Testimony Shows State Parks Employees Missed Reporting Smoldering Lachman Fire Before It Erupted into the Palisades Fire

State Parks Under Scrutiny After Palisades Fire Incident

Officials are facing criticism over their handling of the Lachman Fire, which initially sparked concerns near the Skull Rock area along the Temescal Ridge Trail in Pacific Palisades. According to an NBC Los Angeles report, California State Parks employees observed the fire site still smoldering on January 1, 2025, yet failed to alert fire authorities about the ongoing risk.

In deposition footage obtained by NBC Los Angeles, one State Parks employee acknowledged witnessing "evidence of smoldering" when she visited the site. She reasoned that it was not necessary to close the park, and further admitted she did not communicate her findings to her colleagues.

An after-action report from the Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) indicated that embers from the Lachman Fire continued to burn underground, ultimately reigniting and leading to the Palisades Fires just six days later. This revelation forms a crucial part of a lawsuit involving more than 10,000 plaintiffs against various government agencies, including the State Parks Department.

David Howard, one of the plaintiffs, expressed his frustration over the lack of accountability in this incident. “I joined this lawsuit because the people that are responsible for public safety need to be held accountable, and public safety did not happen in the Palisades,” Howard stated, reflecting on his family’s loss of their home shortly after evacuating on January 7, 2025.

Roger Behle, an attorney representing Howard and over 3,000 others in the lawsuit, criticized State Parks officials for not monitoring the area following the fire’s deemed containment. “If they see something, they could call CAL FIRE or they could call LAFD back. It’s their obligation because it’s their land,” Behle said. According to him, State Parks’ own guidelines dictate that regions affected by fire should remain closed until staff conduct a thorough inspection.

The Temescal Ridge Trail is part of a broader park system managed by California State Parks, further complicating the agency’s responsibilities in ensuring visitor safety. In response to the allegations, a State Parks spokesperson claimed that Behle and his team "misinterpreted" the agency’s policy, asserting that decisions regarding visitor safety are made at the park’s discretion.

The case also raises questions about the state’s "avoidance maps," which identify environmentally sensitive areas to prevent damage during fire mitigation efforts. Although the state maintained that the Lachman Fire did not infringe on these avoidance zones, maps from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives indicate otherwise.

Internal communications among State Parks employees from January 1 reveal concerns regarding endangered plant life in the vicinity. One message noted that a cultural site and endangered plant population were nearby, advising caution in fire mitigation efforts.

Despite these concerns, the state insisted that no interference with firefighting efforts occurred, emphasizing, “California State Parks is not a firefighting agency and does not direct the fire response.”

Behle challenged this assertion by presenting photographs of a State Parks environmental scientist consulting with firefighters. This biologist testified that he had directed fire crews to restore vegetation in the area to prevent confusion for hikers.

Additionally, drone footage captured by a local resident revealed visible smoke in the area, reinforcing Behle’s claims that state employees should have acted on this evidence.

“This case against the state has nothing to do with firefighting. It focuses on the state’s responsibilities as a landowner to ensure public safety,” Behle emphasized.

Howard concluded that the lawsuit aims to hold government officials accountable and prevent future tragedies. “We lost 12 lives here," he stated. "The truth of the matter is, (fire) is going to happen again. The question is, how bad will it be?”