Gov. Schwarzenegger Issues Statement on Court Action Filed by State to Protect California’s Forests

Governor Schwarzenegger today issued the following statement after the state today filed a U.S. District Court complaint contesting four Southern California forest management plans. In August 2007, the United States Forest Service denied California’s appeals of management plans for the Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres and San Bernardino National Forests.

“Protecting California’s forests and wildlands has been a priority of my administration since my first day in office. I have said many times how important it is that we keep these cherished and valuable lands free from unnecessary and damaging roadways.

“Today, in the face of threats, we are forced to once again stand up for California’s forests. Despite repeated attempts to ensure that the United States Forest Service honor its written assurance that California’s roadless areas would be protected they have failed to do so.

“Under my administration, California’s forests will be safeguarded. The court action filed today by my Secretary for Resources Mike Chrisman to hold the Forest Service accountable to its word and to the law is a testament to that commitment. The people of California deserve nothing less.”

Secretary for Resources Mike Chrisman filed the complaint, through the Attorney General's Office, challenging the four Southern California forest plans after the federal government denied the Agency's appeal. Governor Schwarzenegger has been tireless in his efforts to protect California's forests, consistently advocating that "roadless areas in California will remain roadless."

###

CONTACT: Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER)
Mark Davis [NFFE] (920) 992-6208;
Carol Goldberg [PEER] (202) 265-7337

Forest Service Outsourcing Program a Fiasco, GAO Finds Scathing Report Rips Firefighting Erosion, Illusory Savings and Law Violations

WASHINGTON, DC - February 21 - A Bush White House initiative that pressures federal agencies to put civil service jobs up for bid by private contractors has wreaked havoc in the U.S. Forest Service, according to a Government Accountability Office report released today. The GAO found the program put the nation’s fire response capabilities at risk, violated congressional restrictions and used shady accounting practices to hide costs – findings that validate past criticisms by National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE) Forest Service Council and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

Under the Bush administration “competitive sourcing” program, work performed by federal employees is either outsourced or awarded to in-house, quasi-contractual “service providers” formed by wrenching internal reorganizations. GAO concluded that Forest Service competitive sourcing –

• Risked jeopardizing “the nation’s ability to fight fires and respond to other emergencies” by failing to consider how outsourcing positions affected the agency’s ability to respond to forest fires and other emergency situations requiring immediate on-the-ground capabilities;
• Violated Congressional spending limits imposed to prevent abuse;
• “[C]ould not substantiate the savings it reported to Congress.” In one case, costs of roughly $40 million were excluded from the $35 million in savings reported to Congress.

“We welcome the findings of this independent GAO review as an important first step in bringing some accountability to this misguided and counterproductive program,” said Mark Davis, Chair of the NFFE Forest Service Council Legislative Committee, noting that the Forest Service follows the same OMB accounting guidance used by all federal agencies, thus throwing in doubt any White House claims of major savings from competitive sourcing. “A broader, government-wide review is needed into OMB’s role in encouraging misleading accounting practices and outsourcing inherently governmental work.”

GAO typically uses guardedly euphemistic terms in its publications, yet in this report it employed blistering language to describe the Forest Service competitive sourcing program, such as –

“This is a massive undertaking whose long-term success will depend on a realistic strategic plan, clear guidance to identify the key work activities that should be excluded from competition, and a strategy to assess the cumulative effect that outsourcing a large number of federal jobs could have on its firefighting capability. Unfortunately, the Forest Service has none of these in place.”

“From day one, competitive sourcing in the Forest Service has been an utter horror show,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “The fact that the Bush administration still touts this misbegotten program as a ‘management reform’ is an indication of just how late in the day it is.”

In the current FY 2008 budget, Congress barred the use of any further funding for competitive sourcing in the Forest Service – a ban that ends this October unless extended. Meanwhile, competitive sourcing continues in other agencies.

###

Read the GAO Report on Forest Service Competitive Sourcing

Learn how the Forest Service kept its outsourcing losses off the books

Examine the termination of the fleet maintenance contract for shoddy and unsafe work

View the conflict between Forest Service firefighting capability and outsourcing

Look at congressional restrictions on Competitive Sourcing in Interior and Forest Service

See the current effort to prepare Forest Service biologists for outsourcing

Revisit how Forest Service could not pass its own audits to document outsourced savings

Find out more about the competitive sourcing process

###

www.commondreams.org/news2008/0221-04.htm

I know of an applicant for the AFEO GS-06 position that didn't put down all his
time in Grade as a GS-05 and his application was rejected because he was 12
days short of qualifying. He actually has 1 year and 8 days to his credit
for the GS-06 position. Does 12 days short of time in grade really make a
difference in experience. What does this tell employees about our retention
issue. Why do we only have 56 applicants for this position, is it an AVUE
problem that we have known about for some time and no one fixed it?
For me I would like to see hiring back in the hands of the Supervisors who
will have to deal with the Employees.

Sign me, seen the process and it still leaves me confused

Anyone out there got any great tips for making sure you receive due
consideration for a 401 position if you are trying to qualify through
education and experience rather than with a four year degree? I know I
should be good to go with my background but keep getting rated as
unqualified even with an AS degree and several credits completed through
the 401 program at one of the universities participating in the 401series.
I am also curious to here from anyone out there that has completed TFM and
made it into a 401 job through AVUE. Currently have been removed from
consideration for at least three 401 11 positions even though i am
currently a Zone FMO with a huge program.

Thanks
Bleeds green but about to go postal

My best hope right now is for Administration change that leads us to a scenario in which the FS is funded
and fire suppression is a separate funding stream like hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes and the like. Where
that money would come from is the question.

The DOI, NPS does this already. Its called "FirePro" funding. Its not perfect, but it keeps the Park managers
from re-directing fire funding to maintenance/rangers/etc...

L -- C -- E -- S

Well everyone, 56 applicants for the AFEO jobs in R5, and i heard 90% of them were for So Cal. Sounds like it might be time for the RO and HR people to make them GS 5/6 jobs. I don't know if you all realize that even though they have Merit and Demo Certs, people that are already employed with the USFS and have permanent status cant demo into these jobs. If anyone can answer the question of why for me ? I would thank you so much. All this is doing is making people that would probably stay with the agency leave.

I was the acting AFEO last year on my engine as a GS-5, I couldn't get a detail because I did not have 90 days as a GS-5. I was the operator all but 2 days last summer. It didn't bother me because I was looking ahead and knew that it would look great on a Cal Fire Application. But not to worry my USFS friends, I will see you under unified command on the big one.

So on a another note, does anyone know when the Cal Fire FAE hire round is going take place?

Yours,
Itsbeenfun

"56 applicants for the GS-6 AFEO. That's it, 56. The region's
stance on hiring GS 5's is now showing why special Ed and
others (Randy Moore) need to become engaged."

AV

Lori

I can donate some evenings, a day off here and there and beginner quilting
skills if there is someone more knowledge able about quilting to keep my
stitches in line.

Perhaps Bearly Quilting in Sonora can help or the Sierra Quilt Guild
( quilt@ nospan sierraquiltguild.com ) could help out with with a quilting
bee...

Strawberry Mom
Buffy

Jodi P

If one would read R6 Director Ken Snell's letter closely it is mostly pointing out that the fuels program in the Forest Service-WFHF funded program is important to keep the agency tied to the fire program. And it is and his point is that once that tie through to resource management is broken, then reorganization is inevitable. Which means that fire response/incident management responsibilities would be largely taken away from the FS.

Now one may or may not agree with if that should happen, but someone of Ken's inlelligence should not be taken lightly or as if he does not understand the situation. He does and he cares.

Be careful what you ask for...

Intothewind

REALLY? Is that the best Ken Snell can come up with? I am speechless from the absurdity of that statement!

-Underfunded

AB

An update to the Mark Rey trial in Missoula states he was cleared of contempt charges and ruled that the agency
has competed his order to review the environmental impact of fire retardant.

NorCal FBAN

The Forest Service has much to provide the American public such as open
space/recreation/solitude, clean water/air.

Seems like this Snell person has taken in one to many of the old Harbour sunrise and sunset speech. Good grief. Take a break Snell. It's your fellow upper level managers working on moving fuels from fire to veg.

Snell and all: Get very familiar with the idea that Fuels is leaving fire and going to Veg. Can anyone say TRANSFORMATION! Just visit the TRANSFORMATION fsweb site. Some forests are already moving ahead with reorgs (so cal forest) to move fuels out of fire and into veg mgt.

To this end, I say take it. Let veg mismanage the the fuels program for about 3-4 years. We will get it back when the phone calls and emails come in from concerned citizens and elected officials. Since the RO/WO are allowing for more ticky, secert ways to report fuels accomplishments, I don't think Forest Service Fire employees should be within 25 feet of the program. Give it to veg and have them call us when they need us to put some fire on the ground, as long as veg employees are involved in the shady reporting of accomplishment. Our new number will be 1-800-FED-FIRE if you need us.

We are going to spend our time the next 3-4 years working towards centralized fire management or a separate fed fire department.

See ya Snelly........

Signed,

Keep hammering!!!!!!! P to P in 2008 !!!!!

TC

Part of a weather course I'm studying has the following information -- a phenomena I've never heard directly
discussed in fire circles. (Although our Watch Out Situations would certainly cause us to take notice.) I don't
think I'd want to be near a fire while something like this happens:

"Dry heatbursts are responsible for a rare weather event called "Heat Bursts". Heat bursts usually occur at
night, are associated with decaying thunderstorms, and are marked by gusty, sometimes damaging, winds,
a sharp increase in temperature and a sharp decrease in dewpoint.

While not fully understood, it is thought that the process of creating a dry microburst begins higher in the
tmosphere for heat bursts. A pocket of cool air aloft forms during the evaporation process since heat energy
is required. In heat bursts, all the precipitation has evaporated and this cooled air, being more dense than the
surrounding environment, begins to sink due to gravity.

As the air sinks it compresses and with no more water to evaporate the result is the air rapidly warms. In fact,
it can become quite hot and very dry. Temperatures generally rise 10 to 20 degrees in a few minutes and have
been known to rise to over 120°F (49°C) and remain in place for several hours before returning to normal."

What do you know about this?

Still Out there as an AD

On a positive note.  Two of the "MAIN" suggestions that came out of the recruitment and retention meeting to the WO was,
1. change in USFS mission and
2. portal to portal pay. 

The numbers have been ran at the RO which indicate a little increase in costs which come out of WFSU funds not WFPR. 
So with that mentioned, the increase in retention and recruitment along with increased mitlia interest would probably level
the cost increase.

Noname Fire

Faced with possible jail time, U.S. Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey apologized Tuesday to a federal judge
in Missoula for the Forest Service's delays in evaluating how wildfire retardant affects the environment.

But Rey, the Bush administration's top forest official, insisted the agency has complied with the National
Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act.

Rey testified before U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy in a watchdog group's lawsuit accusing the Forest Service
of violating the nation's top environmental laws through its use of fire retardant. snip (etc.)

NorCal FBAN

No link was sent with this and we won't post more or risk being in violation of copyright. Feel free to click the news button at the top and go to the news page for a search. Ab.

Listen folks, while polishing the leaves of my plants yesterday, I got to thinking about all of the crap that is going on and how we all need to do something to unite us. Something kind of like the Civil Rights Movement's march on Washington. I ain't one for marching, so what ever we do it has to be fun and support a cause. As y'all should know, May 17 - 18, 2008 is the Wildland Firefighter Foundation Family Day, I know this is right at the begining of "Fire Season" but so what! Let's all storm Boise for a weekend and support the Foundation and the families from the past, present and future. The Native American ceremonies and the sweat lodge were experiences that I'll never forget and look forward to participating again this year. I don't know if the Cottonwood Station would support all of us but it would be a blast to go up there for a big ass BBQ and a sweat. Bring some peace of mind just for a few days. I'm attaching (or going to attempt to) the registration form. Bring your families, have some fun, take your cause to the lodge and don't forget your $52.00 for the club. For more information or to check out last years Family Day, log on to www.wffoundation.org . I guess I'd better let Vicky, Burke and Melissa know that I just threw this out there. If you can't get approved leave and don't have the balls to just go anyway, support the cause by joining the 52 Club.

Peace, Love and Soul to you all!

BatGrl12

At the FS GS-6 level, 56 candidates for consideration. It would appear as some have continued to say, "We don't have a recruitment problem". Almost everyone knows that statement is untrue.

At the State level, it looks like a 200:1 level recruitment ration "competition" from positions that pay the same and have similar duties.

I will not do the work for others, but if folks want to refute the facts without proper citation... Learn and navigate the California State Personnel Board website.

Several folks at the SES and other appointed levels said that the Forest Service fire program doesn't have a recruitment problem.... It is archived in the Press over the years, Congressional Testimony, and most recently by someone trying to keep out of JAIL.... Mr. Mark Rey. Hopefully tomorrow he goes to jail.

Just last month, Mr. Mark Rey testified before Congress once again saying the Forest Service didn't have a problem with recruitment of firefighters.... Not only does he lie to federal court, he has been lying to both Congress and the American people for years.

I'm a volunteer.... see the problem?

Lobotomy

Some of us sent in material for a quilt a young lady was making last year. Any idea where she is on her project?

Firehorse

Ab,
I got a kick out of the Ramona logo, it's been around for quite awhile in it's various stages. Find attached two jpg's from my father's slide collection showing the Ramona logo as it appeared on Hemet Valley's TBM's at the time.

TBM 71, Shelly Knudson's TBM at Hemet for winter maint., January 6, 1966 (never mind the "ramp-rat" in the red shirt LOL)

TBM 72, John Norman's TBM reloading at Ryan AAB May 7, 1967

Enjoy,
Tom Stein

Thanks, Tom, I put them on the Logo 14 photo page. Ab.

Ken

"It frustrates me to see so much time and discussion spent on R-5 FS
issues, and the amount of mis- information there is about what is really
going on around the country within the Federal Wildland Fire Service and
with all the Land Agencies. I spent most of my career in R-5 , I have been
in the Southeast for over eight years and there are a fantastic group of
dedicated Federal Fire Fighters out there. The issues are the same
nationally. No, the cost of living in Mississippi, Georgia, Florida and
other states is not 1/8 of what it may be in R-5. Some Southern States have
the highest COLA in the Nation, and many Federal FS, NPS, BLM, BIA and FWS
Firefighters are struggling to keep their head afloat ! I applaud and feel
for the personnel in R-5, but If we are to help make any change with wages,
positions and direction we must do this united and Nationally.

This is how Congress and the public will understand it. I am glad that we
have Casey Judd out there fighting for the entire Federal Wildland Fire
Service.

Thanks , Mark"

I totally agree with Mark on this topic, the cost of living is getting higher and higher nationally, not just in CA, CA is just where it has become almost absurd. This is a national problem, and it needs a national solution.

ASB

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

Subject: Forest Service Standardization of Fire Fleet

To: Regional Foresters, Station Directors, Area Director, IITF Director and Deputy Chiefs
REPLY DUE: MARCH 17,  2008

Fire and Aviation Management (FAM) leadership introduced 47 Management
Efficiencies (MEs) in compliance with national leadership direction in
October 2006. These MEs were developed to identify areas for FAM to gain
program efficiency and potential cost savings.

The MEs were discussed and reviewed by the Deputy Chiefs and eventually
presented to the Chief and the Under Secretary of Agriculture, resulting in
a portion of the MEs being implemented during FY 2007.

One of the MEs selected for further evaluation and potential implementation
was the standardization of engines within the fire program. Specifically,
the Efficiency states “Establish a national policy for engine
standardization and develop a series of common models to be used
nationally. All Geographic Area needs will be considered in the selection
of standard models.” To move this forward, a committee has been
established with representatives from Fire, Fleet, Engineering, and the
Line Officer community.

In addition to this effort, the Fleet Business Process Reengineering is
moving forward to capitalize on the work done over the past year. Fleet
standardization is part of that report and this effort will tie directly
into the implementation of the Fleet BPR.

