Rancho Fire here on the Los Padres, Santa Barbara Ranger District, Los Prietos is 250 acres at 
1920. 

Spotting and running with 80 ft flame lengths. Forecast here calls for 100+ tomorrow.

DV

Just my thoughts,

Mike

“Prior to 1900…about 6 million acres of the historic burning was in forest and woodlands and the remaining 14 million in grassland, sagebrush, and chaparral.” Pg. 30.

“However, we do not know what forests would have been like without Native American ignitions.” Pg. 31.

Just to make it clear, Native Americans were human beings too. They modified the landscape to suit their needs. They used fire to basically eliminate plant communities that didn’t provide them necessary resources. For example, they began the process of converting California shrublands to grasslands (more deer, more seed crops) long before CDF helped ranchers perform “range improvement.” Now that those grasslands are basically filled with alien sticker weeds and frequently burn every year in some areas (the front range of the San Bernardinos for example), a lot of folks (except for a few dinosaurs) are beginning to wonder if that will be the fate of other shrublands as human populations expand and fire frequency increases.

While it may feel good to try and replicate Native American burning patterns, the fact of the matter is, we really don’t know a lot about them despite some of the grandiose assumptions some people like to make. Separating out lightning caused fires from Native American lites is not particularly easy as Arno states in his text.

Then we come to the second quote listed above. What’s natural and what is an artifact of human activity? From all the platitudes I’ve heard about how we’ve (firefighters) screwed up forests due to fire exclusion and how we should use “pre-settlement” burn patterns to restore wildlands, one must conclude that North American forests and wildlands must have been a mess before us humans got here.

All just a word of caution to remember that simple answers are frequently not what they seem to be.

jimhart

I just had the opportunity to read over the sacramento bee article and
only have a few things to say about it. First, if I build a home, I do
not care what neighborhood I live in, if there is a chance of fire, I
am going to do whatever I need to do in order to make it defensible. If
that means I cut down a tree over 6 inches DBH with or without a
permit, so be it. And if the homeowners association of the neighborhood
I live in thinks they are going to fine me, then we will have words.

I have an odd feeling that the people who live in the tahoe area and
other fire prone areas are now thinking the same way, that they are not
going to allow a homeowners association limit them from protecting
their home. In fact, if someone in CA is in this situation, they should
call CALFIRE and ask them to inspect their home's defensible space.
Then if there are deficiencies, go to the homeowners association and
tell them to shove it because you arent going to get fined for doing
what CALFIRE tells you and what your family needs.

guns-n-hoses

It seems we could be "ground truthing" lots of different hypotheses we've held through the years, not only about homes and interface, but also about natural resources and how fire hot/bad burns on lands that have burned before under different kinds of "treatments". There's lots of data collected, quantified, etc these days that could be analyzed to look for better practices given the "new normal" that seems to be arising. Ab.

A reporter from AP was asking a fire friend in Los Angeles area why upper level firefighter managers won't say there aren't enough firefighting resources. Engines on the ANF are being lost on a daily basis. Engine crews, while theoretically qualified and carded, are not very experienced. The few fire managers that are left and are approaching 50 are planning to retire before year's end when they hit their 50th birthday. The reality is bad enough that no one wants to work in so cal so the fire program continues to dwindle away.

My friend told the AP reporter that if national fire managers said there weren't enough resources, they'd be out of a job, given the reality of the current admin and budget. 

Last year the admin told fire managers they couldn't mention climate change. This year that's a different story.

I think we'll find out soon enough about whether resources are adequate. Next year could well be a different story... What's that old saying? Fires give the test just ahead of the lesson.

I sound so cynical today... (but I am actually quite happy...)

I really like lurking on the hotlist.

Mellie

There are so many Unable to Fills for single resources already, I guess we 
might get to a UTF Team situation too?

R6 FF

That rumor is floating around. I hope other regions are being apprised of the reality, whatever that is. If R5 Teams are not being restricted to the region and do not expect such a restriction this season, please let us know. Ab.

For actual cost you can contact USFS WO office in Boise. They pay the bill.
Boys from downunder are cheaper then CDF or GS 11 and up.
And that includes their flight. Flat daily rate for each one.

Canadians actually cost more, even though they are just across the borders. Better negotiating skills??

concerned taxpayer

Thanks, JG. I added it to the jobs page HERE. Ab.

Thanks,

Casey Judd
Business Manager
FWFSA

Letter from Casey to US Attorney re Ellreese Daniels indictment (29K doc file)

This DOJ reply to FWFSA is circulating in R1.

Letter from US Attorney to FWFFSA re Ellreese Daniels indictment (155K pdf file)

NoName

Just read the US attorney's response to <Casey's> letter. I agree with many of
<Casey's> issues relating to Ellreese Daniels case, but I think <he> missed one
major issue. Ellreese was put in a position that he should not have been
in, and would not have been in if it were not for diversity goals, quotas
or whatever todays code word for discrimination is. I don't think he should
be charged with involuntary manslaughter when the agency set him up for
failure. There is a line officer over in Washington that got some brownie
points for hiring someone that most people on the Forest regarded as
inadequate for the position. That line officer should be held accountable
for the lives lost, not Ellreese, that is the point missed.... There
are good people out there and we need to get them in the fire service.
Discrimination is wrong and this time it cost four lives... Too bad as we
move into another fire season...

Old FMO

USFS tries for economic firefighting
www.towncrier.com/pages/stories/story220070628.html

Bone-dry conditions in California stress need for prevention near homes
www.contracostatimes.com/

The highly readable sequel to Steve Arno's Flames in Our Forest, this is a practical how-to guide that also informs and predicts outcomes for fire's continuing reintroduction into America's wild lands, ready or not. If the citizens and agencies now blaming each other for the debacle at Lake Tahoe had read this book when it came out last year, lots of houses now burned to the ground would still be standing. With over 30 years experience as one of America's top fire scientists, Arno is especially suited to the role of prophet and we should listen and learn. Arno is a writer who makes technical things easy to understand and who is not shy about giving the reader the benefit of the doubt, and teaching hard lessons with courage and candor. Anyone fighting or lighting fire in America today should have a dog-eared copy of this book on the seat of the pick-up. Arno's conclusion that we must figure out how to reintroduce fire where we have suppressed fire for so long, either as actual prescribed fire or as mechanical thinning, logging, and fuel reduction, is absolutely correct. Lake Tahoe just demonstrated the pointlessness of continuing to deny that fire is not going away and that only people can make forests and communities survivable. Read this book and then go do what it says in your own back yard.

Five stars. Among the best of the current crop of books written to drag us into reality and show us how to get out of the mess we're in.

Frank Carroll
Custer, SD

sacbee.com - The online division of The Sacramento Bee
www.sacbee.com/994/story/243982.html

Failure to clear brush aided fire, officials say
By Mary Lynne Vellinga and Matt Weiser - Bee Staff Writers
Published 12:00 am PDT Wednesday, June 27, 2007

The failure of property owners to clear small trees and brush from around their houses contributed greatly to the devastation of this week's fire south of Lake Tahoe, according to fire experts touring the burned areas.

Houses sitting on cleared spaces with irrigated plants, fire-resistant roofs, metal fences and other fire-safe features were spared while their neighbors' homes burned.

"A lot of homeowner inaction went into creating this urban fire," said John Pickett, Tahoe Region Chapter Coordinator for the Nevada Fire Safe Council, as he drove through burned neighborhoods Tuesday.

On Cone Road, a house with gravel spread around the foundation, cleared brush and a metal fence survived unscathed while the one across the street was burned to the foundation.

And on Boulder Mountain Drive, a house with a stone patio swept free of pine needles and sprinklers placed on the roof was still standing. All of its neighbors were gone.

"If you look at how many small flammable sticks there were throughout here, you can tell they weren't dealing with their defensible space; there's tons of ground fuel," said Stewart McMorrow, forest fuels manager for the North Tahoe Fire Protection District.

Julie Regan, spokeswoman for the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, said the majority of the 1,300 properties in the area affected by the fire did not have "defensible space," a cleared area around the home.

Not all of these had homes built on them, and not all were in the direct path of the flames. In all, 275 structures had burned as of Tuesday afternoon, 200 of them houses, according to the U.S. Forest Service.

"It's obvious we need to do more to educate the community," Regan said.

The condition of national forest land adjacent to the neighborhoods played a role, too. Streets next to land thinned of underbrush and small trees by the U.S. Forest Service fared better than those next to more overgrown areas, Pickett said.

"We've spent all day trying to get our brains around what happened here," Pickett said. "If the forest adjacent to the homes was thinned, then the homes stood a chance. If it wasn't thinned, they didn't stand a chance."

The U.S. Forest Service released a map Monday showing that most of the national forest near burned neighborhoods had been thinned to improve fire safety.

Since 2003, the Forest Service has thinned almost 15,000 acres around Lake Tahoe, said Matt Mathes, spokesman for the service's Pacific Southwest regional office. It plans to thin another 42,000 acres in the next decade.

But Pickett said his tour of the burned neighborhoods Tuesday revealed plenty of thickly wooded sections where crowds of small trees and underbrush created fuel ladders for the fire to race to the tops of the big trees and jump hundreds of feet.

On Lookout Point Circle, where all the houses were burned to the ground, the adjacent forest was "grossly overstocked," he said.

Meanwhile, the fire has exposed an undercurrent of distrust between residents and the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, or TRPA, which regulates building in the Lake Tahoe basin.

In order to remove a tree with a diameter of more than 6 inches, homeowners need a permit. But many are reluctant to apply because they think TRPA will inspect their properties and find a reason to fine them, some fire officials say.

Part of TRPA's mission is to maintain Tahoe's forest canopy.

"People are scared to death to do anything on their own property because they are afraid of retribution; it's created this huge paralysis," said Jessica Mahnken, defensible space coordinator with the Lake Valley Fire Protection District.

Pickett agreed that people are <Click the link to read the rest>

Fair use disclaimer

Mellie

They were taken to the hospital for observation, a prudent action to make sure nothing was being overlooked. They're OK. You should read the hotlist on this. Ab.

FYI From Bernie Weingardt

AC

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

Today I met with staff representing FAM and HR to discuss the GS-5 Senior Firefighter hiring issue. It was obvious this issue is complex, both in terms of causal factors and effect. Following are my observations and intent to address it.

There is a need to enlarge the pipeline that provides senior firefighters, and I have asked FAM and HR to develop a strategy that accomplishes this. It will be predicated on some key principles.

The solution:

1. will not adversely affect or dilute the purpose, need, or efficacy of the apprenticeship program;
2. will not open the door to individuals that do not currently meet or have the potential to meet our performance expectations and standards; and,
3. will require that those hired under this authority, not already meeting the Region 5 (Apprenticeship Program) work experience and training standard for the senior firefighter, to do so within one-year.

In addition to this immediate effort, and in response to recommendations developed by the FAM Board of Directors, I have directed FAM to work toward elimination of the 2-year apprenticeship program requirement, and to develop means to graduate apprentices based upon their competencies rather than time in the program. This will obviously take some time, but our intent is clear.

This solution will not solve the problem. There are many causal factors that cannot be addressed by it. Principal among these are local decisions and biases that contribute to the issue.

• Some module leaders discourage quality seasonal employees from participating in the apprenticeship program for fear they will be unavailable to meet their objectives
• While I firmly support and want us to continue our efforts to achieve Type 1 HS status for the remaining 15-MEL crews, I am not overly concerned that it will take more time. All of the national Type 1 IHCs are certified, and that must remain our paramount objective.
• Several units (many of which are those that are most vocal in their expression of the GS-5 issue) have simply not hired, nor are they currently hiring, apprentices in view of future needs.

There must be additional contributing factors. I want you to address the factors I’ve been able to identify and any others that are exacerbating the issue on your unit, and correct them.

On a final note… We have established certification and performance standards that we know are necessary to safely and effectively perform our complex program of work. During times where our capacity is challenged on all sides, it is difficult to hold fast. I believe these standards must be maintained, or we will establish others that are not complimentary to our purpose. That takes team work and commitment, which is what I expect from us.

Here is an FYI regarding the fire hire going on. Starting on July 16th, offers will 
be made for jobs and will go through September 14th. They will be starting with 
GS-9 jobs, then 8's and so on down to the GS-6's. You have probably been 
getting interest calls and supervisory checks already, but just wanted to let you 
know the exact dates of hiring. 

Faker

Good on the seatbelts. Best wishes for speedy recoveries. Ab.

I have a few comments on this subject.

Just as there are conks working in the world of media, there are conks in every organization. However, there are a few points I would appreciate you all keeping in mind...

I am a journalist and photojournalist and proud of my initial occupation. I started out in a small newspaper where resources were scarce and the reporting staff was small. I ended my newspaper career at a mid-size urban daily. I now write freelance for national periodicals, in addition to my business pursuits.

Over a 23 year span, I have seen a lot of both fine journalism and poor journalism. I saw writers anguish over how to tell a story so the context was accurate and all sides (or as many as they could reach) were represented. And I also have seen slop - lazy, thrown together crap that didn't come close to what journalism should provide to the public.

If you are approached by a print reporter,

• make sure to clarify what publication they work for. 
• Ask how to get in touch with them, and 
• when they plan on running their story. 
• In addition, know that your request to review their story "before it runs" will almost always be denied, as it should be. HOWEVER, you have the right to ask for your quotes to be read back to you prior to publication, and that 
• the writer clarifies what context they will be used in. 

I have had this discussion with many, many other reporters. The majority felt as I did - that's a legit request and I, personally, have tried to abide by it whenever I could, or was asked.

If you read a story that you believe is inaccurate (particularly one you have been interviewed for, and which includes your comments), you should immediately contact the publication. First, talk to the reporter politely and professionally. They'll either listen and address your concerns or blow you off. If they blow you off, rather than getting mad and yelling (which will promptly get you cut off at the telephone switchboard). Ask to be transferred to the managing editor. I have seen these folks work hard to rectify a story gone bad. I have never witnessed a NEWSPAPER editor ignore a complaint. I'm sure it's happened. I've just never seen it. And, I've had my own share of stories to fix. When you work on a deadline, it happens. When something needs to be fixed, it needs to be fixed.

If you are approached by an electronic media team - you're on your own. Maybe someone else out there can address this area. I had a nice little episode last year with a television reporter who "wanted to get the scoop" and sat in an office with an corrupt Oregon senator and recorded my conversation with him covertly. (Yes, this is illegal.) I tracked down the reporter, and her station's managing editor and shook them up a bit. The result? Not a thing...So, you see? Sometimes even a journalist is the recipient of journalistic shrapnel over material taken out of context and used by an idiotic, uninformed, lazy reporter.

Now, a word on memory...for most people unaccustomed to interacting with the media, an interview can be incredibly unnerving. Just as your mind tends to narrow, slow and skip slides in other "emergency" situations where your heart rate becomes elevated (and other physical responses occur to ready the body for fight or flight...) an interview - particularly with a camera running in your face - results in similar mind altering phenomena in terms of memory. This means that you just may not remember the situation exactly like it occurred. Now, I know some of you who have been through this may scoff. But, I'll give you this little example:

I was doing a story on Hetch Hetchy. The story traced back the very beginning of the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir near Sonora - back to the day when the land was privately owned, and Hetch Hetchy wanted it, because San Francisco wanted the water. I interviewed an older woman whose family had "sold" their land to Hetch Hetchy. Actually, the way it happened was that she was a widow and she was made an offer for her land and told that every day she waited the offer would lessen in value. Needless to say, she was very agitated about that memory. In her mind, Hetch Hetchy had essentially stolen her ranch for pennies. At the beginning of the interview, I'd asked her permission to record our conversation. She said "Of course you can, honey." And so I did. I talked to her a number of times to make sure I had the story right. We ran it. The next day she called my editor livid about one of her quotes used in the story. One of her quotes had the word "dam*" in it (with an "n"). It was an excellent quote. It summed up her position very well. But, she said she would never, EVER have said such a thing. My editor came to me for proof. I pulled out my recorder (I told him I had asked permission to record the interview) and played it for him. He said "Oh..."

But, the thing is, I have no doubt this woman remembered what she had said differently than what I had recorded. I don't think she even had it in her to lie to my editor. She really, honestly, didn't remember using that word. Now, we could debate about the use of that specific word in a story. But, the point is accurate memory, particularly when a person is in a state of agitation or fear.

Having your words etched into history is a scary thing, particularly when you

1. don't know the reporter;
2. don't know the publication;
3. are in an emergency situation and
4. know that when you walk away from that interview you have become vulnerable to the interpretation of your message by another person who may or may not understand what you just said to them.

Yea, no wonder your heart rate is elevated.

Some things you can do:

• You can start by slowing down. Turn around and breath deeply.
• Look around for back up.
• Is there someone you could confer with over important points?
• It might also help to have someone else listen in to the interview that you trust. This also might keep you calmer and your speech slower and less jumpy. (I always hated this as a newspaper reporter but if I were on the other side, I'd do it.)
• And, though there was a day I didn't really feel this way, your agency PIO (Public Information Officer) is often an excellent resource for you. I know some incredible agency PIOs. (And then I also know some not so incredible ones.)
• If the hair raises on your neck in the lead up to an interview, listen to your intuition. Wait. Nothing says you HAVE to do that interview.
• If you don't feel up to it, then defer to your PIO. Those folks WILL come through for you when they can. If you don't know who your PIO is, just ask the reporter to contact the PIO. I can almost guarantee they know who the PIO is. I always did.

So - good or bad - there are some of my thoughts on the media. Just as it's lazy and inappropriate for a reporter to make broad, sweeping unsubstantiated statements about wildland fire, so to is it inaccurate to make such statements about "the media." It's not a black & white world - unless you're color blind. (And then I still believe there are shades of gray.)

If you have any personal comments, feel free to have Ab forward them on to me.

Shari

Nicely done. 
I posted it in the Documents Worth Reading section. Ab.

Ab.

Sounds like a good one for the hotlist... Ab.

Don't exactly know what Agency you're talking about. I think the problem is with sig and nalgene bottles. The OSHA rules have existed for several years as I understand it. It's only recently that the FS Safety shop has been warned that fire is out of compliance with whatever the new iteration of rules is. If FS is out of compliance, so is everyone else -- at least that would be my take on it. Maybe someone has the details and can fill us in. Ab.

Gee, is that cost effective? Ab.

Ab,

I see the excerpts I pulled from the House and Senate Interior Appropriations bills have made their way to They Said already, courtesy of And There I Was. I had intended to send them in earlier, but with the House bill on the floor today we were busy working to protect the provision halting competitive sourcing (CS) in the FS in '08 from an amendment that would have allowed the program to continue. It appears we were successful and in the end the amendment was not even offered.

So, while the CS moratorium is not a done deal yet, what we do have is identical language in House and Senate bills -- a very strong position. We will of course continue to shepherd this -- and invite interested parties who, for instance, might like working for the FS to make a call to their elected reps in Washington to offer their support.

We were also encouraged to see the liability insurance co-pay in the Senate bill. We worked hard to push this and I know Casey (a good man to have on your side!) did as well. We will continue to work with Congress to clarify the scope of this provision and encourage its passage into law. This is only a band-aide on the liability issue; we will also continue to work on building a statutory "privilege" firewall around information obtained by a safety investigation.

Mark Davis, Chair
NFFE Forest Service Council Legislative Committee

links to the bills are two posts down...

G-LWM

"The Committee is concerned about the huge costs of
agency business process centralization and therefore
directs that detailed reports remain a part of the
budget justification and that all expenses be
carefully evaluated and explained, and transparent to
the public at large…

The Committee notes that the Forest Service has done a
poor job of implementing its competitive sourcing
program."

The FS seems to only show savings relating to personnel
reductions, not taking into account costs from other
areas to try and cover for hiring too few people, (not
to mention the health of the stressed out workers in
the System). The new term for doing it yourself, "Self
Service Technologies" is aggravating and very time
consuming,. We have yet to see the full effect of
Centralization. 

And There I Was

approps08-hr-2643-interior.rtf
approps08-s1696-interior.rtf

Part of the issue today has to do with the criminal liability faced for not adhering to a defined SOP. I noticed that many crews now write SOGs  (Standard Operating Guidelines) rather than SOPs so as not to back themselves into a corner later when trying to solve a problem that may need a flexible approach. This is a big issue when federal firefighters are facing criminal charges for not following what have become firefighting "rules". Best solution would be to train to a standard but not have the standard be "set in stone" that the lawyers will stone you with later. Ab.

Well, the last few days have been very stressful for them. 
#1 their friends and neighbors have lost their homes 
#2 my family's homes were spared, but very close calls at both properties. 

They told me on the phone last night that the men and women that did structure protection on their homes (that were saved) did a outstanding job. They were professional, friendly and truly cared about their concerns and fears. I am so proud of all of you that are there and those who aren't that protect all of us in time of crisis. I am a Engineer/EMT-1 and proud to be a part of such a excellent fire service family in R5. A million Thank You's to those who put it on the line for my family's homes in South Lake. God be with you all, be safe and we are forever grateful for "YOUR" valiant efforts.......

Signed,
Driver51 

Hello Ab and wildland fire community!

I’m sending this email to you because I value your involvement in the
Wildland Firefighter Foundation, and your past support of Ken’s running
endeavors, and because you are someone(s) that may be able to help me make 
some connections in California and elsewhere to gain sponsorships, support, 
and awareness for Ken’s latest endurance event.

Ken Perry, having run more than 120 miles and raised more than $70,000 for
the Foundation, has signed up to complete a 150 mile race over 7 days
through the Sahara Desert in Egypt:
www.wildlandfire.com/docs/2007/kens-sahara-run-wff.htm.
He has signed up stating that he is doing the race to raise funds for the Wildland 
Firefighter Foundation. On October 26, 2007, Ken will be en-route to Egypt – on
the one year anniversary of the Esperanza Fire. The run will end on November 3. 

If you know of ANYONE in the California media, a publicist, anyone with
connections in the news, with a celebrity, with a corporation that might
sponsor this event, please get in touch with me at this email address 
melissa@wffoundation.org; my cell phone (208) 866-3063 (call anytime); 
or by mail: 2049 Airport Way, Boise, Idaho 83705.

I am actively seeking sponsorships, putting together a media package, and
doing research to get information out.

