www.montanaforum.com

As I peruse the FS News Clip on the intranet and read the newspaper
editorials pro and con I noticed a pattern. I have not done any formal
count, but a significant number of the newspapers publishing editorials
opposing any land management and supporting a 'just let it burn' position
seem to be from large cities far from the nearest forest. The newspapers
supportive of land management and scoff at the idea of letting all fires
burn are for the most part from communities close to forests. The
'experts' quoted in the 'let it burn' articles are mostly environmental
industry lawyers, lobbyists, and university biology professors while the
experts quoted in the pro management articles are all foresters and
firefighters.

Interesting -- those most familiar with the problem and face it daily have
a different viewpoint from those distant and not familiar first hand.

-=Dave=-

I listened with great interest to the audio post JF (nice post JF !!!!), sent in. It certainly stimulated some thinking. Mr. O’Toole may not understand fire behavior and potentials, but he did have some very good points.

If you look at the Federal Wildland and Prescribed Fire Management Policy Implementation Guide, it states that a WFIP (Wildland Fire Implementation Plan) will be initiated for all wildland fires. Generally this goes only as far as stage one, but intended purpose is to guide the manager to the most appropriate suppression response or to continue with stage II and III if the fire is to be managed for resource benefits. If units were in fact doing this and the Risk/Complexity assessment portion of Stage II, it would satisfy much if not all the documentation requirements of the 30 Mile Abatement Plan, etc. But this is not the case as most decisions to seek immediate control are made days if not years before the ignition and WFIPs are rarely prepared for wildland fires.

The WFSA is vehicle used to document the suppression response decision. It does have to be prepared on any fire that escapes IA/Extended attack. It usually provides only general operational guidelines for containment lines, but some are more specific.

MIST is not mandated in wilderness, it is up to the unit administrator to set those guidelines.

Fire use is a different, and often economical, way of managing fires. Fire use management levels are set by the level of risk. High risk = high level of management, even to the point of containment and control. Low risk = a much lower level of active management. The trick, of course, is a good assessment of risk and threats (this is one reason why Fire Use Teams are heavy with FBAN/LTAN types) and applying the proper level of management to those. But; it almost always works, and could probably be successfully applied to 60-70% of wildland fires. It also requires a good deal of planning and analysis, so when “fire use” decisions are made they are based on sound assessments.

Fire use involves uncertainty, and requires continuous analysis. Wildland fire involves risk, but things are usually very certain, that is eventually, whatever the cost, the fire will be subdued. The analysis is usually the WFSA and it can be prepared in 2-3 hours and updated only when cost or acres are being exceeded. The core decision is rarely revisited which is why sometimes line is constructed in the rain and snow!! Hack, cough, hock.

DM

These are from the Blue Cut fire in the Cajon Pass near San Bernardino on
Father's Day June 16, 2002.
#1 Tanker drops in front of fire as traffic continues along I15 southbound.
#2 Fire has crossed I15 right over the traffic (8 lanes).
#3 About 1 min later fire has made the 300 yds between it & me. Time to skeedaddle.
#4 Fire is only 3 hrs old. From Mormon Rocks.

MF

I put them on the Fire 12 photo page. Remember this is the fire with extreme behavior that resulted in the burnover of the CDF engine. Glad ya got outta there, MF.

Also added a photo from a Colorado fire entitled "First Day" and put some CO crew photos on the Handcrews 6 photo page. Somehow I deleted the info on these photos. Will the photographer please resend the info --on the fire name, etc? Thanks. Ab.

Sounds like you're about ready to start learning about fire planning. You should start asking your fire mgmt buddies about all that. In your letter, you're kind of mixing apples and oranges.

About WFSAs - they are mandated, but they don't so much set containment lines as the strategy. Containment lines are often identified as part of the strategy, but the key is setting the strategy and evaluating the probability of success. MIST (aka Maximized Income Suppression Tactics, heh heh) is not mandated, it's just a management option.

But the decision to consider wildland fire use (WFU) is made during big-time planning for the entire unit. Resource Management Plans (RMP, aka Land Management Plans) are agency documents that set the umbrella objectives and uses for the land unit. Fire is part of those plans - also air, soil, water, range, timber, wilderness, wildlife, etc etc.

Now all federal land mgmt agencies are supposed to have Fire Management Plans (FMP) that tier off the RMPs. The RMP determines the role of fire on the unit, and identifies the goals of fire management. The RMP would usually identify any areas that would be candidates for WFU. The FMP would describe how, and under what conditions WFU would be allowed and basically a prescription is established for WFU. The FMP determines the extent of attack for all fires in the unit, among other things. Incidentally, the RMP is expected to meet NEPA requirements. This stuff is all done way ahead of acutally implementing any WFU.

If there is an ignition in an area that is designated as possible WFU, the numbers have to be run to determine if the weather and fuels conditions are appropriate to meet the resource objectives. Like they may want it too hot or dry so it won't scorch, or if there's been an extended drought then the expected Maximum Management Area (MMA) might be exceeded and so forth - basically a bunch of fire behavior projections.

Also the wildfire situation has to be evaluated, usually through Preparedness Levels (your homework is to read the National and Geographic Area mob guide sections on Preparedness Levels to see how they relate to Prescribed Fire and WFU). The short version is that the level of fire danger and activity has a bearing on whether candidate fires for WFU are allowed to burn or whether they are initial attacked, or something inbetween, as determined in the FMP.

WFU is essentially like prescribed fire, the conditions must be established and approved beforehand.

In some places, it may be established in the RMP that fires are not worth attacking on an economic basis and allowed to burn because they aren't worth putting out, but that's technically not WFU because WFU is to meet resource objectives like prescribed fire.

