The STAY AND DEFEND concept started in Australia, after a devastating wildfire killed 73 people in 1983. Even after the horrendous wildfires of January, 2009, that killed 173 people, the STAY AND DEFEND OR LEAVE EARLY concept is accepted as a necessary fire defense system. In California, the STAY AND DEFEND OR LEAVE EARLY policy is rejected out of hand for political reasons. The fire unions are firmly against the policy, as are many firefighters who believe citizens should not place their lives in harms way to protect their property. The same firefighters appear not to understand the historical and emotional connections people have with their property, nor of a property owner’s right to defend their own castle. Nonetheless, the California fire service is not aware of the possibility that homeowners can safely defend their property. Their belief is based, I believe, in the lack of understanding of how homes in the wildland urban interface can be protected- with a different strategy from what their used to using. The fire agencies continue to implement the same strategy and methods for fighting wildfires that have been around for decades, and refuse to accept a new paradigm for suppressing interface wildfires.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/5574847/forced-evacuations-not-the-solution-commission-hears