Fire by Rattlesnake Landing?
 

Sat just before noon we were boating to the Rattlesnake landing and saw a large amount of smoke on shore. It was a house fire that only had the chimney and foundation standing. I logged on today and didn't see anything posted, so i thought i would see if others saw it. It almost looked like a controlled burn by the fire department as everything was nearly in place to control the fire.

If an accidental fire, I hope everyone was ok.

62 Rollins road
 

This was a controlled burn. The property has been for sale for two years and did not sell so the owner had it burned so he could build a house in its place. It was sad to see such a classic camp go that way, it had some unique bead board built ins, wood flooring and classic old camp features. It also had some roof issues.

We were out and saw the fire as well --

As stated, it was a Controlled Burn, but what boggles my mind is how they EVER got a permit to do such a thing. With all the tall pines on eithor side, all the heavy smoke -- if I was a neighbor (and there were houses in close proximity eithor side) I would be totally miffed.

Kudo's to the Fire Dept. but that very easily could have gotten into the tree tops and ran away

I have pictures from the water side but do not (after all these years) know how to post/ attach them here

The FD was on site
 

I was listening to the scanner and heard Lakes Region Dispatch call the Alton Fire Chief to say they had a report of a fire near Rattlesnake Landing and if that was likely their controlled burn training exercise.

I think is was safe to assume that the FD assisted the property owner by using the burn as a training tool for their dept. Here is a picture from one such training session back in 2006. The training allows for realistic training and the property owner is responsible for the removal of the debris.


http://www.winnipesaukee.com/photopo...ng-small-2.jpg

Hope this upload of pics works -- my first time trying

If this is a blank post my apologies -- there should be three pictures of the fire from the water side

Yipee

It worked !!

learn something new every day :)

Thanks for posting!

Seems like an environmental issue, surprised they could do that.

Beyond Environmental -- (refer to first picture for reference) as we watched it it was truly amazing that it didn't start running in the Tops of the Pines -- Fire Dept or not they NEVER would have been able to contain it -- We had a similar house fire near us that ran the tree tops (Pines). Eventually took out 4 houses -- local Fire Dept was on the scene within minutes of THAT fire starting.

And also, wonder how much smoke (smell) & soot damage the neighbors on eithor side of this house recieved ?

The pictures above do not show this at the height of the fire.

As I said in my first post, I am TRULY amazed that this was allowed

Well, at least the wind was favorable :rolleye2:

This is culture shock to me working and living in a city where it's against the law to have a small fire pit.

My burning questions...
Is this a method of demolition?
How much material does one avoid removing by burning first?
Is there anything in it for the fire dept.?
Is an insurance policy required?
Are metal items like copper or leaded plumbing removed first?
Can I bring marshmallows?
How long would the stick have to be?
:rolleye2:

Answers to burning questions
 

Yes this is a method of demolition. It typically requires a donation (have heard anywhere from $1K to $5K) to the local FD before they consider it. Then the site gets a full review and a date is set. All environmental conditions have to be met in order to start or they reschedule.

We just removed a single car garage with an 8 foot attached mudroom with an excavator two weeks ago. Removed 60yards of material (cost $1,100.00 for dumpster and tonage and another $1,200.00 for the excavation contractor to bring it down) for a structure that was 20 feet deep by 23 feet wide, single story.

Fire department receives a donation (typically) and real world training in a controlled environment. The project I had been a part of in the past actually involved multiple towns and each crew would light the structure and proceed to enter and extinguish the fire. Lather rinse and repeat with the next company until the building was structurally compromised. It was then started and allowed to burn fully to the ground. It is not a bon fire, so they do not keep moving the unburnt wood into the fire. It burns how it burns. Removed what was left in a 30 yard dumpster.

Would think that the insurance policy would be void, but not sure on that item.

Metal is typically not removed. The project I was a part of, they did not want anything removed, that included furniture and appliances. The idea is to get as close to a real world situation as possible.

You could roast marshmellows, but the flame is toxic, may scrub a few years off your life, but a bucket list is a bucket list.

I would estimate 20 to 30 feet of marshmellow stick. You may still need to put your hand in front of your face to block the heat.:D

It was actually a nice little place, we looked at it a while ago to buy. Thye just put the new docks and granite steps in this summer.

The house next door is brand new, I am sure they were thrilled to have this going on next door, so close by.

A few years back we did the same thing with a commercial property we had in southern NH. The local town did not require a donation from us. We did sign a form that we were donating the building them for training. The donation form also allowed us to write off the value of the structure as a donation to the town. They trained for about a week performing small fires and rescues. At the end of the week they cleaned up and burned the building and garage down on Saturday. The whole process was neat and clean and very inexpensive .