Urban fires can mean long trips for helicopters to get water. One firefighter had a better idea
Glenn Chavez sets a timer as water fills a newly installed Heli-Hydrant, a small, open tank that helicopters can rely on to get water faster for urban fires, in Cabazon, Calif.
By DORANY PINEDA and BRITTANY PETERSON
Mark Whaling and a crew raced up and down a hill in a tanker truck as they battled a wildfire in Los Angeles County, scrambling to get water from a street hydrant in time to stay ahead of flames moving up a ridge. A helicopter flew in to drop water, but it had to fly a long distance to refill — and a fire that might have been stopped went on to destroy homes.
As they fought that early 2000s blaze, Whaling says, he spotted a sealed, million-gallon water tank nearby that firefighters had no way of accessing. He thought that was ridiculous.
'We don't tell fire engines, 'Protect the city and go find your own water.' We put fire hydrants every 600 feet all around cities,' said Whaling, who has since retired from the county fire department. 'But when it comes to the helicopters, we weren't supporting them as robustly as we should.'
His frustration sparked an idea: the Heli-Hydrant, a relatively small, open tank that can be rapidly filled with water, enabling helicopters to fill up faster for urban fires rather than flying to sometimes distant lakes or ponds.
As wildfires become more frequent, Whaling's invention is getting the attention of officials eager to boost preparedness. First used for the 2020 Blue Ridge Fire in Yorba Linda, 10 Heli-Hydrants have been built across Southern California and 16 more are in progress, according to Whaling.
Helicopters are essential for firefighting. They can drop 1,000 gallons (about 3,785 liters) of water at once — some much more. That's far more than hoses can get on a fire all at once, and can be the best way to attack fires that are difficult for ground crews to reach.
But pilots sometimes have to fly a long way to scoop up water, and in drought-prone areas, natural sources can sometimes dry up or diminish so they're hard to draw from. In Southern California's Riverside County, helicopters have had to fly up to 10 miles (about 16 kilometers) to find water, eating critical time from battling fires.
On a remote plot in the Southern California town of Cabazon, contractor Glenn Chavez stood on a ladder and peered into an empty Heli-Hydrant. A radio in hand, he clicked a button to activate the system and watched as water roared into the tank. In about six minutes, it filled with 8,500 gallons (32,176 liters).
Chavez, a general contractor, was testing the Cabazon Water District's latest investment — a second Heli-Hydrant that local officials are counting on to help protect the town. At $300,000, it cost slightly less than the average price of a single home in Cabazon.
'Living in a beautiful desert community, you're going to have risks of fire," said Michael Pollack, the district's general manager. "And to have these Heli-Hydrants is a major advantage. People will have a little bit of comfort knowing that they have another tool for fighting fires in their community."
Pilots can remotely activate the tanks from half a mile away, with the tank typically filling quickly from a city's water system. Helicopters can fill up in less than a minute. Once it's activated, solar panels and backup batteries ensure the system can still be used during power outages. And at night, lights from the tank and a tower nearby guide pilots toward it.
In November, fire responders in San Diego put the product to the test when the 48-acre Garden Fire in Fallbrook, a community known for its avocado groves, prompted evacuation orders and warnings. Helicopters tapped the tank nearly 40 times.
Pilot Ben Brown said its proximity to the fire saved not just time but fuel.
'They're great for when you don't have other water sources,' he said. "The more dip sites, especially in some of the more arid environments in the county, the better.'
Heli-Hydrants have raised some concerns about their placement in urban areas where houses, buildings and power lines can be obstacles to flight and they might have to squeeze into tighter spaces.
In those cases, firefighters may choose to fly farther to a natural source that gives the helicopter more room, said Warren Voth, a deputy pilot with the San Diego County Sheriff's Department. A pilot's goal is to always to face the wind while entering and exiting an area, for safety, and they need room to accomplish that.
In some cases, the municipal systems needed to fill Heli-Hydrants could go empty during major fires. As the Palisades Fire in Los Angeles burned, three 1-million gallon tanks that helped pressurize city hydrants in the Pacific Palisades ran dry as demand soared and burning pipes leaked water.
