LOL @ Pueblo, CO AMR/Fire Response WHY??????????????

[JPINFV]

Or the newest one, their new house is being threatened by wildfire.

Well, most of the times the houses that burn are the ones that don't have proper brush clearance. If you want nature to go all the way to your door, your house will eventually burn. Other times (cough San Diego last year, cough), you could have a million pieces of equipment fully staffed and it won't do a lick of good. If the fire is spreading so intensely that it's jumping 8-10 lane freeways like some unpaved back country road, a few hose lines aren't gonna stop it.

[Flasurfbum]

As we can afford several ambulances/crews for the cost of one engine/crew, this would lead me to believe that we should be able to afford at least as many ambulances as engines...why should anyone have to wait?

You're right though, it makes no sense to have the same number of each and then double up on ambulances...that is why my post was very specific about cutting the dead weight and adding additional necessary resources.

And as you've seemed to have read my post as "just another bonehead bashing fire", then don't take my word for it...remove your emotion, do the math, and see if you don't reach a like conclusion...

Besides, when you or yours is in dire need of ALS and transport, wouldn't you prefer the arrival of an ambulance rather than a pumper?

I count 2 ambulances per Engine, including staffing, if they do 24/48. Less if you do 12s. And that is only if the Engine is properly staffed.

I see where you are coming from, but at the same time, see our POV.

We can provide on scene stabilization of the patient while waiting for an ambulance to get on scene. While I do not see the need for EVERY Engine to be ALS, where ILS would be more appropiate, I just can not support the cutting of Engines to open ambulances.

[Flasurfbum]

Well, most of the times the houses that burn are the ones that don't have proper brush clearance. If you want nature to go all the way to your door, your house will eventually burn. Other times (cough San Diego last year, cough), you could have a million pieces of equipment fully staffed and it won't do a lick of good. If the fire is spreading so intensely that it's jumping 8-10 lane freeways like some unpaved back country road, a few hose lines aren't gonna stop it.

Oh no doubt, Brother. There are some structure we write off. No questions asked. Evac the home owners, get them to save what they can, and GTFO.

But as I can attest to, we saved a LOT of structures so far this year in the Palm Bay/Grant/Malabar, Florida wildfires with lots of apparatus, well staffed at that.

[DwayneEMTP]

:roll:

Most of the people who hold the opinion that Fire should be cut really have no idea how many Firemen it takes to mitigate an incident.

Honest question. When was the last time you were at an incident that taxed the resources of your town? If you had had fewer resources available, how large a difference in outcome would it have made to have to wait 10-15 minutes for additional resources to come from elsewhere?

I only ask you this, (as each time I've asked in the past I've gotten the, "Yeah! But what happens if an airliner crashes into the orphanage while we're fighting the structure fire!?!?! BS answer.) as I have a lot of respect for the attitude and honesty of your posts.

Now, when was the last time that you had a code, or anaphylaxis, or severe pulmonary edema that waiting the additional minutes for a response would have made an equally small difference? Wouldn't you say that the medical calls are very much more time sensitive than the fire calls? And aren't the losses, with the few exceptions where putting out a fire saves lives, much greater when the medical call has to wait?

I don't have a chip on my shoulder for firemen. When precepting in the Springs, where fire controls the scene/patient until released to the privates (Me) I found them to be terribly professional, cooperative, and conscientious. I do have a chip on my shoulder for the fire services. And the reason is this. When I argue for more ambulances, fire's argument is always that if you cut fire resources then stuff is going to burn down. They, in my experience, always argue from the point of view that 'things' are more important than people. And if you're so tasteless as to mention that, you get the pat, "Tell me that next time the school is on fire", answer. For some reason the, "When was the last time that happened?" question remains off limits in these discussions, even though we're happy to tell you how often someone needed medical attention, but couldn't get an ambulance.

The reason I'm ok with less firemen (God bless them) and more ambulances is simple. When my son gets hit by a car, or my wife has an MI or stroke and needs ALS/thrombolitics, I want someone that can transport. Not someone that looks good in uniform to hold her hand until someone comes that can treat and transport. Does that make sense?

It's about quality medical care. If making sure my family has quick access to quality care and transport to definitive care means my house, and my neighbors house, has to burn to the ground some day? So be it.

Property is relatively cheap...How do I replace the damage done to my family when a fire truck is sent to my medical emergency?

Dwayne

[Dustdevil]

But if they're "not doing anything else," why not use them?

This is why.

While I do not see the need for EVERY Engine to be ALS, where ILS would be more appropiate, I just can not support the cutting of Engines to open ambulances.