I could go on, but it might be easier if you get some of your fire staff buddies to go over this with you. There are probably some mistakes in my description or some places where it's done differently, but I gave you the short version textbook answer as I know it.

BLM Bob

How does a region decide whether to let lightning fires burn? Do they decide ahead of time? or always wait until fire occurs?

I know that once a fire exceeds IA, a Wildland Fire Situation Analysis (WFSA) is done to evaluate alternative suppression strategies against selected environmental, social, political and economic criteria. Is the WFSA mandated for helping set containment lines?

I know that on many fires such as the Florence Fire (now Biscuit) that burn into the wilderness, the decision is made to use MIST (Minimum Impact Suppression Techniques) and when resources are scarce they are often put on non-wilderness portions of the fire. Is the use of MIST mandated in a wilderness area?

Does the economist on NPR know of the environmental and legal constraints incident management teams and wildland firefighters work under? Do such constraints really exist?

It seems that people like the economist who haven't fought fire are naive about fire behavior, controllability and fire effects.

For one thing, they do not understand what catastrophic fire is and how it affects the soil as well as really burning up the vegetation and wildlife. Crown fire that burns very hot "nukes" the topsoil, burning the organic duff away, taking it down to mineral soil and baking it so it is hydrophobic (water fearing). Rains come, water drops bead up on the soil surface and run if there's an incline. There's nothing to hold the water back and nothing to keep the water and moving mineral particles from running into creeks, streams, rivers and reservoirs, making waters murky, killing aquatic life... and silting in drinking water supplies for cities. Such soil takes time to develop a new organic layer that can support seedling life and slow runoff.

I know some theysaid readers have worked on Fire Use Teams to promote low level burns to benefit the environment. Educate us. (Unless all are out fighting fire... and I know most are.) For some pics of wildfire use, check the Whitetail 1, 2 and 3 photos on Fire 6 photo page.

Sure would like to know more about how fire use decisions are made.
Mellie

Northern Rockies, all fires are in the wilderness of MT except the Phlox Fire
21 fires of less than 2 acres, 8 of which are deemed "out"
4 fires that are less than 100 acres
4 that are between 100 and 200 acres
4 that are 500 acres plus; of these, the Phlox in Wyoming is the largest at about 3600 acres

Rockies, all 4 fires in the wilderness areas of CO
smallest is 415 acres, largest is 15,500 acres

Eastern Great Basin, 3 fires in ID, UT, and WY
smallest is under 10 acres, largest is 2600

Southwest has 6 fires in the wilderness of NM
smallest is 157 acres and largest is 2450

Southern California has the Wolf Complex in Yosemite National Park comprised of 4 fires totaling 588 acres

As far as I know there are no Wildland Fire Use (WFU) fires in the Western Great Basin, the Eastern, Southern or Northwestern Areas. yet, that is...

Tahoe Terrie

JF

This is an audio segment from National Public Radio. Ab

I've been on numerous assignments in California over the last few years as Demob Unit Leader. Everybody seems to dread the chaos and pandemonium associated with Demob. I've come up with a good method to avoid some of the log jams:

During active demobilization, with lots of Crews and Engines to Demob, the teams have allowed me to announce the tentative releases of Crews and Engines for the day at the beginning of the 0600 operational briefing. I instruct them to go directly to Demob for a "Demob Briefing" This gets them out of the briefing, where they don't need to be anyway.

Once at the Demob Briefing, I take a roll call and ask for travel times home. I explain that the farthest resources will be given first priority. The ICS 221's are already prepared and handed out. I spread them out as far as when they are to report to ground support. Most vehicle inspection stations can handle about 2 engine strike teams or 4 crews per hour, usually a little more than that. I usually monitor the flow at ground support via logs radio, with the help of someone working in Demob, or a Security person if available. Another potential back up is with the Time Unit. I always co-ordinate with them and try to manage the flow through there also. Usually, the time it takes for vehicle inspections sets up a natural flow...

Firebruc

"NTSB investigators and a U.S. Forest Service team
were also on their way to Fairplay, in the mountains
southwest of Denver, where a twin-engine Beechcraft
Baron on a reconnaissance flight for the Forest
Service made an emergency landing Monday. The
two people on board were not injured, Helmerick
said."

Here in the west of Australia we have very little water. The lakes we have
are saline and generally dry from December onwards. Even then the fringes
would bog a duck and access is an issue.

Therefore we have to employ dry fire fighting techniques including hand tool
attack. However we are unable to mobilize vehicle based resources from other
jurisdictions (e.g. NRE as Peter described) as they are some 3,000 km (2000
miles) away. Therefore we have to get smart. Waterbombing is only effective
in our country when supported immediately by ground crews.

We therefore spend a lot of effort in establishing trafficable firelines
using dozers, loaders, graders etc. Where areas are not trafficable, we
resort to hand tools. It must be stated that we don't have any where near
the same problems with slope over here.

One fire last year in our Goldfields region was in the order of 300,000
Hectares, (500,000 + acres) the resources there were about 4 managers, a
fixed wing aircraft for reconnaissance, 2 dozers, 4 graders, and about 4
water carrying appliances (tankers).

Almost all of our appliances for wildfire are four wheel drive and are able
to get very close to where we need them. Rather than ignoring the skills of
these very competent people there may be something to be learnt from them.
The reason they are there is learn and to teach, none knows the lot, but
maybe we could learn some more from each other

regards,
Joebloggs.

Great to have the input from Downunder. Ab.

