"THEY SAID IT" ARCHIVES
September, 2004

Home of the Wildland FireFighter

DATE
SUBJECT    (Previous Archive: AUG-04)

Return to Archives Page

9/30 Dick,

hahahahahaha <clutching sides> <rolling on floor> <hiccup> I did wonder who I
would reel in on the IC Bennett as National Weather Service! Thanks, I needed that.

I know Alaska has only one team, did Dash tenure out or retire? As far as I could
tell he was IC in late spring. Or did I miss a change then? Who is Lynn Wilcock?

I didn't realize that CA no longer has 5 IMTs. Which one disbanded? Neh, now
you gotta be trolling! :O)

I know the teams change year to year and ¿apparently? even within one season?¿

The thing I rediscovered earlier today by looking closely at who is on the teams
is that they are remarkably diverse and, from what I've observed in other situations,
members like each other and work well together! Hallelujah!!

Mellie

9/30 Regarding JT's response to the helirappellers on the Salmon-Challis:

First, it appears the main issue here is communication. A concise
explanation of the situation and the potential consequences must be
communicated to the dispatchers and fire management to underscore the
gravity of the situation.

Second, I agree with JT. We jumped three easy "good-deal" fires in the
Strawberry Wilderness in Oregon during the early "90's. A serious
rainstorm precluded getting picked up by helicopter so we hunkered down,
set up hootches (shelter) and waited it out for 24 hours. I remember
eating sardines while reading a "pocket" novel I carried in my IA gear. I
had on my warm clothing and stocking-cap, was nestled in a good sleeping
bag, had a good chew of copenhagen waiting in the wings, and all the while
rain beat down incessantly on my rain fly. Cozy and comfortable I drifted
off to sleep while being paid for my wilderness experience. I have heard
epic tales of jumper survival camps, ranging from 3-day snowstorms wherein
cannibalism is discussed, to making the most of an experience while waiting
several hours to get picked up by district personnel. I trust
heli-rappellers are also getting trained in simple survival techniques.
Hell, all wildland firefighters should learn basic survival skills. How to
build a shelter, stay dry, light a fire in inclement weather, use maps and
compass, etc.. It sounds like the Salmon-Challis is going to discuss this
issue and resolve their communication problem. But modules can make
themselves less dependent on others by training their firefighters to be
independent, self-sufficient, thinking individuals.

Sincerely,
Sherman

9/30 I have a few comments on the Safenet filed by the Salmon-Challis helitack safenet.

First of all, with that amount of precipitation forecasted, what is the HEMG, line officer or Agency Administrator doing even putting people out there at all! We have a new tool folks, its called a Wildfire Implementation Plan and it allows us to fire use on these fires instead of risking firefighters by rappelling them into a tight spot and having to pick them up in the rain. We need to consider this option before we leave helibases rope ready and just kick into rappel mode without making the appropriate management response. FMOs on that forest need to be teaching that to there HEMGs and ICs.

However,
The Forest did their employees an injustice by not picking these firefighters up, promptly. I grew up in that country, and the ceiling lifts and drops in a matter of minutes and sometimes under a minute. These guys were in a tight spot and had what I justify to be an "emergency". There is a time when we need to quit trying to define words and situations. This was an "emergency" that could have become an "accident" or a "disaster". They tried to get to the proper landing strip and did not succeed. That information was relayed to dispatch, and then came the typical cat and mouse game at the Supervisor's office and the District Ranger Station to try to figure out who wants to make the right decision and declare this a situation to be dealt with. This is a good example for folks on what we go through now as first line supervisors on fires with political, that's right its political when District Rangers and Forest Supervisors get involved, decisions being made. This forest needs to fix this problem because it happened to me with some employees that I supervise last year on a fire outside Challis. We had to ditch gear into a lookout tower and beat feet to a nearby road, that just happened to be right out of the wilderness boundary. Another hour and we would have been stuck for two days, one day more than we had supplies for.

My advice is to consider alternatives to suppression before the rotors crank up (that includes fixed wing rotors). We have to think about these things ahead of time, because our managers sure aren't!

jde

9/30 Well, I took a look at the Frank Church Wilderness of No Return Plan and came up with the following observations: wwwfs.fed.us/r4/sc/projects/index.shtml#frank

In Chapter 2, Section VII - Fire Management

Item D - Objectives
1. Firefighter and public safety is the first priority in every fire management activity.

Item E - Standards and Guidelines
(Note: (S) is a Standard, (G) is a guide) - Standards and Guides are how you meet the objectives.

6. All fire management activities will be conducted in a manner compatible with overall
wilderness management objectives. Preference will be given to methods and
equipment that cause the least: (G)
a. Alteration of the wilderness landscape
b. Disturbance of the land surface
c. Disturbance to visitor solitude
d. Reduction of visibility during periods of visitor use
e. Adverse effect to other air quality related values

7. Fire camps, helispots and other temporary facilities or other temporary facilities or
improvements will be located outside the wilderness boundary wherever feasible.
Disturbed areas within wilderness will be restored to as natural an appearance as
possible. (G)

Is there a different document somewhere that supports the following statement from the Supplemental Corrective Action? If so, could someone please post it?:

“According to the Frank Church Wilderness Fire Direction/Policy: The use of helicopters for demobilization is limited to cases where the Forest Supervisor determines the use is necessary to meet the following: 1.)Other fire emergencies 2.)Safety 3.)When removal by non-motorized means would create significant impacts on the wilderness resource.” SHOULDN’T SAFETY BE NUMBER ONE??????? .

Tim, great quote…. “Safety is about being proactive. Responding to an emergency is being reactive.”

… responding to an emergency when you could have prevented it…… repetitive swiss cheese model. Sooner or later the holes line up.

Lobotomy
9/30 Mellie - Wally Bennett of the Northern Rockies is retired USFS (Flathead NF) and currently with Montana DNRC out of Kalispell, not the WX Service!

Mellie - Alaska only has 1 National IMT, and the Southern Region kicked in a 2nd team when California backed down to 4.

Dick Mangan
9/30 right on tim....

The history on the Salmon-Challis goes well beyond what has happened in the last two years. The people they have chosen to hire in leadership positions, the lack of involvement from management, the inability to address known problems, and like you said reactive instead of proactive line officers, have forced good people to leave for better pastures. No matter what the truth is or the facts, the Salmon has lost credibility in the fire community. Where did you go Joe Carvelho? You are missed.

JD

9/30 Concerning the SCNF helitack demobe.

According to Colin Powell, "The commander in the field is always right and the rear echelon is wrong, unless proved otherwise."  This bit of wisdom is available from NIFC at:   www.fireleadership.gov/toolbox/about_leadership.html

So we have a situation where an IC (I am assuming that he or she is knowledgeable concerning wilderness tactics and policy) is requesting the use of an alternate helispot for safety concerns.  The Frank Church Wilderness Fire Direction/Policy states that helicopters can be used for a variety of reasons including safety.  The request is denied because the safety concerns have not yet escalated to a "medical emergency".

Safety is about being proactive.  Responding to an emergency is being reactive.

Tim

Excellent slide show on LEADERSHIP by Colin Powell. I added the quote to the Quotes list. Ab.

9/30 EMT_MB

I was curious. Here's a breakdown of which agency the ICs on the the Type I IMTs work for:

Pacific NW Area: IC Anderson of PNW3 is Spokane Co FD when he's not IC. IC Lohrey PNW2 is Forest Service.
California: All 5 ICs are Forest Service
Northern Rockies: IC Bennett, is NWS (National Weather Service); IC Frye is National Park Service (GNP)
Great Basin: IC Sexton is Forest Service; IC Martin is Forest Service. Their rosters are hosted on a BLM server.
Rocky Mountains: IC Hart has CO-PBS as a home unit, Colorado State Forest Service?
Southwest: IC Oltrogge is National Park Service; IC Whitney is  Fish and Wildlife Service
Southern Area: IC Kearney is Forest Service; IC Ferguson is Forest Service
Alaska: IC Dash is BLM, don't know about IC Wilcock.

10 FS, 2 NPS, 1 BLM, 1 FWS, 1 NWS, 1 Spokane Co FD, 1 Colorado State Forest Service(?)
Hmmmm, 17. I thought there were 16... Type I teams

I learned something.
Fedfire, thanks for the reply.

Mellie

Southern Area lists both Red team and Blue team as Type I, that is, before they took down their main info pages. Ab.

9/30 Anyone know why all the www.fs.fed.us sites are slower than usual?

GG

I have heard it's the Mt St Helens web cam and people seeking info on the Gifford Pinchot NF that's slowing down the FS server. Ab.

9/30 Tahoe Terrie

Firefighter safety appears to have been disregarded in this situation, but there appears to have been another option these forces could have taken to mitigate this situation: STAY PUT.

I've been flown into wilderness helispots, with the intention of getting flown back out, but you can never count on air support. My crew and I were in a similar situation a few years back in Montana, a day of rain swelled the creek, the ceiling was very low, and we were stuck at the drop off point. No ride out, no safe way down off the hill. We sat for almost 2 days at a spike camp. Yes it was a large incident and yes we had enough provisions cached for the endeavor. On the third day, the snow let up enough long enough to long line most of our gear out, we radioed ahead to make arrangements for pickup at the nearest road crossing on the creek, and then tramped out the 6 or 7 miles, aware of the dangers of hypothermia.

Why couldn't the action taken be to just stay put and construct camp until the weather let up? Basic backpacking skills that I learned when I was 13 in Scouts. It seems that a lot of the time we rely to heavily on technology to take us out of a difficult situation rather than rely on our own wit and training.

Just my 2 cents.

JT
9/30 Ab et all,

I am setting up a display honoring the fallen wildland firefighters. Do we
have a count on the number of fatalities since Mann Gulch?

Where could I get that number?

Thanks,

PSM

Here's some info: NWCG Historical Wildland Firefighter Fatalities 1910 - 1996 pdf file. Ab.

9/30 Just reading the safenet about the Salmon Challis rappellers. Just when you thought
it was safe enough to go back in the water.......

When is this going to end for the poor folks on that forest? Somebody stand up and
take that fire program to its happy place.

Cramer, Cabin Creek, and now this garbage. Good luck guys, maybe you should think
of going to a place that cares a little more about you before you get hurt.

How about a line from management about their plans for next year....another near miss,
another fatality, or a revamp of operations to better equip, train, and support their folks
on the ground.

The Goat
9/30 Abs and All,

I just received this email from FEMA. As you read this article, they make it sound like the USFS runs all the IMTs! And they can handle ANYTHING!

