should you "stay and defend" your house in a wildfire?

Our typical approach here in the United States is to provide early warning of a wildland fire danger and encourage or in some cases order an evacuation from homes being in the path of a wildfire. This is not necessarily the case across the world.

In Australia they leave it up to homeowners with a strategy of “Stay and Defend or Leave Early” approach. This is explained in more detail at this link, Public Response to Wildfire: Is the Australian "Stay and Defend or Leave Early" Approach an Option for Wildfire Management in the United States?

In summary it is this:

“In the United States, the increasing costs and negative impacts of wildfires are causing fire managers and policymakers to reexamine traditional approaches to fire management including whether mass evacuation of populations threatened by wildfire is always the most appropriate option. This article examines the Australian "stay and defend or leave early" (SDLE) approach (which is not inherently the same as shelter in place) and the contextual factors that may make it more or less appropriate in the United States. We first discuss what SDLE actually entails and then examine four contextual areas that could influence how appropriate the approach might be in the United States: nature of fire risk, agency roles and responsibilities, education and shared responsibility, and human dimensions and decision making. Although some contextual differences may mean that there are US locations where the approach would be inappropriate, they are not systematic enough to mean that the approach would not be viable in many localities. However, significant groundwork would need to be laid to ensure success.”

What prompted me to address this in this blog post was this news item: Elderly couple saves home from Palisades Fire using garden hoses  This is a “success story.” There are other stories coming out of the fires where one homeowner was found dead in his front yard with the hose still in his hand because he stayed trying to protect his property.

There are plenty of factors that can come into play. Do you have home/fire insurance? How old are you? How “vested” are you in the place where you live? What is your perception of the dangers of staying? What has been your experience from the past? For the ABC story shared above this same couple had stayed and protected their home from a fire decades ago.

I don’t know of a fire chief anywhere who would recommend staying and trying to fight a fire as a homeowner. I do know one who told me that there was a wildfire in King County Washington, where I was the emergency manager, and he had seen homeowners who stayed to try and protect their homes—and they were successful in doing so. He believed that without their personal efforts their homes would have burned down.

I can tell you I had a wood shake roof on a home and I purchased a system “similar” but not this exact one https://www.nationalfirefighter.com/roof-saver-sprinklers-rapid-deployment-kit.aspx?srsltid=AfmBOooOBAN0eHAJFTFTSxl8D6iY1jWF6IAal1-f50VIvNFLAuAFcYDO  and I found it unworkable for my situation. Maybe it was me!  I think a better and of course much more costly system would be this one Frontline Wildfire Defense You can activate it remotely and if you are home, activate it and then evacuate.

It depends on how you want to spend your money! Maybe your home insurance company might give you a break on the cost of a policy or even allow you to obtain one.