Here in Australia we do have and use handtool crews. In the state of Victoria the Dept of Natural Resources and Environment employees about 800 seasonal firefighters every Aussie summer, most are used as handtool crews, some as part of engine (called tankers in most parts of Australia) crews. In the state of New South Wales(NSW) were I live, even the predominantly volunteer NSW Rural Fire Service uses handtool crews including Remote Area Fire Teams (RAFT), which are similar to your hotshot crews. What must be understood is that in general, we use engine crews in preference because of the ability to hit harder and faster with this method on the more accessible fires. If no engine access is possible we do it in a similar way to you guys, ie hand tools, dozers, water and retardant bombing from aircraft etc.

Take care -
Peter

Helicopter Fighting Fire Crashes

AK

The story goes on to say that "In the past decade the USFS has failed eight out of 10 inspector general audits." I wonder if the other fedfire agencies do any better.

Does anyone have more info on this story?
Fireronin

The AP story Memo admits $215M wildfire management mistake. Ab.

Keep after it!
ZK

I'm unavailable for the next 7-10 days because of personal and business reasons: does NorCal Tom extend his criticism to all those of us not on fires at this time? Does my non-availability negate my recently completed 18 day assignment on a T-1 IMT? Or my earlier assignments back into May 2002? How about the several T-1 DPICs and OSC1s that are unavailable this season, too?

One last point of confusion, based about taking a downgrade assignment: doesn't ICS 310-1 encourage that practice, by allowing a DIVS to maintain currency by taking a TFL assignment? I for one have taken an Ops assignment this season below my highest quals: seemed like a simple solution to filling a Resource Order when I was asked!

NorCal Tom made a critical point: its been a long season, and its wearing on folks. As long as its on the web, so be it. But on the fireline, we need to be clear thinking and logical, and if we can sense ourselves getting run down, its time for more than the mandatory 2 days off before heading out again.

Remember that the next fire is the most important fire. We really don't need Yogi's "deja vu all over again"!!

Mollysboy

Yogi's deja vu? Hunh? Ab.

You can reply if you like, but I'm heading back to the line and I'm sure THINK ABOUT IT has already gone. Why are you at home sitting in front of your computer? Sorry Ab, can't remember when some comment has made me so mad. Must be the season wearing on. An Ab, thanks for sitting in front of your computer. We all appreciate theysaid.

Yer welcome. Be safe. Ab.

The practice of planting more trees than would eventually be needed was/is done for several reasons. Since any given summer's weather pattern can not be realistically predicted, more trees are planted than are eventually needed to ensure that enough trees survive to fully regenerate the area being planted. In Ca., 1st year planting survival for pine is around 75-80% while fir and sugar pine survival is much lower. After the 3rd year, survival is even lower. In addition, planting extra trees permits the eventual removal of many of the genetically inferior trees (double tops, poor growers, etc), animal damaged trees, etc. during the thinning process. If, however, thinning is delayed for whatever reason, plantations with high survival rates can end up overcrowded. When this planting pattern was first developed, I'm sure the plan developers did not take into account that the timber program would dry up and take the funding source with it. 8 x 8 ft. spacing is very heavy. We have generally used 10 x 10 which plants around 435 trees per acre. Today, we must live with the decisions of the past and move forward.

Reading various posts and news articles I get the impression that some believe that the contractor (or logger) gets to pick and choose what he/she does within the stands they are working. FS contracts are quite specific as to what is to be accomplished and how it is to be accomplished. Timber to be removed under a commercial contract is designated prior to sale of the contract. Around this area designation in commercial projects is by painting of either leave trees or cut trees. Precommerical thinning (under 10" dbh) projects also have designated leave trees and specific specifications that must be followed. Inspectors/sale administrators enforce these specs. Our thinnings are done "from below" where the big trees are left and the smaller trees, fuel ladders and down materials are removed. It can, and is, being done.

It is quite expensive to remove many, many small trees per acre and then transport them to a location where they can be utilized for whatever product is viable in that area. Distances to processing plants are much farther in the west than in the south. Slopes are much steeper. Mechanized equipment that can be used in the south to reduce costs can not work the slopes of the west. It is often more expensive to treat and leave this material in the woods to be burned or chipped.

It is neither an easy nor cheap task that lies ahead to save our forests. To do nothing, however, is to watch our forests die from overcrowding, insect attacks and fires.

DAS

Some people talk like if we allow harvesting, its up to the loggers to take what they want. ..ummm...aren't there foresters (be it government or timber industry property) that write up the specs that will be used in the harvesting?? I think so!

I think it was mellie that mentioned about it always being the two far extremes battling each other and I agree. Why the F are people like that??? There IS a middle ground and it is usually the best choice in the long run in every way. Do we need "Old growth" forests? Sure we do, but should we manage everything for old growth to support a few endangered species and overall do not provide good habitat for the majority of other wildlife? I don't think so. And what happens when that "Old Growth" dies of old age?? Its not going to be there forever.

Another thing that always sticks in my craw is when folks reference property being "destroyed" by clear cutting. Yes there has been clear cutting that has harmed the land, but in most cases not from a forestry aspect. I agree looking up on the mountain and seeing a bunch of big square blocks that have been clear cut looks like crap. But in most cases thats just it, it LOOKS terrible. If those open blocks were natural openings (granted they wouldn't be square, that is one bad thing about clear cutting in the past) would you still consider it a devastated area?? I think probably not. Also, why don't you go back and visit some of those "destroyed" areas that were cut 20-30 years ago. I'm sure that you will find in most cases they don't look so "destroyed" anymore as the new stand of timber has now began to dominate the site.