In order to assess where the Forest Service is today, we will collect some
additional data relative to Suppression and Prevention Engines. A Data
Call database has been established to facilitate gathering the necessary
information. It is critical that this letter reaches the appropriate
individuals and units within the Forest Service to provide all the data
necessary to be analyzed and report all existing equipment. The Fire
Vehicle Standardization Committee wishes to take into consideration what
currently exists throughout the organization to develop the standard that
is most beneficial. A link to the Data Call database is attached to this
message. If the link does not work, you can access the database by through
your Lotus Notes inbox by:

· Click File
· Click Database
· Click Open
· Set the Server to ENTDATA03 (if you do not see this in the list of
servers, select Other and in a few moments a complete listing of Notes
Servers will come up, select ENTDATA03)
· Double click on the yellow fsfiles folder
· Double click on the unit folder
· Double click on the fleet folder
· Double click on the national folder
· Double click on USDA FS Fire Vehicle Standardization database

Please contact Linda Keydeniers, lkeydeniers@fs.fed.us, (909) 599-1267,
ext. 240 or Mike Arias, marias@fs.fed.us, (707) 562-8847, with any
questions about the Data Call. The Committee lead is Tory Henderson, FAM
Fire Equipment Branch Chief. She can be reached at (208) 387-5348 or
thenderson@fs.fed.us.

/s/ Robin L. Thompson (for)
JAMES E. HUBBARD
Deputy Chief, State and Private Forestry

With the many SERIOUS critical issues and concerns out there .. I hope we dont get distracted by minor developments such as " The Feds chipping in for boots". Can you say .. " Re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic" ?? I was at Reno yesterday and listened to Karen Woods ...Leader ?? a mono-tone " speech full of mushy-ness " ..kinda..." ,"..sort of..", " issues vetted here and there", a Leader ?? I think not .. a " react-er" maybe ..... The Fed " Fire Fighter" .. opps Forestry/Range Tech" is in a situation requiring to make progress against a very strong head-wind. We needed forceful leaders/advocates.

Signed,
35 Fire Seasons

Words from the R-6 Director of Fire.

Gorge FMO

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

To: Regional Foresters.

In recent years fire suppression activities have been under a lot of
scrutiny for cost and safety, and there has been talk about developing a
federal wildland fire protection agency (if not this administration then
perhaps the next). I do not support this. Fire protection, for resources we
manage and the public, is fundamental to our mission as an agency and is
'relevant' to the public.

The only program that is holding fire management to the agency is the fuels
mgt program. If it is moved to vegetation management there will be little
reason not to ‘stove-pipe’ fire protection and lean towards one federal
wildland fire protection agency (not immediately but eventually; NIMO and
IFPM are helping to separate fire mgt from the agency). There are many that
believe this should happen. I caution against this. To be important to
the American tax payer an agency must be ‘relevant’. The Forest Service
has much to provide the American public such as open
space/recreation/solitude, clean water/air, biomass products, and yes
protection from unwanted fire. Once the Forest Service loses fire
protection to a federal wildland fire protection organization, such as
homeland security or FEMA, it will become less relevant to the public. The
signs of appreciation that are found at most large fires will not longer be
addressed to the Forest Service, but to other deserving agencies.
Relevancy is important and we should not for get it.

Thanks for taking the time.


Ken Snell
Director
PNW Fire, Fuels, and Aviation Management

thanks for posting our logo, the boys were waiting but with the season in cal.
this year you all had more important things on your minds than a logo.
all the new ones look great

ken

Karen Wood (sp?) said today at the Chiefs Meeting that one agency
issue is boots. Could be boots would be covered by a uniform allowance
or maybe there would be a contract with some boot companies.

I like my Nicks.

The DOI agencies used to have a program (still might) which re-re-reimburses fire employees for boot maintenance and purchase.
Its only $100 a year, and you have to provide a receipt showing the expense, but its a great way to get your boots re-soled every
year, and its better than nothing.

But, be careful what you wish for. I like my nicks too, and would hate to be told that I had to wear the USDA approved boots
(pretty sure they would not be nicks/whites/etc...)

L -- C -- E -- S

Normbc9

Noname Fire

Mark,

We all understand this is a much larger issue than just R-5. The NFFE is addressing it for the entire Nation. We are working with Casey to make sure that ALL involved are represented. I hope you don't think that we are just looking out for R-5.


Robert Ethridge
President, NFFE Local 1650
Co-chair NFFE National Fire Committee

One of the more humiliating and frustrating thing last fire season was fact that due to the sometimes overzealous cost containment effort, the crews suffered greatly with the re supply issue, type one crews averaged close to 100 days on fire last year, yet were unable to get simple specialty Items such as chainsaws, tool pins, sleeping bag zippers and GPS units replaced by the fire, these items were expected by the crews to be utilized on the fire of course, but replacing them last year seemed to be taboo. Cal Fire logistics personnel working in the supply unit, along with some our own, were notorious for scratching off those much needed items on the resupply list, they would suggest we pay for it with our project dollars from our forest, our forest of course also being budget sensitive would put a cap on our supply spending putting us between a rock and a hard place. This of course was extremely frustrating to the troops, and they would often make demoralized remarks as they watched a DC-10s make expensive "political" retardant drops and the agency in question scurry off to their motel rooms while getting paid round the clock.

The point I was trying to make was that we don't mind fighting fire in rags and broken handled shovels, but a simple gesture like supplying the workers with decent equipment, would have done wonders for the retention effort it would have shown them that they were valued by their agency.

Professionally yours
Reality check

Normbc9,

That's what happened to the old Region 7. Interesting thing is, folks have looked at trying to merge regions 6 and 10 together in the past, and always ended up concluding that it would cost more to try to run a region from "down south" than it would to maintain an RO presence in Alaska. That plus you have another whole set of federal laws (and alphabet soup) to deal with up there that is unique to Alaska.

Still Out There ...

Ab,

It frustrates me to see so much time and discussion spent on R-5 FS
issues, and the amount of mis- information there is about what is really
going on around the country within the Federal Wildland Fire Service and
with all the Land Agencies. I spent most of my career in R-5 , I have been
in the Southeast for over eight years and there are a fantastic group of
dedicated Federal Fire Fighters out there. The issues are the same
nationally. No, the cost of living in Mississippi, Georgia, Florida and
other states is not 1/8 of what it may be in R-5. Some Southern States have
the highest COLA in the Nation, and many Federal FS, NPS, BLM, BIA and FWS
Firefighters are struggling to keep their head afloat ! I applaud and feel
for the personnel in R-5, but If we are to help make any change with wages,
positions and direction we must do this united and Nationally.

This is how Congress and the public will understand it. I am glad that we
have Casey Judd out there fighting for the entire Federal Wildland Fire
Service.

Thanks , Mark

"The primary means we achieve safety is through risk management. Risk
management is a process for measuring and assessing risk and developing
strategies to manage it. This helps leaders make sound organizational and
operational safety decisions in a logical manner. Fire leaders at all
levels should develop and cultivate high reliability organizations-
organizations that operate under very trying conditions yet achieve
extremely low error rates. In high reliability organizations, leaders place
a high priority on safety and reliability. Significant levels of redundancy
exists (sic) which permit back-up capability to compensate for failure. Fire
program leaders must seek CONTINUED AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT
IN ALL AREAS OF ORGANIZATIONAL SAFETY, both for
themselves and their subordinates."

I have to say, that is some serious gibberish! The first three sentences about risk management aren’t too awful, not quite how I would define risk management but I’ll give that part a pass. But the rest of the paragraph that supposedly supports high reliability organizations appears to be the work of someone who has a rudimentary understanding of behavioral science and HROs, but knows some of the buzzwords like Error and Failure.

Don’t get me wrong, I very much support the recent increased awareness of high reliability organizing and accident theory within the wildland fire community. But it disturbs me when people misuse the terminology so badly, especially in an interagency document intended to guide the actions of our fire and aviation leaders.

Let me explain why I feel that misinterpretation of these concepts is harmful. To start, HROs are not something you plant within an organization; a HRO is the organization. From top to bottom, the organization understands the nature of the hazards their employees face, and the measures that are needed to insure their employees’ safety.

Among other characteristics, a true HRO is organized and committed to a never-ending battle to detect and eliminate latent failures (defects) within their systems before these failures can contribute to an accident. In fact, two of the pioneers of HROs, doctors Weick and Sutcliffe, now support use of the term high reliability organizing instead of the label high reliability organizations. The distinction is that they feel it is more helpful to think of HRO as a state you need to constantly strive for instead of a destination at which you will eventually arrive.

Certainly, HRO principles and mindfulness can be practiced within a crew, or within a fire management organization. But these practitioners will be susceptible to the actions of managers and coworkers who do not understand and support HRO principles.

The following two sentences are what really caught my attention. I’d be curious to know where the writer picked up these definitions of HRO qualities. I have never heard of or read about anyone else using these terms to describe a HRO.

“In high reliability organizations, leaders place a high priority on safety and reliability. Significant levels of redundancy exists (sic) which permit back-up capability to compensate for failure.”

From Managing the Unexpected: The five core HRO principles are:

Preoccupation with failure
Reluctance to simplify
Sensitivity to operations
Commitment to resilience
Deference to expertise

Notice the words safety, reliability, redundancy, or back-up capability in the five core principles? Me either. Safety and reliability are by-products you get if you religiously follow the five core principles. Building redundant capabilities might be one solution to an individual problem within an organization or system, but I don’t understand why someone would use those words to generally describe a HRO. Perhaps the writer actually intended to describe resiliency, which is something quite different than redundancy.

I also wonder where the writer got the idea that HROs apply “back-up capability to compensate for failure.” HROs are preoccupied with finding and eliminating weaknesses within their systems (latent failures) before they combine with human actions (active failures) to become an accident.

The point I’m trying to make is that when our leaders issue these kinds of statements, which are intended to guide our culture into a new direction, they need to make sure they get it right! It is hard enough trying to grapple with getting our firefighters to accept strange new concepts without our leaders pulling stuff out of their as*es. We certainly don’t need more meaningless bull*hit, there seems to be more than enough of that to go around these days.

Misery Whip

Ab -

Here's a photo of Marc to add to the Memorial. It was taken at the Kelly USA Evacuation Center for Hurricane Katrina evacuees in San Antonio, Texas. Marc's Team was managing the facility which at times supported over 12,000 evacuees. Without any prior notice the Government of Mexico sent a military "Humanitarian Unit" to San Antonio to help in the relief effort. Through Marc's efforts a major international crisis was avoided and the Mexican Army was blended into the relief effort.

The individual on the left is the Mexican Consul for Texas, the military person is the Mexican 2 Star General in charge of the unit, then Marc, and on the right is from the San Antonio Red Cross.

I'm sure Marc had a lot of good tales to tell about this "Incident Within An Incident".

AK Old Timer

"Congress needs to take a long hard look at the administration's competitive sourcing agenda after
such a damning report," Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., said. He released the report with Sen. Herb
Kohl, D-Wis., who said the administration "played fast and free with the facts in providing a different
picture than the reality."

By Stephen Barr, The Washington Post
Published: Saturday, February 23, 2008 8:21 AM CST

Small Agency FMO

Looks like the SE is set up for another long fire season.

Firefighting funds already gone
Wildfire outbreak drains state forestry agency's 2008 budget for blazes

www.inrich.com/cva/ric/news.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-02-24-0185.html

Season as bad or worse than 2007 expected
www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/022408/geo_250339179.shtml

Midwest FMO

Normbc9

Brilliant letter, great insight, thanks, I'll be in for the long haul too, the ones I worry about are the newer employees who want to eventually start families, or keep the ones they have, sunsets are nice to enjoy, but its hard to enjoy them when a persons child support and alimony payments brought about by the steady down ward spiral of equitable pay and benefits....might cloud a persons vision.
*AB Would it be possible to re post the infamous "tip toe through the tulips and watch the sunsets with me" Tom Harbor speech to the 2007 Apprentice Academy? (substitute the word famous for infamous to those of you in the "mis-management elite" club)- Or tell me whare in the archives it is,? I can't find it whaa!? It couldn't have been as detrimental and demoralizing as everyone is telling me it was, so I'd really like to judge for myself. His response was hard to swallow too, sounds like allot of people in other functions of the Forest Service are upset with fire program there fore the trendy lack of support...Whaaaah!... Used to be that fire and emergency response (hurricane relief etc.) was treated by all as a priority, even above fly by night programs like Ag-Learn, there used to even be a militia. Now I'm not sure what to think. Although if we calculate how many public resources, lives and private property were saved by the fire program as apposed to such programs as AG-Learn, NEPA, Public Relations or the failed "don't give the groundpounder much needed supplies while the DC-10 flys by,... cost containment effort." Well... we all know who would win.. by a long shot.

"on one hand you hate to lose trained people, on the other hand they're still fighting fire under a unified command system" They're going to be on the line along with the federal firefighters." Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey to reporter Erica Werner 2/12/08..........
***You decide who would you rather have protect your home .. this guy or six- GS-3 wildland firefighters

Reality Check

Ab,

All looks fine and dandy. Not much more to ad. I would like to say for the record, that my father started out with the USFS prior to the Korean War, but went to work for the CDF when he returned from the war. He spent a good chunk of his 38 years of service at Ryan Air Attack Base. Even though he was CDF through and through he had the utmost respect for the USFS and it's people, whether they were admin's or ramp rats. Some of his career had him sitting at the old Region 6 HQ, working side by side in a multi-agency dispatch center, hammering out problems and finding solutions....together. If there were politics involved, he never showed it and I never heard it. He was a team player and he didn't care what agency you worked for, it was all for the common goal and good of the communities he served.

Tom Stein (jr)

Mark Davis,

You have a good idea when you suggest people in California contact Senator Feinstein and thank her for her support.

I do suggest we go farther with this. Nothing wrong with people in other states dropping an e-mail to the Senator. As pointed out here in they said 40 states have FS employees.

I would also like to point out that "competitive" sourcing initiatives or variants of it have been going on in most all of the land management agencies. Some of these have been fairly narrow in scope such as admin function, telecommunications, animal handlers. So that picks up the last 10 states, as well as Guam, Puerto Rico and the various US territories/protectorates in the Pacific.

So send Senator Feinstein an e-mail thanking her and send one to your own Senators and Representatives pointing out the out come of the GAO report.

The job you save may be your own.

Small Agency FMO

ab,

been following the site for a long time and had a couple thoughts. Please bare with me... I chose to be a Forestry Technician not an English major.

First off, I want to state that I like my job even with the bull *&^%. I do not want to work for Cal Fire or any other agency at this time in my life. Unlike many who have left due to pay, I for the time being can still afford to be here and enjoy my quality of life and work environment. I hold no personal opinion or judgment in regards to those who have or plan to leave the agency as human nature dictates most will do what they need to survive. The experience and contributions of those who leave will be sorely missed by those on the ground within the FS and Fed Fire.

For Mr Rey, you are right! Our Cal Fire brothers will always be a welcome hand on the fireline and there is no doubt many from Fed fire will bring good things to their table as well as "unified command" on the fire ground. Rather than repeat what many have already said or state the obvious about your statements to congress I say this:

* Under DUTY in the Fireline Leadership Principles is says "Be proficient in your job, both technically and as a leader". The first bullet under that states "Take charge when in charge".
* You sir like so many others in Fed Fire are CLEARLY no longer in charge as far as I am concerned regardless of you title.
* You should sleep well at night knowing those of us on the ground who want effective change will take charge for you and the many others like you who are failing at the WO, RO, Forest, District, and Unit level to provide leadership.
* If you or the others like you would care to donate some of your salary to those coming up with solutions, effecting change, adapting to our curring environment and doing your job for less pay, please contact the FWFSA. Their voice has been strong where yours has been absent.
* Know this, we on the ground will continue to fight, adapt, innovate, and lay the ground work for OUR future until you Mr Rey and those like you retire or quit.

OK, I apologize for the non productive statements(grrr) and will now proceed to my point. There are a wide variety of issues we in the FS and Fed Fire face which demand creative solutions, adaptability, and compromise. The issue I wish to address is upholding and or creating ACCOUNTABILITY through the effective utilization of the Performance Based Appraisal System the FS currently has in place. Please keep in mind that the following are generalizations and in no way are meant to insult those who are actively part of the solution at any level during these turbulent times.

So let me ask a few questions as food for thought. Who is responsible for the attrition, lack of retention and failure to recognize or even respond to the obvious need for a pay increase within the Federal Fire agencies right now? To whom can we clearly point the finger? The President? Congress? WO? RO? Forest Supervisors? District Rangers? FMO's? Captains? Does this responsibility reside with one individual or a group of individuals? Are the performance standards of those tasked with the challenges we face today truly defined in a way that anyone could possibly be held accountable for our state of affairs and if not why? Do those tasked with holding these high level decision makers accountable buy into the performance appraisal process at all? Can we clearly define our issues in BLACK and WHITE and hold those responsible to a MEASURABLE STANDARD? How can someone be accountable for their decisions and actions if their performance standards are not measurable and or their supervisor does not buy into the process?