Other times, helicopters just can't access them. When winds are fierce, flying is nearly impossible; hurricane-force winds that supercharged the Los Angeles infernos initially grounded firefighting aircraft. When multiple helicopters respond to large blazes, they can't all use the Heli-Hydrant. And smoke can make it hard to see it.
Portable water tanks can accomplish some of the things that Heli-Hydrants do, but can require time, people and equipment to set up.
Areas where wildland vegetation intersects with human development have always been vulnerable to fires, but more people are living in them today, and climate change is creating conditions that can make these regions drier and more flammable.
Jake Wiley has seen intensifying wildfires devastate his community. Two blazes — in 2007 and 2017 — collectively scorched more than 400 structures in San Diego. The last one forced Wiley, now general manager for the Rainbow Municipal Water District, to evacuate.
That fire also prompted local agencies to install a Heli-Hydrant — and when the Garden Fire erupted in November, it played a big role helping firefighters protect homes.
'It seems like when you've seen the worst, you haven't yet,' Wiley said. 'Anything we can do helps.'
© Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
3 minutes ago
- Business Recorder
Gold falls on strong dollar; US-China talks take spotlight
Gold prices declined on Tuesday, hurt by an uptick in the U.S. dollar as market participants awaited details from the second day of trade talks between the U.S. and China in London. Spot gold fell 0.6% to $3,307.72 an ounce, as of 0502 GMT. U.S. gold futures slipped 0.8% to $3,327.50. The dollar index rose 0.3% against its rivals, making gold more expensive for other currency holders. The trade talks between the world's two largest economies encompass issues ranging from tariffs to rare earth metals restrictions. 'With U.S.-China trade talks still in the works, gold is trading reservedly until we see any progress is made between the two global superpowers,' said Tim Waterer, chief market analyst at KCM Trade. U.S. President Donald Trump said his administration was 'doing well' in the negotiations. Last month, both sides agreed to a temporary pause in tariffs against each other, offering some relief to financial markets. Data from China showed export growth slowed to a three-month low in May as U.S. tariffs affected shipments, while factory-gate deflation worsened to its deepest level in two years. Gold prices remain stable in Pakistan Meanwhile, U.S. inflation data, due on Wednesday, could give investors more guidance on the U.S. Federal Reserve's monetary policy path. 'If CPI has ticked marginally higher, that would be an expected result, but if it jumps, then that could raise some alarm bells for investors, and any resulting flight to safety could help the gold price,' Waterer said. Gold gains appeal during times of geopolitical and economic uncertainty and tends to do well when interest rates are low. Elsewhere, spot silver was down 0.5% to $36.52 per ounce, platinum was flat at $1,219.65, while palladium gained 0.4% to $1,078.94.