Whew..ok, I guess thats enough... just needed to vent a bit. But I just have one last thing. Before you make up your mind one way or another visit www.greenspirit.com/ and read the article "Trees Are The Answer" . I was fortunate enough to attend a lecture by the writer, Patrick Moore a few years ago. I was very skeptical going in as he was a very extreme activist with greenpeace back in the 60's so I kinda expected to come out of there very frustrated with the environmental extremist stuff he was going to spout. Nothing could have been farther from the truth. What a breath of fresh air and a logical common sense perspective.

Pulaski

Why was I told at Yellowstone in '88 that the fire was a wonderful thing, just mother nature restoring her balance, and no one ever tried to put it out (just "herded' it in different directions and got the hell out of Dodge when she went on a tear). Seems like the same thing is happening this year. Is it no longer a wonderful thing that nature is restoring her balance?

Why was I told on the Rabbit Creek fire (Idaho, '96 and only one example of a wide-spread condition) all the bug killed timber could not be salvaged but the courts had ruled it must be allowed to fall and decay so nature could take her course and it was a wonderful thing? Is this part of what we are now calling excessive fuel loading?

Why is having wide-spread large timber with NO timber harvesting so much more important in the Northwest than it is anywhere else in the country? Put another way, does the NW deserve a free ride having the benefits of forest products by forcing the rest of the country to furnish the supply as well as letting the rest of the country pay unimaginable amounts to remove the "little stuff" to manage the fuel load but not cut any trees to help pay for it?

Lets face it, with 300 million or so people and more coming every day, timber must be processed as I, for one, do not want to return to the outhouse (I don't think Sears makes catalogs any more anyway - oops, that is a timber product too) and certainly am not interested in a Southeast Asian type "squatty potty" which only requires water. Sort of reminds me of California's letting Washington/Oregon supply her electric needs - and at a reasonable price please. Why? Is it because California's land is so much more valuable than Washington/Oregon's that power plants/hydroelectric dams must not be allowed to deface that beautiful state? California has many, many things to recommend it, but that situation seems a little one-sided. Is the NW timber situation similar? Maybe the idea is that EVERYONE should drastically change their lifestyle to resemble that of a third world country so ALL timber can be large.

What is so terrible about uneven-aged management and multiple use? Before clearcutting of large areas of public land was allowed, it seemed to provide for most uses reasonably well. That was before the perceived overriding human values of few uses (and users) gained predominance. Seems to me virtually no one wants to go back to the days of clearcutting large areas of public land. It was a lousy idea on public land to begin with, but was done to maximize fiber production to meet projected demand of a growing country and world (which , indeed, it helped do). It also got practically the entire timber industry kicked out of the NW, and some other places as well.

Incidentally, please don't try to justify the current mind-set of NO timber cutting as necessary to save all the endangered species, etc. by producing a "natural" forest. I got sucked in by the spotted owl fiasco and don't intend to be so naive again.

Just a few of the things I don't understand. Somebody help me, I'm confused.

Remember the highest priority: everbody comes back.
mossback

Good points on your insight to the nations ecological problem. Philosophically speaking...lol! We are our own worst neighbors and here's why: many of our lands in the west have been protected under a special designation that carry "can do" and "can nots"...ie...mitigation factors of the T/E Species Act, wilderness, monuments, parks..etc. The nation has been moving steadily towards becoming better stewards (I use this word loosly because it carries a lot of meaning) of the land because publics at large are concerned for land, water, and plant/animal species health. I don't think that we can actually point fingers at one single administration for causing the fuel loadings that we are currently faced with unless we point at the Smokey the Bear campaign.

Finding balance as the pendulum will be the critical responsibility of this administration. Hopefully, that can be done without have the scales tipped.

r3firetaz

I can't seem to get into the photo section of fires 2002, specifically the NcNally Fire. It keeps saying the page is not available.

My son is in one of the photos and I would love to see it.

Can you help me out?

Thanks,
Diana

Diana, This is the R5 fire url that our Fires 2002 page links to: http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/sequoia/incident/McNalleyphotolink.htm .
Try this one instead. I'm changing the www.r5.fs.fed.us to the equivalent number addy. You can try this any time you have a problem with the R5 fire site. http://166.5.1.221/sequoia/incident/McNalleyphotolink.htm
If this doesn't work, e-mail me again and I will give you the solution provided us by the "hackers" among us who have written in. Nothing illegal of course, but conditions have stretched some of the people trying to get info from the R5 web to seek more creative solutions. This Ab has even learned a few things. Hopefully those in charge of the R5 fire web will come up with a permanent and consistent fix soon. Hmmmmm, wonder what the politics and personalities are behind this current and ongoing SNAFU... Ab.

I would really like to see the details of the Presidents "Healthy Forests Initiative" so I can decide for myself whether this is a legitimate plan for thinning for fire control or a loophole for clear cutting. The rhetoric from both opposing sides on this is just too polarized to believe. It certainly doesn't help that "last-minute provisions in the amendment added by the Bush administration, at the insistence of timber groups" were slipped in as this suggests a collusive partnership rather than an open and honest process. Though normally not a great fan of "environmentalists" I can well understand why they are very skeptical of this policy at this point. I too find the Presidents' "declare emergencies and get to thinning now, before it's too late" statement a bit alarming, given his history. The "declare an emergency" strategy has used by several past leaders and have too often turned out to be more of a "quick... while they are scared lets' pull a fast one" move. Personally I am a bit concerned that the "war on terrorism" appears to be turning into a war on constitutional rights. But I digress.

We need a legitimate and sustainable thinning and preemptive burn policy implemented very soon. I hope this is what is currently being presented. A policy which in any way appears to be tailored to primarily enrich large logging companies will prove in the end to be exactly what is not needed.

