DATE	SUBJECT    (Previous Archive: Sep-Oct99) Return to Archives Page
12/31	Ab, After sending ya'll my story I went to check the snail mail, and  found a late arriving Christmas gift. Curious, seeing as I almost  never get mail addressed to me I opened it and found inside a copy of  Fire on the Mountain, it seems that our Camp Director from the last  summer shipped off copies to everyone who put out our small blaze. Since getting the book, I've read it in entirety, and spent some time  looking over yours and others comments, reading for the first  time, the 10 and 18, and I must agree on a few things. Mistakes were made on all levels, however the fatalities could have  been avoided on the scene by the supervisors. The offices, although  strained probably could have given more concern to the Storm King  fire. The thing I see here is a lack of communications... Maybe  you're right in that the fire arena needs more hands and journalists,  I feel a well worded report could have gotten better results from the  offices.  I would like to say however Ab is that youmight have been a  little harsh on your review, criticizing the writer more than the  work. I stand along with those who say "He's a writer, not a fireman,  give him a break." If he was a firefighter though, I would have  expected a bit better out of him.. maybe I'll make that one of my  goals.   Best regards to all for the New Year and hopes for a safe season. Tiny,  The aspiring wildfire journalist. P.S. Thanks for the idea Ab, never thought about wildfire journalism, I  have helped to write a few statements for my local county fire  district for the papers, but never thought about wild fire.. it's an  interesting prospect.
12/31	Hey Ab-- I've never done this photo thing before. How many (how large?) can I send at once? Is jpeg better than tif? Do you have any other suggestions? Guess I'll send these one at a time... Hey Doug, do you have a CPS for sending photos? Any watchouts or fire orders, Dave? (I hate these steep learning curves!) Mellie Thanks for the photos Mellie, you did just right.  Send the photos one at a time in jpg format.  If any of you don't have jpg capability, I can convert just about any format.  Try to keep the files below 150k or so for download speed concerns.  If they are bigger, let me know before you send them so I'll know they are coming.  If any photos would make a good background for the desktop, keep in mind that many folks are running at 800x600 or 1024x768.  Any questions, drop me a line.  Mellie, your photos have been posted on the "Guest3" page.  Ab.
12/31	Abercrombie and All--Happy New Century, may it be a safer one... Three of us spent Christmas day hiking Strom King. The day was auspicious, a day on which people enjoy family and celebrate life. No one had signed the register since December 9. There were stickers on the register box lid of many hotshot and other fire crew with whom I feel family. Only one adult-sized ski pole in the can, but 2 or 3 for little children. We'll need to see that a few more recycled adult poles get collected and delivered. Some snow but no footprints, clear weather, not too cold. We hiked in silence. Hellava upslope wind when we reached the top of the canyon. Western aspect 2PM, would have been preheated fuel if there were any fuel left at all and if it had been summertime. Actually, I'm rattling on because I'm sitting here crying, just as all three of us cried there. It is so sad. They shouldn't have died. Thanks for all the dialog about safety and methods for looking at fire behavior on this web site.   I took a few pictures. We felt we were climbing as emissaries for all who remember.   Thank you ALL for your good work in fire. A special hug for those of you who fought and rehabed fire in Nevada last summer/fall and didn't get the recognition you deserve. Mellie from Five Waters
12/31	I knew I should've clarified my statement about "not fighting fire  downhill"...  I was speaking in general terms, and generally it is accepted  that fighting a fire downhill can be very dangerous. Of course there are times when you can "fight" a fire by moving downhill.  Depending on fuels, expected behavior, topography, and weather, you may make  the decision to make your line downhill.  However, in reference to the  specific event at Storm King, those factors were not requested or were  ignored.  Make that decision using as much information as you can. There are very few absolutes in life... except that no stretch of forest is  worth losing firefighters.  Moleskin Isn't it fun exposing your opinions and thoughts to the world, Doc?  Glad to hear from you, post on!  Ab.
12/31	When I click on the "They Said It" line this is the message I get from the  internet?? Unknown Host   ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Description: Unable to locate the server named "www.wildlandfire.com" --- the  server does not have a DNS entry. Perhaps there is a misspelling in the  server name, or the server no longer exists. Double-check the name and try  again.  ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If anyone else has experienced this problem, it's my webpage server's fault.  Seems they were having difficulties this morning, but seems ok now.  Ab.
12/30	Abercrombie, Thanks for having a page with links, info, and probably the most  important of all, the forum. It is an excellent site and I only wish  more like these existed. I am a youngster (16 if anyone was wondering) and I got interested  in wildfire the summer of 1994, when the Tyee Creek blaze burned  through the central Cascades in Washington State. My Boyscout troop  was on a 50 mile hike through the back country and I remember taking  night time fire watches on pourpose just so I could see the amber  glow across the ridges to the west of us.  This past summer I served at a summer camp for the Boy Scouts of  America in Okanogan (or maybe Ferry) County of Washington and I was  assigned as part of the Staff's motley fire response crew.  As a part  of the staff of Camp Bonaparte, my offical job was that of Assistant  Camp Ranger, or more precisely, fix-it man, on the fire crew  though they gave me what were referred to as Bladder Bags. (Later I  found out they were originally called piss bags). I thought it was  cool, a giant squirt gun with a high pressure range of nearly twenty  feet if there wasn't wind and you arced the stream enough.  I, nor anyone else on staff this summer never thought we'd actually  have a fire to contend with, but as the Scout regulations call for,  we had practice drills every week within the first 24 hours a new  week of campers arrived. That was until the second to last week. I  had noticed everything was drying out, and insisted on making rounds  at night to make sure that the camper's had put down their fires to  an acceptable level, as night time winds in the area tended to be a  bit breezy. My extra pushing of the issue of fire safety paid off  when that Thursday, the Lifeguard at our camp was returning from  using the kybo and saw a column of smoke rising out of the forest  near the slope of Mt. Bonaparte. Very calmly she asked if trees gave off grey colored steam, over the  2-way UHF radios we used to communicate in camp, when I told her that  steam wasn't likely this late in the afternoon she said then we have  a problem. Then our Camp Director, who had been a fireman for twenty  years or so yelled over the radio to get the bladder bags and  pulaskis up the mountain. I don't ever believe I ran any faster than I did that day in my life.  It was a good hilly area so gettin gto the mess hall where my bag was  hooked convienently on the outside of the building was a bit of a  chore so I diverted instead to our camp Office where another pair of  bags were held, but I was concerned with taking another crew member's  gear, fortuneatley my detour turned out to be good because  the young man's bag that I had was closer to my bag at the mess  hall so we just switched for the episode. Once equipped I thought  back to a few words of advice: "Don't run with the bladder bags,  you'll get too tired before you reach the fire." Those words were right, as I walked briskly the three other young men  with the piss bags ran to the fire, but as they stood gasping for  their breaths at the bottom of the hill on which the fire was  burning, I marched up the hill where the members with hand tools were  already working and I began giving assistance, it took the other  three about ten minutes to get up the side of the hill to be any  good. Thankfully the fire was close to Lake Bonaparte and when a bag  would run out the man carrying it would go down to the lake and fill  it. Also, the fire didn't consume so much as a small bit of brush  thankfully, and the impact was minimal. We will never know what  started the fire, for certain.  In hindsight, all the drilling we did should have alerted me to a  problem with our bags, and that was they leaked, slowly, from the cap  where the slide is attatched, however I was told we lacked teflon  tape to fix the problem, so each week I asked for someone heading to  the city to pick up a roll of tape to fix it with. It never came, so  I took it as meaning it was low priority and went about things like  reparing cook boxes, mending feces, and filling propane tanks. I  regret not having gone to the stores myself for the tape, for I am  willing to say that if the fire had gotten any bigger and the winds  were stronger our leaky bags may have hurt us more than helped. Any how, that's my story from the lines if you can call it that. Thanks to all of the wild land fire fighters out there, you ladies  and gents do a hell of a job, and probably don't recieve enough of  our (the public's) gratitude. "Tiny"  Thanks for sharing your experience with us Tiny!  From the quality and depth of your letter, I think you will be able to pick from at least two careers, either journalism or a firefighting.  The fire arena needs both. . . why not a fire going journalist?  Ab.
12/30	Another thing to consider regarding the MEA, and I hesitate with this as my knowledge is limited. Within the past year I received a letter informing me what I owe the gov't money to buy back my temp. service. In the letter, it described why I could only buy back my time prior to 1/1/89, and anything beyond that date could not be bought back and applied to my service computation date. Huh? I started in 1985, and received my appointment in 1992. This means there is a small period of time which I served the agency and will not get credit for it. The relationship to MEA......   In the past year vacancy announcements for demo and jac positions have been saying that an applicant must not have reached their 35th birthday. However, the application describes that an applicant may decrease their chronological age if they have previous service that qualifies. i.e., age 37 with 2+ years of temporary service reduces their age to 35. Now, one of the claimed reasons for the MEA is so that we all can retire with 20 years of service at age 55, or at any age with 25 years of service. IF, someone who is above the 35 year age limit has had their age reduced by calculating temp time gained AFTER 1/1/89, how can they retire at age 55? they can't! or atleast not without penalty, because they will not have the minimum 20 years of credible service.  When I calculated my SCD myself, I in fact discovered that it does not include the accumulated months of service post 1/1/89. Does anyone out there have any more info on this? Not that it really matters, but if the-powers-that-be have been reducing age by using temp time served post 1/1/89, then there has been an abundance of exemptions to the MEA by the FS. This could open a huge can of worms, but could also help Pappy's friends' attorney. Someone, please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm losing faith in this agency. f.g.
12/30	Just wanted to know what is going on with the step test? is it in or out? The rumor for the last couple of years is that it is next years requirement and then next year comes around and it still isn't online. I have been in fire since 1977, and personally, just standing in front of the step, before I even start, sends my pulse racing... I like the idea of the mile and half run, and even this pack test. I think that the physical test should be one of unisex nature, with one requirement...that you pass it at the same level as everyone eles. I am female and lived through the U.S.F.S.'s Consent Decree in California...I worked in fire and went to forestry school before C.D. hit the ground. If these timed tests were implemented then, surely those, overweight and out of shape would have been plucked out off the line long ago. (noname) It sounds like it will be in place for the coming (if it's ended in your area) fire season.  Year 2000 that is!  Abercrombie agrees that the pack test should be implemented.  Have you all seen how many firefighters were felled by heart attacks this year?  Ab.
12/30	Moleskin, I would have to agree with you, if you don't know how to fight fire while going down hill then you and your crew are better off not starting. However, to make a blank statement that implies fighting fire down hill should never be done is very discourging. There are times and places where this is not only a very effective tactic, but it is the safest also. Let's not start limiting our options, just learn the correct time and place to impliment the tactic. "Boo"
12/30	The homepages for all the hotshot crews who have them are listed at:  http://www.umt.edu/globalfirenet/nationalpage.htm 6
12/30	Regarding the hotshot enquiry: You can find the hotshot crews listed at www.fs.fed.us/fire/operations/crews   The Flathead hotshots are located near Whitefish, Calispell and Hungry Horse in NW Montana. A great bunch, they fought the Megram fire at our ranch in northern CA this last summer. Small world, my uncle from Polson, MT delivered one of the crew and all of his brothers and sisters. Another worked with my cousin in Whitefish! Ya'll come visit! The Entiat Hotshots are located 200 mi E of Seattle on the Columbia River.    The Bitterroot Hotshots are located 65 mi south of Missoula near Darby in western Montana.  The Helena hotshots are from Helena, Montana. Their crew boss is Larry Edwards. This group is also near and dear to my heart because they helped hook a 1/4 mi long slopover that extended 800 feet down below the containment line just above our ranch. Saving that slopover was the psychological turning point of the western (Denny) side of the fire. Thanks ya'll! Mellie from Five Waters
12/30	As a former CDF firefighter and a retired fire captain for a county fire district in Califorina, I found your web site great!! I can't wait to dig out some of my old fire photos to share with you.  I have since went into business for myself, owning bulldozers and specializing in wildland fire control and prevention.  So I was wondering if you knew of any "dozer" re- lated associations, web site, info, etc.. for us who fight wildfires with bulldozers.  Thank-you for your time and a truly  great site!!! Gary
12/30	Concerning the 12/29 request for web info/shot crew websites: http://www.umt.edu/globalfirenet/nationalpage.htm Puffin II
12/30	Last week when the fires were breaking overnight in So Cal, I thought I could  find a decent place to get the news on the web. SZ gacc, no luck, LA County ,Nothing  several other  places no new news. So I went to Channel2000.com, LA's CBS affiliate, news with video, went to  nbc4la.com  more news.  Then RS's comments about firefighter fatalities got me wondering so I looked at  firehouse.com it has a great breaking news site with excellent pictures and links to other neat stuff.  Firehouse also had links back over to the Los Angeles networks.  want to add abc7.com to cover all the  stations in beautiful LA that I know of.  So if you want the latest news go to some of the sights listed.  Hey AB do you know of any other places we can get the latest info? Dave Not really.  Ab.
12/29	I'm am interested in working on a hot shot crew in the summer of 2000. I'm having a little problem with finding a web site for the north west crews. the area that I would like to go to is Montana Idaho region can you give me any advises
12/29	I wanted to really  thank Kristin H.   Kris you have been the only one to  stick up for us after WF mag ran its article" Foam on the Range".  This mags  journalism concerning that article was extremely one sided. I know the truth  about  the 1999 season in Nevada, I was there and so were you. The season  started early with fires that we could pick up during one or two burning  periods and manage as type 3 incidents.  That day when we recieved over One  Hundred Lightning strikes by noon.  We prepositioned at the bunk house and  stayed there for 15 minutes before jumping to the first fire. Four days later  when we returned for the basics  (  MREs, Diesal / Gas, Drinking Water and  Foam). the locals gave all of us dirty looks and mean comments.  From this  point on we had few friends in Central Nevada but you always stood by us.  Thanks.  A special note for those people who were not in the state for the seige of  1999.  Please judge yourselves before others.   I HAVE NEVER, talked about incidents I was not at or Arm Chair  Quarterbacked crews on fires.  You should not either. Yes we had catastrophic  fires in rural areas. We went direct where we could to limit fires size ,  saved the threatend homes ( with no fuels clearence )  and valves at risk.  We fought fire aggressively But provided for Safety First,  we kept in mind  the local residences and the economy ( Ranches and Cattle ).   Winter is here and were into the biggest fire rehab in history.  I bust my  tail everyday to get the work done, rehab is tougher than suppression, again  racing mother nature.  The people who do not do our work can talk, bitch and cry. The feds are  screwing up our land. I done see the whiners out donig this work but I hear  the bitching. Oh no words of thanks to any element of the fire community was ever uttered,  It was a sad situation. Not like in California were thankyous abound. Thanks to everyone who worked on  and supported our work during the Nevada  Wildfires of 1999,  We all made it home for Christmas.
12/29	RS, mentions something about firefighter deaths on 12/27 and then takes a swipe  at us all that we  didn't make note of it.  Maybe  he could inform us as to the reports, I remember  the folks up in  Worchester, Mass.  At any rate I need more info from ol' RS so I can make note  of it.  Last week at the  fire depts  kids Christmas  party all uniformed personnel wore black bands on  their badges. We are  concerned about firefighters.   By the way have your hugged a veteran today. Happy Mil-Looney-um !! Frank
12/28	Pulaski, The top ten will not provide any further insight into CPS. All the quotes are  directly from the cps book.  You are correct in saying that I am afraid of something, I'm afraid that some  firefighter somewhere will  use some phrases from the cps new fire behavior language and no one will  understand what he is  saying.  Once again I will say that I believe Mr. Campbell knows his fire behavior but I  also believe that the  language needed to describe it is in place.  Like "6" says a couple of posts ago  "Regarding CPS, nothing will ever replace a heads-up  attitude and sound decision making process.  S-290 and  CPS may or may not make firefighters safer.  You can't  mandate wisdom." As far as needing a fire behavior analyst to predict your fire behavior . Please  don't wait for one of them  to arrive at your incident and I think this is where Doug's teaching can help  most of us. The basic fire  behavior knowledge that will prevent you from doing a frontal attack or trying  to hold the ridge when the  fire may race towards you, this is what you need, not a laptop, not a  shadometer. I believe that cps's philosophy is the same as any firefighter, reference the  fire order that reads ' Initiate  all action based on current and expected fire behavior.'  Doug and I are trying  to achieve the same  goals, the prevention of firefighter death.  You may remember the struggle the fire services have had with developing a  standard nomenclature for  equipment and apparatus, why do we need a new language now? Maybe we can just agree to disagree.