The Advertiser
4 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
Muslim preacher defends 'dehumanising' sermons on Jews
An Islamist preacher's speeches that allegedly painted Jewish people as "vile and treacherous" were not racist but formed part of a robust discussion, his lawyer has argued. Sydney-based Al Madina Dawah Centre cleric Wissam Haddad has been accused of racial discrimination after a series of fiery sermons from November 2023, which have racked up thousands of views online. In one of his speeches, he appears to blame the roots of "the enmity that we see today" on "none other than the Jews ... because their forefathers had shown the same enmity to the Prophet (Mohammed)." Mr Haddad is being sued by Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim and deputy president Robert Goot, who are seeking the removal of the allegedly racist speeches. They also want Mr Haddad to be barred from making similar comments again. Mr Wertheim told the Federal Court on Tuesday the speeches used "overtly dehumanising" language. "Making derogatory generalisations, calling Jews a vile and treacherous people, calling them rats and cowards ... are things which I think would be experienced by most Jews as dehumanising," he said. His barrister Peter Braham SC told the court the speeches drew on a large range of offensive tropes and were designed to threaten, humiliate and denigrate all Jewish people. The court was told Mr Haddad, who is also known as Abu Ousayd, addressed a camera and engaged with media coverage of his commentary. But his barrister Andrew Boe argued the preacher's speeches were intended for a private Muslim audience of 40 people and he was not responsible for publishing them online. He said it was unlikely any Jewish people would have come across the speeches if they had not received coverage by media organisations. "It would be analogous to a person of a prudish sensitivity seeking out pornography on the web and then complaining about being offended by it," Mr Boe said. Mr Haddad denies breaching anti-discrimination laws and claims he was delivering historical and religious lectures on historical events from the Koran and the war in Gaza. The speeches occurred in the context of a vigorous political debate characterised by an intensity of feeling on both sides and set against the background of a long religious history, Mr Boe said. He advocated for the preservation of free speech and argued the boundaries of debate couldn't be set so narrow as to exclude views which were not polite, bland or balanced. Mr Wertheim said being exposed to challenging ideas in robust conversations did not insult him "as long as they don't cross the boundary into vilification". His lawyer told the court that the Jewish community lived with "a communal memory of past persecution and which remains conscious of threats to its safety by reason of race". The hearing continues. Lifeline 13 11 14 beyondblue 1300 22 4636 An Islamist preacher's speeches that allegedly painted Jewish people as "vile and treacherous" were not racist but formed part of a robust discussion, his lawyer has argued. Sydney-based Al Madina Dawah Centre cleric Wissam Haddad has been accused of racial discrimination after a series of fiery sermons from November 2023, which have racked up thousands of views online. In one of his speeches, he appears to blame the roots of "the enmity that we see today" on "none other than the Jews ... because their forefathers had shown the same enmity to the Prophet (Mohammed)." Mr Haddad is being sued by Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim and deputy president Robert Goot, who are seeking the removal of the allegedly racist speeches. They also want Mr Haddad to be barred from making similar comments again. Mr Wertheim told the Federal Court on Tuesday the speeches used "overtly dehumanising" language. "Making derogatory generalisations, calling Jews a vile and treacherous people, calling them rats and cowards ... are things which I think would be experienced by most Jews as dehumanising," he said. His barrister Peter Braham SC told the court the speeches drew on a large range of offensive tropes and were designed to threaten, humiliate and denigrate all Jewish people. The court was told Mr Haddad, who is also known as Abu Ousayd, addressed a camera and engaged with media coverage of his commentary. But his barrister Andrew Boe argued the preacher's speeches were intended for a private Muslim audience of 40 people and he was not responsible for publishing them online. He said it was unlikely any Jewish people would have come across the speeches if they had not received coverage by media organisations. "It would be analogous to a person of a prudish sensitivity seeking out pornography on the web and then complaining about being offended by it," Mr Boe said. Mr Haddad denies breaching anti-discrimination laws and claims he was delivering historical and religious lectures on historical events from the Koran and the war in Gaza. The speeches occurred in the context of a vigorous political debate characterised by an intensity of feeling on both sides and set against the background of a long religious history, Mr Boe said. He advocated for the preservation of free speech and argued the boundaries of debate couldn't be set so narrow