You are demonstrating the validity of the above link. You are asserting that there is an inherent link between EMS and the fire service that is incapable of being broken. That to elevate EMS would unavoidably marginalise the fire service. Why is that? Why should increasing EMS funding and staffing affect the fire service? Of course it will affect those fire services who dedicate resources specifically to EMS provision. But if fire is really there just to help us out because they are available and not doing anything else, then why would us suddenly not needing their help any longer adversely affect them? Why would we have to cut needed fire engines if they truly are "needed"?

If properly funding and staffing EMS means that fire jobs are lost, then that is only a sign that your city didn't need you as bad as you think they do. If, as fire protection professionals, you are incapable of convincing your community leaders with valid statistics of the need for your services -- without claiming someone else's numbers in the process -- then frankly you FAIL and need either better numbers or better leadership. Or both.

And that is really what this is all about. Numbers. No matter how they try to cook the books, the NFPA and IAFF and IAFC FAIL at justifying their demands without trying to claim our numbers along with theirs. And not surprisingly, we resent you attempting to steal our money and manpower just as much as you resent us for denying it to you. Go figure.

[air.stump]

You hit the mark Dust except you forgot one thing, Money.

Money from the FD because they lose engines.

Money from the homeowner because of increased insurance rates.

Money from the politician that proposed the cuts that caused the increased rates because he gets voted out of office.

No one likes to give up their Money and because of this, change, however desperately needed, won't happen until more Money is at stake.

[jsadin]

I started out in fire-based EMS and I am still a member of my local fire dept (running on the ambulance only). I love the fire fighter guys/gals on the dept and they are some of the most genuine people I know. That being said, out of the 20 or so that attend the refreshers each year, about 4-5 actually run any ambulance calls.....ever. Most of them have absolutely no desire to do EMS work and they hang onto their EMT simply because its a requirement of their employment. Many of them will tell you straight up that they will not work on the ambulance, even just to drive. If my small dept has this type of attitude prevailing, what do you think larger depts have to deal with? Do you really want a fire medic who is just biding his time until he can drop him medic treating your loved one? Do you think they're going the extra mile and learning anything beyond the bare minimum?

In regards to needing mucho fire equipment; if you're in an area that has frequent, large brush fires, I can see having a good amount of personnel and equipment. Up here in Massachusetts, that is not the case. I can listen to my scanner for weeks on end and never hear a piece of fire apparatus role to anything. And then if they do role, it's usually a box alarm set off by someone burning dinner in the elderly community.

[parobmedic]

:roll: First and foremost, let me state that if the units were driving as poorly as you suggest, then yes, there needs to be some looking in to their actions. I do submit though, as most of us know, they would tell a different story, and somewhere between the two would be the truth....

Secondly, this post smacks a little of the attitude we are desperately trying to get rid of on a National scale and that is Fire and Ems MUST MUST MUST work together in a smooth, seemless fashion or EMS will not survive another 20 years as a non-fire department functioning entity. FD get there faster, are becoming better trained, and have the resources in place to take over EMS in many places, and are doing it on a regular basis.

As you can guess, I am a senior staff officer with a large FD in South Carolina. We have a County EMS system that transports our patients, but they staff one, yes one, ALS ambulance in a city of close to 70,000. Call volume last year was 5500 calls. We run Paramedic engine companies out of each of our stations, Ladder Trucks are BLS, Rescue and Boats are ILS levels. We consistantly arrive on scene 5-20 minutes before our County EMS units and we save lives every single week running ALS engines for our taxpayers. It is an affluent community and they demand the service. EMS fought us when we first started calling it a duplication of service because it was making them look bad (in their eyes), we only took this on to provide better services for our community. You should all be ashamed of yourselves for not being grateful there is a shiny red truck on scene when you get there to help asses, treat, carry, and HELP your patients. If nothing else, Im sure we've saved some backs.....Please re-think in the future your thoughts on working with and not against your local FD's......ITS NEVER A WASTE OF RESOURCES IF WE'RE RESPONDING TO YOUR HOUSE !!!!!

[spenac]

we save lives every single week running ALS engines for our taxpayers.

So how many do you kill every week? If you claim saves you have to accept blame for the deaths. If you are saving one life a week you are having at least as many dead patients.

The problems you describe that allows fire to arrive sooner would not exist if EMS were properly funded. In the case I described EMS won the race, but there should not have been a race. If EMS had more funding they could have staffed enough ambulances that 2 units of healthcare professionals would have shown up rather than what arrived.

As to their driving even if you cut my description in half it was to fast for the conditions. I have been in this business too long to get excited and embellish bad driving when I see it. Had they worked with my service I would have discussed this with them, if discussed before would have written them up, and if previously written up I would have seen to it that they were fired. I will not tolerate stupidity.

[p3medic]

Oh please... :roll: Lets see how fire would react if the EMS agency staffed a heavy rescue or engine, just to "help". It is your international unions mission to take over EMS, not because its the best way to deliver health care, but because its the best way to protect fire jobs and funding, plain and simple.