12/28	Moc4445, f.g., Madhatter, ab, and everyone else,     I need to clear some things up.  First of all, in response to madhatters claim that "An applicant must not have reached their 35th birthday" being printed on all of the outreaches, this was simply not the case.  The Outreach in question simply said "not over the age of 35".  This is where the problem arose.  My friend questioned whether this meant the thirty fifth year before the age of 36.  After review by our FMO, District Ranger, forest personnel office, AND the provincial level, the general consensus on the maximum entry age (MEA) interpretation was "not yet age 36"!  She has written documentation stating that this is how the interpretation was made at all these levels.  It was then forwarded on to the regional level and they agreed with the interpretation of the age requirements made by both the forest and provincial levels.      Two weeks ago our district gets a call from our forest personnel saying that they are about to receive word that this interpretation was not correct according to the powers that be in Washington, and that she is to be terminated immediately.  This termination was ordered to proceed without anything received yet in writing.  By this time she is already 15 months into the apprenticeship program and has turned down two permanent positions in law enforcement.  So now at age 37, she is not only out of the two law enforcement positions that she turned down outside of the FS, she is also no longer eligible to get into law enforcement within the FS, which is what her ultimate goal was.     In a letter dated April 24, 1997, from Jerry Baughman ( the gentleman that wrote the MEA rules) he says that BLM has made exceptions.  If we could find out under what circumstances these exceptions were made it would show that precedence has been set.  I anyone could help us out here we would truly appreciate it.  If you could email any suggestions or comments about where to look or who to contact I would be really grateful.  All correspondence will be kept confidential.  Email me at: pappyplace@hotmail.com     I would like to thank both Moc4445 and f.g. for their support. This is exactly why we in the FS need to really form a stronger union.  Until we start to organize and support one another we will never get the type of respect (both monetarily and other) that other organizations like CDF and most county departments do.  Thanks for your time,  Pappy
12/28	Thank you Pulaski for your comments about CPS. It made me think that maybe some of the objections stem from the feeling that CPS is a complete fire behavior course.  It is not. CPS was designed to be a piece of the pie.  CPS is about using observations made on the fireground to determine the tactics for engaging the fire.  The idea is that no one will get hurt if they know when and where fire behavior variations are going to occur.  The book is an attempt to explain how the experienced firefighters have done that in the past. There area lot of very good firefighters out there.  Among those who have contributed to the CPS are: Redding Hot Shot Sups ,Charlie Caldwell, Craig Lechleiter; Los Padres Hot Shot Super, Mark Linane; Marc Castellnou of Barcelona Spain; Kern Co. BLM Anthony Escobar; Ops Chiefs. J.W. Allendorf; Dave Provencio, FMO,  Will Spyrison, Batt chief, Lance Cross, Division Chief of the LPNF; Terry Raley, Plans Chief, VNC; Pat Shanley, Capt. LA City; J.P. Harris, BC LA County; Drew Smith, FBA for LA County and many others.  From these people come the wisdom of successful firefighting. CPS has been validated by these individuals.  CPS uses their experiences to create an explanation of how to do it right.  CPS enables them to communicate their wisdom to others about, " how they know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em." They can explain why the fire is going to change BEFORE it happens and base  their actions on that knowledge. Not scientific you might say? You are right.  If the fire changes from a backing fire to a head fire because of slope change, is that where science is used? I think not.  That is where an observation made of the situation before it changes slope alignment is a size up and it is not science. If you know how to read the fire's signatures and apply that to the tactical plan, then you predetermine the tactics based on the potential fire behavior.  What is going to make the fire change? Is it changing slope, winds or fuel flammability change?  What difference does it make to nit pick the science of things? Many times firefighters know the situation is getting worse but have no language with which to extract themselves or others from it.  With a language to explain why their tactics may be an opportunity for engagement but not a good fire behavior tactic, many experienced firefighters have avoided the danger. Observations, situation description, tactical choice and constant evaluation are the ingredients of CPS. Some have called it "in situ" training, meaning it is situational. Someone called it a BGO course, a" blinding glimpse of the obvious." Most who take one of the CPS courses say, "I knew that but just didn't know how to express it." If you don't know what the fire is about to do in the way of change should you be there? If you can't explain the fire situation before  sending troops into action. should you be in command?  Can a safe escape route be picked if you don't know what the fire might do?   Can you provide clear instructions and be understood? CPS teaches how this is done and how it relates to tactics.  Fire behavior is not a stand alone subject. It is coupled with decisions that determine the action on the fireground.  The experiences that firefighters have are important to use in teaching others. To those who do not prefer or like CPS I would like to say thank you for your comments and acknowledge that there are many very good firefighters who can do the job without CPS's help.  Its OK. For those who find some support for what they already knew in CPS I am here for them too. The idea is to put your ideas forward so that the firefighting community can pick and choose their way through the minefield of choice. To all the firefighters, may you continue to be safe and continue to learn from the lessons of the past.  May you value the quiet, silent firefighter who goes through year after year of safe and effective work.  Why not ask that group how they did it? Learn from the past, predict the future........... My best regards to all. Doug Campbell
12/27	Ab,   I lie your forum a lot but does everybody live in a vacum? There were 9 fire fighter deaths this last week and not one word from anybody. I would like to take a moment for reflection and hope this doesnt happen any more. Ive been out of fire for a while but I still care.        RS
12/27	I know i'm coming into the discussion late, but I had to add some thoughts  about "Fire on The Mountain". It's little wonder that it's the little fires that kill people... or at least  the fires that start out as little.  It's also no big surprise (to me,  anyway) that bureaucracy, lack of experience, and failure to stick to the  basics can kill firefighters. We all know that effective Incident Management can help to mitigate the  dangers of firefighting.  However, it (as has been said) comes down to the  div sup's, crew bosses, squad bosses, and individual firefighters to keep  their heads up and fight fire aggressively but with safety in mind.  I think that the South Canyon fire was a mixture of all those things.  However, I'm inclined to agree with the camp that finds fault in the  leadership of the fire/area.  No matter how you boil it down, I feel that  being the IC, it all comes down to me.  It is MY responsibility to ensure the  safety of the folks on my fire.  This starts with good a good organization,  and leadership skills.  If they don't make it then the responsibility lies  with me first, and foremost. I've heard that a lack of resources is partly to blame.  Well, as an eastern  firefighter, I look at the resources available around here that sit largely  unused in the summer months, and I highly doubt the vailidity of that  argument.  If there aren't enough resources, then don't commit the few you  have.  By blaming the management, I don't mean that there weren't mistakes made at  the boss and firefighter level.  I also know that it's not easy to second  guess our fallen brothers and sisters.  However, we owe it to their memory  that we take a hard look at how the events transpired, create a dialog, and  do our best to ensure that it never happens again.  Yet, even after the the lessons are discussed, they are ignored.  Budgets and  promotions come first, the "it can't happen here" statements are made... and  people continue to die. *I* promise to never make the mistakes committed in the past... I won't fight  a fire downhill, I will: post lookouts, get weather updates, insist on good  escape routes and safety zones, and refuse an assignment that I feel is  unsafe.  I also promise to look at that little 5 acre fire, and see the  potential that it has, and never forget that ALL fatal fires start out small. I would hope that anyone that manages firefighters would make the same  promises or they don't belong in that position. Moleskin
12/27	Even though Doug has stated and defended his philosophy fairly well, since I helped start the discussion on CPS, I guess it is time I chipped in.  To be honest, I haven't taken or given 190, 290 or 390 (or however they are grouping them now) for a number of years and I haven't really read Doug's book cover to cover for several years now and have done no research or checking for my following comments. I say that to try and put you in my perspective, that I am going on the fire behaviour evaluation tools that I have with me when I arrive at a fire ...my mind. Regarding Dave's top ten list, I didn't quite get it. While, granted Doug's written presentation might lack that of a polished professional writer, a majority of  the statements of "questionable science" you credited to Doug's philosophy are correct to my way of thinking. Maybe  you could try again and explain why you think it is questionable science. I have to admit I had the same question or curiosity as Doug, in that it seems like you are afraid of something...be it change or a different way of looking at something. If I am right or wrong on that thought I do not know, however I have always felt that no matter what the subject, there is always room for improvement.    What struck me so strongly was that after I read Doug's book I sat back and said...well, yea this is basic behaviour information, but it sure makes more sense now! ..why don't they present it in 190/ 290/390 like this!  To me the most important concept in Doug's philosophy is that of "time tag tactics" and "alignment" and I don't remember anything like these being covered in the standard courses, at least in a fashion that made it stick in my mind.  I never got the impression that Doug implied that the basic behaviour courses shouldn't be taught.  Nor did I get the impression that his philosophy covers all possible behaviour factors in every situation.  Obviously it does not..and nothing does!  The standard behaviour courses are fine (although I wish they woud utilize some of Doug's way of putting things together and terminology) and the Look up, down, around as well as the new Lessons Learned courses are excellent!  However, If you look closely at fire fatalities over the years, you will find that a majority (but not all) occur prior to any established team with a fire behaviour analyst on scene to provide a behaviour estimate for the ground troops...sooo...what are they to do? ..   I'm sorry but I don't have a laptop or the old Twhatever calculator along with me to tell me what I can expect the fire to do. CPS is (in my mind) very valid philosophy, and if you are dealing with slope and predicted winds in daytime situations it will save your butt.  It is another tool, one of many, to help the firefighter in gauging / predicting fire behaviour AND when and where to expect the most extreme behaviour.  We are all on the same team here, fighting for the same things. Keep an open mind. Pulaski
12/26	Fudgie, my guess is that the legal/liability issues would sink that idea.  (Ask your insurance agent about the cost of malpractice insurance for that type of activity!)  I think the integration of retirees into existing teams as ADs might be the best of both worlds. Regarding CPS, nothing will ever replace a heads-up attitude and sound decision making process.  S-290 and CPS may or may not make firefighters safer.  You can't mandate wisdom. Have a Merry Christmas! 6
12/25	Hola Firefighters Some of the fire type retirees have been talking about forming incident management teams and making themselves available under contract to agencies needing assistance with managing wildfires. These teams would be made up of retired team members proven as top performers that held positions in all functions and at all levels and were qualified under national standards.  We have been reading about team member shortages, teams not meeting the needs of the local land managers, cooperators, and land owners, and teams not deep enough in experience to understand what they were facing. I know for fact there are some good incident management teams out there but if we are hearing it right there are problems and the field fire folks need better support than they are gettting. Some of the issues we have been batting around are:         acceptance by the ground pounders          can we contractually do it and all the ramifications of the legal issues         would our mentoring on teams made up of regular employees have value         only accept work that wouldn't take experience away from regular employees         would we fill all team command and general staff positions. there are alot more issues and concerns connected with this idea. We want to hear from you folks that we would support in order to make go no go decisions. Fudgie
12/24	Torch I never have said the Romero fire was driven by solar preheat. If you have ever listened to my story of the Romero fire you would know.  When you tell others what it is that I teach at least get it correct. I do not know what Bishop teaches, except that it follows the S-course lesson plan I suppose.  That is fine and dandy. The S courses should be taught.  I do not propose that CPS should replace anything.  Do you suppose that there could be some more information packaged in a different way that could be beneficial?  Sounds like you wish to suppress information not look at the whole picture. Where is Jim Bishop working as an FBA?  Jim, if you read this I just pulled another FBA job on the Ranch fire on the Ojai RD and did not see you there with the CDF team?  I did not see you on the Kirk fires either  Do you do FBA jobs any more?  The solar preheating was nil here on this fire. The fire behavior changes were due to wind the first night, then the slope became the dominate factor of change.  The night put most of the fire out before cold trailing could be completed. I would like to see a model that could represent this behavior. The flame lengths were reported to be 300 ft. then the next day the flame length went to 30 ft on the head fire and 2 ft. on the backing fire.  That night the fire went out. Doug
12/23	Pappy I read your comments,yet i don't know what the Forest Service policy is and I have don't have any idea how old your friend is but I'm guessing over 35. Now if you read any Demo or Jac apprenticeship vacancy announcement that is for fire it states very plainly  " An applicant must not have reached their 35th birthday" it's not hard to figure it out. I hate to sound like an asshole but if someone does apply and they are over the age limit and they have what happened to your friend happen to them I don't feel bad for them one bit it really irritates me because the block the door for other people who would qualify.Now I'm not talking shit about your friend I'm sure she is good at what she does for all I know she could walk on water. Madhatter
12/23	Greetings AB........ As I sit here on forced vacation, (isn't use or loose a terrible thing?  NOT), I decided that I wanted to send a greeting to all of my brothers and  sisters out there. And to wish them well for the Holiday Season. Keep Safe everyone and Best Wishes for the coming millennium. R5 Firecapt I checked it out, thanks R5 Firecaptain, here it is folks: xmas card  Ab.
12/23	Hi AB and Pappy,     I received my first permanent appointment (with NPS no less) several months before my 35th birthday. I started on the payrole with them the day AFTER my 35th birthday. However, in the opinion of the NPS Personnel Official, my 6.5 years of previous federal service in fire would not count toward retirement because I did not contribute. I was told that if I had prior government service in Fire (462, 455, 303, 301, and/or 081) Series that it would count if it were before January 1988. I found in the Federal Employees 1999 Almanac a statement regarding new permanent employees who have had previous federal service (temporary, term, career, or military) that it applies to your comp date and toward retirement. Also, if you had time in, and as a temporary you did not contribute to the federal retirement system (either FERS or CSRS) that you could pay that amount for that time back on your own to get credit for it. Because of a conflict in statements and opinions I am challenging the personnel official's opinion. It turns out she has no love for firefighters and screws them over on issues like this to get back at everyone. If your friend has prior government service in fire or other public safety areas her, particulary if she was a term employee at some point, it is supposed to reduce the age limit by years of service. Ultimately, if you disagree with the department's opinion, you can seek a ruling through the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) either by e-mail or by contacting a regional office and speaking to an individual. There is also an OPM Website that can help you also. Have her file a complaint with the deparment and ask for a ruling either through the Upper Levels of the Department (either Region or Washington) Personnel, and request a ruling by OPM rules or by OPM itself. This summer I did exactly that and won a DoD seasonal job when the Personnel Office of that base decided (on her own opinion) said to me "there were three qualified people on the list for the position, your number 3, and the other two are veteran's." When I asked for ratings she would not give me that, and when I asked for qualifications all she would say was "the other two were veteran's including one who was 30% disabled." What is that, a one-armed firefighter? I advised her that I would be sending a formal request regarding who is to be hired for a similar position if one or more applicants are more qualified than the veterans who apply. Two Weeks later she e-mailed me a reply with a note from her supervisor AND OPM stating that if the non-veteran scores higher, even with the 5-10-15 additional points they get, then the non-vet is offered the job. 24 hours after recieving the reply I was hired for the job. Tell her not to give up! If she was a federal cop she has time in. Good Luck!!! MOC4445
12/23	"Do You See What I See?" Said the citizen to the Dispatcher...... Do you see what I see? Up there on a hill dispatcher? Do you see what I see? A fire, a fire, burning in the night It is giving off an orange light... It is giving me quite a fright! Said the Dispatcher to the Engine Crew.. Listen to what I say... In your station warm Engine Crew... Listen to what I say... A fire, a fire is burning orange and gold you will have to go out in the cold You will have to go out in the cold! Said the Engine Crew to the Dispatcher... Do you hear what we hear? Out there along the road Dispatcher... Do you hear what we hear? A fire, a fire is roaring up a hill, We will need more help, yes we will.... We will need more help on this hill! Said the Dispatcher to the FMO... Do you know what I know? In your cozy home FMO... Do you know what I know? A crew, a crew is out working on a fire More help is what is required... And they blew out their back left tire! Said a Jolly voice on the radio.. Listen to what I say! A happy elf announced on the radio... Listen to what I say! The fire, the fire is about to stop A load of retardant, I am about to drop! Tanker Santa one-one is making a drop! Said the Engine crew to the Dispatcher... Do you see what we see? Way up in the sky Dispatcher... Do you see what we see? The sleigh, the sleigh, has dropped a split load and the fire has now grown cold! The fire is out now and it HAS...GROWN....COLD!!! Zonie-spatcher
12/23	Pappy We need to rally together for her, she is truly being screwed, and those responsible should be held accountable. Those responsible for the mistakes in personnel should be terminated the same day she is, or atleast suspended without pay for being "incompetent". Personally, I think the MEA (maximum entry age) is a bunch of crap in most instances (I said MOST instances, not all of them).  I think it would help to write to your representative, but only if a solution to the issue is presented after the statement of the facts. The solution -- suggest an exemption on the terms that a contractual agreement be entered into by both parties, the student and the agency, agreeing that they 1) retire as a primary ff at age 55 with reduced benefits due to a tenure less than the required minimum of 20 years -- this is a feasible solution but unlikely that the powers-that-be will buy into it; 2) and/or, suggest an exemption on the basis that she will seek a position in a secondary ff classification or other p.d. prior to her 55th birthday, which will cancel the maximum age limit. If she is unsuccessful with #2, then the agreement falls back onto #1; 3) suggest the MEA be increased to 37; it worked for law enforcement; 4) recommend a repeal of the law which allows the MEA; 5) allow the employee to contribute a higher percentage of pay into the retirement system, greater than the current 1.7%. And, of course, get a good lawyer. If all else fails, sue the pants off the idiots who are responsible for the misinformation, and misinterpretation of the law. Read the following: "This has nothing to do with an individual's ability to do the work at age 36 or 40, but is justified by the need to move employees out of that line of work in their 50's.  "Our experience is that there are many qualified applicants for permanent positions. There are also some limited opportunities to enter permanent employment in secondary fire positions or mixed fire positions that have no maximum entry age. Finally, individuals are free to continue to fight fire under temporary appointments at any age, as long as they can meet the fitness standards." written by Dale Nelson for Jack W. Thomas, and copied from www.rhubble.com © 1999 rhubble.com  ******how is it that a temporary employee can fight fire at ANY age, and a permanent employee cannot? Wouldn't this be an EEO complaint? It's certainly unacceptable. Even if it doesn't help to write congress, it sure won't hurt. Try this site:  http://www.nwlink.com/~rhubble/smokejumpers/write.htm. or http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/29/ch14.html. Good luck, and I'll provide a copy of my letter to you Pappy, or anyone else who may be interested in helping.  f.g.