Can someone with more GS than me please email Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge (FEMA is part of Homeland Security) and inform him of our IMTs interagency nature.

And please also modify the position descriptions and pay rates of those team members out there to equal Superman, because according to FEMA, they can do anything.

(Sarcasm totally intended)

EMT_MB

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is a message from the Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Fire Administration. You may submit your comments or request additional information by contacting USFA through our web site at: http://www.usfa.fema.gov/applications/feedback/
------------------

September 29, 2004

MEMBERS FROM THREE INCIDENT MANAGEMENT TEAMS TRAVEL TO FLORIDA

Teams being developed using the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) All-Hazards IMT Technical Assistance Program learn first-hand about IMT operations during major emergencies

Emmitsburg, MD- Members from the Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and National Capital Region "Type 3" Incident Management Teams (IMTs) were recently teamed with Federal IMTs operating in response to Hurricanes Frances, Ivan and Jeanne. The purpose was to partner and observe their counterparts on Federal "Type 1" IMTs and to monitor their functions, tasks, and responsibilities to gain hands-on experience at an actual incident. The shadowing assignments were coordinated by the USFA in partnership with the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). The USFS coordinates the Type 1 IMTs and Type 2 IMTs, both of which are Federal resources that are trained and equipped to manage large-scale incidents and disasters.

"Developing local, regional, and state incident management teams will support the National Incident Management System," said Michael Brown, Undersecretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate within the Department of Homeland Security. "The interface between these IMTs and Federal assets is critical during a disaster, as we have seen with Hurricanes Charlie, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne. There is no better way to prepare the IMT members than to have them see these operations in real-time."

Currently, Type 3 IMTs are being developed at the State and Regional levels across the country, to include team training and mentoring, position-specific training, and shadowing. A Type 3 IMT is a standing team of trained personnel from different departments, organizations, agencies, and jurisdictions within a state or DHS Urban Area Security Initiative region, activated to support incident management at major or complex emergency incidents or special events that extend beyond one operational period. Type 3 IMTs will respond and operate within the State, depending upon State-specific laws, policies, and regulations.

In addition, the USFA All-Hazard IMT Technical Assistance Program is helping develop Types 4 and 5 IMTs at the local level across the country. For more information on this program, contact the USFA's All-Hazards IMT Technical Assistance Program office at (301) 447-7888 or FEMA-AHIMT@dhs.gov.

On March 1, 2003, FEMA became part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. FEMA's continuing mission within the new department is to lead the effort to prepare the nation for all hazards and effectively manage federal response and recovery efforts following any national incident. FEMA also initiates proactive mitigation activities, trains first responders, and manages the National Flood Insurance Program and the U.S. Fire Administration.

9/29 Does this SAFEnet address current USFS policy? 64CS2MSAFE
Supplemental Corrective Action 64GUMDSFIR
Supplemental Corrective Action 652MD8SAFE

I THINK NOT!!!

Firefighter SAFETY should come FIRST. Action should be taken prior to the
situation becoming a full blown medical emergency! The Salmon-Challis leadership
should NOT be allowed to continue putting firefighters at risk! The environment
simply  yells FIREFIGHTER LIVES ON THIS FOREST ARE NOT VALUED!
It's an atmosphere in which accidents are encouraged to happen! My god, what
does it take for these people to learn the Corrective Action should be more than
Cover Your Ass??

Tahoe Terrie

9/29 Mellie,

I can only give you my experience with refusing assignments, which is not that extensive.

To the best of my knowledge there is no paper trail saying you were bad. It is rare to even get any official eval on a fire, good or bad. About the only long term effect is your relationship with your crew (were you looking out for them), in the short term good or bad performance can affect when you get released from the fire (if they don't like you, guess who is usually the first to go) and what kind of assignments you get while there (hotline or mop up). I've found most supervisors are pretty reasonable, if you give an alternative or at least a convincing argument, they will work with you to find a solution. As you said crews vary in quality and experience, an experienced crew can take an assignment without a second thought that a green (inexperienced) crew has no business taking, if the supervisor doesn't speak up who else can be blamed for the outcome? I think it would be an interesting study to see how many of the tragedy fires and near misses resulted after another crew refused an assignment (personally I think it should be a requirement to tell a crew when they are getting an assignment another crew refused, and why it was refused).

As far as long term effects I've found that those who already had a bad opinion of you will use it as their proof you are a bad firefighter and those who don't will take it at face value respecting that it is part of your job to make those decisions. Some will even see it as proof you are a good firefighter who has the ability to take a risk to keep the crew safe.

Fedfire
9/29 Dear Mr. Judd,

Regarding Mr. Paulson's comments and my response:

I never said there was no relationship between politics and firefighting or firefighters. I said there was no relationship between Eva Schicke's death and the politics surrounding the binding arbitration bill. True, politics and politicians impact nearly every aspect of our daily lives whether we know it or not, like it or not. But not every aspect. Rest assured Mr. Judd I am not so naive as to believe otherwise, nor do I need a lesson in Politics 101 to understand "the much bigger picture of the relationship between politics and firefighting".

One problem with Mr. Paulson's statement is that he was not referring to the big picture of fire service related politics. He was responding to the veto of a very specific bill and included a reference to a particular dead firefighter. The bill - binding arbitration, was/is, at its core, all about money. Not fireline safety. The bill had nothing to do with anything that goes on out on the line. No element of that legislation would have had the slightest impact on the events of that tragic Sunday afternoon had it been signed instead of vetoed. Eva's death and the binding arbitration bill are completely unrelated.

You use the horrors of Sept 11, 2001 as an example of the connection between politics and the fire service in an attempt to justify and rationalize Mr. Paulson's statement. Yes indeed, firefighters and politicians of every stripe used the tragedy of September 11 to focus attention on how the service had been left to rot in recent decades since "raise taxes" became a four letter word in this country. They used it to focus on the closed houses, the understaffed engines, the obsolete equipment, the lack of up-to-the-minute training and technology, and on and on. It was the clarity of focus resulting from the Trade Center devastation that resulted in the SAFER and FIRE acts; two pieces of legislation that relate directly to the safety and operational capabilities of firefighters. These two acts succeeded because politicians, union lobbyists and agency administrators worked together to bring about change that would have a direct impact on the safety of firefighters. Using the terror of September 11, 2004 to bring attention to and pressure toward passage of the SAFER and FIRE acts was legitimate because those pieces of legislation would have a direct impact on the safety and capabilities of firefighters in the future. The legislation and the firefighting were/are connected. But this example has no relevance to Mr.. Paulson's statement.

There are other examples of legislators and agencies responding to tragedy or newly discovered deficiencies by working to pass new laws or change policies. The USFS was motivated by the tragedy in Mann Gulch to begin development of what would become the Ten Standard Firefighting Orders. The disaster at Storm King Mtn. has resulted in significant changes in everything from firefighter attitudes to fireline procedures. The Thirty Mile catastrophe also wrought significant change. Whether it was Mann Gulch in 1949, or the Thirty Mile fire in 2001 providing the motivation, administrators and politicians have rightfully used those events as springboards to innovation in policy or procedures designed to improve the safety of firefighters. And in each case, the changes resulting from these terrible events by in large related directly and specifically to fire line operations. Not conference room wrangling over wages and benefits. It can be said that the legislation and or policy and procedure changes were directly connected to the firefighting.

I have to ask. Does NYFD enjoy the right to binding arbitration? If so, how does that fact connect to the death or survival of those brave NYFD souls, or the saving of firefighter lives in the future? Whether they enjoy that right or not has no bearing on whether firefighters lived or died on September 11, 2004. And it will have no relevance to the safety of firefighters in the future. Just like our recently vetoed binding arbitration bill has no relevance to Ms. Schicke's death or the future safety of firefighters like her.

It's clear then Mr. Judd that your use of the September 11th attack as an example of the connection between firefighting and politics is erroneous when used in this debate. Not because it doesn't highlight how politics is often brought to bear after a tragedy to make positive changes. But because it and the other examples highlight how the subsequent politics result in changes relevant to the tragic event that motivated them. The key is relevance. If one is to use your reasoning, now that Mr. Paulson has used Eva's death to "raise the awareness of those who have the ability to affect positive change" we can hope for the passing and signing into law of a new binding arbitration bill as legislators, union lobbyists and fire department administrators rush to correct a deficient system that has for years put firefighters at risk. And as a result of this new binding arbitration bill, firefighters like Eva will be less likely to die on the fire line, right? Oh... ... wait. NOT! Passage of this bill would have done nothing to save Eva. If another such bill is passed and signed tomorrow it will have absolutely no effect what so ever on the future safety of firefighters like her. It will have not even the slightest direct impact on the way we work out on the lines. It will have no means of preventing the causal effects of Ms. Schicke's death from occurring in the future. Why? Because unlike SAFER, FIRE, the Ten Standard Orders or the Thirty Mile Protocols, in this case the legislation is not relevant to the firefighting, the veto not relevant to firefighter safety. Binding arbitration and Eva Schicke ... the two are utterly unrelated!

Let's look at a what if, and ponder what Mr. Paulson's response might have been had the Governor signed the bill. Any chance Mr. Paulson's statement would have read something like this: "We applaud the Governor for acknowledging the sacrifice of Ms. Schicke by signing this important bill. Now Eva can rest peacefully knowing that her brothers and sisters have the right to binding arbitration. Firefighters now and in the future will have the tool they need to protect themselves and their crews while engaged in the most dangerous of endeavors - that tool? Binding arbitration." Not a chance! Instead he and his peers would probably be congratulating themselves for a long and valiant political fight well fought. It is likely they would have remarked publicly that it was the right thing for the Governor to do, that equity has been achieved, in part anyway... but now we must fight for equitable pay. And surely they would have been pleased to call the Governor a friend to Firefighters, and likely as not, slipped a contribution under the door. I can't imagine any reference to Eva had the bill been signed. And rightly so. Because binding arbitration and Eva Schicke's death are not connected in any way. And there would have been no reason to try and embarrass the Governor.

