond to assist them.
Many comments have revolved around the fact that the Fire Department wanted to build a training center and had mill requests defeated on two occasions. That is an indisputable fact that even facts himself couldn't get wrong.
However they could have started construction on the center the day after the mill proposal was defeated.
How is this possible?
Simple...they weren't asking for permission to build a training center. They were asking for funding to build and support it. The district voted against providing them with those additional monies. By no means were the forbidden to build it. If they had the funds to build a scaled down version or build it in sections it would have been well within their right to proceed with what they felt was a district need.
Often times comments make it sound like the vote was about allowing them to build it. The fire board can build facilities, purchase equipment and run the department as it deems necessary because that is what the were elected to do.
Would my identity change how you would debate your position?
Perhaps my name is Saunders?
I raised valid points with your letter. I did not insult or make derogatory remarks. I am only debating the topic. If you are unable to debate the topic and not the person I am sorry.
Most likely we could debate and debate but I would venture to say that much of what we would be debating would have more to do with perspectives than cold hard facts. Just as it was your right to submit your letter to the editor I will use this to dispute what I see as inaccuracies.
Again I look forward to reading Part 2
It occurs to me that Dave raises a good point. If they are suppose to be tasked with providing these services maybe they need to invest in more equipment to provide these services at the highest level. The problem becomes where to keep it? They already keep two HAZMAT trailers outdoors at the City of Craig Municipal building and if anyone has been in the current station it is at capacity. If like Dave suggests they need a supplied air system for confined space rescues and a boat for water rescues where should it be kept?
Maybe Station 2 could be useful.
Looking forward to reading Part 2
Last login: Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Craig Daily Press. All rights reserved.