12/23	Hey Ab, could you post this for me?  Everyone,  I was wondering if anyone out there might be able to help me out?  The US Forest Service in Region 5 has an apprenticeship program that many of you might be familiar with.  Last year a friend of mine was picked up and signed an agreement with the Forest Service to complete the Academy.  The agreement simply says that if she finishes the Academy that she is promised a job somewhere at the 13/13 gs-5 level.  She had previously completed a law enforcement academy and had several potential law enforcement  jobs (outside of the FS) in the works when she was offered the wildland fire academy position.  After she was picked up and started the Academy someone (in personnel I'm guessing) noticed that she had already passed the age limitation for new hire (by less than a few months).  The forest wanted to immediately terminate her contract but since she was already way into the program AND she had already turned down one law enforcement position outside of the FS AND they decided to support her and turn it over to the region.  The regional office also supported her so we thought that it was all over.  Then someone from the Washington office calls last week and says that she is to be terminated immediately because there are "No exceptions to the age rule!".  Has anyone ever heard of this type of situation before?  I'm sure that there have been exceptions but I am not sure how to find out where and for what reasons.  I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions on where to go from here?  I have worked with this employee for several years and she is truly an asset to the agency.  Any suggestions that you could help me out with would be truly appreciated.  Thanks for your time,  Pappy

12/22	Couple things on my mind after reading through here & visiting the archvies. Doug, Dave has a "GREAT" sense of humor! I share his points along with Bishops & Beighley's & Sage (They Said Archvies 7/18/99) that your not encouraging firefighters to look at the whole picture. You can't use only part of the formula.  While fire behavior isn't rocket science, it's a little more complex than than simple addition. When one reviews Wilson's Common Denominators and then chooses a fire behavior prediction system to apply, one has to ask. "Will the fire behavior prediction system I choose consider all of Wilson's factors?" Like the shape of the topography, size class of fuel, it's ability to respond to moisture changes (timelag ring a bell?) and winds, (frontal, t-storm or subsiding) and nighttime fire behavior, because yes we have lost firefighters at night. To teach, learn and understand interrelationships of all the factors is crucial to firefghter safety.  Failure to do so is ignorance.  Fuel temperature wasn't key to the Romero fatalities, it was the RAPID drop in humidity and RAPID esculation of the subsiding wind, and it was at night. And as you & I both remember, and it happened in less the 20 minutes. IT also happened again the night after the fatalities when shot crews were almost sent into another hole, but fortunately saner minds prevaied (and for those saner minds many of us are here today).  That fire is a key reason I became a student of fire behavior that considers all elements and interrelationships.  CPS's claims of satisfaction, based on user reviews, is how magazines and swamp land are sold.  On another track, I continually see references to the 18 Watchout Situations being violated or broken.  FOLKS, you can't violate a watchout situation. If we did, you wouldn't fight fire! We are going to make frontal attacks, the wind will change direction or speed, the day will become hotter & drier, you will take a nap at night (or day) on the line, yada yada yada... BUT, when these situations occur it is time to become more heads up, dilligent, FOLLOW THE 10 STANDARD ORDERS, use LCES. Haven't read FOTM yet, but hope I get a copy in my stocking, if not I'll head for the bookstore. Be Careful Out There! Torch
12/22	I've had some dealings with reporters over the years, and I've got a little advice for people that might find themselves in the company of the media.  You can interchange the word "journalist" with "reporter." Despite what Kelly wrote, remember that there are a LOT of things that are worse than having reporters laugh and smirk at you.  One of the things that's worse is having a reporter with an agenda that takes what you tell them and uses it in a way that doesn't do you any good.  It can happen, and has happened.  Not all reporters are good people, and if you aren't ABSOLUTELY sure that what you tell them will be presented in a good way, then my advice is to pass up talking with them.  I can live with reporters smirking at me - they smirk a lot anyways.  This isn't to say that there aren't a lot of great reporters out there.  Many of them will help you get your message out in a positive way, but you have to be really careful.  Once I was interviewed by a TV crew that asked me to talk about both sides of the "suppression vs. natural fire" debate.  Without telling me what they had planned, they only used the parts where I talked about the need for suppression, and spliced in an environmentalist talking about the need for natural fire.  It ended up looking like I was debating against natural fire.  That was totally unethical, and it's just one rather mild example of my experience.  Like I said, there are some great reporters out there and I've been lucky to work with some of them, but you're setting yourself up for trouble if you assume that they're all worth talking with.  I'm just saying that you need to be careful, particularly if there's a chance that what you say could be used wrong.  But hey, Happy Holidays to everyone that reads (and maintains) this great site and here's hoping you have a great New Year!  How about those LA Basin folks - Christmas Eve in fire camp?  In the 75-76 season I was on the Bear Divide crew and spent the holidays working.  A raised glass to the folks out on the line - *clink*!  The Lurker FMO
12/22	Ab, Once again, R-3 gets screwed out of a great training program. Here in  Northern AZ, we were looking forward to Doug's CPS program in February 2000.  I have spent over 13 years in this game of fire, and not once have I ever  had an opportunity to take this program. Now with all the feedback that I  see here about CPS, I really need to sit down and take a good long look at  what's out there in the way of fire behavior classes. My first exposure to the S-290 was at Redding when there was this big  upheaval between S-290/S-390 back in 1995. The program that we got was truly  the 390, even though they had to put 290 on the cert. I finally got into a  390 class last year in Tucson, and was a little disappointed. Mostly review  for myself. I couldn't believe the large number of folks in this class who  had just taken 290 a week before and already in a 390 class. The majority of  the people I talked too couldn't wait to get their cert so they could start  their Strike Team Leader taskbook. Again, we are sending people out there in  leadership roles that don't understand basic firefighting concepts.I sent  some of my guys to the 290 class in Sedona last spring, and again, based on  what I heard from them, I was VERY disappointed. Doug, PLEASE COME TO FLAGSTAFF!!!!!  We want your class, we need your  class!!! Merry Christmas to all!! AZ Trailblazer, FMO
12/22	hey all! i hope everyone has a happy holiday. did anyone spend 2 weeks in  lovely kentucky? i went with the njffs and seen more fire in 10 days than any  other trip i have taken! for the most part it was a good trip- one  crew-member ended up in the hospital with triple by-pass surgery( a reason  for yearly physicals) . the member had no prior history of heart problems! i  personaly got separated with my crew's from the rest of the crew when the  fire blew up the slope. i never imagined the fear of what others must have  felt when they either deployed shelters or came close to deploying. we had a  good safe zone but it was close none the less. we are a type 2 crew but was  assigned to perform type 1 work. we completed all assignments and recieved  excellent reviews from management. although the terrain wasn't as high as out  west it was as steep and as hazardous as anything i have seen. who says crews  from the east are not up to the task?!  overall it was good and i am looking  forward to next season!
12/21	Doug, Actually I do have a great sense of humor, but I didn't realize that discussions  about preventing firefighter death was a place for humor.  Now do your best to dig your toe in  the dirt and make that halo appear over your head and become the much maligned and criticized Doug.   Undoubtedly some of your phraseology has seeped into the fire behavior vocabulary but the ideas you  cover are the same as what already exists you have only changed the jargon. Which to me can only  introduce more communication problems. But if only everyone would use the CPS, I can here you  saying. That would be nice if everyone knew and understood the same language, now wouldn't it?  The  language is there for anyone to use.  aspect, slope, time of day, air temperature, relative  humidity, wind speed and direction, fuel type, mountain, valley, ridge, saddle, chimney, chute, etc., etc.  No it doesn't bother me that you are trying to recover your expenses.  But why don't you teach the  accepted fire behavior courses?  I think that everyone who has ever predicted fire behavior has looked at the  immediate situation from every angle, taken everything into account and made the prediction.  Whether the  prediction was for the next shift, the next day or the next 10 minutes or for some time in between.  But the prediction has to be in a communicative style that facilitates understanding.  Maybe CPS will be  the guidepost for the future of fire behavior prediction. I don't know,  I certainly can't predict  human behavior.  So next time you decide to be funny put it next to a little (ha,ha) then we will  know your intent.  Dave
12/21	To Mellie, S-290 Intermediate Fire Behavior, is an approved National Wildfire Coordinating  Group (NWCG) training course. For available classes navigate to www.fire.nifc.nps.gov, click on fire  management, click on Training and education, click on Multi-Agency Wildland fire Training schedule  and scroll down to S-290. Several places offer the course as a part of their curriculum and it is  designed to meet training requirements for a Single Resource Boss.  Probably the best way to get more info  on this class is to talk to your local fire dept whether it's local. state or federal.  There is good info at the wildfiremagazine site that you refer to.  Merry Christmas To All  !!!                                  Dave
12/21	So this is the best laugh I've had all week. "... if you don't grant a reporter an   interview he/she will be out to get you. " Man, what is that high-pitched whine I hear?   sheeeeeeeeesh. Though that statement is *not* true, this one is: Post tripe like that to pages like this and reporters will laugh and smirk at you. Kelly
12/21	Ab, Just finished the book and as promised I have signed the cover and passed it on, to another to read. I didn't learn much more from it that I hadn't already got from the reports and my visits from those that were there. I'll leave it at I liked "Young Men and Fire" better. Hope you and your's have a good holiday season and a prosperous New Year!
12/21	To 6, I can't and won't comment on if the "Reporter" was out to get Robertson and Blume, but if I had received and ACCEPTED a pay increase for my actions during the '94 fire season I would not have a problem talking with the "Reporter". MS
12/20	Mark Sorenson, "I wish that everyone would support Mr Macleam's book and build on it from personal experience."  The personal experience that can be gained is that if you don't grant a reporter an interview he/she will be out to get you.  Ask Robertson or Blume 6
12/20	New helicopter photo on Guest 3 page:  Lama  Ab.
12/20	To Doorsmaurer: Whoops - just a little confusion here,  The Type 1 *hotshot crew* wasn't disbanded - it was the Type 1 *overhead team*.  The IC and staff, those people at the top of the organization chart in the shift plan.   The Type 1 hotshot crews mentioned in the report did the right thing and didn't get in any trouble for it. To Spencer: First off, don't worry about stirring the pot.  That's how things get hashed out.  You've got good questions. Though only one person needs to screw up one of the 10 & 18 to put people at risk, the crew boss of the NPS crew wasn't the only one that strayed outside of the 10 & 18 at the Sadler.  Read the report - it tells how the division supe, the branch chief, the ops chiefs, the plans chief, the safety chief and the IC each made pretty serious mistakes.  The investigation team found that altogether those people broke all of the 10 and compromised 13 of the 18. That crew shouldn't have been doing what they were doing when they were doing it, and that wasn't just the fault of the crew boss. I'm not going to knock your source - if that person was on one of the hotshot crews or the engines there at the safety zone that day, then what you wrote would be an understandable interpretation of what your source saw.  But the thing is, the division supe and the superintendent of one of the hotshot crews were the people that told me the hotshots declined the assignment.  If you read the report carefully, you can see how what your source saw fits in with what's written...but I'll go with what the division supe and hotshot supe told me.   They were interviewed by the investigation team - just about all the overhead were. the Lurker FMO
12/20	This special season, as always, is a time for enjoying the company of friends and loved ones.  Let's continue into the New Year with the commitment to doing whatever we need to ensure that every firefighter goes home safely from every assignment.  We can glean the best from traditional NWCG training, the latest research, Doug's CPS, investigation reports, and MacLean's novel......and use that accumulated knowledge to reach our goal of a safe assignment for all firefighters.  Thanks to you "A" for making this site available for continued dialogue.  Wishing you and all who visit this site peace and joy. Old fire guy.
12/20	I just stumbled across the web site you have set up and would like to say  nice job. It's the best set up to wildland fire I've seen I would like to say  thanks and keep up the good work (noname) Glad you found it and thanks for your encouragement.  Ab.
12/19	Apologies to all for the delay in posting, I recently installed a firewall which caused some temporary interference with my ISP.  Things should be back to normal now.  Ab
12/19	I just discovered your web page and am very excited. As a 26 year vet of wildland firefighting I am glad to see a forum like this. As for Fire On The Mountain, I think that it is an excellent history book. Although every question isn't answered, it gives a broad overview of what happened and exposed some things that many of us might not have found out. I have not read all of the letters yet, but it bothers me to read some slamming John Maclean. He is a good journalist, but without extensive wildland firefighting experience it would have taken many more years to research everything he needed to know to give the complete story. Even then I don't the complete story will ever come out. I wish that everyone would support Mr Macleam's book and build on it from personal experience. Mark Sorenson
12/18	To Lurker FMO, Thanks for clearing up a few things, but I still don't understand why a type  1 shot crew was disbanded if they had nothing to do with the fire.  Was it  because they were smart and refused the assignment?  I may be kicking a dead  horse if this was already discussed here back when it happened, but I don't  recall it.  Thanks for the info. Doorsmaurer
12/18	(New Guest photo of a B-17 airtanker drop). . .  taken in Arizona in 1979.  Ab.
12/18	Ab, Just got off the engine this morning from driving Santa all over town  inticing the kids to come over to the station to get their picture and a  candycane... Hard to believe that it's December and winter here in Northern AZ. The ground is dry, temps in the 60-70's during the day, and yes, fire danger  is between high and very high. Oh yes, our winter fire season in the  southwest always brings a hint of joy to me and my guys, especially for OT  and Chritmas just a week away. Once again we are dealing with Mother Nature's ugly child, La Nina. If the  computer models are correct and those guys in the weather office (who make  less $ than I do) are telling the truth, then we could expect another dry  winter and could expect a good season. For those of you that are on furlough for the winter and still have the fire  bug in the system (ie, no job and not going to college this year) keep a  heads up for the Southwest. We have a good chance to keep things active for  a while. A few local fire agencies will be hiring earlier than usual, and  our training programs will begin early January. For those who wouldn't mind  working as a reserve or partime firefighter in the souhtwest, let me know,  and I'll send you some information on local agencies. OPM has already  started posting for R-3. AZ Trailblazer, FMO
12/17	Good discussion going on.   It is enlightening and if nothing else,  it sure  gives our fellow firefighters more awareness of fireline safety, certainly an  edge over those that have been sacrificed. To Lurker FMO:  Yes, I admit some of the 10 and 18 were trashed, but by an  overzealous, egotistical Crew Boss wanna-be, not anyone else that was there.   You wanted to know why I said the Sadler report was flawed.  Well its  because its not accurate, that's why.   You don't see any speculation in the  report?   What do you call the analysis of the 10 & 18, considering that  there was only 1 person who broke the rules?   Who told you the two hotshot  crews declined the assignment.  I have it from a very accurate and reliable  source that they were reluctant to commit because they're Supt's were not  with them at the moment and they had concerns about safety zones.   While  both those concerns were being addressed, both crews were diverted to a  another section of line.   Does this sound like they declined?  Not in my  book.   I think we're on the same side, just not on the same page. To FMO & Maclean,   I don't think it would have made any difference if  Robertson had been there or not.   Well it may have if he took an aerial  recon.   Otherwise he wouldn't have seen anything different than anyone else.   Speaking of aerial recon, yes Shepard and the Prineville Crew were fresh  eyes, they were also the new kids on the block and its always difficult to  change plans already in place.  Maybe if Shepard had not been denied that  recon flight there might have been a happier ending to your story, John. To firegirl, I appreciate your thoughts and comments, however, I can't help  but think that if Maclean had shared his manuscript with anyone else (besides  J.K. and his compatriots), possibly a hotshot or two, that the book would be  a lot truer than it is, and would not be slanted so much towards our friends  that fall out of sky. Hate to stir the pot, but can't help it.        Spencer
12/17	Ab, great comments on Maclean's book.  I agree 100%! To firegirl, why is it OK for Maclean to "arm-chair-quarterback" fire and not OK to "arm-chair-quarterback Maclean's...piece of work"? 6
12/17	Log Padres Hotshots 50th Anniversary flier & Retirement Party for "Supe" Mark Linane
12/17	Abercrombie:   I noticed on the discussion page that one participant said he couldn't find  Fire on the Mountain at his local bookshop.   As a service, could you put a note in your discussion They Said that  autographed copies of FOTM can be obtained through the Supply Cache, internet  address: jfelix@firecache.com. Can and did.  I purchased mine through amazon.com, here Fire on the Mountain Ab.
