KUER0%

Pine Valley is still picking up the pieces one year after the Forsyth Fire 22%

By David Condos0%

6/18/2026, 8:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 27 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Optimism Bias, and Anecdotal, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 19.1% saturation with 173 hits. Analysis detected 1,133 faulty-reasoning hits from 904 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 35.6% and a BS Rank of 22% (16,193 of 20,517 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 78.90% of the article peer group.

One year ago, Dale Hagemeyer’s day started with a bowl of cereal. 
He looked out the window of his Pine Valley home and saw charred trees in the distance. 
They seemed far removed from his kitchen table. 
And for a moment, he thought his small mountain community in southwest Utah had dodged a bullet. 
But that night, June 20, 2025, the wind shifted, and the Forsyth Fire roared into his neighborhood. 
“It came shooting through here to the east and took out 13 homes  just boom, boom, boom, boom, boom,” Hagemeyer recalled. 
“And this is one of them.” 
The retired businessman was busy elsewhere that night, fighting the flames as part of Pine Valley’s volunteer fire department. 
When he returned the next day, the house where he and his wife had lived for a decade had become a smoldering crater, filled with the remains of just about everything they owned. 
The Forsyth Fire burned nearly 16,000 acres in the mountains north of St. 
George, and left its mark on Pine Valley, population 355. 
“Either we're just going to sell this charred piece of dirt and go someplace else, or we're going to rebuild,” he said. 
“We just decided, where else would we go? 
We like it here.” 
But the nearly year-long road to recovery has been excruciating. 
Fanned by ferocious winds, the fire burned hot enough to crack the foundation of Hagemeyer’s old house. 
So, the concrete footings needed to be ripped out before the rebuild could start. 
After replacing the foundation, a flood from the fire’s burn scar slathered his new basement with an 18-inch layer of sludge, which had to be vacuumed out with a specialized pump. 
Simply getting good help with the basic aspects of construction in such a remote area has been a challenge. 
“I’ll be honest with you, it's incredibly painful, because people don't show up when they say they'll show up,” Hagemeyer said as he leaned on a dishwasher box in his half-finished kitchen. 
“Every step along the way  the painting, there's something that will go wrong. 
The plumbing, there's something that will go wrong.” 
Some of his neighbors have had similar problems, he said, and other rebuilds are just now getting started. 
As Utah expands further into undeveloped areas and climate change supercharges the dry, hot, windy weather that fuels wildfires, disasters like the Forsyth Fire will likely become more common. 
And when an inferno comes to town, it leaves more than physical damage. 
“It was really hard on people,” Pine Valley Fire Chief Robert Hardy said. 
“PTSD is a very real beast.” 
One part of that fateful night stuck with him most. 
It was when he sent two of his crew members toward the fire to keep it from jumping a road. 
“When I saw them get wrapped into this cloud of smoke and flame, and they just disappeared, I thought, ‘Man, I really hope I see those guys again,’” Hardy said. 
“I'm not really trained for that. 
I'm not a firefighter, I'm a retired pharmacist.” 
It wasn’t until a few months after the incident that Hardy realized he was experiencing post-traumatic stress. 
Now, nearly a year later, he said it feels good to see signs of recovery around town. 
Green grass once again carpets the hills behind the fire station, and Hardy said the U.S. 
Forest Service has planted tree seedlings on the singed slopes in the distance. 
“After the fire, this was all scorched black,” he said, motioning across the landscape. 
“It's amazing how quickly it's come back.” 
The trauma he and his crew experienced is healing, too. 
Just a few months before the fire, the department got a $16,000 state grant to cover one year of support from a mental resilience program for first responders. 
Crew members and their families were able to meet with counselors within days of the fire and have continued to do so. 
Having that help in place has been vital, Hardy said. 
“By taking these stressful, traumatic instances in your life and dealing with them in a healthy, proper way, you can actually experience growth,” he said. 
“I've seen that happen with our department. 
Most people are probably stronger this year than they were last year at this time.” 
There are signs of recovery at Dale Hagemeyer’s place, too. 
His new house may not have a kitchen sink or all of its lights yet, but he said it’s just a few finishing touches away from feeling like home again. 
Through the windows in his mostly bare living room, Hagemeyer looked out at the forest beyond his backyard, now peppered with black matchstick trees. 
This isolated mountain setting is what drew him and his wife to Pine Valley  and kept them here through the trials of the past year. 
He understands that deciding to stay in a place like this comes with risk. 
“That's why you don't hear me saying, ‘Woe is me,’” he said. 
“If you live next to the forest, the forest may rise up. 
And if the forest rises up, as we've seen, there's nothing you can do about it.” 
Still, he’s trying to do what he can to be ready, like building his new home with more fire-resistant materials. 
And after roughly 10 months of work, he finally expects to move back in within a couple of weeks. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.8%David Condos: 3.1%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias2.8%This article: 3.1%David Condos: 1.8%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias3.1%This article: 8.1%David Condos: 3.0%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic8.1%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.7%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 3.8%David Condos: 0.6%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias3.8%This article: 3.2%David Condos: 2.5%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias3.2%This article: 2.4%David Condos: 7.5%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect2.4%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 2.2%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 1.5%David Condos: 1.0%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias1.5%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 13.6%David Condos: 5.8%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias13.6%This article: 4.2%David Condos: 5.7%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias4.2%This article: 19.1%David Condos: 6.8%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias19.1%This article: 2.9%David Condos: 1.4%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias2.9%This article: 5.1%David Condos: 0.8%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error5.1%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.2%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 1.4%David Condos: 1.0%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect1.4%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.1%David Condos: 1.8%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias1.1%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.3%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.9%David Condos: 5.6%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority0.9%This article: 2.4%David Condos: 1.5%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma2.4%This article: 5.0%David Condos: 2.3%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope5.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.4%David Condos: 2.6%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization6.4%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.5%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 2.1%David Condos: 5.3%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion2.1%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 14.3%David Condos: 2.9%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)14.3%This article: 1.3%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque1.3%This article: 0.9%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.9%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.5%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.3%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 11.0%David Condos: 2.1%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal11.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.3%David Condos: 1.0%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.3%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.2%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground2.2%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.4%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection2.4%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 1.8%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 2.8%David Condos: 2.5%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination2.8%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 2.1%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.4%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Condos: 0.5%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

904 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers38%attributed speech559writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 22 words • 100.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 22 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 8 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 32 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 8 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 13 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 30 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 6 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 13 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 14 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 10 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 25 words • 100.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 7 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Hardy • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 12 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 12 words • 0.0% coverageDale Hagemeyer • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Robert Hardy

88%flagged-word coverage
171 attributed words50% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Indoctrination+14.6 ptsWriter: 0.0%Robert Hardy: 14.6%14.6%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.