as to exclude views which were not polite, bland or balanced. Mr Wertheim said being exposed to challenging ideas in robust conversations did not insult him "as long as they don't cross the boundary into vilification". His lawyer told the court that the Jewish community lived with "a communal memory of past persecution and which remains conscious of threats to its safety by reason of race". The hearing continues. Lifeline 13 11 14 beyondblue 1300 22 4636 An Islamist preacher's speeches that allegedly painted Jewish people as "vile and treacherous" were not racist but formed part of a robust discussion, his lawyer has argued. Sydney-based Al Madina Dawah Centre cleric Wissam Haddad has been accused of racial discrimination after a series of fiery sermons from November 2023, which have racked up thousands of views online. In one of his speeches, he appears to blame the roots of "the enmity that we see today" on "none other than the Jews ... because their forefathers had shown the same enmity to the Prophet (Mohammed)." Mr Haddad is being sued by Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim and deputy president Robert Goot, who are seeking the removal of the allegedly racist speeches. They also want Mr Haddad to be barred from making similar comments again. Mr Wertheim told the Federal Court on Tuesday the speeches used "overtly dehumanising" language. "Making derogatory generalisations, calling Jews a vile and treacherous people, calling them rats and cowards ... are things which I think would be experienced by most Jews as dehumanising," he said. His barrister Peter Braham SC told the court the speeches drew on a large range of offensive tropes and were designed to threaten, humiliate and denigrate all Jewish people. The court was told Mr Haddad, who is also known as Abu Ousayd, addressed a camera and engaged with media coverage of his commentary. But his barrister Andrew Boe argued the preacher's speeches were intended for a private Muslim audience of 40 people and he was not responsible for publishing them online. He said it was unlikely any Jewish people would have come across the speeches if they had not received coverage by media organisations. "It would be analogous to a person of a prudish sensitivity seeking out pornography on the web and then complaining about being offended by it," Mr Boe said. Mr Haddad denies breaching anti-discrimination laws and claims he was delivering historical and religious lectures on historical events from the Koran and the war in Gaza. The speeches occurred in the context of a vigorous political debate characterised by an intensity of feeling on both sides and set against the background of a long religious history, Mr Boe said. He advocated for the preservation of free speech and argued the boundaries of debate couldn't be set so narrow as to exclude views which were not polite, bland or balanced. Mr Wertheim said being exposed to challenging ideas in robust conversations did not insult him "as long as they don't cross the boundary into vilification". His lawyer told the court that the Jewish community lived with "a communal memory of past persecution and which remains conscious of threats to its safety by reason of race". The hearing continues. Lifeline 13 11 14 beyondblue 1300 22 4636 An Islamist preacher's speeches that allegedly painted Jewish people as "vile and treacherous" were not racist but formed part of a robust discussion, his lawyer has argued. Sydney-based Al Madina Dawah Centre cleric Wissam Haddad has been accused of racial discrimination after a series of fiery sermons from November 2023, which have racked up thousands of views online. In one of his speeches, he appears to blame the roots of "the enmity that we see today" on "none other than the Jews ... because their forefathers had shown the same enmity to the Prophet (Mohammed)." Mr Haddad is being sued by Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim and deputy president Robert Goot, who are seeking the removal of the allegedly racist speeches. They also want Mr Haddad to be barred from making similar comments again. Mr Wertheim told the Federal Court on Tuesday the speeches used "overtly dehumanising" language. "Making derogatory generalisations, calling Jews a vile and treacherous people, calling them rats and cowards ... are things which I think would be experienced by most Jews as dehumanising," he said. His barrister Peter Braham SC told the court the speeches drew on a large range of offensive tropes and were designed to threaten, humiliate and denigrate all Jewish people. The court was told Mr Haddad, who is also known as Abu Ousayd, addressed a camera and engaged with media coverage of his commentary. But his barrister Andrew Boe argued the preacher's speeches were intended for a private Muslim audience of 40 people and he was not responsible for publishing them online. He said it was unlikely any Jewish people would have come across the speeches if they had not received coverage by media organisations. "It would be analogous to a person of a prudish sensitivity seeking out pornography on the web and then complaining about being offended by it," Mr Boe said. Mr Haddad denies breaching anti-discrimination laws and claims he was delivering historical and religious lectures on historical events from the Koran and the war in Gaza. The speeches occurred in the context of a vigorous political debate characterised by an intensity of feeling on both sides and set against the background of a long religious history, Mr Boe said. He advocated for the preservation of free speech and argued the boundaries of debate couldn't be set so narrow as to exclude views which were not polite, bland or balanced. Mr Wertheim said being exposed to challenging ideas in robust conversations did not insult him "as long as they don't cross the boundary into vilification". His lawyer told the court that the Jewish community lived with "a communal memory of past persecution and which remains conscious of threats to its safety by reason of race". The hearing continues. Lifeline 13 11 14 beyondblue 1300 22 4636