12/16	To Doorsmaurer: That article in Firehouse.com is taken from a recently published AP article.  A few things were left out, but you can download the actual report on the Sadler entrapment in Adobe format at: http://www.blm.gov/fna/index.htm The crew wasn't BLM - it was a Park Service Type 2 crew from California.  They were at a big fire on BLM land that was being run by a Great Basin Type 1 overhead team.  Other than the fire being on BLM land, BLM people weren't much involved with the events of the entrapment.  Six members of the crew were overrun while backfiring a large (+170,000 acre) fire near Elko NV.  The rest of the crew was in a nearby safety zone.  Two hotshot crews had declined the assignment because the line was not secured.  The AP article "paraphrased" a bit about the level of experience.  The report says, "There was a notable lack of experience on the (NPS) crew, especially for the backfiring assignment....Of the 20 crewmembers, 17 were qualified only as firefighter (FFT2), and only three were qualified as squad boss (FFT1).  It was the first wildland fire assignment for at least five of the crewmembers.  No one on the crew was highly experienced..."  The BLM field office manager (NOT the fire organization as reported) at Elko was cited by OSHA, but there are no fines for the federal government when cited by OSHA.  OSHA had a hard time deciding who should be cited - they considered citing the overhead team members, but decided against that partially because the team members were from several different states outside that OSHA office's jurisdiction.  OSHA considered citing the Great Basin fire directors' board that is responsible for management and oversight of the Type 1 teams, but those people don't have agency line authority (agency line authority is people like district rangers, field office managers, park superintendents, forest supervisors, state directors, etc. - it doesn't have anything to do with fireline).  So OSHA ended up citing the manager of the local office - there's been some discussion about if that was the right person, but OSHA generally looks to hold the agency management responsible, rather than the people working for them.  After the investigation, the Type 1 team was disbanded by the Great Basin directors' board.  The NPS has set standards limiting the number of inexperienced people on a Type 2 crew.  the Lurker FMO
12/16	Ab, Dave, Doug Campbell-- Dave, Ab, what is S-290? Where can I go or who can I call to find out about it?  I found some refs for Countryman, Rothermal, Albini, Burgan, and Andrews from your list, Dave. (For others who are interested, check out the references sections of the articles at www.wildfiremagazine.com/safety.shtml). I'm starting to wade through it. Pretty impressive science and seems like some of it provides the foundation for the CPM. But it seems to me IMHO that the CPM has the purpose of letting the firefighter facing the fire now have a logical, practiced, and communicable (ooooew, that sounds dangerous) approach to evaluating a situation that might save her life.  Can't wait to visit the Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station, if they allow visitors.  To Doug Campbell--the term "flamomamanometer" (or whatever it's spelling) put me off a bit, too, when I read it; then I realized that you were probably overcome by a moment of whimsy (even at your age!). Personal stories and humor do make the "how to" and "why" science stuff more palatable. Heading down to the Storm King memorial to hike the mountain with some new firefighter friends over vacation. Thanks for FOTM, Mr. Maclean. Thanks also for the links to refs that accompanied your post about FOTM, Ab.  Have a wonderful holiday everyone-- Mellie from Five Waters
12/15	I guess Dave hasn't much of a sense of humor.  I lost 28 of my friends in predictable burnovers during my career.  It made me think that there was something more that needed developing.  To those firefighterswho walked into Hell I dedicated my work.  To those who have avoided the danger I take my hat off.  They must know something worth while. I found that the existing fire training could stand a little practical improvement, so I wrote CPS.  I made an offer to the Govt. to work on the ideas while in service and they elected to pass. The only way I could develop the course and book was to fund it myself.  After the initial investment I set the costs to recover the expense like any other business. Does that bother you Dave? The Ventura County Fire Dept. assisted me to that end.  Since then many departments have adopted this training program into their training programs. Since 1995, 90% of 2500 students rated the course very useful.  How do the course evaluations of S-290 compare? I am sure not everyone wants to look at things from a different angle and Dave expressed his preferences loud and clear.  That is OK with me. Go ahead and confine your understanding of wildland fire to the presentations within S-190, S-290 and so on. CPS does not disagree with the course content of those courses. It is just another take on how fire behavior was determined  and the tactics were selected from the perspective of an old dog who accumulated a lot of wildland fire experience.  If you don't like that, fine. Doug Campbell
12/15	To M, While I don't know your circumstances here are a couple avenues you may check on. 1) The Public Safety Officers' Benifits Act is compensation for in the line of duty deaths and in 1999, paid $143,943 for the loss of life due to a trumatic injury on the job.  In 11/13/98, the act was ammended to also include Educational assistance.  More info can be obtained by calling the toll freee # 888-744-6513, or 800-688-4532.  I also recommend a word search @ usdoj.gov. 2) I believe in California there is a stipulation that survuving children of a public safety officers, killed in the line of duty, are entitled to a free education at a CA State University.  I don't have all the specifics, just remember reading a couple months back about an air tanker pilots son fighting to get it as his dad was a contractor not a public safety officer, but I believe he ended up recieving it. Good Luck,j
12/15	Does anybody have the real story about an article that was posted on Firehouse.com website on 15 Dec 99 about the BLM crew that was almost overrun and the OSHA fines?   The author said they were inexpierenced...Is this true or was the author making suppositions? Doorsmaurer
12/14	Well, it took me a while to think about John Maclean's reply to me about the SC fire, and if he's going to leave the discussion I might be wasting time, but I have a few thoughts. Maclean's reply ignored my thought that the SC fire had some really good hands on scene and things might well have been so busy at the Grand Junction office that Robertson may have been tending to legitimate business there.  He also didn't give any reply when I asked him what reason he had to think that things might have gone differently if Robertson were there (besides other fires on the district being neglected), especially given the expertise that was already on hand at the fire.  I'd have liked those things addressed, but I made the points to show that there were some things that Maclean didn't know about how things work. And any fed that's ever given an award to an employee knows that it would be just about impossible give one to yourself.  You'd have to forge it. Maclean went on to accuse the Colorado BLM of stonewalling and hammered them for stating that employees should not argue with him and should stay on the high ground when responding to questions about his book.  I didn't see anything to support the stonewalling accusation, but I don't think it's a bad thing for the agency not to argue with him and to try to stay on high ground.  There's nothing to be gained by arguing between Maclean and the BLM.  I agree that it was appropriate that the state director and the head of BLM Colorado's fire program were both forced to retire after the SC fire. Maclean said that he wrote his book "for the Kathy Brinkleys of the world, not the  Winslow Robertsons."  I hope that my position that Maclean's book suffered because he is unfamiliar with the way things work in the fire world doesn't give the impression that I don't care deeply about the victims of the SC fire and their counterparts across the country.  I've set myself in my job to doing everything I can to prevent anything like the SC fire from happening on my watch.  But it doesn't do the victims (or anyone) any good to pick a scapegoat in anger, based on speculation. I would imagine that it's very frustrating to be deeply involved in a project that is important to you and others, and yet find that some possibly crucial information is withheld.  But in this case, I don't it's right to speculate that there are malicious or suspicious reasons that Robertson wouldn't talk with Maclean.  I can think of a number of reasons that Robertson might have felt he didn't want to talk any more; he's been through a lot.  He'd lost friends at that fire, he'd been heavily scrutinized by the BLM, OSHA, his peers, his subordinates and himself.  He may not have had a reason to think that there was anything to gain from talking with Maclean.  Maclean himself observed that Robertson is known to be quiet and reserved.  Maybe this is a cheap shot, but in "Young Men and Fire" Wag Dodge's reticence wasn't held against him. I believe I've seen some speculation in Maclean's book and his posts to this site, and I also think that Maclean seems angry at Robertson.  I'm not sure that Maclean would have been impartial if Roberston had spoken to him. As I said before, that doesn't take away from the many, many fine and accurate writings in "Fire on the Mountain."  I guess I'd just like readers to keep an open mind, and remember that understanding what happened is a difficult and complicated process - the SC fire was a difficult and complicated situation. Wish that had been shorter, the Lurker FMO
12/14	can you tell me where i could recieve survivor benifits info. my daughters father was a smokejumper and were estranged , she wants to go to college. are there any funds set up for her aid. he had no life insurance or will set up. thank you , M Survivor's benefits depend on several issues and I'm not really qualified to answer many of them, but here is the official Office of Personnel Management's benefits site http://www.opm.gov/asd/index.htm.  I'm not aware of any separate funding established outside an individual's retirement program.  Here's a link to the US Fire and Aviation Management page which has several smokejumper sites, http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/infodir.shtml.  You may also contact the personnel department of the Forest he last worked, an index of Forests may be found here, http://www.fs.fed.us/links/forests.shtml.  Ab.
12/13	The Top Ten reasons why there is questionable science involved in the Campbell Prediction System. 10.   “ The sunlit fuels give off steam as they heat.”  9.   “ they (firefighters) think that the fuel is not changing flammability hour by   hour, and is not of varied flammability.”  8. “ The conversion of thermal energy in the atmosphere to other forms of energy,  and vice-versa.” 7. “ The fuel flammability varies over terrain, but the humidity is considered constant.”  6. “ Fuel temperature is as measurable as air,” 5. “ I have … written a fire behavior language.” 4. “ …on a fuels-type fire, it is quickly evident that the topography and weather are secondary factors.” “ Wind forecasts are important because a change in wind will dictate the direction of spread and spotting distance.” 3. “(he) took temperature and humidity readings each hour logging them in his notebook. He was looking for a correlation between the humidity readings and the fire’s extreme behavior. He deduced that when the humidity readings were in the teens, the fire behavior could become extreme.   On the other hand , I was looking for the time and aspect relationship, trying to find the time and aspect when the fire became extreme.” 2. “The smokes had increased as the peak burning period for the day approached. I remember thinking , ‘ I bet the humidity hasn’t changed much. ‘ “ And the number one reason CPS has questionable science is one word, 1.  “Flamma-namma-momometer” I have no doubts that Mr. Campbell knows his fire behavior.  But it is not new, nor is there a need for a confusing , confounding language (unless you are trying to sell something) these ideas and languages are covered in publications by bonafide research scientists.  I invite anyone out there to study Clive Countryman’s work, Richard Rothermal’s work, Frank Albini’s work, or Jack Dieterich, Steve Sackett, Bob Mutch, Bob Burgan, Deming, Cohen, Andrews, Bradshaw, the list goes on and on and I regret I can’t recall them all.  Look at S-190, S-290, Look up, Look Down, Look Around etc.  There is already in place a way to communicate fire behavior changes, to determine which slopes and aspects will burn the hottest and when they will.  My thanks to Mr. Campbell for his insights but I will stick to nationally accepted terminology and prediction systems. Dave
12/13	Ab,   I haven't had a chance to read Mr Maclean's book,I would that I can find it here in  my area soon so that I might.  I would like to praise Mike's comments and add that with all the commentary that this has gotten(both good and bad)it will make everyone think about their safety.If this saves one life it is worth all the attention it gets. As always,I would like to praise your site and say that I commend you on the way that you try to keep it fair and openminded whether the comments are good or bad. Everyone please have a safe and happy holiday let's remember those that have gone before us and the brothers that are still here having to deal with the loss.   Keith
12/10	Ab, I just read your thoughts of "Fire on the Mountain" and found on many points you are right in my ever so humble opinion. As the book points out there were mistakes made at every level on the incident, from those on the line, who lost their lives for their mistakes to upper management of the incident who have to live with the outcome of those mistakes everyday of their life. I hope that we all do not have the need to point fingers and place blame in one direction, there were numerous mistakes made and no one person can accept the full blame. Bringing  these mistakes to light can prove to avert a tragedy in the future by placing the  ultimate responsibility for safety on each and everyone of us, be it on the line or in a position in overhead. We all play a vital part in the safety of ourselves and everyone else on a incident. For my second thought on your review my opinion differs from yours. To attack the author for writing the book is wrong. At no time did the author say that he was a authority on fire but instead stated that he relied on the help of people that were either involved at the incident or had a background in the fire field. He did offer his opinions on certain matters but guess what, its his book and in so, he took the time to research, and to find out what facts he could and deserves to stae his own thoughts. The entire story will never be told because one can only speculate what happened in those final moments. The only ones that can tell the entire story are gone and there will always be questions that we can only speculate about. The fact that it has drawn so many different responses to your commentary speaks for itself. NO, its not the final answer to all the questions evolving from the tragedy but it has sparked many folks to take a look again at what happened and my hope is that in the future it will be the catalyst for folks to engage their minds before taking on assignments that go directly against their training. Lets face it, at one time or another if one fights enough fires, eat enough smoke, we all will undoubtedly find ourselves going against what we have been taught. Yes, we all know that we should not do it but to say that we have not taken on assignments that went against one aspect of our training or another would be a misrepresentation of facts and a lie to ourselves. I applaud you for your remarks and thoughts regarding this subject. I also applaud Mr. Maclean's book, his research and time spent to offer some more pieces of the puzzle. The final word from myself on this book and the remarks that it has brought about would be this. "Anything that is written that brings attention to the safety of firefighters is worth its weight in gold!" It has done just that and in turn I hope that everyone including myself thinks before going against what we have been trained. My only hope is that there is never another need for such a book because for that to happen would mean that more folks will have lost their lives. I certainly hope that lessons will be learned and that future tragedies can be averted by all of us continuing to train, practice what we have been taught and that we never forget those that have lost their lives. Happy holidays to all and trust yourselves folks, its the one constant that we can rely on, ourselves and our gut instincts. If it does not look safe it probably isn't. Mike
12/08	Ab, my apologies if I've offended you with my remarks about the scanner. My intentions were good, however the one-liner was obviously misunderstood. Apparently, I should put more consideration into presenting my 'serious' side, rather than attempting to humor you which was my original intent. The scanner works fine, I've not had an inkling of a problem; I'm a happy customer and now an owner (for the second time) of a quality scanner. Lighten-up. firegirl Thanks for the clarification.  Ab.
12/08	we just looked at your webpage.  looks great.  wasatch helirappellers Hey there rope people.  Don't wear out your welcome now, hear?  Ab.
12/07	For dave..in a mesage 12/6 you stated :.  "CPS is seat of the pants and although a good tool has some questionable science behind it." Was just wondering what you are refering to in questionable science? For John Maclean  (and yea, I had to go back and check the spelling!) Thanks for taking the time to comment here. No matter who, how or if parts of the government improves safety practices, at least I for one have definitly improved my line safety awareness. Ab,  ...my copy of FotM I purchased is now on to its 4th reader.  :)
12/07	To Dave and Wp, I need to clarify some things so I'm not here under false pretenses.   Mellie is my real name, I am a woman, and Five Waters is the location of our ranch on the New River (downriver from Denny CA). I am not a firefighter as you are. I did not have a crew leader to rely on to read the signature of the fire I fought. However, I feel a kinship with you who fight fire as your life's calling. I have a strong commitment to firefighter safety. I also have a desire to understand your situation to better understand the changes I have gone through since August. I, like some 8,000 of you, participated in suppression of the Onion/Megram fires. (Map at firegirl's link.) I was in its smoke for 73 days, most of it alone, except for my scanner and the firefighter friends I came to know and love. Again, I want to say thanks to you all. The Big Bar Fires started on Aug 23 as a result of lightening. The Onion Fire burned down Big Mountain (that overlooks our valley) to New River on Five Waters' eastern boundary. It was always smoky. The Sacramento Hotshots from NM conducted burnout operations on Sept 6 that came onto our land on the eastern side of the river. As it turned out, that containment line of the Onion held and signaled its end.  Over the next weeks, the Fawn and the Megram burned together in the Salmon-Trinity Wilderness just north of Denny. Base camp for the complex was at Big Bar. A spike camp had been set up in Denny and then another camp was established in Orleans. (Later there would also be camps at the Hoopa Reservation and Willow Creek).  Containment lines at Quimby Creek near Denny held for quite a while. But the fire, one that was mostly fuel-dominated and burning under an inversion, continued to grow to the north, the northeast (site of the '87 Klamath fires) and northwest near Orleans on the Salmon River. Because of the inversion, it was almost as active at night as during the day.  On Sept 27, Denny spike camp was closed. Shots, crews, and equipment were moved  to Groves Prairie and Grizzly Camp to be nearer to the blowdown on Devil's Backbone. Others went to Burnt Ranch on the Trinity River and to Orleans on the north side. Late that afternoon, the Megram fire (now to the north of Five Waters) blew up into the blowdown and spotted, some spots flying 2.5 miles away to the west into Horse Linto Creek and Tish Tang drainages. Scary situation. Grizzly Camp at the wilderness edge was evacuated. Groves Prairie was evacuated in the middle of the night and a Hoopa man died from cardiac arrest. That began the fire's new and dangerous spread west and south into extremely wild and vertical country. My concerns for my friends' safety were heightened when the IAP's began to contain messages that the glue in fire shelter seams could ignite at certain high temperatures. The message was clear--firefighters should not rely on their shelters, except as a last resort.  On Oct 6 we had a quarter of an inch of rain, and some thought the end of the fire was near. Often by this time of year, the winter storm pattern has started with its drenching deluge. Many firefighters were demobed, including Larry Wright, our Branch Super who had been with us residents since the beginning and had taught us all a lot about this fire and how people stay safe. On Oct 16 after days of drying, we had another wind event. The fire came over Happy Camp Mountain ridge, jumping the containment line at DP16 and into Five Waters watersheds from the west. At this time, firefighters and resources were scarce, as many had been called up to Redding to fight the fast-moving fires there. A firefighter friend who was a single mom died at that fire. I still find myself in tears when I think of her young daughters growing up without her guidance. Then I think of the Colorado Interagency Crew who didn't know her but immediately put out a can for donations to help her family with expenses. The big-heartedness of your fire family is moving. At that time, not just the fire, but the whole situation felt incredibly BIG, out-of-control-and ripe for more deaths. My brother came for 2 days to help mark off dozer lines that were made down our ridgetop (from DP49). Within days, the first arms of fire backed down Bell Creek to the Denny Road, which had become the final containment line. Fire was encircling us. Our mailbox is the place where my brother and I fought fire for some hours one evening, as I mentioned in the first post I made to this website.  Some of us residents called Larry Wright at home. He came back the next day. Feelings of death receded, but the danger was still there. For a while, the situation was even more taxing as the fire backed down to the Denny Road along its 15-mile length, from DP47 (the "Onion Saddle"). Larry, Brian Ramsey (Denny Division super) and most of the firefighters (and camp crew) didn't get much sleep those days. Many worked round the clock. The 16 men and women (Shasta-Trinity Strike Team with Ron Armstrong and engine 5771 from Klamath) who slept on my floors came in at midnight or one, if they were lucky, and were up and gone by 5:30 in the frost and smoke. Some nights they brought home strays or didn't come back at all. One engine was decommissioned and another damaged in a rockslide at Panther Slide before the road was closed above and below our mailbox. Another engine stayed on duty all night to make sure the road stayed closed and people stayed safe. That night we had new people-those cut off short of Denny camp by the road closures. I finally understood watchout 18, the one that had seemed so silly when I first read it--about taking a nap near the fireline. When the fireline is everywhere around, you don't sleep or nap, and you're exhausted.   As you all know with your fire stories, this one goes on and on. Branch and hotshots hooking a slopover onto our driveway, fire heading for the retirement community of Hawkins Bar, experiences at Willow Camp with Team 3 after the rain, fire camp at Pooky on the reservation. BAER team efforts interspersed with logging cleanup.  And then there's the end of the fire and trying to reintegrate one's life into family, work, and the non-fire world. There's the edginess, the fire thoughts, the recall of the emotion I never felt before and don't want to forget, and the trivia that everyone else seems to think is important.  I walked through the mall last weekend and didn't have a fire thought for at least 6 minutes. Making progress… Thanks for the website, AB. Mellie from Five Waters PS  To work off the edginess, I'm putting together a photoarchive of the fire. If you have some special photos and/or a story, e-mail me at five_waters@hotmail.com
