A letter intended to provide clarity around use of a planned ignition for the Bush Creek East wildfire in the North Shuswap hasn鈥檛 convinced Jim Cooperman it was the right thing to do.
On the contrary, the Lee Creek resident maintains fire resulting from the ignition is what blew into his and other North Shuswap communities last August.
鈥淟ighting that fire was the absolute worst thing to do 鈥� they created a bigger fire rather than creating a kind of solution, and their argument doesn鈥檛 hold water at all,鈥� said Cooperman in response to the letter, written by the B.C. Wildfire Service and Ministry of Forests on behalf of the B.C. Premier鈥檚 Office.
Intended to provide more 鈥渃larity to the events that occurred at the Adams Lake Fire,鈥� the ministry explained the Aug. 17 planned ignition, 鈥渁 common fuel removal tactic in wildfire response, was implemented to reduce the intensity of an advancing wildfire鈥� toward several communities in the North Shuswap region.鈥�
鈥淭he purpose of this tactic was not to contain the wildfire, but reduce its intensity, providing a greater chance of survival to any structures in its projected path鈥�,鈥� reads the letter, which goes on to explain how within one day, the fire grew faster than what was predicted.
鈥淎n overnight run by the wildfire on Aug. 16 (8 km under less severe conditions than those forecasted for Aug. 17/18) caused further concern and factored into the decision to use a planned ignition, given the extreme likelihood the wildfire would reach communities without mitigation. The alternative was to let the fire progress naturally, with the potential to impact an area from the Adams River to Scotch Creek (approximately 12 km with several hundred homes).鈥�
The ignition was conducted along a 10 kilometre stretch of powerlines. The ministry said this 鈥渃ontrol line alone would not have stopped the fire, as the fire鈥檚 activity was already such that it was spotting ahead of itself at further distances than the width of the control line.鈥�
鈥淎t the time of ignition, at 3:15 pm on Aug 17, the south flank of the wildfire was already within 1.5 km of the powerlines and two spot fires had already been reported beyond the ignition line the day prior,鈥� reads the letter.
Cooperman argues the powerline instead acted as a conduit, bringing the fire from the ignition into Lee Creek and neighbouring communities.
鈥淚t didn鈥檛 serve its purpose as a control line because it was filled with dead brush, so instead of a control line it was a fire conduit,鈥� said Cooperman, explaining the fire wound up sweeping through Lee Creek canyon, exacerbated by strong winds. 鈥淭he wind comes through there with the fire and it becomes like a blow torch鈥︹��
Cooperman said Tuesday (Feb. 13) that it was interesting he should receive the letter, in response to concerns he submitted to the Premiere鈥檚 Office in September, the same week he happened to be in Victoria, meeting with different government agencies and politicians, as well as giving a talk about what he calls the Shuswap Firestorm, and the ongoing campaign to reform the province鈥檚 wildfire response, to environmental law students at the University of Victoria.
鈥淵esterday, I was the Forest Practices Board office and talked to one of they key managers there about our issues and had a promise that they will look into it,鈥� said Cooperman, explaining one of those issues, reflected in a signed petition he brought with him to Victoria, calls on the province to allow the signing up of contractors and forestry professionals 鈥渢o be part of the firefighting team so fires can be put out early,鈥� and to 鈥渁llow for rural residents to help protect their properties if wildfires approach.鈥�
鈥淭hat has to do with utilizing contractors, licensees and rural landowners because right now 鈥� it鈥檚 a policy, it鈥檚 not in the Wildfire Act 鈥� so their policy is to not allow contractors to put out fires. So we鈥檙e quite interested in that facet because it certainly doesn鈥檛 make any sense,鈥� said Cooperman. 鈥淢any of the wildfires that have destroyed communities in the last few years could have been put out by local contractors who had offered to put them out and were told no. In fact, they were told if they tried to do it they would be taken to court.鈥�
Cooperman鈥檚 schedule for Feb. 14 included the presentation at UVIC and a meeting with BC Green Party leader Sonia Furstenau.
Cooperman also learned this week that many of the recommendations he and Rob Morrow, a professional forester who conducted his own assessment of the planned ignition, submitted to the province鈥檚 recently struck emergencies task force may soon be action items.
鈥淪o basically it鈥檚 wait and see,鈥� said Cooperman. 鈥淭he way I look at it now, with the briefing document and the recommendations we put forward, basically we鈥檙e setting the goal posts, we鈥檙e creating the gold standard for what is needed. So it will now be up to us and others to pay attention to when these recommendations are brought forward at the end of February, to see if they measure up to what we have recommended ourselves.鈥�
On Feb. 14, the Ministry of Emergency Management and Climate Readiness announced the province is preparing for the upcoming wildfire season by upgrading and expanding B.C.s firefighting aviation and ground fleet, as well as equipment for ground crews.
鈥淣early $16 million has been invested ahead of April 2024 to expand BC Wildfire Service鈥檚 on-the-ground firefighting equipment, including pumps, fire camp equipment, safety gear, and medical and hygiene equipment,鈥� said the ministry in a media release, adding additional investments have been made, including two mass water-delivery systems that can be used for fire suppression and flood operations.
More information about the petition to reform B.C.s wildfire response can be found at .