Let's now compare and contrast Mr. Paulson's statement with that of my own Union President, Mr. Bob Wolf, which was posted upon learning of the veto (<http://www.cdffirefighters.org/newsreports/> ). Despite the fact that the vetoed bill was to specifically benefit those whom Bob represents, of which Eva was one, not one word in his statement so much as alludes to her death. I'd like to believe that he made no reference to her death in his statement because he understands where politics and firefighters are and are not connected within the big picture. It would have been nice had Mr. Paulson exhibited the same understanding. Had Mr. Paulson been responding to a veto of a bill that mandated upper level fire behavior training for all CDF personnel including seasonal firefighters; a bill that mandated an increase in engine staffing; a bill that set in place minimum physical fitness standards; a bill that would have put new fire behavior prediction technologies into the hands of fire ground officers; any bill at all that had any relevance what-so-ever to fire line operations and safety, I could have accepted his comments as sad but true. But no. He chose to reference her death in regards to a bill dealing with the inner most details of contract negotiations. And worst of all he used Eva's death in an attempt to embarrass the Governor. Again I say, with the utmost certainty that he was wrong to do so. And the examples and rationalizations you offer in his defense Mr. Judd are, frankly, weak and patronizing. If Mr. Paulson's remarks are an example of the relationship between politics and firefighting then I fear our profession is in trouble. When one of the leaders of our profession, a man reputed to be "personable, honest and caring", exhibits so little regard for human feelings and has so little understanding of the impact of his politics that he would release such a statement to the press, then our entire profession, our brother/sisterhood is severely diminished in the eyes of those he purports to represent and the hearts of those we serve.

To his credit, Mr. Paulson has apologized, at least to me and my crew. For that I have thanked him verbally and by letter. I even admit the return of a measure of respect for Lou for having the sack to call and apologize. Even so I will continue to argue vigorously, until fires cease to rage, that he was wrong. And I imagine that you and he will argue the opposite view likewise. So be it. It just goes to show that some of the best fights are between "brothers".

Never Forget; Never Again!
Bruce Lodge FC
Columbia Helitack

( Thanks again AB ! )

9/29 NorCalTom:

Whomever was calling the said ST wusses was not looking at it from a
perspective of who was there making the decision to not go too deep.

There was volatile fire like you said. As with any fire making a run LCES
and firefighter safety come first, as you know. The next part of the
equation is the "comfort" level of the leaders making a decision to engage
or not engage.

This is based on experience and what level of training and experience others
on strike teams have.

The lesson learned here is that strike teams, crews, single resources need
to let TFLs and Div. Sups know what their level of expertise and comfort
is. Those leaders that are able to make conscious decisions to justify their
actions will be a safer tool to use out on the line.

EW will probably reply to this to clarify further the actions carried out on
the fire.

sfirelake
5 minutes early, not 5 seconds late....
9/29 I realize I don't know something. Well clearly I don't know a lot about a lot of things... But I did read the post about refusing and an assignment on an interface fire in WA and I wondered if there's an official way that some supt or strike team leader gets labeled a "wuss" or gets some negative review from overhead if they refuse? Is there some official letter that says they didn't do their "duty"? That they refused an order? Does that follow them around until they promote or retire?

If so, do you take the DIVS or the Branch Commander's word for LCES being met?
I know there'll be a resounding "no" on that one.
If wildland and structure firefighters are working together or if structure is supervised by wildland, do you take the wildland overhead's perception as truth (safe enough) or the structure supt's perception as truth (not safe enough under these conditions and for these firefighters that I'm responsible for)? What if they don't agree? (Even if it's in the yellow pocket guide on page 18 how to refuse? and come to an agreement.) This may or may not be about meeting checklists or safety directives. It may be about gut feelings and you use the pocket guide to back yourself up and you get a bad review anyway. Who's to say you weren't right? Theoretically, pressures external to the fire can filter down to affect overhead decisions when politics, media pressure etc are present.

It seems that beyond the LCES safety issues, if you're a engine strike team leader you also have to consider the experience of, say, the particular group of engines you supervise and the comfort level and understanding of your people. If they are primarily structure engines, the firefighters on them may be less comfortable with a raging wildland fire, the one way in/out, the proposed safety zone, etc. What one wildland commander might think has mitigated LCES might change in moments from the perspective of the groundpounders or structural firefighters. LCES has to shift with the fire, with the location of the firefighters, etc. Look at the photos of the Cedar Fire. That fire was really going. LCES was changing moment by moment for many days in a row. Structures were lost there. A structural firefighter lost his life.

I may not be putting this very well. Mostly I'm wondering about a negative paper trail blaming those who might have refused for good reason from their perspective. My only experience is wildland. I do remember back to several hotshot supts who refused to go downhill on a slopover off the Denny Road in '99. I know now the supts were recalling the Loop Fire and Storm King. (On the Loop didn't some crew refuse before the El Cariso went?) The fire behavior, time of day, etc in this case were different than occurred prior to and during those tragedies. There was a lookout, several even; it was early in the day; and inversion and 18 inch flame lengths had been the rule in days prior. FOBS had been walking other parts of the fire's perimeter using the black as safety zone. After some discussion and several refusals, the Branch and the Safety Officer went downhill first to flag it and personally observe the conditions. I know now that this was very unusual, but at the time it seemed reasonable to me. The slopover was hooked by other crews from above and below. But did the hs supts that refused get some kind of "bad letter" for their refusal? Probably not, I hope not. They're excellent firefighters and leaders making the best decisions for their crews. If they did, could that letter have been reviewed? Is there a formal process? In the overall scheme of things would existence of such a letter hurt the supts involved? I'm just using this as a "for instance" but I am wondering if such a letter in someone's file (if such things even exist) is another pressure to not refuse to build line when ordered or to save this neighborhood or not. It seems to me that Hotshot supts have more mental toughness, experience and intestinal fortitude for every decision they make than do other supts of engines, dozers, mixed resources, etc. Hopefully strike team leaders do as well when safety is in the balance.

I know, some (Old Fire Guy <chuckle>) will say that good firefighters will talk it over with overhead and mitigate. What if you think you've done that? Say the fire environment is like the Cedar Fire and you feel you've arrived at a reasonable solution to fall back - and then later you later get a notice of a bad performance?

LCES, size of safety zone, reasonable escape route, even lookout can be a nebulous thing in a changing fire environment. I hope strike team leaders, engine captains, hotshot supts continue to take care of their people first without fear of reprimand.

Can anyone tell me what is standard operating procedure for evaluating intermediate management folks performance (supts, STLs)? Do files of letters exist - good and bad? Are bad reviews weighed against good ones? Does a bad review matter? (I'd be pissed.) Is there a standard process for reviewing bad reviews and offering your perspective after the fact? Has anyone done this and not been called a trouble maker? Wow, lots I don't have a clue about.

Mellie

9/29 The Jobs page and Series 0462 (Forestry Technician) & Series 0455 (Range Technician) jobs pages are updated.

I posted a nice photo of a CDF engine at work by Matt on the Engines 12 photo page.

There are some spectacular photos on Handcrews 15 of the Pleasant Valley Hotshots on the Blackwall and Willow Fires compliments of BG.

BG said,
"The Blackwall fire was in 2003 and took place on the border of Montana and Idaho on the Continental divide. This day "Big Ernie" nuked off 2,000 acres in about 20 min." Of the Willow Fire he said, " Here's a picture of crew buggies with the Willow fire in the background. PV was the first crew, IA the fire when it was about 150 acres and PV was the last crew to leave when it was 120,000 acres."

I posted a photo of sent in by Steve L on Helicopters 16. He said, "This is N407S landing atop Desolation Peak in Washington during a Palm IR flight on the Freezeout Complex, 2004. There wasn't much room to hang on to and the 'helipad' was barely bigger then the skids. And no, I didn't look up, I just raised the camera and went for it...."

Thanks contributors. As always, your photos reveal what you do and are interesting to look at.

Ab.

9/29 MJ, sure I’ll hand out coffee. At least we would be helping someone
instead of sitting on our backsides waiting for a fire.

IHCSUPT
9/28 Does anyone have any beef about structure protection vs wildland concerns on
the Fischer Fire and safety? I know there were lots of politics and volatile fire
behavior involved. I heard at least one structure protection ST refused an unsafe
assignment and got called wusses. I would like to know more of the whole story.
There may be some lessons to be learned for interagency, interface firefighting
with big media coverage and dangerous conditions.

NorCal Tom
9/28 FOBS73 - could you be specific about IAPs during the past 5 years that show
DIVS with a span of control of "twenty to thirty to one".

Which Incident? Which IMT? Which Agency/Location?

Gracias!

Aberdeen

Ab would be happy to pass the info on privately.
9/27 Looking for answers to a few questions related to the NIMO document (Draft version #6)? This is a fascinating read. Clearly a lot of thought and work has gone into the development of the document. Two questions.

1. What is the time line for final approval?

2. How was the first assumption under "Content for Analysis of Options" determined? It states, "The same number of overhead positions will be needed in the future for incidents". Most of the subsequent staffing related numerical projections seem to be based on this assumption.

My personal observations in the last five or six years does not support this. I have seen the number of GIS Specialists, Line Medics, Assistant Safety Officers, Assistant Information Officers, Archeologists, Technical Specialists, Field Observers, clerical/camp support, and other positions increase consistently every year. I would anticipate large increases in the numbers of overhead positions assigned to fires in the future, not a "steady state" system.

Look at divisions alone. Last week in class I was showing students numerous IAP examples from the last five fire seasons where Division Supervisors had "span-of-control" ratios of twenty and thirty to one. Over the years we have consistently identified "span-of-control" as a significant problem as it relates to Fireground safety. With the increased organizational emphasis on safety, personal concerns related to legal liability, OSHA citations, case law, formal reports such as Thirty Mile and Cramer Fires and agency accountability, I think you will see a lot of Division Supervisors simply refuse to accept overloaded divisions. If this occurs, the simple solution would be more divisions or more Strike Team Leaders to consolidate resources on the division (or just not staff sections of the line). More Divisions, means more Assistant Safety Officers, more FOBS, more Medics, etc... More divisions also means more Branch Directors, more support, more clerical, more Logistical/Financial/Planning support, etc... Either way, your staffing numbers go up!

Look at the staffing issue from an external analysis standpoint. The Guidance Group's report, written for the Wildland Lessons Learned Center, entitled "Lessons Learned 2003, Successes and Challenges From AAR Roll-ups", lists 88 pages of ideas generated to improve the effectiveness of IMTs. While increased staffing is not required to implement all of the changes/suggestions listed in the document, for other "best practices", IMTs will clearly have to increase the number of overhead positions assigned to the fire. You would not contract for this type of review, unless you wanted IMTs to implement the suggestions. Implementing many of these will result in more staffing. Other causes of increased staffing could include more complex finance issues, increased logistical support functions, etc...

