# Canada's military feeling the strain responding to climate change



## 211RadOp (24 Jun 2019)

> *Canada's military feeling the strain responding to climate change*
> 
> Darren Major, Salimah Shivji · CBC News · Posted: Jun 24, 2019 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 5 hours ago
> 
> ...



More: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-s-military-adopting-climate-change-1.5186337


----------



## AbdullahD (24 Jun 2019)

Maybe leave the armed forces for fighting wars, so their training, exercises and conditioning can reflect that goal...

Then maybe create or bolster another entity in order to respond to natural disasters, only deploying the armed forces if unrest, looting etc can not be handled by respective policing forces.

The military should not be expected to do evertthing.

My .02 only
Abdullah


----------



## brihard (24 Jun 2019)

AbdullahD said:
			
		

> Maybe leave the armed forces for fighting wars, so their training, exercises and conditioning can reflect that goal...
> 
> Then maybe create or bolster another entity in order to respond to natural disasters, only deploying the armed forces if unrest, looting etc can not be handled by respective policing forces.
> 
> ...



The real multiplier that the military brings to the table in this is almost completely organic logistics. Getting volunteers to do physical labour isn’t hard. Moving them, feeding and watering them, sheltering them, providing medical care, equipping them, establishing remote communications, and integrating them with an incident command system is the challenge. The military comes more or less self-sustaining as long as they can contract for consumable goods- which they’re good at.

No other organization can or would be able, in a pinch, to fill a couple cargo aircraft and ground convoy into a disaster site on short notice, and hit the ground basically running. Not with anything near the same degree of effectiveness. The military uniquely can because the same enablers needed for an expeditionary military operation also allow the force to deploy to a disaster and sustain their efforts when there. Only the military can have thousands of people effectively waiting around for something to go do. It’s the only real organization set up and working full time to be ready to go do stuff, but spend most of their time not actually doing it and so have the capacity when needed.


----------



## AbdullahD (24 Jun 2019)

I agree with you, my huge "but" to that is if natural and/or man made disasters are going to be such a threat. Should we not develop another system to deal with it?

Also what happens when, God forbid, we have to fight a tough war and fight these disasters at the same time? I would love to say there will never be a bad war again.. but we know that will not be true. 

So yes, all your points are true, legitimate, correct... but does it have to stay that way? Why not create another entity possibly heavily recruiting from the armed forces, personnel, culture etc to gain the benefits you mentioned and possibly jobs for those who want to exit. Or what about a program like other countries around the world have, you have to serve 'x' amount of time in the armed forces or public service.. so just a third option that they serve to help deal with disasters...

As it stands now, I agree, the Canadian forces are our best option. I just worry we may be tasking them for to much and this is a slippery slope... next thing we will know is more and more of their budget will go to fighting disasters and not wars and god forbid if we need to fight a war again.. we will be in  ad shape.

Abdullah


----------



## FJAG (24 Jun 2019)

Maybe for the next flood or fire or two we should haul a thousand people out of various headquarters and let them do their fair share for a week.

 :stirpot:


----------



## Remius (24 Jun 2019)

AbdullahD said:
			
		

> Maybe leave the armed forces for fighting wars, so their training, exercises and conditioning can reflect that goal...
> 
> Then maybe create or bolster another entity in order to respond to natural disasters, only deploying the armed forces if unrest, looting etc can not be handled by respective policing forces.
> 
> ...



A lot of Canadians have no problem with our military exactly because we do things like disaster relief.  They see value in our military when Canadians are directly benefiting from that sort of help. 

The red river floods in 96 and the ice storm of 98 were, in my mind a turning point in the public's perception of the military and those events garnered a lot of support for things like pay increases and better support.  

No need to give more reasons to cut our forces.  Also it is doubtful that any other organisation civy or other have the footprint or could ever achieve the same footprint across the country. 

The Ice Storm had 15,000 troops deployed.  The latest OP Lentus had 2500. 

I doubt that anyone lese can match that or the resources, manpower etc required.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (24 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Maybe for the next flood or fire or two we should haul a thousand people out of various headquarters and let them do their fair share for a week.
> 
> :stirpot:



Actually, I saw the opposite in Halifax during "OP SPLINTER" in 2003 (Hurricane Juan).  Despite the JTFA, MARLANT, LFAA and 36 Bde HQs all existing within a very small area to start with, the Bde "TF" also stood up it's OWN HQ in the Armouries.  ;D

Lots of empires in a fairly small space!!!


----------



## Remius (24 Jun 2019)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Actually, I saw the opposite in Halifax during "OP SPLINTER" in 2003 (Hurricane Juan).  Despite the JTFA, MARLANT, LFAA and 36 Bde HQs all existing within a very small area to start with, the Bde "TF" also stood up it's OWN HQ in the Armouries.  ;D
> 
> Lots of empires in a fairly small space!!!



A lot of our CBG HQ folks were sent (voluntold) out to support Lentus.   Who says you can't deploy Class b types  ;D


----------



## brihard (24 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Maybe for the next flood or fire or two we should haul a thousand people out of various headquarters and let them do their fair share for a week.
> 
> :stirpot:



You magnificent bastard.