From the ground I feel lack of accountability is most easily recognizable from the GS 9 position (most likely due to my current status) although I will acknowledge its presence at all levels. There seem to be many in management who disagree with the direction of fire in the FS (Land Management vs WUI ect...), are waiting to retire, and or are proving their point (so to speak) while they are waiting to retire while refusing to address change. Amongst this generalized group are those who did at one point care but seem to have been so demoralized by lack of clarity and direction from their supervisors that they seemingly have given up. Whatever the reason for this lack of accountability and or ability to adapt to our current environment is, we all know it is unacceptable. Why are we on the ground held to such high standards, expectations and responsibility when it seems our current leadership can seemingly wait out the rest of their careers while we suffer? I feel addressing accountability (for all) through the Performance Based Appraisal System which we are all supposed to be utilizing can help us as a culture create sustainable change down the road. I propose for reaffirmation that a clear direction and mission (with buy in) can be accomplished when we as a culture are creating responsible, measurable, and quantifiable expectations for those who work under us.

We can start to instill change right now by holding ourselves accountable. LEADING both UP and DOWN in these turbulent times is a challenge those who still care are either doing or are capable of accomplishing today. We all need to ask the hard questions that must be asked and demand answers in a productive manner. We can rabble on and on about our problems or begin to hold both ourselves and our leadership (at all levels) accountable for their actions. As a first line supervisor I need, expect, and strive to create an atmosphere where I am held accountable for my own performance by those above me. All supervisors are responsible to provide clear, quantifiable, and measurable standards for rating their employees performance. My experience has been that measurable standards leads to clarity, efficiency, and most of all the tools for success. For those who do not perform, clear, quantifiable, and measurable standards lead to accountability for their actions.

Only YOU can clearly define the tools you need to accomplish and succeed at whatever level you reside in Fed Fire. I challenge the FAM Washington, Regional, Forest, District, Unit and Crew leadership of our CHOSEN organizations to take another hard look at their expectations for employees and themselves!

* Utilize the training and leadership principles we have been taught.
* ASK the questions that need to be asked.
* Hold those above and below you accountable for their actions or lack there of in the professional and constructive manner which we have all been taught.
* Present solutions.
* Tell your supervisors what you need to succeed in your job and offer suggestions.

We can no longer continue to be a reactive organization living in the past and dwelling on how things used to be. Now is the time to utilize the opportunity we in the Forest Service and Fed Fire have been presented with to ferret out the weak, substandard and absent leadership which is crippling those of us who care at all levels. Now is the time to take the lessons of the past, quality leadership, failures and successes we have learned from and move forward.
I firmly believe that once we as a culture are able to hold each other accountable for our actions and only then will we truly begin to reaffirm the current and or gain a new clear MISSION, VISION and CORE VALUES that will lead us into the future and assist in addressing the many other challenges we face.

PS: FS retention in 08 from the ground. With measurable standards comes measurable success. Anyone who rates another's performance should keep in mind the Award system ($) and be familiar with it. Spot awards up to $750 can be issued as many times as an employee meets the criteria during a rating period. Cash awards up to $2000 can be issued once during a rating period when the criteria is met. Also, QSI eligibility requirements are clearly defined and should be utilized at every given opportunity when an employee meets the requirements! If you rate someone's performance it is your responsibility to become familiar with the awards system and I believe utilize them to the fullest. Because you "never got more than $250" during your career does not constitute an excuse for educating and exercising you ability to award your employees according to the rules. Hey GS 11s, remember your 9s, hey 9s remember your 8s, hey 8s... you get the idea.

ActNow

Probably because the Chief just announced her decision and finding of No Significant Impact - www.fs.fed.us/fire/retardant/Aerial_Application_of_Fire_Retardant.pdf (2/18/2008).

Sign me: SST4Now

I was on the Converse Hot Shots 1962 and 1963. In 1961 Bob Woodland was the foreman - no sup at that time. In '62 Gary Bratton was the foreman. At that time only a 15 person crew. I believe Bob Glascock was the foreman in 64 and 65. I was drafted early in 1964. When I came back from Vietnam in 66, Converse was already disbanded. I was stationed at Oak Glen as a driver from March of 66 until August 66. Then reassigned to Converse until the summer of 1968. Went to Del Rosa in 1973 and retired in 1997.

Converse Alumni include Bill Shaffer, Bob Chandler (retired Arrowhead Fire District), Greg Davis (retired USFS), Jesse James Wadkins (living in Oklahoma), and Dennis Stine (retired USFS).

Ron Regan, Retired Sup 3

Thanks Ron. I added that info to the "IHC or SJ-->Fire Manager" Project

Texas Canyon IHC & CalFire Team 8: Logos compliments of Tim C.

Smith River NRA: SRNRA is the Smith River NRA (Six Rivers NF) Logo compliments of PZ.

Awahtsakiiks Helitack: Here is the patch from our all native helitack crew (Blackfoot Confederacy) in Southern Alberta.  Logo compliments of Ken C, Wildlife Ranger, Southern Rockies, Canada.

CDF 1-4: CDF1, This is from the early 1960's; CDF2, Late 70's when the Dept. was created out of separation from the Dept. of Conservation; CDF3, Late 70's new shield style; CDF4, Early 80's with the addition of CDF, FIRE, and FORESTRY into the new shield style. Logos compliments of Tom Stein

Dozer 2, San Bernardino County Fire Dept, slide fire 2007.

AS

Thanks AS. I put it on the Equipment 11 photo page. Ab.

TD

Thanks TD, dramatic. I put it on the Equipment 11 photo page. PPE? Ab.

I was on the Converse Hot Shots 1962 and 1963. In 1961 Bob Woodland was the foreman - no sup at that time. In '62 Gary Bratton was the foreman. At that time only a 15 person crew. I believe Bob Glascock was the foreman in 64 and 65. I was drafted early in 1964. When I came back from Vietnam in 66, Converse was already disbanded. I was stationed at Oak Glen as a driver from March of 66 until August 66. Then reassigned to Converse until the summer of 1968. Went to Del Rosa in 1973 and retired in 1997.

Converse Alumni include Bill Shaffer, Bob Chandler (retired Arrowhead Fire District), Greg Davis (retired USFS), Jesse James Wadkins (living in Oklahoma), and Dennis Stine (retired USFS).

Ron Regan, Retired Sup 3

Many thanks, Ron. I added the info to the table. Ab.

Folks: Fire and Aviation Management has been asked by the Deputy Chiefs
involved with the fire retardant litigation to pass on a heads-up from our
Office of General Counsel. We received the following message this
afternoon from OGC:

"The trailing email [omitted] relates an effort by a representative of
<snip, org name> to directly contact an FS employee to request documents
pertaining to the fire retardant litigation. The proper defense of this case
requires that all information requests be channeled through counsel to
insure that legitimate requests are handled correctly, confidential
information not be disclosed, and full information concerning the scope
of the agency’s disclosures be available to litigation counsel. Please
insure that your staffs are aware that they may be approached by persons
seeking information or documents concerning this case, and that they
refer all such requests to OGC."

Please pass this message along to Forest Service staff who may have a need
to see it.

In other words, if anyone is asking questions about retardant use, direct them to appropriate channels. Ab.

Investigative Interview
November 26, 2007 1130 hours
Corral Fire CA-LAC-259483

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

AFTER ACTION/LESSONS LEARNED
CORRAL Incident, Malibu, CA 11/24/2007
Near-Miss Incident Involving E96

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

Messages with these documents:

Sheltering in a structure.

Please share this report with anyone who may become involved in structure protection.
I applaud LACO for sharing this information.

LACO does train on using a structure as a place of refuge and it paid off on this fire.
Note the crew was well briefed on the plan and SA was maintained.

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

Attached are two reports of a near-miss involving an LA County FD engine
company during the initial attack of the Corral Fire in Malibu.

During wind-driven wildland fires structures with “good clearance” became
well involved with fire in a few minutes as embers enveloped them,
surrounding ornamental vegetation ignited, and near-by burning structures
added heat to the “fuel-load”, surprising seasoned firefighters.

Captain Scott Polgar
North Region Training & Safety
North County Training Center, Los Angeles County Fire

Anyone hear what's been going on with this? Have any other Forests
followed the LPF/OGC requirement banning the sale of a mobile homes
on Forest Service land?

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

Date: February 15, 2008
Subject: Forest Housing Policy Request
To: Forest Supervisors

REPLY DUE MARCH 17, 2008

In reviewing the Forest Housing Policy, questions of possible long-term “scope creep” are being raised regarding Line Officer approval of employee housing issues. Included in these issues are maintaining personal mobile homes or other types of housing on Forest compounds for extended periods of time. As a result, I am requesting each Forest Supervisor review and report any written Forest housing policies which have been issued by the Forest, in the past 10 years, to this office. This will allow Regional Office staff to evaluate the current “state of the region”, in regards to employee housing and how local policies may conform to established national policies.
Please provide your responses via email to Gwen Nishida, Regional Facilities Engineer @ Gwen Nishida/R5/USDAFS. Please contact George Kulick, Director of Engineering, @ 707-562-8841, if you have any questions.

/s/ Randy Moore
RANDY MOORE
Regional Forester

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

From WIKI;

Scope creep (also called requirement creep, feature creep, and sometimes kitchen sink syndrome) in project management refers to uncontrolled changes in a project's scope. This phenomenon can occur when the scope of a project is not properly defined, documented, or controlled. It is generally considered a negative occurrence that is to be avoided.

Typically, the scope increase consists of either new products or new features of already approved product designs, without corresponding increases in resources, schedule, or budget. As a result, the project team risks drifting away from its original purpose and scope into unplanned additions. As the scope of a project grows, more tasks must be completed within the budget and schedule originally designed for a smaller set of tasks. Thus, scope creep can result in a project team overrunning its original budget and schedule.

If the budget and schedule are increased along with the scope, the change is usually considered an acceptable addition to the project, and the term “scope creep” is not used.

Scope creep can be a result of:

• poor change control
• lack of proper initial identification of what is required to bring about the project objectives
• weak project manager or executive sponsor
• poor communication between parties

Scope creep is a risk in most projects. Most megaprojects fall victim to scope creep (see Megaprojects and risk). Scope creep often results in cost overrun.

Letterman

I was thinking this morning about friends, family and others we sometimes take for granted in the day-to-day hustlebustle of our lives. Please take the time to say thanks or otherwise express your appreciation to those around you in a personal way. Too often those who make a difference in our lives may not have been reminded of that fact either enough or lately.

Several months ago I got a surprise bouquet of flowers in my very favorite colors from someone who posts here. It about blew my socks off, not that it was flowers, but that the person tailored the colors for me and sent it.

Appreciation can be expressed in different ways, especially by firefighters. I was touched by the story of Marc Mullenix being lovingly harassed by team and friends after spending the night in a motel while on a fire. Seems that everyone conspired to let him know how much they "loved" him. This is the real stuff of our lives - who we are touched and changed by and how we acknowledge the importance of their contributions in our life.

Take some time to say thanks today to someone who's made a difference to you.

Mellie

Reality Check

"on one hand you hate to lose trained people, on the other hand they're still fighting fire under a unified command system" The're still going to be on the line along with the federal firefighters"

Mr. Rey ....instead of making detrimental statements such as those to the press, and if you refuse to resign, apologize or retract, might I suggest that you do something useful that you might be good at like.. outsourcing AG-Learn, this would save the taxpayers millions of dollars in wasted time and tax dollars, government service and production would spike a hundred fold and you would be everyone's hero once again!!! If you are concerned about the two redundant pieces of barely useful information learned for every ten hours of "AGGin" then have the contractor send it to us via snail mail. It' a win/win situation!

**Hey does anyone have a copy of the infamous "Sunsets and Daisies" speech that Mr. Harbor gave at the Academy? I've been hearing allot of negative things about it and would like to determine for myself if it was all that bad.
PS: thanks for the mercy chuckle AB

Reality Check

We posted it. Do a search on Academy or go back to the latest archive; probably has already rotated off the page. Ab.

There's a race of men that don't fit in,
A race that can't stay still;
So they break the hearts of kith and kin,
And they roam the world at will.
They range the field and they rove the flood,
And they climb the mountain's crest;
Theirs is the curse of the gypsy blood,
And they don't know how to rest.

If they just went straight they might go far;
They are strong and brave and true;
But they're always tired of the things that are,
And they want the strange and new.
They say: "Could I find my proper groove,
What a deep mark I would make!"
So they chop and change, and each fresh move
Is only a fresh mistake.

And each forgets, as he strips and runs
With a brilliant, fitful pace,
It's the steady, quiet, plodding ones
Who win in the lifelong race.
And each forgets that his youth has fled,
Forgets that his prime is past,
Till he stands one day, with a hope that's dead,
In the glare of the truth at last.

He has failed, he has failed; he has missed his chance;
He has just done things by half.
Life's been a jolly good joke on him,
And now is the time to laugh.
Ha, ha! He is one of the Legion Lost;
He was never meant to win;
He's a rolling stone, and it's bred in the bone;
He's a man who won't fit in.

Robert Service

And in response to Tom Harbour, one vacation every two years is ridiculous! I travel the world for months every year, all provided by my hard work in the summer. What a beautiful job.
P.S. The steaks in Argentina are as good as they say!

Wandering Fireman

So by my count:

* 6 San Berdu or Ex-San Berdu employees
* 2 Mendicino employees
* 1 Norcal Forest Employee

According to They said. Anyone got some better numbers?

Here's the stats I have from the FAE/FF2 hiring. Now keep in mind I am getting this all second hand as I pry it from various members of Cal fire.

* 4,000 applicants
* 3,000 got supplementals
* Supps. were due Jan 18th 2008
* FAE phone line says list out sometime in the spring. So that would be March, April, May
* I've heard various time frames out of various people. 2 weeks to 2 months for the list.
* FAE (medic) and FF2 (medic) interviews start in the beginning of March for the Second Round in 12 months of Medic hiring
* The list is going to be burned up inside a year is a couple predictions I've heard
* HR possibly getting ready already for another onslaught come August for FAE and FFT2 hiring. LOL

What I am curious about is: out of these 3,000 applicants how many are Fed? Losing 3,000 people in R5 would sting a bit. Even 500 people. My prediction is that Norcal in the end will be harder hit with these hirings than Socal. This will be an interesting beginning to the fire season when Cal Fire hires the lower ranks and it breaks apart effective summer modules and sends most Captains regionwide scrambling for drivers. I think that Mr. Harbour answering our NFFE president on the Angeles was a good thing. It showed me that the thought line out there is that this is our fault as ground people. That if we had a Nation first family and money last attitude that we wouldn't be in this problem. As for the people that think we already get paid too much. "Thanks for standing up for your NFFE brothers and sisters!" I wonder what would happen to all these people's jobs if we had a system like the DOI for our fire money. How many of these people would be out of a job? As for this "stick with us and you will be rewarded like a good dog" stuff from Mr. Harbour. It's kind of like what Ron White says about how far a plane can go with one engine out... All the way to the crash site.

I refuse to sit around and watch my family spiral farther and farther into debt. I get paid the same as people in Mississippi and Georgia where the cost of living is a 1/8th what it is here. I can't move from a forest that is RUS locality, because I can't afford to even rent! Yeah Mr. Harbour you hear that? I can't even afford to RENT in most places. Sounds like a bunch of guilt trips and bullS**t to me. What I don't understand is why this isn't all over CNN! They love meaty stories. Mr. Harbour come to the R-5 chiefs conference and have a Q&A with the rank and file that are there. I'll be the guy that stands up and asks you what you are doing to recruit and retain your employees to keep the Forest Service functioning into the 22nd century? And the cookie cutter evasion techniques you have been using to avoid, pass blame, or make feel guilty will not work or be acceptable. With my module and my employees the buck stops here! You have alot of people looking up at you! Does the buck stop there?

Gone but not forgotten

P.S. I get a little fired up sometimes when I see people trying to yank other people around. I need to remember when it comes to Harbour, Rey, Kimball, Bush, Our old PhD friend, and some others. Take a deep breath count to ten and repeat after me Moosefrawba. Casey keep up the good work!

I have spend the last 9 years working for the forest service. Initially, I had a passion for trail crew work. I spent my first season working for the Flathead National Forest mule trailing around the Bob Marshall Wilderness fixing trails. What could be better? I was stuck out in the wilds for months on end with no way to communicate with the world. Perfect for a History major stuck in the past at the University of Montana. However, after another year of trail work and graduating from college, economics beckoned. Well, logically I signed up to fight fires. Started out on a engine crew, helitack rapeller for a year and then onto hotshot crews which I have done for the last five years. Second sawyer on an established R-5 crew, lead sawyer, Saw boss and currently Squad boss on an R-3 crew. ( no need to differentiate between regions) Anyways, my point is, I signed up for the agency because of their throwback reputation. I don't know quite how to explain my position well, but I figure another man always has better words. In the words of the great Yukon poet Robert Service, some men in this modern world just don't fit in, and this is why I fight fires.