Going back to question #2. Was the assumption that overhead staffing will remain constant, based on the idea that we will be taking a different approach to staffing divisions? Not staffing some areas of the fire? An increased use of contractors within the Plans and Operations sections? Other?
Any clarification will be appreciated.

Thanks,

FOBS73
9/27
 
Attached is a interest survey for Union IHC Squadleader GS-6 14/12 PSE.
Please distribute widely. Response due by 10/30/04
Thanks, Dan.
9/27 JG,

I talked to Vance Hazelton's mother on Friday. She said he is back to work
on light duty. She said that his spirits are up since returning to be with his
Midewin Hotshot crew.

I also talked to the FS liaison for Nicole Lustig of the Bitterroot Hotshots this morning
and she told me that Nicole has a tremendous spirit in working her way back from
her head injury (resulting from the crew buggy crash early this season). While she has
to be lifted into a rowing machine to exercise, she's working very hard on her motor
skills and cognitive recovery.

If any of you would like to send Vance or Nicole a card or note, we will forward
it on to them.

Vicki

Wildland Firefighter Foundation
2049 Airport Way
Boise ID 83705
www.wffoundation.org/
9/27 Does anyone know how Vance Hazleton (Midewin HS) is doing? I heard he went
home from the hospital in May but have heard nothing since then.

JG

9/27 Ab(s) reading & digesting the recent posts sent in by those who are much more eloquent and knowledgeable than I. (yes, that was a complete sentence)

This website is the best available to wildland FF's, regardless of location or affiliation
"things are a changing" - none of us knows what's what in another region, nor in the bigger scope of things...
My guess is the Fed FFs will be expected to deal with homeland security issues in addition to "normal" duties. hopefully appropriate training and a pay raise are on the horizon!

Best wishes, y'all. be safe!

northzone
9/26 my friend eva's flight home

Copter 404
Heading Home

BN

Thanks BN. Ab.

9/26 T-27 on the Left Hand fire in Boulder Co. September of 2004.

vt-cowboy

Thanks cowboy. I put it on the Air Tankers 12 photo page. Ab.

9/26 From the Sit Report: Where the Type I IMTs are and what they're doing.
Take a look at the Type I IMT Page. Some teams have links to their websites
with more information on hurricane relief. - Firescribe

HURRICANE FRANCES / IVAN RESPONSE, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Bennett's Northern Rockies Type 1 Team is managing a base camp at Saufley Field Naval Air Station in Pensacola, FL.
A Georgia State Type 2 Incident Management Team (Cline) is assigned to Saufley Field Naval Air Station in Pensacola, FL to support the receiving and distribution of relief supplies.

Sexton's Great Basin Type 1 Team is managing an Operational Staging Area at Maxwell Air Force Base, Montgomery, AL.

Anderson's PNW 3 Type 1 Team is assigned in Milton, FL and is managing a base camp and supporting the receiving and distribution of
supplies.

Wilcock's Alaska Type 1 Team is assigned in central Alabama and is managing a base camp and supporting the receiving and distribution of supplies in nine counties.

Lohrey's PNW 2 Type 1 Team is managing a base camp and supporting the receiving and distribution of supplies in Baldwin County, AL.
A North Carolina State Type 2 Incident Management Team (Houseman) is assigned to the Jacksonville Naval Air Station, Jacksonville, FL and is supporting the receiving and distribution of relief supplies.

Kearney's Southern Area "Blue"  Type 1 Team is staged in Atlanta, GA.
Frye's Northern Rockies Type 1 Incident Management Team has been ordered.

9/26 Does anyone have any information about IHCs and other wildland firefighter
crews currently working on hurricane assignments? What tasks are they
performing? Thanks.

COG
9/26 Good Sunday morning All.

I just posted some photos of the Simi Fire taken on Oct 26-28, 2003 by Battalion Chief Keith Burson, South Placer Fire District. They're on the Grand Prix-Old-Simi Fires Photo Page. They start with "Making a Stand". Thanks Keith.

Here are some photos of Pleasant Valley IHC including - hotshot wedding, Pulaski wedding arch, birthday on the line and taking a break on the KP Fire. And a good time was had by all. I put them on the Handcrews 15 Photo page. Thanks BG.

Ab.

9/25 From Firescribe:

Fire history story of the MN Boundary Waters.
The Forest for the Trees

9/25 Dear Bruce (re CPF president Lou Paulson):

As you well know, and which was evident at Eva's service, when firefighters are lost, the entire firefighter community mourns the loss and reflects on each other's fragility while in this honored occupation.

Perhaps a debate could be ongoing as to Lou's comments and the inferences drawn as to their intent. While it is perfectly reasonable for you, as part of her team, to feel some ill-will towards the comments, I would like to suggest that you look at the much bigger picture of the relationship between politics and firefighting.

One must be extremely naive to believe that there is no relationship, or nexus between the two. From the local fire board, to City Councils, to Boards of Supervisors, State Legislatures and Congress, firefighters must understand how integral a role politics plays in their profession... whether they like it or not.

Leaders, whether they be local firefighter union presidents, or the president of the United States, can never please everyone. And, whether you personally agree with it or not, it is by its very nature, reasonable to expect leaders of the firefighting community to utilize such tragedies for the purpose of raising the awareness of those who have the ability to affect positive change on the issues affecting those the leader represents.

Let us not forget 9/11. If anyone didn't think the firefighting community, led by the International Association of Fire Fighters and departments across the country, took full advantage of the loss of 343 of New York's finest to sway congress to fund the Safer Act and the FIRE Act, and state legislators and local governments to increase staffing and address a number of firefighter issues, then they need a serious lesson in Politics 101.

Sadly, incidents such as these are a natural forum for bringing awareness to certain issues. How many times have you read of a legislator introducing some bill after a certain crime happens or some tragedy occurs. Sadly again, it is all too often.

Now let's look at the CDF and federal wildland firefighters, many of whom I'm proud to represent in the Halls of Congress. The wildfire season provides ample media attention. The attention allows our issues to remain in the forefront of the minds of those that can effect change. For the CDF, that is the Governor and the State Legislature and, to a lesser degree, congress. For federal wildland firefighters, congress is the only game in town. Think for a minute how incredibly difficult it must be to educate members of congress on federal wildland firefighter issues when those members of congress represent inner cities and have no clue whatsoever what a federal wildland firefighter is, or does. The only thing they know about wildfires is what they see on TV.

Working the state legislature and congress is a year-round job. It may be easier during the fire season but can be extremely difficult during the winter months. If an incident occurs which draws attention to the occupation, I guarantee someone in a leadership capacity is going to use it to raise the awareness of issues affecting firefighters.

Now to Lou. As a former Executive Board member of the CPF, representing the State's federal firefighters, I came to know Lou several years ago. Unfortunately, I resigned my position as 5th district VP shortly after Lou became the 4th district VP and therefore did not have an opportunity to work much with him on the Board. I regret not having the opportunity to serve him as the president. However, knowing his commitment to those in Contra Costa County, knowing his work ethic and commitment to those he represents, there is no one less deserving of your assault than Lou Paulson.

He has recently been elected to the position of CPF President as a result of the retirement of an icon in the business...Dan Terry who spent 31 years as the leader of the organization. While Dan didn't always appreciate my tenacity in working firefighter issues at the federal level, he was a master at creating a state association, second to none in the country, primarily responsible for improving pay and benefits for the state's municipal and CDF firefighters.

The shoes Lou has to fill, and the expectations that accompany the position, are enormous. Quite candidly, I don't think Lou has the questionable character to take an event such as Eva's death and create a calculated political opportunity as a result of it. He is a genuine neat guy.

Many of us have lost brothers and sisters in the line of duty as firefighters. Your reaction is not exclusive. For quite a while New York City firefighters didn't want any assistance from any other firefighters in recovering their own and even got into it with the IAFF for a while. I'm simply asking you, and those that condemned Lou's comments to understand the complexity of politics as it relates to firefighting and the enormous role politics play in our occupation.

As I said, you can debate Lou's comments until next season. But there is no more personable, honest and caring person that I can think of to lead an organization of some 30,000 firefighters than Lou. And yes, that goes also for the unbelievably talented staff at CPF.

So please allow all of us to mourn the loss of Eva and please understand the staggering task of leading an organization of the world's finest and bravest.

With Great Respect & Sincerity to all of our CDF Brothers and Sisters:

Casey Judd
Business Manager
Federal Wildland Fire Service Association
9/25 TSI Guy,

Given the information you have given, this looks like a State of California bill, which due to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution cannot and will not affect Federal lands in any way. The legislature in California knows this and would not attempt to pass a bill to challenge this relationship. The manner of the wording of the bill summary matches the laws which are administered by the natural resource management folks at CDF (the none firefighting part of CDF) and apply to timber harvesting on private land. Doesn't sound like a great idea to me as the state's biggest tool in regulating private land logging is the harvest plan. At least that is my impression. On the other hand we need to provide some incentives to accomplish fuel management on parcels owned by tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of owners. So often the legislative approach can throw the baby out with the bath water.

Retired Forester
9/25 The Table of Contents of the Autumn "Montana The Magazine of Western History" has been posted on the web at: www.montanahistoricalsociety.org/pub/magazine/current.asp. The magazine includes an article on the Mann Gulch Fire that might be of interest to you and to others you know. Please feel free to share this information. The magazine should be completed and mailed next week.

Thank you, Tammy Ryan
tryan@state.mt.us

Fire and Ashes: The Last Survivor of the Mann Gulch Fire
by John N. Maclean
Bob Sallee was a living legend, the last survivor of the Mann Gulch fire, the forest fire that had killed thirteen men on an August day in 1949 in a draw northwest of Helena, Montana. Sallee had been two weeks shy of eighteen years old when he parachuted into Mann Gulch, his first-ever fire jump. As he floated down, he felt little except a rush of adrenaline at the prospect of what lay ahead. In the aftermath of the disaster, youth and mental toughness helped Sallee put disaster behind him. Decades later, though, he felt the pull of the gulch. A series of events - a return visit to Mann Gulch, a memorial get-together, the publication of Norman Maclean's Young Men and Fire, and the deaths of the other two Mann Gulch survivors, Walter Rumsey and Wag Dodge-cast him in a star role. A tough, bluff man, Sallee had no desire to relive ancient trouble. Under the influence of revived memories, though, his attitude began to change. By renewing old ties, he learned the depth of the fire's effect on the loved ones of those who had not been able to walk away as he had. And he came to appreciate the importance of his memories to solving the mystery of what really happened as the orange flames catapulted forward on heavy winds toward the smokejumpers.

