Emergency evaluations…

[chuckChuck]

According to the news many property owners seem to be working on protecting their property and fighting fires.

In other cases the authorities have evacuated communities and properties. Probably because the assessed risks are too high.

Who on this site thinks they have more training and experience assessing, coordinating, and fighting fires than the fire crews and authorities from the Counties and the Province?

Would you allow property owners and community residents to stay, when your training and experience says that they would be at serious risk? Your job and their lives depends on you making the best decision possible at the time in a volatile situation.

You have the overview and information from the air and central coordination. The property owner is likely exhausted from work, likely isn't sleeping well and is very scared. Would you let property owners make that life and death decision on when to evacuate?

Your number one job is to protect people. How many of you would allow residents to potentially become victims trying to save their home and property in an unpredictable and dangerous fire?

[jazz]

There’s chuck right on cue with govt knows best.

Sure let’s send the guy with 100 dozers home. Trust the experts.

I have never seen the local RM put out a fire without a ton of farmers helping out. And no they don’t wait for directions from inept govt officials and RCMP.

[Blaithin]

According to the news many property owners seem to be working on protecting their property and fighting fires.

In other cases the authorities have evacuated communities and properties. Probably because the assessed risks are too high.

Who on this site thinks they have more training and experience assessing, coordinating, and fighting fires than the fire crews and authorities from the Counties and the Province?

Would you allow property owners and community residents to stay, when your training and experience says that they would be at serious risk? Your job and their lives depends on you making the best decision possible at the time in a volatile situation.

You have the overview and information from the air and central coordination. The property owner is likely exhausted from work, likely isn't sleeping well and is very scared. Would you let property owners make that life and death decision on when to evacuate?

Your number one job is to protect people. How many of you would allow residents to potentially become victims trying to save their home and property in an unpredictable and dangerous fire?

Adults are capable of making their own decisions. Not like you can say them staying in their homes is putting everyone else at risk like the house of cards built around a certain germ.

Consider it like a DNR. The property owners inform emergency services they are staying to fight, they don’t want to be rescued and therefore use up and put emergency services at risk, just leave them be.

Everyone has their own priorities. Some people are ok with leaving their livestock behind, others will stay and try and keep as many alive as possible and protect their homes. It’s not for you or the government to tell someone their priorities are wrong.

The #1 responders out here for grassfires are farmers. Farmers are generally closest to the scene, they have the equipment available to assist, they are typically fairly prepared. Are you saying they should stop responding and sit and wait because someone more knowledgeable will eventually show up?

Volunteer stations have been run ragged last week with grass fires. I’m sure they were quite thankful that many times the fires were under control or almost out by the time they arrived on scene. It saves having to call 3 stations from different towns to one location and allows them to cover 3 fires instead of 1.

[chuckChuck]

So Danny Smith is saying no to mandatory evacuations and that provincial emergency laws are out the window?

That everyone has the right to stay and protect their property even if they are going to die?

And the ones that stay and get caught in a fire and are injured or needing to be rescued? They wont be calling emergency services? You are certain of that? They will have signed a document to that effect?

I think everyone sympathizes with the terrible situation that residents who have been evacuated are faced with.

But suggesting that everyone should have the right to face floods, fires and other natural disasters and that the authorities don't have the right to evacuate them is a big step backwards in emergency planning.

Is any provincial politician saying this is a good idea?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

According to the news many property owners seem to be working on protecting their property and fighting fires.

In other cases the authorities have evacuated communities and properties. Probably because the assessed risks are too high.

Who on this site thinks they have more training and experience assessing, coordinating, and fighting fires than the fire crews and authorities from the Counties and the Province?

Would you allow property owners and community residents to stay, when your training and experience says that they would be at serious risk? Your job and their lives depends on you making the best decision possible at the time in a volatile situation.

You have the overview and information from the air and central coordination. The property owner is likely exhausted from work, likely isn't sleeping well and is very scared. Would you let property owners make that life and death decision on when to evacuate?