There's a race of men that don't fit in,
A race that can't stay still;
So they break the hearts of kith and kin,
And they roam the world at will.
They range the field and they rove the flood,
And they climb the mountain's crest;
Theirs is the curse of the gypsy blood,
And they don't know how to rest.

If they just went straight they might go far;
They are strong and brave and true;
But they're always tired of the things that are,
And they want the strange and new.
They say: "Could I find my proper groove,
What a deep mark I would make!"
So they chop and change, and each fresh move
Is only a fresh mistake.

And each forgets, as he strips and runs
With a brilliant, fitful pace,
It's the steady, quiet, plodding ones
Who win in the lifelong race.
And each forgets that his youth has fled,
Forgets that his prime is past,
Till he stands one day, with a hope that's dead,
In the glare of the truth at last.

He has failed, he has failed; he has missed his chance;
He has just done things by half.
Life's been a jolly good joke on him,
And now is the time to laugh.
Ha, ha! He is one of the Legion Lost;
He was never meant to win;
He's a rolling stone, and it's bred in the bone;
He's a man who won't fit in.

And in response to Tom Harbour, one vacation every two years is ridiculous! I travel the world for months every year, all provided by my hard work in the summer. What a beautiful job.

P.S. The steaks in Argentina are as good as they say!

Wandering Fireman

ms

Tom posted this on his BLOG. (internal FS web.)
http://fsweb.wo.fs.fed.us/pao/fs_today/2008/080222/03.0About Us/harbour.html

A discussion with an Apprentice
By Tom Harbour Categories: Leadership
Comments 0
Recently, I was sent a posting from “They Said”. (Yes, I know about “They Said”). While critical of me, I thought the piece showed some thought was basically well written. Assuming the writer is one of our apprentices, they are new to the organization. There are some organizational misunderstandings in the document, but it raised some good issues. In this case, I think there is an important exchange to be had. So – let me try to answer the person who responded to my recent speech at the Apprentice Graduation (posted on the FAM website on the Directors corner) and let’s see where this takes us.

The note focused on three key items (1) Mission (2) Pay and (3) Ethos.

Mission – There are a number of laws which define the mission of the US Forest Service (the USFS points to the Organic Act of 1897 as one of the key defining laws). Those laws get translated into policy. In the USFS, there are sections of the manual pertinent to defining our fire management policy. After Storm King/South Canyon the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture decided the federal government needed more coherent policy. That objective was met through some iterations almost a decade after the accident. So after all that policy evolution, shouldn’t our fire management mission be pretty clear? I don’t think it’s as clear as it needs to be now, because since the implementation of Federal Fire policy, a number of new issues, mostly prompted by questions about roles and responsibility in the wildland urban interface (WUI), have arisen. At each end of the undeveloped/developed land spectrum, roles are clear. For example, we generally have no direct fire management role in downtown LA and the LFD has no direct role deep in the West Fork. The rub is the interface. The big expense is the interface. The USFS, and our partners, each see different responsibilities when fires threaten the interface. Who does what, and who pays are big questions. Others mission and our mission in the interface are not as clear in terms of responsibilities as they should be. We do great things all over America in the interface and in the wildlands, but the current question is whether or not we might be doing too much. Even inside our own agency there is great debate about our role. The USFS is in danger of being swallowed by fire and most agency folks don’t like that. As a more specific example of that confusion about mission, many, maybe most line officers do not believe we should be responding to medical aids or TC’s. But the debate about traffic collisions pales in comparison to defining what we should or should not be doing to protect homes and communities during an incident.

I’ve frequently spoken about the premium we pay for our decentralized decision making. I believe our firefighting mission is not as clear as it should be. I want more clarity in “leader’s intent” for our fire folks. Our fire folks, as well as line officers, ought to understand the role of the USFS in wildland fire in the United States. I believe we need a national wildland fire policy, not just a federal wildland fire policy. National wildland fire policy will get us the clarification we need in our fire management mission.

Pay - Nothing seems to get folks as riled up as pay. It is a hot button issue. Some folks outside fire think the fire folks already make too much money. Some folks outside SoCal think the fire folks there are already overcompensated. It is a difficult problem, even to define. I am obviously concerned about the folks leaving us and going to other agencies. The problem to me seems currently acute in SoCal. We are losing some good folks.

I want our folks to live the “American Dream”. The ability to have a home, send the kids to school, take a vacation every few years, those are things I hope our fire folks can do. When I tell our folks they will not grow wealthy in fire jobs it means I doubt you’ll join the ranks of millionaires based on your career earnings. It means you probably won’t be able to afford that 28 ft inboard Bayliner or the big new RV.

The Chief is on top of the debate about SoCal pay and retention. The Chief is examining the issue carefully. The pay problem the Chief is wrestling with is complicated. She is being careful and disciplined about the conclusions she draws. As difficult as it is, she has 30,000 employees in over 40 states to consider, not just fire folks and not just fire folks in southern California.

The more fundamental, long term point of my apprentice speech is that pay is derived from the knowledge, skills and abilities we ask of our firefighters. Those abilities are cogent only in terms of what we ask our folks to do, which stems from our mission. I’m button-bustin’ proud of USFS firefighters, they are the best in the world at what they do. What we do in the wildland community is different, in some key aspects, from what the society expects of municipal firefighters. As long as there is a differentiation between the skills expected of wildland firefighters and municipal firefighters, we’ll be paid differently.

Ethos -- Here the person who wrote the piece to me and I agree on many points. Ethos and Ethics are most important. Maybe this is the area we need to spend more time in discussion, but the writer quickly moves to pointed remarks about agency leadership. The point in my apprentice speech is that in our “line-staff” organization, “line” determines where this agency heads. The Chief makes that decision for the agency. She allows her Regional Foresters significant discretion in their decisions. Those Regional Foresters provide latitude to their Forest Supervisors. We in fire management work for those folks. We are not a separate fire department. More important than organizational schemes are the values, traits, experiences, and characteristics which bind fire folks together. We are trusted, and we must maintain that trust.

A couple more thoughts in conclusion. The writer notes his love for this nation and for the job. Nothing pleases me more than knowing that. That kind of passion for this great nation and the work we do will indeed, in my mind, ultimately help us through these troubled times. Mission and pay will get resolved by folks who are willing to stay with us. More importantly, ethics and ethos will stay strong as we stay united in our love for America and our work.

Whoever you are, I appreciate the thoughts. I hope you know you can speak to me, or write to me directly. This blog is a way to do that. Let’s keep up the dialog; these kinds of discussions are important.

Comments:
No comments have been posted about this article. Be the first one leave a comment by filling in the form below

www.washingtonpost.com/

Fighting Fire With the Wrong Sector?

By Stephen Barr
Friday, February 22, 2008; D04

In today's Washington Post:
www.washingtonpost.com/

Fighting Fire With the Wrong Sector?

Forest Service outsourcing plans, criticized by yesterday's GAO report, could put nearly two-thirds of the agency's workforce into job competitions with the private sector.

By Stephen Barr
Friday, February 22, 2008; Page D04

The Government Accountability Office faulted outsourcing projects at the Forest Service in a report released yesterday, prompting renewed calls for more scrutiny of the Bush administration's effort to contract out federal jobs, a plan known as competitive sourcing.

The Forest Service does not have a realistic long-term plan for determining which agency jobs should be given to the private sector and does not have reliable data to back up claims of cost savings, the GAO said.

In addition, outsourcing substantial numbers of Forest Service jobs to the private sector could, over time, reduce the agency's ability to fight fires in the wilderness and to respond to emergencies such as Hurricane Katrina.

"Congress needs to take a long, hard look at the administration's competitive sourcing agenda after such a damning report," Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) said. He released the report with Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), who said the administration "played fast and free with the facts in providing a different picture than the reality."

As a general rule, federal agencies are supposed to rely on the private sector to perform work that can be easily obtained in the commercial marketplace, such as computer maintenance and cafeteria services. In 2001, the Bush administration began urging agencies to put more civil service jobs up for bid by contractors as a way to lower or better manage costs.

Federal unions have lobbied on Capitol Hill to stop such outsourcing, and a number of annual appropriations bills, including one that covers the Forest Service, have restricted the practice.

But the curbs have not stopped the Agriculture Department and the Office of Management and Budget from ordering the Forest Service to push ahead on outsourcing, the GAO report suggests.

According to the GAO, the Forest Service plans to consider putting nearly two-thirds of the agency's workforce into job competitions against the private sector.

The success of such a "massive undertaking" will hinge on clear guidelines and "a strategy to assess the cumulative effect that outsourcing a large number of federal jobs could have on its firefighting capability. Unfortunately, the Forest Service has none of these in place," the GAO concluded.

The Forest Service has about 37,000 full-time employees. About 10,000 hold a job related to firefighting, and another 20,000 are certified to fight fires and respond to national emergencies.

In its report, the GAO questioned whether contractors can be expected to provide emergency services, compared with Forest Service employees who know they may be asked to volunteer for one to three weeks each year on a fire line.

"For example, the Forest Service could not hold a competition for fleet maintenance and expect firms that specialize in fleet maintenance to provide unrelated services at the scene of the fire, such as providing food and supplies," the GAO said.

The GAO also questioned claims by the Forest Service that it has saved money as the result of job competitions.

For example, the Forest Service reported saving $35.2 million in fiscal 2005 and 2006 after an in-house team won a competition to provide technology services by restructuring operations to be more efficient. But the GAO said the Forest Service excluded about $40 million in transition costs, which suggested costs exceeded savings by about $5 million.

Because of the controversy over job competitions and estimated savings, Congress shut down the Forest Service's competitive sourcing program for fiscal 2008. The administration wants to reinstate it for 2009.

In prior years, Congress has limited spending for the program. In fiscal 2006 and 2007, for instance, the Forest Service was limited to spending no more than $3 million per year.

But the GAO said the Forest Service did not have sufficient data to show that it complied with the 2006 and 2007 curbs. The agency "narrowly interpreted the spending limitations to exclude certain costs," the GAO said, citing money spent on employee salaries during studies to determine the feasibility of conducting a job competition.

In a letter accompanying the report, the Forest Service acknowledged it lacks an overall strategy to assess the effect of outsourcing on its emergency response, but said it weighs any such risk "on a study by study basis."

The Forest Service also said "it does not believe that it exceeded" spending curbs placed on outsourcing by the Congress.

Fair Use Disclaimer

Stole this from one of my fellow hotshot captains but
its pretty pertinent in the day and age of Aglearn,
and whatever else we have to do to waste time from
actually doing our jobs as Forestry Technicians
........

"Staring at the land, serving the computer."

TMK

I was looking at the team rosters, and FYI, Joe Ferguson is no longer the IC of the
Atlanta NIMO team. I just round out he retired at the end of Dec., surprised me
since I had just taken S420 with him, he is a great guy. Anyway, they currently do
not have an IC named.

Thanks, take care,

Information Diva

ht

Why don't we send Congress and the Senate a vote of "no confidence"
for the R5 overhead as well as Mr. Rey..

smokeater

Hopefully the FS can resolve those retention problems they have....... or do they?

signed

Only the beginning

Our great condolences to you and your family, Jim. Ab.

ES

I have a friend who is an engineer on the south zone who ranked on band 2
who works for cal fire and he hasn't said anything about being offered a
promotion (yet). Also, A captain from the green team that I know hasn't
been offered anything either.

squirrel

Our hearts and prayers are with you Jim and your Dad . You have done so much for the fire community . It is our time to be there for your family. I would hope to see that all that you have helped will be there. I have had the experience to meet your dad. He was a guy that you could talk to till the sun went down and beyond. I have not heard any news since the crash. I would hope that updates could be posted on this site.

signed Former BDF Firefighter

de

I realize leadership is problematic, it always is, regardless of who you choose to work for. I wish you all luck and I hope you are successful and get paid more, but realize it probably wont be better for anyone not living in California. It's expensive in Denver, Miami, Flagstaff, Boulder, and so many other places, but the only ones that seem to be complaining are those from California. The rest quietly persevere. If you like Cal Fire's program, I hear they're looking. Good Luck! signed rotn

It does not sound like they are to concerned about the fence sitters on the CDF hire list, except maybe for a push-off !!

sideline observer

I was one of the few you addressed during your ‘Quest for Respect’ speech, I’m also one the few from R5 that you addressed in your ‘Quest for Respect’ speech. I’ve read the post from those that partake in this forum, it’s clear how they feel. We’ll Sir now I’d like to address you.

Let ‘me’ share some thoughts about three things which might interest you, (1) mission, (2) pay and (3) ethos.

Let me first discuss our mission. Our mission was created a long time ago in a different world. The resources in which we were placed as steward have changed. The reasons why these resources where to be protected and preserved have gone from an industrial nation’s boom and the timber needed to sustain it, to the present where the original resource has become an American’s home, school, church etc. If you thought our mission has stayed the same since decreed by our father Gifford Pinchot, once again Sir, it hasn’t. In your speech you failed to describe our mission instead choosing to list the problems that have plagued this agency for too long. Many occurring during your tenure. So in the absence of your definition allow me please to give you what I feel mine is. My mission is to provide the people of this country and the very land itself with a competent fire fighter that protects and nurtures the resources of this great country of ours. These ‘resources’ include timberlands, grasslands, waterways, the wilderness and the houses of the tax payers of this county. My mission is to grow in this agency and gain the knowledge to lead and better assist my fellow fire fighter.

Lowly stuff I know, but I will not dodge the pay issue. You vaguely spoke of our ‘mission’ and then as if it could be used as a corollary tried… no you did tell us, using the words ‘never’ and ‘wont’ be paid for the services rendered to the public. You Sir, seem to have forgotten that the price to watch the ‘sun rise and set’ is the blood and sweat from swinging that shovel in your hands hours on end. The back to back fourteen day assignments with little to no contact with your wife or children family or friends. The sixty days at the Academies. All for fourteen bucks an hour.

And then Sir you questioned our desire for wealth, how dare you Sir. Wealth is not a god-dam sun rise or set. You seem to think wealth is being able to afford a home, an apartment, to simply take care of your family. If that is your idea of wealth then YES Sir I’d love to be wealthy. We don’t need a raise to vie with CDF, LACoFD etc.. we need a raise to simply survive. California fire fighters (Sate, County and City) are paid more than fire fighters in the rest the country. Why? Not because they provide ALS or HAZMAT or any other contrived reason you or your office come up with, it’s three words: “COST OF LIVING.” My take home check is about $1,400(base) a month. Average cost for an apartment from the LP to the CNF is $1,000.00, which leaves me with $400.00 to pay for food, gas, car note, insurance, bills, etc. Its simply not enough.

You chose to compare us to LACcFD and Cal. Fire, so I’ll do the same. You Sir said ‘we are not the same’ no Sir we are not, I don’t know a soul that makes this claim. Then Sir, you go on to assert that they have ‘higher training and capabilities’ thus the reason for their pay. Yet you remind us that this pay disparity is not nationwide but in fact the opposite in most of our nation. Let’s face the truth they (LACoFD, CDF) put the fires out, they put in the hose lay’s they put in the hand line, they spike out… we (USFS and BLM) stage or do structure protection. Apparently we live in two different worlds Sir, because when I compare a green engine and a red engine I see two things: one to the hardest job and one to take 2-5 times the pay on the ‘same’ fire.

So let me finish with the two things you said we’re ‘most important’ our ‘ethos and ethics.’ First lets define these word Ethos:[n] the distinguishing character, spirit, or disposition of a person or group. Ethics:[n] 1.a system of moral principles. 2. the branch of philosophy dealing with right and wrong and the morality of motives and ends.

In summation our ethos, Sir are broken. The disposition of this group is of no hope for this agency and zero confidence in your leadership.. Leadership, that lacks ethics and fundamental respect for its people. Leadership, which seems content to keep a chasm between it and its people.