Ab and fire community, Thank you in advance for any help you might be able to 
provide!

Melissa Schwagerl
Wildland Firefighter Foundation

Sounds good. I'll put on my thinking cap. I hope others do as well. Everyone, please send out emails to extended family and friends who might be connected. (By the way, Melissa, good work also on the grant writing program. The Foundation's work on our firefighters' behalf never ends.) Ab.

I want to put it out there that Avue has bad timing for when they do scheduled maintenance. Most stations do not have the computer speed to write Apps at work. Our own time at home is the best time, and that is when Avue does their maintenance. Makes it hard to apply for jobs.

CS

Smokejumpers training in San Bernardino

Can't we all just get along? I really don't understand the point of your ranting. As a former Ad crew member, USFS Hotshot, private contractor crew member, and now a CDF ( Cal Fire) Captain I find it disheartening to hear the tone of your e-mail. I can appreciate your concern about professionals missing out when CDF crews are mobilized however, they are a resource "supported by the taxpayers " and taxpayers get quit a bang for their buck with these crews. They are trained to a high standard and we maintain that standard throughout the year. Some of these inmates actually become crew members of Federal crews and private crews upon their release and yes, some fail, but some succeed. Do we not find this the same in the real world? From working as a collective group on an emergency we can all get the task accomplished. And I"ll let you know that I'll cover your backside just as I know that you would cover mine on the next fire we are on together, regardless of our uniform whether its green blue or orange.

Be safe, see ya on the big one - 

DWD

I am very pleased to announce the selection of Ms. Willie Thompson as the new Deputy Director of Fire and Aviation for Region 5. Willie has a very strong fire background, gained by working for two agencies, four Regions,
and on three Type I Incident Management Teams. She currently is the Assistant Director for State and Private Forestry in Alaska and is the Fire Program Lead.

I am particularly impressed by Willie's commitment to safety. She is a leader in promoting fire safety through direction, advice and personal modeling.

Please join me in welcoming Willie to the Region in early August!

Bernie

Bernie Weingardt
Regional Forester
Pacific Southwest Region, FS

I'd be willing to put those interested in the article in touch with someone willing to share it. Ab.

Angora fire jumps fire line; more evacuations ordered

Fire is making a hard run! Be Safe fellow F.F.'s....

Someone also emailed me that there's a report of shelter deployment. No one injured.

Ab.

MB

www.2news.tv/news/truthsquad/8171582.html (video of the report available here too)

Truth Squad: Firefighters Burned

It is some of the hardest work imaginable, under the harshest conditions. So, why aren't these Northwest firefighters getting paid?
That's the question one group of firefighters has been asking for almost a year.

The solution seems simple: people did months of work on public land, but don't have a penny to show for it. No one argues they deserve to get paid. Cutting through the bureaucratic red tape has been another thing.

Last year a group of firefighters, working for Pacific Wildfire out of Boise, worked a series of wildfires in Idaho's rugged Sawtooth Mountains.

"It was a busy season. It was tough, it was hot," says Kevin Reynolds, a firefighter who worked those fires. However, the season ended on a bitter note. That's because Kevin Reynolds and his crew of 56 firefighters from Oregon and Washington never got paid for more than a month of grueling work.

Reynolds is owed $12,000 in back wages. For all the firefighters, it's a total of nearly 176 thousand dollars. So, why no pay for the work on federal land? Forest service spokesperson, Dave Olson says it's simple, " The company was not paying their employees. The employees for that contractor are not government employees. They're actually employees of the contractor."

So, the government says the contractor actually stiffed his firefighters.
But Kevin Reynolds says the problem really started at this office in Boise, where the U.S. Forest Service hires firefighting companies from across the region.

The Forest Service is supposed to pay the private contractor. In this case, Reynold's former employer, Pacific Wildfire. Pacific Wildfire in turn pays the firefighters.

Reynolds doesn't blame his former boss at Pacific Wildfire. He says the person who approves contracts for the Forest Service accidentally rubber stamped payments to two companies for the same job. When the mistake was pointed out, Reynolds says the forest service worker stopped the flow of money to everyone. Pacific Wildfire never got paid, and firefighters never got paid. Reynolds says, " She doesn't care. It's not her paycheck. She still gets to pay her bills on time."

The last check they got was in August- ten months ago. Many of these firefighters worked through September and October and never got a paycheck. In late October, Pacific Wildfire owner, Eric Helpenstell, took the dispute to the Department of Labor in Portland. That agency launched an investigation.

Click the link to read the rest. View the video. Is that the entire truth?

We've heard that the news reporter did not do complete homework on this article and that the Fed Investigation is not complete by a long shot. I guess time will reveal more of the truth. Stay tuned. Ab.

Fair use disclaimer

'White Fire' (CA) burns red hot near Oak Creek Canyon
By: By Carin Enovijas, Tehachapi News Editor
Description: More than 400 firefighters have zero containment of 6,000 acre blaze

Shrek

"Not a day goes by that I don't miss them."

Shrek, our hearts go out to you and the others close to this tragedy. I can't save this pdf file and post a link without violating copyright. I know it is making the rounds behind the scenes. Please know that we hold all of you in our hearts and minds. We'll always remember. Ab.

www.mercurynews.com/

Supertanker firefighting aircraft nearly crashes

By Steve Geissinger 
MediaNews 
San Jose Mercury News 

Article Launched:06/25/2007 10:17:40 PM PDT

SACRAMENTO _ A new, largely experimental supertanker firefighting aircraft commissioned for use by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger suffered a near crash Monday evening fighting a blaze in Kern County. 

The California Department of Forestry issued a statement that the DC-10 had been grounded and cannot assist in the blazes currently ravaging  California until completion of an investigation. Officials provided no timeline for the probe. 

Tanker 910 encountered severe turbulence while operating on the White Fire, causing the aircraft to descend and strike the top of several  trees. 

The flight crew was able to apply power and fly out of the turbulence and safely return to their base at Victorville. There were no injuries to the flight crew or anyone on the ground. 

The aircraft was flying in the area of Bison peak, south of Tehachapi. The investigation of the close call will include a complete structural evaluation of the aircraft. It will remain on the ground until the investigation is concluded. 

As part of an executive order May 10, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger told state officials to arrange "for immediate availability and utilization" of the new plane, which became the first such aircraft to battle a blaze last July in San Bernardino County. 

Use of the supertanker also was intended to make up for the reduction in U.S. Forest Service firefighting planes, following retirement of aging military-surplus aircraft without any ready replacements. 

The giant tanker can drop a flood of 12,000 gallons of retardant on fairly level ground - 10 times the amount spewed from the more numerous, familiar and agile state-owned S-2 turboprop air tankers. 

It can be used, for instance, to build a buffer of retardant between a fire and a community, allowing ground crews to get into position for containing the blaze. 

The privately owned and operated DC-10, based at the former George Air Force Base near Victorville, is a converted American Airlines jetliner jointly developed by Oklahoma-based Omni Air International and Cargo Conversions LLC in San Carlos. 

Contact Steve Geissinger at sgeissinger@angnewspapers.com.

Fair use disclaimer

Kent Swartzlander's NorCal Team 1, a Type 2 team (great team), was present and handy for quick mobilization, less travel time, etc, that's all. Hawkin's CIIMT 1 (great team), I believe they were mobilizing for the first time with Rich as IC. (Remember Don Feser retired precipitously as FMO of the Angeles NF and as IC of Team 1 this spring after a disagreement with his ANF line officer.) In any case, I believe the T1 team was ordered at almost the same time as the T2 team. If I'm wrong, someone please correct this. Ab.

The 10 Standard Firefighting Orders for a Fireman's Wife

http://www.wildlandfirefighterwives.blogspot.com/

Standard Firefighting Orders for a Wife of a Fireman

1. Base all plans on current and expected fire behavior that way you won't be surprised when he gets sent on a fire, and all your family plans get canceled.
2. Identify yard work that you have to do and safely use the proper yard tools.
3. Ensure your direct deposit is set up correctly. These reasons are self explanatory.
4. Remain calm. When your husband calls and tells you he's working his days off.
5. Be thankful for that you are the "WIFE (wear that with pride)" of a Fireman.
6. Leave clear instructions of "honey-dos" for days off and insure they are understood.
7. Maintain a loving home for them to come back to and relax.
8. Pray for your husband & his crew's safety until they come home.
9. Maintain control of your children and the pets, despite your feelings of fatigue.
10. Know that he fights fire aggressively, having provided for his safety first.

Okay, this one I expect some comments or emails on (wffwives@cox.net). I've been thinking about creating the Standard Fire Orders for the Wives of Firemen. This has been taken and modified from the 10 Standard Fire Orders that Wildland Firefighters use. I would love to change any of these as you see fit. Comments????????????

Ab would be happy to pass on any messages from the media, haw haw.

First and foremost you all run a great site and I've read this info for a few years pre and post retirement. Your issues of safety, compensation struggles, and recognition strike a very sympathetic tune with me. I started with CDF in 1970 and retired after 36 years with no regrets, well maybe for not being a "Dorian Grey" and just always doing it.

I'll speak briefly about the (your ) issues over who's CDF (CAL-FIRE) , USFS, BLM, or this or that city fd and or vfd. At the end of day it matters not one "mote in God's eye". The funny thing for me after my career is to see the argument or comments about lack of recognition for the USFS and other Fed agencies lately. I lived that lack of "ID",..... it seems forever. In the 70's, 80, mid 90's , and still occasionally I see CDF referred to in print as "forest service, the division of forestry....." You guys for the most part until very recently got the press credit. Well, the FLAKS in R-5 on CDF's part have stepped it up and your Agency has been somewhat lacking it appears in that respect, not to mention the retention issues you face. I'm not at all saying "the worm has turned" but that times are changing and that in 20 or 50 or 75 years from now maybe there is a UK type system established that puts all the BS aside and there is only one Fire Service. [strangely enough in China where the fire service is the Military there is that wildland/structural disconnect ,,,,,,,, go figure].

It's a tough deal for the folks in the trenches to deal with. I can say with long experience that there are good ones and bad ones irregardless of agency affiliation. I must say that your comments about Native American crews (and I assume you include those from Alaska) being compared or viewed as CDCR crews to be troubling. The absolute worst things I've ever heard heard said about the Native American crews have come from fed agency people at the line and ICT levels when on incidents, and this was echoed in the 70's, 80,s 90, and 2000... It's a social/perception problem that the press or you for whatever reason equate skin color with who is or is not an inmate crew. If you or anyone else takes the time to examine the skin color of CDF/ CDCR crews you will see an ethnic and racial mix ,,,,,,,, maybe its the orange that gives the CDF/CDCR away. Be well and I hope your men and women get both the recognition and compensation they deserve. Think first and be PO'd later. It all changes and flows.

#..18

CF-EMS

I do not mind when all h*!! has broke loose and ALL professional resources have been used up and we are beyond the point of the military being activated. Then bring on the inmate crews, Bring them on last and demob them First. As long as normal resources are available they should NEVER be replaced by someone who has been convicted of crimes and has found a way to get out of jail for a while and have some fun and excitement as well. I am sure there are good inmate firefighters, that is not the point. I am sure they have some good leadership that take them out on assignments, again not the point.

If a career firefighter is missing experience, overtime pay and advancement opportunities because they were not ordered when an inmate crew was there to replace them, It is wrong. The inmates did not make a career choice like the rest of us. (At least not one to become a wildland firefighter). They made a mistake, and in paying for that mistake they should not take a job from you, Me or any of us.

Every time a convict crew is ordered... some professional resources are missing out on part of a career they chose.

CW

CM

I heard all the drip torches are all gon'na haf'ta be painted red, too.

My thanks to Michelle as well. She is a woman who is larger than life. 
(For those who don't know, it was her brain child to do all the little 
2-3 minute safety flicks. Great learning tool.)

Tahoe Terrie

We just had a private crew in our office that was being dispatched to the Angora fire. 
They said they were told 600 homes had been destroyed. Can you see if anyone can 
confirm that?

Thanks.

SW 

Safety/Fire Managers

This message is sent to provide an update regarding issues related to the (Draft) Interagency Transportation Guide for Gasoline, Mixed Gas, Drip Torch Fuel & Diesel (aka "Fuel Transportation Guide") and the situation with OSHA concerning their interpretation of 5 different hazmat container issues.

A meeting was held with OSHA this past Tuesday (6/12/07) and we were able to successfully demonstrate our unique applications using Sigg bottles, drip torches, and metal jerry cans to gain approval for (continued) use. However, we had to make some concessions and they are noted below. We will also be making final edits to the Fuel Transportation Guide based upon our new direction from OSHA. The Fuel Transportation Guide will also be cross referenced in the (draft) revised safety handbook (due out for review soon). OSOH will continue to work with MTDC to develop the necessary Alternate Standards that OSHA is requiring of us, as noted below.

Below are the main summary points.

• OSHA indicated they will approve our use of MSR aluminum fuel bottles and drip torches if we apply for alternate standards signed by the USDA and DOI Secretaries. They offered to assist us with these applications. We also agreed to phase out all old, non-specification drip torches within 10 years of the publishing date of the Fuel Transportation Guide, and update specs on all new drip torches - requiring the containers to be red in color (currently working on draft specification).
• OSHA reversed its previous stance and informed us that we COULD use the square, metal jerry cans.
• Nalgene bottles absolutely can not be used for fuel storage or dispensing.

We also agreed to phase out the use of all military green plastic gas cans (within 3 years of the issuance of the Fuel Transportation Guide)

Since we now have verbal communication from OSHA that they approve of our use of Sigg bottles, metal jerry cans, and drip torches, the field should know that they may continue to use these types of fuel containers. The field should also be informed to begin phase out of all military surplus plastic gas cans and Nalgene bottles used to carry fuel.

Thanks to Wes Throop (FS/MTDC), Louis Rowe (NPS), Al King (NPS/NIFC), Mike Tupper & Ken Morin (BLM), and Tory Henderson (FS/NIFC). They demonstrated the various fuel containers and provided photos and other information through a power point presentation. How we got through security of the DOL building with all those gas cans and drip torches I'll never know! The field should know how well these folks did going to bat for them so that they can continue doing their job with the convenient (and safe) types of containers that they have used for years.

As stated, more to follow formally -via policy and guide - but this message was deemed necessary to send to communicate to the field that use of Sigg bottles, metal jerry cans, and drip torches are approved for (continued) use.

Please forward message to appropriate field personnel who have tasks associated with hazardous material fuel transportation.

Respectfully,

Allison Good, MPH
Acting Director of Safety
WO OSOH
USDA, Forest Service

Our great thanks to Michelle Reugebrink, Safety Officer on the TNF and former Redding Smokejumper who brought this whole issue to the attention of the "powers that be" at the annual safety meeting in DC. I do believe she was the only one at the meeting who had any field experience. (This is what I have discovered through the "fire mole" grapevine. Hope Michelle doesn't "get in trouble" for any of my revelatory comments. In my opinion Michelle is one of Fire's and the FS's secret SAFETY weapons. She accomplishes more than any 4 people could all together.) Ab.

Web site: www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/ 
Medical job titles: www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/rm/job_titles.shtm 
General email: FEMA-NIMS@dhs.gov

Any all-hazard work in wildland fire should really be coordinated with the NIMS office, as NWCG is no longer the "keeper of NIMS", especially in terms of all-hazard stuff. 

Former NIMS nerd

Thanks for that. It's a necessary organization. The website must have been getting revamped when we went looking. Ab.

Ab,

The thread whining about some Hotshot crew being mistaken for a CDC inmate crew shows how petty some in our midst are. As one who has been in the fireservice for over 32 years I have seen first hand how a minority of my brothers in green have struggled with their place in life. I have led CDC inmate crews into the common battle with the enemy for over 22 years. I have been saddened on many occasions by the snobbery of some in the wildland community whose egoes allow them to be perched on a self produced elevated position of superiority. This divisive attitude has shown itself on the fireline as well as base camp. By no means do I find this at every incident but I thought we as a community of "Firefighters" were maturing in this area.

So much of being a firefighter is in the attitude, and how we present ourselves to the public and those we work with. I have had the pleasure of fighting fire with many professionals who wear many different colors of uniforms. When training my inmate crew I always told them that those who were smiling and waving to them while we were in transit had no idea that they were inmates. The majority of the public saw them as FIREFIGHTERS who held them in high esteem.

We all need to act like we are firefighters. Having been at several funerals of wildland firefighters (both free and inmate) I can tell you with certainty that those who fall in the line of duty leave behind love ones who are proud of their sacrifice.

Be safe and I'll see ya at the top.

smokeater

And I have trouble with reporters who see a Native American hotshot crew and lump them with people who are serving time for breaking the law, even if they are acting as firefighters! Ab.

Mike 

It disappeared about 4 months ago. Hugh Carson stepped down as president and, poof, it was gone as far as we can tell. Anyone knows different, please let us know. Ab.

Stanley, sure am glad you didn't fall off that roof! (tongue firmly in cheek) Ab.

Ab,

I'd appreciate you posting it to encourage those who haven't stepped forward
to do something meaningful about an issue they feel passionately about, to
consider doing so.

Those of us who have pushed the Justice Department on the PSOB issue have
had nothing to gain from it for ourselves. This is the first time I've
actually said this as directly as I am now. There is bitching. And then
there is powerful, intentional, direct, intelligent, collaborated action.
There is power in numbers. There is power in challenging a status quo that
is dysfunctional, and standing firm when the lion lunges.

There may be a cathartic release in getting together on Wildlandfire.com and
venting. There is SO much energy spent here doing just that. Well, folks,
progress takes more than pounding the keys. Don't let your involvement stop
with your posting. If you have something that concerns you, learn as much as
you can about it and thoughtfully consider how you would like it to BE.
Okay...I'll say it as clearly as I can...get beyond incessantly bitching
about the way it IS. Spend your energy and time working toward a solution.
There IS ALWAYS a solution. Often, there are many different aspects of a
solution, or many different solutions to the same issue or problem. Don't be
overwhelmed by the idea that you're not bright enough, politically
influential enough, socially connected enough, rich enough, ...or
even...good looking enough to make an appreciable dent in the armor of the
status quo.

Jericho's walls cannot stand up against the power of your heart and passion.
No stone is eternal.

I didn't even know about the PSOB program before timber faller Alan Wyatt
was killed on the Missionary Ridge Fire in Colorado on July 2, 2002. But a
bunch of us learned about it real fast when his family was denied PSOB
benefits after his death. Then we did something about it.

I encourage you to have an impact somewhere, on behalf of someone other than
yourself. It matters.

Shari Downhill

Be safe all and keep up the hard work, going to be a long and treacherous season.

MM

More here (750+ acres; no injuries): www.kcra.com/news/13560870/detail.html

Good luck on that Casey. Thanks. Ab.

The east end of the drift from the Angora Fire plume is over Elko, NV (about 6 hours east of Tahoe on I-80), as of about 1930... lotta fuel goin' up right now...

Be Safe, Ya'll!

Pyro

has anybody found the link for this yet one guy said that he was "trying it out"?

woodsman20

I think the link is nonfunctional now, but it was amazing watching the power of the fire and seeing houses burn just like that... Be safe all. Ab.

Yes, I am reading. Hi to you too.

frozendu mom

cy

Here is a link to a news article in our local tv news..... it is interesting how they said WE HAD TO LEAVE OUR VEHICLES BEHIND AND HIKE IN WITH OUR OWN FEET. LOL I wonder if for some reason the reporter thinks that all we do is drive around all day? http://kdrv.com/content/contentID/17477 

enjoy your weekend out there and be safe!

Southern Oregon FireFighter

Beige,

I hope that my posting did not come on as "finger-pointing" regarding the SC incident ....................... it certainly was NOT meant to be, as it is way too early in the investigation for anyone to form his or hers opinions or conclusions.
When I mentioned "finger-pointing", I only was referring to some of the past incidents, one of which I was personally, hands on, involved with, and it goes without saying that there are times that finger-pointing when all the facts are in hand, is justified and warranted.

As for the Storm King Incident, I spoke with a USFS close friend of mine who in the prior year had supervised one of the FFers that was there when the tragedy took place ...........................  he was hands on and did some serious finger-pointing ............ I do not know or want to know the details. 

Keeping all FF'ers in my prayers.

DANNYBOY

In regards to your "trained Type 2 Wildland Firefighter" , they may be referring to the redcard system. Requirements for a FFT2 (Firefighter Type 2) are S-130 (Basic Firefighting), S-190 (Basic Fire Behavior), I-100 (Introduction to Incident Command System), L-180 (Human Factors on the Fireline) and the task book for this position is completed and signed off. Hope this help.

A Happy California Cow

Here is link to the task book Good luck

www.nwcg.gov/pms/taskbook/operatio/fft2.pdf (pdf  file)

ES 

SB asked a legit question. Let's not assume nit picky but in search of info. This is the place to do that. Gotta admit, you look at enough of those apps and it's even hard to remember your mother's name. HAW HAW. Hi Frozendu, I know you're reading... Ab.

I was a type 2 for 17 seasons a type 1 is supervisory squad boss or higher. 

Dagwood!

I'm looking to apply for seasonal firefighter at the end of the year for 
Riverside County/CAL FIRE, and I'm looking for any advice that can 
help me along and what I can expect. Thanks!

Cy

SB

His way of saying Firefighter 2?

Medford BLM can now use B20 or 20% Biodiesel in their fleet. soon to be 
installed hopefully is a B5 tank for all fleet vehicles. I run B100 in my POVs 
and it smells good and the little troops don’t get blasted with bad fumes when 
we load up....

JS

Interagency Aviation Safety Alert (315 K pdf file) text below

June 21, 2007
Subject: Risk Awareness and Mitigation of Hazards Caused by Human Factors
Area of Concern: Fire Suppression Operations

Distribution: Aviation and Safety Managers, Unit Aviation Officers, Pilots, Pilot Inspectors, Flight
Crew Members and all Aviation Support Personnel.

Discussion: Aviation System Safety assessments recently identified 18 hazards that are common among all
of the aviation missions studied, and which require National level mitigation. Inherent among the common
hazards are several Human Factors concerns that need mitigation and demand a higher level of situation
awareness. This Safety Alert should benefit all interagency aviation personnel, by defining the hazards and
offering solutions for mitigation, especially during times of increased activity. It is strongly recommended
that this Alert, as well as the completed program risk assessment package be utilized as a briefing tool and
operational checklist by Incident Management Teams, FAST Teams and ASTAT Teams and local unit
aviation personnel. Copies of the Risk Assessments are available from State Aviation Managers and Region
Aviation Safety Managers.