The Advertiser
4 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
Microscope on IVF giant over 'inexcusable' embryo error
A second embryo blunder from a major private fertility clinic has raised fresh fears about system flaws. Staff at a Monash IVF laboratory in Melbourne on Thursday transferred the wrong embryo to a woman, giving her one of her own rather than one from her partner, as they had requested. The pair is believed to be in a same-sex relationship. The company, which is based in Melbourne but has clinics around Australia, apologised to the couple and launched an internal investigation. But the Victorian Health Regulator has swooped in with its own probe of Monash IVF and how the error occurred at its Clayton site. State Health Minister Mary-Anne Thomas said the mistake was "completely unacceptable" and the company must provide answers. "This will be quite devastating for the couple at the heart of this," she told reporters on Tuesday. "We all know that the IVF journey can be a very long, torturous one. It can be very expensive as well." In a notice to the stock market, Monash IVF said it would set up additional verification processes and patient confirmation safeguards. It has informed the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee certifying body and insurers, declaring it expects the mix-up to fall within its insurance coverage. The company's profit guidance remains unchanged but the news sent its share price tumbling by more than 26 per cent to below 55 cents as of 3pm AEST. Monash IVF revealed in April a woman at a Brisbane facility had another patient's embryo incorrectly transferred to her because of "human error". The mistake was picked up in February after the birth parents asked for their remaining embryos to be transferred elsewhere and an extra embryo was found in storage. Monash IVF apologised, expressed confidence it was an isolated incident and hired leading barrister Fiona McLeod to lead an independent review, which has now been expanded. Alex Polyakov, a fertility specialist at Melbourne's Royal Women's Hospital, said the latest stuff-up was also likely because of human error. He said the mistake in Melbourne was easier to make than the one in Brisbane but equally serious. "You have the couple's names on every embryo," the Genea Fertility Melbourne medical director told AAP. "It's not just the patient or the egg provider, it's also their partner. "I could see how this would happen." About one in 18 babies is born via IVF in Australia. Associate Professor Polyakov said the two transfer errors were the first he was aware of in Australia since the IVF industry began operating 40 years ago, although there have been high-profile cases in the US and Israel. He called for more vigilance and extra layers of protection but conceded no system could be made foolproof from a "black swan event". Shine Lawyers medical law Victorian practice lead Daniel Opare said alarm bells should be ringing across the industry. Known errors disclosed by Monash IVF raise questions about potential issues at other clinics that do not have the same reporting obligations, the medical negligence expert argued. He said Monash IVF could be exposed to lawsuits for failing in its duty of care to the patient, on top of breach of contract if the couple signed an agreement setting out which embryo was due to be transferred. The two separate errors disclosed by Monash IVF were "up there in terms of severity" compared to other previously known industry errors, he said, including embryos being damaged after trays were dropped in laboratories. "It's inexcusable," Mr Opare told AAP. Pink Elephants support group founder Samantha Payne was concerned about the impact on other couples undergoing IVF and called for a wider discussion about how clinics are run. "You'd be terrified if you were going through a round of IVF now," she said. A second embryo blunder from a major private fertility clinic has raised fresh fears about system flaws. Staff at a Monash IVF laboratory in Melbourne on Thursday transferred the wrong embryo to a woman, giving her one of her own rather than one from her partner, as they had requested. The pair is believed to be in a same-sex relationship. The company, which is based in Melbourne but has clinics around Australia, apologised to the couple and launched an internal investigation. But the Victorian Health Regulator has swooped in with its own probe of Monash IVF and how the error occurred at its Clayton site. State Health Minister Mary-Anne