Append a “Business Continuity Non-Essential (aid to civil power)” tag to every position accurately described by same. That places the incumbent ‘in the pool’, subject to being declared deployable domestically on a reasonable notice to move. That right there also substantiates the bona fide occupational requirements of much of UOS.

(Incidentally- autocorrect on iPhone doesn’t like Latin, we almost had a discourse on Boba Fett there. This segue brought to you by the Air Canada Maple Leaf Lounge)


----------



## mariomike (24 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Maybe for the next flood or fire or two we should haul a thousand people out of various headquarters and let them do their fair share for a week.
> 
> :stirpot:



Wouldn't that be a sight to see,


----------



## Blackadder1916 (24 Jun 2019)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Wouldn't that be a sight to see,



They're not in step!  The horror!


----------



## QV (24 Jun 2019)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> They're not in step!  The horror!



There is probably a little bit of horror associated to the inconsistent order of dress.  

TBH, I'm not comfortable with the CAF associating their domestic assistance to flood and fire as a result of climate change.  Too political.  It seems that was meant to support the LPC narrative of a climate emergency.  It was determined a large number of fires were arson.


----------



## brihard (24 Jun 2019)

QV said:
			
		

> There is probably a little bit of horror associated to the inconsistent order of dress.
> 
> TBH, I'm not comfortable with the CAF associating their domestic assistance to flood and fire as a result of climate change.  Too political.  It seems that was meant to support the LPC narrative of a climate emergency.  It was determined a large number of fires were arson.



And a lot weren’t. The floods definitely weren’t. Is it objectively true? That’s what matters. CAF must be ready for objective reality, whatever it may be.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (24 Jun 2019)

QV said:
			
		

> There is probably a little bit of horror associated to the inconsistent order of dress.
> 
> TBH, I'm not comfortable with the CAF associating their domestic assistance to flood and fire as a result of climate change.  Too political.  It seems that was meant to support the LPC narrative of a climate emergency.  It was determined a large number of fires were arson.



Alternatively, the focus on the CDS's comments could also be:



> Gen. Jonathan Vance, the chief of the defence staff, says he needs more men and women to handle these crises and his soldiers need more training to deal with fires and floods.
> 
> Just this spring more soldiers were deployed to assist states of emergencies — during floods in Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick as well as wildfires in Alberta — than were deployed overseas.
> 
> ...



So...need more servicemembers...we need to train and equip them properly for this type of tasking.


----------



## QV (24 Jun 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> And a lot weren’t. The floods definitely weren’t. Is it objectively true? That’s what matters. CAF must be ready for objective reality, whatever it may be.



What is objectively true:  CAF is understaffed, under equipped, and lacking training for these domestic tasks.

The CAF linking these tasks to "climate events" and ergo the LPC climate emergency, could be viewed as partisan.  That part should have been omitted.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (24 Jun 2019)

QV said:
			
		

> What is objectively true:  CAF is understaffed, under equipped, and lacking training for these domestic tasks.
> 
> The CAF linking these tasks to "climate events" and ergo the LPC climate emergency, could be viewed as partisan.  That part should have been omitted.



I'm sorry - the impact of climate change is a political issue?  Really?


----------



## Remius (24 Jun 2019)

QV said:
			
		

> What is objectively true:  CAF is understaffed, under equipped, and lacking training for these domestic tasks.
> 
> The CAF linking these tasks to "climate events" and ergo the LPC climate emergency, could be viewed as partisan.  That part should have been omitted.



So what are these tasks actually linked to then?

I think you are reading too much into this.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (24 Jun 2019)

QV said:
			
		

> What is objectively true:  CAF is understaffed, under equipped, and lacking training for these domestic tasks.
> 
> The CAF linking these tasks to "climate events" and ergo the LPC climate emergency, could be viewed as partisan.  That part should have been omitted.



Or perhaps, just perhaps, the CDS has people inside the department whose job it is to analyse threats and potential calls on the CAF resources, including for DomOps, who have analysed the data relating to recent increases in frequency of calls on the CAF for DomOps and found them to be in line with scientific predictions of climate change - thus advising the CDS accordingly without any political interference - but rather on the basis of proper scientific analysis.

Just spitballing here ... but it is possible, isn't it?


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Jun 2019)

>I'm sorry - the impact of climate change is a political issue?  Really?

To the extent that mitigating impact requires policy decisions, it is.

To the extent that people conflate climate issues with other land use mistakes in order to gin up funding to mitigate the latter, it is.


----------



## FJAG (24 Jun 2019)

QV said:
			
		

> What is objectively true:  CAF is understaffed, under equipped, and lacking training for these domestic tasks.
> 
> The CAF linking these tasks to "climate events" and ergo the LPC climate emergency, could be viewed as partisan.  That part should have been omitted.