9/24 My thanks to MT Smokey for the link to the news article on the plane crash
incident. Even without all the pertinent information discovered yet, I think
there are some significant lessons to be learned from this event.

I share the feeling of joy with the survivors and their families. I also share the
sadness and grief over the ones who were lost.

not quite as Curious, but still Sad.
9/24 Ab, here is a link to todays Missoulian article on the crash and
survivors that curious was asking about, it should answer all his
questions. Weather was the biggest factor in the delay of the search as the
failure on the ELT precluded ground forces from knowing where to look. Also
if survivor training was as prevalent down here as it is in Alaska, they
would have known to leave some kind of message and their intended route of
travel for the first crews on the scene. All in all they are two very tough
and lucky young people.

www.missoulian.com

MT Smokey
9/24

Cutting and removing of trees to reduce the threat of wildfire will be exempt
from timber harvesting plan requirements if various requirements are met.
AB2420, by Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa, R-Biggs.

hi my name is kevin im on a tsi crew in seirra national forest just wondering
if any body has more info on how this may affect timber harvesting- could
this mean we will once again be able to cut 30 dbh trees for harvest just
wondering any further info would be great.

tsi guy

kdillon@calpoly.edu

9/24 Some of the bills signed into law yesterday by Schwarzenegger:

Fire Protection:
  • CA will require firebreaks of at least 100' around homes in areas where the state has firefighting responsibilities and in high-fire-risk areas patrolled by local firefighters. Insurers may require even wider breaks around certain homes. SB1369, by Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Santa Monica.
  • The state forestry department will be able to pre-certify military pilots to fight wildfires, similar to programs now for National Guard pilots. SB1526,  by Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth, R-Murrieta.

Forests:

  • Cutting and removing of trees to reduce the threat of wildfire will be exempt from timber harvesting plan requirements if various requirements are met. AB2420, by Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa, R-Biggs.

SoCal CDF

9/24 Scott,

The following information on the Mack II Fire comes from interview notes in my files, not from the official report.

Fire Date is September 19, 1971, Fatality is Robert Maxwell Miller.
The three other USFS employees on the engine with Miller where Bruce Mitchell, Larry Smith and Ron Court. Ron Court was the individual closet to Miller as they came back up the hillside.

The engine was out of Vista Grand or Granda? Station in the Banning area.
Fire Location is about 2 1/2 miles south of Banning on a track of 160 degrees.

Fuel conditions at the time of the fire are:

  • 2.0 tons acre Chamise
  • 1.0 tons acre White Sage
  • 8.0 tons acre Manzanita / assorted brush
  • 1.0 tons light grasses

Live fuel was:

  • 69% Chamise
  • 126% Manzanita

Dead Fuel was:

  • 4.0-6.7% White Sage (Ten hour)
  • 2.5% Grasses

Slope along the hoseline is 35% towards the bottom to 66% at the top by the guard rail.

FOBS73

9/24 OuttaHere:

The only thing I’d like to add to Steve's and FOBS73’s posts is to emphasize that the only thing that will make a real difference is personal initiative. A very good friend of mine recently made his medical unit leader cert as a small department vollie…now he goes out as name request with a Type II Team. Lack of agency support is no excuse. How did he do it? He worked his butt off. He actively searched for training, drove thousands of miles to train on his own dime, sometimes paid for training out of his own pocket, pestered FMOs and ICs and people in the position he wanted to be in until they gave him assignments or good advice. No one’s responsible for your success (or failure) but you. If you want it that bad, go get it.

Nerd on the Fireline
9/24 Ab and all,

Two days ago I posted a letter in which I expressed my outrage at a quote in a local newspaper by Mr. Lou Paulson, President of the California Professional Firefighters (a union representing local Gov't firefighters throughout Ca.). His quote regarding the Governor's veto of the Binding Arbitration bill included a reference to the fireline death of my fellow crewmember Eva Schicke. In my letter to Mr. Paulson I demanded an apology for what I thought were his insensitive and ill-conceived remarks. You can see my letter etc if you scroll down a ways. Seeing as how I slammed him pretty hard in this public forum I feel it is only fair to provide a follow-up in this same forum.

Yesterday (9-23) upon my arrival at the base I was notified that there had been a phone call for me. Another call came in while we were doing PT. And finally another as we were having breakfast. By this time I had printed my letter and the newspaper article in question for the rest of my crew to read. When I took the phone call I put the caller on the speaker so that all of us could listen in. It was Mr. Paulson calling in reply to my letter, calling to apologize and explain himself.

Lou related to us some of the history of the Binding Arbitration bill, reminding us of it's importance to both the CPF and CDF Fire Fighters (CDF's employee organization); including some of the politics involved over recent years between previous Governor Gray Davis and now Gov. Schwarzenegger. Paulson went on to describe how his quote was just one line out of a much longer statement; that the press/reporter, doing what they're well known to do, cherry picked (my term) what was seen as the most gripping portion of his total statement for inclusion in the article. He described how the Governor has previously indicated his respect for firefighters, both in words and by his attendance at FF related events. He related the process in which the Governor has 30 days to sign or veto bills, yet chose to veto this bill just 5 days into that time line, just 3 days prior to Eva's memorial service; it was he said, the Governors timing of the veto that was disrespectful. And he went to some length to deny using the passing of Eva for political gain or advantage over the Governor in regards to the veto (if his statement wasn't a premeditated attempt to discredit the Governor I'll eat my White's). No, It was Governor Schwarzenegger who was disrespectful he says ... it was the press who edited his statement down to one line. To Lou it appears he still feels his statement was a legitimate use of the fact of Eva Schicke's tragic death.

All this background and context is all well and good, and I understand a great deal more now about the context in which Mr. Paulson made his statement. But in the end all this background and context did nothing to lessen the insensitivity of Mr. Paulson's statement. He still chose to include Ms. Schicke's passing in a political discussion completely unrelated to Eva Schicke. In the end I still feel very strongly that Mr. Lou Paulson acted in a "shocking and disrespectful" way.

To Lou's credit he did apologize. To me and the several members of my crew listening in on the speaker. He apologized several times in fact. And for that I must give him credit, because the bottom line is that an apology is what I demanded. Thank you Mr. Paulson, I appreciate the guts it took to make that call. While you did not admit you were wrong, you did apologize for the hurt you caused. I accept your apology.

Never Forget; Never Again!
Bruce Lodge FC
Columbia Helitack Base

Good enough. Ab.
9/24 I read in the local paper today about the USFS workers surviving the plane crash in Montana. The article described their walk out to civilization from the crash site. It mentioned they had remained near the crash for a day and a half awaiting rescue, before deciding to try to walk out. Does anyone have any insight into why there wasn't a rescue, or at least an attempt to recover the bodies (it was initially reported there were no survivors)?

Was the weather too severe to allow helicopter flights? The paper didn't say how long it took them to walk out, but it sounds like about one day. If they could walk out, one of them with a fractured back and burns over 20% of his body, couldn't S&R have hiked in?

Curious.
9/24 As to where the inmates get their boots, I believe that one of the CDC institutions
(possibly Chowchilla) makes all the footwear in house for CDF Conservation
Camps. They are issued to the inmates by CDC on their arrival at the camp, and
replaced by same, so if the inmate blows out a boot on a fire, tough luck! (at least
till they can find another pair).

EC

9/23 Todd,

You failed to mention another big reason that factors into the lack of
replacements to fill the upcoming gaps in the IMTs. That reason is the
potential lack of agency support if something happens. Seems like there is
always somebody out there willing to pull the carpet out from underneath
you if you make a mistake. Even worse in an election year like 2002 in
Washington with Thirtymile. Not many folks willing to put twenty to thirty
years into building a career just to have some kind of adverse action take
place against them for doing the job they are trained for.

Until folks know that their respective agencies will back them through the
possibility of lawsuits, politically motivated public lynchings, and career
ending actions I don't see this situation getting any better. Check with
any of the folks you know that do much prescribed burning and see how many
of them carry personal liability insurance to cover the potential lawsuits
that might/will arise from a lost burn.

Joe
9/23 What do Bill Gates and Homeland Security Department have in common?

No-No

I assume you can make a fire connection here? Ab.

9/23 Good afternoon! I am looking for information on two significant fires for
our room posters here at the Wildland Firefighter Apprenticeship Program.
First, does anyone have the names of the three survivors on the Banning
(Mack 2) fire near the San Berdu in 1971?
Any pertinent info would be much
appreciated. Second, does anyone have info on the Hamm fire on the
Stanislaus in 1987
wherein a firefighter was killed falling a tree? Please
e-mail me at swhitmire@fs.fed.us or call at 916-640-1061.

A gentle reminder to all prospective crew bosses, staff and instructional
cadres that applications for the 2005 Academy season are due in 22 days.
Yes, even those whom have participated in the past should submit apps. We
have approximately 70 apps from new people and only about 40 from the salty
old farts. And don't tell me fire season has prevented some of you from
applying. It only takes 15 minutes to fill an application out (25 minutes
for those of us over 40). And some of you better start working out! (You
know who you are).

Thanks. Scott Whitmire

They're both listed in this NWCG Historical Wildland Firefighter Fatalities 1910 - 1996 pdf file, but only scanty info and nothing on names or circumstances. Ab.
9/23 From Firescribe:

Fire Burns 100 acres on the LP

Hot List Forum says there's a column building since this article came out. Ab.

9/23 I will be having a interview for becoming a volunteer firefighter for Riverside County
and I want to know what they will be asking me and what will they be looking for to
come out of me.

Thanks
Cy

Ab will pass any info along.

9/23 RHC or IHC, I'm happy to get either on a fire. It's great to have so many of both types.
The RHCs have given many of our bright up and coming youngsters a chance to
get the kind of fire experience needed maximize safety and to build the next generation
of professional fire managers. Such experience wouldn't have been so readily available
with only the existing IHCs.

In my estimation, they're equal and deserve equal respect.

NorCal Tom

9/23 Mellie, this is a mind blower.
Here's a telling statistic and warning from that NIMO report -- :

"Over the next five years, the Interagency Type 1 and Type 2 Incident Management Teams and
Area Command Teams will turn over 92% of their Command and General Staffs (473 of 512
positions) due to retirements, tenure, or inability or unwillingness to participate.

