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

Sincerely,
Sherman

jde

JD

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

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

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 ! )

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

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.

JG

Copter 404
Heading Home

BN

Thanks BN. Ab.

vt-cowboy

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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

• 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

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

EC

No-No

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

Fire Burns 100 acres on the LP

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

Thanks
Cy

Ab will pass any info along.

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

NorCal Tom

"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.

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

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.

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

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

CN

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

R

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.

Rest in peace "Little Sister".

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

BT

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

BB

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.

"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)