So let’s talk these ethos and ethics, specifically as the Fire and Aviation Chief of the United Sates Forest Service, lets discuss your ethos and ethics. Is it right or wrong to be in California while your subordinates speak to Senator’s about the very subject you tell us you’re trying to fix? What kind of spirit do you project when your office says “…there is no retention problem in Region 5…?” Where is the morality when you use Type I Engines to do a job better suited for Type III? At what cost? At what point do you recognize that you are at the helm of a quagmire? Let’s look at the economics. You pay for the training, then the person leaves for another agency and you pay 2-5x to staff the person on the fire. How is that not a problem? Your people are working the hardest, they’re the most qualified and yet you pay for lesser skilled resources. You allow half of your resources(R5) to be left behind the economic curve and yet you have the audacity to talk about parity. Your system is broken. Will you fix it? Seeing how your office has yet again postponed the Senate hearings, I think its clear you don’t have a plan.

In summation our ethos, Sir are broken. The disposition of this group is of no hope for this agency and zero confidence in your leadership. Leadership, that lacks ethics and fundamental respect for its people. Leadership, which seems content to keep a chasm between it and its people.

The following is a message to you Sir, your Boss and to anyone that still believes in the monetary value of sunsets. It’s time to rethink your effectiveness, it’s time you ask yourself if you are helping or hurting our cause. With all due respect, Sir its time you cashed in on those sunsets. And to all those who aren’t willing to do what it takes, let me be clear: STEP DOWN. Allow the future to forge its path.

And to those who want change step up, the days of complaining in the bay, on the line, and here in “They Said” are over. We clearly can’t rely on the powers that be, unless you plan on retiring with sunsets. I love this country and more importantly I love this job. I think it’s atrocious that those so-called leaders of our agency have gotten away with mismanagement of funds, mismanagement of resources and when Senators ask for an explanation, they simply put they’re heads in the dirt and stall.

So my friend, this may be the start or the end I don’t know, unfortunately our future is linked to you and your office. But find some time to think about your people, think about your legacy and what you’ve left behind. Think about what the real problems are and come up with proper solutions.

Apprentice 39-41

April 1st ?  April fools day ?................

KM

This is the third time I have heard this demoralizing, and apparently trendy comment being parroted by one of our "leaders".

Instead of addressing the safety/retention issue as a team and using truthful statistics and whatever tools and political pull we have to deal with this issue, and then instill hope for the future, we are "led" to stick our heads in the sand and become "defeatists" by the ones at the top of our "leadership" ladder. I will have to agree with Mr. Hollingshead about the mischaracterization of our "leaders", first we have to have "leaders" in order to mischaracterize them. As a groundpounder with 30 years on the fireline itself I have been forced in to living in a state of reality, this doesn't seem real to me, but If I were concerned about being a good leader and made such such a statement, I would apologize to the ones who plan to stick it out, or resign in regretful humiliation.

Maybe we should help Mr. Hollingshead work on our "migrating mission statement" whatever that may be, is it like a "burn -by?"
How's this for starters? "Train your firefighters well, so they can get a job with a cooperator that pays more, so us "ignernt" ones who want to stick it our will have some good people to work with on the fireline, well except if we go out of region, Oh yeah if their union allows them off the pavement."

*Big word of the day definition: Di-a-tribe: a forceful verbal attack or criticism. Definition made available to those of us who are to ignorant to join a cooperator who pay more.

*Special mega kudos to Casey Judd, who recognizes temps as real people and employees who should be counted, lets see we still train them, pay them, watch them go to other agencies and they get hurt and die the same as us so why not?

Professionally and sometimes humorously Yours: Reality check

www.pe.com/localnews

10:00 PM PST on Monday, February 18, 2008

By RICHARD BROOKS
The Press-Enterprise

Capt. Vance Tomaselli remained unconscious and in critical condition Monday after suffering a stroke while driving a fire engine to a blaze in the San Bernardino Mountains.

"I have a feeling he knew what was going on," said Thom Wellman, San Bernardino County Fire Department division chief.

"He was trying to tell (radio dispatchers) that he knew something was going wrong with him, and he was trying to get off the road when he sideswiped a tree."

At noon Saturday, the 60-year-old Angelus Oaks resident and a trainee were headed to a blaze that destroyed a caretaker's cabin at Camp Edwards in Angelus Oaks.

If Tomaselli had lost control of the engine, the rig likely would have plunged down a mountainside, Wellman said. That could have killed both occupants.

"We're talking 600 feet -- a long ways," Wellman said.

Instead, Tomaselli negotiated the turn from Jenks Lake Road onto Camp Edwards Road, where other firefighters came to his aid and summoned a medical helicopter.

By many accounts, Tomaselli is an independent soul.

"Ornery, strong-willed, stubborn," Wellman said. "But a man with probably as big a heart as any man I've ever met in my life -- a man who has always put the community before himself.

"When people get in trouble, they call the fire department. In Angelus Oaks, when they get in trouble, they call Vance."

Tomaselli, who joined the Fire Department 27 years ago, underwent surgery Saturday, said Fire Department spokeswoman Tracey Martinez.

"We're just all praying and waiting," she said Monday.

In addition to his paid-call work with the Fire Department, Tomaselli had worked at a glass company in San Bernardino. He retired after his wife died a couple of years ago, his colleagues said. But if anything, he increased his hours at the fire station.

"He was their leader," said Capt. Tom McIntosh, of the Forest Falls station, who helped close Highway 38 so the helicopter could land to pick up Tomaselli. "He was the one who always took the extra step to get the job done."

Fire stations with paid-call crews -- the modern version of volunteers -- often are short-staffed on weekdays.

During recent fire seasons, McIntosh and Wellman said, Tomaselli spent many weekdays at his station in case fires broke out.

"He's a fixture there," McIntosh said.

Fair Use Disclaimer

Apple

www.sbsun.com/breakingnews/ci_8290283

dispatch log of the incident. This may be helpful for SoCal CalFire.

www4.rimoftheworld.net/incident/4530

Thank you,

Stephen

I've been putting in some research time, investigating alternatives to currently used aerial long-time fire retardants. There are several water enhancers available and most of the companies have been more than happy to help. One company, Thermogel Technologies, has been high profile with good press in recent years, has not returned inquiries. Now their websites are down. My question; does anyone know what this company's status is? Are they still in business? I have heard rumors that they may have closed their doors because the product was unable to meet environmental hurdles- this may well be untrue, I just can't seem to get any answers. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks for the help and enjoy your winter down-time,

Woodsman25

Hope you're having a pretty fine weekend. I am.

Ab.

Wow...thanks so much for your letter with absolutely no new information. Again. And thanks for giving us another missed deadline with no new information. And thanks for giving us another month to stand by and watch the carrot dangle in front of us. Maybe we are all doing what they want us to do. Keep on doing what we do while they give us a bunch of empty promises. Blah...I know this has all been said and said before, but after Mark Rey's comments about losing firefighters being okay because they just come back under Unified Command at 5 times more expensive makes my blood boil.

Anonymous

ccu-rep-sherman-angeles-fire-pay-signed.pdf (772K pdf file)

Under high stress conditions such as fear, the entire Sympathetic Nervous System (SNS) is activated, producing a “fight or flight” response: this is an immediate, widespread physiological arousal response. The fear-related stress hormone -- epinephrine (commonly called adrenalin) -- causes physical, cognitive, behavioral, performance and heart rate changes. After the danger passes, nor-epinephrine returns the body to a balance, but because the body has had such a profound change in response to the adrenalin, a backlash often follows.

Many of you probably know this parasympathetic crash. You've probably felt it following prolonged stress arousal during an intense fire season. The parasympathetic system symptoms include profound exhaustion, even nausea, vomiting, dizziness, and depressed heart rate and blood pressure. Nerd on the Fireline once wrote about this on Familysaid- about grumpy firefighters after the season is over. She had a good graphic too... (Safety Expert Dr. Gordon Graham -- the "Predictable is Preventable" guy -- spoke on this topic several years ago at the R5 Chiefs meeting.)

The numbers on the table are ballpark heart rate numbers related to the SNS stress response. There are potentially large individual differences in heart rate relating to physiological arousal and other cognitive, physical, performance and behavioral responses to the stress hormone. Let me be clear, I'm not talking about increased heart rate due to exercise. That's different. Lots of athletes perform optimally when their heart rates are elevated; with conditioning and practice they can perform well physically and cognitively and their stress hormones may not be greatly elevated. However, if they become stressed (fear or performance fear, demands exceed their ability to cope, etc.) their heart rate increases and their performance falls off. The inverted u-shaped arousal :: performance curve was described by Yerkes and Dodson in a very old publication in the early 1900s, if I recall correctly. (OK, here's a description: Yerkes-Dodson Law.)

Also note that people can have high heart rate unrelated to SNS stress. Older people often have higher resting heart rates and may be more reactive to stress and slower to recover than younger people who are better conditioned.

The topic of stress and fight/flight grabbed my attention in a deep way in about 1990 in conjunction with Carnegie Mellon University/ U Pittsburgh post doc program on stress. A bunch of us with different areas of interest (some were involved in cardiovascular stress research at Pitt, dang, can't remember the name of great stress and cardio researcher) were brainstorming correlations between fear-induced stress, different kinds of functioning -- both macro and micro -- and heart rate. A bit later I read a lot of Bob Sapolski's work (Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers; Stanford University) and Bruce McEwen (The Hostage Brain; Rockefeller University) who looked at the effects of hormones on brain function/fight or flight/ and also the HPA stress axis. They were part of a MacArthur Foundation Working Group on Stress and Health that I had the good fortune to interact with.

The military ended up being where the rubber hit the road for this kind of research, because they had lots of [willing?? (grin)] subjects and could see some real benefits to studying the psychology of combat [like staying alive and surviving re-entry into the non-war world]. That's where some of the cutoff numbers coalesced: with Dr. Dave Grossman's and Dr. Bruce Siddle's research with the military in the mid-90s. Siddle wrote Sharpening the Warrior's Edge. Some really good books by Lt Col Grossman are On Killing and On Combat, the Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in War and in Peace (this last book with Loren Christensen). (On Killing was nominated for a Pulitzer. Grossman did a lot of lecturing to Police and Military, taught at West point; I think his lecture I heard, the Bulletproof Mind, turned into On Combat. He's a very fine lecturer, dynamic like Gordon Graham.) It's fascinating stuff, Dave lays out a stress related psychomotor physiological aspect of "human factors" that influences decision making and performance.

(Whenever soldiers, police or firefighters are criminally charged, I always pray for a person like Dave Grossman to take their side and put their actions into perspective. It's not black and white. People simply do not know how altered human function, physiology, cognitive performance, reasoning etc are when adrenalin kicks in.)

Bruce, I don't know if Siddle was first to publish or if Grossman was. They may have done the research together. I don't know which journals their original work is published in, maybe it was only available to the military, but their work is important and profound. Good luck with sorting out the table. I wrote it as kind of an off the cuff response to some question on theysaid. Maybe read On Combat first.

Wow, look what I just found: Grossman has a website: Killology Research Group His publications are listed there.

Mellie

Thanks

Bruce E
The Pennsylvania State University

SB

It's mentioned here on the Castle Rock hotlist thread, too.

~~ THE~USFS~SAID~THIS~WAS~SUPPOSED~TO~BE~THEIR~NEW~DAY ~~

ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`
-=RETENTION=--=DAY=--=RETENTION=--=STRATEGY=-
!!-=RETENTION=--=MESSAGE=--=DEADLINE=--=TO=--=CONGRESS=-!!
ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°ºø¤ ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`

I imagine this will be good reading. Heard they interviewed 103 firefighters in a number of positions and from a number of agencies. Ab.

Congrats. Ab.

www.wildlandfire.com/docs/2008/retention/housing-rules-fs98.pdf (172K pdf file)

Here's the OMB document A-11 that's referred to.

www.wildlandfire.com/docs/2008/retention/housing-a11-rules-omb97.pdf (103K pdf file)

Housing policy on the LP was changed unexpectedly with some devastating consequences for employees. Policies may not be the same on other forests. Perhaps those on other forests could chime in with their forest's policies. Ask if your forests policies are likely to change if you can get that info. Maybe you could let Ab know what you find?

Anyone from other regions, could you let us know your forest's or region's policies?

Thanks,

Todd

OK, I'll copy/paste or pass the messages. Ab.

Just a warning for first responders and EMTs: make sure you document and save a copy because you do not know when you will be called to court for some reason or another, and have to explain your and others' actions. This happened to me (not with the FS); it was not a great experience. Luckily the company I worked for at the time had kept all these reports so I didn’t get on the witness stand and look like a complete Idiot.

With that being said; I believe the public views us as every other fire Organization whether we are in Red, Green, Yellow or Blue. Its not up to what we want anymore, its what the public expects. And they expect us to render assistance on any emergency, especially when we are an hour from the nearest hospital or ambulance.

So that’s why I am more than willing to go to these incidents with a smile to help out the small and sometimes large communities we work in and around.

BE SAFE

DJP

Re historical info on the Forest Service:

Thanks for providing the two hotlist threads. (hotlist/showthread.php?t=2609; hotlist/showthread.php?t=2608)

I feel that as we look towards the next hundred years of service, folks need to look squarely and objectively at the history of the Forest Service, and especially at the foundation that our fire qualified line officers fostered in the past.

It is important to understand and embrace the concepts and history of the fire program, before it is led towards oblivion by line officers who have never been firefighters or, in many cases, ever stood on a uncontrolled fireline.

I personally am hopeful that our current and future leaders in the Forest, RO, and WO programs will step up and lead the troops forward. Some have been even after retirement, or having to offer up opinions contrary to their "bosses" at great risk to their careers.

I've been a little confused though when folks speak about leadership. Our managers in the Fire Program are de facto leaders. They can be either good leaders or bad leaders.

The good leaders embrace the facts, the culture, and the "family" of the past..... and look forward at an ever evolving sub-mission within the Forest Service known as Fire, Fuels, and Aviation Management.

I've never wanted to follow bad leaders or bad leadership.

The 1956 Report to the Chief was one of the first times the Fire Program stood up and was recognized for some very unique problems that were surfacing.

Lobotomy

I am not sure where Hotshot75 got those links about salaries, But looking at my area, they are a bit off and should be higher. Most likely because of contracts, cola's etc. This could likely be the same for most municipals. I am sure you guys knew this, though.

As far as what PB is saying yes and no. In most states and counties, including C., a few things must happen. In Ca. (R-5), EMTs are covered under Title 22. Such things covered are duty to act, scope of practice, negligence, etc. Just like code three driving, the wheel is already pretty round, why reinvent it......... Your discretion to print this one, just trying to creatively expound...

Former green soldier

Secret Squirrel

Preview:

Top Issues in Hearing:

1. Fire costs are escalating at the detriment of other programs and FS work
2. Suppression budget – 10-year average
3. Preparedness – explain $77 million decrease
4. Haz Fuel funding decrease
5. State Fire Assistance and Volunteer Fire Assistance decline
6. DOI/FS merge into “Fire Service”
7. Funding alternatives – Partition; FEMA funding
8. Agreements with State and Local governments – state feels that we are just trying to pass costs. Fed lands not managed and fires running off to private lands
9. Incentives to enact “Firewise” building codes in the WUI
10. Haz fuels treatments in priority areas – collaborative approaches are creating positive change
11. CA firefighter pay
12. Military aircraft – MAFFS in So. CA (click the link for the rest)

Just curious... What about the tragic accident near a CNF Fire Station a litlle while back of personnel that were on their way home from work. The engine that went over the side in Nor Cal a few years ago? Or the BDF heli-tac crew truck that went over the side last Fall? Sorry, maybe that stuff was fantasy... The Forest Service First Responder program was started to take care of our own, (I was an original instructor) and the public if needed. Or do we call 911, if there is phone service, than bury our heads in the sand and say good luck...

Hotshot75, no worries...... Talked to a friend (one of the three lol...) who said at a recent hiring test for a contract county, their were several hotshot, engine, smokejumper, and BLM, (and yes CDF also) shirts visible of applicants. You wont have too many people moving out yonder because in this sad state of affairs for R-5 Fire, eventually their won't be anybody left. I made a life decision also. But I wanted to stay close to year-round firefighting, AND most importantly my family and friends I grew up with...

When the government finally decides to justly recognize and compensate federal wildland firefighters a lot of this will be a thing of the past.

Former Green Soldier

I did a quick hour's work on the web searching "wages in California" here is what I got
straight from that state's website on wages, and OPM.gov.

www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/cgi/career/?PageID=3&SubID=152 - 137k -

www.opm.gov/oca/07tables/

I used the wage tables for San Bernardino county for both searches.

The OPM # are for '07 and the California #s are he latest available 1st quarter 2007.

For all occupations in the SanBerdo/Riverside areas the median wage is $14.74/hour or $30,659/yr.
this equates to a GS-4 step 2 at $31,305/yr or $15.05/hr.