The NIMO Study offers agencies with wildland fire responsibilities a clear choice in both
leadership and management of complex incident management.
Choosing a “non-NIMO” option will either fail to improve complex incident management or will
result in many years of implementation because of the evolution of policy changes proposed.
The unknown realities of response to the National Response Plan, and the increasing workload in
wildland fire responses, coupled with the declining numbers of qualified people to staff IMT’s in
a volunteer militia management philosophy, may create a Federal Wildland Fire Service or the
Homeland Security Agency may seize a lead nationally in all complex incident management
needs for the future, including wildland fires."

Todd

PS Ab, OMG! They're quoting John Maclean as some kind of a justification. Now ain't that about the asses patoot!

OMG= Oh my god. Ab.

9/23 Re: Outt'a here.

Steve's post is right on the money. If you have not got your task book signed off after seven years, you need to do some self re-evaluation before you blast the agency. I will be the first to admit that there are a number of problems with the course selection and trainee assignment system. But, based on my experiences with teams and home units, they will find a way to get you assignments and get you signed off if you meet two criteria. One, you have to be good at what you do (or show a significant desire to learn and contribute to the teams mission). Two, IF you are good at your job, you have to be willing to do it without complaining.

Fundamentally, Incident Command Teams select team members and "Unofficial" team members (name requests) by one of two methods. People, who know you and have worked with you, recommend you for an open position or trainee assignment on the team. Or, you get asked to come on board after you worked with the team in some capacity, normally a single resource overhead assignment. This only happens if you have met the two criteria listed above (being good at your job and willing to do it). When I said that you have to be willing to do the job without complaining, it does not mean you have to get along with everybody. Every IC understands that with forty or fifty people on a team, they are not all going to like each other. But, they do have to be willing to work together in a civil manner.

EVERY team that I have worked with is always looking for good unit leaders. If, after seven years, you have not been asked to "come play", either they do not like what they are seeing, or you have not been following the steps outlined in Steve's post. Either way the ball rests in your court not the agency's.

FOBS 73
9/23 Outta Here,

Are you from the East? I have heard there's even less support for fire
teams in R8 and R9 and fewer teams than in the West. If so, I feel for
you.

Skids

9/23 Bruce and Ab.

Thanks for the photo of Copter 404 and the crew. I will remember Eva smiling.

AL

I put it on Helicopters 16 photo page. Ab.

9/23 Just another monkey wrench to throw at "Outta Here" in her/his quest to become carded as a Unit Leader: although it sometimes isn't followed, the nationally accepted standard for becoming qualified in wildland fire is NWCG PMS 310-1. I haven't read it too closely lately, but recall that it requires that all required training and pre-requisite experiences are accomplished BEFORE a Task Book is issued or training assignments are given.

In light of the current trends toward "accountability" as being seen on Thirtymile and Cramer, maybe folks are starting to look at and follow the rules for issuing red cards and task books more closely?

Aberdeen
9/23 R5 Peanut Gallery, the main difference I see is in funding of IA resources on forests.

IHCs and RHCs are kinda funded from different pots of money -- or using different algorithms might be a better way to put it. All IHCs are a shared national resource. They have a home forest where they do IA if they're home and available, but in modeling the budget to arrive at MEL for a given forest, they are modeled to spend a good deal of time away. There's an algorithm to calculate that. RHCs are regional and are expected to stick closer to home; they are modeled as a Type I handcrew.

On each forest that has an IHC, money for the IHC (like for helicopters) is always there. Money for RHCs may or may not be available depending on budget fluctuations. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Given the NFMAS modeling, if cuts come in the future, the RHC will go before the IHC.

I think that if cuts come in the future the RHC will also go before the engine crew. It has to do with productivity. The productivity of a Type 1 handcrew, I think, is 10 chains per hour. For an engine it's 30 chains per hour because of the water. I have heard that the real value of handcrews is on EA.

It is probably more complicated than this. I may be way off base. Maybe someone who does NFMAS each year can clarify.

Now, I think something the RHCs and the IHCs should both be looking at is the way they will be used in the near future. I came across a link to a draft document last week that I posted. In my opinion, the implications of that document are staggering. Type III teams will be called on to handle fire "as soon as is possible" and Type I and II teams will handle other things, maybe even prioritized first for the other things? Extending the thinking backwards from teams to crews, does that mean the IHCs as a shared national resource will be more likely to be called for terrorism and other emergencies while the RHCs are kept closer to home to fight fire?

Another implication of that document? and I need to study it more closely...Will there be a new kind of Type III IMT with more responsibility for fires? Will there even be enough Type III ICs to manage them if the Agency doesn't back fire management employees up legally when the sh*t hits the fan. As fire management jobs get more complex and require more responsibility for potentially undertrained/underexperienced  people on the line, will the financial risk for managers' families be worth it? We still haven't gotten the news on the Cramer DOJ legal outfall...

Well there's more I could speculate on, but I'll stop. Like Steve, I believe that the fire organization will go on.

Mellie

Draft NIMO Report is in pdf:
Part a
Part b
Part c
Part d
Part e

9/23 Re: Outt'a here (or poor, poor, pitiful me) on 9/22 wants to be a unit leader.

First, here's some cheese and crackers to go with your whine. <photo omitted, but looked yummy>

Now, with your mouth full, you might stop shouting and listen to some options or alternatives, which you could have simply asked for in the first place.

1. Take your case to your agency's Red Card Committee, or whatever they call themselves in your area. If you have the documentation to support your argument, they may decide in your favor. If not, you might at least convince them to place you higher on the priority trainee list for fire assignments.

2. Contact the Incident Commander from the fire you were on this year and let them know of your supervisor's refusal to document your experience. I'm assuming there was a team of some sort on the fire if you went as a Unit Leader Trainee. Other sources you can request help from are your Forest FMO and Forest Training Officer. I'd use my chain of command first, then go as high up in the organization as needed, if I still felt I was right. Use your own discretion on this option.

3. Be patient. It took me nine years to get from Crewboss qualified to my first Strike Team Leader Trainee assignment (mid-Consent Decree time period).

4. Try to foster a relationship with your supervisor which will allow you to be available for fire assignment. If your supervisor is anti-fire, document their statements and decisions and go over their head. Once again, discretion is advised.

5. Keep your local dispatch office informed of your availability. Visit them personally, take an interest in their activities, talk with them about resource orders and large fire needs. Make sure they can put a "face" with your name as they peruse their list of who to call at 0200.

6. Stop whining. You may have already alienated others ("nitwits") to the extent some of the above suggestions are futile.

Regardless of what other choices you make, either fully commit yourself to fire or get out. The fire organization will continue either way. Fire is not a "show" where you get selected to star in a role just because you want to. Try putting fire first and your personal goals second.

You stated, "I could be a good section cheif in 5-10 years". Could be, we may never know, but I know it wouldn't happen until you learned how to spell chief.

Steve
Question Everything

PS: I'm so proud of myself Ab. My knee-jerk reply to outta here's post post was just, "Don't let the door hit yer big butt on the way out!".

I'm proud of you too. <haw, haw> You provide some good advice, but sometimes the knee jerks make for interesting reading. Ab.

9/23 What is the difference between IHC and RHC Crews in
R5? From my understanding, and I'm sure you'll
correct me if I'm wrong;

Same budget (at least on my forest)

Same Assignment rotation at GACC

Same assignments on fires

Held to same qualifications (i.e. NIHCOG & 5109.17)

Held to same review process

So am I missing some here or is there a difference
nobody but you know about? Enlighten us I'm sure I'm
not the only one here curious here.

R5 Peanut Gallery
9/23 Greetings:

This cycle of the boots discussion got me wondering what boots
the inmate crews get. Can someone fill us in?

Shep
9/22 Do you believe in miracles?

Yesterday, the Flathead County, Montana Sheriff announced that all 5 folks aboard
the USFS-chartered flight had died when it crashed in the mountains heading into the
Bob Marshall.

Today, 2 of the 5 were found on US Hiway 2, where they had walked out after the
crash. Both are hospitalized, but ALIVE!! The crash occurred on Monday afternoon.

Never give up hope, and be thankful for small miracles....and the chance to live
another day!

Mollysboy

Great news! Firescribe contributed this link: 2 Walk Away Ab.
9/22 Ab,

I only discovered your site about a month ago, and I've never posted before. Now here I am posting twice in as many days. Anyway, I have a picture I'd like you to post where appropriate. First, thanks to J. Watt for posting our crew picture on Wednesday. Unfortunately that picture is not complete. That picture was taken a couple months ago for use in the soon to be published CDF yearbook. Being a normal duty day, only a portion of the crew was on duty. The rest were off doing what fit fun twenty-somethings do with free time in the summer.

A couple of weeks after that photo was captured, around the first week of July I think it was, CDF firefighters across the State were "frozen" on duty - all days off cancelled due to ongoing major fires. So at Columbia Air Attack base, like stations and bases throughout the state, we enjoyed one of those rare opportunities when the entire staff was on duty together. We seized the opportunity, it quickly became "picture day" ... the helitack crew went one way, the fixed wing staff - retardant loaders, pilots, managers, Air Attack officers, went the other. Each group got their own shots in front of their own aircraft. But soon enough we all gathered up for one big group shot ... all dressed up, actually wearing our uniform shirts for a change, and smiling from ear to ear. Except in the case of the helitack guys. Of course before the shutter is actually tripped everyone is jokin' around and cuttin' up. But as soon as the photographer shouted "okay now... smile", most of the guys revert to their serious he-man Helitack look. Maybe it's one of those goofy guy things. But there was at least one notable exception. Check out the grin on Eva's face! It was a good day, a happier time. And that's the way she was ... the way I'll remember her ... smiling.

Much to our sadness now, we've been in the press alot over the last week or so. I reckon the names could kinda pass by a person as they read the news accounts. But be assured friends that my fellow crewmates who were involved in this recent horrific tragedy are real people, suffering real scars. Not just names in the newspaper. But don't let yourself dwell on the sadness. Check out our picture. Put a happy face to the names in the paper. I encourage all who knew Eva, and those who never had the chance, to look at her smiling face in this picture and remember her, and think of us, like this ... joyful in each others company. It was a good day.

Never Forget; Never Again! Bruce

(Thanks Abercrombie)

Photo of Eva and the whole crew
Yer welcome and thanks, Bruce, for working with me on getting the photo to me. For clarity sake, John didn't send the crew pic, just one of the helicopter that returned Eva home. Ron sent it. I changed my note on that post to give him credit. Ab.
9/22 I put some engine photos on Engines 12 photo page. Ab.
9/22 here are some pics for the taylor complex in alaska, courtesy of Alaska State Forestry, Tok Area Office

CN

Huge flamage. Thanks CN. I posted them on Fire 23, Fire 24 and Handcrews 15 photo pages. Ab.