Is there a copy of the plan available online?
Dana

I woke up in the middle of the night THINKING ABOUT IT. This has been an ongoing issue on this board, how those from out of an area can safely fight fire when they have no experience with local fire. I thought of about a dozen people I wanted to call and talk to, from crew members to team members on up. Trouble is, many are away... and others wouldn't appreciate a call at 3AM. Instead I just got up and found a book to read so as not to think about it. <chuckle>

Today I rearranged my schedule and have been watching some TV, an unusual thing for me. I want to see what the networks are saying in preparation for Bush's talk in Oregon today. For the most part, they have chosen people to face off who represent the extremes, the Sierra Club rep who faces off against the Heritage Foundation rep on MSNBC, for example.

The Sierra Club guy says the Forest Service has had 7 years to reduce fuels and hasn't done it. He also stresses that there is no plan and there is a lack of fiscal accountability. Boy he is living in the past at least as far as FS FIRE goes. Fiscal accountability is there once the money gets to the fireground (overblown FS cost pools is a problem, imho). The fire plan is there -- in the last 2 years -- which is the time we have had to bring the work force up a bit to be able to begin to safely accomplish a plan. As far as not doing it in 7 years, good grief, with the court cases and foia paperwork that groups like his bring, it's no wonder we're not yet up to speed on fuel reduction.

The Heritage Group woman was better, although she clearly represents the loggers which again polarizes the discussion. And in my mind this is not about logging -- which conjures up images of clear cutting, but about thinning, finding a way to get out the small stuff with a minimum of larger stuff being taken.

One other issue that came up was restricting the fuel reduction to areas on the interface. It seems the Sierra Club rep doesn't even understand that we need fuel reduction in areas outside the interface so as not to have the catastrophic fire that nukes the trees, soils, etc and makes forest recovery very difficult. We do not have the conditions that existed a hundred years ago.

OK, I know I'm preaching to the choir here.
<turns around to address the lurkers>
Please, I ask you listen to whatever is said with an open mind. Rise above viewing fire issues only in terms of the extreme polarities the media seems to thrive on. Work on understanding the real issues and work on finding some real solutions. Ask your fire professionals who are also environmentalists to speak up. Don't let this process be driven by the extremes. We are all in this together.

Finding no solution is a choice that puts our forests, our wild environments, our water supplies, our threatened and endangered species and our interface communities at risk.

Bush is slated to speak soon.

Mellie
<aghhhhhhh> The Wilderness Society rep is saying "there's a fair amount of timber being cut in the west now." Not true, compared to 10 years ago.

During the summer of 2000, I was at NIFC when the concept of using Aussies, Kiwis and Canadians was raised: they all sent reps to Boise with all their Training and Quals manuals/handbooks/etc. There was a rigorous review and comparison of those standards and criteria against ICS 310-1, and they were only certified when they met the US criteria. Their OPS and Air folks performed very well on our fires, and a thorough review was conducted that supported their continued use.

I've also had the opportunity to travel to Australia on 6 different occasions to work with the Aussies on Bushfire/wildfire issues, and found them to be well trained, competent and safety conscious. Yeah, they do in fact have 10/18: worded slightly different than ours, but nearly identical. They are mostly Tanker-based (our engines) in their suppression efforts, but have some hand crews and tractor operations. They have a serious concern about safety (all of my trips DownUnda were fire safety related), and they have studied our fatal fires such as South Canyon in great detail; "Fire on the Mountain" was required reading at the Country Fire Authority's (CFA) "Professional Development Course for Operations Officers" in 2001. When they do have a safety failure ("Linton" in December 1998 killed 5 tanker crewmen), they do a full, complete AND PUBLICLLY OPEN review of all the details. Check out www.cfa.vic.gov.au/linton/index.html

Yeah, there is a difference in Australian/NZ fires and "Biscuit"; the same can be said for fires in the Florida swamps, West Texas plains and Indiana Sand Dunes. We accept Easterners, Southerners and Mid-westerners on "Biscuit", and they also allow us Westerners to go South to into the Okie National Wildlife Refuge or the Volusia County interface. Is there really a difference bringing in Aussies and Kiwis? Their areas around Sydney and Melbourne are mirror images of conditions in Southern California chaparal.

I too was on "Biscuit" as an OSC1, and sure didn't find the folks at NIFC offering up lots of DIVS from USFS Regions 4, 9 or 3 as suggested. We only call up the Aussies, Kiwis and Canucks (as well as us old retirees) 'cause there aren't enough permanent, full-timers from America to fill all the resource orders.

Its a basic premise of the National Wildfire Coordinating Group that we accept each other's quals, weather Fed, State, Rural, County. Let's get past our biases and look at performance. The options this year (again) were to overextend the span of control, or leave fires (or some divisions) unstaffed. In my opinion, our "mates" from the Southern Hemisphere are a welcome addition to our fire forces.

Dick

I do have a problem with making them DIVS and actually assigning American trainees to them after they shadowed an American DIVS for a few days. They can't be ready for such a task on a busy, and exceeding large Division with more resources than they will ever get on a large fire in their own country.

By their own accounts the Australian contingent have never seen anything like this, and outside of Alaska we have not either. Terrain, fuels and weather in the Siskiyous are so different than anything they have ever experienced. I know that if I was sent to Australia and put in the environment that they are from I would not assume such responsibilities and I have been a DIVS since 1988.

They may be the best firefighters in Australia but I can't believe they can be making tactical decisions based on anything but what the Branch Directors are telling them.

Some will say fire is fire but there are vast differences in the way we do things and the way they are used to fighting fire. There are no handcrews in Australia therefore no hand crew tactics or safety considerations. Do they know the 10 AND 18? the Downhill, Indirect Fireline Guidelines? and how to apply them to the situation at hand? Are they aware of the Common Denominators of Fatality Fires and the types of tragedies we have experienced in our recent history.

