Categories
Uncategorized

M.I.S.T.

MIST, not mist, stands for Minimum Impact Suppression Tactics. A video on Youtube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6&v=bQpHSSAVDCU&feature=emb_title) provided by National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) explaines the importance of MIST and why it should be used as a baseline for active wildland fire management. MIST can also be found in the Incident Response Pocket Guide (IRPG https://www.nwcg.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pms461.pdf) on pages 97 & 98.

The importance of MIST is to offer an ethical practice in regards to tactics when considering natural, ecological, social, economical values, firefighter safety, fire conditions, and good judgement for ones actions. MIST is intended to accomplish suppression with a minimum amount of resource damage or long-term adverse impacts on the land.

MIST is to not comprise safety.

MIST was developed to incorporate every person on or near the fireline. It allows all operations of fire to adhere to a joint responsibility to be stewards of the land when considering wildland fire management plans. MIST also allows for firefighter safety to be probity number one.

I believe MIST was developed with safety in mind due to the number of firefighter lives lost between the 70s to 90s. There use to be a mentality of putting the fire out and saving the environment at all costs, even lives. Now, trees and grasses are no longer put as a higher regard for the men and women fighting these fires. MIST incorporates the 10-18, LCES, and looking up, down, and all around to mitigate any hazards. The mentality of MIST is another way to show that even though these environments can be destroyed and burnt down they still have the ability to grow back with new growth and life, but the lost of human life is permanent.

On a final note of the MIST video linked above, I thought it was very interesting that NWCG, the creator of the video and many of the safety standards when on the fireline, encourage the use of explosives before the use of chainsaws. They provided examples such as when dealing with snags or suppression rehab by concealing flat cut stumps. In my 5 seasons of fighting fire all around the country spanning from as far west of Alaska to Tennessee I have never seen the use or thought of using explosives as a tactic. I do think it would be fun, but I believe it is much more dangerous to the firefighters if implemented due to the unpredictability of explosives.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2 replies on “M.I.S.T.”

Kolton, I strongly, nay, vehemently disagree with you that explosives are more dangerous than chainsaws! Just kidding buddy. I was a demo guy for most of my time in the military and I think I can honestly say I feel more comfortable with a bunch of C-4 explosives than I do with a chainsaw. And I love running a saw.
I appreciate your take on this video because of your experience as a wild land firefighter. I fought fire for a summer before I joined the Army, so I appreciate it and respect the profession, but my experience is nothing compared to yours. I have enjoyed getting yours, Dylan’s, and Ian’s perspective on wild land fire in our classroom setting. It gives me the ground truth perspective in an academic setting. So in your experience, do you feel that MIST is truly followed during an incident? Do you feel that the IC is considering environmental concerns during a fire, and do you think that the individual firefighter or crew is really willing to step back to let structures burn unless there is a imminent threat to life? I just see most firefighters as pretty motivated, maintaining a never fail attitude. Possibly an underlying reason for the Yarnell Hill tragedy? Just interested in your opinion.

After reading you comment and then going back to my post I think I have to agree with you. Demo is actually stable, I think I was thinking more unpredictable in the sense of shrapnel and splintering. Seems like “come on, just cut down it 5 minutes and get it done” seems like the more appropriate approach. Plus, I also think there’s probably like 5 people in the US trained for demo on fires cause I’ve never heard or seen it on an incident.
To answer you question about about MIST, yes it or a truly followed… most of the time. MIST is really online 2 pages out of the couple hundred pages in the IRPG, so yes It is important but it’s not the complete motivation when determine tactics and planning, especially on a small incident or scale. I would say MIST is vital in wilderness areas, park areas, and where immediate threat to safety and applicable damage to the land may occur. One thing to note about it MIST is that you must use your best judgement. If you need to give up some acres to fire in order to safe more than you are not breaking proto. It’s relative to the event, person, and situation.
Of the position of ICs, again it depends on the person and the incident scale. An IC5 isn’t gonna need to follow MIST to a T on a 10ft by 10ft Fire. But an IC1 on a mega fire may encounter multiple land owners, federal obstacles, resources, etc. it can get muddy real quick, but this is also why we have separate incident management teams (IMT).
As for allowing houses to burn, yes. Firefighters will step back and let it burn IF they are no longer in a position to safely protect it. But, they will not give up structures due to thinking “well if we start our Blackburn in joes kitchen it’ll save Sally’s house”.
As for Granite Mountain, we will never truly know why unfortunately. That is one event that I constantly think about on the fire line and use as an example to remind myself to slow down and think when things start to get going.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *