Skip to main content

Mackenzie Fire Shelter Deployment – June 1, 1994

This Day in History is a brief summary of a powerful learning opportunity and is not intended to second guess or be judgmental of decisions and actions. Put yourself in the following situation as if you do not know the outcome. What are the conditions? What are you thinking? What are YOU doing?

 

To learn more about this incident read See You on the Other Side.

Incident Summary

On May 31, 1994, the Mackenzie Fire was reported 40 miles south of Kingman, AZ in the Hualapai Mountains. The next day, three members of the Prescott Interagency Hotshot Crew deployed their shelters in a boulder field and survived a high intensity burnover with minor injuries. Two of them, Prescott’s Foreman, and Squad Boss, were very close friends who had full and unlimited trust in the other’s leadership and judgment. This account includes the reflections of Curtis Heaton, who deployed that day, and asks readers to examine the role of trust in their organization.

Standard Tactics

Prescott Hotshots arrived on scene and after an aerial recon decided to work the head of the fire toward Pleasant Valley Hotshots who were to anchor from the fire’s heel. The fire was 100 acres of grass/chaparral in steep terrain, held in check by a retardant line. Prescott’s foreman and one Helitack crew member flew into an agreed upon landing zone (LZ) in the black. The pilot declined landing in the black and selected a new LZ (H2) in the green ahead of the fire’s right flank. From there, crew personnel planned to hike to the fire’s edge and construct direct line. Prescott’s foreman and the Helitack crew member unloaded at H2 while two Prescott crewmembers shuttled in on the next flight to join their foreman and begin the assignment.

Keeping Silent

As Prescott Squad Boss Curtis flew into the fire, he noticed turbulence in flight and a significant increase in fire behavior from just minutes prior. Something didn’t feel right. It was June in Arizona and 2 p.m. “Why the hell are we landing here?”, Curtis recalls thinking as the helicopter descended into the green at H2. Looking out the helicopter window he tried to read his foreman’s face. He paused. He could key his mic and turn down the assignment. But Curtis knew his foreman well, trusted his fire expertise, and trusted his judgment immensely. So, despite not liking the situation, Curtis stepped out of the ship, answering his own question: “If it needed to be shut down, he would have done it.” From H2 the three hotshots made note of a wind change in direction and started moving together away from the head of the fire. Yet within a few minutes, the fire had flanked into alignment with the canyon previously identified as their escape route. The flank quickly became a head fire cutting off all egress, and the three hotshots deployed in the boulder field moments before the flame front arrived.

Discussion Questions:

  1. Curtis explains that trust contributed to the acceptance of tremendous risk that day, yet it is the same trust that saved their lives. Define trust in your organization. How does the kind of trust you aim to develop look and perform?
  2. Days after the deployment, Curtis asked his foreman why he chose that location for a LZ. His response: “Why didn’t you say something?” Working in a high-risk environment requires high-risk discussions across ranks, why do we often view questioning someone or having genuine curiosity as a lack of trust? 
    If you have a mutual trust relationship, wouldn't questions and curiosity be welcomed by both parties?
  3. Training opportunity: Build a tactical decision game where two or more parties have limited information and must question each other to fully understand the situation. Establish a trigger word such as "Unclear" or "Uncertain" that alerts both parties the conversation must go further to reach understanding. This informs everyone that it is not about trusting the sender but about acknowledging the complexity of what is occurring.
  4. What systems (like trigger words) can you employ to encourage raising questions at key decision making points? How do you practice questioning each other so that it becomes a part of your crew’s culture?

References:

Mackenzie Fire, Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center
See You On The Other Side, Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center
Curtis Heaton, personal communication, January 15, 2024
Recommended Reading: Schein, E. H., Schein, P. A. (2021). Humble Inquiry: The Gentle Art of Asking Instead of Telling (2nd ed.).
 


 

Have an idea or feedback?

Share it with the NWCG 6MFS Subcommittee.


Follow NWCG on Twitter and Facebook

NWCG Latest Announcements

The Incident Position Standards and Next Generation Position Task Book are now available for Status/Check-In Recorder (SCKN)

Date: August 27, 2024
Contact: Incident Planning Subcommittee 

NWCG is excited to announce that the NWCG Incident Position Standards for Status/Check-In Recorder, PMS 350-32, NWCG Position Task Book for Status/Check-In Recorder (SCKN), PMS 311-32, and Checking In Resources Customer Service Job Aid, J-111 are now available.

The Performance Support Package, which for SCKN includes the Incident Position Standards, Next Generation Position Task Book, and job aid were developed through the Incident Performance and Training Modernization (IPTM) effort. The Performance Support Package will support trainees, those qualified in the position, and evaluators.

References:

NWCG Status/Check-In Recorder Position Page

NWCG Incident Position Standards for Status/Check-In Recorder, PMS 350-32

NWCG Position Task Book for Status/Check-In Recorder (SCKN), PMS 311-32

Checking In Resources Customer Service Job Aid, J-111

The Next Generation Position Task Book and Incident Position Standards are now available for Safety Officer, Field (SOFF)

Date: July 26, 2024
Contact: Risk Management Committee 

NWCG is excited to announce that the NWCG Incident Position Standards for Safety Officer, Field, PMS 350-81 and NWCG Position Task Book for Safety Officer, Field (SOFF), PMS 311-81 are now available.

The Safety Officer, Field (SOFF) is responsible for monitoring operations on an incident from a risk management perspective to provide for the welfare of incident resources and the public. The new Incident Position Standards and Next Generation Position Task Book are developed through the Incident Performance and Training Modernization (IPTM) effort.

References:

NWCG Safety Officer, Field (SOFF) Position

NWCG Incident Position Standards for Safety Officer, Field, PMS 350-81

NWCG Position Task Book for Safety Officer, Field (SOFF), PMS 311-81

Updated NWCG Standards for Electronic Documentation (eDoc), PMS 277

Date: July 25, 2024
Contact: Incident Planning Subcommittee 

The Incident Planning Subcommittee has updated the NWCG Standards for Electronic Documentation (eDoc), PMS 277.

The NWCG Standards for Electronic Documentation (eDoc) establishes the standards for collection and retention of records on wildland fires. This July 2024 update will provide incident management teams the most current standards required to maintain incident records and submit them to host units at the close of an incident.

References:

NWCG Standards for Electronic Documentation (eDoc), PMS 277

eDoc Box Directory (zip file)

NWCG Off-Highway Vehicle Typing Standard Request for Comment

Date: July 24, 2024
Contact: Mobile Fire Equipment Subcommittee 

The Mobile Fire Equipment Subcommittee has released Equipment Bulletin 24-002 NWCG Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Typing Standard - Request for Comment. This bulletin outlines the proposed NWCG OHV typing standard, as well as the business need for establishing the standard. Comments on the proposed standard will be accepted through August 15th using the comment form linked below.

References:

ETC-EB-2024-02: NWCG Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Typing Standard - Request for Comment

NWCG Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Typing Standard Comment Form