You know I'm a CPC supporter and I'm not really that concerned about this being a veiled support of the LPC agenda. The CPC isn't really climate change deniers; they just see some different solutions to the problem.

What does concern me is that he's whining about a few domestic operations "stressing" out the CAF. It's true that we're under equipped for high end military operations albeit we're not badly equipped for light and medium weight ones. We're only understaffed at the sharp end because we're grossly overstaffed at the blunt end and as it is we're having troubles meeting recruiting quotas with the establishments that we have.

Let's face it, flood and fire fighting isn't rocket science; it's bull work which our military training and organization has and can easily adapt to.



> 1972 Lieutenant-General Guy Simonds put it this way: “The armed forces should primarily be trained and equipped for the possibility of conflict with a first-class power - the most severe testing they may have to face. It has been proven over and over again, that well trained and well disciplined military forces, trained primarily for major warfare, can easily and effectively adapt to lesser roles of aid to civil power or peacekeeping. The reverse is not the case.”  - . Simonds, Lieutenant-General, G.G. Commentary and Observations, The Canadian Military: A Profile, ed., Hector Massey, Toronto: Copp Clark, 1972. P 267



That was true when we were facing nuclear disaster oriented aid to the civil power and is even more relevant today.

Canada gives DND around $25 billion per year. If we're really stressing out some units or elements for these type of operations then it's our own bloody fault. The CDS needs to get his own house in order before he start whining to the public like Oliver Twist: "Please, Sir. Can I have some more?".

 :worms:


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Jun 2019)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Wouldn't that be a sight to see,



PAFOs will see that picture and it'll be on the next wave of recruiting posters.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (24 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Let's face it, flood and fire fighting isn't rocket science; it's bull work which our military training and organization has and can easily adapt to.
> 
> That was true when we were facing nuclear disaster oriented aid to the civil power and is even more relevant today.
> 
> ...



Maybe it is the supporting kit/equipment that makes up some of "want/need" list?  Res units, years ago, didn't get *1 for 1* exchanges on things like the G-Wagons when the Iltis was scrapped;  TCCCS radios also were not a 1-for-1 for 77, 46/49 sets.  I don't know if the CommRes lost #s in their CPs over the last decade +.  How is say, the Army Reserve with troop transport capabilities...is there a healthy ratio of # of troops and available troop transport?  Res units used to sometimes suffer from higher VOR #s back in my Res days.

Air assets are also helpful to move troops/equipment quickly.  We're supporting Mali, Latvia, NEON, IMPACT, etc etc simultaneously;  this puts quite a bit of weight on the Transport Sqns keeping things moving.  We've got TacHel assets deployed to Iraq and Mali...

The average Reg or Res servicemember isn't trained for fire-fighting;  if we deploy, we (I'm assuming) need SMEs to help 'effectively lead our efforts".  If we provided some key people in each level with training, would that not help us be more autonomous during DomOps in basic things like fire-fighting (I have no idea how/where to attack a forest fire)?

I've no experience with how the CAF and provincial EMOs interface in situations like this, other than assuming LOs are used at the higher level of interaction.


----------



## mariomike (24 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> PAFOs will see that picture and it'll be on the next wave of recruiting posters.



20 years ago. Seems like yesterday.


----------



## tomahawk6 (24 Jun 2019)

Cant beat Mother Nature much less control it.  ;D


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Jun 2019)

People have been beating mother nature for millennia, but not 100% of the time.  As with any contest, you have to know the enemy and know yourself.  It's just as hard to pin down what "climate change" means to people on the "convinced" side as on the "skeptical" side.  If everything weather-related can be blamed on "climate change" and outlier events are always immediately assumed to represent long-term trends, there will be many more things to fix and improve than there are resources to fix and improve them.


----------



## tomahawk6 (25 Jun 2019)

Fighting Nature wont require tanks or artillery or bullets or even ships.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Jun 2019)

> Canada's military feeling the strain responding to climate change



Church of Climate change.


----------



## brihard (25 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Church of Climate change.



Well the climate _is_ changing, in big and small ways, and we are seeing the effects of it and the military is having to deploy more. Senior CAF leadership saying that doesn’t mean they’re staking out a position on what’s causing it. Just that it’s here and causing more DOMOPS than we’re historically used to.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Jun 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Well the climate _is_ changing, in big and small ways, and we are seeing the effects of it and the military is having to deploy more. Senior CAF leadership saying that doesn’t mean they’re staking out a position on what’s causing it. Just that it’s here and causing more DOMOPS than we’re historically used to.




Not disagreeing the climate is changing but I think there's some discrepancy between how much is natural and how much is a result of human behavior. There's obviously a following out there who are ready to label everything climate change. 

Hot/cold summer, above/below average snow.  Wet/dry summer. It reminded me of debating with a friend. God sent the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs--kind of impossible to disprove that  

The CAF is deploying more to fight floods and fires. Is that because there's more of them happening or just because we weren't ordered to deploy to the other ones?