Your number one job is to protect people. How many of you would allow residents to potentially become victims trying to save their home and property in an unpredictable and dangerous fire?

Can someone edit this statement, every time Chuck says property owners, change it to say drug addicts. And see if he still agrees with his authoritarian assessment of the situation.

[chuckChuck]

Try to stay focused A5! LOL

So which politicians and local authorities are saying that we don't need the power to evacuate residents under the Emergency Management Act?

And that emergencies should be best handled by local residents and that the province should have no role in emergencies?

[cropgrower]

purely obsessed with Danelle Smyth , likely dreaming about her every night !

[chuckChuck]

That's all you got crop? LOL

Danny Smith is as close as you will get to a libertarian premier and far as we know she hasn't repealed the powers in the emergency management act.

So the opinions on Agrisilly don't seem to have much traction.

[cropgrower]

i will let you rant away about how government shud run our lives in every way

[Blaithin]

So Danny Smith is saying no to mandatory evacuations and that provincial emergency laws are out the window?

That everyone has the right to stay and protect their property even if they are going to die?

And the ones that stay and get caught in a fire and are injured or needing to be rescued? They wont be calling emergency services? You are certain of that? They will have signed a document to that effect?

I think everyone sympathizes with the terrible situation that residents who have been evacuated are faced with.

But suggesting that everyone should have the right to face floods, fires and other natural disasters and that the authorities don't have the right to evacuate them is a big step backwards in emergency planning.

Is any provincial politician saying this is a good idea?

Right to evacuate them…

Why is that a right?

I mean, rights are pretty feeble claims anyway and subject to personal discrepancies, but why would a government have a right to evacuate anyone for anything?

It can be said they have a responsibility to evacuate those who cannot evacuate themselves, such as hospitals. But the right to enforce their beliefs on people, in a crisis?

The information should be given, the evacuation alert given, but to enforce it, no. If you start forcing people from their legally owned property and say it’s your right to do so, you’re towing a very dangerous line.

[chuckChuck]

In Every way? LOL Who said that?

You really are out of your league here Crop.

You gotta come up with some better responses.

[chuckChuck]

Right to evacuate them…

Why is that a right?

I mean, rights are pretty feeble claims anyway and subject to personal discrepancies, but why would a government have a right to evacuate anyone for anything?

It can be said they have a responsibility to evacuate those who cannot evacuate themselves, such as hospitals. But the right to enforce their beliefs on people, in a crisis?

The information should be given, the evacuation alert given, but to enforce it, no. If you start forcing people from their legally owned property and say it’s your right to do so, you’re towing a very dangerous line.

Which politicians are saying that the emergency management act should not have the power to evacuate during floods and fires?

[jazz]

Funny how we can get an amber alert instantly and it takes a day to get a fire alert in a community.

The RCMP shouldnt be in charge of anything. These guys should stick to harassing protestors and the unvaxxed. The local fire dept with community volunteers should be leading this charge.

Just like in Fort Mac, the contractors pleaded with the authorities to take every cat in the area and knock down a ring of of forest around the town. Request denied, we know better, surprise town burned to the ground.

Somebody explain it to chuck like he is 4yrs old, people dont recover from these losses no matter what insurance you have. So they have an interest in protecting it, not standing by while some egghead does a Trudeau talk to them.

[Blaithin]

Which politicians are saying that the emergency management act should not have the power to evacuate during floods and fires?

I have no clue, I don’t pay attention to politicians.

Power to evacuate is not the same as Right to evacuate everyone.

One offers resources to assist those who wish to evacuate to do so safely. The other is enforcing the decision on people who may not wish to do so for various reasons.

You can have the first without the second.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Adults are capable of making their own decisions.

You Start out your argument with the assumption that we are all adults. While you are responding to the poster who was banished to the children's daycare because he had proven over and over again that he was completely unable to act like an adult.
Most children require and expect some higher authority to make all important decisions on their behalf.
They do not want to take on the burden and consequences of being responsible for their own actions and decisions.

This concept of personal responsibility is so completely foreign to intellectual children such as chuck, that this discussion is futile.