Case Study of the Cedar Fire

As the second largest wildfire in United States and the largest in Californian history, the Cedar Fire emerged as one of fifteen fires that began in the early Winter months of 2003. After extensive and lengthy studies of the physical terrain and criminal investigation, government authorities concluded that the fire was actually synthetically induced. With this understanding, authorities determined that Sergio Martinez started the flames as a signal after becoming lost caused the fire. Martinez was sentenced to five years imprisonment for falsely lying about his involvement in the fire. However, the longevity and magnitude of the fire resulted from purely natural causes. On that particular night, temperatures were hot and dry with well above 32 degrees Celsius and single digit humidity. On top of that, strong 64 km/h easterly winds persisted.

Consequences

Ultimately, the fire burned over 280,278 acres of land, destroyed more than 2,800 buildings and killed 14 people. The dangerous fire was destroying land at a rate of 5,000 acres/hour. In terms of economic damage, institutes measured a total loss of $32,500,616.

Citizen Response

The majority of citizens faced with direct flames stayed the course of the fire so as to ensure the security of valuables and their houses. Accordingly, many citizens were afflicted with burns and incidences of trauma. For those citizens who attempted evacuation, most were too late in their efforts and found that they were either driving towards a wall of flames or encircled by fire. Analysis from assessment reports led to the understanding that citizens responded with a vigilante mindset, and those that decided to leave resolved far too late in the process.

Government Response

Government response, in this case local, was provided quite promptly and with sustained vigor. Helicopters were immediately dispatched to drop bales of water on the center of the flame source while also keeping a concurrent mission to rescue stranded or trapped individuals. In addition to this aerial support, firefighters were deployed to rescue people from flame-engulfed or jeopardized homes and combat the peripheries of the fire using hoses. These firefighters were accorded overwhelming local acclaim following their brave efforts. On the contrary, the emergency support units were unfairly branded as using a delayed response after it was determined that two helicopters that could have been sent off were actually returned to the base for re-briefing and mission alteration. Additionally, one helicopter that could have poured more water on the flame's center was recalled. However, even in hindsight, the swiftness and efficiency with which the fire was dealt with on an emergency management level should serve as model for other communities who may experience such an event.

Sources Consulted

Sources