If 30 Mile and South Canyon are so important to us that we make far reaching changes in the way we look at all the aspects of this firefighting thing from safety zones to the 2 to 1 work rest ratio, supervision, decision making, risk awareness and all the rest. Then how in good conscience can we put some one from Australia in charge of 1000 people on the biggest fire in living memory??

The Aussies are great firefighters and I enjoyed working with them and the Canadians on the Biscuit fire, but I pity the fool who decided to make them fireline supervisors after a week of shadowing a Type 1 team member on a fire and visiting NIFC for a day. If someone gets hurt or killed on their watch where is the responsibility going to lie? and what is OSHA going to say about that?? On the other hand if they are successful, is this going to be the way we do business from now on. I am sure there are plenty of DIVS sitting in Region 4 or 9 or 3 that would love to come to Oregon.

Bring the out of country folks in to learn how we do things or run a pulaski or squirt water, but don't put them in supervisory positions. I would expect no less if I were lucky enough to be invited to Australia or Canada.

THINK ABOUT IT

I've got to agree with OB. No info at all on the blokes from Oz and how they're going. Thanks Molloysboy.

Here on the west side of Oz we are also having a ver dry spell. So far this August we are at 40% of average rainfall. June and July were also below average. I am glad we have some people over there getting up to speed and learning some new stuff in time for our season.

Stay safe,
Joebloggs

Onelick, I definitely do not have any animosity towards IAFF members. They have some great firefighters, I mourn the loss of their members, and I respect the right on that organization to honor its fallen brothers and sisters.

The IAFF memorial has had some controversy. The Colorado Springs newspaper ran some articles critical of the IAFF for being discriminatory while the memorial is in a city (not union) owned park. In 1994 a Colorado Springs radio station held a fund raiser for the families of the South Canyon fatalities. They chose the IAFF memorial as a location. They were told to cease and desist by the IAFF because none of the 14 fatalities were union members.

FWFSA Socal , I agree, let us remember the sacrifices. I mourn the loss of my friends. I am saddened by the loss of any firefighter, whether they be VFD, contract, union, Fed, city, etc. But also remember that families and friends have gone to the IAFF memorial and found out that their loved ones did not qualify. That is truly a slap in the face.

6

Amidst other discussion, Forest Ecologist Jim Agee explains why
Western wildfires have become so common
MSNBC.com

Bush proposal to target "fire crisis"
MSNBC.com

It sounds like you are talking about a Pine plantation. They are common in my neck-o-the-woods (midwest) and probably so in most of the eastern US. I have never noticed many in the western us, however I do clearly recall planting trees (using a chain saw head with an auger attachment to dig the holes, and, boy did that separate out the wimps!) at abt 8x8 spacing. Plantations usually go through a couple of row thinnings before it gets to the point where you start doing a selective thinning and by that time the trees are usually big enough for saw logs. For pulp the mills take trees down to a 4inch dia at the small end and sometimes even down to 2inch if they need the wood. The difference here (midwest at least) is that there is a HUGE pulp (trees to make paper) market (in both demand and mills that need the raw product) and we do not have the huge costs/difficulty of getting the trees from the stump to the mill as in a remote mountain location. I would assume that the problems with accomplishing some thinning needs in western states are just that. The cost is to much to make it economically feasible.

On a related theme, I also remember doing a LOT of post timbersale work ( in the west) which consisted to cutting down all remaining trees & saplings to prep an are to be burned and replanted. I dont have a clue now as to what was the the majority species we were cutting down, (probably something the foresters did not want or it was stunted from being under the original canopy...at least I hope) but I have always wondered as it seemed like we cut down a ton of trees just to replant the area after the burn.

pulaski

Schedule A resources such as Type I engines, Rescues, Paramedic Units, and Truck Companies are funded by a local government agencies such as a county or fire district. CDF has about 38 Counties in California that have contracted with CDF to be their fire department. The contract county determines the amount of staffing and type of equipment they want and CDF will tailor the fire protection to there needs and budget. If the contract wants 4 person staffing on an ALS Truck company, we can do that. If they want 2 person staffing on a Type II engine, that can be done as well.

As for 5150 this is a code that basically says a person is a danger to themselves or others due to a mental incapacity. A peace office can place them under arrest for 72 hours for their own protection until a psychological evaluation can be conducted.

RC

While I'm not a CDF'er, I believe that Schedule A and B have something to do
with whether or not a county has contracted out fire protection to CDF. A
5150 is someone who's not quite all there, is determined by a Peace Officer
to be a threat to themselves and/or others, and can be arrested (I think on
a 48 hr. hold) for their own protection.

TC

Heavy green canvas wall tents housed 10 people each. The ground inside was covered by wooden pallets, nicely carpeted with thinsulite foam pads. We each had a cot with extra paper sleeping bags. Propane heaters at either end of the tents and flourescent light kits strung up along the ridgepole completed the homey setting. This made for long evenings playing cards or reading. We also had a VCR movie tent and I saw more videos than ever.

The work was winding down; we only saw fire or smoke twice. Most of the days were filled with rehab of wilderness firelines along trails, flush-cutting and covering stumps, making waterbars, etc. We moved mountains of dusty old tanoak and madrone brush which had been sitting outside the fireline for at least a month. Then there was the rehab of all the various firecamps. If a farmer's field had been rented we fixed fences, picked up garbage after the 20-yard dumpsters were moved after being in the same place for weeks (yuch!), re-seeded tracks through the pastures, and fixed anything else the landowners thought we had disturbed. All this without any possibility of hazard pay.