12/06	I have not visited the site in the past few weeks and just took the time to  catch up.  Interesting discussion of MacLeans book, I will have to read it.  But I saw a comment from 5 Waters Mellie that just got me going.  In Her  (His?) posting of 12-5, Watch Out #13, she/he takes a shot at logistics at getting food to a spike camp late.  Yes, I know it happens, but from one who  has worked both ends of the fire, I can tell you that sometimes just getting  food to a spike camp is a major feat in it self.  If you want a hot meal at  the same time each night, then carry an MRE with a heater or find another  job.  I was at Big Bar with the first team in, and for those on the line it might  of seemed like every thing worked like it was supposed to.  But I will tell  you it took people working 18 hours a day and only getting paid for 16 to  make it happen.  For all you ground ponders out there that think the people  in camp have an easy time, think again.  While all you have to do is put in  your shift and get a meal, shower and some rest.  It takes a 24 hour a day  operation to make it happen. When I work a camp job I cover more miles in  camp then I would do on the line.  Most camp folks work 16 hour days or  longer, when you are sleeping we are working.  We are up to make sure the  kitchen will have breakfast at 0430, and the hot cans are ready at 0300 so we  can get the trucks loaded and out.  We are up till 2300 to 2400 to insure  that tomorrow's supply order is ready when you are.  I could go on and on, I  could tell you how it was in the "old days" but won't, but I will say that  the way fires are managed today , the food and facilities provided are  greatly improved.  I do not want to go back to the "good old days." I do want to say that the food at Big Bar, for at least the first three  weeks, was consistently the poorest I have ever experienced in my 20 plus  years of fire fighting!  I did express my opinion to the log chief more then  once but it did not help much.  Wp
12/06	To Lurker FMO   Your informed speculation may be an adequate answer as to why Winslow  Robertson failed to go to the fire on July 6; the IC, Butch Blanco, was on  the fire and there were plenty of "fresh eyes" around, notably Tom Shepard. I  have tried to check out this matter myself and have only speculation as an  alternative; I won't offer it because I can't prove it.   But it is a good question, one I would have liked to have discussed with  Robertson. In one of his interviews with OSHA, Pete Blume was asked about the  general practice in the Grand Junction district of an FMO visiting fires.  Blume replied that in past years he always went to fires of 10 acres or more  himself to see if the IC was having problems, and to acquaint himself with  the general situation (FOTM, p. 157). During the 1994 sason, Blume was too  busy to go. Fair enough. (FMO: You refer to my estimate that by July 6 the  district had many troublesome fires; I would note as well the more searching  analysis earlier in the book, pps.20-21, showing that the number of real  fires on the district was a handful, nothing like the 40 later claimed by  Blume).   So why didn't Robertson go to the fire if Blume was tied up? If there's a  simple answer, why don't we have it from Robertson, and under circumstances  where he could be questioned on that and other matters?   Let's broaden the discussion for a moment so we don't get hung up on one  item.   The general conduct of the BLM on this fire was sufficiently awful that Bob  Moore, Colorado state director for the BLM, was forced to retire as a  consequence: that's a solid fact (FOTM, pps. 225-6). Blume and Robertson, to  the contrary, received pay raises and a congratulatory memo in public -- the  memo, FMO, was signed by Blume, among others, undermining your argument that  Blume and Robertson simply had money and glory thrust upon them.   The Colorado BLM has refused comment on any factual matter regarding my  book including the disparity between the treatment of Moore and the two  others, and instructed its personnel not to comment (Blume, to his credit,  has taken several reporters' telephone calls).   Many people made mistakes on this fire. Some died for their errors; others  sat down afterward and went over what happened with me, not an easy task.  Telling the story makes a difference.   "I don't think there's such a thing as healing," Kathy Brinkley said five  years after the death of her son, Levi, on Storm King. "I think you just, you  learn to live with it ... You think of it every day, but it's not that  gut-wrenching deal it was at first. It's there all the time. It's always in  the back of your mind.    "For us, if they would have come out and said, 'We really screwed up and  made a mistake; we shouldn't have done this; it was our fault.' We would have  been able to go on a lot easier. But you know the government."   That's the difference: it would be easier for people to move on.    While some within the BLM took the consequences of their actions (Rich  Tyler and Butch Blanco come to mind), the Colorado state office of the BLM  decided in early August of this year, before my book was printed let alone  put on bookstore shelves, to stonewall it. They sent memos around accusing  the book of being nothing but "insinuations ... allegations ... opinions,"  and instructed BLM personnel not to answer questions about it.    Barb Perkins, author of at least one of the memos, has been quoted in the  Glenwood Post as saying the BLM learned about the contents of the book  "through the grapevine."    "We are aware the book names specific people and makes  insinuations/assumptions that are his opinion," one of the memos with Perkins  name on it said . "We do not want to get into the trenchs [sic] arguing with him about his opinions and want to stay on high ground in responding to  questions about his book."   If I had a similar "grapevine standard" for Fire on the Mountain, the book  would be in trash cans and law courts. Similar exercises in stonewalling in  big-name cases like Waco and Ruby Ridge have led to unpleasant consequences  for the federal government -- a loss of credibility, as Kathy Brinkley's  remarks show, and violent rage. I' m not violent, but I'm mad as hell.   I wrote Fire on the Mountain for the Kathy Brinkleys of the world, not the  Winslow Robertsons.    FMO and Mike: I appreciate the remarks that you have addressed to me, and I  have tried to take them in the serious manner they were offered. Now I'm  going to leave the discussion on this website to you and the others, at least  for a while. You will make the difference as to whether the lessons of the  South Canyon fire save lives.   Sincerely, John N. Maclean
12/06	The first thing I would like to bring up today is that we should all take a  moment of silence for the 6 firefighters in Worchester , Mass . The way I understand it is they were told they were homeless people living in the warehouse and 2 went in for search and rescue, at some point the mission went bad and they radioed out for help and the next 4 went in to help, moments later the floors collapsed.  The warehouse was a total loss and I'm sure it will be a while before any recoveries can be made.  The  entire firefighting community feels your loss, our thoughts are with you. To Mellie, 1. yes the guvmint at any level , federal, state, county or city all have their  own agendas and priorities and occasionally they don't include firefighter safety. Firefighting is inherently dangerous enough without politics entering into it.  2,3,4,5 you are correct. 6. People in operations tend to be hardheaded and whether we are going west to east, or east to west there are different styles, priorities, confidence levels,  being or becoming familiar with terrain and fuels and weather at the local level. " We don't do it that way here"  7,8 Some folks have an idea that that won't happen to me or anyone on my shift, and as a result put tasks and timelines over the importance of  firefighter safety.  9. You have to use the right tool for the right job. Farsite is cool as you suggest but its uses are for long range fire predictions in basically a beneficial natural fire scenario,' how long can we let this fire burn  before it reaches a boundary '.  CPS is seat of the pants and although a good tool has some questionable science behind it.  Yellow meter and shadow meter, OK.  As you learn more about fire behavior and its prediction you need to constantly monitor the fire behavior triangle to assess when and where fires will grow.  As to when to use the escape routes and safety zones this can be communicated to you by the LCES process . The lookouts could call you and tell you the fire is making a run at your position get to the safety zone, or you may see the smoke column turning black and bending your way, the warning may come from air  attack or it may come from your gut.  On the Butte fire in 1985 (70+  shelter deployments) several crews got to the safety zone when humidities  dropped below 21 percent. Mellie, hopefully your  crew leader has developed a sense for fire behavior, but  by all means develope yours. It takes training, it takes experience and it takes a commitment to  firefighter safety. Dave
12/06	Hello and Hi, This being my first year in fire was the best summer I ever had.  About a month before I reported to work I read MacLeans book and kind of freaked myself out.  A couple of weeks into the season we as a crew were given a synopsis of the south canyon incident.  It was stressed to us that at any time should we feel that the situation was too unsafe that it was ok to voice our opinions or refuse the assignment.  I was blessed with a kick ass crew boss and did not once feel unsafe.  It is to my CB's credit and those who trained him that I want to be a career wildland firefighter.  I'm sure there will be close calls but Watchout and Fire Orders are always in my mind.  I think that I worked for some of the best overhead the whole season long.  I'm really trying to say that overhead like any other pool of people will have the odd bad appple, and I was fortunete not to get any of them.  any way thanks for having this page and if you can tell a guy named Dutt from STF R-5 that he did a kick ass job.  thank you ps I diddn't spell check sorry
12/05	It hasn't been a banner headline on the national news, but 6 Mass.  firefighters lost their lives in a warehouse fire on Friday.  Four gave their  all in a search and rescue attempt when two of the brethren called for help. John Marker
12/05	Abercrombie- more questions What is IHMO? These translations and questions are especially for Dave if he is willing…. Good one about the camel. So is this what the 13 watchouts mean in non-fire language?- WATCHOUT FOR 1. Politics entering into command decisions. (This might be a watchout, but might happen if the IC Team/US govt has to interact with another sovereign nation, such as with an Indian reservation. Does it happen in other cases?) 2-4. You're briefed on a plan then the line officer changes that or ops changes that or you (and others) don't have a record of the plan. 5. Division super doesn't know what's going on first hand.  6. (Significant part of Operations overhead is two time zones or farther away from home.)  Does this mean that Ops comes from a region that is so far from the fire that he or she doesn't know the territory? Or does it mean that Ops is located someplace other than incident command base leading to potential communication problems? If it's the first, is this a problem? I know, Ab, that you've said it helps to have shots and crews experienced in the local terrain. I guess that could apply to overhead, as well. 7-8. (Your assignment includes obvious fireline "Watch Out!" situations which are not addressed during briefing. Your questions about how Standard Fire Orders can be observed in your assignment are answered in terms of important tactical tasks or timelines instead of firefighter safety.)  I never experienced these on the Denny side of the Megram. We really got the sense of safety coming from the top down.  But yeah, if these actually are true sometime, a cynic might think that, in those cases, the 10 and 18 exist so as to have something to point to in order to blame firefighters and avoid tort in the case of a screw-up or burnover.   9. I still don't understand how you know exactly where escape routes and safety zones should be if you don't know how the fire is going to behave--like its rate of spread and direction. I mean, Farsite is cool, but doesn't predict local fire activity on the ground during the course of a day except in a general way, does it?  And when do you decide to escape? Is there any other system besides CPS that lets fire fighters evaluate fire behavior to determine these things? I'd appreciate any references or links to alternatives… 10. Should this one bother us-except that training processes in unknown agencies is unknown?  11. Scary, a leader with no plan! Thanks in advance for any insights, Mellie from Five Waters IMHO is an acronym for "in my humble opinion", there are many more in use, mainly in the newsgroups.  BTW, as another example is "by the way".  Here's a pretty good glossary which contains the most common: http://www2.wave.co.nz/~douaine/glossary.htm  Ab.
12/05	Thanks for the 13 Overhead Watchout Situations, Dave (and Dean).  I have 12 and 13! I'll ask some questions about some of the other ones later.   12. The ops officer tells your night branch and division super (who have been the day branch and day super all day long as the fire backs down to the line in many places) to be sure and get some sleep! (Now, isn't he supposed to be the one to assign overhead for the night shift?) 13.Logistics gets food to Spike Camp 2 hours late, resulting in the night shift being 2 to 3 hours late for shift change. In the meantime, residents fight fire at their mailbox… (In hindsight, I'm glad we had the experience. Of course, if I were dead, I might feel differently! Or not…feel.) REGARDING THE DIALOG I am still here-lurking and watching the current fireworks. PHEW! I commend YOU ALL for the dialog. It's clear that you all care for each other and are passionate about what you think and do.  John Maclean, I thank you for bringing your father's book to press and I thank you for Fire on the Mountain. Many people I know were hurting because friends had died. You opened the door to the current dialog, which, in spite of its fiery character, seems healing.  Abercrombie, THANK YOU for the forum. I REALLY like your writing, even if it is a little less than PC at times! My emotions in reading this stuff have alternated between "Wow, this fire will help the woods" to "Shit, here comes another snag rolling over!" It's clear that participants in this dialog speak with the integrity of their experiences and understanding. Such a process can only illuminate the dark corners for all of us. I feel honored to be allowed to lurk! Or speak! as the case may be. Mellie from Five Waters
12/04	Mr. Maclean, I don't know if I would fit your definition of a fire expert, but I'll take a crack at your questions.  I can think of a few reasons why Robertson wasn't at the scene of the SC fire - but keep in mind that these reasons are supposition...as are any faults on Robertson's part that you might surmise.  Neither of us has talked to Robertson about it - which is a pertinent point if we are going to try and arm-chair quarterback about what he was thinking. One thought that comes to mind is that Robertson wasn't the IC - Blanco was, and Robertson may have had faith and trust in Blanco to handle the fire.  As you know, that SC fire wasn't the only one on the district.  Just because it was the number one priority doesn't mean it gets all the attention - the other fires can't go without any attention.  The office has the radio, and Robertson's bosses (the FMO and the line managers) are there and perhaps they needed some of Robertson's time.  I don't know that this happened, but for instance, the district manager may have wanted a briefing on the district-wide situation,  or the FMO may have asked Robertson to stay there to coordinate the needs and resources between all the fires. A fire staff member can't be everywhere on their turf during a bust like Grand Junction was undergoing at the time.  That's why fires have ICs - to oversee the fireline operations for the fire staff. We have the luxury of hindsight to know how the day turned out, but no one I've talked with (and I've talked with a lot of those people) expected the fire behavior that occurred.  Whether people should have expected it or not is a different topic that we can address if you want (and I'd like to). But since no one expected it, I can see how Robertson may have been augered into the office trying to sort out and deal with the millions of coordinational and operational problems that existed on the Grand Junction district at that time.  From your book: "There were plenty of big, troublesome fires on (Grand Junction) district on July 5,..." A total of thirty-six.  Fire staff like Blume and Robertson are responsible for ALL those fires, not just the number one priority.  I happen to think that they erred big-time in not having ordered enough managerial-type help, but your (condescending and presumptuous) question was "what was so interesting in the office?" You mentioned that the fire "needed a fresh pair of eyes."  On the day of the disaster, the Prineville Hotshots and a second load of jumpers arrived at the fire.  28 fresh pairs of eyes - how much fresher can it get?  A hotshot superintendent is generally acknowledged to be an astute fire hand. The jumper load had a spotter, who is virtually always a very experienced and fire-savvy person (and that one was - you can take my word).  The spotter can be (and usually is) asked to stay over the fire and size it up from the air for the troops.  My point is that there was a LOT of expertise on scene at the fire, and Robertson may have felt that with all that fire savvy there, he could attend to the nagging details that were undoubtably hounding him in the office. Look at it this way, there was a well-regarded Type 3 IC, two loads of jumpers, a local helitack crew, and a hotshot crew on scene.  If I were in Robertson's place and wasn't expecting highly unusual fire behavior that day, I can see how I would think that a roughly 125 acre fire had some capable people with good fire skills looking after it.  Given all that, what reason do you have to think that Robertson would have had things done any differenly if he were at the fire (besides neglecting all the other fires on the district)?  Hindsight is 20-20. As to the awards, you might keep in mind that Blume and Robertson didn't give themselves the awards - the district management did.  I agree with you that Robertson and Blume made mistakes, but as I pointed out in an earlier post, your lack of understanding of how things work in the fire world has hurt your assessment of responsibilty and blame.  And the tone of your questions about Robertson and Blume lead me to confirm my earlier observation that you're looking for an easy focus to the blame.  However, I also feel that doesn't invalidate your entire book - I thought it held some very fine insights and I appreciate the work you put into it.  I tell everyone I know to read it - I just think you got a few things wrong. For the record, I strongly believe in accountability at fires...for everyone.  Scapegoating someone does not achieve accountability if others' responsibility is overlooked. Lurker FMO
12/04	I've been following the dialogue on the J. Maclean book versus real life firefighting and it got me thinking about the past.  The first wildland fire I fought as a rookie firefighter a young man was killed.  It was on the Logwood Fire on the Los Padres NF in July or August of 1973.  His name was Danny Himes (sp).  He died as the result of a terrible fall off a side slope down into Logwood Creek.  He landed hard on the rocks in the creek and sustained major head trauma.  That same night, I was struck in the right leg by rolling rocks which put me out on medical for three weeks.  I've carried that with me for 26 years.  I've often, and I mean often, thought about Danny.  When I enter retirement, I plan to propose a memorial to Danny and the Logwood Fire.  Even if I make something and pack it in, I'll know he's remembered. I applaud both Ab and J. Maclean for the guts to ask why. Groundpig.
