Safety must not be overlooked
I commend Fire Engineering on publishing an excellent journal that covers the broad spectrum of topics firefighters face today. I also would like to comment on some of the serious safety concerns that were unaddressed in “Training Benefits Evident in Successful High-Angle Rescue” (Volunteers Corner, December 1996). While reading the article, I was quite impressed with the decisions the agencies involved made while performing their high-angle rescue. When I looked at the pictures, however, I was disturbed to see the safety concerns that were overlooked.
The first problem I saw pertains to the pictures on page 10. In both, rescue personnel are rigging their anchor points extremely close to the ledge without proper PPE (helmets/harnesses). This only tends to complicate the problem if one of the rescuers were to fall.
In the photo layout on page 12, we see some overlooked safety concerns that could eventually lead to catastrophic events in regard to the rescuers. In one photo, we see a rescuer rappelling down the side without a helmet or gloves. This leaves no protection should he hit his head while navigating outcroppings or hand protection from rope burns. Since the rescuer noted is a paramedic, this can lead to his inability to treat the patient and to his becoming a patient himself. Next, we see another rescuer who is ineffectively belaying a rappeller from the side while there is too much slack in the line. This method will not stop the rescuer in time to prevent injury as a result of a fall. Last, we see a rescuer no longer in a harness, and none of the rescuers attached to a safety line. This to me would seem to be quite important considering that the author later states that they are working on an unstable rock wall.
Finally, on page 14, I see a couple of more overlooked items. One is that the patient who is being lowered down does not have a harness on him or a safety line attached. What would save the patient should the main line or the stokes basket fail? A 30-foot piece of one-inch webbing fashioned into a full body harness attached to a safety line would have done the trick. Also, we see a rescuer working within six feet of the water without a personal flotation device. This is a violation of the U.S. Coast Guard standard.
It has been said that in technical rescue we lose more rescuers due to unsafe practices. The fact that the patient was rescued safely and successfully deserves a round of applause. But, there was a great potential for disaster, and this also is something we have to look at and learn from so that we all can have long and fulfilling careers in the fire-rescue service.
Gregory T. Maurer
Firefighter-Paramedic
Nassau County, New York
