South
Canyon Fire
1994
6 Minutes for Safety — 2009
Fire Behavior Report, 1998
Fire Environment
- July 2 to
Evening of July 5
- July
5, 2230 to July 6, 1530
- July 6, 1530
to 1600
- July 6, 1600
to 1603
- July
6, 1603 to 1609
- July 6, 1609
to 1610
- July 6, 1610
to 1611
- July 6, 1611
to 1614
- July 6, 1614
to 1623
- July
6, 1622 to 1830
- July
6, 1830 to July 11
References
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
|
Fire
Behavior Associated with the 1994 South Canyon Fire on Storm King Mountain,
Colorado
Preface
The tragic loss of 14 lives on July 6, 1994, on a fire in western central
Colorado stunned both firefighters and nonfirefighters everywhere. Immediately
after the incident, one question on everyone’s mind was, “Why
and how did this happen?” The Federal agencies involved in the fire
launched an official investigation. The Occupational Safety and Health
Administration launched a separate investigation. The first official report
on the accident was released 5 weeks after the incident. Other reports
followed within a year. Investigators attempted to reconstruct the sequence
of events and decisions that occurred on the fire. However, their efforts
were hampered by the short timeframe allocated for the report and difficulties
associated with getting witnesses to talk objectively about a fire that
killed some of their closest friends.
One year after the original report was published, different theories
were still being proposed to explain the specific fire behavior. These
theories included speculation about the source of the fire in the West
Drainage. For example: was it caused by rolling debris, general dowhill
fire spread, or spotting? Rumors of arson even surfaced. Other theories
postulated the buildup and explosion of a cloud of combustible gases that
killed the firefighters.
Ted Putnam, a Forest Service expert on firefighter entrapments and a
member of the original accident investigation team, found the position
of the bodies and gear to be significantly different from what he had
observed on any previous entrapments. This generated in his mind questions
about the fire behavior leading up to the entrapments. These questions
and those associated with the various fire behavior theories led Putnam
to ask fire researchers to visit the site of the South Canyon Fire and
work with him to better understand the fire’s behavior.
After a visit to the South Canyon Fire site in August 1995, the group
organized an informal team to reconstruct the fire behavior in greater
detail than the original accident investigation report.
The original accident investigation report presented important and timely
information, but the investigators were limited by time constraints. We
have had a much longer time to review all the original witness statements
and personally talk with many of the witnesses in considerable detail.
The process entailed much more time than originally planned. But, because
we had no time limitations, we were able to determine details not covered
in the earlier reports.
This report is not meant to replace any of the previous work by the original
investigation teams. Rather, our objective is to provide a thorough account
of the fire behavior. As with any effort aimed at reconstructing an incident
involving humans and complex physical phenomena, it is virtually impossible
to know the sequence of events with absolute surety. This report presents
what we consider to be the most probable fire behavior scenarios given
the available information and current state of fire behavior knowledge.
We do not address related issues such as human behavior factors or the
ability of currently available fire models to predict extreme fire behavior.
These other issues, while certainly germane to wildland fire management
and firefighter safety, are left for future studies. Our primary objective
is to develop information to help firefighters recognize potentially dangerous
conditions, thereby preventing future accidents.
The Authors, September 1998
Contents
|
|
page |
|
Introduction
|
1 |
Fire Behavior
Overview |
3 |
|
Summary of Critical Factors Influencing the Fire Behavior
|
6 |
Fire Environment
|
6 |
|
Topography |
7 |
|
Fuels |
13 |
|
Weather |
16 |
Fire Chronology
|
22 |
|
July 2 to Evening of July 5—Low
Intensity Downslope Spread
|
25 |
|
July 5, 2230 to July 6,
1530—Continued Downslope Spread
|
25 |
|
July 6,
1530 to 1600—Double Draw Crown Fire Runs and Spot Fire on
Main Ridge |
28 |
|
July 6,
1600 to 1603—Fire Crosses West Drainage
|
32 |
|
July
6, 1603 to 1609—Fire Moves Up West Drainage |
32 |
|
July 6,
1609 to 1610—Fire on West Flank |
35 |
|
July 6,
1610 to 1611—Fire Below West Flank Fireline |
38 |
|
July 6,
1611 to 1614—Firefighters on West Flank Fireline Overrun
|
39 |
|
July 6,
1614 to 1623—Helitack Firefighters Overrun |
46 |
|
July
6, 1622 to 1830—Smokejumpers Deploy in Shelters on Lunch
Spot Ridge |
46 |
|
July
6, 1830 to July 11—Search and Rescue, and Fire Burns to
Glenwood Springs |
50 |
Fire
Behavior Discussion |
51 |
|
Fire in South End
of West Drainage
|
51 |
|
Winds Push Fire
into Bowl |
54 |
|
Fire Transitions
to Gambel Oak Canopy |
54 |
|
Fire on West Flank
|
56 |
Conclusions
|
63 |
References
|
66 |
Appendix A: Glossary |
67 |
Appendix B: Chronology, Fire Behavior, Weather,
Distances, Firefighter Travel Rates, and Fire Spread Rates |
69 |
|
Chronology, Fire Behavior, and Weather
|
69 |
|
Distances
|
76 |
|
Firefighter Travel Rates
|
77 |
|
Fire Spread Rates |
80 |
Appendix C: Mesoscale Meteorological Model |
81 |
The use of trade
or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does
not imply endorsement by the US Department of Agriculture or any product
or service
<<< continue
reading—Fire Behavior at South Canyon Fire, Introduction >>>
|