For Firefighters the median wage is $21.39/hour or $44,491/yr or a GS-6 step 8 who earns $21.58/hr
or $44,892/yr.

First-Line Supervisors/Managers of Firefighting and Prevention workers (sounds like a BC or ADFMO
to me). Median wage is $30.01/hr or $62,420/yr. or a GS-9 step 10 who makes $62,354/yr or $29.97/hr.

The upper levels of all these categories (the 75th percentile) are:

All occupations $23.31/hr or $48,484/yr, a GS-7 step 7 makes $48,794/yr or $23.45/hr (Engineer?)

Firefighters $29.20/hr or $60,736/yr, a GS9 step 9 makes $61,027/yr or $33.18/hr (Hotshot Supt?)

Fire Supervisors/Managers $38.31 or 79,684/yr, a GS 12 step 7 makes $80,797/yr or $38.84/hr (FFMO)?

I want to see everyone make as much money as possible and have a good life, but it does not appear
the the GS wages are as far off the mark as you might think. I am attaching the California tables
in case anyone wants to see them pretty interesting I thought, especially the Job Description for FFs.

Hotshot75

fed/firepay.doc (160K doc file)

Please Big Earn-ie, save us from a rising convection of wage charts with percentile header. Its own fire weather with collapsing column. I might have to start a hotlist thread for this... Line it, contain it... Ab.

I work in region one of the FS and have been an EMT-B since 1998. I have never been dispatched to an EMT call as a USFS asset but have happened on accidents and rendered assistance. I am associated with the local ambulance service and work under their medical director. When I start to render aid, I am no longer a FS employee, I am a member of the ambulance squad for liability purposes. All of our engines have basic jump kits in addition to the required first aid kits and our AFMO's vehicle has oxygen (He is an EMT also).

My point is that California is a different beast. I am sure that comes as a big surprise to you! If it makes sense to have the USFS respond to EMT calls in a certain area, I hope that our leadership can think outside the box enough to make it happen. If it makes sense to respond at various code levels or wear collar brass, I hope that the leadership would allow that to happen. I don't need any of that stuff in my area, but if Southern California needs it, more power to them.

On a different note, I am in San Diego for a month for some training (Not related to Fire). Any fire related memorial, stations or staff rides I could look at on weekends? I would love to get a look at some of the stations and equipment since I have not had the opportunity to fight a fire down here.

Domaque

In reading your post about an emergency medical event last Sunday, I got the drift that you believe that the responsibility to provide emergency medical support to local communities should be in some part borne by the taxpayers of the US who don't live in the local area? In my world, we have lots of USFS and NPS stations that are "closed", either because of the weather, season, or time-of-day. I know that similar situations exist in many of the States across the US. So, do we petition Congress for funding to staff all of the Fed stations 24/7 even when there is not a valid "resource protection need"? Nice idea, but here at home, we taxed the local folks at the County level to pay for a rural fire department and ambulance service. Wanna live here and get services: pay the appropriate tax bill! What were the fire weather conditions on the CNF when the motorcycle accident occurred? Should a wildland fire crew have been "on the ready" in case a damaging wildland fire ignited? Were the CNF natural resources left unprotected? Or was it cold and rainy, with no risk of wildfire?

In a perfect world, the Fed Natural Resource agencies could be all things to all people (and plants, wildlife, etc), but in really it is far from a perfect world: providing those ideal levels of resources costs mega-bucks, and the current Administration has said it's priorities lie else where. Don't blame the USFS folks for living within the budgets they are handed by Bush-Cheney and cohorts.

It's ironic that the example you use was the CNF: isn't it mostly located in the San Diego area, with millions of residents? One of the most wealthy and affluent places in the US, but in a County that has yet to bite the bullet and redeem their responsibilities to their tax-paying citizens (in their very spendy residences) by creating their own county fire protection agency (that might also offer some level of EMS support to accident victims.).

CDF obviously fills a needed and wanted role for the citizens of their State, and the citizens willingly pay for it. Gee, ain't the concepts of States Rights (and responsibilities) from the Constitution wonderful?? Do we need/want another Federal "no accident victim left behind" program too?

Hundekot

wh

"No plan to protect a structure should be based on the anticipated need to seek refuge in the engine, structure or in a fire shelter when the flame front passes."

vfd cap'n

Guns n Hoses

Mission

• Forest Service Wide
2. The Forest Service is prepared and organized to support national and international emergencies with trained personnel and other assets when requested.

3. Agency employees respond when they come across situations where human life is immediately at risk or there is a clear emergency, and they are capable of assisting without undue risk to themselves or others.

Emergency Non-Wildland Fire Response-Management Controls to Mitigate Exposure

Managers will avoid giving the appearance that their wildland fire suppression resources are trained and equipped to perform structure, vehicle, and dump fire suppression, to respond to hazardous materials releases, or to perform emergency medical response.

Emergency Non-Wildland Fire Response-Structure, Vehicle, and Landfill Fires
Structure, vehicle, and dump fire suppression is not a functional responsibility of wildland fire suppression resources. These fires have the potential to emit high levels of toxic gases. Firefighters will not be dispatched to structure, vehicle, or dump fires unless there is a significant threat to lands and resources that are under agency protection, including by protection agreement. Firefighters will not take direct suppression action on structure, vehicle, or dump fires. This policy will be reflected in suppression response plans.

FS - FSM-5137.03 - Policy for Structure Fire Suppression. Structure fire suppression, which includes exterior and interior actions on burning structures, is the responsibility of state, tribal, or local fire departments.

FS - Forest Service officials shall avoid giving the appearance that the agency is prepared to serve as a structure fire suppression organization.

Emergency Non-Wildland Fire Response-Emergency Medical Response
24 Medical emergency response is not a functional responsibility of wildland fire suppression resources. Wildland firefighters are not trained and equipped to perform emergency medical response duties, and should not be part of a preplanned response that requires these duties. When wildland firefighters encounter emergency medical response situations, their efforts should be limited to immediate care (e.g. first aid, first responder) actions that they are trained and qualified to perform.

What are our engines supposed to look like?
Can anyone define the leaders intent here?
See any contradictions?
Isn't policy supposed to be clear?

tired of scratching my head here...sting

Appreciate the "facts", Sting. Ab.

In my opinion, the problem isn't with training, FS firefighter training is awesome; but there are many other issues that many people in the FS are the process of trying to get worked out. Communication is key on those. Still, nice to have options, especially online options. Thanks MG. Ab.

I know you all don't want to hear more apprentice B****ing but here it goes, I have sacrificed my life for the past 4 yrs as a Nor. Cal apprentice, I have been shipped to many different duty stations 75+ miles from my duty station and told it was still my forest so I could shove it in terms of per-diem. I was also told my duty station was changed and once again once the module was disbanded for the winter I worked burning/winterizing my original duty station, how many thousand dollars did i spend driving and not receive mileage or per-diem, a lot!

Next subject, I have seen so many pencil whipped FFT1 taskbooks from the direct orders of a Divs. or Batt. just so a FF could attend a certain class that coming winter while on the other hand my FFT1 book "cannot" be signed because of 3 tasks which include "use of a chainsaw"... I have my A card? And, "mobilization"...I went on a single resource assignment over a year ago.

Abuse of power. I have seen a Batt. use their red lights to pull over an apprentice in their POV on a small town street just to yell at them and tell them to go back where they came from (the apprentice was a minority). Is this the "professionalism" I am told so so much about.

"can do attitude" ...at the apprentice basic academy my class was shown a 9/11 powerpoint 4 times which said "hero/you are" every other page and "they wonder why more people are dying... the young impressionable minds are being agency impressioned by Hero worship, save people no matter what... All Risk?? R5??

I just wanted to write this to not only give other apprentices hope in knowing they aren't the only ones getting royally screw by their forests, but to show that certain units finish the apprentices they want and find ways to drive off or fire apprentice that they feel don't fit the cookie cutter USFS mold.

signed -nobody in North R5-
a.k.a people will be mad about this point of view and they don't need to know where/who I am.

Anything we can do to help? Abuse of power should be addressed up the chain of command or some other way. Ab.

First off, I just want to say the FS is the best wildland fire department in the world. No other department can come even close to the work ethic and knowledge the FS has in fighting wildland fires, not CDF (will never call them cal fire), county or local departments. Don't hate you guys, think you're great but just stating a fact, and many would agree with me on this one.

Second, the FS needs to pull their heads out of their a#$, and truly realize they have a serious problem. I know they're trying to make strides in this but the WO and R5 RO have only gone to show us they are not capable of looking out for us or supporting us. Do we really have to remind them WE ARE THE FOREST SERVICE, not them. We are the ones the public sees saving their lives, homes and valuables, protecting the environment.

What Mark Rey said about it's really not that big of a deal that we leave 'cause we'll still be in the ICS system, is total and complete BULL S%$#. He must really not care about the FS.

Third, where's the FS gonna be in 10 years when most of all the old knowledge and work ethic is gone and retired, and all us youngsters keep leaving so we can actually make a good living? I've worked in so cal for the FS for 7 years now and cant wait to get out. Don't get me wrong, I truly love working for the FS. The people I've meet and the work ethic and knowledge I've gotten from all my overhead is invaluable and I will take this with me when I go. But the fact of the matter is it is only going to get worse before it gets better if it ever gets better. The FS needs to do a complete 180 and get into the 21st century, it seems like the WO wants to keep us in the early 1900's. I don't really see alot coming out of all this in Washington, they will do just enuff to get congress off their backs and then it will be the dark ages all over again. I really truly hope they amaze us all with what they come out with in the end.

To all who are planning to stay with the feds, good luck to you and keep your hopes high and keep showing the rest of the world why the U.S. Forest Service is the BEST wildland firefighting force in the world.

JB

My green engine is as well equipped as any schedule B engine that the state offers, be it medical aids, vehicle fires, vehicle accidents or personnel and I have the utmost respect for CalFire. I feel it is a disservice to our personnel and the public, if we do not provide these tools to both. I think what our management fails to see that regardless of the Forest Service mission we are still public servants, regardless of our GS level, and our job is and always will be to serve the public.

smokeater.

Don...
There is no truth in the assertion of on-going plans to contract USFS fire operations to CalFire. Not on 12 forests, not on a single forest. As you know, our Regional Forester, Randy Moore, identified quickly with two principal themes affecting retention throughout California and, specifically, in Southern California. One was the migrating mission in the 21st century environment, the other was pay disparity between FS and other fire and emergency management agencies. The pay options we developed in December are not budget neutral and if implemented would require a substantial commitment of budget. In our anticipation of the question, we worked with CalFire to develop an estimate of the cost to contract fire operations on the four-southern Forests. That analysis, though in draft form, clearly shows the cost would be prohibitive, not to mention the myriad of intangible costs and issues that would accompany such an action. While I know we will likely have to refine data and answer questions of nuance, I doubt the conclusion will be any different... just as it was when a similar analysis was performed in 1990. I am dismayed by the mischaracterization of agency leadership found in these and other diatribes one reads in the blogs. They are neither accurate, nor do they reflect any understanding of the positions these people hold, or the actions they are taking to help us resolve these difficult issues. Thank you for bringing this straight up to my attention. That's the kind of leadership I expect and respect.
-ed-

Final comment from the theysaider; Maybe your so called mischaracterizations of agency leadership would not occur if you and others would not of closed your eyes to the problems for the past 4 years. Good grief.

One and all, keep hammering away until we get what is long overdue. No rest, keep them on their toes. You know we have them exactly where we want them when they are reading our stuff more than we read all their new rules and regulations.

Keep the chatter HIGH

Forest Service at a Glance

<snip>
After World War II, the Forest Service worked with Congress to provide lumber for the rapidly growing home market. During the 1950s, timber management became an area of emphasis for the agency. Timber production increased through the 1960s and 1970s. In 1960, Congress passed the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act. This act gave recreation, fish, wildlife, water, wilderness, and grazing priority, along with timber management, conservation and protection, and Forest Service resource planning.<snip>

Lobotomy

Forest Service studying loss of U.S. firefighters to Calif. force
www.signonsandiego.com

There is no truth in the assertion of on-going plans to contract USFS fire operations to CalFire. Not on 12 forests, not on a single forest. As you know, our Regional Forester, Randy Moore, identified quickly with two principal themes affecting retention throughout California and, specifically, in Southern California. One was the migrating mission in the 21st century environment, the other was pay disparity between FS and other fire and emergency management agencies. The pay options we developed in December are not budget neutral and if implemented would require a substantial commitment of budget. In our anticipation of the question, we worked with CalFire to develop an estimate of the cost to contract fire operations on the four-southern Forests. That analysis, though in draft form, clearly shows the cost would be prohibitive, not to mention the myriad of intangible costs and issues that would accompany such an action. While I know we will likely have to refine data and answer questions of nuance, I doubt the conclusion will be any different... just as it was when a similar analysis was performed in 1990.

I am dismayed by the mischaracterization of agency leadership found in these and other diatribes one reads in the blogs. They are neither accurate, nor do they reflect any understanding of the positions these people hold, or the actions they are taking to help us resolve these difficult issues.

Thank you for bringing this straight up to my attention. That's the kind of leadership I expect and respect.

-ed-

NonameFire

I agree that groundpounders do not understand the actions upper FS managers are taking to help resolve the issues. Communication is key. Leaders communicate. Ab.

Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner but the cows was needing fed, the hogs slopped
and I had to attend my bruther Billy Bob's weddin' (he's done found the girl of his dreams, my Aunt
Gertrude) I sure hope they will be real happy raising their 14 kids on the south 40 in that leaky
roofed old shack shack that is father-in-law (our grandpa) built. He took the old slip-on fire
truck (you know the one they used to let him keep at the house) down to Texas yesterday on a I.A.
detail for a couple of weeks. I'll let him know you was thinkin' about him.

But really I was just trying to give some hope to some of the young firefighters out there who need
know that the Government is never going to pay them Rock Star wages to fight fire in the Santa
Barbara Mountains and that there are other places to work.

There is no way, no matter who is running the administration, that the Government is going to raise
a GS-4 firefighter's base pay to $60,000 (2008 dollars) a year. Even if they did you still couldn't
afford a home there. So. Cal got a 25% pay increase a long time ago and still the retention rate
dropped there are a lot bigger problems than just pay and housing.

On the bright side the with the lousy economy the housing market is in a nose dive so you might
find a real good deal on a 3 bedroom one bath house for $600,000 instead of $750,000

I suppose some would like to see the fire service go the way of the military and build bases with
housing and medical clinics and govt. grocery stores on site. But that is not the answer cause we
have military families on food stamps.

I made a life decision to move to an area where I could afford to live on what I made without my
wife having to work unless she wants to. Where my kids can breath good air and drink good water
and go to good schools. Where I can leave my keys in the car and only lock my house if I leave the
county. And guess what else? Our crews are out on fires over 100 days a year so we have plenty of
work to go around.

On second thought just stay where you are, don't need a population boom here it would screw it all
up.

hotshot75

Haw Haw. Your country is beautiful. Ab.

Normbc9

Thank You
Cold in R1

I'm sure a lot of people who read this are already aware that R5 fire stations that are near major highways that run within the forest respond to vehicle accidents, vehicle fires, medical aides, and the like. So do stations in the area where an all-risk incident is occurring. We follow our SOPs which outline the response, and justify the response as protecting the forest from the eminent threat of fire in the case of vehicle fires, but in all truth the public knows where we are and of our support.

The public drives right by our stations and if we didn't respond, there would be many angry people especially if it was someone they knew who was involved in the accident. For medical aides the public may just show up at the station to receive aid while they wait for the response from county fire and private medics. It's not a a matter of "Just saying no, we don't do that". We live in the community, people know our capabilities and where we work. It does not matter what we are called or what we are tasked with, whether it's in our job description or the agency's catch-all of duties as assigned, we respond.

So for those who don't think that we in the FS are responding to these incidents, we are -- maybe not in all areas or in a large number --but where we do respond, it's in a number large enough to make the community glad that we're there.

-J

Travel,
All Terrain Vehicle / UTV Policy

"By June 13, 2013 all units must stop using ATVs for “industrial use”
applications and use only UTVs for “industrial use” activities."

from R8 -
Louie, Louie, awwww baby, we gotta go, nah nah nah nah
guess we gotta get in those last rides

PS... Ab add "tongue in cheek" on mine. Louie Louie with air guitar.

Found this site: www.fs.fed.us/im/directives/ Ab.