> When you look at the 2015 numbers, the sheer size of the area burned is stunning. The total forest burned in 2015 (as of Aug. 17) is 3,004,848 hectares. That’s a larger area than the island of Sicily, Italy.
> 
> And in 2014, which was the worst fire season since 2007, 4,123,986 hectares burned, the equivalent of burning the entire country of Switzerland.



I think it could be argued the amount we deploy can also be policy driven and not just an indicator of climate change increasing disasters.


----------



## mariomike (25 Jun 2019)

For reference to the discussion, 

Global Warming/Climate Change Super Thread  
https://navy.ca/forums/threads/32987.1050
118 pages.


----------



## Remius (25 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Not disagreeing the climate is changing but I think there's some discrepancy between how much is natural and how much is a result of human behavior. There's obviously a following out there who are ready to label everything climate change.
> 
> Hot/cold summer, above/below average snow.  Wet/dry summer. It reminded me of debating with a friend. God sent the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs--kind of impossible to disprove that
> 
> ...



and the CDS made no mention of it being man made or what not.  Just that we are responding to more climate related incidents.  We've had two 100 year floods in two years here in the valley.  Might be a fluke or might be a trend.  There are more happening, it just so happens that local authorities are asking for help more often.  In 2017 the NCR and area waited too long and did not ask for help.  they were not taking that chance again this time and asked early.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Jun 2019)

Some will argue that the increase of forest fires is as much to do with the pine beetle and 100 years of fire suppression catching up to us.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Jun 2019)

Remius said:
			
		

> and the CDS made no mention of it being man made or what not.  Just that we are responding to more climate related incidents.



Yer right pardner he didn't. 
I was quoting the title of the cbc piece. The CDS clearly said "climate-related events". 




> We've had two 100 year floods in two years here in the valley.  Might be a fluke or might be a trend.


Exactly. 



> There are more happening, it just so happens that local authorities are asking for help more often.



Im not trying to sound like a climate change denier, because I'm not, but the bc wild fires aren't a new thing. I haven't looked at the frequency of them by year and compared them yet. 

I'm probably seeing things between the lines that aren't there but the story, to me, implied these events are happening at an alarming new rate so much so the CAF can't respond.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (25 Jun 2019)

Just throwing it out there, but I would love to see what the Emergency Preparedness Plans look like for these provinces first. How many of their surplus budgets have back stopped by cutting funding from conservation and disaster response? I can't help but feel that calling the CAF in has become the default COA when things get wet or catch fire.


----------



## OldTanker (25 Jun 2019)

I can't speak to other provinces, but neither BC nor Alberta put anything like the necessary resources into emergency preparedness and response that they should. This is even worse at the municipal level. I suggest there is no, repeat no, municipality in Alberta or BC that puts the necessary resources into being prepared for a disaster, natural or man-made. Maybe, just maybe, Calgary might come close, but even they underfund their emergency program. It gets progressively worse the closer you get to the coast. So, once bad stuff happens, there is little recourse but to request federal support, and since other than DND, the federal government has pretty much NO capability to respond to a disaster (we have no equivalent of FEMA in the US), the CF is the default go-to. And its going to get worse, so either the CF is going to have to be prepared to respond on a more regular basis, or be prepared to say no. Let's see how that plays out.


----------



## Remius (25 Jun 2019)

rmc_wannabe said:
			
		

> Just throwing it out there, but I would love to see what the Emergency Preparedness Plans look like for these provinces first. How many of their surplus budgets have back stopped by cutting funding from conservation and disaster response? I can't help but feel that calling the CAF in has become the default COA when things get wet or catch fire.



Possibly.  but as I mentioned, when we had a flood in 2017 the city here did everything it could not to call the CAF so much so they were in denial.  People basically fended for themselves. 

This time they called in the CAF for help partly I think because of the backlash of the last one.


----------



## QV (25 Jun 2019)

The climate _has_ been changing since the beginning of time, and it will continue to do so.  In recent decades there have been longer intervals between F5 tornados in the US, than in the past.  Is this change good?  There were a lot of temperature records set in 2010.  There are also a lot of temperature records that remain since the early 20th century.  So if some places have not had an extreme temperature swing in 80 or 90 years, is that good or bad?  Nothing new here.            

We need to be good stewards of the environment, but there has been a lot of dishonesty about climate change and it's being used to advance political agendas.


----------



## mariomike (25 Jun 2019)

OldTanker said:
			
		

> I suggest there is no, repeat no, municipality in Alberta or BC that puts the necessary resources into being prepared for a disaster, natural or man-made.



The City of Vancouver has Canada Task Force 1. HUSAR.
https://twitter.com/cantf1?lang=en

https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/urban-search-and-rescue.aspx

The City of Calgary has Canada Task Force 2. HUSAR.
https://twitter.com/cantf2?lang=en

http://www.cantf2.com/

The City of Toronto also has a HUSAR unit. Canada Task Force 3. ( CAN - TF3 ).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_(CAN-TF3)_Heavy_Urban_Search_and_Rescue

https://www.toronto.ca/311/knowledgebase/kb/docs/articles/fire-services/training-and-technical-operations/toronto-husar.html
"Toronto HUSAR is an acronym for Heavy Urban Search And Rescue Team, which is a multi-service, multi-skilled, and multi-functional task force developed within the framework of existing response agencies such as the Toronto Police Service/Toronto Paramedic Services/Toronto Fire Service."


