Old Trails Wildfire in Washington Reaches 99 Percent Containment
Crews report 99 percent containment on the Old Trails wildfire in Washington.
2 reports on this incident · first at Aug 20, 2026, 7:24 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Aug 20, 2026, 7:24 a.m. ETFirst report
Old Trails Wildfire in Washington 99 Percent Contained in Developing Incident
The Old Trails wildfire in WA remains an open, developing incident. According to official records from the National Interagency Fire Center, the wildfire was discovered on 2026-08-01 at 2026-08-01T18:59:44.000Z. Crews report it 99% contained, with containment listed at 99 percent. National Interagency Fire Center records list the fire's total area at 3176 acres and report minimal fire behaviour. The official record classifies the event as a Type 1 Incident and lists the cause as Human.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 120 Aug 2026, 11:54current
First published.
- Version 120 Aug 2026, 11:24current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.