12/03	Hi Ab, I can't believe it, you sucker me into buying your scanner (and at a great price!) and you don't even link my page to yours?  A few questions and thoughts:  1--I didn't read your review of Macleans book and I'm not really inclined too either. Why not? I'm not interested in hearing someone arm-chair-quarterback Macleans great piece of work. He did his homework. I can say that because I recall countless phone calls from a great friend of mine (J.K.), who was reading Maclean's manuscript and assisting in all the ways he could, even meeting with John in DC on several occasions. JK was almost as enthralled with the prospect of a quality, well planned and written book as possibly Maclean himself, and he was only one of many, many individuals and groups that Maclean interviewed or seeked out for quality input. Having spent most of his career in various aspects of Fire Mgmt. from the ground-pounding jumper level and up the ranks, JK knows what he's talking about, and was one of us unfortunate brothers and sisters to lose a close friend on that mountain. We demanded answers. Logical, as-true-as-can-be-expected, un-bureaucratically censored answers, and Maclean set out to do just that. My hat is off to this man for dedicating 5 years of his life, and his families life, for making an honest acceptance of our unspoken challenge for answers. Sometimes, IMHO, there are certain things in life that just aren't worth criticizing or trashing, and Macleans book is a piece of work that I don't intend to question. Sure, I have my opinions on some of the text, and there are issues that were not addressed in the book that I would have liked to gain more knowledge of, but given the dedication and commitment put forth in Macleans work, I would much rather sit down with a relaxing cheap glass of wine and read a good book rather than spend my evening pouring through the pages in hopes to find an error or misrepresentation. 2--I would like to hear more about the age 55 issue for arduous redcard qualification in the DOI, anyone have any more information on this subject? I work with someone although for a different agency, who has an arduous qualification on his redcard, and he's 56 and in great physical condition. cheers and happy holidays! (((((:))))) firegirl Yer buying the scanner wasn't linked to my adding your link.  But here it is. . . www.firegirl.net and a permanent link is also been added to the links page.  Is there something wrong with the scanner?  The word "sucker" infers to me that ya don't like it.  If so, ship it back and I'll refund your money.  Ab.
12/03	Here's a serious but lighthearted view of some additional Situations that shout  watch out.  New 13's Here is an anecdote for Mellie from Five Waters: Do you know what a camel is ? It's a horse put together by a committee. Dave
12/03	To Mike   Thank you for your note.   I hope when you do read Fire on the Mountain you will see that the reasons  for the fatalities, as described in the book, are many -- a long line of  errors, no one of which can be blamed directly for the deaths. It is a simple fact that the majority of the fatalities -- 12 of the 14 -- could have been  avoided as late as the time of the blowup on July 6 if the crew on the west  flank fireline had realized how much danger they were in at that moment.     Eric Hipke, the only survivor from that group, says they thought the fire  was going to cross Hell's Gate Ridge behind them; only as they retreated  along the west flank line did awareness gradually come that the fire was chasing them. One man, Rob Johnson, died with his chain saw in his hand.    I still find it sickening that Pete Blume and Winslow Robertson received  pay raises and a congratulatory memo, all done in public, for their role in  that summer's fire season. Those actions are quite a message to send the  families and loved ones of the dead. Blume and Robertson made their share of  mistakes, some of which have never been explained.    Let me ask all you fire experts out there, as one example, Why was Winslow  Robertson in the Grand Junction district office on July 6 until the fire blew  up in late afternoon? Why didn't he visit the scene of the district's No. 1 priority fire, which he had looked at on July 3 and declared to be no  problem?  Isn't that supposed to be an embarrassing situation for fire  experts, having a fire that was declared no problem come back to life, big  enough to be a No. 1 priority?    That fire badly needed a fresh pair of eyes. What was so interesting in  the district office on July 6?     Thanks again, Mike, for your polite interest.       Sincerely, John N. Maclean
12/02	Ab,  ok, Ive stopped laughing at all the flack youre getting about the mclean remarks..you knew it was coming! *L* ..oh well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. My point here is that..THE positive thing here is to get folks to talk about incidents like this. To give folks the knowledge and confidence that they can say no if they feel a tactic or situation is unsafe. Today, I completed the new training package "lessons learned".  This is an excellent course and reccomend it to everyone. The point is not to finger point or find fault in an individual or agency, but to learn from their mistakes.  One comment from the class makes me wonder.  While his opinion was not what is ment by the common phrase, too often I believe it is the case. The public demands and expects alot from firefighters (or any emergency service personnel for that matter) ...so, why is it that we say that they were trained to the "minimum standards" or that all new employees will be trained to the "minimum" standards. There has been much discussion in the past on the difficulty (amoung other things) of getting more advanced training. To say that cost is the reason is a cop out (to me anyway). Why should there be any "fee" associated with a training session aside from fixed costs for books or classroom, meals etc?  If there is a demand for a class, let more folks attend or put on another session!  If its a travel distance problem, put it on locally! It always amazes me that when I put on a formal class and ask around to other agencies to see if they have people who want to attend that I get a look of disbelief when I tell them there is no cost except for meals or lodging for their employees.  pulaski
12/02	Whoo!  Are we having fun now? To Kelly:  While you're right that a person doesn't need to know about fire just to write a book, I would expect someone that called their book "The True Story of the South Canyon Fire" to know an awful lot about fire - or at least enough so that they could understand and analyze complex events that took place.  Isn't knowledge the basis of truth? Maybe Ab didn't write a book, but that doesn't mean he can't criticize one. I'd say that anyone that believes that an author is uninformed doesn't have to write a book before they say so.  I don't mean to put words in Ab's mouth, but I think he was just saying that Maclean didn't know enough about how things work in the fire world to write a book about "the truth" on it. For what it's worth I agree with Ab.  Maclean's strength might be journalism like you say, but when he writes about fire (especially what he wrote), he should know more about fire.  IMHO. Now, on to Spencer:  In the Sadler Report, it tells  how all 10 Fire Orders were broken and 13 of the 18 Situations were compromised.  Shelters were pulled, six people were trapped and treated at a hospital for smoke inhalation, and three of them were kept overnight - two with second degree burns.  If that isn't "trashed," what is?  I have talked with people that were there, and that's what they said.  What did you see that was different from what those people saw? I know the people that did the report and I don't believe there's any speculation in it.  Let us know if you have something to back up your allegation.  I'm also interested why you call the report "flawed."  As far as "one-sided" all the overhead were interviewed as well as the crew that was involved. Lurker FMO
12/02	To:  John N. Maclean  (I) Read your dad's book- nice piece of writing.  Great historical piece, not much in the way of relevance to today's fire management context. With the exception of the safety factors which kill firefighters -which are pretty much timeless. The firefighters and the society of the 1940's were a bit different from today's reality. I haven't had a chance to read your book, so I will have to cough up some bucks and get it. In my ignorance I will have to say that I hope that we can avoid the premise that mere bureaucracy kills firefighters.  Bureaucracy is as much a part of the wildland fire environment as weather and topography. It is the responsibility of every firefighter to read the bureaucracy as they would all the other factors which make up the fire environment.  Until each of us take some responsibility for our own safety, books will continue to be written about tragedies which could have been avoided. Mike
12/01	There is certainly an abundance of thought provoking comments and ideas that  flow from your discussion forum. most of them positive.  I am encouraged by  the knowledge and attitude your responders exhibit and I appreciate your  effort in hosting this discussion medium.  However, with some of the  discussion I've seen here recently, I'm compelled to comment on what I refer  to as "gutter talk by Monday morning quarterbacks".  In regards to the South Canyon Investigation Report, Macleans book "Fire on the Mountain", and the  Sadler Incident Investigation Report, I offer this advice.  Don't believe  everything you read.  I'm not prepared to comment at length but I will say  this.  To call Maclean's book "The True Story of the South Canyon Fire" is an equivocation.  Granted, the storyline is fairly representative of what  happened but many of the details and inferences are simply not true or are  misleading.  As for the Sadler Investigation report and the Lurker FMO  comments I am totally appalled.  First of all, the 10 & 18 were not "trashed"  by any means.  Ask anyone that was there (I was).  The report is terribly  flawed, absolutely one sided, and was wrought by sheer speculation.   I've offered you folks out there my advice.  Its up to you to determine  where the truth lies. Spencer Spencer, my friend, your message is why I'm here.  Cut the bullshit, lies, and half-truths.  Me and the folks here write about what we see and what we hear.  What we are looking for is the truth.  Tell it like you saw it, if you were there.  Ab.
12/01	Good thoughts of yours on the South Canyon tragedy. Some folks may wonder how a  person can refuse an assignment on a fire. But I will tell you that every firefighter out  there has the right to a safe assignment and you should not have to worry about any consequences. A few  years  ago I took the crew over to a lightning bust and we got to our 10 acre fire about 1030 hrs, we  got off the bus and walked down the road to our assignment.  The guy says we want you to catch this  slopover so I look down off the road at the tops of ponderosa, fir and manzanita. The fire was  already doing some intermittent torching. I asked the guy if there was a crew at the bottom working  this way, NO he says, I say Me and these boys ain't goin' down there,   But the IC wants you to.   I say,  where is he, get him over here and he and I will hold hands and go down in there and scout this thing  out. He got the IC on the radio and said if we didn't accept the assignment to go sit in the burn.  Well we did that and within an hour the fire blew out of the canyon and went to 5,000 acres. We pulled a 36  hour shift from a secure anchor point and although we had had a face to face with threatened  disciplnary action, after the blow up that IC sorta avoided me and the crew. YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO A SAFE ASSIGNMENT. FOLLOW THE STANDARDS, LEARN YOUR FIRE BEHAVIOR. DAVE PS Hey Abercrombie your gonna have to quit writing about yourself and your ideas in the third person, it's unnerving. Later.
12/01	On November 27, 1999 a Houston Helicopter crashed in Philadelphia, Mississippi.  Both the pilot, Bob Smith and the mechanic, Hank Landrum were killed.  The week before they had been working fires in Virginia and were in route to Texas to help there.
12/01	Anyone know where I can get a hold of prints of firefighter art by James Reed? If so , please e me at kippmorrill@mindspring.com Thanks in advance Kipp Morrill
12/01	Ab, Here's a little of that heat that people have suggested you'd get over your essay on Maclean and his book. What you wrote was well done in terms of firefighter safety and individual responsibility. If you'd limited your topic to just that, you'd have been in good shape, but you took off into the old-growth poison oak puckerbrush with your attempt at a book review.  You wrote that you'd give Maclean "credit for the research completed and reconstruction of the events leading up to the disaster" and that's kind of you. Considering that he put 5-plus years into his research, you could have maybe put a few more minutes' thought into your essay before trying to paste him. "However, it’s my opinion John N. Maclean doesn’t know and failed to learn enough about the fire suppression organization and firefighters as an entity," you wrote. How much do you think would have been "enough" for him to learn, and when he'd learned "enough," then what? Then he was qualified to write a book? "I think Mr. Maclean’s having a father writing about a similar tragedy forty years prior fail to qualify him to write about this story," you wrote.  AB, BABY, YOU MISS A MAJOR POINT HERE. Your fire experience, while important, does not qualify you to write a book. In fact, it's quite obvious from your writing that you're not qualified to write a book. You can't spell and you can't keep your basic grammar in line. Turn it around now and consider this:  Maclean did not apply for a position on a Type I team here -- he wrote a book. You do fire. He does journalism. Get it? "As part of my own investigation into the causes of the end results of the South Canyon Fire," you wrote, "I’m unaware of anyone applying the existing 10&18 ... "   jeeeeeeeeeeez, Ab, it's a good thing you aren't applying for any journalism jobs in the near future, because five minutes of "investigation" would have shown you what several people have now commented on -- the 10&18 are all over the fire investigations. "Mr. Maclean wouldn’t know an anchor point from a pencil point." Izzzzat right? AB, CLEAR YOUR HEAD of all that smoke you sucked all summer. Think a minute. Maclean makes no pretense of being a firefighter. He wrote a book. He's a journalist. Your attempt to dig on him personally is way off base and outta line. That's like my saying that you wouldn't know a subjunctive clause from a reflexive pronoun. So what? Your lack of writing ability does not make you a lousy firefighter. You wrote that an "excess amount of uninformed, misplaced, insinuations filled far too many pages" of the book. So what would an okay amount of insinuations be? And which insinuations were misplaced? Do you have some informed insinuations you'd like to offer us?  Okay, now I'm done beating up on you and it's warm-and-fuzzy time.  I don't totally disagree with what you wrote, you see. You make several good points. "I believe adequate training was provided these people to prevent this scenario from happening," you wrote. Dead right. Some armchair quarterbacks have said that the people on Storm King Mountain laid all their training down in the dirt and walked right in and killed themselves. That's brutal, but it's one way of looking at it. Others say that individual responsibility for safety is crucial, and we need to all remember to just say no. That's also dead right. Others say that when we supervise, we are responsible for those we supervise. I believe that is also right, and it's clear from your essay that you also believe that.  Think on this, though:   The point of Maclean's book has nothing to do with his father. The point of his book has nothing to do with his knowledge of fire compared to yours. The point of his book was to lay out for us all the facts that are known about the fire and the tragedy and the handling of both. The point of the book is to take a long, cold, hard look at what happened -- in the hopes it won't happen again.  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   Kelly Andersson Whew!  I’m gonn’a pull down my neck and face shield and put on the goggles!  But I ain’t runn’in away and I won’t abandon the line. As the intense heat blazing from my monitor slowly lowers, I take a deep breath ( I knew this was coming).  Even while reading your missive Kelly, yet in the midst of your response, I admit to being enthralled by the syntax of your punishing, yet somehow caring admonishments.  Your words seem to flow. . . "as if golden coins into the coffers of my mind, to be treasured for ever". Who sez I can’t write?  OK, some of it's plagarism.  Now where’s my Strunk and White, damn it? You are correct in one way Kelly, Abercrombie could never write a book, at least not a book about something he never personally experienced.  I’m a firefighter who writes about fires, firefighting, and my intended audience is other firefighters.  I seldom use a spelling tool, my grammar checker quits in confusion before it’s through the first paragraph, and I suffer a distinct lack of having a third party to proofread or a professional (human) editor to check my work for embarrassing mistakes prior to publication.  I live with that.  I encourage, accept, read, and publish all response, critical or positive, for the content on this web site, grammatically correct or not.  This isn’t a site which punishes the readers for writing in all caps or lowercase, for forgetting the correct punctuation, or for misspelled words.  Few folks here regard grammar as a priority, it’s the subject matter that keeps this page alive. While I maintain little hope or desire of becoming a journalist, I’ll point out that I paid $19.20 plus shipping for the pleasure of reading “Fire on the Mountain”.  I feel every person, including myself, who read the book has the right to express their opinion.  I know you do also.  I don’t stray too far from what I know about, that’s why I have a firefighter’s website and not a newspaper website.  I don’t write about the inner functions or working conditions of the upper crust, department infighting, or peons of the Chicago Tribune. As several readers have advised after my posting, I now realize there are a couple more documents applying the 10 Standard Fire Orders and 18 Watchout’s to the South Canyon Fire.  Some of them are far more insightful than my own humble conclusions.  I did not read these articles prior to my own publishing and did not want to, lest they influence or corrupt my own opinions. Can Abercrombie write?  Humph. . . how much has he written over the last two years that you’ve avidly read?  You don’t have’ta love him, you don’t even have to like him.  But if you keep coming back you probably have a sneak’in suspicion he knows what he’s talking about. Abercrombie.
11/30	Ab, About your paper on "Fire on the Mountain"; first, I'd like to commend you for taking a stand that was thoughtful and reflective, instead of just falling lock-step into Maclean's point of view.  You may take a little heat about it, but it's easy to see that you're thinking hard about things, and that's a trait that makes for good firefighters.  Keep thinking - it's something that's good to see in fireline supervisors.  I should probably mention that a number of the people in the book - both on the mountain and in the offices - are/were friends or acquaintances of mine, and some might feel that affects the way I view things.  I think you are onto a crucial point when you say that the firefighters and crew supervisors had a responsibility to take care of themselves.  Maclean's lack of knowledge about how things work in the fire world hurt his writing.  It is easy to blame the office people for everything that happened, but it's a cheap shot.  Lots of serious mistakes were made in the office, and the friction between Grand Juction District and Western Slopes back then was notorious throughout the agency.  But as you pointed out, serious mistakes were made on the mountain as well and it doesn't anyone any good to overlook that.  You have to take everything into consideration if you want to understand. And you have to understand if you want to avoid repeats.  My take on John Maclean is that he's a journalist, interested mostly the story from a news aspect.  There's nothing really wrong with that, but he certainly lacks the insight, compassion, and involvement of his father's writing.  Norman Maclean's book on Mann Gulch focused on the human tragedy and loss - instead of who screwed the pooch.  Norman Maclean had a much, much deeper understanding of the people, their work, and their lives, and he tapped into the mystery and tragedy of their passing.  John Maclean lacked that - he just wanted to blame someone.  Your analysis of the 10 & 18 was really good.  But were you aware that the 10 & 18 were addressed in the South Canyon Fire Investigation?  It wasn't completely indepth, but you can find it starting on p.30.  And the jumper Tony Petrilli did a compelling analysis of the 10 & 18 in his 8/10/94 written statement to the South Canyon Fire investigators.  You can read it in the Appendix of the South Canyon Fire Investigation.  Comparing his analysis to yours is really interesting.  If you need a copy of the report, e-mail me and I'll send one to you.  I'm intrigued at how often the analyses of accidents at fires turn up major violations of the 10 & 18.  I've come to think that if you follow the 10 & 18 closely on the fireline, you're well on your way to heading home safely afterward.  They are probably as good a standard of performance as we have in the fire world.  For a recent example of serious 10 & 18 trashing, check out the Sadler Fire Entrapment report, which can be downloaded at: http://www.blm.gov/nhp/Preservation/FireSuppression/index.htm Work safe, the not-such-a lurker FMO
11/30	Regarding your comments to "Fire On The Mountain".  You hit it on the head Ab! ...Lots of things could have been done better eariler in the incident by management...BUT..the final responsibility in saftey lies on each individual and the crew supervisors. Yet that is not to say that management should get off scott free either, I sure hope they have cleaned up their act. I would add to your comments to order #2 however.  Several times the book mentioned how surprised the firefighters were at how well the fire was burning during the night and early in the morning....hello??? how do you think it is going to burn in the afternoon when the sun gets on it??? And also to order #5 and 8. ..and I have never heard of anyone addressing this question..why didnt they put someone on the ridge to the west where they could look back at the big picture and more than likly down in the canyon bottom??  It seems to me I have seen some photos taken from that ridge top and you can see the entire area of the fire top to bottom. and lastly...a bit of advice maybe...CPS CPS CPS!!!   Campbells prediction system. If you dont know what it is, and utilize it...YOU SHOULD!   ( http://www.dougsfire.com/Default.htm ) Dougs way of looking at things is simple and effective, I find it difficult to understand why it isnt required training.   pulaski
11/30	Ab, If no one has taken you up on the offer I'd like to. "Boo" Walker You've got it.  I'll mail it out tomorrow.  Ab.