----------



## Eye In The Sky (25 Jun 2019)

QV said:
			
		

> The climate _has_ been changing since the beginning of time, and it will continue to do so.
> 
> ….there has been a lot of dishonesty about climate change and it's being used to advance political agendas.



This I agree with 100%.


----------



## OldTanker (25 Jun 2019)

For Mario Mike. (I don't know how to post a quote from a previous post). The HUSAR teams are a good start and the three municipalities (and the provinces and feds who have provided support and funding) are to be congratulated. But these three teams, for the entire country, do not represent any sort of level of adequate preparation. I stand by my statement. We, collectively, are woefully prepared for a major disaster and the only significant mobile, deployable and self-contained response agency is the CF.


----------



## Furniture (25 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> You know I'm a CPC supporter and I'm not really that concerned about this being a veiled support of the LPC agenda. The CPC isn't really climate change deniers; they just see some different solutions to the problem.
> 
> What does concern me is that he's whining about a few domestic operations "stressing" out the CAF. It's true that we're under equipped for high end military operations albeit we're not badly equipped for light and medium weight ones. We're only understaffed at the sharp end because we're grossly overstaffed at the blunt end and as it is we're having troubles meeting recruiting quotas with the establishments that we have.
> 
> ...




Could it be that the type of people interested in war fighting aren't terribly interested in fighting floods and forest fires? We can make them do it once they are in, but can we keep them around when between training to fight first class opponents they spend what should be their summer leave fighting forest fires, and filling sandbags? 

Does the budget size matter when the people clearly aren't interested in joining or staying? Perhaps the CDS is making it known the CAF is feeling a bit stretched so we can ramp down the pace of operations and give our deployers a break?


----------



## mariomike (25 Jun 2019)

OldTanker said:
			
		

> For Mario Mike. (I don't know how to post a quote from a previous post). The HUSAR teams are a good start and the three municipalities (and the provinces and feds who have provided support and funding) are to be congratulated. But these three teams, for the entire country, do not represent any sort of level of adequate preparation. I stand by my statement. We, collectively, are woefully prepared for a major disaster and the only significant mobile, deployable and self-contained response agency is the CF.



I agree with the high-lighted part, OldTanker.

HUSAR is what we've got. I wasn't a member, but I was permanent on the Mass Casualty ( MCI ) multi-patient buses after 1980, and was well aware of our limited surge capacity.

Since funding is provincial, I don't know how it works in Vancouver or Calgary.

The challenge we faced was our funding was based on the census population, not the business day commuter population. As a result,  there were always more people requiring service than the system was funded for.

Add things like the Raptors parade, Pride, Caribana, Pearson Airport and Union Station, general tourism, 18 live lanes on the 401, etc. etc , many of those visitors are from out of town.  

I'll leave the Climate Change debate for its 118-page super-thread. But, in terms of weather, because of the density , a major snow storm can paralyze this city. 

I know NYC relies heavily on their National Guard units during snowstorms.

 :cheers:


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Jun 2019)

Stockpile more bridging, rafting and water treatment equipment at the various Reserve Combat Engineer units.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Jun 2019)

[quote author=QV]     

We need to be good stewards of the environment, but there has been a lot of dishonesty about climate change and it's being used to advance political agendas.   
[/quote]

This is exactly what I mean (but fail to articulate). 
Climate is changing, some of it very well be man made. There's a lot of dogma about it and dishonesty for personal or political advantage.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Jun 2019)

OldTanker said:
			
		

> I can't speak to other provinces, but neither BC nor Alberta put anything like the necessary resources into emergency preparedness and response that they should. This is even worse at the municipal level.



This is exactly what I noticed. My area had significant flooding a couple years ago. Residents and municipalities seemed wholy unprepared  for more flooding and seemed to do extremely little in the way of preparation.

Politics among the municipalities was dumbfounding.

People complained a lot the CAF could have helped a lot more if we were called out 3 weeks earlier and they were not wrong.

But if the CAF is going to be used as de-facto firefighters and flood responders then we need training and especially equipment. CAF members shouldn't be buying hip waders on their own because they don't want to stand in shit water and there's none in the system.


----------



## OldTanker (25 Jun 2019)

If the CF is going to be more committed to domestic operations in the future, perhaps there is some value in considering re-configuring Army units specifically for this role. For example, we could consider reconfiguring Militia Armour and Artillery units to engineering, logistical and medical units, something that would be sorely needed after a major disaster. And then equip them accordingly. We need to think of the CF role in a major disaster (the big earthquake on the West Coast for example) and not just relatively short-term flood and fire responses. Shades of the "snakes and ladders" days of the Reentry Columns of the 1960s I know, and heresy to an old tanker, but we need to face reality. The soldier in me understands the need to maintain a military capable of fighting, the taxpayer in me wonders what point there is in spending billions of dollars on something that can't protect us from an emerging threat. This probably *shouldn't* be the responsibility of the CF, but if not them, who? Suggestions cheerfully solicited.