Meals were taken at the restaurant in Agness; they had wonderful carved jack-o-lanterns on display from the previous Native American crew. The local store couldn't deliver sodas or juice (this was before bottled water) because they had not been paid yet for all the supplies they had delivered earlier and they could no longer extend credit to the govt.

I thought at the time it was a unique situation, but now I see this historical experience may be valuable again. These are just some of the situations you all may be facing next month as the Biscuit fire winds down.

"Woman-on-Fire" - now grown and changed into "WhiteAsh"

Clifford

From your previous post...... "Last time I checked, you had to be a member of the IAFF killed in the line of duty to get your name on the IAFF Colo Springs memorial. Last time I looked there were no wildland firefighter's names on that memorial." ...... When you check next time there will be. IAFF Local F0262 Member, Steve Oustad, member of the Federal Wildland Fire Service Association will be missed by all of us in the Wildland Fire community.

All three members of LNF E-11 will be added to the California Firefighters Memorial and the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial in Maryland.

Let us remember the sacrifices they have made and not begin discussions of who is or is not on specific memorials. To begin discussion like that would be a slap in the face to the families, friends, co-workers, and the entire Wildland Firefighting community.

FWFSA Socal

Here's a question for anyone: Has there been a formal or informal ban on Federal Wildland Fire Agencies from posting individual websites up (like for engines, crews, stations, etc.). There were once some good ones either attached to a Forest's Website (such as the R-5 Modoc NF's E-65 crew/station) that have been removed or cannot be located. The Lassen NF has a great website regarding information about its Fire Management Teams for each district.

Anyone have an answer?

MOC4546

Home for a moment from the Biscuit. This satellite image has been making the rounds. Awesome to see where I just was.

http://asterweb.jpl.nasa.gov/default.htm

If you click on the photo you go to a new page devoted to the fire. If you click on the photo on that page you get a even bigger image, you can see the burnout and the ridges and the roads. Amazing technology.

AL

Very nice one, Al. The detail on the large image is excellent. One of the Abs updated the Current Fires, 2002 page last night. With new fires burning in CO and further west, it's interesting to see which ones get represented on the web. Hats off to those teams who are able to put the info out for the public. It's easier and more efficient for them to pull the info than for the team to have to push it via fax or phone. Ab.

TO OB - Best place to get a GACC map (of the fire management regions) is on the NICC (National Interagency Coordination Center) site at: www.nifc.gov/news/nicc.html .

The best place to find out how to get to the CA / R5 site is here, as it's still not fully functional all the time. No outlook yet on when that will be up but I hear folks are working on it, or at least some of them (hopefully...).

Also, as a side-note, here's a gem few seem to know about for "real-time intelligence"... at least two of the GACCs have "News & Notes" pages that are updated with current information throughout the day.
Southern CA: www.fire.r5.fs.fed.us/scsc/gaccintel/notes.html,
Southwest: www.fs.fed.us/r3/fire/webdaily/swaintnn.htm.
The southern CA site also has some pretty good archives of the fire season this year and last, but you have to navigate around a little to find stuff as it's not on the main CA Intelligence Site.

TO IIMT - I have heard from some folks who are involved with FEMA that they are working on ICS and also using some of the other things the wildland system has in place for setting priorities and managing multiple disasters. Also, in Bush's recently released National Strategy for Homeland Security, and in all of the other related literature his offices have put out this spring, he very clearly states the need for one single comprehensive integrated national incident management system and the response plans to match (also integrated). In some of the literature, ICS is mentioned as well as mutual aid, interagency efforts, etc. However, it is not yet obvious how or when FEMA or the new Department of Homeland Security (which doesn't quite exist just yet) will make a move in this direction. I would be interested to talk to you more.... if you want, maybe Ab can send you my name or vise-versa... I'm trying to find out more on this myself. Here's part of what I've come across...

The National Strategy for Homeland Security is at:: www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/ ...Look for the "emergency preparedness and response" sections...

Here are two newsletters on homeland security issues, for those who are interested (the first one is the most useful...):
www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/current_bulletin.cfm
www.twotigersonline.com/8.05.02.html

It is my personal opinion that FEMA and the rest of the country could learn a lot from wildland firefighters. We manage more and larger incidents and mobilize more resources faster than any other government or other agency anywhere in this country. And, we even work together doing it a lot of the time, between agencies. If there is another proven way to handle so many large incidents more efficiently than we do, I would be very interested in finding out how it could be done. It is inspiring to see the Coast Guard take such an active role in learning how we do business... they even have their own version of the Fireline Handbook (I think it's online somewhere also).

Well, that's a soapbox if I ever saw one. I guess that's why we have this forum, huh Ab? And on a personal note, three cheers for Ab for all the time and dedication you are putting into this site. I remember when I first started following "They Said It" in 98... with a small chummy group of "discussors" participating and a much more basic set of topics than the complexity we have nowadays.
Thank you, Ab and the other one(s) for making this site
an invaluable intelligence tool,
a forum,
a laundry room,
a training center,
a firehouse,
a neighborhood,
a family,
a support group,
a union hall,
a counseling center,
an open mike night (and we have some poets), and
an all-around wildfire clearinghouse.

Thanks again, and don't overwork yourself (take some time out! we'll survive!) --
- butterfly

Nice list of descriptors for the site, Butterfly. Ab.

The Hinman fire was combined with the Burn Ridge fire and is now being reported under the Mt. Zirkel Complex. On Fri and Sat we had 50 mph winds. Windy! Aircraft were even grounded. The Burn Ridge Fire began on Aug 12 as the result of lightning and blew over the continental divide in the Mt Zirkel Wilderness on Sat. On Sat the Hinman grew to 9,236 acres.