But he did mentioned the events that change our lives that we responded to, like 9-11 with the New York Trade Center and the Pentagon. Also he mentioned Hurricane Katrina. What he didn't mention was the Space Shuttle Crash and all the other non-wildland fire events that the USFS responded to that are all risk.

I think it's about time that Mr. Harbour and everyone in the RO and WO recognize that we do respond to all risk situations all the time.

Dan

All,

To my knowledge, BLM contracts all fire suppression to ODF (west of the Cascades) and to Cal Fire (west of the Sierras) and they take care of the rest of their federal lands. If you ponder it, that's not much land at all, so the cost and contracts issue is probably nothing. If the FS were to do the same, it would take years and years to figure out who deals with what (NEPA, Law Suits, etc.) and then the real issue would come to head, the COST of fire suppression. Just look what has happened to the "Amador Contracts" that Cal Fire has had to give up because they have gotten too expensive for certain counties to use them. I know Lassen County among others have decided against such contracts in recent years (3-5) due to costs. So once again, consider the Serco quagmire and cost as you talk with your congressional rep.

Casey, keep up the good fight.

Noname-Fire

KM

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

Reply to the person asking:

There are a couple of issues at hand.
1. Make sure that Nomex fleece (or other flame resistant material) cold
weather garments are made to be NFPA 1977 compliant, this ensures, among
many issues, that the garment is made with all flame/heat resistant
materials. Check the label to ensure compliancy.

2. The standard issue yellow fire shirts can be worn under the jacket.
Nomex fleece/FR material jackets come in many colors, some quite dark, one
thing to be aware of is the visibility of the firefighter while wearing a
dark colored jacket.

Hope this helps.
Tony P
Fire Equipment Specialist
Missoula Technology and Development Center

Beware of the flowers - letter (119K doc file)

Beware of the Flowers doc with pictures (164K doc file)

On Tuesday Trinity Co. declared a fire emergency. The following
link is to their website and includes the declaration along with a letter
they are sending to 6 Senators, 2 Congressman, Mark Rey and the
FS Chief.

www.trinitycounty.org/Departments/Admin-Bos-Cao/agenda%20min/Backup/602.pdf

Couple of posts from GA Peach on the Hotlist this morning. Thanks, GA Peach. Sounds like they're so busy fighting fire that many don't have time for 209s. Ab.

CNN News this morning is saying there are 250 fires covering more than 6000 acres in North and South Carolina and Virginia; some started by electrical wires rubbing on trees in the wind; others started by unsafe trash burning given the drought and windy conditions.

A number of homes have burned near Conway, South Carolina.

Perhaps some southerners will have a chance to write in with details. Ab.

If one studies the history and mandates of the United States Forest Service, and as others suggest - "follow the money," it is really quite simple to see why the agency is in this conundrum. Timber was king. Timber receipts from the sale of BILLIONS of board feet annually not only added 75% of its profit to the US Treasury, but also 25% to local counties and schools.

When the FS was forced out of the timber business beginning in the early 1980's - the "profits" went to lawsuits fighting in the courts with the enviro-attorneys - until the timber attorney's fought back - bottom line: no timber got sold and the government federal deficit increased because somehow these lawsuits had to be paid for. Where at once the Forest Service provided a net income to the Treasury, now we are a liability reliant on the fickle finger of the federal budget. This Was and IS the paradigm shift that changed the culture of the Forest Service.

I would rather see the Forest Service fulfill its mission to maintain the integral ecology of the planet and ensure that these primary sinks of oxygen, water and clean air remain. FS is not a WUI machine. Let fire go to a federal, or contemporary fire service and let the forest service manage and administer the public trust.

We saw the culture change in the 1980's and it is here again in the 2010's. Get used to it. The solution is not in the past but the future. Give fire to those that want it and use fire only in the forests the way that nature intended it. The earth is more adaptable than its species. People and animals may not survive, but the forests will - with or without protection from fire - with or without fire protection from people.

Sorry, I'm just

looking ahead.....

I asked Jeanne P-T, our R5 IFPM guru to keep me/us up-to-date with what's
going on with IFPM quals and deadlines. She sent this message this morning.

Thanks, Jeanne, for remembering.

Mellie

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

FPM Mid-Course Review update (Barnett)
Lots of rumors out there. The controlling group is now NWCG as the
Natl Fire and Aviation Executive Board has been dissolved. They are
taking on the role to work with the implementation team to review
areas; they have 7 areas they have as far as concerns and potential
mid course corrections. I will be providing input to that group
overall. The FS will look at the recommendations that group makes
all the way up to Tom Harbor and Tom will provide the vote direction
for the FS on those issues where a recommended alternative applies.
This could be anything from a program extension for instance, the OPM
regulations (NWCG courses no longer applicable unless on a
transcript) to potential elimination of one or more of the key 14
positions. As we all know, the two that have come under the most
criticism are prevention and dispatch. These decisions are due in
April.

Jeanne Pincha-Tulley
Chief, Fire and Aviation Mgmt.
Incident Commander, Team 3
Tahoe National Forest

For the USFS W.O. who read these messages.

Your personal agenda against R5 is reprehensible as it fails to protect the public! You should be ashamed.

Firefighters, Stay united, Stay strong. You will prevail!!

Cal Fire Jake

The arrangement for a meeting is not a rumor, however. Ab.

If I read/hear another "leader" mention sunsets, I'm
going to puke.

Gimme a break.

noname51

REL

This may be a confirmation of that piece of information.

On Wednesday, I attended the Firehouse World Conference in San Diego. The keynote speaker was the CDF Director, Ruben Grijalva, and Chief John Hawkins. Both presented an overview of the 2007 Southern California Fires on the things that went right, what went wrong, and what was learned. Then the Director talked about changes to CDF coming in the near future.

One of the subjects that was discussed about the future was improvements in CDF's Helitack Program, which included replacing all the Vietnam-Era UH-1H "Huey" Helicopters with new one, brand new ones, and the purchase of three Sikorsky FireHawk helicopters. The 11 old helicopters would be given to local governments to use for fire and search & rescue. Not placed in reserved, released for other agencies to use.

Director Grijalva then "emphasized" CDF's plan for staffing, with almost all the state engines to have 4-0 staffing for the fire season. The director also emphasized that the hiring of seasonal firefighters was normally around 1500, and that 700 NEW FIREFIGHTERS were going to be hired in the near future.

The director told us at this meeting that the Governor Arnold approved these fiscal improvements and would uphold these costs, even though the State of California is right now looking at a $15-20 Billion shortfall in state tax revenue. How much does a new Bell 412 helo cost? How much does a civilian BlackHawk helo cost? That is a capital outlay of hundreds of millions of dollars in a deficit year.

Think about this, CDF has been doing the 4-0 staffing with those 1500 seasonal firefighters, why do they need the extra 700 firefighters?

Now add this into the equation, CDF has been exploring placing new stations in sections of National Forests across the state to better protect SRA land patches located within the National Forests. In the Butte Ranger Unit, there are at least two stations being planned into the Plumas NF, well into Plumas County, outside Butte's response area.

39BCNorm, a former CDF Battalion Chief, has been telling me over the last year that CDF is taking steps to move in to taking over R-5 Forest's Fire Management. I did not believe what he was saying, but look at the facts. It came out very quietly in San Diego last week from the CDF Director.

The costs for CDF to come in and do R-5 Fire Management would quadruple, and that is not an effective way to fund the fire program.

To Mr. Tom Harbour: I have not met you nor have I worked for you, and as a former federal wildland firefighter (1987-1995) I can't tell how ashamed I am of how the leadership of the US Forest Service in R-5 had fallen apart. Your budget has been usurped for non-fire projects (which is supposed to be illegal), your people are leaving in groves for better paying state and local government jobs at lower ranks, there is little or no support from forest leadership for Fire, our members are being held to criminal charges for accidents on fire scenes for what our counterparts in the full-service fire departments consider a normal danger of the job, you ignore the dedicated people from your Engine Captain's work group coming up with ideas to improve things, and now it looks very much like R-5 Fire & Aviation Management is being pawned off on the state, or worse to private contractors.

The Forest Leadership's reply to these issues is to conduct studies, talk about things to hear their own voices, and come up with completely unrelated but STUPID memos regarding Code-3 driving policies not related to any incidents with the subject, ordering fire personnel to remove unauthorized collar brass, badges, and patches not approved. Everything is being done to work AROUND the problem, INSTEAD OF ON THE PROBLEM!

When corporations fails their contracts, when salesmen don't meet quotas, and when the CEO's actions cause a loss of profits, those people responsible for not performing are replaced with people who can meet the objectives and responsibilities are replaced. The laymen’s term is:

YOU'RE FIRED! GET OUT! NO GOLDEN PARACHUTE FOR YOU!!

Something is broken. Something is really broken because this kind of ineffectiveness would not have happened 20 years ago. And we as an organization, trying to provide for a safer environment for our firefighters, have painted ourselves in a corner with regulations and rules for what has been forgotten is a dangerous job. Firefighting is dangerous, be it wildland, structural, industrial, or aircraft.

Casey Judd, I don't know all the work you are doing but I know you are effective at what you do. Keep up your good work, but all the changes and benefits you have worked for will go to naught if the organization falls apart. Isn’t it time for the Heavy Politicians (Senator Feinstein, Speaker Pelosi, and Congressman Herger) who are critical of the Forest Service in R-5 to step up to the plate and slam some heads into the desk?

As time progresses, things evolve, change occurs, and those who don’t change die. Bureaucracy has increased, personal responsibility has been shifted for those in upper-level management, and the organization has stagnated. The Forest Service, and the other land management agencies, need to look at CDF as an example of the level of service that the public expects to see. For those of you fed firefighters looking to go to CDF, you are going to have to go to the medical aids, the car fires, the structure fires, the Haz-Mat incidents, vehicle accidents, EVERYTHING, not just wildland fires. This is one of the things the FS needs to do to survive. BLM and NPS have taken those extra steps, and hire people with those full-service skills. And anyone not willing to take on these responsibilities needs to find another job. Progress, or wither.

As to the issue of contracting, at what point did contracting become the priority? When did this shift happen? When I started doing this and was exposed to wildland fire suppression contractors, these were private individuals and businesses that provided resources for the point of relieving IA federal resources to go to other fires, to serve to do mop-up operations, to support government management and suppression, and all of this was based as an on-call resource, with no guarantee of payment unless they went to a fire.

Today, these private contractors have government contracts to provide 7-day staffing of engines and crews, to provide fuel reduction projects, to conduct control burns, IA responsibilities that substitute for federal fire resources. And while these things have happened for private contractors, government resources have been reduced. I don’t care what the privates have to say about them being more ‘cost effective’, but the costs that I saw with a contractor I know showed the cost were higher than a similar government resource.

It seems to me that the simple solution to contractors, is to make them a secondary private resource again, like what it was 20 years ago. And like any private contractor, you only get paid when there is a fire, and only when you are called to go there. Not paid to be on standby. Not be paid to do the government’s control burns, and fuel reduction projects. This is common sense.

But I digress here. Changes need to happen for Federal Fire Management. I support a Federal Wildland Fire Service, but to do that you need to take away that control from the Forest Service, BLM, NPS, USF&W, and BIA. Those overall superintendents and managers outside of fire don’t want to lose that control, nor the illegal control of shifting funds from fire to non-fire projects. Until we see a Forest Superintendent being led away in handcuffs for diverting funds, not much will change. When those who sit in the palace find themselves thrown out of their jobs with no retirement, no benefits, and no more government career, MAYBE things will change.

Does the Forest Service want out of Fire Management? If so, they need to understand that they then LOSE that funding. If they want to contract out, why not ask BLM to come in and do it? Same reason, they don’t want to lose control of that funding. It is supposed to be illegal to shift funds that way, but no one holds those decision makers responsible.

MOC4546

MOC, CalFire is authorized to be at not less than 82% of their designated "State of Readiness". They have been below that for some time. End of last year they had 640+ open positions. Their fire forces continue to retire; some leave for better paying jobs. They must increase their numbers. 700 is not an unreasonable target. Ab.

Normbc9

Thanks Norm. Ab.

Cross Boundary Protection Concept Letter It's a concept, hopefully one that was dismissed and will not be found to be viable now. Ab.

We need your help. I am a spouse of a firefighter that has worked for the Forest Service for over 20 years. My family will be directly affected by the new housing policy that Mr. Ken Heffner, Deputy Forest Supervisor, has written. If this change in policy goes through, my family will be homeless!! Not only homeless, but still paying a mortgage for a house we cannot occupy or sell. To me this is disturbing and, more importantly, unjust. Over 60 families will be affected, not just mine.

Wildland firefighters have a true passion for the service they provide. It is more than just a mere job to them. It is preserving our National Forests, and protecting people and property. They work with dedicated pride for the Forest Service of the United States of America. Experienced firefighters of 5, 15, 25 years of dedicated service are being forced to leave their homes. Firefighters risk their lives to save people, their house, and their property, only to lose their own? This is extreme and an ultimate injustice.

My husband and I lived in a 2 bedroom mobile home in Santa Barbara County. We had a child at the time. We decided we wanted to have a bigger family and started pursuing housing options. We came to the conclusion that we were not able to afford housing in the central coast area. At that time my husband looked into government housing. We bought a $100,000 manufactured home and were told that we could put on a pad in the Los Padres Mobile Home Park. We were also told that once we decided to move or my husband was promoted that we would be able to sell our home. We could not get a loan without a signature from the District Ranger. Now Mr. Ken Heffner has decided to come in and change the housing policy. And with the changes that he wants to make, it will be impossible for us to sell our house and get the money back that we need to be able to put a down payment for another house.

My husband has missed out on a lot of memories with his kids because he is constantly gone fighting fires. That is his job and he truly has a passion for what he does. Don’t let his time away from his kids be a waste. Please give us the opportunity to continue to give the stability that our kids deserve. If you would like to help us, please write your congressional representatives and senators.

We need your help. None of our families deserve this.

Spacorky

SOUTHWESTERN LAND OFFICE
Anaconda: (FREE LODGING PROVIDED)    Pay
Firefighter                          $9.92/ $10.79
Engine Boss                         $11.76/ $12.81
Single Resource Boss/Crew Boss      $11.76/ $12.81
(guaranteed seasonal-6 months)

Garrison: (FREE LODGING PROVIDED)
90607/90608             Firefighter                   $9.92/ $ 10.79
90608                Lookout/Relief Lookout          $10.79
90609               Initial Attack Dispatcher        $11.76
90609/90610             Engine Boss                  $11.76/ $12.81

Clearwater (Greenough): (FREE LODGING PROVIDED)
90607/08                Firefighter                   $9.92/ $10.79
90609/90610             Engine Boss                  $11.76/ $12.81
90609                 Initial Attack Dispatcher      $11.76
90608          Radio Operator/Relief Radio Operator  $10.79

Lincoln: (FREE LODGING PROVIDED)
90607/08                Firefighter                   $9.92/$10.79
90608          Radio Operator/Relief Radio Operator  $10.79
90609/90610              Engine Boss                 $11.76/ $12.81

Missoula:
90607/08                Firefighter                      $9.92/ $10.79
90608                Lookout/Relief Lookout             $10.79
90609/90610             Engine Boss                     $11.76/ $12.81

SWLO                 
90607/08            Helicopter Crew Member               $9.92/$10.79
90610                Forestry Technician                $12.81
90609                 Fuel Truck Driver                 $11.76
90609                  Aerial Observer                  $11.76

Fire was King (1905 to 1956), see the hotlist thread by Gizmo

Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act of 1960, see Gizmo's hotlist thread on that one.

"I must remind you that in most places in this nation we, the federal wildland fire professional, are either at parity or more highly paid than our state, county, or local counterpart. "

Tom,

Do I need to put together another national breakdown of salaries, benefits, and working conditions for you? How about another breakdown of housing costs?

You need to address the current facts, and not what were facts 20 years ago. To mislead a group of entry level apprentices, as you have done, is wrong and contrary to your stated "ethos".

The western United States have changed drastically due to urbanization and competition for skilled employees. The western United States are where the majority of the Forest Service protected lands are, and where the bulk of the wildland fire management program exists.

Lobotomy

Wildfires in Virginia, North and South Carolina.

Check the HOTLIST.

Ab.

www.wildlandfire.com/docs/2008/retention/020608speech-to-appr.doc

Thanks Fire Mom. Ab.

Thanks for that info. Ab.