The following human factors pose significant hazards to safe flight operations. Each situation should be
mitigated to acceptable levels prior to accepting a mission. Mitigation measures are suggested or you may
use any other means at your disposal to mitigate these hazards.

Task Saturation: Potential for human error is increased when personnel must multi-task as a result of
the mission/ergonomic environment (human/machine interface), the organization, or the complexity of
a tactical operation) thereby losing situational awareness. Ensure that flight crews and aviation managers
are qualified in their assigned position and trained in techniques for workload management (i.e. delegate
tasks, adjust tactics, reduce number of resources if necessary, get additional personnel to help with
operation). It may be helpful to establish local/personal “trigger points” to identify when task saturation is at
a critical level. When practical attend Crew Resource Management and/or simulator training.

Risk vs. Reward: Routine acceptance of high-risk assignments as a normal job expectation is a
hazardous attitude. Assess the complexity, as well as the need/value for the mission, ask if it can be done
another way, and ask if all personnel are essential to the flight/mission. Solicit input from the fire line and
pilots as to the effectiveness of air operations. Risk Management courses are available at ACE.
Fatigue/burnout: Extended duration of incident assignments as well as year round incident support
(i.e. hurricane relief, fire support, other all-risk) contribute to the cumulative effects of fatigue leading
to poor decision making, risk taking and complacency. Ensure that aviation personnel are allowed
adequate periods of rest between assignments. Monitor symptoms of cumulative job fatigue and be proactive
to implement duty restrictions for affected flight crews. Emphasize restrictions on personnel that are in
extended travel status vs. those operating from home base. Adhere to work/rest guidelines, if necessary
implement a more restrictive rest policy based on personal/family needs.

Pilot knowledge of equipment and emergency procedures. Flight crewmembers are often being
assigned to new or unfamiliar aircraft, especially in call-when–needed contracts. Be on the alert for
a lack of familiarity with avionics, performance calculations, and knowledge of emergency
procedures. Alert pilot inspectors to assess and/or have pilots demonstrate knowledge of equipment and
emergency procedures during the carding process. Aviation Managers and inspection teams (if correctly
configured) should discuss and review these issues with flight crews. Request vendors to provide
additional training for pilots that need to improve performance. Provide relief pilots adequate time to
transition with outgoing pilots.

Lack of Crew Resource Management (CRM): Effective use of all crewmembers is vital for
maintaining situational awareness and decision-making during high risk, high consequence missions.
Provide briefing and de-briefing tools (i.e. after action reviews, current information, and situation status
reports) to pilots and aviation managers. It’s critical, to the extent possible, that we monitor the mental and
physical well being of our pilots and support personnel, and curtail operations when necessary. Continue
to emphasize classroom based CRM training.

Fire Suppression, Science, and Personal Opinion

With what has happened in South Carolina this week and some of the other things going on, I'm not particularly in the mood to discuss this issue, but recent events make it impossible to ignore anymore.

First some background. Although I have had the unfortunate experience of being manipulated by a few reporters over the years to say that one "personal-headline quote" they were fishing for, I have tried to deal with this continual fire suppression/fuel build-up debate in Southern California on a strictly scientific basis. I've always felt it best to ignore the personality and stick to the data. This is typically not the approach the press emphasizes, but it is how science is supposed to work.

However, there comes a time when a viewpoint becomes so disconnected from the accepted body of scientific knowledge that it distracts from constructive dialogue. At times it can even delay or alter important policy decisions. Such delays create negative consequences for future generations by creating unproductive, "my expert" vs. "your expert" politicized debates in the press. Although each of the experts are assumed to have equally valid viewpoints supported by objective data, one or more are solely interested in promoting their own individual cause or agenda regardless of the facts. Often these causes are pushed by narrow, special interests in a consciously dishonest manner. Or alternatively, the promoter honestly believes his or her own view of the world so strongly that he or she is unable to objectively evaluate contrary data. Instead, everything is seen in light of a favored theory and seemingly obvious contradictions are dismissed (often unconsciously). Consequently, when the cause is continually taken to the popular media instead of being objectively discussed within the framework of science, it becomes impossible to ignore the messenger. This is why a number of well-know fire scientists spoke out in 2006 about Thomas Bonnicksen who was disregarding scientific fact to promote politically motivated policies dealing with wildland fire.

The June 17, 2007, San Bernardino County Sun news article "Forests Need to Burn" was a signal to many of us in the wildland fire and fire science communities that the time has come to directly address Dr. Richard Minnich's promotion of incorrect and potentially damaging notions about wildland fire management.

In his insistence on focusing on only one variable (chaparral age), Dr. Minnich does not appear to have a clear understanding of wildland fire. Wildland fire risk in Southern California is not the fault of the fire service, or the result of old stands of chaparral, it is an inherent part of the landscape. Laying more fire on the ground on a landscape level or allowing fires to run is unacceptable in Southern California for both safety and ecological reasons. The Baja California fire mosaic model originally described by Dr. Minnich in 1983 and elaborated in 1997 is not applicable to Southern California. The best and most efficient way to reduce wildland fire risk is through proper community design, fire-safe building construction, adequate vegetation management around structures and strategically placed fuel treatment projects.

A Closer Examination

As both a biologist specializing in chaparral ecosystems and someone who has taken the time to get to know fire up close and personal, I find much of what Dr. Minnich says to be in direct opposition to reality.

To put these theories in perspective, it is important to understand that Dr. Minnich has been a major critic of the fire service for years and has blamed us for causing the conditions that have allowed large, devastating fires to occur. He has claimed that fire suppression has allowed an "unnatural" level of chaparral fuel to accumulate, leading to unstoppable wildland fires in Southern California. This is based on a paper he wrote in 1983 comparing fires in Baja California with those in Southern California, two radically different environments not suitable for comparison for a number of reasons (different climates, different soil types, different vegetation patterns, and different cultural and land use perspectives).

Research over the past twenty years has clearly shown that large, wildland fires in Southern California are not the result of past fire suppression practices, but rather a function of severe fire weather conditions: drought, low humidity, and Santa Ana winds. If you would like a more detailed analysis of the Baja California mosaic theory, please go to our Fire & Science page on our website at www.californiachaparral.org.

In the Sun article Dr. Minnich was quoted as saying,

"So, right now ... if you go from Santa Ana River and west of Cajon Pass, the fire hazard is nil because it burned in '03. It's three-year-old brush, and nothing is going to carry there for another 20 years - you don't have a problem."

Immediately after the 2003 Old fire in San Bernardino, Dr. Minnich repeated similar perspectives by saying that the area wouldn't burn again in our lifetimes. After the Griffith Park fire in May of 2007 he also said, "There's 800 acres of Griffith Park which have just burned, and that's the good news. There's no fuel there and those areas are unlikely to burn for years if not decades to come."

Let's look at the data:

1. On Saturday (June 16, 2007), the day before the Sun article appeared, there were 4 fires in the Cajon Pass area, all of which could have evolved into major incidents under the right weather conditions. One required extensive use of aircraft to control. It is unfortunate the article's reporter did not adequately check out the facts before publishing as news unsubstantiated opinions.

2. On Monday (June 18, 2007), the day after the article, a fire occurred in the Lake Arrowhead in an area that had burned 3 times since 1994.

3. The first 20,000 acres that burned in the 2003 Old fire was a patchwork of fuel that was generally less than ten years old. Most of what burned during the first couple days had burned in the 1980 Panorama fire or subsequent fires. The Old fire also re-burned 1,000 acres that burned during the 2002 Arrowhead fire. And it wasn't a chaparral fire that was responsible for destroying most of the homes burned in San Bernardino during the Old fire, but a grass fire that came roaring off the mountain. Embers igniting palm fronds and other ornamental vegetation were major contributors to the fire's spread into the city.

4. Many areas in the front country of the San Bernardino Mountains burn repeatedly, sometimes once a year. This is because the fire return interval has been so great that chaparral and coastal sage scrub plant communities have been completely eliminated and have been replaced by highly flammable, fine, weedy fuels. These weedy fuels create conditions that allow fires to return frequently because they quickly accumulate each year and can be ignited easily. To say that these areas present an "abnormally low" fire hazard is a clear misinterpretation of the fire environment.

In another quote, Dr. Minnich says,

"The area that was involved in Esperanza, the stands that burned, a lot of them previously burned in 1974, about 32 years before that, and that's actually rather young chaparral. The fire, even in the Santa Ana wind, was kind of struggling getting through that. ... It managed to consume it. But within the (Esperanza) fire, there were islands of unburned vegetation, which were far older than 32 years, and this structure was in it. The chaparral was at least twice as old ... so it resulted in much more intense fire behavior, in that small area, and that's where these people went into."

Every chaparral stand is different. Many young, post-fire recovery chaparral stands have plenty of fine fuels to carry a fire. This comes from invasive grasses and some natives such as deerweed. After 10 years, many chaparral stands close their canopies and create perfect fuel beds to carry a fire. The 2006 Esperanza fire started in grassy fuels near the desert floor. The Cabazon area where the Esperanza fire began has burned so many times over the last 30 years it is almost completely covered with cheatgrass. To say that the fire was "kind of struggling" to get through 32-year-old chaparral during the Esperanza fire indicates data was not collected from USFS firefighters who were on scene and who really understand fire in the San Bernardino National Forest.

Yes, chaparral systems provide ready fuel and can pose serious threats to poorly designed communities. This is why vegetation clearance recommendations are critical to follow as well as efforts to correct unsafe building designs in fire prone areas.

During a May 9, 2007, FM radio interview on the KCRW program "Which Way LA", host Warren Olney referred to how LA County fire officials had blamed the recent fire in Griffith Park on record low rainfall and drought conditions. He then asked Dr. Minnich "If there's more to this than just a dry rainy season and low humidity, what should people be concerned with the most?"

Dr. Minnich responded,

"Well, it depends on what kinds of vegetation you're working with. If its chaparral, the flammability of it depends on the accumulation of fuel over decades, not how much it grows or how much it's stressed by one year's deficiency of rainfall. I was looking at a video of this fire and its pretty mature looking chaparral and its ready to burn and that's the nature of the beast with this kind of vegetation. It's the old stands that burn, those areas that haven't burned in a long time, and not the young ones. And drought really doesn't have the specific relationship to fires other than to lengthen the individual fire season, which started a little earlier this year."

The fact that drought and low fuel moistures lead to dangerous fire conditions is one of most significant variables in determining whether or not a wildfire gets out of control. It's not just about fuel, but how dry the fuels become and how fast the winds blow. To ignore such variables is to create a perception that native ecosystems are "the enemy" and the only way to stop wildland fires from burning homes is to eliminate or drastically compromise the natural resources Californians value and wildland firefighters risk their lives to protect.

Warren Olney later asked, "So in other words, it isn't so much that it is drier than usual, it's that there's more fuel than usual, it would burn under any circumstances?"

Dr. Minnich replied,

"Well, there was sufficient fuel for the fire to take off and once chaparral gets 30 to 40 years of age throughout Southern California you have a big fire threat. On the positive side, those areas which are grassy hardly had any growth at all so the fire hazard is far less than usual this year."

Important variables are being ignored. Yes, over time chaparral does accumulate fuel, but it is highly variable depending on type, location, and prior rainfall levels.  ... to read the rest, of this document worth reading, Click this link.

I've added this to our Documents Worth Reading section and our Site Map. Ab.

But after reading some of the posts about the tragedy in South Carolina, I'm struck but the same theme of "someone has to be blamed!". When I read things like "finger pointing", "poor information", ect:ect:ect;. I guess that I get a little bent when the armchair QB's start throwing their "learned" opinion about without truly knowing the facts. I was on a fire on the Payette in 1994 after the Storm King tragedy and talked to a family member of one of the fallen, and I remember the pain in his face, and the agony in his voice when he talked about how people who think they knew what happened drew conclusions from their perceptions, and not the facts. I guess all we can ask is unless you have walked a mile in the IC's shoes, who I'm sure is dying a thousand deaths right now, or were going in that building with the fallen, please try to wait for the facts when a thorough investigation is completed. I believe then we can start an active and thorough debate through which we can all take lessons from. I can almost guarantee 100% that none of those Firefighters woke up that morning thinking that maybe decisions that they will make latter in the day might lead to their deaths. Structure and Wildland firefighting one big common denominator, fire doesn't care what uniform you're wearing, and dead are still just as dead whether it's in a dark hallway, or high on a mountain. I'm sorry about my rant going so long, but the longer I do this, watching the roll call of the fallen grow, I grow more heartsick as every year passes.

Please remember the basics...THEY WILL SAVE YOUR LIFE ONE DAY......

10/18, LCES, situational awareness, common denominators, and the checklists

Stay Safe,

Beigefoot

Good grief! When will everyone learn that we are each geeks in our various 
professions /trades /towns /cities /counties and stop expecting the rest of the 
world to know all of the nuances of our specialty, location etc.?

We each must know our audience and address them where they are in 
understanding and knowledge. You would not talk about fire behavior in S-490 
in the same way you would in S-190.

USFWS tired of being the DNR 

JS

If I remember the discussion correctly, it burns just fine, but has a different viscosity (it's "thicker" than diesel) at low temperatures. Ab.

Upper Lake (CA-MNF) using Energy Efficient Biodiesel 

The Upper Lake District of the Mendocino National Forest is working to be more energy efficient by using biodiesel in their diesel vehicles and equipment. Using renewable resources to reduce energy and carbon emissions is a new way of doing business. For the past month, the Upper Lake District has been using a blend of 20 per cent biodiesel and 80 per cent diesel in equipment and vehicles. Biodiesel is a clean burning fuel alternative that produces less net carbon dioxide emissions than petroleum based diesel. The blended fuel can be used without having to make modifications to equipment.

Studies show that using biodiesel can increase fuel efficiency and reduce carbon emissions. “We all have an opportunity and obligation to be involved in issues which affect the environment The Forest Service is mindful of our ecological footprint and using renewable resources such as biodiesel is one way we can positively affect our impact on the global environment,” acting Upper Lake District Ranger Jim Ruhl, said. 

Plans are underway to increase the use of biodiesel to other areas of the Forest. If you have questions about biodiesel use at Upper Lake, please contact Jim Ruhl at 707-275-1401. For more information about the biodiesel industry, please visit http://www.biodiesel.org.

Why isn't there Resource Status Listings for Cleveland National Forest on the WildWeb Dispatch Center link? 

Thank you, 

Gary

CAL FIRE, Does Not have CONVICT Fire Crews. They have Inmate Fire Crews. Those that have run CAL FIRE Crews know there is a big difference between convicts and inmates. For those newbies that jumped from GREEN to BLUE they didn't go to fire stations they are going to the Camps, and will soon find out first hand what a big difference there is between convicts and inmates. The next batch of green that jumps to blue will also find out the difference between the two. The real Convicts are doing 25 to Life, most of the inmates are doing 10yrs or less, and have to have 5yrs or less to be considered for the camp program with an average crewmember having 2yrs left on their term. For the guys in Green you wouldn't want to hear AG Crew instead of Hotshot Crew same difference between Inmate Crew and Convict Crew.

CAL FIRE Since 1977
Crew Captain Since 1987

Do I think those folks were heroes... He*l yes. They chose a noble and honorable profession with known risks at service to others and made the ultimate sacrifice. They did their best and they did what they were trained to do....

DC Ret said,

"I firmly believe that in most cases where Firefighters die in the line of duty, it is because some major mistakes were made and they are usually glossed over and white washed while the victims are buried as heroes. Corrections are seldom made and these things will continue to happen."

Do I think they or others may have made mistakes? Probably. Would I, or you have made the same mistakes? Possibly or probably?..... We weren't in their shoes at the "aww sh*t" decision making point so we will never know?

Often times, as Ab noted, the very basics of human behavior are often overlooked and never addressed... such as using accusatory terms such as "mistake" or "failure". In other instances, underlying latent factors go un-noticed or uncorrected because of the basic human behavior factors of the survivors to protect themselves, their families, and their friends...... or the reactions of fire and land managers to protect program delivery.

More than not, the folks involved want to tell their stories. Give those folks some time...... Give them some space...... and the Lessons Learned will come forward.

Student of Reason

A retired reporter friend refers to today's media as "Drive By Media".

It seems in today's world of sensationalism, sound bites and talking points, most of the important specific truths are edited out sooner or later.

Good grief: for starters, when will the media realize there is a big difference between any fire being Controlled vs Contained?

Be safe y'all,
River

"I have a powerpoint presentation that explains "How does young chaparral burn?".

Ab, can you see if he'll provide a link we can download the powerpoint from?

Thank you

MJK

Develop those protocols so you can use them while obtaining the 
professional and more complete medevac services.

My opinion.

Mellie

I have to agree with DC Retired's presenting a "question" only writing.

I, in the past have been a part of the investigating team for burn victims (cdf). It seemed to me that after all the fact gathering, interviews, etc., that the obvious is ignored for some reason. I believe that the reason is that the organization, whichever it is, will not point fingers when finger-pointing is due............ therefore, the real lesson is not taught.

I guess finger-pointing would open the gates for law-suits............ oh well................. if it would save a life somewhere down the line..... well worth it.

Lori, If you are concerned about the ignorance of the media regarding anything to do with wildfires .......................... you are clear out of something to do. The media makes fools out of themselves to you and I, but the general public doesn't see the stupidity of their reporting. And the truth of the matter is .................... the general public doesn't know or care the difference between CDF (calfire), USFS, Local Departments or whatever. It does fry me however when I see them interviewing inmate crews....... so I guess I am guilty of some of the same. Smiling.

DANNYBOY

Hindsight is 20/20. As with wildland, let's get somewhat through the shock and grieving and let the process take its course. Ab.

Are the Firefighters who lost their lives this past week truly “heroes”, or are they actually victims of flawed polices, inadequate leadership, inadequate supervision, inadequate accountability, inadequate or flawed training? My heart goes out to the families and loved ones of these men.

I firmly believe that in most cases where Firefighters die in the line of duty, it is because some major mistakes were made and they are usually glossed over and white washed while the victims are buried as heroes. Corrections are seldom made and these things will continue to happen.

DC Ret

You forgot human factors, like the drive of those fine men to save two lives, like a fire that flashed over and burned faster and hotter than anything in their experience. Mistakes are part of the human condition. We all need to better understand venting location and flashover (area ignition within a structure). 

Lessons learned is a large part of structural firefighter culture as well as wildland firefighter culture. I am sure that many in SC and beyond are asking themselves the same questions you pose, even as they weep. Heartfelt condolences for all our pain. 

One fine legacy that can be offered for the SC 9 is to learn as much as possible from this tragedy so that firefighter deaths will never happen that way again, and to finally bring the bedding non-flammability standards up to a reasonable level so structure firefighters are not at risk from that. Ab.

I finally got fed up with it and called them about the mistakes they had been making. While it has gotten better, it still happens more often than it should.

One year, on a fire up near Tahoe, one of the Sacramento tv stations were reporting on what was happening. They were showing footage of the FS, but were talking about CDF and interviewing their people. It was a FS fire with CDF helping out. I contacted the station and asked them why they weren't interviewing FS personnel. Their answer - we talked to who we had first contact with. You have to admit that CDF has one heck of a program for public information and they push it every chance they have while the FS seems to just sit back and wait for reporters to come to them. Not very good PR on the Forest Service's part.

I would contact the paper and tactfully let them know that not all wildland firefighters in CA are with CDF. Some of this state's finest wear green....

Lori

Lori, no offense meant to you but I would point out to them in no uncertain terms that to be lumped in with CONVICT crews even out of ignorance of the reporter is TOTALLY unacceptable!!!

I came to Charleston SC for the Firefighters Memorial with a group of Fire/EMS personnel (municipal, federal, private) from the Great Basin (R4). Our trip from the airport to our hotel last evening was breathtaking, everywhere one looks there are makeshift memorials, flowers, posters created honoring the fallen. There are Firefighters and families from all over the country here for the memorial, Career, Volunteer, Municipal, Federal. Some of the Firefighters that accompanied our group had just come off the fireline after fighting several wildland fires is Southeast Idaho and Northern Utah. On the flight here the firefighters were discussing what happened during the fire here and everyone agreed that what happened here in Charleston can happen to anyone, anywhere, anytime. While listening to the discussions I saw a true meaning of "Brotherhood", the structural (municipal) guys were explaining "Flashover" to the wildland guys, comparing flashover to burnover, how a whole engine crew didn't hesitate to entered the building to look for trapped employees and so on. I hope everyone will hold the fallen and their families in their prayers and now that wild fire season has kicked into gear, that all those who will be on the fireline or will be answering the next tone out will be safe and look out for each other. May God Bless those who have Fallen and those who continue to protect us.

Jodie
RN & Firefighter's Wife

Yes, let's hear it from a fire in chaparral ecosystem expert. Ab.

Go read it on the hotlist. www.wildlandfire.com/hotlist/showthread.php?t=457 
Maybe some of you will want to write a letter to the editor or call? Ab.

Leadership When Events Don't Play By the Rules
By Karl E. Weick

Not too long; easy in html...

Mellie

That Bridge fire was a fun one. Lots of briars though. It was sure hard to move through that stuff, but that's the Six Rivers for ya. 

The Salyer/Hawkins Bar RX burn is all tied in surrounding the community of Hawkins Bar, but we still have at least one more unit we will probably get to next spring farther up Waterman above Salyer. We got about 165 hard acres this spring with minimal impact to the communities along the Trinity corridor. Kudos to the whole LT team getting that project (almost) wrapped up.

Thanks for noticing 

" More like a 911 fire department for the nation, one part of which deals with fires in the wildlands... Would that be better? Would it be better or at least as good for our nation's natural resources? Would it be better for firefighter training and safety?"

My one word response to the above is !!!!!!YESSSS!!!!!!!

It took me a while but I have definitely come around to that way of thinking. We retired guys spend a lot of quality time pondering what needs to be improved. We have time to do that and no fear of reprisal.

Right on Lobo! Hang in there.

Thank you so much Abs for the forum!!!

