The 2009 Australian Wildfires and the proposed

 Stonegate/Merriam Mountains Development

The death toll in the February 2009 Australian wildfires (over 200 people killed) has prompted a reappraisal of Australia’s policy to “stay and defend” as a wildland or bushfire strategy. The prevailing policy of “stay and defend” suggested that adequately prepared and able-bodied residents could remain in their homes in the event of wildfire. These residents would be required to act as firefighters and attempt to protect their homes while hoping the homes could protect them at the same time.

Working in conjunction with development interests, Southern California fire authorities had previously pointed to the Australian policy of “stay and defend” as an example of how California residents could stay in their homes and remain safe during a wildland fire. Now, suddenly, it has been shown just how deadly this policy could be.

The Stonegate/Merriam Mountains development is a proposed 2,700-home development to be built atop a severely fire-hazardous mountainous region with very limited egress. The Merriam Mountain developers have admittedly predicated their fire strategy (which they called “shelter-in-place”) on an even more flawed copy of Australia’s “stay and defend” policy. In the Southern California version, the fire strategy would rely solely on “fire-resistant” construction of the homes and vegetation setbacks to protect the residents from wildfire. There would be no reliance on the population that would remain behind to act as firefighters (which Australian authorities stated was imperative to their chances for survival). The 2003 and 2007 Southern Californian wildfires demonstrated conclusively that “fire-resistant” homes with vegetation setbacks could and did in fact burn to the ground due to firebrands and windborn embers that could traverse any land barrier and spread a wildland fire in an unpredictable and uncontrollable manner.

The recent California and Australian wildfires have demonstrated that there is no sure way to protect residents during a wildfire aside from a successful evacuation. The developers of the proposed Merriam Mountains development have acknowledged that project residents could not be evacuated in time in certain likely wildfire scenarios. That leaves them with a diverse population group of project residents (including children, elderly and physically compromised) remaining in their homes and praying that firebrands will not burn down their homes since they are unable to evacuate in a timely manner. Australian authorities have always understood that residents who are medically compromised, handicapped, physically debilitated, young, or elderly will likely succumb from the physical trauma, panic and chaos during a wildfire and that evacuation is a must for the great majority of residents. In the Southern California version, evacuation is not even an option for most residents because of the unavailability of adequate time. Residents will simply be trapped.

The central problem that has not been addressed is how developers have conspired with government officials to get permission to build high-density projects in extremely fire hazardous areas that cannot be evacuated or defended from wildland fire. This rezoning for dense development results in massive windfall profits for the developers and pours money into the coffers of the politicians in the form of “contributions” from special interests. The taxpayer is again left holding the bag in having to pay for fire protection in indefensible areas and then paying in human lives for the egregiously poor planning.

The San Diego County government, headed by the Board of Supervisors, is in the process of doing the unconscionable in allowing the building of the Stonegate/Merriam Mountains development that cannot be adequately protected in the event of wildfire. The building of this 2,700-home development atop Merriam Mountain will also endanger and obstruct the already limited evacuation capabilities of the surrounding communities in North San Diego County.

The Governor of the State of California, Cal-Fire, and federal agencies such as the Department of the Interior and Homeland Security are not yet reacting to the whistle-blowers who have been blowing the whistle very loudly. The book entitled “The Politics of Fire: The San Diego Catastrophe” (currently posted on this website) was written prior to the February 2009 Australian wildfires. This book predicted that many deaths could easily result as a consequence of a wildfire in which residents remained in their homes and followed a “stay and defend” strategy. The 2009 Australian experience has taken a prediction and turned it into fact. This website will serve as a permanent witness to the culpability of San Diego County in condoning an ill-conceived fire protection strategy and not requiring that any proposed development provide for adequate and timely evacuation in the event of wildfire. It is time for the regulatory authorities to stop looking the other way and react to these whistle-blowing efforts directed at preventing a massive loss of life that would eclipse the death toll of the 2009 Australian wildfires.