----------



## mariomike (25 Jun 2019)

This was the headline in 1954, after Hurricane Hazel. 

To the best of my knowledge, 1954 and the 1999 ( snow-storm ) were the only times the army deployed in Toronto. 

Looks like the 48th Highlanders (?) in one pic.


----------



## FJAG (25 Jun 2019)

OldTanker said:
			
		

> If the CF is going to be more committed to domestic operations in the future, perhaps there is some value in considering re-configuring Army units specifically for this role. For example, we could consider reconfiguring Militia Armour and Artillery units to engineering, logistical and medical units, something that would be sorely needed after a major disaster. And then equip them accordingly. We need to think of the CF role in a major disaster (the big earthquake on the West Coast for example) and not just relatively short-term flood and fire responses. Shades of the "snakes and ladders" days of the Reentry Columns of the 1960s I know, and heresy to an old tanker, but we need to face reality. The soldier in me understands the need to maintain a military capable of fighting, the taxpayer in me wonders what point there is in spending billions of dollars on something that can't protect us from an emerging threat. This probably *shouldn't* be the responsibility of the CF, but if not them, who? Suggestions cheerfully solicited.



Sorry mate, I couldn't disagree more. Having briefly been part of the "snakes and ladder" crowd for a short period in the '60s I can attest to how thoroughly demoralizing that was. Luckily our officers basically ignored the mandate and kept us focused on our artillery role but we lost a lot of good NCOs and other folks who didn't want any part of that nonsense. I quoted Gen Simonds above about a military trained for major warfare can easily adapt to civil power roles. The opposite isn't true.

Dealing with disasters is a provincial matter. Federal legislation kicks in only when a "public welfare emergency" is of an extant "that results or may result in a danger to life or property, social disruption or a breakdown in the flow of essential goods, services or resources, so serious as to be a national emergency." Military involvement generally comes only to augment provincial authorities by way of aid to the civil power. 

Climate change, while serious, is not on the scale of '60s style "imminent nuclear destruction". There is time for federal, provincial and local governments to get serious and address concerns at their respective levels and create the essential mechanisms and organizations to deal with those matters.

My personal opinion is that we shouldn't ignore the very real revival of the cold war that the government has identified in SSE, and for which we now keep forces deployed for in the Baltics, and reorganize and equip our reserves (especially armour, artillery, infantry, air defence artillery, engineers and service support units) to be an effective expansion (both depth and breadth) of our Regular Force. Aid to civil power should remain as a secondary or even tertiary capability on a stand by basis.

 :cheers:


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Jun 2019)

Except for municipalities that face specific recurring likely risks and which should at least plan accordingly, I would not expect municipalities to put much into emergency preparedness.  While a province might face one major event per year, not every municipality will - centralize resources accordingly.  Where municipalities might be negligent in matters under their direct control is in management of infrastructure and land use practices.

Municipalities and provinces seem to be running out of funds but not out of things they want to buy.  (There is a constant stream of ideas for squeezing out a little more tax and fee revenue here in BC, particularly in the lower mainland.)  The federal government doesn't just provide access to people and equipment; it provides access to funding.  More frequent requests for these resources should be expected; but there will always be a need for something at which to point a finger other than "we didn't manage our forests/waterways/interfaces prudently".


----------



## mariomike (25 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Climate change, while serious, is not on the scale of '60s style "imminent nuclear destruction".



EMO
http://maps.library.utoronto.ca/datapub/digital/metro_1963/metro_1963_046.jpg


----------



## YZT580 (25 Jun 2019)

The principal cause of forest fires is still arson.  The largest fire in Ontario last year was indirectly caused by global warming true: equipment overheated that was being used to construct windmills.  Just a little irony.  Much of the flooding in Ontario has been caused by the closure or partial closure of spillways on the St. Lawrence system, allowing construction on known flood planes,  and inhibiting water flows through the use of pipes and channels rather than allowing natural flow.  Hurricanes have been of normal strength and duration.  In fact one of the most devastating financially wasn't even a cat. 3.  Just bad luck and a random track.  Just think, if they had spent the money on planning and prevention for both flooding and fires instead of subsidising wind power and fridges for large companies most of the problems would never have occurred.  IMHO


----------



## FJAG (25 Jun 2019)

mariomike said:
			
		

> EMO
> http://maps.library.utoronto.ca/datapub/digital/metro_1963/metro_1963_046.jpg



That reference to auxiliary police is actually a very good one. I know most provincial measures organizations have stores for emergencies, trained headquarters and supervisor staffs and links into parallel organizations (fire communications, air drop etc) as well as sources of personnel resources (such as local communities in the north for fire fighting staff).