Thomas said the mistake was "completely unacceptable" and the company must provide answers. "This will be quite devastating for the couple at the heart of this," she told reporters on Tuesday. "We all know that the IVF journey can be a very long, torturous one. It can be very expensive as well." In a notice to the stock market, Monash IVF said it would set up additional verification processes and patient confirmation safeguards. It has informed the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee certifying body and insurers, declaring it expects the mix-up to fall within its insurance coverage. The company's profit guidance remains unchanged but the news sent its share price tumbling by more than 26 per cent to below 55 cents as of 3pm AEST. Monash IVF revealed in April a woman at a Brisbane facility had another patient's embryo incorrectly transferred to her because of "human error". The mistake was picked up in February after the birth parents asked for their remaining embryos to be transferred elsewhere and an extra embryo was found in storage. Monash IVF apologised, expressed confidence it was an isolated incident and hired leading barrister Fiona McLeod to lead an independent review, which has now been expanded. Alex Polyakov, a fertility specialist at Melbourne's Royal Women's Hospital, said the latest stuff-up was also likely because of human error. He said the mistake in Melbourne was easier to make than the one in Brisbane but equally serious. "You have the couple's names on every embryo," the Genea Fertility Melbourne medical director told AAP. "It's not just the patient or the egg provider, it's also their partner. "I could see how this would happen." About one in 18 babies is born via IVF in Australia. Associate Professor Polyakov said the two transfer errors were the first he was aware of in Australia since the IVF industry began operating 40 years ago, although there have been high-profile cases in the US and Israel. He called for more vigilance and extra layers of protection but conceded no system could be made foolproof from a "black swan event". Shine Lawyers medical law Victorian practice lead Daniel Opare said alarm bells should be ringing across the industry. Known errors disclosed by Monash IVF raise questions about potential issues at other clinics that do not have the same reporting obligations, the medical negligence expert argued. He said Monash IVF could be exposed to lawsuits for failing in its duty of care to the patient, on top of breach of contract if the couple signed an agreement setting out which embryo was due to be transferred. The two separate errors disclosed by Monash IVF were "up there in terms of severity" compared to other previously known industry errors, he said, including embryos being damaged after trays were dropped in laboratories. "It's inexcusable," Mr Opare told AAP. Pink Elephants support group founder Samantha Payne was concerned about the impact on other couples undergoing IVF and called for a wider discussion about how clinics are run. "You'd be terrified if you were going through a round of IVF now," she said. A second embryo blunder from a major private fertility clinic has raised fresh fears about system flaws. Staff at a Monash IVF laboratory in Melbourne on Thursday transferred the wrong embryo to a woman, giving her one of her own rather than one from her partner, as they had requested. The pair is believed to be in a same-sex relationship. The company, which is based in Melbourne but has clinics around Australia, apologised to the couple and launched an internal investigation. But the Victorian Health Regulator has swooped in with its own probe of Monash IVF and how the error occurred at its Clayton site. State Health Minister Mary-Anne Thomas said the mistake was "completely unacceptable" and the company must provide answers. "This will be quite devastating for the couple at the heart of this," she told reporters on Tuesday. "We all know that the IVF journey can be a very long, torturous one. It can be very expensive as well." In a notice to the stock market, Monash IVF said it would set up additional verification processes and patient confirmation safeguards. It has informed the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee certifying body and insurers, declaring it expects the mix-up to fall within its insurance coverage. The company's profit guidance remains unchanged but the news sent its share price tumbling by more than 26 per cent to below 55 cents as of 3pm AEST. Monash IVF revealed in April a woman at a Brisbane facility had another patient's embryo incorrectly transferred to her because of "human error". The mistake was picked up in February after the birth parents asked for their remaining embryos to be transferred elsewhere and an extra embryo was found in storage. Monash IVF apologised, expressed confidence it was an isolated incident and hired leading barrister Fiona McLeod to lead an independent review, which has now been expanded. Alex Polyakov, a fertility specialist at Melbourne's Royal Women's Hospital, said the latest stuff-up was also likely because of human error. He said the mistake in Melbourne was easier to make than the one in Brisbane but equally serious. "You have the couple's names on every embryo," the Genea Fertility Melbourne