You're right, the Hinman that began July 12 had been reported contained at 1426 acres on July 24. Contained isn't controlled though and all it takes are fuel, O2 and some flying embers. You've been on our fireline, you know we have drought, a million tree blowdown and beetle killed trees. There are thousands of standing beetle killed spruce trees - 30 to 80% depending on location- in the Mt Zirkel Wilderness. Their needles are quite flammable and they're ready to torch off. Flamelengths rise a hundred feet or more above the trees. Brands and embers get kicked out and take off up to a mile and a half ahead of the fire. No stopping it. Just gotta get out of the way. Managers are being safe.

Diann Pipher our FS spokeswoman is saying that the fires are likely to burn together. We are now managing them as one and trying to keep them from spreading to private property. I've heard this is one of the top priorities in the Rocky Mts.

Co FF

PS Some arguments for reducing fuels and cutting trees here.

I was wondering if FEMA has a working ICS in place or if they're working on it. If the IIMTs are in the middle of a fire season like this one or the one in 2000 and are actively evacuating people from the fire front, our teams might not be so available to respond to multiple events elsewhere. Priorities will have to be evaluated. We have a good system for setting priorities with multiple fires and other disasters. FEMA should use us as a model.

IIMT guy

I have heard that such plans are in the works. Coast Guard and other non-fire people have been showing up on fire this summer to see how the system works. Undoubtedly our ICS is being used as a model.
Ab.

Wildfires Fuel Forest Thinning Debate

Ab, please add this one- The actual news event and release of the report (on the networks) was much more directed toward changes than this CNN article suggests. The mayor made it very clear that this is not a blame game or pointing the finger, but looking for ways to improve response and functioning when confronted in the future with such a large and difficult incident.
FDNY recommends policy changes

I hope that someone viewing They Said might be able to help me. I'm trying to locate and purchase the fabric used to make fire shelters [shiny silver], by the roll. A couple of seasons back I ran into some folks from the City of Portland OR. Fire Dept., who were wrapping historic buildings with the stuff prior to getting hit with flames, but I haven't been able to find these folks since. Any info that someone might be able to provide would be greatly appreciated.

Stay safe and thanks!

Rock @ Wood's Fire and Emergency Services 530-832-6358

Co FF

Gotta thank Mollysboy for the update of where our people are – we’re not getting any info back here unfortunately.

Dana a paper was written by one of the Aussies that came over in 2000 which can be read at www.calm.wa.gov.au/projects/fires_in_usa.html.

From a Down Under perspective, we are heading in to a drought here after having a very dry winter (sound familiar to anyone?), 80% of NSW (New South Wales) in declared drought, & fire prohibitions in place in some areas since the beginning of August when it’s usually October.

Ab, one question – where can I find a map setting out the areas for the Regions so I’m less geographically embarrassed in some of the discussions?

Many thanks
OB

Take a look on the top of the Links page under News then go to Sit Report by Geographical Area. The next line is Geographic Area Map. You can click on the areas for the GACC (Geographical Area Communication Center) Reports. The only one that doesn't work is California - R5. We have the Sit Report by GACC page as a workaround for that problem, we hope. Ab.

If you haven't signed up, now is the time. These are some of the issues that the FWFSA has been fighting for years now for the Federal Firefighters.

An-R5er

The Abs agree. If you're a federal firefighter, sign on up. Link at the top left of the header.

Firehorse

I'll be there after my trip on Friday to visit the South Canyon Fire Trail.

I'd hope that every Wildland Firefighter that can come... does. I am busy, as are all Wildland Firefighters, .... but this time is special to me and I've made time for it that I CAN take off......I'm sponsoring a fairly new Wildland Firefighter and member of the FWFSA to come as my guest and view some of the history of wildand firefighting and the IAFF. Please readers, if you get a chance, join us in this memorial service and BRING A FRIEND.... Its means alot to us in the Firefighter Community.

Here's the link: http://daily.iaff.org/FFMemorial/home.htm

SoCalCapt

This year we recruited a guy who is a stock broker. He came to one of our recruiting fairs that we put on in the winter. He was interested in the job and asked if we could help him out getting a seasonal job fighting fires in the west this fire season.

He didn't have any fire experience or training, the only thing going for the guy was his drive, passion and just wanting a chance.

We helped him out with his application and got it turned in on time before the fire season began. He is now on one of our new engines as a seasonal firefighter and having a great time. He is probably one of the best recruits that we hired. I know the Captain is really happy with him and thanked us for giving his name to him.

Here is a little advice that I can give you. Keep the drive going and ask as many questions about the job as you can. If you are worried about classes you should probably look in to the local colleges and see what type of classes they offer and sign up for them. I know the web site for the ASAP program is still up and has all the instructions that you need to fill out an application.

I would suggest waiting until next fire season to get hired. You need to get as much information as possible about the job, get into the best physical shape you have ever been in (hike, run, and lift weights) and fill out that application and turn in.

We got lucky finding a guy who was in top physical condition and able to pick up really quick all the S classes that we put on during the fire season. He didn't have any experience at all, he just listened and asked questions when he didn't know the answers.

Good luck with everything, and if you have any questions, Ab knows how to get a hold of me.

An-R5er (yes 07 it is me)

Ab.

The next day several people sent in links to photos of the crash site and rescue, and official CDF information including names and engine number.

Guess you don't read theysaid on a daily basis... You're welcome to... Even had an update on how the three who were injured are recovering. Sounds like they're doing fairly well -- at least better and better -- for which we are very thankful. One has gone home. Anyone have more up to date info than that?

Ab.