Essentially I see two types of issues that need addressing. The first is short duration events such as seasonal flooding and fires that need a readily available supply of local volunteers (either paid or unpaid) together with an available deployable infrastructure of command and control and supplies. The second is major long term environmental changes such as coastal sea rise, and agricultural impacts which go far beyond local resources and require major investments in infrastructure and government policies. Japan is an example of a society and government that is dealing with disaster issues better than we are. We should look to them for some guidance and volunteer auxiliary disaster agencies would play a far better role than continued reliance on the the military which is a an expensive resource (at least to the federal purse)

 :cheers:


----------



## mariomike (26 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Japan is an example of a society and government that is dealing with disaster issues better than we are.



Japan ( and Germany ) both rose from the ashes after 1945.



			
				FJAG said:
			
		

> We should look to them for some guidance and volunteer auxiliary disaster agencies would play a far better role than continued reliance on the the military which is a an expensive resource (at least to the federal purse)
> 
> :cheers:



 :nod:


----------



## garb811 (26 Jun 2019)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> The principal cause of forest fires is still arson.
> ...


Not to quibble but just because a wildfire has a human cause does not make it arson. Arson is a criminal act and relatively few wildfires comparatively are ever investigated as such.

While it is true that the "major" cause of wildfires is human, lightening is a close second at 47% (at least in the stats I've seen). The difference between a human caused wildfire and a lightening strike has a huge impact on the initial response though. A large number of non-arson human fires are reported immediately and are generally in areas easily accessible to local firefighters as first response and they tend to be contained and suppressed very quickly. The major problems come with lightening strikes because they can happen in the middle of nowhere and can be well established and out of control before they are even spotted...  This is the reason some provinces established fire lookout tower systems in remote areas; Alberta still has 127 of them in use.


----------



## mariomike (26 Jun 2019)

Wildfire? Bring in the Fire Train. 

30,000 gallons of water.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (26 Jun 2019)

Nothing more impressive that watching Martin Mars doing drops on a fire.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (26 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> . . .  Japan is an example of a society and government that is dealing with disaster issues better than we are. We should look to them for some guidance and volunteer auxiliary disaster agencies would play a far better role than continued reliance on the the military which is a an expensive resource (at least to the federal purse)



The German model is also one of the better ones (well, maybe that's my opinion because I have some dated experience in seeing them in operation - back in the 1990s one of my neighbours in Schuttern was a Hilfswerker).  Most of the tasks that the CF does as assistance to civil authorities as well as overseas operations similar to DART are the responsibility of the Bundesanstalt Technisches Hilfswerk (THW, Federal Agency for Technical Relief).  This is a civilian agency that currently has about 80,000 members; 99% of them are volunteers (usually unpaid).  Of course, there is a different culture in Germany.  Back when there was conscription, the THW was one of the options as alternate service, five years with the THW (an unpaid, part-time commitment) or 18  months full-time service in the Heer with a reserve requirement afterwards - that's why my neighbour said he started in the THW but when I knew him he had been a Hilfswerker on and off for almost  20 years.

Besides the higher profile major operations, they are also available to respond to much smaller and more locally focused situations.  Sections are organized in a large number of communities.


> Departments
> 
> 668 local sections, 66 branch offices, eight regional offices, a federal training center with two locations and THW headquarters. THW has stretched its safety net over Germany. All contact details can be found here.



Their website is also in English https://www.thw.de/EN/Action/action_node.html, but some of the more detailed description about organization is only in German.

As an example of a typical section, the Lahr website provides some detail (though it's in German).  Seems that they moved onto the airfield once we left in 1994.
https://www.thw-lahr.de/das-thw-lahr/


----------



## daftandbarmy (26 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> We should look to them for some guidance and volunteer auxiliary disaster agencies would play a far better role than continued reliance on the the military which is a an expensive resource (at least to the federal purse)
> 
> :cheers:



Japan has a population of about 80 million in a land area about half the size of of BC, and a GDP many times that of Canada's. 

And a few other differences....


----------



## Blackadder1916 (26 Jun 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Japan has a population of about 80 million in a land area about half the size of of BC, and a GDP many times that of Canada's.
> 
> And a few other differences....



Just because we have more land and fewer people doesn't mean we can't learn lessons from countries that take civil protection more seriously than us.


----------



## FJAG (26 Jun 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Japan has a population of about 80 million in a land area about half the size of of BC, and a GDP many times that of Canada's.
> 
> And a few other differences....



Like a habit of social responsibility while we tend to gravitate towards social indifference. 

Maybe we could change that with a few tax incentives for volunteerism of this type as we already do for political contributions and charitable donations. Maybe even federally/provincially funded rough terrain fire fighting and rescue equipment located in fire-prone rural communities (many of which already have volunteer fire departments). 

Oh and how about development moratoriums on flood plains (like Vancouver  ;D)

Ooh! Ooh! And how about long range fire watch IR drone surveillance instead of towers.