NMAirBear

You're welcome!

And, oh, I understand your opinion. It also grows out of years of workaround and frustration. 

I still don't have a firm opinion on which might be better and you certainly won't offend me if you hold a differing view. In fact, I count on people having their own views many of which differ from mine. Discussion and disagreement are frequently how we come up with better alternatives.

Pros and Cons:

"National Fire 911" would be better for fire safety/training/streamlined finances, if DHS (or whatever agency it fell under) didn't become equally as much a bureaucratic snafu. Natural Resources/Fuels work for the FS could be agreed to and accomplished by National Fire 911, perhaps even as part of wildland firefighter training. The costs of the work could get charged to a FS "Fuels Code" funded by Congress explicitly for that purpose. Finances would be disentangled. Perhaps National Fire 911 could rent living accommodations from the forests, as well pay the forests for computer services, etc. 

Alternatively, retaining Fire within the FS would probably be better for managing natural resources overall. Other aspects of NR would continue to be funded by fire. Resource managers could continue to get fire experience a boon for planning and management of forests shaped by fire. I know there's more... Ab.

Operation Firestorm to enforce fire restriction violations. (AZ)

Old Sawyer.

Operation Firestorm

Ab,

Word is that fire activity is picking up and norcal is seeing more class c fires daily.

I had the same initial response as you, but then I thought this through, trying to see what's really going on with the Forest Service as a whole. I think there are some big FS changes coming along - evident in bits and pieces - that could be setting a good FS trajectory for the next 100 years. The things I'm seeing are not the status quo, although change is still in the early stages. Time will tell. If the changes don't work or aren't sufficient, I think we'll be facing a stove-piped fire organization that includes all the land management agencies' firefighters and comes under Department of Homeland Security. More like a 911 fire department for the nation, one part of which deals with fires in the wildlands... Would that be better? Would it be better or at least as good for our nation's natural resources? Would it be better for firefighter training and safety?

In my opinion we don't know the answers. All is speculation. Carry on. Ab.

I thank the hundreds of people who participated in the Safety Culture for the 21st Century project and contributed to the Dialogos report. No change effort, however important, has ever survived without deep commitment from the people charged with doing the work.

I ask you as senior leaders in the Forest Service to:

• Distribute this letter and enclosed summary of the report for further discussion;
• hold and promote regional change dialogues, and report results to me;

Is there a list of who "the hundreds of people who participated in the Safety Culture for the 21st Century project and contributed to the Dialogos report."?. How many of them were field firefighters or fire managers?

Is there also a means to quantify or stratify responses?

While well intentioned, the Chief's response doesn't hit the target for firefighter safety or reflect the views of the field!!! It is simply agency speak and not addressing the changes for safety that should be made without fear of losing personal political appointments.

Either you want to keep folks safer, or you want to stay status quo and do business as usual. You can support the status quo.... or you can support change for the better by listening to the experts and scientists in the field? Safety first, foremost, and always!!!!!

Lobotomy

sr5401

Engine info....each CAL FIRE engine should have a "radio call plan" book in it.
These will list all equip by Unit and give its location as a station number or name.

I know engines in Nor Cal have a listing for all the north units including Sac HQ.
Pretty sure they also list aircraft.. Just have to find the book.

Dave

I have read Mr. Macleans book and having participated in the 30 Mile Staff Ride in May, and having know and worked with many of the folks involved, I still shake my head at what happened. I agree with John's point that the organization gave Mr. Daniels the Shaft, I know Chief Lietch and agree with that quote. I think John's view point as a Journalist is just that a distant observer, he can sit back and give third hand accounts of what was said and make conclusions. I look at it from all the view points of fact. Many things were overlooked and botched in the report, leaders up on that fire that day and the Forest fire staff have many questions to answer. Convicting Mr Daniels of Negligent Homicide wont answer those questions I dont think he meant to do it but the Wenatchee didn't do him any favors in his career. He should not have lied and he will probably pay for that I think this new book looks at this from an author's point of view and we should wait until the trial and see what facts are rendered from the crucible of justice before reacting. Do read the book it offers accounts and stories that are true that I can testify to from Tom stories about going out with Mr. Foss, I was the crew boss trainee that trip. Until last year I could not bring myself to go up there to the memorial and I went to a staff ride with the Winemucca BLM at Oravada NV and that really opened my heart and mind to the power of staff rides. Remember we need to teach the next generation of fire folks these lessons and staff rides done correctly really drive the points home. So if you want to get facts go on the staff ride dont depend on a writer's view of the facts. RIP tom, Please check out the methow valley memorial web site and help raise funds for that. just type in methow memorial fund. thanks and please take a moment to "stand down" this week

Bushman 82

Senate Rejects Administration's Proposal to Cut Preparedness Funding

Today the Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittee sent a clear message to the Administration similar to past political slogans like "its the economy stupid" by suggesting "its preparedness stupid" in rejecting the Administration's FY 08 Budget proposals to reduce preparedness funding while increasing suppression.

The Subcommittee "marked up" the Interior Appropriations bill by moving to increase preparedness funding by $11 million over the FY 07 enacted level and $108 million above the President's budget request for a total of $676 million.

The Subcommittee also increased suppression but in the press release from the subcommittee, it was stated that "the bill rejects the Administration's proposal to cut readiness funding and reduce equipment, training & support staff for firefighters."

Obviously this isn't the final word on exactly what the level of appropriated funds are. The FWFSA still must work to ensure that whatever preparedness funds are appropriated by Congress actually get to those who will use it for preparedness resources rather than siphoning off hundreds of millions for non-fire projects.

We have been working closely with the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee in preparation for their upcoming fire preparedness hearing June 26th. To that end I will be attending the hearing next week. Also while in Washington I will be visiting with Andrea Bright, Manager of OPM's Standards, Competencies, and Assessment Development Group to find out what seems to be the problem regarding OPM's lack of movement on the classification issue.

Casey Judd
Business Manager
FWFSA

Thanks MOC. Contacting each Unit is very time consuming if there's a more central source. This is a very time limited project. Ab.

Ab and All,

I am trying to complete some Fire Program Analysis data and am having a hard time finding a comprehensive list of all Cal-Fire stations with equipment numbers and staffing levels. I could live with just what equipment (with identifiers ie., E2468) is at what station including dozers, handcrews, and aircraft.

Do you know where I might find this? I have found some parts of this such as lists for Shasta and Tehama counties on a norcalscan page. Any help would be greatly appreciated as I am pushing a hard deadline.

Thanks!

A-

This is a legit request for a fed project. If anyone has access or knows how to find access to this data all in one place, please let me know. I'd be happy to pass on contact info for A- or provide a link. Ab.

Thanks, DirtMiner. We logged off here and took a moment in the garden. Our best to the families and friends. Ab.

Thank You Casey for your dogged persistence, your fairness, your good humor! FWFSA and all firefighters benefit from your knowledge, skills, abilities, HUMOR and character. Those who haven't signed up for FWFSA should. Support the work of this good association. Ab.

Here's the cc'ed email from 5/15/07:

Casey,

Thank you for working with me on legislation that will clarify that the Forest Service and Department of the Interior are authorized to reimburse temporary wildland fire managers for a portion of their personal liability insurance costs. You will be pleased to know that today Senator Cantwell along with Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Bingaman and Ranking Member Domenici introduced legislation that will do just that. In addition, Chairman Bingaman and Senator Cantwell sent the attached letter to the Interior Appropriations Committee encouraging the committee to include provisions of the Cantwell-Bingaman-Domenici legislation in the Fiscal Year 2008 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.

Thanks again,

Joel

Joel C. Merkel, Jr.
Office of U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell, WA
511 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Well said. Ab.

ADTexas

I'm committed to good communication.

LCES

JC

On the other hand from my more optimistic side, maybe Fire's Lessons Learned and Commander's Intent Doctrinal Change is rubbing off on the larger FS organization. The way the Agency picked up on Doctrinal change following the 2003 Firestorm Lessons Learned and the Pulaski Conference was heartening. (Thanks to Lobotomy for the writing contributions he made to the R5 Agency in those early days before Doctrine even had a name. Interesting the impact a Series 0462 groundpounder can make.)

Everyone, something we can all do:

WEAR our SEATBELTS!  Just DO IT!

Ab.

Another item that could have an effect on what the FS does this
summer..............................

TC

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

Date: June 15, 2007
Subject: Safety Culture Report and Broader Implications
To: Regional Foresters, Station Directors, Area Director, IITF Director, Deputy Chiefs and WO Chief Staff Directors

Last year Chief Bosworth charged our national safety council with examining the ingrained habits, expectations, and “ways of doing business, or culture” that contribute to death and injury, despite visible commitment to the safety and health of Forest Service employees. Enclosed is a summary of the report called “Safety Culture for the 21st Century” that the consultant Dialogos International prepared in response to Chief Bosworth’s charge. The report describes our safety challenges in terms of a much broader set of issues and dynamics.

After interviewing over 400 Forest Service employees at every level of the organization and analyzing what they learned, Dialogos determined that our safety record is not just about safety – it is about literally everything we do, and how we do it.

Our safety record and our operational challenges are embedded in how we:

o Contribute to mission confusion by not making hard strategic choices;
o Avoid or discourage straight talk, including reporting near misses;
o Divert energy from mission work, overtaxing people and diminishing our capacity;
o Skip time to detect, learn from, and act on our errors;
o Lose energy to a proliferation of piecemeal initiatives that come and go;
o Support a normalized attitude that it is okay to deviate from safety protocols.

This is not easy for most of us to hear. However, it is critical in this time when we are transforming and realigning our national and regional organizations. We need to ensure that we as core leaders are better aligned; provide more mission clarity; ensure better community and working relationships; and integrate our work and capabilities across boundaries. To ensure our success, we must continue to engage our employees in identifying things that drain energy away from our mission, and integrating what we learn in a single, unified effort to work well, safely, and consistently for the long run.

Our agency fatality rate (six or seven people a year “do not go home”) is triple that of the National Park Service and more than four times that of the Bureau of Land Management. Clearly, it is not just that we are a natural resource agency in an intrinsically dangerous line of work.

Perhaps most painfully, our can-do mindset is diluting our effectiveness, overtaxing our workforce and resources, and contributing directly to fatalities and injuries. Every time we say “that rule does not apply to me,” we are exacerbating operational challenges that put our coworkers and the Forest Service itself at risk. As Einstein once noted, “insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.” Our culture creates the results we get; we cannot expect different results until we do the hard work to change it. The good news is that we now know we can turn this around.

I thank the hundreds of people who participated in the Safety Culture for the 21st Century project and contributed to the Dialogos report. No change effort, however important, has ever survived without deep commitment from the people charged with doing the work.

I ask you as senior leaders in the Forest Service to:

o Distribute this letter and enclosed summary of the report for further discussion;
o hold and promote regional change dialogues, and report results to me;

Stay tuned. We are in this together.

/s/ Abigail R. Kimbell
ABIGAIL R. KIMBELL
Chief

Dialogos Report: Integrating Mission Accomplishment with Safety at the U.S. Forest Service (461K doc file)

I read through all those attachments on TC's post. I am not FS. I have not gotten the "Agency Line".

In my opinion, We are in trouble! Does nobody else see this???

That system sounds like a formula for disaster. Non-fire people running fire by a Committee??? If the type 1 IC is given command but the Committee does not like what he or she is doing, they just tell him to go home? We really need a committee of bureaucrats telling fire professionals how to do their jobs? That is what it sounds like to me. I am sure every Type 1 IC is wondering "how the h*ll do I do my job?"

noname

Somebody with the moniker BLMer asked for about info on this. Some
significant changes for 2008 for the BLM, but it looks like it could be
good decisions, based on shrinking budgets.

NR

Pres 2008 Budget Cuts - Effects on BLM Fire Resources (226 K pdf file)
Appendix- Aviation Resources (111 K pdf file)
(Ab named these links.)

SC Furniture Warehouse Blaze Kills 9 Firefighters
more details and photos: S.C. Warehouse Fire Kills 9 Firefighters
My condolences as well. Ab.

The Fire on the Kaibab last year was brought up, and I
would like to share some video of the fire.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K-4ok4kV5g  and
www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8hqSWGDl5E 

>From what I saw, there is the need to staff a FUMT
(Fire Use Management Team) to the level of a Type 2
Team, and they also should not be considered a low
cost way to manage a fire. If it goes to suppression
it will be a much bigger fire.

A FUMT is usually on the bottom of the priority list
when it comes to ordering resources, made it difficult
with all the other fires in the Region.

That Fire was going to do what it wanted to, decadent
forest, record ERCs, red flag conditions, combined
with a very political situation. The biggest mistake I
saw was when the Forest revised the Plan to include
more acreage that could burn instead of calling in a
Type 2 Team when the fire burned outside the initial
area. Just had to say something about a great bunch of
people that dealt with a difficult situation.

COMT

Two non-Forest Service readers have written in wondering if this is a hoax. One included comments on how letterhead can be fabricated to appear real. I can assure everyone that it is not a hoax.

The communication originates from Karyn L. Wood/WO/USDAFS, Director of Operations, NIFC. It began its rounds on 6/11/07. The 3 identical versions we have gotten have made the email rounds through two different Regional Fire Directors first who got them from Karyn and forwarded them on. As for the person who asked why this has not been in the news if the system is now in place, maybe people don't know. The direction indicated by these documents is consistent with everything I've been hearing behind the scenes here from fire managers and from firefighters on CA forests.

Ab.

fs-correspondence.doc
lg-fires-wfdss.doc
lg-fires-stratified-rep.doc
lg-fires-chiefs-principal-rep.doc
lg-fires-regional-foresters-principal-rep.doc

TC

We just got an email soliciting hotshot firefighters willing to try out to be on the FOX game show “Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?”

I forwarded it to the advertising dept here at wlf.com.

HAW HAW
Wonder if they'd want you to wear full PPE.

Ab.

Saw the crews working on that fire at the bridge about 1100 this morning
as we drove home from Yreka on Hwy 96. It was still putting off some
smoke.

Good job hooking it.

On 299 near Hawkins Bar. Didn't get a chance to look for the controlled
burn sign on the turn for the Denny Road. Is the Rx burn over, the one near
Trinity Village and Waterman Ridge?

Good job on that burn, getting it done.

Lots of Fathers Day pancake breakfasts in all the little Klamath and Trinity
River communities we drove through this morning.

Dads, we're sure glad you're in our lives.
OK enough of the mush for now!

Mellie

-MJ

I've been reading about everyone leaving r5, ive got two apps in on avue one for feo, and one for fire dozer operator and i havent heard a thing. I guess if everyone's leaving they arent getting replaced either. im well qualified for both positions and ive heard that they are exhausting all options from on forest personnel first. just thought id let you all know whats goin on in r5 country.

Does anyone know how long the Beckwourth HotShots have been around? I see their buses everyday and i was curious, definitely glad to see them. for those who dont know, Beckwourth is on the Plumas NF, Beckwourth District.

thanks
guys and girls b safe

MM

Has anyone heard more on the BLM budget cuts? I have been
hearing things about hotshot crews and aviation being affected.

-BLMer

Thanks,

-MJ

I will vouch for Faker's trustworthiness, although the moniker makes one wonder! Faker does get such info early on. Ab.

To all it concerns,

You have to understand that the crew is not labeled IHC because they want to be.
The forest and even the region is in on that, so you cannot nag on the crew.
Secondly the crew was held to the same cert. standards as an IHC. So they work
and perform under IHC standards. Third, I realize there is heartache from older
hotshot crews about newer crews. You have to realize that there are some crews
that perform strongly against older crews and some crews that need a little work.
For one thing we are all HOTSHOTS we all do the same work so what does
anything matter?

DK

DK, I don't think anyone was really nagging the crew. Someone said some time back that the BOD was going to call all R5 hotshots HOTSHOTS and quit making the distinction between RHC and IHC. Could be the FMO and the forest line officers decided to do that for the one crew. Seems like nationally dispatching all the hotshot crews on equal footing makes that even more reasonable. Wonder what would happen if all RHCs just entered themselves into ross as hotshots. Maybe consider creating an alternative to the existing hotshot site? (See the post below.) Seems to me this same process went on years ago and all the hotshots got put in the same category eventually to the benefit of all. Ab.

I think it has to do with status and competition for resources. When Supts, Capts and Squad Bosses are in short supply, those that are part of the "in crowd" and have the PR or website to show they are, they attract those guys to fill their vacancies. Like when people go to hunt for info and nothing comes up on Google.

To some degree this status-power thing is OK, but there are some RHC's that are better qualified and can out-perform. We just don't have the name recognition or visibility.

My opinion.

JD

No national standards have changed as far as I know. R5 has held to the 1,2,2 standards for initial certification. The only question that has come up as I understand is this; If overhead on an established hotshot crew is lost, is there a period during which 1,1,3 (another national std) can be used, as training—>ojt—>redcards are brought up to speed for captains & squaddies, (the 1,3 becomes 2,2)? This is especially critical since this level of manager is in short supply in the wildland fire force; since hiring firefighters takes years, sometimes; and because timing of OJT (and training that precedes it) may not lend itself for recert for the season once hotshots get out fighting fire. Sometimes it's hard for crews to get the right (or any) fire assignment for their people to progress early in the season or late in the season and then get home to take care of paperwork.

The Hiring SNAFU is a serious snafu with SAFETY implications.

Another side that someone may not of thought of, is if an established R5 hotshot crew (1,2,2) has to drop back to Type 2 IA (because it's 1,1,3 or lower), even temporarily, that crew then fails to be a nationally dispatched hotshot crew. It's not available to be dispatched outside of the region or the forest.

And then there's how many crews will be cut in the 2008 budget?

As someone said, it's simple -
but from another perspective, its not.

Strider

OJT=on the job training; SNAFU=Situation Normal, All effed Up; Acronyms list: www.wildlandfire.com/docs/acronyms.htm Thanks, Strider. Ab.

You said, "The Laguna IHC has completed the required red card qualifications: Supt.
TFLD and Capt. STLC. The forest FQRC (Red Card Committee) finalized the
paperwork today. The crew is now back in Type 1 status."

Have the requirements for Hotshots changed? And if so, what changes have been made
and why? Was it the Interagency Hotshots Guide or the IFPM standards?

Gizmo

Apparently I'm the Poster Boy up there as the guy who's trying to do
the right thing. So... She's going to go talk to the department heads
& see if they can't flow for school.

So the jury's out & once again I've learned something I wish I already
knew about OWCP. I guess my "things you should know about OWCP"
booklet was lost in the mail long ago.

At this point looks like I have to prepare to pay for school myself,
with the hope that I won't. Which begs the question.. How's a guy
who's on disability supposed to pay for college? Especially when the
state he's in doesn't seem terribly anxious to pay the bills?

Yes I've talked to the state guys & since I'm going into a field that
will grow "as fast as average for all occupations over the 2004-14
period" they're at least at this point unwilling to fund me.

While I have the ear of ... Pretty much everyone out there, here's a
gem of information I should pass on.

Say someone is injured (at work) & goes to the doctor. They get fixed
& the bill is sent to OWCP. For whatever reason it goes unpaid &
eventually is sent to collections.

As soon as the collections agent contacts the injured worker... Said
collections agent apparently just committed a felony. Yes, it is
against federal law for that to happen. Now I don't have the chapter &
verse yet.. But it's another thing I've learned from this claims
examiner. Passing on stuff like that is why she's so cool. (If you've
seen the speech, you've heard me speak of collections & how much fun
that is.. Took me 6 years to figure it out.)

Ok, that's all I have for now. Finals are over so I need a nap.
Krs

Excellent. Ab.

Why is 1,2,2 better? Whats the downside?

Thanks for the help Strider. Thanks Ab.

GA Peach

You're welcome. There was some discussion some time this spring on your questions.
1,2,2 indicates 1 supt, 2 capts, 2 squaddies;
1,1,3 indicates 1 supt, 1 capt, 3 squaddies (one or more that might be working for capt); disadvantage of this is that if you want to divide the crew in half, one half might not have as experienced overhead as the other half.)

Reminder that June 19th is the initial cut-off date for all FS applications to be received. If you are interested in a fire position, please apply to as many of the vacancy announcements as you'd like. Referral lists will be created on June 20, 2007 to fill currently vacant fire positions. They will also be used to "back-fill" positions that become vacant as a result of filling current positions. This process should provide multiple opportunities in a shorter period of time, compared to how jobs have traditionally been filled.

Please advise all your potential candidates that after June 19th, regional referral lists will be issued for each vacancy announcement from the GS-9 level and below.

Potential candidates can access these announcements at http://www.usajobs.gov/ by doing a search for the announcement number.

Potential candidates should apply now through AVUE to be considered for these positions.

I'll email Gordon Tamplin (FWS) & Ron Serabia (retired CDF/ ATGS) Jeannine's contact info... Ab.

I was back east on the Sweat Farm Road Fire. Met up with someone in firecamp. Their computer was tuned to theysaid. I commented like I hadn't seen it before. They told me "It's the place you go when you want to know." I had to grin.

Just thought you should know. This is our own kind of news site. Maybe some whining, but not much.

Thank you Abs.

Strider

Strider, I have only recently heard that description, although it sounds 'bout right. This site wouldn't exist without the contributors and community. The "news" and insights, the reports, the questions and comments add up to much larger "information" than the individual pieces. Because breaking info comes in from people near the source, it's usually here pretty fast. I don't know how interagency firefighters can get on the same page without this kind of info sharing... Sometimes even crews that are intra-agency need this kind of info sharing...

~ Leadership ~ Integrity ~ Professionalism ~ Teamwork ~ Performance ~ Ab.

They have the same requirements according to the IHC Ops Guide (there are two overhead stds there: 1,2,2 and 1,1,3; that's unusual???). R5 has the higher std of 1,2,2 for certification. In some cases this is the only thing that has kept a new crew from certification.

It's even possible that in CA, RHC that have just become certified might be more highly overhead qualed (1,2,2) than a long time IHC that has had leadership retire bumping them back to (1,1,3)... true?

How they are funded... does it matter money wise to the home forest or the forest they're going to serve? If not, to everyone else in the world a hotshot's a hotshot. You need em, they come, they perform to hotshot stds, they go home.