9/22 In Reference to boots that are NFPA 1977 & 2000 compliant, I have done and been a part of boot committees, All safety gear usually follows these standards, however NFPA is just a consensus, not law. All safety gear is held to some standard or the other- whether thru NFPA, U.S. Fire Admin. or your local Osha requirements. In having prior contacts with these agencies there is now set standard for wildland boots other than department policies which go off recommendations thru NFPA and are a guideline to help you have an idea. That's why most Departments are changing S.O.Ps (standard operating policies) too S.O.Gs (standard operating guidelines).

NFPA is getting ready to start a study on firefighter foot wear. They just have ended their study on leather gloves. It will be interesting too see what their findings are in Jan. 2006. Whoever wants contacts with NFPA, their Liability Specialist -a.k.a.- Lawyer or some folks thru NIOSH and U.S. Fire Admin. email me and I will be glad to put you in contact with them.

SoCal FF
9/22 BT – Re: Boots

My opinion: Nick’s by far. 3 reasons – 1) Nick’s customer support is better. Remember that both companies are busy, and while White’s is a bigger company and you may get your boots a bit faster, what’s 2 weeks? Keep reading… 2) Nick’s uses higher quality leather. Thicker, too, which means longer lasting before a rebuild is necessary. 3) Nick’s has a thicker midsole resulting in better heat protection.

The Whites company has diversified into a smaller Cabela’s like company. Their store and catalogue has a multitude of different products (hunting, fishing, etc.) which has taken away from their concentrated effort on boots. The decline in boot quality has shown over the last 5 years or so. Nick’s remains just a boot company, no bells or whistles. Just great boots.

Whites are good. Nick’s are better. My opinion. And just so you know, you are asking the Ford, Chevy, Dodge question. So be prepared for those types of responses.

R2 localyokel
9/22 My thoughts and prayers are with Eva Schicke's family and crew.

R

9/22 This is the typical USFS water tender. It is made by Pierce on a '02-'04 International 7400 DT530 chassis. This one is WT38 of Grindstone Ranger District on Mendocino NF. Photo taken on July 23, 2004 at Stonyford Work Center.

This photo came in some time back and I've only just gotten to it. I put it on the Equipment 8 photo page. Ab.

9/22 Ab, and all in the Firefighter family,

This morning I awoke around 3:30 with thoughts of Eva swirling in my mind.
To kill the time 'till sunrise I sat at my computer and searched for
articles and pictures regarding Eva's memorial service. It was just a day or
two ago that the true nature of the fire service family was on display for
the world to witness. That service was quite an inspiring display of
brother/sisterhood. I wouldn't have thought anything regarding Eva could
make me mad. Then, in my search I came across an article from the
Sacramento Bee in which the President of the California Professional
Firefighters union was quoted. You can read the quote below. In short ...
I was pissed! A dark, silent morning of reflection and remembrance of a
wonderful person was ruined by politics. Ruined in fact by one of our own.
Below is the letter I fired off to Mr. Lou Paulson, CPF President. I want
to share it with readers of THEY SAID, along with a couple links, in case
people are motivated as I was to express their displeasure with this
so-called "Presidential" statement.

Dear Mr. Paulson,
While searching press accounts of the FF Schicke memorial service I came
across an article describing the fact that the binding arbitration bill had
been vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger. The following passage appears in
the article, by Sacramento Bee reporter Margaret Talev, and published in the
September 17th edition: "It's shocking and, in our view, disrespectful to
see that the Governor would take this action at a time when CDF is mourning
the first female CDF firefighter to die in the line of duty," California
Professional Firefighters President Lou Paulson said in a statement released
by a spokesman.

Mr. Paulson, what is truly "shocking and ... disrespectful" is that you
would drag the good name of Eva Schicke into this discussion. It is clear
you are trying to discredit the Governor and play upon the sympathies of
your supporters and the general public. You have miscalculated badly. Your
statement is a disgusting example of crass politics. And I resent the
attempt to associate Ms. Schicke with this issue. In so doing you have
sullied our profession at this most difficult time. Tell me Mr. Paulson,
what does the death of Eva have to do with binding arbitration? Had the
Governor signed the bill would it have somehow lessened the grief we feel
right now? Would it have softened the blow to her family, friends and
fellow fire fighters? Would binding arbitration have prevented her death?
There is absolutely no connection between the two, except that which you try
to create for the purpose of scoring political points. You do not hesitate
to invoke her name when you feel it suits your political agenda, yet I have
noticed that not so much as even a simple sympathy card bearing the CPF logo
has arrived at Columbia Helitack base. You disgust me. You should be
ashamed.

I am one of FF Schicke's Captains at Columbia Helitack. I have worked with
her for the better part of three years. I can tell you with absolute
certainty that she didn't give a damn about binding arbitration or the CPF.
I on the other hand have been following this issue for some time, and agree
that it is important to us in CDF. And yes we appreciate the work the CPF
has done over the years toward securing these rights for our membership.
But I cannot sit by and listen to you dishonor the sacrifice made by my
friend, my coworker, my sister, by dragging her into your world of stinking
politics. I demand an apology to the brothers and sisters in CDF and the
California fire service as a whole, whom you have tarnished with your
insensitive and ill-conceived statement.

A copy of this letter will be submitted to my union leadership and will be
posted at various online locations. I and my brothers and sisters in the
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection await your apology.

Never Forget; Never Again!
Bruce Lodge FC
Columbia Helitack Base

If you also feel compelled to contact Mr. Paulson, you'll find their website
at www.cpf.org In the lefthand column you'll see a "contact CPF" link
which will take you to one of those fill-in-the-blanks email forms. Or use
your own email software and send it to info@cpf.org

And finally ... on a more positive note, there are several photos of the
memorial service posted on the CDF Firefighters web site. Here's a link to
get you most of the way there.
http://www.cdffirefighters.org/evaschicke/ There are links to many photos
of my friend for those who desire to put a smiling face to the name we've
seen in print so much this past week or so.

Thanks Ab for letting me vent a little. And, oh by the way ... I'm on my
way now to join the Wildland Firefighter Foundation's 52 Club.

Peace,
Bruce

Thanks for the post, Bruce. Let Mr. Paulson hear the outrage and apologize.
Thanks for the link to the photos that reflect her spirit, her athleticism and good cheer. She is missed. Ab.
9/22 Abs,
Attached is a photo taken at Firefighter Eva Schicke's service. Her crew
members have placed her casket on board Copter 404 for her final flight,
fulfilling the fire service tradition of returning a fallen firefighter on
the apparatus on which they responded.

It was a very emotional ceremony, I'm proud of the nearly three thousand
fellow firefighters (four columns, 1/4 mile long, 260 apparatus) who
attended in support of her family, friends, and co-workers. And for taking
her passing into their own lives; we live not for ourselves, but for others.

J.Watt

Helitack 404 crew members including Eva. Ron got this from the CDF pdf information file linked to several days ago and sent it in. Ab.
9/22 CDF did a fine job of sending F/F Schicke to rest. To finish the service with an OV-10 in formation
with 2 S-2T's in a fly over, then Copter 406 hovering overhead, made everyone stand at attention.
Then the whole home unit lined the way, as her pine casket was carried to Copter 404, bringing
tears to all eyes. As Copter 404 pulled pitch, lifted and rotated towards the south, all was quiet
as Eva headed towards Columbia Air Base and home.

Rest in peace "Little Sister".

Rush, Copter 103 CA-LNU (73/75), CA-SAC, NorCal 2

9/22 From Firescribe:

Billings Gazette
Five people killed in plane crash
9/22 Hello my name is Cody McFarland and you guys ran a job announcement in the Spring of 2004 for jobs involving heli-rapel in Utah and I was just wondering if there was anyway you could get me the Sup's number or at least the forest agency they were with. You can reach me at opy12@hotmail.com. I would really appreciate the help and make next spring a lot more enjoyable.

Cody
9/22 GH and Abercrombie,

Thanks for the link and info... it'll come in handy for a report on insurance and WUI relationship.

Rex
9/22 I have a pair of Wesco boots right now but am in the market for a new pair.
What in your opinion are the better boots, Whites or Nicks? Thanks!

BT

9/22 I would like to share an experience in trying to get "unit leader" qualified. Why? Because I've decided to get out of the fire show due to the following. Maybe someone somewhere will get the point and keep someone else from quitting. Names have been changed to protect the guilty. Here's what happened.

1998: I was asked to act as "unit leader" because no one was available. I held one of several positions on the fire supervised by that unit leader, and was asked to cover as unit leader AND another position for which I was not qualified for. It was a small incident supporting about 7 crews. I decided I should become unit leader qualified if I was going to DO the job infrequently in emergency situations.

1999 and 2000: I was unable to take the course for unit leader because it was canceled one year AND because in another year I was not allowed to go to a course I was already signed up for because of work duties on my home USFS unit.

2001: finally got the unit leader course under my belt. My FMO approved a task book with I got used on two incidents.

2002: I thought things were going well until my task book was disapproved by a home unit training person. The reason? I had failed to complete a 12 hour "_______" course. The 80 hour "________" course I DID take wasn't good enough and could not be considered equivalent to the "fire" "________" course. In reality, the fire course was rather rinkydink compared to the intense two week BLM course.

2003: On incident as a manager, but despite a slow time in season, was not allowed to act as trainee unit leader. Got very little signed off.

2004: This year's fire season yielded one fire detail a few months ago for me. BUT while I was a trainee, my supervisor/unit leader again refused to take the role of trainer and I got essentially nothing signed off.

A word to the wise (please excuse my shouting). IF IT TAKES SEVEN YEARS TO GET A TASK BOOK SIGNED OFF AS UNIT LEADER, HOW THE HECK ARE YOU EVER GOING TO GET NEW SECTION CHIEFS? I give up! I would have gladly worked toward section chief, but its been too long a time trying to get training and get signed off. I blame it on: 1) district ranger who would not allow scheduled training 2) nitwits who didn't credit a 2 week course (or experience in other roles) cover for a 12 hour course and 3) incident personnel who don't care to have trainees around underfoot.

After six years of trying to get signed off, I give up. I don't want to go back to my "old" manager positions and refuse to wait a seventh year to try to get a task book signed off. Sign me "outta here!". See you in the office. I'm done with fire. I could be a good section cheif in 5-10 years, but now it won't happen.