11/30	Dear Abercrombie:   When you are reviewing a book, and especially when you assign motives to  someone you don't know -- i.e., "Mr. McLean used his father's name to try and  sell books" -- you should learn to spell the author's name correctly. It's  right there on the front of the book.    Sincerely, John N. Maclean Right you are!  Abercrombie is embarrassed, offers his apologies, and has corrected the mistake.
11/30	AB, Read your thoughts on the John Maclean book and South Canyon fire.  I am in general agreement with your thoughts on the book and author.  However, I also re-read the Causal Factors in the South Canyon Fire Investigation Report, which clearly addresses the 10 Standard Fire Orders and 18 Watch Out Situations (contrary to your claim that no one applied them during analysis).  Interestingly, your conclusions are strikingly similar to those in the Report.  Comment? Puffin II I haven't really compared my conclusions to others yet.  Actually, I hadn't read any of the documents I listed at the bottom of the page until after I had completed my own review.  When doing a search for other documents on the same subject to provide alternative opinions, I did notice some similarities.  I expect there will be those who agree with many of my comments, and probably a bunch who won't.  Such is the nature of this site.  Ab.
11/30	Just read your review.  I have not read the book, but have heard of McLean's and other's desire to emphasize the faults of upper management.  Certainly in a  tragedy there is sufficient blame for all to share...... What we need to instill in our firefighters though is an acceptance of the ultimate responsibility for safety on a personal level.  Most certainly the fire will  impose the consequences on  the individual. Our "Standards for Survival" refresher training  is evolving to include more participant scenarios.  I'm anxious for the time when we present a scenario in which the participants recognize unacceptable safety situations, and "just say no" is the correct response.     I still hear stories from folks who have in the past accepted  assignments/tasks that they recognized as unsafe.....but were afraid that saying no  would hurt their career.    Until we move beyond that, we'll keep bringing folks off the mountain in body bags. Again, ultimate responsibility for safety rests with the individual.   Even the best intentioned and best skilled of overhead will miss or not be aware of a site specific condition.   Thanks for sharing your perspective; expect to receive some grief over it. ____________________ Ralph Thank you for your comments Ralph.  Ab
11/29	As promised, here's Abercrombie's perspective on the book "Fire on the Mountain" by John N. McLean.  Ab couldn't read the book without offering his opinion on why he thinks 14 firefighters died on the South Canyon Fire.  Click the link below to see Ab's diagnosis! Ab's Thoughts on "Fire on the Mountain" Ab agrees with other readers who have said every wildland firefighter should read this book, although perhaps not for the same reason.  Ab also sez he will send his copy, free, including shipping to the first person who emails asking for it.  All that he asks is that the receiving person offers the same deal when they are done reading it.  Abercrombie is gonn'a sign his name to the front page inside the jacket and asks that all who follow him do the same.  He doesn't want this book resting on some dusty shelf in some mountain cabin somewhere.  Ab thinks all young firefighters, especially those who are redcarded crew supervisors should read this book.  There are lessons to be learned! Ab.
11/26	Hey AB-- Got the answers to most of my random questions about training. One friend who visited even gave me his old pink card. Are they any redder when they're new? Interesting how categories just get added as one gets better qualified! You can never escape your past. When I asked what happened when they get full, I was told that you don't want that to happen or you never go home. "Overhead" is defined in the red bible and, for gosh sake, any thinking person knows that PPE is personal protective equipment! Friends advised me to study up on my own a little more before I go posting questions to this site. (I think they're concerned that I'll make them look dumb if it ever comes out that we're friends! Plus, I'd be wasting the dispatcher's time and that's a very important position.) I also apologise for the presumptive comment I made about committees and quality control, especially the "IN THEORY" part. My friend reports that committees do work pretty well, in fact much better than the old system, so I stand corrected. I guess Thanksgiving is a day for eating turkey. Seems like I've eaten my share! Hope you all are having a happy holiday! And to absent friends who are still in Georgia, come home safe! Mellie from Five Waters
11/26	I am trying to find good links to fire biogeochemistry.  Any hints? P.S.  It's no fun being female on fire with all those flies buzzing at my bum while using the port-a-toilettes at base camp.
11/25	The Members and Officers of the Mayer Fire District wish to send out a very Happy Thanksgiving to all those that are out doing what we do best . For those working shift today, please be safe and watch yourselves and your partners. In God's Speed, The Mayer Firefighter's
11/25	In (partial) answer to Mellie's (huge) 11/23 list of questions: The 10 & 18 in English:www.fs.fed.us/fire/safety/1018eng.shtml The 10 & 18 in Spanish:www.fs.fed.us/fire/safety/1018spa.shtml Lookouts, Communucations, Escape Routes, Safety Zones: www.fs.fed.us/fire/safety/lces.shtml Why are some hotshot crews training crews? What are they training for? See the Redmond Hotshot website at  www.fs.fed.us/fire/operations/crews/redmond for answers to this.  What is PPE that information people must provide for media and VIP's as appropriate? Most media types, in my experience anyway, get equipped with nomex shirt, pants, hardhat, boots, and a shelter -- IF they are apparently able to handle going out to the actual line accompanied by an IO.  Home units must support the fire system for it to work at an interagency level. Do all home units care? They obviously do not. I'm currently working on a R5 project analyzing the 1999 season's unable-to-fill (UTF) resource orders, and one of the common themes is employees noting that their supervisors did not support their leaving for a fire assignment. The pressure's on for meeting targets and getting the work done on the home unit, and many people have apparently been told that they CAN'T go out on fires. My, how times change. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   Kelly Andersson
11/25	Well I said 1999 would be the year fire season never ended. I just got back from the Blood Complex fires in Ga. A couple of interesting points. Resources are always in short supply. However, it took us two days to get a type II helicopter, thanks to the IHOG requirement the helo's sat at the airport until the full modules arrived. Something has got to be done about this. Also, we finally got two type I crews from out your way. The problem of not being able to carry saws with them is always a hassle, but we got past it. One interesting comment overheard from one of the crews, as the fire made a run up the mountain with 120 foot flames, "I can't believe we came all the way to Georgia and got our ass kicked". Just goes to show it can happen to you anywhere, so be heads up. Hope everyone has a good turkey day holiday. If people are get to bored there's still activity down south. Come see us!! "Boo"
11/23	New version of Firestorm simulation is available at ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/simulatn/fstorm20.zip  THANKS John Daigle Cricket Software
11/23	Abercrombie-thanks for your web page. To the "OLD FIRE GUY" (who probably isn't all that old by non-fire people standards). I did look up the 18 watchouts and 10 standard orders you mentioned. They were noted time and again in the IAP's from the Megram and Onion and I found them on the inside covers of the red bible you guys use (that my fire mentor gave me). I also found them on a card handed out by Bacon's team at the beginning of the Onion Fire--So the info is out there--but do you think through those lists routinely unless you're a Safety or a Hotshot leader? LCES is another mnemonic that I heard, but I can't remember what that stood for-and that's only four things.  When my dad trained up his Boy Scouts to deal with emergency situations, he always stressed having a logical process providing a mental checklist that was automatic when faced with a crisis situation. All I could think of with the snags coming down across the Denny Road (aside from the "wow" and "cool") was that there was some safety list firefighters used that I couldn't remember. I also thought that my dad would have been shaking his admonishing finger at me because I hadn't figured out my system prior to the crisis. So to each firefighter I say (with the appropriate finger action--the index, you guys!) "Do YOU really have a safety evaluation system that works for YOU in any situation?"  Thanks for the NWCG training info. It's 108 pages long! But answered quite a few questions and raised a few more. A few random questions (and you're welcome to tune me out when you reach saturation):   Why are some hotshot crews training crews? What are they training for?  Who is a red-card holder? Obviously necessary but not sufficient, it must be someone under 55! What is a job aid? Some kind of training materials that accompany a trainee into the field? What is PPE that information people must provide for media and VIP's as appropriate? Nomex under another name? >From the dispatcher post: Is Overhead a particular type of resource?  The fireline handbook (red bible) states that the IC approves the use of trainees. Do IC's on small fires even think of trainees? I know from the IAP's that on big fires like ours, there's a certified training specialist (now from the NWCG, I know the name) who prods trainees to get their PTB's in, etc. Right from the start of the Onion, Larry Wright had a safety trainee (we called him "goat-boy", don't tell the human resources specialist! and it wasn't because of his smell, but because of his nimbleness), but I didn't start seeing info about trainees in our IAP's until about a month into the fires.  Who makes the decision about inviting trainees when a call for Overhead first comes in? (I presume that an evaluator on the fire has to be willing to accept a trainee. For how long? Does it have to be for 3 or 2 weeks? Are things chaotic enough at the beginning of an incident that trainees are overlooked until closer to mop-up? What is the incentive to have a trainee?)  The committee idea sounds like a good one for quality control in theory. Does it replace the home unit training specialist or the evaluator, or does it just act on their recommendations? Home units must support the fire system for it to work at an interagency level. Do all home units care? Is this just more work for them in a time of budget crunch? Is there any expectation or incentive from the feds (well, er, I know many of you are the feds, but, you know, the feds with the money.) Seems like downsizing would be a distinct dis-incentive.  To change the subject a little, isn't it unusual that there are currently 5 major incidents (4 fires and one hurricane) happening now. I heard toward the end of the Megram that, of the 17 Type 1 Incident Command Groups,  maybe 8 might be able to field complete teams this late in the season. Now we have 5 major incidents and 5 teams out. Right now it would take only one big earthquake or a few more fires to really land us in deep doodoo. And I see my dad's big admonishing pointer finger being wagged at me (and us) again. Of course, this is probably all common knowledge to you-but I'm a little shocked! (And God, please, with your biggest finger up there, I didn't mean that we should have any more upheval to deal with right now…) I have more questions, but I mustn't wear out my welcome.  Thanks in advance to Abercrombie and everyone else.  Mellie from Five Waters
11/22	Ab, As always thanks for the site.  It is always interesting to say the least.  In regards to Mellie question about fire quals - she can look up the 310-1 at http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/310-1  This site has a section on training, among other things.  It would be nice if we all played by the same set of rules.  Every unit has a little different idea of what it takes to fully qualify a person for a position.  A lot of units don't have a committee to look over task books or training records.  Our unit has recently put together a committee to look over training records and task books, we make a determination on whether the assignments were appropriate for the task.  Just because the reviewer says they recommend that a person be signed off for the position, even if the task book is complete, the committee may decide that the person needs another assignment, either off district or in another fuel type.  We need to make sure that the folks that we sign off on are truly qualified for the position that we are signing them off on.  It is important that the firefighters are fully qualified for the jobs that we are sending them out there to do.  We as an organization need to really come together on this, we need to stop pushing people up the ladder, when they are not truly ready for the next level.  We need to support the firefighters and give them the training and training assignments that they need so that they can do a quality job out there on the line.  Several times this summer when orders came in for Overhead, we had trainees that needed training assignments, and we were turned down when asked if the fire would accept a trainee.  I hope in the future that we will be sending trainees with the qualified folks on a regular basis. Enough of the soap box..... dispatcher
11/22	Here is a pic taken this summer 10/99 of Dan King (Burns Interagency Fire Zone) on the Stonehouse Fire. (OR-BUD-2205). Taken by Steve Morefield (AFMO Suppression) Enjoy. J. Manski burnout.jpg Verrry nice.  Permananet access available from the "Guest3 photo page.  Ab.
11/22	NWCG standards can be found at www.fs.fed.us/fire/310-1/310.1pdf One perspective for a safe assignment:  If any of the 18 "watch out" have not been mitigated, if any of the 10 standard orders are violated.......then just say no, explain why, and stay alive.---Old fire guy.
11/20	Hey, AB,  I couldn't get the web-site e-mail to work, so here it is when I send it the regular way: I'm entirely new to They Said It , but I'd like to understand... With regard to Dave's post on 11/17,  where can I find a copy of the NWCG guidelines?  In the Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and Program Review (1995), both the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture have the same policy "The NWCG provides a formalized system to agree upon standards of training, equipment, aircraft, suppression priorities, and other operational areas."  Is this policy followed differently by these two groups? Do you know what the guidelines say about task completion? What is OJT?   Thanks. I  was on the Onion and Megram Fires (Big Bar Complex) as they threatened our land on New River for 79 days. One night on shift change, my brother and I and a field observer named Fortunate were the only ones available to fight fire at our mailbox. The mix of emotions I felt from "Oh shit, here comes another snag that's going to roll over the road" to "Wow, this really is a good fire, only 4 or 5 inches tall" still has me in its grip. In the last weeks before rain came, I lost a firefighter friend  Karen Savage during the Jones Fire.  I love all you guys and want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for coming!  Please be safe. No fire is worth dying over. (If you get the chance, please learn the Campbell Prediction Method for reading the fire's signature. All mess-ups at the higher levels aside, I feel that if this method had been used during the Storm King Fire, it would have saved lives.) It's really hard to adjust to "non-fire life", isn't it? If I don't think of fire for three minutes in a row, I'm doing well... Mellie from Five Waters Hi Mellie, glad you found the site, don't worry about being new to it, there isn't a lot you need to know.  Just state what's on you mind and ask questions if ya need to know something.  Regarding Dave's letter, there is a feeling some agencies provide the required training for red carded positions but are slack on enforcing completion of the OJT (on-the-job) training assignments.  For example, let's use the Division Supervisor position which I feel is one of the most critical line positions there are.  If an individual was to attend the formal training and then complete two trainee assignments where they were limited to supervising crews on fireline improvement and mopping up, they're not yet qualified to lead the same resources in direct attack on an escaping fire.  Unfortunately, due to various reasons, this same individual may show up on their next fire as a fully certified Div. Sup.  Two situations  I've observed wherein an individual may be rushed through the process are the pressure for the trainee to become qualified due to requirements for their non-fireline duty positions and situations where a trainee is attached to their "buddy" on an assignment and their "buddy" signs them off as qualified. A quick search this morning was unable to find anything online regarding NWCG publications, including the NWCG site which has a half completed look about it.  You can find it here:  www.nwcg.gov  Hopefully some of the readers will have some ideas.  Ab.
11/20	Hey, heres a pic to keep us all warm as winter approaches. Had this one taken on the GunII fire one night as I was doing some shovel  burnout and holding. Before the night was over we burned several miles and  not all by shovel!! LOL Hope everyone enjoys this one. Happy Holidays R5 firecapt Thanks Cap'n, the new pic can be viewed on the Guest 3 photo page.  For those of you who are now sitting around watching the rain fall, let's get some of those photos you took this year digitized and send 'em in!  Ab.
11/19	I just finished the book "Fire on the Mountain - The True Story of Storm King Mountain Incident". I knew when I saw the report come out from the government that it would be a political whitewash and place blame mostly on the firefighters and not on the overhead and administrative personnel. I was so suprised that more was not done to punish the overhead personnel than what happened.   I want to suggest that you all either get, beg, borrow, or steal a copy of this book before the start of next fire season, and take the time to read it. This will really open the eyes to what we all still have to put up with and ask questions about why things can't be streamlined more.  After reading this book it left me more informed about what chain of events happened which lead up to the loss of 14 firfighters, what to watch out for other than fire line activity, and what happened in the aftermath to those involved.  It made me think of creating the 19th Watch Out Situation: 19. You are placing resource orders to dispatch that you know you need, but the district continues to refuse them stating "Thats not our policy", "Committed to other fires", or "We're saving it for a more important fire". Everyone, please get a copy of this book and read it. Don't simply accept the government's version of the event. MOC4546 I've recently finished the book also and have some of my own ideas of where the blame should lay.  Stay tuned. . . Ab.d
11/19	ab, let me ask you a question: The woods are burnin like hell's own inferno all around me, and i work on a NF in VA southwest VA to be more specifc, and im sittin home on the internet...aren't they hollerin for folks from all around the country to bring in here? Wonder if they have forgotten that they still have at least one resource on district?  i know, complain, complain.. but i want some hours, i havent been in green and yellow for over a month!!!!! be safe Ain't that the way it seems to go sometimes.  I was just talking to an engine captain today who complained that as his forest burned 55,000 acres this last summer, his engine and crew sat on their asses and did nothing while hundreds of engines drove by his station.  All I can suggest is check your qualificationos as shown on your red card against what's in demand.  Apparently it's something other than what you have.  Ab
11/19	I hope you dont mind but i took a few of your pics of your page and set them as wall paper on my machine. I not only don't mind, that's what they are there for.  Ab
11/19	Does anyone out there know that the Dept. of Interior and the National Park Service are planning to implement, On January 1, 2000, a regulation that will prohibit anyone age 55 and over from holding a "Red Card" arduous rating?  This will prohibit anyone over 55 from being a firefighter. It will not matter what kind of physical condition you are in. Nothing really new about this, the mandatory retirement age for the GS-462 series (poorly classified as firefighters) in the Department of Ag. (Forest Service) has been 55 for as long I I am aware of.  I don't know of any non-fire, fire-going personnel, and I know them all, who hold qualifications for any positions requiring ardous fitness levels.  Ab
11/18	Just to let everyone know...a lot of people from our area (Eastern Great Basin) are headed down to the southeast.  I've been told that they are still trying to fill positions.  If anyone is interested, check with your dispatcher.  Red. Right you are Red, we've sent about 8 overhead from our forest.  Ab.