So it comes down to some hotshots want to maintain the high status-quo of the IHC name? and appear on a partial hotshot website? Why does appearing on a hotshot website matter?

snotshot

I feel very sorry for Krs and his battle with OWCP. It's bad enough to get seriously injured on the job but another thing to be forced to fight OWCP for what is needed to help KRS.

Anyway, my sister is an attorney who specializes in these types of claims. She is willing to help KRS. The cost would be minimal or none. She understands what firefighters go thru. Maybe all my stories have helped.

Feel free to have KRS contact me via email.

I am a FMO in Region 9.

Gary

Done. Ab.

MA

~ Leadership ~ Integrity ~ Professionalism ~ Teamwork ~ Performance ~ ... Ab.

California Hotshot crews is a very confusing topic.

There are in

• North Ops
  • 14 certified crews
  • 9 crews working on getting certified
• South Ops
  • 26 crews certified crews
    + including Vandenberg
  • with only 1 working towards certification
  • but 2 have dropped down to Type 2 IA for qualifications reasons.

Being listed as RHC or IHC or as Hotshots is just what the local dispatch center has entered the crew as in ROSS for the crew name. There is no standardization on the 3 categories. At the Hotshot workshop in Reno this past winter all is holy and great and there is no more of RHC versus IHC, Us versus Them mentality. But wait, there are two exceptions to that:

1. To become certified a new crew must be staffed 1, 2, 2. Whereas to keep your type one status you may go out as 1, 1, 3. There have been some crews around California that are certified, but have taken assignments below 1, 1, 3. This is an integrity issue and I am personally proud of Laguna for stepping down to Type 2IA.
   Until ROSS and IQCS are smart enough to check that the resource order is filled by folks with the qualifications required by the IHC Ops guide, this issue is handled at the Forest and district level.
2. The California Hotshot website. All of the MEL crews are not listed. Polmar is certified but listed as a disbanded crew. Funding for Polmar came from the National Fire Plan just like Klamath and Modoc, but they are grouped in with the MEL Crews. It might be because the website is run by a crew that is not with the Forest Service.

And the Pot has been stirred!

California Hotshot / Notshot

Laguna got the certs necessary to be reinstated as IHC on the Goldledge Incident. My understanding. Congrats to them for the excellent effort. Ab.

Brushboy

heh, heh. Ab.

DirtMiner

I have a potential Big Problem with OWCP.

History, for those of you who are new:

I was 2nd saw on Plumas IHC in 2001.
On a fire in Ky (31 Oct '01) a tree fell out of the
burn, struck me over the head & broke many things,
worst of which was my back, putting me in a wheelchair
for the foreseeable future.

Fast forward to fall of '06. I've moved to Oregon &
enrolled in Oregon State University (OSU) in the
Botany program. I've been here for a year & will take
my last final tomorrow.

For several reasons I've switched my major over to Bio
Chemistry with an Entrepreneurial minor. Luckily all
the classes I've taken cross over so I'm not behind.

Here's the surprise:

OSU wants $2,288.64 in back tuition before I can
register for classes next year.

Now I have a rehabilitation counselor assigned to me
by OWCP who is supposed to be paying for my
retraining, right? (That's what I understand)
So I called said rehab counselor last Friday I left
him a message detailing what I need to register. He
called back today leaving a message for me. (I turned
the phone off so I could study Chem for tomorrow) He
had talked to OWCP & they said "Funding is not
available." However, they would still like him to
check in on me monthly to see how that retraining is
going.

So I called him back & got his machine... "Not to be
blunt, but how the hell am I going to continue my
retraining without the funds to do so?" I asked.

So I really hope this is just a disconnect since from
what I understand part of OWCP's mission is to retrain
us gimps so we can be productive & no longer need the
monthly disability payments. (As when I start work
again I will no longer be disabled in their eyes.)

I also called my claims examiner (who has been
*Really* good compared to the SF ones) and left the
same question for her. Maybe I'll get a call back
tomorrow, maybe not. But I'm going to wait until
Friday & then pay the bill myself. I've got the money,
it's just someone else is supposed to pay the
bill & I honestly doubt I'll be reimbursed... But the
longer I wait the more the classes fill & if I don't
get into something I need, it may be a whole year
before I can attempt to take it again.

Obviously I don't have the whole story yet as the "Why
not" question hasn't been answered. This is simply a
"just the facts" report for all of you out there who
are still following my life.

I'll report more when I know it.

Krs Evans-

http://yakimaherald.com

I know about the funding...what I am trying to find out is,...R-5 said last year
that when a Crew got their Type 1 status, they would be a full IHC, that they
would no longer have RHC crews in this Region. But when American River
and Feather River got their Type 1 status, they are now called RHC, not IHC.

But when Beckwourth got their status, they are called IHC, this is what I'm
trying to sort out...

How did Beckwourth become IHC when the other crews got called RHCs??

-MJ

Not to stir the pot, but maybe this is a clue; we don't see Beckwourth listed here. Ab. www.californiahotshotcrews.org/

CM

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

USFS Anza fire station closed
www.towncrier.com/pages/stories/story120070614.html

By J.P. Crumrine, Assistant Editor

The U.S. Forest Service (FS) announced last week that Station 53 in Anza would close.

“I’m working on some alternatives and this may only be a temporary situation,” said FS San Jacinto Ranger District Fire Chief Norm Walker. During this period, the Kenworthy unit (engine 52) will spend mornings and afternoons in Anza.

During this time of year, fires are more likely to start in Anza than Garner Valley. If lightning strikes are expected, they normally occur in Garner Valley and the engine will remain at station 52, according to Walker.

Regardless of the length of time for the station closure, its cause was the loss of staff. Separately, the engine chief and crew were offered positions with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE).

While state and local agencies typically offer higher salaries to experienced FS firefighters, the confluence of several other events, such as prosecution of a Forest Service crew boss in Washington, have created strong incentives for those interested in seeking a career change.

The accompanying table compares the salary of a fire or engine captain for the FS with other local and State agencies. This difference is not unusually greater this year.

Although the national and regional offices continue to argue that staffing and station closures are at normal levels, the data suggests an alarming trend.

Locally, one of seven stations is now closed. In the region, more than 10 percent of the 3,600 fire positions are vacant despite efforts since winter to accelerate firefighter hiring.

“Although funding exists to meet normal staffing levels, there are still 485 job vacancies in the region’s fire organization,” wrote Matt Mathes, FS regional information officer. “These vacancies mean that currently 75 percent of the region’s engines are staffed and two type 2 initial attack crews have leadership vacancies.”

In addition, compared to the 2005 fire season, there are fewer type 1 crews and fewer engines in the whole region. Of the 485 vacant fire positions, Walker said he has 11 career vacancies in the San Jacinto district.

For 2008, the FS is actually reducing the number of firefighters available nationwide. (more)

Click the link to read the rest. Ab.

What I was asking about the Type 1 Crews is,
why are some still being certified as RHC, and
others in the same Region being certified as IHC?

-MJ

I have copied and pasted your four emails to Jim Paxon. As far as I can see they came from our folks who have already posted their outrage on theysaid. I am not trying to minimize our fire community's hatred of arsonists or condone what appears to be several fire managers' support of Van Bateman, their friend and colleague. However, I am really curious about what is the truth regarding what Van's friends said. It seemed illogical to me that they would say that such firestarting is common practice or typical of ICs, Line officers, and others. So at the end of the copy-paste email to Paxon last night, I asked him to further clarify what he had and hadn't done lighting fires and asked his take on the AZ Republic article. This is what he replied:

Ab, You do not know how very much I appreciate your even tempered and "equal" handling of this hot issue. Thanks to MAC and Ol’ Fire Guy too for their balance and perspective. I guess I was not very clear in my last post, although I tried my best. Even though I have been found guilty by association, apparently by the masses, I do not want this to erode into a pi__in' match with anyone. For clarification, please let me reiterate some salient points to you. Do with them as best fits the appropriate use with you as the webmaster/editor. I am looking for understanding and I wish for healing. It might take awhile. I am pretty thick skinned and know what I have and have not done. If you have other replies that you wish to send, that is fine. If they are only repetitions of these two, then I understand the common thread. I really do not expect to see this in “They Said” but leave that up to your judgment in posing another viewpoint. Again, Ab, thanks for the way that you handle this matter and God’s best to you and to all of us.

--for 22 years, I was a District Ranger. I was the line officer with the delegated authority to sign burn plans and implement Rx fire projects, until about 1998, when that authority was re-delegated to the Forest Supervisor only.

--I never lit a fire and walked away from it...NEVER-EVER!!. Neither have I broken any LAWS with regards to burning. I can’t and won’t speak for Charlie Denton nor Larry Humphrey. You can ask them.

--What I did from the early 80's and afterward, was some occasional test burns and some sampling of readiness for B.D. piles on timber sales before crews initiated crew burning. That was done with at least one or more also qualified fire individuals with me and notice to dispatch by radio. Piles were hand-lined, PPE was in place and the piles were either consumed or mopped up before leaving.

--The only thing I am "guilty" of is burning more acres than allocated on prescribed burn projects,...technically not authorized (but included because of secondary areas in the burn plan). Those additional acres were reported up front and I let the S.O.'s deal with the reporting accomplishments. The conditions for additional acres burned were within prescription and the results were reviewed on the ground by fire managers. I was never reprimanded for this, although often, acres reported were changed to match the allocation and the rest were “banked” by the forest or used by another district.

--I had 34 years fire experience when I retired in 2003. I have been qualified for fire since 1969 and my quals never lapsed. I was on the line in many states over the years until after Yellowstone in 1988. My quals included STLC and ICT3 as well as IOF1. I was a Sector Boss and a Crew Liaison Officer in the old Large Fire Organization. I was a proponent of PNF's and then Managed Fire Use on the Gila N.F. Those who have personally worked with me or for me know my experience, ethics and safety attitude.

--As I said before, in a simpler time, without the complication of environmental laws and smoke restraints, projects were easier to accomplish. Things have changed over the years, sadly it seems that Van Bateman did not.

I want to see Raymond Oyler get the most from a judge/jury as much as anyone. Leonard Gregg who started the Rodeo Fire is in prison for 10 years. I have never understood why Valindo Jo Elliott, who started the Chediski Fire was never charged. I do not condone what Van did. Remember that he pled guilty. He is going to prison this month. What I do know is that this is another tragedy not only for him but also for the fire community. It does not undo the good things that he did. All I have done is stand by him as a friend. He has told me that he is ready and wants to get his debt to society taken care of.

And in a more private communication from Paxon to Ab, that I asked permission to post in the spirit of understanding:

The reporter <snip> did take what I said and change it in kind of a twisted summary. I told him that I had never lit fires and walked away but that I had done some test burns and such and that I had several times burned more acres than allocated/funded. Technically, they were less than authorized. Big sigh and much regret from talking openly. I guess that means to him that I did the same thing many times. He does not have a good grasp of fire management. I don’t believe that normalizes any breaking of the law nor condones it. The whole thing is a mess and it would have been much easier to just stay “mum” But I really think that the F.S. also left Van out without scolding, counseling, reprimanding, etc., while they continued to use his services and expertise for more than a year. In my opinion, many of them have dirty hands in this whole mess.

http://washington.bizjournals.com

June 7th, 2007 @ 6:06am
by Jim Cross/KTAR

A top fire commander says he's on the sidelines with
Arizona moving into the heart of the fire season.

Larry Humphrey says he's no longer allowed to fight
fire on federal land because of a recent 'Arizona
Republic' article in which he reportedly defended a
former firefighter's act of lighting an unauthorized
fire.

Humphrey says he was misquoted. "Yes, I was. Although
I think they read it wrong also. They assumed that I
said I had set fires and I never said that at all."

"The letters that we wrote in support of Van (Bateman)
made the judge extremely angry, saying that we were
just a bunch of renegades cowboys up there. And I
think that may be one part of the reason he slapped
Van with the two years. It looks like our efforts to
support our friend totally backfired."

"First of all, I have to say that the state has really
stood behind me. But the federal agencies have decided
I can't fight fire on federal lands because they don't
feel comfortable with me being an incident commander
on federal land."

Humphrey led an elite firefighting team that stopped
the largest wildfire in state history five years ago.

The Forest Service is trying to determine if current
and former firefighters were accurately quoted in the
Arizona Republic article reportedly defending
Bateman's actions.

"What are they going to do? Take away my birth date?
There's nothing that I've done criminal that they can
get me on. I mean they can probe and make noise and
come out in the paper and ban me from federal fires.
But I'm having a real good time with retirement."

And if he never fights fire again. "With the current
climate that's going on, I won't miss it. What I'll
miss is my friends. It's not worth the effort
anymore."

Fair use disclaimer

Community, please include a link when you send in copyright information like this. Thanks. Ab.

Good humor... Welcome to theysaid, jed. Ab.

-MJ

1-2-2 not 1-1-3

So if 1-1-3 due to attrition or injury, crew is bumped back to Type II IA.
I think this pulls them back onto their forest. Out of the national mix.

This is, in fact, not the case. What has happened this year is that R5 has agreed that the 1-2-2 configuration is not the only game in town. This is mostly due to the huge turnover that has occurred this season. If a Type 1 crew (IHC or otherwise) meets the criteria for either the 1-2-2, or the 1-1-3 (with regard to staffing, quals, etc…), then they retain type 1 status. I do know of at least one IHC which is using 1-1-3, and has bumped back to type 2 IA until the foreman is fully qualified. The region does expect those crews running in a 1-1-3 to move back into the 1-2-2 as soon as hiring and/or training allow.

L—C—E-S

libratory mice: those that live in laboratories or libraries... haw haw. Ab.

I just need to say this, because what we don't think of comes back to bite us in the behind.

If anything bad happens to you or a crewmember this season ~heaven forbid~ remember that you have the right to medical care, That includes medical care to reduce mental trauma. Your and your crew's mental health requires you talk things over with friends without fear of reprisal. If someone overhead pressures you to go to individual debriefings following a burnover or deployment, if they want to stick you in a motel room to wait for investigators, or something else that doesn't feel right - DOCTOR UP. Demand it. Its your right and responsibility to insure your future health.

I heard that the new policy is that people will not get to talk with anyone following a bad event, that they want to keep you unpolluted for the investigation. Well, screw that! Take care of yourselves first.

I have a couple of friends who are still dealing with bad juju from years ago.

Todd

Someone sent me this hantavirus alert for the CS-STF-McCloud RD (577 K doc file). When I was on the Klamath this spring for the engine captains' gathering, a person from the state vector-borne diseases section spoke about hantavirus and several other dangerous viruses. This is nothing to trifle with. Deer mice are the vectors and a large proportion of them are carriers of the virus. You can end up dead (30-40% do) if you get it. Here's the American Lung Assn website that gives the symptoms, etc, lots of info...

I know there was discussion some years ago about not harming the wildlife in firecamp, but as I recall the mammals that were killed were not rats but deer mice. Deer mice or rats, if they cause disease, I think killing them is warranted.

If anyone gets sick, document, document, document!

Mellie

fat'ie deer mice or lil'ratties? Ab.

This is Fire Management Training for Forest Service fire employees, leading to qualification requirements for the 0401 series. Ab.

Date: June 4, 2007
Subject: Timeline for Hiring through Avue Digital Services
To: Forest Supervisors and Directors

As you are aware, Avue Digital Services (ADS), the automated classification and staffing program used since 2003, will not be available after September 30, 2007. The following timelines were developed to allow us flexibility to take advantage of the time remaining:

Single Vacancies, All Open-Continuous Non-Fire, and Fire GS-11 & above:

• June 15 – last date for SF-52 to be created and approved
• July 2 – Outreach to be completed and position moved to 4a Outreach Completed in Tracker
• July 2 – last date for HR-Employment Center to issue vacancy announcements
• August 13 – vacancy announcements close
• August 13 – last day for employees/applicants to apply through Avue
• August 14 – final nonfire open continuous and single vacancy referral lists created
• August 20 – last date to send referral list package to Point of Contact (POC)
• September 4 – last date for POC to return referral list package to Regional Selection Team (RST)
• September 10 – all selections made by RST
• September 17 – acceptances from selectee
• September 30 – all referral lists audited and closed out

Fire Open-Continuous Announcements GS-09 and below:
Based on input from the fire community, we are streamlining the fire hiring process as one large selection pool to include making offers to individuals beginning at the GS-09 grade level and progressing through to the GS-06. We anticipate this will alleviate much of the declination impact, as well as speed up the hiring process.

Current Process

• June 8 – last single referral list issued to POC (new process after this date)
• June 4-8 – Regional Selecting Official for Fire to make selections for single fire packages received by POC
• June 11-June 29 – Regional Selecting Official for Non-Fire to make selections for single fire packages received by POC

New Process

• June 1 through June 18 – focused outreach by Fire & Forest Civil Rights Officers (FCRO)
• June 19 – initial cut-off for all applications to be be received to be considered for most vacant position through the end of the fiscal year.
• June 20-22 – regional referral lists issued for each fire vacancy announcements GS-09 and below. Additional referral lists may be created later if needed.
• June 25-29 – Fire subject matter experts meet to prepare referral list packages for RST
• July 2-6 – Preparation for Regional Selection Officials
• July 8-13 – selections made by Fire RST (2 selecting officials)
• July 16 through September 14 – vacant positions matched to selectees
• August 13 – vacancy announcements close
• August 13 – last day for employees/applicants to apply through Avue (note: employees should be encouraged to apply by the original cut-off date of June 19)
• September 17 – acceptances from selectee
• September 30 – all referral lists audited and closed out

The migration to the ASC and the loss of ADS will continue to impact our workload. How can you help?

1) ensure outreach is completed for current actions (located in button 4 of the Tracker) so that the Employment Center can balance the workload of new and current actions.
2) evaluate your organization’s vacant positions now in order for us to use ADS to fill your positions.
3) use the automated Tracker to track the status of your actions. Updates are made daily in the tracker.
4) use the R5 HRM website and follow the step-by-step instructions

QuickHire is the automated staffing module of the near future. There is a team established at the Albuquerque Service Center that is preparing the module to meet Forest Service needs. Information relative to QuickHire deployment will be forwarded when available.

Your assistance in ensuring that supervisors and employees are fully aware of these changes is appreciated. Employees will continue to apply to Avue announcements through the same process as in the past until August 13 when all Avue announcements will close. It is very important that you encourage employees interested in fire positions to apply prior to the June 19 date.

Questions from Line Officers and RO Staff Directors may be directed to Joy Thomas, Employment Center Manager at (707) 562-9178, or Carmen Funston, Acting Director at (707) 562-8736.

/s/ Vicki A. Jackson (for)
BERNARD WEINGARDT
Regional Forester

A fed firefighting "direction" being echoed across the West in the last paragraphs below from Flathead Lake area MT...

Don't Panic Yet
http://flatheadbeacon.com

...But, as with so many other things, the Flathead’s rampant growth is changing the roles and risks firefighters face, particularly when it concerns homes built in remote, heavily-wooded areas often bordering public land, known as the Wildland-Urban Interface, or “WUI.”

“There are more homes being built in the Interface, which present a whole other set of problems for wildland firefighters,” Frye said. In the ever-expanding WUI, firefighters must now contend with the protection of large, expensive homes while attempting to suppress a blaze.

Responding to this situation, the state Legislature passed a bill this year requiring the DNRC to provide a lawyer to any firefighter prosecuted for, say, property damage that might occur while doing their job.

“With development in the Interface, you’ve introduced a human-caused fire source that previously didn’t exist,” Frye added. “There are very few wildland fires today that don’t include residences.”

Adding structure protection to wildland firefighting has driven up the costs severely. As a result, Harrington and Frye said, the federal government is trying to cut back on the amount of money spent fighting “mega-fires” on remote, public land far from populated areas. The newer, cheaper approach to such fires will be to contain it and allow it to burn itself out, rather than expend millions in a futile attempt to extinguish it completely.

An example would be last year’s “Tripod Complex” fire in Washington’s Cascade mountain range, which burned 175,000 acres and cost $82 million to fight.

“A fire similar to the Tripod fire will be looked at much more closely in terms of management response,” Frye said. “A larger, potentially extended-duration fire may not receive all the resources that it would have received in previous years.”

I suppose that things are never as they seem. I have read “They Said” regarding Bateman’s case and recent sentencing. Wow! It is amazing to me that there are so many “judges” with all the answers. I too am of the mind “Say it ain’t so, Joe!” I am disappointed in Van’s actions and do not condone them for a moment. Let me be clear that I have never started a fire and walked away from it. I have lit test burns and sample fires (BD of piles from timber sales to check readiness for crew burning). And as so many “fire-using” District Rangers, I have burned more acres than were allocated in both funds and targets, under conditions that met the objectives. That was what I called being efficient. The results were totally satisfactory to those who reviewed those burns on the ground. Targets were actually either changed or accomplishments reported where changed and the difference banked for the future. The results were technically “out of authorization!” Were they criminal—I hope not.

I was part of a group that pioneered burning in Bighorn Sheep altitudinal migration routes on the Taylor River north of Gunnison. We burned standing Lodgepole Pine to open areas up and clean up sheep dung in bedding areas. During my tenure on the Gila National Forest, we burned more than 100,000 acres in ten years, with outstanding results for watershed and wildlife habitat improvement. None of those fires were anything but good. I have lived prescribed fire and have done a little suppression work through the years as well, including working on six fatality incidents as an I.O.F.1.

In times before NEPA, NFMA, Clean Air Act, etc., burning was much simpler and with an overall plan, often burns were conducted when conditions were right. Some approvals were obtained over the radio, before igniting… from the site. Things are not that way now. What grieves me is that a good man who has given decades to protection of the public and is a recognized fire manager is on his way to prison. What he did was wrong, no doubt. Were his years as Ops and Type I IC considered? Was the fact that his team went to New York on September 12, 2001 and helped out in recovery on “the pile” for 31 days considered? He received a FEMA award as one of the “True Heroes” of 9-11. Did the fact that a critical burnout on the Dome Fire in 1996 kept fire from moving closer or into Santa Fe, New Mexico surface? On the Rodeo-Chediski Fire near Show Low in 2002, another critical burnout kept fire from running across U.S. Highway 60. If it had jumped 60, it would have burned thousands of homes in Show Low and Lakeside, Arizona and could have been at least ½ million acres bigger. Were Van’s accomplishments considered at all in his sentencing? Van tells me that no one from the Forest Service, his Ranger, Fire Staff, Forest Supervisor, any Regional Office official ever talked to him about troubles to come, until he read of his indictment in the news. Yet, he continued to be sent on Type I fire assignments, hurricanes and instruction of fire management, even to NYFD. Is that good supervision and compassion from an outfit that you have spent your life serving? My Grandad told me that “he who makes no mistakes does nothing! He who does not learn from his mistakes is a fool!” Wise words for us to ponder.