medical director told AAP. "It's not just the patient or the egg provider, it's also their partner. "I could see how this would happen." About one in 18 babies is born via IVF in Australia. Associate Professor Polyakov said the two transfer errors were the first he was aware of in Australia since the IVF industry began operating 40 years ago, although there have been high-profile cases in the US and Israel. He called for more vigilance and extra layers of protection but conceded no system could be made foolproof from a "black swan event". Shine Lawyers medical law Victorian practice lead Daniel Opare said alarm bells should be ringing across the industry. Known errors disclosed by Monash IVF raise questions about potential issues at other clinics that do not have the same reporting obligations, the medical negligence expert argued. He said Monash IVF could be exposed to lawsuits for failing in its duty of care to the patient, on top of breach of contract if the couple signed an agreement setting out which embryo was due to be transferred. The two separate errors disclosed by Monash IVF were "up there in terms of severity" compared to other previously known industry errors, he said, including embryos being damaged after trays were dropped in laboratories. "It's inexcusable," Mr Opare told AAP. Pink Elephants support group founder Samantha Payne was concerned about the impact on other couples undergoing IVF and called for a wider discussion about how clinics are run. "You'd be terrified if you were going through a round of IVF now," she said. A second embryo blunder from a major private fertility clinic has raised fresh fears about system flaws. Staff at a Monash IVF laboratory in Melbourne on Thursday transferred the wrong embryo to a woman, giving her one of her own rather than one from her partner, as they had requested. The pair is believed to be in a same-sex relationship. The company, which is based in Melbourne but has clinics around Australia, apologised to the couple and launched an internal investigation. But the Victorian Health Regulator has swooped in with its own probe of Monash IVF and how the error occurred at its Clayton site. State Health Minister Mary-Anne Thomas said the mistake was "completely unacceptable" and the company must provide answers. "This will be quite devastating for the couple at the heart of this," she told reporters on Tuesday. "We all know that the IVF journey can be a very long, torturous one. It can be very expensive as well." In a notice to the stock market, Monash IVF said it would set up additional verification processes and patient confirmation safeguards. It has informed the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee certifying body and insurers, declaring it expects the mix-up to fall within its insurance coverage. The company's profit guidance remains unchanged but the news sent its share price tumbling by more than 26 per cent to below 55 cents as of 3pm AEST. Monash IVF revealed in April a woman at a Brisbane facility had another patient's embryo incorrectly transferred to her because of "human error". The mistake was picked up in February after the birth parents asked for their remaining embryos to be transferred elsewhere and an extra embryo was found in storage. Monash IVF apologised, expressed confidence it was an isolated incident and hired leading barrister Fiona McLeod to lead an independent review, which has now been expanded. Alex Polyakov, a fertility specialist at Melbourne's Royal Women's Hospital, said the latest stuff-up was also likely because of human error. He said the mistake in Melbourne was easier to make than the one in Brisbane but equally serious. "You have the couple's names on every embryo," the Genea Fertility Melbourne medical director told AAP. "It's not just the patient or the egg provider, it's also their partner. "I could see how this would happen." About one in 18 babies is born via IVF in Australia. Associate Professor Polyakov said the two transfer errors were the first he was aware of in Australia since the IVF industry began operating 40 years ago, although there have been high-profile cases in the US and Israel. He called for more vigilance and extra layers of protection but conceded no system could be made foolproof from a "black swan event". Shine Lawyers medical law Victorian practice lead Daniel Opare said alarm bells should be ringing across the industry. Known errors disclosed by Monash IVF raise questions about potential issues at other clinics that do not have the same reporting obligations, the medical negligence expert argued. He said Monash IVF could be exposed to lawsuits for failing in its duty of care to the patient, on top of breach of contract if the couple signed an agreement setting out which embryo was due to be transferred. The two separate errors disclosed by Monash IVF were "up there in terms of severity" compared to other previously known industry errors, he said, including embryos being damaged after trays were dropped in laboratories. "It's inexcusable," Mr Opare told AAP. Pink Elephants support group founder Samantha Payne was concerned about the impact on other couples undergoing IVF and called for a wider discussion about how clinics are run. "You'd be terrified if you were going through a round of IVF now," she said.