Outta here!
9/21 The IHC Steering Committee does not decide who is an IHC. Who will be an
IHC is up to the agency itself (FS, NPS, BIA, BLM, etc.)...

If RHCs want to be IHCs, why don't they ask their agency heads? Oh yea, they
did and were turned down. If the agency does not recognize you as being IHCs
why will anyone else?

STOP trying so hard to be an IHC. RHCs knew from their conception what their
role was, and it was not totally the same as IHCs.

You can't have everything IHCs have! (ie., IHC web site!!)

R5 DirtMiner
9/21 Myth-Buster: you posted that the hiking boots are "fireline approved". Have they gone
thru the NFPA 1977 process, or some other approval process? Want to know before
spending $$ based on rumors.

Aberdeen
9/21 Oh my, it's the touchy subject of the IHC and the RHC! It's clear as mud, dontcha know....

Just to clear up one minor detail......The California Hotshots website is not run by Arrowhead Hotshots. They do have the same webmaster; that's about it. Neither website is paid for with our tax dollars. Arrowhead's website is paid for by the crew members. The CAHS site is paid for by the members of the California Interagency Hotshot Crew Steering Committee.

The website has been approached by several RHC crews wanting to be represented on the site. They are told that once they become a certified CA IHC and pay a small fee to offset the cost of webhosting and the related costs, their history and contact info can be added to the site.

I know this because I AM the webmaster. I'm not going to get sucked into the whole issue of IHC and RHC. I do like the idea of a nice RHC website. It would probably clear the air for a lot of folks. Why don't the supts get together, decide what they want on a website and just put it out there! Out of all those hundreds of RHC crew members, there must be a few that have the required web skills. Just start asking. The cost is minimal. It just takes a little dedication.

So don't be offended! Take control and put your info out on the WWW where we can all see it and LEARN!

mlf
9/21 Local TV news has confirmed that the USFS-chartered aircraft has been found,
with NO survivors. On board were the pilot, 3 USFS Rocky Mountain Expt
Station folks, and a Flathead NF radio tech.

Mollysboy

Condolences to the families, friends and co-workers. Ab.
9/21 IHC does not mean Nationally Funded. It just is the crews that have been recognized by the IHC Steering Committee. There are many places the money can come from; Federal, State, County. It does not necessarily mean Federal. They are also listed in the National Mobilization Guide, in which the RHCs are not listed in yet. (big controversy)

But both types of crews are held to the same standards and are in the same rotation for assignment. Likewise the IHCs should not be snooty towards RHCs because in many cases the RHCs stole the next generation of IHC overhead. Most of the RHCs are sitting better overhead wise vs the IHCs.

Can't they all just get along? From my point of view they both have good crews and bad crews like everyone else. With the new hiring and apprenticeship program there are not the same 18-20 people on the crew every year. There is so much turnover that all crews are different from one year to the next no matter how long they have been established.

R5 Peanut Gallery
9/21 Responding to a couple of threads:

The California Hotshot Crew page is a great page, and shows and gives links for the California Interagency Hotshot Crews. The page is for IHC crews, and not Regional Hotshot Crews, RHC. Everyone knows they exist as they all now have hotshots plastered all over their rigs. Why not start your own page with RHC if you feel so left out. Additionally, what standards are NPS crews not held too? I think you should be certain on your statements before shouting personnel attacks at someone like Brit, who is not the webmaster. There are some good RHC crews, everyone is quite aware of that, but they are not IHC crews, no-matter what is says on their trucks or their shirts, hence the reason they are not on the page. I'm sure no IHC crews would want to be an RHC page.

Secondly, the La Sportiva Glacier boots are fireline approved, and have been field tested but a lot of people, including hotshot crewws. They were demoded, but some Great Basin IHC's last season, and were subsequently approved for fireline use. I have been wearing a pair off and on this season, and have been pretty happy. They are somewhat lighter than the almighty Whites, but don't have the large arch support or the "ruggedness." They are good for a lot of the work hotshots or anyone does on the line, and is nice to see some new ideas. They are 8" leather boots, and yes, they can be resoled as they have a vibram sole.

Anyways, enough. Santa Anna's are blowing again. Be safe.

myth-buster

No need to light off fusees over this. Just my opinion. Ab.
9/21 Ab,

On 9/18, Rex asked about the damage estimate for the Oakland Hills Fire.
Reference the following site that estimates the damages at $1.5 Billion.
www.firewise.org/pubs/theOaklandBerkeleyHillsFire/
click on Abstract in the Table of Contents.

GH
Asst Chief, Operations
CDF / BEU

Thanks for the link and info. Ab.
9/21 Ex-shot

It looks like the hotshot webpage just covers the Interagency crews
(nationally funded) and not the Regional ones. I understand they all need
to meet the same standards, but there are still many conflicts between the
types of crews (mostly amongst themselves). I for one wish they'd get
over it, a Type I crew is a Type I crew. I do understand there have been
instances where crews that have not been certified as type one, have signed
into fires as such. That kind of thing just adds to the conflict.

BTW - Has anyone heard or seen the proposal to reduce the numbers of
type I crews and increase the crew strength on the remaining crews? I've
just heard rumors that it is being made, not even sure by who.

TC
9/21 Plane Missing with 4 Forest Service employees on board

Here's the link to the billings newspaper. Haven't
heard anything on the S&R.

Search for missing plane continues in northwestern Montana
www.billingsgazette.com

BB

9/21 California Hotshots www.californiahotshotcrews.org
have their own website run by the Arrowhead Hotshots.
The site is dedicated mainly to crew histories. My
only question I can't get answered by them, is why do
they ignore the fact of several crews existence? Brit,
are you trying ignore that Groveland, Samon River,
Springerville, Vandenberg Hotshots Exist? As well as
a few others I keep forgetting the names of? Not to
mention the type 1 crews that are held to the NIHCOG
stricter than The NPS crews. They dig line together and
sometimes better, and are held to the same standards,
but why are they not included?

ex-shot
9/21 Dear Abs,

I feel sad as I read about Eva on They Said. I reflect on our Wildland Fire Community and am thankful that we have a place to post, where we can communicate, share and grow.

At the Foundation this past Saturday, we hosted the Grayback families and a survivor of the Hayman Fire van accident.

We provided lunch and a large gathering room for them – they all came. What happened was a special day of healing. The families shared their children’s and their lives. As I looked across the room, I saw such love in those faces. Two years ago there was nothing but pain. They sat and shared like we do here on They Said.

We learned that the families want to come together. There is an energy that helps them heal as they share. We are going to sponsor an annual event where fallen firefighters’ families can come and be with each other. I told Allen Wyatt’s widow about it this morning and she was very excited. She has been corresponding with Wayne Turner’s (pilot) widow – our get-together will give them a chance to meet. Both women are looking forward to meeting each other.

Our community’s Foundation will help pay their expenses for this family gathering - all of the families. To support them, we will need as many of you on the 52 as we possible. Shane Heath’s mother asked me if Eva’s marker at the monument could be placed next to Jeff (Allen) and Shane’s marker. She said she wanted to take care of Eva’s marker for Eva’s family. She will be waiting to meet them.

As I have met with the Storm King families, they have told me that the gift in all of this is the meeting and sharing with other families.

I want you to know that whenever we send out a statue or financial help, we always say this is from every Wildland Firefighter across our Nation.

I guess what I am trying to share is that each of you who contribute to the Foundation and all of you who have joined the 52 Club, are not only helping families with financial help in their time of immediate need, we as a community are creating a place for families to heal with each other -- and that is creating a safe place for Eva’s family to begin their journey.

My heart wells up when I see each of you firefighters sign your posts with your 52 CLUB membership #. It will take a lot more of us joining the 52 Club to continue to take care of our fallen firefighter families.

Vicki Minor - 52 CLUB - member #54
Director, Wildland Firefighter Foundation

Wildland Firefighter Foundation, 52 Club

Well said, Vicki. I know why they call you an angel. Thank you for all you do. Burk, thank you also for your outreach with the trailer.

The Abs of wildlandfire.com, #1 on the 52 Club Gold List.

9/21 Jeff (#765), Steve (#443), Rush (#425), I knew NorCal Team II is a class act,
but it does me very proud that you guys from my neck'o'the'woods joined the
"ONES" and put your Team's name out there! Sorry I overlooked you,
Rush and Steve! Can NorCal II be the first from CA to sign up all their
members?

"Another CDF BC" I was really proud of CDF and the fire community yesterday.
I was also reminded of Eva as I drove past every station between NorCal and San
Francisco and saw the flags at half staff. I thought of others lost, too --Steve
Rucker's family, friends, and coworkers as we passed his station in Novato.

Healing the loss of a loved one takes time. I hope the CDFers and others who put
such time and love into the ceremony will also join the Wildland Firefighter Foundation
52 Club. Families of fallen firefighters and all in the fire community need the
opportunity for healing the Foundation provides.

Thanks Ab for the forum.

Mellie, living the dream "The Power of One" ("ONE" #7)

9/21 AB:

Haven't posted for some time now, but thought I would tell you after making the trip to Calaveras County to observe and attend the memorial service for our CDF fallen firefighter Eva Schike, I can't tell you how proud I am to be a member of CDF!

Hats off to the leadership of CDF to put on a class act service for Eva's family, the local unit, and future CDF'ers to come. You spared nothing and history will remember you well for what you did for Eva yesterday.

To all the member departments that supported CDF in this time of tragedy, a heartfelt thanks. The fire service is truely one family.

The healing has begun.

"Another CDF BC"
9/21 On the passing of Fred Terzo, Los Angeles County Fire, Fred was one of my
foremen, back when I had my first fire job at Camp 2. (Yes, this was decades
ago). Fred was an excellent coach and mentor, he cared about his people. I
remember that it was said he had worked the camps long enough to see the
entire county burn at least once! Certainly nobody knew fire behavior
better. I was blessed to have worked under him. His example will live long
after his passing and reside in many of us who learned from him.

Contract County Guy
9/21 Ab,

Thanks for posting the green sheet on the Tuolumne burnover. I printed a
copy and sent it with one of our instructors teaching S-130/190 in Boise
this week.

Sadly, this tragedy brings added relevance to the discussions of downhill
line construction and the common denominators.

I was struck by the times given in the preliminary report: the wind shift
lasted less than 2 minutes, and the fire flared for just 30 seconds. But, I
guess that's all it takes.

vfd cap'n
9/21 The Jobs page and Series 0462 (Forestry Technician) & Series 0455 (Range Technician) j