I spent 33 ½ years in a great outfit, working with great people. I am proud of my career and of the association with many fine professional firefighters and managers,… many of you. It pleases me to see some folks speak up here and offer another perspective. I do not wish to see any fragmentation of our small fire community. We need all of us going forward in a positive way to meet the demands of the future. Fuels are getting worse and WUIs are increasing. Looks like agencies will continue to struggle with budget constraints, which means less folks on the line and fewer funds for training, equipment and fuels reduction. I envy no one in a management role today. You folks out there, please take a deep breath and walk a few steps in another man’s Whites. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Best always,

Jim Paxon

Good Luck
Insurance Agent

1-2-2 not 1-1-3

So if 1-1-3 due to attrition or injury, crew is bumped back to Type II IA. 
I think this pulls them back onto their forest. Out of the national mix.

JJ

Just wanted to say great job to the PAF fire school grads. Welcome to the family!!!

-HOG

I noticed about Beckwourth getting their IHC status, and I have a 
question maybe someone out there can answer.

Did the Region ever figure out the RHC/IHC certification issue?

When American River and other Crews got certified at the end of 
last Season, they were still being called RHCs, long after I thought 
the issue was dead, and crews would be called IHCs when they 
became certified.

Just Wondering, 

-MJ

Just as a point of interest regarding the photo of Tanker 85 floating on Diamond Lake, the photo(s) are also on display inside the Diamond Lake Lodge with a summary of the accident / landing. Worth a stop by to look at if you're ever in the Diamond Lake area.

Interesting story and picture.

sr5401

Thank you Doug for your persistence over the years since your retirement. Ha, retirement!! Ab.

“I find it funny all you fire scientists talk about fire, but you’ve never been in one.”

This was from a BC in the Forest Service who was listening to a presentation I was giving after the ’03 fires in So. Cal. Well, I took that one to heart and learned how to cut line from some great people. Now I find myself in rooms filled the Ph.D’s discussing fire and I make a point of asking them the same question, and I do so frequently. And quite frankly I’m becoming more comfortable around chewing tobacco and fire stations than at science conferences, but that’s another issue.

I can’t thank you enough for the time you have given to provide insight about fire and relate your experiences. I’ll never have those RPD slides in my head, but I am grateful you all have enough love for what you do to pass their contents along here. You can be sure when I talk to young firefighters, which I do quite a bit, I’ll make sure they have access to those as well.

Be safe dang it,

jimhart

Just Curious,

The PNF Crew 1 received their Type 1 status about 2 weeks ago and became
the Beckwourth IHC.

Fyrfghtr

Congrats! Well earned! This is no easy certification, folks.  Ab.

I appreciate your comments on stereotyping ologists and your earlier stated perspective that wildland fire should remain under the auspices of land management rather than having it become "Amerca's 911". I have mixed feelings on that second issue depending on the day, and some comments on the first.

I think the point that is made repeatedly about ologists overseeing a fire program is that, although ologists may say firefighter safety is their first priority and they think safety is their first priority, they do not have enough live fire experience to be able to make that real. They don't have enough (or any) fire slides in their decision making toolbox. And this isn't all ologists who work for land-management agencies, but quite a number of them.

I am an ologist -- in biology (ecology) and stress psychology (psychoneuroimmunology, human factors) with a strong background in stats and epidemiology. I also feel I've achieved an "advanced degree" in fire over the last 7 years thanks to a number of people in the wildland fire community who have invited me into various arenas and encouraged or mentored my learning. However, in spite of all my non-fire academic training, I don't feel I have enough fire experience to be making safety decisions for wildland firefighters, unless they relate to human factors. (I do think that because of training with Doug Campbell, I got a jump start on recognizing high risk fire behavior conditions on the ground.) Bottom line, I think safety decisions for wildland firefighters should be made by people who have been wildland firefighters.

Andrea Tuttle, a personal friend and the former director of CDF, told me when she was appointed that her biggest shortcoming was that she had no wildland firefighting experience. She had advanced degrees in natural resources. She felt qualified to work with environmentalists and "loggers". She also expressed concern about firefighters' safety. We all do the best we can, but it's good to recognize your limitations. When you don't have experience/training, you try to have excellent advisors. Whether you have the knowledge or experience or leadership qualities to take their advice -- given the context and pressures of your job (political, financial, etc) -- is another story.

Just a bit of an ologist's perspective.

Mellie

Very logical well thoughtout piece; almost mellow, so a little out of character. The Esperanza report is not very well done. I could find no wisdom in the report. It is the same concept with a different theme. What do I mean, well slamming people for not abiding by the 10/18 was popular for quite some time in accident reports, hence report writers were front loaded to find out how the firefighters messed up the 10/18. Remember Putnam could not go there with the South Canyon Report. Now we are a learning culture, just like that. The Red Book comes out and the 10/18 are now guidelines, not rules, though without any other backing. The Esperanza Action Plan thus supports the learning culture theme, once again front loaded, lets all learn from the mistakes of others, group hug, do an AAR and go eat dinner. What did upper management think, was it because Doctrine is coming, we better not find a reason to add a checklist or technocratic response.

My take is it was a simple breakdown in Situational Awareness: its dark, you can't see very well, they woke you up in the middle of the night to work through your normal REM sleep cycle. Besides that nobody really has a handle on what's going on, there is no apparent plan, There is not an ATGS or any aircraft to tell you to get the hell out. So in support of MW, they were just doing their best.

Whenever I discuss convective heat and radiant heat, I get my lighter out, turn up the flame and put my hand right next to the side of flame almost touching, and then I put my hand over the top of the flame, usually only within 2-3 inches. Even at that scale a huge difference. Seems pretty straightforward, stay away from convective heat situations, or where it may be funneled. Recognizing the risk is so key.

Next week I get to address a new class of rookie firefighters. This is my 28th season, and I will not talk about not bending or breaking anything. I will not try to scare 'em with the fact of all the close calls that I have had. What should I tell 'em, and I mean that. Tell me what you think.

We have to be sound at the unit level, that is where the strength lies. In unit I mean Engine Companies, IA models, Helitac Crews, IHCs. We need outstanding leadership at that level, and I think we are getting there. Lets hold each other accountable, every day.

Thank you all for contributing, reading, thinking and especially maintaining this forum.

Intothewind

He is an asset anywhere he works. He's gon'na haf'ta watch out and not award any horseshoe bob knobs. Never know what an inmate might do with one o' those. haw haw. Ab.

And it is interesting to note that, he posed for his picture in front of a crew
buggy rather than a BC's vehicle. But what CC is SRT?

ht

You're welcome. Never a dull moment. We Abs are always quite busy, but it's the community here that keeps things poppin'. Ab.

I have authored a book, workbook and a course of study that has been taught throughout the USA and Europe. The subject is predicting fire behavior events. The book title is "The Campbell Prediction System." The title of the course is "Wildland Fire Signature Predictions".

The course focuses on when and where fire behavior will change, get worse or easier. This is called a Trigger Point. The TP is shown on maps to denote places where there will be a significant change in fire behavior.

he forces of wind, slope and solar preheating are the major causes of fire behavior change. Where they align, the fire is worse or the head of the fire. Where they are out of alignment, the fire becomes easier.

I have worked on many wildland fires and I always picked a safety area location where fire had to approach out of alignment. Therefore the need for an extensive area was not needed.

To make predictions as to the amount of fire, convection etc. ahead of a fire we developed the Fire Signature Prediction concept. The fire behavior at the head, where the forces are best aligned, is the "In alignment signature". In the path of the fire where the forces are aligned the Fire Signature will replicate. From the previous fire signatures one makes predictions based on the alignment of forces in locations in front of the fire.

The Butte Fire video is an example of failure to take past fire behavior into account. The safety areas became deployment sites because the tactical choice was bad. From the bottom of the adjacent canyon to the top of the ridge where the safety areas were selected was in afternoon alignment with the forces of wind, slope and preheat. The signature would be the in alignment fire intensity of previous days runs. The effectiveness of the shelters was a cover for the real failure, the tactical choice that assumed you can fire out against the alignment of forces and take the crowns out from the ridge. What you would create is a creeping ground fire that was like the out of alignment signature of other parts of the fire.

I think it would be a good idea to open a discussion as to how to pick an escape route and safety area as well as how much area is needed. The fire signature is the best predictive system I have found and I have used it successfully for many years.

Respectively yours
Doug Campbell
Wildland Fire Specialists, LLC

NFFE Praises FS A-76 defund 6-8-07.doc (37K doc file)
Approps_2008_Rpt_070607.pdf (241K pdf file)

Good work. Ab.

Hey Ab,

Thanks for managing this forum!!! I have been keeping an eye on it for quite a while. I am retired FS now, but have a son in the fire service who is dealing with many of the issues that you present. I would like to touch on several topics if I may...

Background: I began in R-4 in 1970 with "Guard School" and did a little bit of everything on the District. In 1971, at 19 years old, my first large fire was on the District and I was assigned to be Crew Boss of a group of "engineers" that had been brought out of the R.O. in Ogden to fight the fire. That was a hoot! These guys had on wingtips and white shirts. They were the most out-of-shape crew that I have ever seen. We broke open the fire cache and found hardhats and hand tools for everyone. Fortunately I only had them for one shift and they were released... no serious injuries, but very little work done either. I had Crew Boss training (6-8 hours) the next season. I guess that we got things a little backward back then.

I eventually moved to a permanent position on the Coconino NF in Fire when Bill Buck was the Fire God/Staff and LFO ruled. I got to know Van Bateman and several others while I was there. I later moved to another Forest in Region 3 where I moved up through the ranks and spent 20 years as the FCO/FMO. My first DIVS assignment was in 1977. I joined Charlie Denton's (National) OH Team in 1984. I moved from OPs to Plans and served on several Type 1 and Type 2 teams until I retired a few years ago. My most enjoyable assignments were working on "Regular" (Type 2) Crews that we would put together from the area and travel throughout the West; although I don't remember turning down any assignment.

Safety Awareness: From my perspective, people were more aware (greater situational awareness) before we had Nomex or Fire Shelters. I believe that a false sense of safety/security came with these innovations. An example is the Butte Fire video extolling the virtues of fire shelters saving lives. The raw footage told a different story. Poor decisions were made when the affected crews decided to stay in place in their safety (deployment) zones, rather than move to a truly safe location. I have heard that the Canadians use the Butte Shelter Deployment to teach proper decision making and that the need to deploy shelters was a failure in leadership.

In Defense of Region 3: When I began with the FS, in both Regions 3 and 4, "winter lightning" was primarily a Lands or Engineering function. By the next spring, there were a few less structures to worry about in the Forest. The unapproved Rx burning was done either by the sheep herders, or the Range Techs in the fall or early spring. It wasn't until the late 1970's that management began to crack down on this type of activity, and only then when T&E Species were getting burned up along with the road clearing slash and the sagebrush. I have never seen anyone in the Fire shop light one of these and in my career, I haven't.

Arson is Arson: I worked as a Forest Service (arson) Investigator back in the old days out of Salt Lake City. I maintained my membership in the IAAI for several years. In all of the fires that I investigated, I never had a suspect who was a permanent government employee. It seemed that they were all working on the border of the Fire Service, in local volunteer fire departments, support or first season firefighters. With this background I have recognized some awfully suspicious situations and heard some rumors, but have never been able to pin an arson fire on a fire manager/supervisor. I left the Coconino about 30 years ago, so I cannot speak to Van's situation, other than as a former arson investigator, when I heard the news, my first thought was "How many other fires has he lit over the years? How could he have violated our trust like this?" An arsonist doesn't just take up the hobby in his mid 50's. It must have been happening off and on since the 1970's. That is the psychology of arson.

Safety a Personal Responsibility: There is a bottom line to my rambling... We as leaders in the Fire Service, whatever agency or company, MUST take care of ourselves and the people who work for us. There are many, many people in leadership positions in Management, on IMTs and FUMT (Fire Use Teams), that are flat-out incompetent and dangerous when it comes to fire management and safety. It has always been our responsibility to watch out for ourselves and not follow blindly. It is even more critical since the massive retirements of the past decade in fire management. There are a lot of folks that may have moved a little too rapidly to fill these critical vacancies. Not their fault. They just need to recognize their lack of experience and take time to review their decisions and the (often unintended) consequences of their actions. Don't be afraid to ask for help and act conservatively until you do have a better foundation for sound decisions.

There are still some great folks out there, many in leadership positions, such as Roy Hall (FUMT) and Gary Loving (IMT2) in Region 3. However, there was a FUMT from R-1 that messed up on the Kaibab in R-3 last summer, burning 58,000 acres. There were incidents in Wyoming and throughout the West in the past few years. These incidents don't all make it into the "Lessons Learned" Center for evaluation. I don't care if the person is a Type 1 IC who is calling the shots, make sure that you and your crews are safe! There are a lot of opportunities for organizational failure between the ICP and the fireline!

Be safe out there! You have a lot of great people who may be frustrated with a struggling management organization and its policies, but you are the ones with the boots on the ground. I had more actual decision making authority when I was a GS-3 living in a remote guard station than I ever had as an assistant fire staff or FMO. Policies are made at the top and interpreted by everyone in the chain of command until it reaches you out on the fireline. You are the ones who implement whatever the policy is based on your situation and your safety at that moment. The best policy is still Don't violate the "10" and Watch Out for the "18"!

Best wishes to all of you! You have dedicated yourselves to an honorable profession that is still undervalued and under-appreciated. But it is "what you do!" It is what I did! Do it safely and take good care of those who have given you their trust!

Sincerely,
-FireDad

Welcome to the forum, FireDad. Ab.

I made a new IMWTK-largest fires (Inquiring Minds Want to Know) page. Ab.

Clearly, wildland fire is a complex process which includes, among many
others, convective and radiant energy heat transfer processes. In fact, I
would be happy to "whine" about just how technically challenging this
problem is and the issues associated with developing guidelines that are
easily understood and implemented, but this is not the time or the place.

The original safety zone guidelines were developed with the full
realization and understanding that they did not consider convective
heating. The primary reasons for this were two fold: 1) there exist some
situations where radiant energy transfer is the primary energy transfer
mechanism in fire spread and 2) we had the tools and understanding needed
to do the analysis for radiant heating, but lacked a complete understanding
of the convective heating process. The safety zone guidelines were really
a first cut and a "stake in sand." They were meant to be a first cut that
then could be refined and improved. Fortunately, research over the last
decade since that original safety zone study has provide us with new
understanding and tools which allow us to more clearly simulate and predict
convective energy transfer if wildland fires.

We have just started a new
effort to develop safety zone guidelines that include consideration of
convective heating. One major part of this effort will be the development
of simple to understand and implement guidelines. To be successful, we
absolutely require input from all of the wildland fire community, but most
specifically from those who work in fire every day. Unfortunately, I
don't anticipate anything as simple as the 4 times flame height rule,
convective heating is a function of wind, size of the fire and local
terrain features.

Regardless of the outcome of the safety zone development
effort, it will still be incumbent upon everyone that is working in fire to
use their own experience and that of their coworkers to be students of
fire, to always be cognizant of what the fire is doing, and to be
constantly asking why it is behaving as it is so that we can make more
accurate estimates of what the fire is going to do. Unfortunately any
safety zone guidelines will require that someone, be it the individual
firefighter or some other source, will have to estimate what type of fire
behavior should be expected in order to evaluate the effectiveness of a
given safety zone. This is an added level of uncertainty. As you
indicated, in many cases we will find that safety zones are really
deployment zones, which means that the only option will be to change
tactics.

I certainly welcome any comments, criticism, complaints, advice,
etc that will help me and my research team in our efforts to further
improve the guidelines. I would like to conclude with a plea to you and
any others who have observed fire to continue to discuss fire behavior and
firefighter guidelines and don't hesitate to send me your comments and
ideas.

Sincerely,

Bret Butler
email: bwbutler at fs.fed.us

Thanks, Bret. I added some paragraph breaks to make your message easier to read on the computer screen. Ab.

Please do not attribute this post. Casey's rant in response to JS prompts
this post. After 32 years, I am at the twilight of my career. I am not an
"ologist", but I am a Forester. Foresters are supposed to see the whole
picture. Fire is and will be in the picture. With the decline of the
Timber program nationally I was asked if I would assume FMO
responsibilities. I am old school enough that Foresters were expected,
required actually, to be involved in fire while I was in my developmental
period. I have been successful as an FMO at ascending levels for 12 of my
32 years.

My expression of our work is that it places us in close proximity to harm's
way, the key point is to not actually get in the way. Anybody that has
felt the heat of being in the "kitchen." knows of which I speak. It is awe
inspiring what you can be close to and yet walk away. We all know that
adrenaline is an amazing compound. It can facilitate great clarity to a
moment, but can at times also tunnel a person's focus away from broader
situation awareness. We win the battles by putting out the fires. We win
the war by retiring, relatively intact.

I also have military experience. I am a believer in leadership principles
and if everybody involved lived the principles of technical proficiency
(really knowing your job), reliability, respect, duty, Integrity and
maintaining situational awareness, despite the potential significant
distractions, we'd be doing the very best we can. Our firefighters deserve
no less.

My motto on safety is, "Safety First, Last, Always."

Sounds like a good moniker to me. Thanks for writing in. Ab.

SoCal FF

Way to go, Rax. Here’s a rare shot of the BIG GUY in clean mode before he retired from the FS last April. Ab.

Assembly Approves 2 Portantino Bills
www.lacanadaonline.com

Portantino also secured a unanimous vote of support for AB 384, a bill co-authored with Fresno Assembly member Kathleen Galgani.

The bill would guarantee spouses and surviving children of fallen firefighters the ability to obtain fee waivers from California's public colleges, and would also guarantee uninsured surviving dependents (spouses and children) have access to a state-funded program to help them gain medical and dental benefits.

Portantino said, "California's civilian federal firefighters face tremendous risks to protect our wild lands from devastating fire, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with state and local first responders. When civilian federal firefighters lose their lives protecting our homes, their survivors deserve nothing less than the benefits we extend to California's own professional firefighters."

He said the need for this legislation was revealed after last fall's Esperanza Fire, when five firefighters died after their engine was burned during the wind-whipped 24,000 acre blaze. All five were California residents. The fee waiver for firefighter families for college was first enacted in 1999. The health insurance program was approved in 2004.

In the intervening years, these programs have been administered in a way that excludes the survivors of fallen federal firefighters who lived, worked and gave their lives within the state.

"When firefighters fall in the line of duty, their families are left with a hole in their lives and, often, a crushing burden to care for their children," said Lou Paulson, president of California Professional Firefighters. "The best way to honor their sacrifice is to do everything we can as Californians to ease this financial burden on their families."

The bill now moves to the Senate.

Fair use disclaimer

This was given to me by the IC of the Sweat Farm Rd Fire.
In light of last year's active fire season and the increasing number of complex large fires, along with the fact that this year's season seems to be starting out as one for the books, I thought that others might find this an interesting read:

The Mega-Fire Phenomenon: Toward a more effective management model
A concept paper.

www.wildlandfire.com/docs/2007/megafire-concept05.doc

AD Texas

Yet when we look at land management agency firefighters, they in fact are working for the Parks & Recreation Department. As a result, those that are in a position to develop and implement policies that impact our firefighters and the management of the fire program have little to no fire experience or expertise.

I am not sure of any land management agency, surely not my agency (NPS) that works for parks and recreation department. In most NPS units, the chief ranger, who oversees the FMO, has some background in fire. Are you talking about land agencies in USA??

dragmccloud

First, I want to re-iterate that I am a fan of the concept of Doctrine. I look forward to a time when this concept is our guiding principle. I am just gun shy about what it might look like before it is fully implemented. It is hard for me to have faith in the ability of the big heads of the FS to let it work the way it is intended.

Also, my intention was not to define a split, or difference of opinion between FS and DOI. However, there is a prevalent attitude on the part of the FS that its rules, opinions, policy, doctrine, etc… are everyone else’s as well. I saw this time and again when I was with DOI, and now that I am FS, it is even more obvious.

Case in point: At the Chief officers meeting last winter, the IHC group had the opportunity to ask questions of a panel consisting of the heads of all of the big Wildland players in R5 (or their rep. in a few cases). Not surprisingly, many of the questions asked were in regards to doctrine. The biggest talking point was that the R5 FAM expected the IHC community to lead the way with Doctrine in 2007. When one of the other agency heads took the podium, they were asked how their agencies intended to implement doctrine. After, a pregnant pause, they replied that while their FAM was supportive, and interested in Doctrine, there were not necessarily plans in the works to adopt it (that is as close to verbatim as I can remember.) That was pretty much what the rest had to say as well. This appeared to catch many FS folks in the room off guard, as if the expectation was that all the agencies where in fact moving towards this end state.

Why is this a concern? Let’s say that Doctrine does in fact become FS practice and/or guiding principle. Now, how does an IMT with a non FS IC, or whatever, determine whether to use doctrine as a guiding principle or not? Is Doctrine only valid on FS land? Do the other agencies accept the new FS way of doing business, even if it violates their safe work practices? I consider this to be a HUGE issue. If our Doctrine leads us to a place where the fire orders are not “…firm, we don’t bend them, we don’t break them, or …every firefighter has a right to a safe assignment…” (just using some obvious examples) then how are we to integrate this with an agency that still holds to the firm, unbreakable nature of the orders? Are we in fact going to get rid of the code of conduct for fire suppression?

Finally, I have an even bigger concern. I spoke with one of the R5 big shots during the conference, and I asked him some pretty direct questions about the implementation of Doctrine, specifically with regards to what had been asked of the IHC group earlier on. We were essentially asked to go forward with doctrine as our guidance, even though it is not yet officially implemented. My questions boiled down to how we would be treated by an investigation if we answered that we were using unofficial policy as our guide lines. The answers did not leave me feeling very comfortable. That conversation, along with all of the other snafus that have been going on in the past year kind of makes it feel like the pile of Swiss cheese is being carefully lined up so that all the holes match.