 :cheers:


----------



## YZT580 (26 Jun 2019)

Both Ontario and Quebec rely upon Satellite surveillance for fire watch.  For the most part it works but it can be up to 24 hours before the map is read and interpreted.  That is a lot of time for a fire to get established.  The Mark 1 works but universal coverage is a physical impossibility given the area to be covered.  There is no perfect solution but proper forest management would go a long way to reducing the hazard.  And yes, the majority of human started fires are not arson: bad choice of words


----------



## Eye In The Sky (26 Jun 2019)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Ooh! Ooh! And how about long range fire watch IR drone surveillance instead of towers.
> 
> :cheers:



How many would that require?  Seems better tasked to a space asset...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (26 Jun 2019)

Not to mention the number of helicopters and small planes buzzing about. If the fire is worth fighting, then likley it's in an area that likley fairly well covered.


----------



## FJAG (26 Jun 2019)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> ... There is no perfect solution but proper forest management would go a long way to reducing the hazard.  ...



Like this:



> “You’ve got to take care of the floors. You know the floors of the forest, very important,” Trump noted Saturday surrounded by the devastation of the burned town of Paradise in northern California.
> 
> “I was with the president of Finland and he said, ‘We have a much different —we’re a forest nation.’ He called it a forest nation, and they spent a lot of time on raking and cleaning and doing things. And they don’t have any problem. And when they do, it’s a very small problem,” Trump said.



https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/trump-says-raking-would-help-prevent-forest-fires_n_5bf0d578e4b0f32bd58a1aba

Oh, wait:



> But Niinisto told local newspaper Ilta-Sanomat that he emphasized the use of a surveillance system – and doesn’t remember mentioning raking.
> 
> “Finland is a country covered by forests but we also have a good surveillance system and network” in case of wildfires, he said.
> 
> He also said he told Trump that “we take care of our forests.”



https://globalnews.ca/news/4676548/finland-trump-raking-leaves-forest-fires/

I guess its back to satellites and drones and towers.

 :cheers:


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Jun 2019)

Classic Trump  :


----------



## AbdullahD (27 Jun 2019)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Wildfire? Bring in the Fire Train.
> 
> 30,000 gallons of water.



It is actually suprising how much of a fire risk trains and/or train crews are.

I am in no way shape or form, implying, suggesting or informing anyone of any legal or moral responsibility for railways to fight fires or any realistic statistics involving railways and fires.

It is just interesting. Also not sure how much I can say without getting fired for slander.

Abdullah


----------



## mariomike (27 Jun 2019)

AbdullahD said:
			
		

> I am in no way shape or form, implying, suggesting or informing anyone of any legal or moral responsibility for railways to fight fires or any realistic statistics involving railways and fires.



That sounds like legalese, Abdullah.  

And you know how much I love trains!


----------



## daftandbarmy (27 Jun 2019)

mariomike said:
			
		

> That sounds like legalese, Abdullah.
> 
> And you know how much I love trains!



Trainspotter, eh? 

Would it make you too jealous if I told you that I touched the Flying Scotsman yesterday?  

https://www.railwaymuseum.org.uk/what-was-on/flying-scotsman


----------



## garb811 (27 Jun 2019)

AbdullahD said:
			
		

> It is actually suprising how much of a fire risk trains and/or train crews are.
> 
> I am in no way shape or form, implying, suggesting or informing anyone of any legal or moral responsibility for railways to fight fires or any realistic statistics involving railways and fires.
> 
> ...


Spring grass fires along the right of way where I grew up were a fact of life.


----------



## mariomike (27 Jun 2019)

AbdullahD said:
			
		

> It is actually suprising how much of a fire risk trains and/or train crews are.





> Railroad only pays half of cost of fires caused by their steam engines
> 
> Coal-burning trains operated by D&SNG in Colorado have started multiple wildfires in the San Juan National Forest
> 
> ...



I read that in the old days when city fire departments used steam boilers, a suppression apparatus had to follow to put out fires caused by sparks.


----------



## daftandbarmy (27 Jun 2019)

I wonder how leadership impacts this stress factor? Patton famously noted that ‘There are more tired Division and Corps commanders than there are tired Divisions and Corps.’ 

I assume that this principle applies to this situation, to a certain extent.


----------



## AbdullahD (28 Jun 2019)

garb811 said:
			
		

> Spring grass fires along the right of way where I grew up were a fact of life.



Yep, I can't count the number of tie fires I have seen in my few short years. Then talking to the foreman grass fires etc that may have been a result of the tie fires.. are insane.

That doesn't even include when your in power say notch 2, 3 or 4.. and take a minimum with the automatic setting up the train line up and drag it into a siding were you throttle down and stop... a mile or two later... does not help the fire situation at all. Using the dynamic brakes all at he head end, would reduce fire risks.. but for train handling it is less then ideal.. but I've been trained by the old guard, the guys who weren't scared by air.

One chap I work with is a fire tracker and he cross references all wildfire burns and spread models with were railways are.. he has some interesting theories.. that may or may not be correct and/or true.

Abdullah 





			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> That sounds like legalese, Abdullah.
> 
> And you know how much I love trains!



*whistles innocently*


----------