11/18	Yo, Ab, I finally got a minute to speed read your page.  In response to a few inquiries, yes Pres of FWFSA, Kent Swartzlander, gave testimony at Senate sub-committee chaired by Rep Pompo in Sept. He was alone with rep from IAFF at his side for support.  The agency had three Washington types in attendance for Q/A.  Kent did us proud and the sub-committee heard the issues of low pay and inadequate retirement benefits loud and clear.   It's on the record now.  There will be a convention and newsletter out asap, but, a few key players are on fire assignments in Kentucky and Georgia.  Please keep in mind, we are working stiffs and fit this stuff in on weekends and A/L. The FWFSA is very much alive and working.  Be patient and continue your support for the FWFSA.  Remember, the wheels of government turn S-L-O-W. Thanks to all for the hard work on the firelines this last season in the West.  Thanks for the page Ab. Groundpig.
11/17	Hey Abercrombie, How's it going ?  I've been reading along with everyone this summer and it's been good.  Interesting dialogues this year.  I wanted to respond to to Jeffsz00tv from 11/10 about the Firefighter Pay act of 99.  Graniteman was tellin' me that all the people who offered testimony at the hearing were in favor of or agreed to what the act entailed, and it seemed to have no opposition in that committee. So I guess now it is a matter of waiting for the Washingtonian grist mill to vote and enact.        On another subject I think that the FS and the CDF need to have a better understanding on what to expect from each other, this summer I had a local red army BC (a forester, not a firefighter) come into the camp where I was and virtually demand the release of all red army resources. ( A total of 9  personnel) He explained the direction was from the state office and it was meant to curb the state people from going "from fed fire to fed fire" I told him a majority of those on his list had come from a state complex and were not going from fed fire to fed fire. He said, "Well I don't know that", I said I did because it was info documented by the resources unit. I suggested to him that if that was going to be red army policy then their personnel should know and understand it. It also seems that they can't figure out whether they are out for 14 or 21 and whether they work 12, 14, or 16 hours a day, while getting paid  for 24.  It would also be very nice if they could get out of the motel soon enough to get to morning briefing on time or at all.  I thought we would be better off without them, but someone said we need them because with reinvention , etc we don't have the people anymore, my recommendation is to use contractors instead.  The outfit doesn't follow NWCG guidelines with respect to task completion or OJT, they go to a class and magically are qualified at that job. They don't invite (order) any or very few fed resources on their fires and they flood fed fires with expensive, mediocre, underqualified motel mongrels.      Well enough of that, the piles are burning down nicely, couple inches of snow overnight and pretty soon the holidays. Life is good but we have to keep a eye out.  Dave I think this fed vs state thing's been hashed several times over Dave.  I recall the consensus being there were excellent, high quality, and yes, overpriced, worthless resources in all agencies.  As far as your recommendation for contractors goes, it's happening.  Seems nowdays each forest is assigned a couple of contract vendors to facilitate  providing the necessary inspectors and to act as a dispatch center for them.  Since most forests can barely cover their initial attack responsibilities during high fire days, this has had further ramifications of allowing forests to beef up their staffing for red flag or predicted lightning days.  As federal budgets continue to decline I predict more contractors and less federal resources each year.  How about the feds just throw in the towel now and acknowledge that Congress no longer has an interest in providing fire prevention and suppression on federal lands.  Why keep overworking and starving modules financially as we try to cope with a shoestring budget?  Why not just turn fire protection nationwide over to the States and be done with it!  Leave the superstructure intact (GACCs & Boise) and have the States run 'em.  Let them share the costs based on how many acres they eached burn yearly.  Ab
11/17	I'm so glad I found this site, it's made my day!  I have just returned from my District up in Washington after a wonderful summer of firefighting.  Now I'm back in the "real" world and day dreaming about are next season.  When I was reading through  everyones thoughts about if we should have 14 term or 21, it's hard for me to agree with the fourteen dayer's.  Reason being is not only do I love my job, but I'm also out their for the money.  Let's face it, this job is not always glorious, theirs a lot of down time, travel, mop-up, and if your as lunky as my crew, garbage picker upers.  I was working on a type-2 crew this last summer, we didn't have it hard, are crew was well taken care of.  I was also the EMT for are crew, I dealt with the injures, and more often then injures on 21 dayer's, the colds.  However we really kept a lid on all of this by making people take a day off if they were sick, and making shure they had all the med.s needed, also which is hard to install, but pushing the wash hands.  I think that really helped.   Hell, mabye for type 2 crews we should only have 14 day committments, but that means I'll find me a good old Shot Crew that wants to make the money, and hell raising memories, only lack of sleep, and spending excesive amount of time with the same twenty people can cause. Jd I'm glad you found the site too Jd.  There was a key point regarding negotiations for assignments beyond 14 days for crews, engines, helo's, etc. in the original message.  One other purpose, not yet mentioned, is a 14 day rule should help get resources released from shitty assignments.  I think we've all been on assignments where the host was  criticized for stockpiling resources for potential future events (that usually never happen).  By this I mean the host that keeps hotshot crews mopping up for two weeks after the fire is controlled, the engine strike team that sits in a staging area for a week doing nothing, or the Type II exclusive use helo that spends a week hauling trash off old spike camps.  This new rule would allow the supervisors some discretion in their release and become avalable for reassignment to a "real" fire. I understand and haven't forgotten about the overtime issue, I still depend heavily on the extra cash flow.  If it's a slow fire season and nothing else is happening, stay the 21 days, or longer (as an earlier message suggested).  Lord knows, during a dead fire season, a type 2 crew may only get one off district/forest assignment each year.  What the hell, if conditions are acceptable and resource demand is low, extend the negotiations, take two days off every 14 days and stay for 35 days.  Ab understands the main purpose of establishing and maintaining fire suppression resources is to have them fight fires, not stack sticks while reading the Sit Report on the computer each morning.
11/16	Regarding the possible NWCG guidelines from 11/13.  I like, in "theory" most of what is proposed as shown in the letter.  Three key points I see are; the ability of modules to negotiate 21 day assignments, a reduction to an expected 14 day response for overhead, and the documentation of the status and/or overall health factors of arriving resources. The first point regarding fire modules ability to negotiate length of stay is very important and places a critical responsibility on the module leader.  I would take this a step further and allow them to negotiate up to a 28 day assignment.  This would need to depend on several specific preplanned parameters during negotiations, but would allow those modules experiencing a slow season a little extra opportunity.  Over aggressive module leaders, or those offering suspicious information regarding their recent activity and/or crew health could be easily verified through their home dispatch offices.  Any module leader reporting false information would need to face severe consequences. Having spent a few years in a dispatch office, I know the first two questions asked by most non-fire overhead.  First, they want to know, "Where is the fire?", second is, "How long do you think I'll be gone?"  Current reality dictates most non-fire support resources can't afford to be gone from their jobs more than a couple of weeks at a time.  Although individuals may desire to accept all fire assignments, they know they will not be excused from completing their targets when it's performance rating time.  I believe a reduction in length of assignments could increase the willingness of acceptance by up to 20%. These proposals would have an impact on dispatch offices from the forest to the national levels in increased activity and a higher cost of transportation.  But, I see it as a small price to pay for the increased health and availability of the resource pool even as it is still shrinking.  Look what happened in the West this year as crew after crew were virtually run into the ground towards the end of the season.  Due to exhaustion or sickness, stemming from inadequate rest and poor living conditions on fires, many refused re-assignments, or were otherwise unable to finish out the season. George
11/16	In response to FIRZ 11/13 post- I don't have a copy of the fire business management handbook in front of me, but I believe that it states that a minimum of 2 days R&R be given in 21 days or 1 in 14. Days start at the time of assignment. Remember, these are only guidelines and they are interpreted differently by every fire team. Tonka
11/13	I was wondering what you can tell me about guidlines for the length of time a crew can work before requiring R&R? I have heard that it depends on the forest, is this true? I was under the impression that it was 21 days. Would days count towards 21, if you to leave a fire go back to another fire the next day? Also if a supervisor were to purposely misinform the IC about when the crew's last day off, what are the possible consequences? FIRZ
11/13	Ab, Thought I'd forward this as fodder for discussion on your site.  Something like this direction will be issued from the NWCG through the National Mob Guide:  "In order to promote safety as an interagency priority, to increase the opportunity for widespread support for long term fire operations, and for efficient incident mobilization and demobilization, the typical and desired length of commitment on incident assignments will be 14 days, excluding travel.  Strong consideration and management of firefighting resources must insure that back to back assignments are considered into the health, readiness, and capability of the resource.  The health and safety of incident personnel and resources will not be compromised under any circumstances.  There may be situations where life and property are so imminently threatened, or suppression objectives are close to being met, that minimally longer commitments up to 21 days, but no longer, are necessary to smoothly allow for replacements.  This situation as well as overall condition of the resource at that time shall be documented by the Planning Section and approved by the Incident Commander. Military battalions are mobilized for 30 day commitments, by prior agreement, as well as the Strike Team leaders and battalion liaisons assigned to those units.  Incident Commanders should give strong consideration as to the health and condition of these crews by varying the intensity and exposure of their assignments.  Government and contract pilots should adhere to the standards in section 24.13 Interim Flight and Duty Limitations, NFES 2092." Look for this to be in effect for fire season Y2K.  I believe the NWCG's primary focus on this was to address problems with: - Type 2 crew safety - BIA recently conducted a study that showed that most accidents (by far) on Type 2 crews occur after 14 days on assignment.  - to a lesser extent, overhead availability - more and more agency people claim they can not commit to a 21 day assignment because of family commitments and/or workload.  As I read this, fire crews such as engines, hotshots, and helitack should be able negotiate for 21 day assignments, but if they feel the need to go home after 14 days, they'll be able to.  This should be interesting.  One thing that shouldn't be overlooked is the impact this is going to have on dispatchers and coordinators - it may greatly increase their workload, at least at the beginning.  However, it may result in greater overhead availability, fewer injuries, and fresher crews with higher production rates.  We'll see...  And of course it'll cost more...but fewer people should get hurt.  I have some opinions on all this, but I think I'll wait to see what others think about it.  The lurker FMO
11/12	The ashkickers link does not come up.  If you are able to raise it, could you send me an email letting me know.   my address is kchri301@uwsp.edu. thank you for your time. Anyone know what's up with the Ashkickers site?  Ab
11/12	Great site Ab.  I find alot of the comments quite humorous.  As a contract firefighter, complaining about 3 days of R & R out of 35 days sounds pretty good to me since that is three days of pay with no production.  In the real world, private contract firefighters may or may not be paid for any R & R that comes their way.  How about a crew line assignment from Aug. 22 until Oct. 28 with no paid R &R?   Required days off after 21 days, at no expense to the incident, then rotating days off for the rest of the assignment is what happens in the REAL world.  Upset? No way!  Some of us are happy to have the opportunity to EARN our taxpayer's dollars! Thank God for the rain!  Stu
11/10	Ab, just wanted to take some time to stop and say how much fun I've had this summer and how much larger my bank account is.  If you don't mind, I'd like to use some space to give some thanks to those who made this happen. Thank you God, for showing me some of the wonders of your nature, including the resurgence of lightning storms, lately absence in the west, which have allowed my and my crew to fully exercise our primary purpose and utilize our extensive training.  Thanks for the dry, hot, wild, unpredictable weather and the erratic winds you've shown us this season as we've struggled (and often failed) to enforce some of the bewieldering land management plans as you (knowingly or not) reduced them to shambles.  Thank you for allowing me to observe some of the finest, as we call it, most active fire behavior in this decade.  I appreciate and will always remember the climbs to the top of the hills you've provided and as promised in my last prayers, have taken the time to stop (or at least glance) in awe at the table you have spread.  I again bow my knees and spread my arms in supplication of the majestic (kick my ass) forces you have demonstrated this fire season. For my fat wallet and the higher taxes I will pay as a result, I also want to thank the 1998/99 United States Congress as they completely failed their constituents by declining to appropriate the funding for the federal suppression agencies initial attack resources necessary to prevent the tragic loss of life and property suffered this fire season.  Oh well, Sirs and Madams, I doubt any of you personally knew any of the victims who died inhaling superheated air or get your loafers dirty assisting survivors return to burned out shells of homes.  I'm sure no houses or people were lost in the neighborhoods where you and/or other members of the Congress live.  Don't worry about your jobs, this fire season will fade from public conscious as they all do. . . won't it?  Lest Congress selfishly accept all my gratitude, I also thank all fire suppression agency heads who lacked the courage to request, better yet,  demand a budget necessary to protect against loss of life and property. Last, but not least, I thank those certain few members of the public who always seem to know more than the common sense majority.  You all know who they are, it's that person who decided to mow the weeds on an extreme fire danger day!  The one who decided it would be ok if he welded in the back yard, the one who had to try out the "metal" blade for his weed eater, or the one who used a grinder on a pipe.  They all meant well, bless their little hearts and selfish  minds. Thanks Ab!  Bear.
11/10	Ab it's been a while since I've had time to drop you a line. Fire season here in Texas seems like it just won't end. I'm afraid Keith hasn't seen the worst of it yet in East Texas either. I just wanted to chime in also on the kudo's, your "They said it" is always good for a chuckle. The latest is the on going battle over where the best fire fighters come from. Years ago Bear Bryant was asked where he got the best football players from, his answer was, "Good Mamas and Pappas". I think the same could be said about fire fighters. In my short 22 years on the job I have found that the worst safety hazard on the line is the fire fighter that thought he or she knew it all. The way I see it, you either go through life or grow through life. For those that have made it through another safe fire season, congrats!!! The rest of us will just keep plugging along. "Boo" Good to hear from ya Boo, we've missed ya!  Whoa, I can't hardly read yer message from all the noise of the rain a pound'n on the tin roof here!  The return to a "normal" fire season we've been expecting has been here and thankfully, for now, gone.  Now we can start lighting those piles!  Ab.
11/10	OK! People have been busy, but there is a lack of information out there that for some reason exists concerning the FWFSA/ Wildland Firefighter Pay  Fairness Act of 1999. I know somebody out there has got some information  about Swartzlander vs. Washington so what's the scoop (legislation was  introuduced into the Senate and not a peep!!! Why???   Jeffsz00tv I don't wanna comment. . .Kent?  Ab.
11/07	Some newly observed details concerning the Big Bar Complex (BBC)!  Seems a certain hotshot crew worked the Big Bar Complex for 21 days.  They. . . unlike some hotshot crews I've seen discussed on this page, agreed to return to the BBC after two days of R&R.  Upon returning to the BBC, they were released after 14 more days on the line.  When finally released, they were given 1 day of administrative leave after returning to their home forest.  Since the authority for allowing the amount of hours of administrative leave compensation rests with the IC of any given fire, I would personally like to commend the IC of the BBC for limiting this crew to three days off in 35.  Way to go IC, the tax-paying public would be proud of your penny-pinching.  Bear.
11/07	Archive time again folks.  To catch up on the discussions, yer gonn'a hav'ta visit the archives.  There are some memorable information exchanges in the September/October page, so find some time, take a visit, and catch up, especially those of you who've been lucky enough to be on fires and have been away from home for awhile.  Ab.
11/07	Greetings Ab, Enjoy the site! I am a 10 year volunteer here in east Tx.We may not have the mt's and altitude that are out west but we still have some pretty hot fires from time to time.This past week the Counties we serve lifted the burn ban at 10:00 and by 2:30 we were out on a 75 acre burn.sometimes Joe Public just doesn't realize the danger.Just wanted to drop a line and praise "They Said".Thanks and stay safe,Keith Thanks for the info and the kudo's Keith.  They are a big part of why I keep on go'in.  Ab.
11/05	the big bar is turning into a big logging show.  welfare for the local community.  what a sick waste of government money and time.  cut load  and haul of wood products is being paid for by the fire and given to the  community.  sign fed up in hoopa   Dear fed up,  Generic accusations without details invoke images of losers pissing against the wind.  Ab
11/02	Hey guys!  I need some help here.  I just got back from the Big Bar fire and my full time job here at home threatened to fire me if I got called out to  another fire.  Does anyone now the legality behind this?  I read somewhere once before that you can't be fired for the call of duty.  Is this right?  I ahve  been doing Wildland for 4 years now and never had a problem before.  I need some advice.  It doesn't seem right to me that they can do that.  What do you think?  This has been my life and I just got hired full time by our local FD, but I don't start the academy until January.  MP  This issue reared it's ugly head last year MP.  It may depend on what State you're from, but I don't recall any clear solutions.  Try a search through the archives looking for volunteer and/or perhaps there's new info from readers.  There's been good, experienced comments from many volunteers here in the past.  Ab
11/01	My view on the east versus west thread         In my career I have fought fire in every western state, Alaska, Michigan,         and Deep South.  Every place I went out of California had unique problems.        The black spruce of the Yukon Flats starts running again 20 minutes after         the rain stops.  The peat bogs of Michigan's U.P. is a mop up nightmare.  I        was a fish out of water in the palmetto.  Likewise fighting fire in the         sonoran veg type of Arizona (ouch), or watching the fire kick our butt in         Yellowstone lodgepole while snowing.  I'll swear the wind blows across Great         Basin sagebrush three different directions at once.  The humidity (100         degrees, 100%RH) in Virginia almost dropped me.         Every region of the country has its unique characteristics that the locals         adapt to and leaves us 'foreigners' wondering what the hell is going on.  To         claim one part of the Nation is tougher, or firefighters from different        regions are not as qualified, is plain wrong.         I learn something new every time I take an assignment.  And some of my best         teachers have been the locals who took the time to mentor this 'California         Kid' on local conditions, equipment, and tactics.  I am a better firefighter         at home because of their efforts.