Now, before someone flames me for my opinions, please remember three things. First, I want doctrine to work, but (second) I have some concerns about the final implemented product. Third, I make no assumption that my opinion is shared by anyone else.

L—C—E-S

Critical points, Ab.

HAW HAW HAW haw haw haw haw haw. Oh my gawd! Ab.

“The real problem we should be talking about is threat recognition, and how to improve the ability of all firefighters to recognize when they can expect life-threatening fire conditions on any piece of fireground, under any weather and/or fuel conditions.”

Thank you Misery Whip.

I do not have the experience nor enough on the line time to have much to say about how fire really behaves or what it is like to be there when things turn deadly. But I can say the one thing that has come up time and time again when I talk to firefighters who have been in potential and actual burnovers, is that how surprised everyone was that things could change and move so fast.

Although I strongly believe that changing the way we look at land planning is a critical factor all this, Misery Whip really does an excellent job focusing on what we can do from within. Coming up with a comprehensive analysis and training program that addresses threat recognition in addition to understanding human (our) behavior under stress is where we will probably be the most effective in preventing future fatality fires.

jimhart

JS

I do not know the totals but in 1999 in Nevada a tremendous amount of acres did burn. I was on the Park Service crew who were on the Sadler Complex. Rough stuff on the range in Nevada folks. The first time down there in 1994 on a Malheur NfF crew we were entrapped and all outside of our safe zone was black after. Two for two in NV. It6 makes me wonder if I ever go back for the third time what will happen. This was on the same day that Prineville got in trouble. The winds will almost always pick up from two to three in the afternoon. All be careful out there this is really no game and dangerous. I was at a refresher one year and Tom Rambo spoke about the Storm King Mtn incident as he survived by up over the top. Stay in shape all and do not be stupid, Dagwood!

RH

1825 - The Miramichi fire in Maine and New Brunswick; three million acres burned; 160 people killed.

1846 - The Yaquina fire in Oregon; 450,000 acres burned.

1853 - The Nestucca fire in Oregon; 320,000 acres burned.

1865 - The Silverton fire in Oregon, one million acres burned.

1868 - The Coos fire in Oregon; 300,000 acres burned.

1871 - The Peshtigo fire in Wisconsin; the most deadly in U.S. history; 1,500 killed; 1.2 million acres burned.

1876 - The Bighorn fire in Wyoming; 500,000 acres burned.

Parts of this chronology are taken from The Big Blowup

1881 -A Michigan forest fire destroyed a million acres of timber and killed 138 people.

1894 - The Hinckley fire in Minnesota; 160,000 acres burned; twelve towns wiped out; 418 lives lost.

1903 - The Adirondack fire in New York; 450,000 acres burned.

1910 - The great fire of 1910, Idaho and Montana; more than three million acres burned; 86 lives lost.

1918 - The Cloquet fire in Minnesota. Cloquet, a thriving sawmill town of 12,000 was gutted; timber land and property losses estimated at $30 million; 400 perished.

1932 - The Matilija Canyon fire in California's Santa Barbara National Forest; 256 square miles burned; 2,500 fire?fighters on the lines; no lives lost

1933 - The first of four Tillamook burns, in the Oregon coast range; subsequent fires burned in 1939, 1945 and 1951. In all, 355,000 acres of some of the finest timber in America were destroyed.

1947 - Texas; in September and October, 900 man-caused fires burned 55,000 acres of timber in eastern Texas; losses exceeded $ 1 million.

1947 - Maine; series of disastrous fires raged for ten days; 16 died; nearly 10,000 required first aid; 175,000 acres burned; Red Cross spent $2.4 million on disaster relief.

1988 - Yellowstone National Park, Montana and Wyoming; a fire that was being allowed to burn broke out of the park. In all, more than one million acres of national park, national forest and private forest land were burned.

Oliver

The East Amarillo Complex in the Texas Panhandle which started on March 13th 2006 was 907,245 acres. 80 structures destroyed, 11 lives lost. Largest fire during 2006 fire season. It was comprised of the I-40 and Borger fires. They were majority grass fires, so I am wondering if those calling the Georgia fires the largest are referring to only timber fires?

I believe there was a fire in Arizona in 2004 that burnt over a million acres, but I might not be remembering it right.

Whether or not they are the largest, they certainly were/are troublemakers. I'm on my second tour on the Sweat Farm.

The largest fire I could find record of ever is the Peshtigo fire in October 1871, Wisconsin and Michigan and burned 3,780,000 acres.

There were others I could find that were not measured and only were called "several million".

AD Texas

The feedback I'm getting concerning the coming changes
at BLM indicate that rather than the IHCs Rotorhead
mentions being changed into Type II crews, they will
be expanded and enhanced to be more self-sufficient,
thus becoming more of an elite strike force. At
least, that's the take on the situation from one
Shot's point of view.

My un-informed observations have always led me to
wonder why IHCs would attack and help control a fire,
then be held on that incident to help mop-up. It
always seemed to me like a not very efficient use of
experience and expertise. Do you think BLM is
attempting to return IHCs to their original purpose?

Hotshot Dad

"For one, safety slogans are pretty much useless, and this one is an affront to the memory of the crew of E57. Until someone can prove to me otherwise, I will continue to believe that the crew of Engine 57 was probably just like the rest of us, doing the best they could, with the tools and knowledge they had, and that the Esperanza investigators have done them a disservice by suggesting they were complacent about safety."

How about a cool safety slogan such as "Hey, the job in the field in ultimately hazardous and our national leadership of the fire program sucks and lacks fire experience?..... We recognize it as wildland firefighters..... The folks who make the policies for the troops in the field are mostly office bound and have never been "wildland firefighters" for the most part, and keep making things worse with their corrective and abatement actions?

JMHO

Sign me... Sorry for spouting out

If it's possible, I'd like my Dad's info added in. My Dad is Dale Jarrell. He was the first superintendent for the St. Joe IR crew (now the Idaho Panhandle IHC) out of the Northern Region and he held the position from 1967-71. He was a district FMO on the Helena NF and Boise NF before becoming the Forest FMO for the Sawtooth in 1978. He ended up retiring as the Forest Service coordinator for NIFC/NICC in 1994.

He also was a Type 1 IC for the Intermountain Region from 1983-1988, and then he became an Area Commander. I believe the Intermountain Region switched from LFO to ICS in 1983 - his first year in the position, because I remember him coming home and telling us he was no longer a "Fire Boss", but an "Incident Commander" and I'm pretty sure that happened before he took an assignment in that position.

I don't know if its a great contribution or not, but he was the "Rogue IC" in the 1988 Yellowstone mess. He refused to work for Area Command without a Delegation of Authority, which created all sorts of waves all of the way to the WO, but it ultimately made them get their act together. It also helped cause them to rethink how Area Commands should work.

Terrie Jarrell

Thanks, Terrie. I added that info to the "IHC-->Fire Manager" Project and the detailed info is here on theysaid. Sounds like he did some very fine things for fire. I didn't fight fire in Yellowstone (Original Ab did) but I did move through the area when it was on fire. Incredible! Ab.

Nothing like a good positive rant. Ab.

1. old growth chaparral and
2. drainages.

I AM SCARED that the similar terrain training package that is being proposed/prepared will overlook the basics and miss that the Esperanza Fire was uniquely different from the SW aspect fires that somehow train our folks these days..... The Esperanza Fire was a NE aspect fire. If someone is so stupid to put the Esperanza Fire next to South Canyon, Thirty Mile, and the Cramer Fire as a learning tool... Listen UP.

Yes, all fires had Lessons Learned, but each fire had unique Lessons Learned signatures..... Another poster will not fix them as a corrective/abatement action.

I agree that we need significant and rapid changes to our training processes. We need to focus training on what can and will make a difference. Here is but one example......

Directly to the southeast of the entrapment site, both of those "entrapment" hazards existed. Both the old growth chaparral and the "undefendable house" are intact while those at the E-57 entrapment site perished.

Two things existed at the site that didn't burn....

1. Old growth chaparral that wasn't susceptible to area ignition such as the lighter (younger) fuels (ie- cheat grass, buckwheat, sage, young chamise, etc through type conversion..) and
2. A house that was built with fire resistive construction with some clearance (not good, but a survivable location).... Yes, it was built in a bad location in a drainage under most current thoughts and conditions..... but that drainage had missed the last 150 years of fire history for "some" important reason...... A very important reason.

Those same two factors existed at the "Double Wide"........ and it kept some damn good folks more safe.

Gizmo

On further checking the NIMO team is costing the FS only its base 8 pay as agreed
upon under the National Response Plan. I was told that whether FEMA pays the other
costs in a timely fashion is another bureaucratic issue.

Thanks for the question, Tim. I got some budget things straight in my head.

Mellie

Just make sure that they know the 10 and 18 are principles or guidelines for decision making, not rules and that fire suppression forces will be operating under a new doctrine 100% after January 1, 2008. Risk assessment is what we're about. Ab.

Doctrine is a Forest Service concept. Although the other agencies generally agree in concept, it is not part of their program, or their rules, policy, etc…

I only point this out to avoid the all too common mistake that many FS folks make regarding the DOI agencies autonomy.

Not saying I don’t agree with the direction that Doctrine is intended to take us, just putting things into a bit of perspective.

L—C—E-S
(Former DOI, now FS)

DOCTRINE is a firefighter concept (military originally); but with attention to interagency detail, I could have said Forest Service fire suppression forces. The Forest Service is the largest firefighting agency, after all.

Hats Off to those working behind the scenes on doctrinal change! The FS is stepping up and breaking new ground -- rewriting agency policy, new direction for the next 100 yr -- but stimulated by the firefighting needs on the ground and firefighter suggestions from the ground. Rather remarkable if people would only step back and see the policy effects begun by -- YOU -- the interagency firefighting ground troops and fire managers. Ab.

In the last couple of weeks those of us in BLM Aviation have been getting some feedback on the 2008 season, much of which I have expected to see on "They Said". These changes are large, and in most cases, affect a lot of people. First, I will say I am not opposed to the plan. I hope it works, and that it's not just another attempt to spend a dollar to save a dime. Plans are to cut 13 Type III helicopters (exclusive use) and replace them with 6 more Type II helicopters with helishot crews. So in 2008, the BLM will have 5 Type III and 13 Type II helicopters. These aren't the only aviation cuts; one Jump Ship will be cut, as well as 13 SEATs.

I am not happy with the timing of this plan. The plan itself, I believe, will be for the better. My issues are that they released this information two weeks ago, just as most of the BLM crews were coming on. This is a total distraction to people in all of our programs. I'm trying to get ready for the 2007 season, yet worrying about what is going to happen in 2008. Crewmembers who love their jobs know that if their ship gets cut, they're out of a job no matter what the big guys in Boise say. Their plans are to cut the helicopter but keep the crews intact for CWN support. You know and I know, this will not happen. The state FMOs will love to cut those positions and pocket that money. So now I have to worry about my seasonal workforce being distracted, when what they really need to be worried about is the 2007 season.

I'm sure someone will say, why did you tell your crew? I believe that my crew needs to know everything that I know and, in return, they give me respect and hard work. It is a team effort in everything we do and I need them to accomplish our goals as wildland firefighters.

I would like to hear what everyone else thinks about the new aviation plan, as well as turning Ruby Mountain, Bonneville and Craig Hotshots into Type II IA crews. I know when I was a hotshot I joined to be a Hotshot, not a Type II crew. The BLM thinks all that great experience is going to stick around, I don't think so.

Out of respect for those crews I say, You do a great job and keep up the hard work. Fight to keep your IHC status.

Signed,

Just another Rotorhead

Glad we're seeing it on theysaid because YOU wrote in. THANKS, Rotorhead. Ab.

After poking through the Esperanza Investigation Report and seeing the Chief’s Esperanza Action Plan, I have some comments and questions.

To start with, I think the investigators missed some very key points and made some really bad assumptions.

We have ample evidence from this and many other burnovers that firefighters continue to be surprised by the suddenness and severity of these types of events. Why is that so? Is it just a temporary loss of situational awareness, a lapse in judgment by otherwise reliable employees, a “high risk-taking” culture, or is there something else going on?

How and why did the firefighter who triaged the octagon house two years earlier see the danger that these folks evidently did not? Is anyone else wondering why the octagon house was identified as a loser two years before the Esperanza Fire, yet an experienced engine supervisor and branch director both failed to realize the vulnerability of that same location and structure just before the burnover?

And I want to know more about why the investigators tagged Mark and the crew of E57 with rule breaking (pg 83: violation of orders, regulations, standard operating procedures). What order, regulations, or SOP did they break? Why doesn’t the report explain this point? If you’re going to say that someone did something wrong that led to a disaster of this magnitude, shouldn’t you be required to explain this statement?

I noticed the 10 & 18 analysis is conspicuously absent in this report. I, for one, applaud the decision to not include the 10 & 18 analysis because they are really not of much value except as a teaching tool and shouldn’t be part of our investigative process. Recognition Primed Decisionmaking (RPD) is what really drives firefighter decisions, not lists of very subjective guidelines. If the investigators felt that E57 broke one or more of the fire orders, such as “identify escape routes and safety zones,” they should just come out and say it.

The safety zone analysis on page 58 reveals just how conflicted and confused we are about identifying safety zones. The report calls the doublewide location a safety zone, yet acknowledges that personnel at that location had to conduct a critically timed burnout to withstand the approaching fire front and were forced to take refuge in vehicles. By our own definition, the doublewide was a deployment area, not a safety zone.

Let’s face it; we still don’t know how to define a safety zone or deployment area, and therefore don’t know how to teach firefighters how to recognize them. Although we teach firefighters that drainages and terrain features can channel convective gases and heat, we don’t spend a lot of time discussing this critical piece of fire knowledge, or train firefighters how to be cognizant of and avoid dangerous terrain/fuel combinations during critical burning conditions.

The Interagency Response Pocket Guide doesn’t even attempt to address this point when discussing calculations for safety zone size (for radiant heat only), except to say that “convective heat from wind and/or terrain influences will increase this distance requirement.” By how much? Under what conditions?

The Fireline Handbook calculation says a safety zone radius should be “four times the maximum flame height plus 50 square feet per firefighter” and “the Safety Zone diameter should be twice the value of the above formula.” But, “if the potential for the fire to burn completely around the Safety Zone exists, the diameter should be twice the values indicated above.” And then it says “keep in mind that these guidelines do not address convective energy.” Huh?

What I get from that description is that all safety zones should be round, and that if convective gases and heat are present these guidelines do not apply. Last time I checked, convective gases and heat are present on every fire, so apparently these supposed guidelines NEVER apply. In addition, how in the hell are you supposed to know beforehand what the maximum flame height will be on a given piece of ground? Isn’t sizing up a safety zone something you’re supposed to do well before the flames start reaching their maximum height?

To me, it is a cop-out to say that Mark and our comrades were careless or complacent about their own safety when we don’t have answers to even these basic questions.

Everything I have seen and heard and read about Esperanza points to two things: that Mark felt he and the crew of E57 could safely make a stand at the octagon house (pg 58: Engine 57 Captain communicated to others on the radio that he felt secure at his location), and that the conditions at that site quickly went from not-too-bad to deadly.

Folks, it isn’t radiant heat that suddenly changes from benign to deadly; its convective gases and heat. In case after case, the Cedar Fire, Thirtymile, and many others, it is the same story; big flames down slope/canyon, column/flames standing up and then lays over, firefighters caught unprepared by the sudden blast of heat, disorientated people reacting blindly in panic. That’s what being on the receiving end of convective gases and heat does to people.

Until our fire behavior people learn to calculate how convective gases and heat can “reach out and touch you” at distances far greater than present safety zone “radiant heat” guidelines are capable of predicting, and then turn that knowledge into a massive training program for all wildland firefighters to hammer home that a safety zone isn’t really a safety zone unless you can account for potential convective gas/heat impacts, we will continue to see events of this nature.

If you doubt that safety zone identification is a problem, ask any hotshot sup or foreman how often they have to “negotiate” with operations people about poorly located or insufficiently sized safety zones. If this wasn’t an issue, all firefighters should have an equal understanding of what constitutes a safety zone. We don’t.

OK. Now I want to address the Human Factors Analysis. I noticed the massive investigation team roster had all kinds of specialists, equipment specialists, operations specialists, a fire behavior analyst, even union reps. So where was the human behavior specialist? They performed a Human Factors Analysis, surely they had guidance from someone with a high level of expertise in this area.

Or maybe not.

On page 80, the HFA failed to give fatigue any value as a contributor to this accident (late-night or early-morning operations, circadian disruption). I would be curious to know how they arrived at this conclusion, given that the firefighters were rousted out of bed a few hours after midnight and the accident occurred just after daybreak. I think most behavioral scientists would find it is entirely likely that the disruption of their sleep cycle had some negative effects on the mental acuity of crew of E57.

On page 81, the HFA said that using improper procedures, ill-structured decisions, and failure to perform required procedures were contributors. If you buy that we have a clearly and mutually understood system for identifying safety zones, this might be correct. I do not. I felt that “inadequate essential training for specific tasks” (ie training to identify safety zones that requires firefighters to calculate potential dangerous effects of convective gases/heat) of and “failure in problem solving” (failure to predict deadly conditions at the octagon house after fire became established on the slope below them) were more pertinent to explaining why Mark and company did not anticipate the sudden blast of heat that overwhelmed the firefighters at the octagon house.

On page 82, the HFA says that intentional and unintentional deviations from procedures were contributors. Without knowing which procedures the investigators were referring to, this is hard to judge. But they failed to check “inadequate essential training for specific tasks” (ie how to identify safety zones where firefighters can safely withstand potential convective gas/heat impacts), which I feel is very applicable.

Page 83 bothers me a lot. The references to high-risk behavior, complacency, imprudence, deviation from procedures seem to me to be misplaced. I think the investigators misinterpreted Mark and crew’s failure to predict the eventual outcome as a failure of character. I think it is an organizational failure. That is why I would have checked “inadequate training” as it applies to this event.

The rest of the HFA is more of the same, vague statements about safety attitude, safety culture, etc. One point with which I heartily agree is that our “organization lacks adequate process or procedures for operational risk management.” Like a training program that trains firefighters to identify safety zones without loopholes such as “for radiant heat only.”

I hope our Chief will re-evaluate the proposed Esperanza Action Plan. Improved mapping of non-defensible structures and abandoning structure protection will still leave wildland firefighters vulnerable to the same problem that killed the firefighters at Mann Gulch and has factored into every wildland fire burnover since. The real problem we should be talking about is threat recognition, and how to improve the ability of all firefighters to recognize when they can expect life-threatening fire conditions on any piece of fireground, under any weather and/or fuel conditions.

And whoever thought up the “It’s cool to be safe” slogan that keeps appearing on WO stationary ought to be spanked. For one, safety slogans are pretty much useless, and this one is an affront to the memory of the crew of E57. Until someone can prove to me otherwise, I will continue to believe that the crew of Engine 57 was probably just like the rest of us, doing the best they could, with the tools and knowledge they had, and that the Esperanza investigators have done them a disservice by suggesting they were complacent about safety.

Misery Whip

Appreciate it Misery Whip. Ab.

And brain tumors, malignant or benign are some of the strange kinds of cancers/
growths that firefighters are more prone to get than the "general population".

Really sad. A tumor can exist and have an effect long before diagnosis.

Mellie

Causal factors

Pyromania is an Impulse Control Disorder diagnosed in part by ruling out "normal" motives like seeking insurance money. The sentencing memorandum filed in open court by Van Bateman says he had a brain tumor surgically removed less than a year before he lit the fires, followed by additional surgery to relieve pressure on his brain. Such trauma is medically associated with onset of Impulse Control Disorders like pyromania. These types of disorders don't provide a legal defense to arson, but may or may not shed light on Bateman's statement to investigators to the effect that he didn't know why he lit the fires.

Sign me - Always Looking for Causal Factors

Thanks for that bit of info. Sad.
(Readers, this is a highly reputable contributor to this forum, not some troll offering flim-flam to muddy the issues.)Ab.

Run over by a bulldozer on the fireline.
From Chief Billy Goldfedder

CANADA....A firefighter has the swamps of northern Alberta to thank after she survived being run over by a bulldozer on the weekend at a fire. The woman was leading a crew of bulldozers fighting the forest fire south of the Suncor Energy oilsands plant near Fort McMurray when one of the bulldozer drivers lost sight of her. The massive equipment drove over both the firefighter and the all-terrain vehicle she was driving. But because the crew was working on top of muskeg - a swamp of water and vegetation - the weight of the bulldozer was absorbed and the woman simply sank into the earth. When the bulldozer drivers realized what had happened, they stopped and found the firefighter trapped underneath the back of one of the bulldozers. She suffered a badly broken arm and a damaged ear.

ht

What's the largest before that? The Tillamook burns in Oregon, or did those occur in later years? I believe one of the Tillamook burns was in the 30's I think, but I also know that there was more than one that occurred over time.
The Biscuit fire in Oregon must have held this title for awhile. Can anyone tell me where the largest wildland fire ever to occur in the U.S. was, and when?

This season sure seems to be heating up fast, reminds me of my 3rd year of firefighting in southern Oregon, that year was 1987. Everyone please be safe out there, lets not be taking any unnecessary chances, it's not worth it. Have a safe season all.

sr5401

Some current season stats: We're currently 30% over the avg number of fires (at about 26,000 fires) and 30% over the avg number of acres (at about 1.3 million acres). We've had 5,180 Rx burns (1.6 million acres) Cool beans on the prescribed burns. Ab.

That they were on a training mission and, as such, it comes under the
National Response Plan? Training is an added value.

Just trying to understand this stuff, now that we seem to be all risk.

Mellie

I put them on the Equipment 10 photo page. Thanks, Ab.

8024.5 Telecommunications – California Travel Net
Transition from USFS California Travel Net to CESRS (pronounced “See-zurs”).

Hey Ab,

In my IRPG dated 2002 page 40 has thunder storm safety (red pages, personal safety).

Northern NVFF

I believe the number for all Agency sponsored crews that are available for National use is somewhere round 650-675 (has been for many years)  this does not include crews like the CDF Inmates which is somewhere round 200 for use instate only.  I may be a little off on the numbers as I haven't really looked at these for a couple years.

Old Green and Gray Guy

Why is that cost not charged to FEMA???

When the FS runs out of $$ again for its everyday tasked functions, where does
that leave our public forests, our wildlife, our open spaces?

This is sooooo wrong!

Mellie

NFPA Releases Firefighter Death Study

NFPA site, last year's news releases and downloads on FF deaths
The pdf study--download-- should become available at that link when
it's available electronically. Couldn't find it yet.

If you're with the Forest Service, 5109.17 does require S-445
prior to getting the task book.

TC

There was one out there that was larger than the size limit for emailing. I think the solution was to put it on a FS FTP server for download... not that it does you much good on your slow system. Ab.

More complicated than I remembered. Ab.

Just came out today. Some changes from the 5/25 version.....

www.fs.fed.us/news/2007/releases/06/esperanza-letter.pdf

www.fs.fed.us/news/2007/releases/06/esperanza-action-plan-6.4.07a.pdf

TC

Does anyone know how many crews are available across the nation total? Just wondering because the sit report is showing 172 crews out (counting state and fed), from the rumors i've been hearing about crew reduction how long into the season is it going to be before all recourses are tapped out? Could this rumored crew reduction impact fire line safety this year? I work on the contract side and we have had a severe cut in crews, and companies still putting out crews are lessening their crew numbers dramatically (well needed and has to be factored into the big equation). With the low snow packs, drought conditions, and factors like forests of bug kill this could be a very busy season for everyone. Hopefully all will be safe as well.

Please sign me,

Ready but wondering.

Not wanting to write directly to a reporter - having seen what they can do with things they think you've said - or maybe would have preferred you to have said, here's one response to the AZ reporter's question. In a thirty year career with several Federal and state agencies, I have never worked with anyone who lit fires without proper authorization. Sure, some plans were better than others, some results were better (or worse) than others - but none of the people I worked with, trained or was trained by committed arson - at least to my knowledge. And given the professionalism of almost all the firefighters and fire practitioners I met, I'm sure the actions Mr. Bateman was convicted of are more rare in these agencies than they are in the general population. I am also totally disgusted that his defense centered on trying to portray all fire professionals as being criminals, too.

"Long-in-the-tooth Smokey"

I totally agree with both Pyro & just another firefighter. The AEDs need to be where they can used best. Camp or in the field matters not a bit, what matters is that first 5 minutes!!

To get fire agencies to place them into to the situation (on fires) is going to require the changing of the safety thought process. Some people think paying for moving forward is not good because of cost. In reality it likely costs more in the long term than anyone can imagine. Especially, since the AEDs have such a low cost and really work. Been there done that.

Put them out where we can get at them. Literally anyone can use one!!!

Zimm

Also, while I am here, do I have to take the S-445 Training Specialist Course in order to start working on the taskbook?

Does SAFENET really work to fix problems?

R3 F/F

I've never filed one, but many have said here that it's a good way to address most safety problems, especially ones requiring a local fix. Link is on our Links page under Safety. Some problems can get fixed locally but some require change at a high systemic agency level. I know of one problem with comm traffic where fire traffic from Sierra Front overlaps with fire traffic from San Bernardino NF. That one has not been dealt with and my guess is that it will have to go to the highest WO levels for mitigation. It better get fixed before the next big one hits either area. Ab.

2ND annual bike rally in honor of our fallen CALFIRE brother Chris Kanton
ride to remember

When: Saturday, August 4, 2007
Time: 10 am
Start: Chris Kanton Memorial Beaumont, CA Luis Estrada Rd. c/o Viele Ave.
Finish: Big bear mountain
* Fuel before arriving

1900 PDT for the west coast'ers.

Just wanted to make a couple of comments about what has been going on in this wildfire world.

To Van, Larry, Charlie and JIm, What are you thinking, then and now. Well I know all these guys and I believe Van set fires which he considerd a criminal act to set them. Larry is BSing to cover for Van, Same for Charlie and Jim. I worked in R3 for 15 years and had an agressive prescribed burning program and we always had a burn plan and followed it, anything else you hear from these guys is BS.

Let me set a scenario for you. It is 0500 hours you are on a northeast aspect in what is best described as fuel model 4, you are at a home that has a nice 100 foot clearance and a swimming pool.

The weather forecast is hot and dry with northeast winds predicted to reach over 30 mph in the early morning ( at diurnal wind shift). What do you do?

To Irony, no map will show you what to do when triaging structures for wildland defense, situational awareness is more important than any map.

The first 3 fire orders relate to situational awareness.
Thr 10 standard fire orders are exactly that, fail to follow these orders at your peril. If you fail to follow these orders you have a greater chance of dieing then if you follow them all to the letter. The 18 watch out situation all relate back to these orders, there is no margin for error, how many wildland firefighters die each year and how many of those relate directly back to not following the fire orders. One of the ABs said these are just guidelines. I disagree! They are orders that must be followed.

By the way a drip torch mix is gasoline and diesel fuel, not oil.

anotherdave

You're right on the driptorch fuel mixture. Slip of the fingers. Ab.

Dear Ab.

Thank you for your forum. I check in and read when I can. I am a 30+ seasonal wildland firefighter in Alaska. I started with Van Bateman as my crew boss on the Flagstaff Hot Shots in 1973. My first fire was on the Coconino, a 20-acre, smoky, understory burn. This was his first fire as Crew Boss and he almost killed our squad.

Our crew arrived on a flank of the fire and, upon meeting up with the Sector Boss, we were told to split the crew up and start flanking the fire. Van directed our squad to travel across the fire through the smoke instead of traveling down the flank to the anchor point and around the other side to begin line construction.

Needless to say, we barely made it to the other side through the hot gas and smoke particulates. The entire squad collapsed with smoke inhalation and the worst carbon monoxide poisoning i've ever suffered in 30 years of firefighting.

Van's reaction to all of this was how weak we were as firefighters and that it was going to get a lot tougher than this along the way. I realized shortly thereafter that the only weakness that occurred that day was Van's cavalier leadership and, more importantly, the spin he attempted to justify his mistake. It was as though his position gave him the right to be above question. I watched him closely that summer and left the Shots for greener and safer pastures hence. As a current ICT3 and DIVS, I teach the Van Factor as part of my lessons to younger firefighters. Pay attention to and follow the principles of firefighting. Also keep your situation awareness tuned to everything that is happening in your changing environment, including evaluating authority.

Peace,

TA

It's very uncommon. Arsonists occur in all segments of the population, so fire has an occasional example, but they rarely make it as far up the ladder as Mr Bateman. If you read back through recent posts, you'll see how greatly they're hated. Ab.

I know when i am out on fires and there is a risk of lightning, i will move heaven and earth to either get back to my carrier (with my crew ) or down as low as i can in the mountains. i have climbed up and down so many times during the course of a storm that i drive my crew nuts! everyone has the responsibility to educate their crews on the dangers of lightning. just my take on it.

ndffire

Two Flame-N-Go inmate hotshots were struck and died some years ago 2000? in Utah. One
left behind a little daughter and a wife. Sad.

Julie

memorial pin photo. It was Aug, 2000. I think the next year that crew was reconstituted as a Type 2 crew. The Flame N Go was the only inmate hotshot crew. Their t-shirt is in the collection on the wall at the Wildland Firefighter Foundation. Ab.

www.wildlandfire.com/docs/2007/2007-142(Bateman).pdf  (32 K pdf file)

Arizona Republic on Van Bateman's sentence:

Firefighter gets two years in prison for setting fires
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0604bateman-ON.html

An acclaimed Arizona firefighter who was honored for his help in managing emergency response in New York after the 9/11 attacks was sentenced to two years in federal prison today for starting two fires in the Coconino National Forest.

Van Bateman, 57, also was given three years' probation, fined $5,000 and ordered to pay $10,390 in restitution to the U.S. Forest Service, where he spent his career of more than 30 years. The sentence matched a plea agreement between Bateman and federal authorities.

click the link for more...

I am having a hard time understanding the post of Rick Johnson.

While I feel that such training exercises have no place on the fireline I am confused by how it could cause a shot crew to loose situational awareness to such a dramatic level ? I think we all.... well most of us are trained and capable of multitasking on the fireline. Dealing with a down firefighter is just another unfortunate part of what we do, Just hearing about one on the radio should not cause the world to stop spinning.

How this would affect someone to the point of not being able to perform their duty... That seems quite a stretch.

CW

That and the fact that no SAFENET was filed by Rick. Why not just try existing systems of reporting first? Ab.

In the Incident Response Pocket Guide (IRPG - every firefighter should
have one) on Page 75 is the reminder list for "Thunderstorm Safety". It's
good to review it during the Annual Refresher, and at Tailgate Safety
Sessions when lightning is forecasted or in the area.

Mollysboy

As I say again I came into the conversation a bit late to have everything being talked about (from 5/28 and before), but yes the AEDs need to be out in the area of where FFs maybe working. Yes they should be with IMS or in the field units. My issue was that when you do this remember there is a cost related to maintaining the AED not in $$ but in time to work on them and keep the running. The technology is changing all the time, if you buy one now it may need replacement in the next 6-10 years. Granted, they need little of either, they hold up very well in some really bad conditions. In my understanding of the earlier conversation, there some people indicating the AEDs should be on every street corner of the fire. Maybe I was wrong in what I thought I understood. To a point it could be done, but there are limits. For firefighter safety, I would at the very least have them in camps (this is where I have seen at least 4 heart attacks). I am sure there are some sorts of standards as to how many AEDs per population there should be. On the line, I would think more in the lines of trauma care not heart troubles.

Zimm

d2

72 Hour Report (doc file)

picture

noname

Looks terrible. Glad the driver was OK. Ab.

Fair use disclaimer

MAST leaders are likely to address the threats to citizens, Law Enforcement and Firefighters based on The Map. As with all other MAST efforts, the relationships with all the partners will develop principles and products to provide for public and emergency services workers.

No one map can protect lives of firefighters or citizens from the acts of arsonists! Esperanza would have not occurred if it were not for the acts of a domestic terrorist! MAST is already taking additional action to deter, investigate and prosecute arsonists. Efforts will also include citizen and public relations efforts to change the apparent acceptance of arson as just another piece of living in southern California.

Thank you for listening.

Irony

Logical, well expressed. Ab.

www.wildlandfire.com/docs/2007/esperanza-actionplan.pdf (4 pages, 726K pdf file)

SJ

FED Management and decision-making liability information

www.wildlandfire.com/docs/2007/mgmt-decis-making-liability050807.pdf  (259K pdf file)

Rhino

I have known all 4 of these guys for quite a while. I, like many others, was shocked when Van was first accused of the crime of Arson. As time has worn on and I have sat back and thought about it, the less shock I have. The "Bateman factor" or as I heard it the "Van Factor" had in fact been kicked around for alot of years. One of those things that those of us that floated in and out of that area over the years tended to disregard. One of the posters made a comment about the 4 people being able to "spin a yarn" which is really true; over time my perception of the 4 was that, one was quite the story teller, one was a goat roper who was a little too loose for me, one was a grandstander who just flat out rubbed me the wrong way and the other one I thought of as a highly respected professional. The concept of bending the rules for burning just never crossed the mind set of those who I learned Rx fire from, and they were some damn fine practitioners, well before the sophisticated training, fire behavior prediction systems, rules, contingency plans, go-no go lists and regs of today's Rx burners. They learned it the old fashioned way and taught it the old fashioned way.

It is not only the Arson crime, it is a crime what Bateman et al did to the Agency and the Rx burners.

If the others are guilty then then shame on then too, too bad that there is not evidence to take them to court too. I agree that the Judge should throw the book at Bateman for what he as done. Firefighters are held to a higher standard due to the public trust they hold. Van violated that public trust and the trust of those that are firefighters. Yes, I said Firefighters because that is just what they are, regardless what the PC folks in the WO say.

Old Green and gray guy

I read your post and...after waiting for a while...decided to write a little "thank you". I certainly do not represent all the other fire response personnel out here in "Retired Land" but after having put in my 35 years "on the line" I couldn't help but applaud your comment regarding Bateman getting what he so richly deserves.

Yeh...yeh...yeh...I can hear all the rest of his cronies saying "Wait, wait...let the justice system proceed" before you tear the man down. B---S--T folks. He did it...he said he did it...and worst of all, he defends his crimes (yes...CRIMES) in the name of "fuel management".

If the Forest Service does not cashier him in a hot second, it will have lost what very little credibility it has managed to hang onto.

Thank you, CK

COPTER 100

Bateman was fired last year or the year before. Ab.

Is there a reason why your unit cannot form a ST or TF on an initial attack or extended type fire? any unit can reserve the right to utilize trainees locally. All you have to do is bring it up when you get on scene, or pre-plan it with your local IC's. Based on your task book expiration date looming, you should be a priority trainee

Benefit: lead up, helps with span of control for an IC, he/she may not even think of it until you mention it
Risk: adequate leadership for your own module, finding a qualified trainer in the same boat.

anybody else?
sting

Anyone who knows how to get in touch with Rick, please let us know. His original note came in as an attachment but has been making the rounds in the FSweb. I left a message with the Globe IHC contact yesterday asking for him to contact us. I believe the Union is involved, as well. Ab.

Ab;

Don't know the Regional policy here in WGB, but do know that we've worked with/ for several STL/TFL (t)'s in the last couple years, on TII incidents, under 3 different Teams: Whalen, Suwyn, and Lund. All excellent Teams, all very training- oriented. Maybe check with them??

Pyro

Well, hope to hear from you all about this. 

Be safe this summer my brother and sisters.

ndffire

Hi former BCD. Wondered if you were still in NV. Welcome back to theysaid. Anyone got suggestions? Ab.

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

Promontory Fire
Tonto National Forest
CWZ Type 2 IMT (Sciacca)
05/18/2007

An incident occurred during 5/18 day operational period that involved a situation that resulted in an IHC crew losing situational awareness during a burnout operation. 

1) What was Planned
DIVS Z contacted OSC2 (t) during the operational period of 5/18 and asked if he could conduct a training exercise for his resources in his division. Permission was granted and DIVS Z continued with the exercise.

2) What Actually Happened
All divisions were contacted by DIVS Z prior to the start of the training (per DIVS Z). However, DIVS A and DIVS A (t) said they didn't receive the message to pass on to the resources. As the training started, the IHC who didn't hear about the training, heard on DIVS Z's Tac channel that a tree had fallen and hit a member of a local engine. The Squad Boss in charge of the burnout asked the TFLD (t) assigned to the division what was going on. The TFLD called DIVS A who said that the traffic was part of a drill. This compromised the IHC crew's situational awareness during a burnout operation. The previous night's shift had burnout the fireline from Promontory Point to Christopher Creek and got about two chain buffer along most of the line. The IHC crew assignment was to clean up areas that didn't burn well and increase the buffer to five chains. 

3) Why Did It Happen
An understanding on the extent of the training was not clearly defined to the OSC2 (t). A cultural difference between wildland and structural training was exposure during this incident. The OSC2 (t) thought the training would entail a sand table type exercise and not a full out scenario of running the sprinklers within the community and a medical incident within the incident. 

4) What Can We Do Next Time
If this type training is to happen again, it will only happen with the IC's approval, identified in the IAP and discussed in the morning briefing. The timing of the drill will be later in the incident when all divisions are in the mop-up stage. 

Bea Day
OSC2

emt_mb

As I understand it, no Safenet was filed. Ab.

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

To my fellow firefighters,

I have decided to recuse myself from fighting fire due to the actions, and subsequent inaction of the Type two team that managed the Promontory Fire. Serious mistakes were made, mistakes that deviated from the rational, safe culture we are supposed to espouse as professional firefighters. Sadly, these mistakes were never addressed at the two subsequent AM briefings which I attended. I was also told that an investigation will not be forthcoming. Everyone involved in our line of work knows that there can be a potential for errors in judgment. However, when these errors are ignored and there are attempts to sweep them under the carpet (when I confronted the Team on this I was told they were still in the "fact finding stage"), that is inexcusable. The Type two team was immediately aware that mistakes had been made. All Safety Officers on the incident were immediately notified. As we should all know the Safety Officer reports directly to the IC. Multiple crews had been demobed off the incident without ever being notified of what actually occurred.

This is inexcusable.

The crazy actions (and lack thereof) of these individuals has adversely affected my ability to work safely within a firefighting team environment. I have subsequently become physically ill, and have been unable to think in a rational state. Therefore, for my safety and the safety of others, I will be taking sick leave until I can get these issues resolved in my head. On the Globe IHC, we do an AAR after every shift. We do this for safety reasons primarily, but we also do them so that we can become a better, more efficient crew. I can only wonder why this wasn't occurring at such a critical/high level of fire management.

There is a lot of fire season left for you all. We can only hope as firefighters that folks take to heart an important item that I am copying from the FS-6100-37 (aka Performance Elements and Standards at the gs-3) that is standard G "assumes responsibility for and learns from own mistakes." Remember, this is a critical element.

If this email has raised anyone's curiosity to what actually happened I have copies of the Globe IHC statements I would happily relay to anyone interested.

Have a safe fire season,

Rick Johnson

Just make sure that they know the 10 and 18 are principles or guidelines for decisionmaking, not rules and that fire suppression forces will be operating under a new doctrine 100% after January 1, 2008. Risk assessment is what we're about. Ab.

I was just scanning your photo pages of the cedar fire and I saw the pictures of the crossing Cuyamuka Lake and Crossing 2 pics. I just wanted to update you all on the who and where those engines are from. We were a task force from Northern California: task force # XSN2376C. The 1st engine was a type 1 from Fort Bragg; 2nd. Was 7471 a type 3 from Anderson Valley; I was in the 3rd, 9870 a type three from the U.S. Coast Guard Petaluma; and the engine way in the back was 7562 from Rincon Valley.

Sincerely,
Christopher "Brett" Callahan,
U.S. Coast Guard Fire Dept.

Thanks for the info, Brett. I added it to the description page. We always appreciate more info on the photos. They're historical record. I added your pic of E-7562 with the smoke roiling in the sky behind it. Entitled it "Military Engine Task Force". If anyone wants to send in photos to add to this page, please do. It was a historical firestorm. In my opinion, this set of SoCal fires and the After Action Review is what has lead to the Fire Suppression Change in Doctrine that is underway today. Ab.

OH, I have been retired for 18 months which, to say the least, makes both me and the government happy. I am sure that BofA just sends cards out, but since this one is a government card, do they charge the FS a handling fee? What if I use it to charge and do not pay? And yes I, upon retirement, cut up my card and had the agency cancel it.

Well, need to cut this short, my bid on Costa Rica was accepted. Thank heavens for that government VISA.

SELDOM SEEN

haw, haw. Ab.

Can be found at www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fJkpbxERFE.

Fishguy

Action and sound with the hovercraft. Gordon's still pics he sent to us are here: Catalina Island Fire Ab.

I wonder if they have thought about discrimination issues connected with access? Some people applying for jobs with the help of a job tutorial group, regional occupation program or school only get an email address for a short time so as to have internet access to send in applications. Frequently, those who do not have long term or consistent computer/email access are minorities. But then, I think the seasonal entry-level hiring must be done at this stage of the season so the impact would be more on firefighters away from home base. Ab.

Can't believe that folks that so long lived as IC's would set themselves up to be so mis-quoted, as recently alluded by one soul. I mean "taken out of context". I know 3 of the players, wouldn't say we were ever close, though. No one should be surprised at all on how they are trying to do damage control. Not really of sure the wisdom with sentencing coming up, what, Monday? So now this discussion contributes to a media plot to bring down an IC? Please, give us all a break.

Maybe the true colors of some are starting to show and they aren't what many folks saw for so long? Both Bateman and Humphrey walked the edge of propriety for years, in my book, even after becoming T1 ICs. Charlie was their mentor; he knew what he had and is this a haunting? Becoming an ICs doesn't necessarily change the package that wears the hat. For me, some shock and disappointment, but not surprise, as to who is involved, where it is now, and where looks like it's going. Again, I wasn't surprised.

Let's see how this plays out in the near future. There is probably is more to this "story". What if it isn't very pretty? Honorable intentions are quickly buried by dishonorable actions. It is good to see that Bateman's friends are sticking with him. I don't see how the rest of us can.

This time, just call me -
Old duffer

Old 10 code for "arrived at scene" and "out of service".
Happy retirement Old Fire Guy. 35 years. Thanks for your service. Ab.

Experienced? Yeah, I've been around the block in a tailspin. But no credit to me; with 33 years in fire suppression, it would be hard not to get experience. And only the last few years that I work will tell if the experience was good, or bad, or if I learned anything at all.

Noble? Not in the least. And I heartily apologize if anyone felt that I was inferring that I had any semblance of nobility. I'm just another rock-breaker, a bush- killer.

Media? I agree with you completely; I have avoided the media like the plague for many years, after being misquoted shamelessly, among other things. In fact, I wrote about the media last winter, during the initial stages of the Daniels Case.

Know Van Bateman? As Ab says, I have met him, and have worked for him on several incidents. But no, I do not "know" him personally, or socially, and have never worked with, or for him, on a home unit.

Evidently, I was not as calmed down as I thought, when I wrote my post. There was a two- fold point I was attempting to get across.

(1): I am personally profoundly disappointed by the lapse in judgment exhibited by Van Bateman, both his actions, and his statements. While fully agreeing that the media may well be twisting the entire story into an unrecognizable fiction, if there is any semblance of fact in the USA Today version, I remain disappointed. Because:

(2): I will never apologize to anyone, including my wife and sons, for feeling responsible for the safety and well- being my crew, adjoining forces, and the fire community in general. That is no way an attempt at nobility, it just... is the way it is. I firmly believe that the responsibility that we accept as fireground leaders, whether squaddies or Area Commanders, is a 24- 7- 365 task, just as much as parenting. There's plenty of room for personal foibles, but never a moment for a lapse in core virtues. I live in terror of the possibility that I will someday lead a young firefighter into injury, or death. My heart goes out to those leaders who have, despite their best efforts. Noble? No, I just take this business d*#n seriously.

Thank you for your time, and for correcting me where due. I apologize for my temper, and lack of eloquence.

Pyro