NIMO Teams - Nothing says they could not be moved to another agency. They are not a sole FS resource nor are they solely wildland fire suppression. They owe more of their reason for being to hurricanes and space shuttle wrecks than wildland fire. That they continue to be in the FS is only a recognition that wildland fire management is where the "federal" skill set got its skills. Heck move them to DHS and take the money for their salary etc. and fund more ground pounders, or build more remote station housing or use it some way to address retention!

'The argument I've heard against a federal wildland fire service cutting across the five land management agencies is that we need firefighters and fire MANAGERS to be integrated into the land management process. Because it's all about forest/land/park management. That's our mission(s)."

And

"What happens to the fire management part, and the ecology? Does CalFire take that on too? Do they handle all the fuels management, burn plans, lawsuits over fuel treatment, etc. and relations with the public? Fire prevention? And most importantly: what happens to Smokey The Bear? Ha ha ha..."

So how would that be any different if we had a "Federal Wildland Fire Management Service" (FWFMS)? Would the FWFMS be suppression only or would it be all facets of wildland fire management to include fuels treatments, prescribed fire for resources benefit (wildlife habitat, forage production, seedbed prep) and prevention (that leaves a home for the bear)? Would the FWFMS take on the ecology part of the Shawnee NF or the Pawnee NG? How would the FWFMS folks know that Desert Tortoise habitat protection is a big deal? Would the FWFMS folks write the fire management plan? Would the local Chief of the FWFMS sign the fire management plan? How many regions would the FWFMS have? And would they be numbered like the FS or BLM or BIA or FWS or NPS or DHS or come up with their own? Would Aglearn and DOIlearn be replaced by FIRELEARN? How would FWFMS organize itself to be able to field the kind of organization, skill sets and training expected in Southern California compared with a part of the country with a more traditional wildland fire management organization that has an extensive emergency management organization provided by local entities? Would this lead to a two tier level of skills and training? Would that then lead to different pay scales? How would the local FWFMS Chief influence the none FWSFMS employees to participate as militia? Or would the FWFMS be big enough that it did not need militia any more? Just the beginning of the devilish details of a stand alone Federal Fire Management Organization.

And there would be a "political appointee" running the FWFMS just like every other agency of the US government. And it would have its own HR shop, and procurement organization, and national and regional offices to pay for.

Midwest FMO

Firefighter want-to-be

Seems pretty sad that management is more concerned about red light and
siren issues than retention and morale. At the rate they are going, there wont
be anyone left to read their stupid policies....

CDF might be cheaper per se, but only 1 person on their crew is being paid.
(not a bash on CDF).

Former Green Soldier

"In terms of costs to the fire, this translates into about $1,006 per shift for the State & local employee and $360 per shift for the federal employee. Clearly, this creates an issue of morale. Working side by side, one would expect equal pay for equal work. This inequity must be corrected."

"Because of the pay issues associated specific with California, it is estimated that about $25 million could have been saved on the two Complexes if federal employees could have staffed the entire incident."

Casey

I've heard that GB is working on the numbers for this meeting which, if you replace engine for engine, 5-0 staffing, 7 days a week, chief for chief, prevention tech for prevention tech, dozer for dozer, etc for etc, the costs are off the charts. I heard IHCs are off the table, they would be reinforcements for CAL FIRE and national support. Even if feds get portal to portal, the cost for CAL FIRE protection would still be off the charts, especially if you match resource for resource.

If you don't replace in kind, National Forests will see even more large fire events, more large fire costs due to fewer IA successes. The other reason they will never allow for farming out National Forest DPA is because they want to continue to expand appropriate management response (AMR) across NF landscapes. Don't think CAL FIRE has too many FEMOs walking around. Even though I have a high amount of respect for CAL FIRE and I'm 100% satisfied with the protection they provide for the SAR just across the street from my house, Even though we currently protect each other's land right now with the "balance of acres", I don't think NF land protection is a good fit and it will never happen on a scale of that magnitude.

High lonesome, thanks for staying positive, touchy subject, thanks for the support. Fed fire costs are higher due primarily to complexity, duration and because we have a tendency to order every aircraft available this side of New Jersey when we get a wildfire. We also pay a heap of money for the great support we get from local, county and CAL FIRE. They don't have too many off ramps and highways in the Ventana Wilderness to anchor from.

ms

PS - I know the last thing you want to use is your ag learn password, however has anyone been to Harbours blog? Any info to share?

Harbour = NO Confidence

IA=Initial Attack; NF=National Forest
DPA=Designated Protection Area
FEMOs=Fire Effects Monitors
Wildland Fire ACRONYMS for more description of the different kinds of DPA, etc

I agree Cal Fire is usually very quick and efficient in the suppression of fires on private (usually) land, however, we are not at all sure they could remain so when dealing with a ripper, or creeper for that matter, fire in the Trinity Alps Wilderness or the Marbles for instance. Me thinks the strategic learning curve for wilderness fires (i.e. no dozers, the logistics of the mates, and all the Fed. land mgmt. policy that will stay with Wilderness areas no matter who fights the fire) will be steeper than you think. The 7 day Cal Fire fire which you allude to might just become the 70 day Wilderness fire the Forest Service is used to.

The bottom line I think, is that the two fire shops are the same but different, the Forest Service still is a land mgmt. agency and its fire program follows suit, while Cal Fire has moved further into the all risk realm where wildlandfire and the management of fire for resource benefit are smaller parts of the mission. I think Cal Fire could, in the end do a respectable job fighting Forest Service fires without Forest Service Fire, but I don't know if they would be any quicker.

007

No pictures, at least not yet. Ab.

Dear Ab

I just wanted to say "Thank You" to everybody who has been visiting,
calling, emailing and sending cards since my husband's passing. This has
been a very difficult situation for me to comprehend and I appreciate all
the support from the fire community.

Many people have asked about the poem I read at the services. I wrote this
poem after working at 9/11.

Never Forget

I enter the subway at 42nd Street
Nobody speaks in this Tunnel of Heat
Only the conductor, which sounds foreign to me
I stare at my boots and try not to Think

I escape this train at Chambers’ Street
The smells' hit me first
In the Air It Lurks
It Invades my Pores, my Senses and More.
This Smoke is filled with Horror

Hardhat, ID, Past Security.....No Fear
Not many women working Here
It's mostly Cranes, Iron Workers and Engineers
So Lifelike, Dinosaurs almost Appear
Digging, Pulling and Wrenching our Tears

I Breathe the Chemicals; I Walk in the Ashes.
I Hear the Stories; I Feel the Pain.
It's like a Nightmare that won't restrain.

Erased from the Living, Transform the Blaring
The Smell of Misery, It's All History.

I stare at my boots and try not to Think.

@ Shawna Legarza 2001

Shawna, thanks for sharing that. You know Marc was so loved, appreciated and respected by all, even those of us who only knew him via emails and posts. A firefighter's firefighter. A public servant. His life made a huge difference for many people. We each could wish for the same. You know, we're all family. Our love to you. If you need anything, you've only got to say. Ab.

From where I stand the following seems clear to me, although this is mostly speculation:

• Forest Service Line Officer and Administrator Policy is being rewritten via the FSM rewrite.
• The purpose is to put interface and structure fire, medical aids, and all but fuels management "back in the box"; to define that those functions are not not part of the FS mission/vision and that suppression and its cost cannot be part of the FS budget, especially in places where fire burns hottest and cost is greatest to the FS, like in SoCal.
• NIMO Teams may stay with the FS or be given to DHS. What if we had a number of those in CA and a number of hotshot crews but they were under centralized fire, DHS or increasingly stovepiped within the FS as NIMO teams are now? (And after this generation of NIMO retires, where do we get new candidates of firefighting, an "immediate art" that takes years to acquire to fight fire safely?)
• Being explored is whether interface fire duties can be given to other fire entities in CA along with the $$ for doing that. Just think, if CalFire and the Contract Counties were the only "fire departments" in the state? What if NIMO only got called in during a large firestorm threatening interface or other large all-risk, non-fire assignment.
• If FS policy makers can figure this out now and get agreement for CA, they can figure it out for the other interface cities with large fire threat next (as with with trailers on govt land). If they can begin to set the new slimmed-down FS fire trajectory, they can approach Congress and the new President after the November elections. They can present their vision of a new Forest Service with refocused mission and vision and a clarity of cash flow.
• Simultaneously, FSM policy is being written on lights and sirens, and probably for many other areas relating to fire. Interim Directives will give away the plan there: some changes may wait until the change in Congressional and Presidential administration.
• It's going to get way uglier before it gets better if FIRE resists.
• Follow the FSM policy changes; follow the messages from Regional Foresters and Forest Supervisors; ask yourself about the $$, its impact on the FS budget, and the costs of suppression to the FS. All of us know that needs to get straightened out.

In my opinion, the FS people involved in this change are doing the best they can under the circumstances with what they know and the "lenses they see the world through".

• In the early days of the Forest Service, "TIMBER was King". The FS system has been fairly unchanged for 100 years; originally its doctrine was based on timber primacy, sustained yield, the long run, and absolute standards. Places like Humboldt State University trained our foresters and did a great job given the deeply held doctrine of the times.
• Firefighting originally was "Suppression at any cost and by 10 AM the next day". Tragedies occurred, but there was little record of fatalities and accidents. Experience was key to survival. Most foresters were also firefighters, as were the timber company barons of the time. There was an integrity of form and function.

We no longer live in that world. Timber in the '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s morphed into many other "ologies" to protect the wild lands for future generations and none of them finances fire or even their own programs, as timber once did. Fire suppression and fire for resource management have and are changing as Public expectations change. 95% of our citizens live in cities or on the interface. For a large percentage, what they know of Wilderness or Wild and Scenic or Late Successional Reserve is what they see on TV. The Public's expectations of the FS has also changed as FIRE has become a larger part of what the FS is perceived to do. Fire tragedies are almost instantly known and the FS has to jump through hoops. From the FS perspective FIRE has become "the uncontrollable 12,000 pound elephant in the woods, but mostly on the interface" whether in regard to tragedy or finance.

In my opinion, the FS is looking for the way to trim down, refocus more on resource management, to give FIRE fighting away if it can't be easily managed for resource management alone. They don't care that giving fire suppression away will cost our country more. They only care that it will not be their expense or headache any longer. Perhaps they feel that a re-focused mission and vision will let them ask for what resource management really needs, they can budget that and be accountable. Change is necessary for survival.

We're in the midst of major change. Transition often feels uncomfortable and uncertain. As Q once said, "The future is determined by those who 'show up', let their voices be heard, and participate in seeking solutions."

I know a number of you professional firefighters are doing what you can to influence that future. It's your responsibility to assume the mantle of leadership for FIRE. Change has always come about from the ground up in FIRE. We need management of our forests and other wildlands for future generations. We also need firefighting on the forests, grasslands, and also on our wildland/urban interface. How that firefighting is done should be determined by FIRE PROFESSIONALS who know the "immediate risk management art" that firefighting is.

The Future is not written yet.

If I can borrow from Ab and others...
"Carry on..."

Mellie

First, if the Forest Service ever receives higher pay, portal to portal, recognition as FFs, etc. (all rightly deserved) won't USFS fire suppression costs start approaching the roof if not go through it?

Second, I think suppression would actually be less in the long run with Cal Fire. Forest Service fires tend to go big and stay big and take longer to suppress. Cal Fire may spend more money per resource, but the fires are of shorter duration. I'm just looking at it from a simple stand point; if a Type 1 IMT costs roughly a million dollars a day, a 7 day fire is a helluva lot cheaper than a 27 day fire.

I realize this will stir the nest although that is not my intent. The USFS is going through some very trying times and I agree the "lack-of-management" is being reactive as opposed to proactive. The USFS is needed here in R5 as well as the rest of the Nation. Cal Fire is not the solution nor is it to be blamed for R5's troubled times.

High Lonesome

• What forests are on the table and
• will they keep the BC's, Patrols and firefighters and the green engines or will the forest be swarming red?

I believe these items if known should be posted... I hate to see my brothers in green lose their jobs.

WH

Lobotomy

DR = District Ranger

have some balls and post it on lotus cause not everyone reads they said

AV

Everyone should read theysaid. I'm told "It's the place to go if you want to know." I wouldn't call us "immediate art" but I do think we're pretty dam* fast. Maybe your forest supervisor is slooooooooooow or doesn't know... Yesterday at 1400 hours the Forester's it was sent to pdl r5 rlt@FSNOTES and pdl r5 fs staff@FSNOTES and was then sent out by forest supervisors who sent it to firefighters and others. We got it from 3 firefighters at about 1600 hours. Ab.

Gordon

Mellie

• One, the FS is scrambling to alleviate the pressure from Feinstein's office and others on capital hill so they are looking for any possible solution.
• Two, the cost of fire suppression would go through the roof by letting it go to Cal Fire.

Does the Serco situation ring a bell with cost efficiency? From what I understand no one on capital hill is in favor of such an option but it just goes to show that once again the USFS is being re-active instead of pro-active.

NonameFire

Firefighter Recruitment and Retention:

On January 30th, I briefed Chief Kimbell and her staff on my
recommendations for a firefighter recruitment and retention strategy for
Region 5. Based on the briefing and discussion that followed, the Chief
and her staff agreed that the Forest Service needs to address the two
primary issues we brought forward: clarity of the agency fire mission and
firefighter pay. There is acknowledgement that mission clarity is an
agency issue that is appropriate to resolve Agency-wide. Likewise, pay has
national impact and any solution must be considered nationally. Solutions
to both issues will require working with our Federal partners.

The Region and the Washington Office will continue to work together to
refine our proposal that will be presented to the House and Senate
Appropriation Committees later this month. The work the Region has
completed will be incorporated as the foundation for the Chief’s plan for
the agency.

In addition, there are solutions the Region will act on to address
secondary issues related to work environment and leadership that we will be
moving forward with. Many of the solutions are already in place, but not
fully utilized.

As we continue to address this significant issue, I will keep you informed.

Randy

Randy Moore
Regional Forester, R5

From the Fire Management Today article by Ed Hollenshead.

Policy is the body of rules that guide the objective parts of a mission.
Policy serves as the structure to put doctrinal principles into action.

From the Fire Suppression Foundational Document ~Ed Hollenshead

“Rules are those decisions you would not leave to the discretion of
your best fire fighter.”

I would like to understand policy/rules of forest admin in the context of lights and sirens.

Don't firefighters know best when conditions are safe and need dictates that lights and
sirens get used? Why not train professional firefighters to the standard and let them do
their best? (Maybe this will be clearer when the Final Directive on lights and sirens
comes out.)

Mellie

LL

? ALLLLLL the Hugh Carsons - Multiple personalities? (Hugh, tongue firmly in cheek.) Ab.

I did some more searching and found this 2 page piece from Fire
Management Today Volume 66 No. 2, Spring 2006. Does this
shed any light?

Why We Need Doctrine Now (84 K pdf file)

Check the Two Key Terms box that describes Doctrine and Policy.

NorCal Tom

HRO = High Reliability Organization

I had to go back and search for something I posted a number of years ago (3/18/05) that was from '04. I wish it were a bit more clear speak (example concentricity??? promulgation=formal proclamation or operation), but perhaps the topic is hard to describe.

Let me toss the following in the Doctrine discussion mix. Wouldn't we all like to understand what DOCTRINE means? What are the rules for line officers, the rules for wildland firefighters? Where systemic latent fire safety problems in the FS come from, etc?

NorCal Tom

PS. Ab, Please add link to this longer 2005 document: Fire Suppression, Foundational Doctrine from the Pulaski Conference.

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

USDA Forest Service
National Fire Operations Safety
Information Briefing Paper
Date: June 1, 2004

Topic: Agency Mission, Intent Expressed in Policy, Public and Management Expectations, and the Reality of Fire Suppression Management on the Ground.

Background: An outcome of the South Canyon and Thirtymile fire tragedies has been the promulgation of prescriptive policies intended to address shortcomings in fireline decision-making, leadership, and fire operations oversight. The unintended consequence of these policies, as expressed by incident management and fire operations personnel, is the creation of an untenable disparity between agency and public expectations, expressions of "acceptable risk", and the realities of fire operations necessary to meet incident-specific issues. Nowhere was this more evident than during the Southern California fire siege, November 2003. Following are key points of discussion resulting from a "Safety Protocol Review" of the Old and Cedar fires, and may be understood as applicable across the wildland fire management spectrum in the United States today.

Key Points:

• " Having to focus on meeting the letter of prescriptive policy rather than a clearly stated intent creates a distraction, palpable tension, and excessive workload for incident managers. Firefighters and fireline supervisors are expected to exercise initiative and to perform according to the fundamentals of safe operating practices, but the myriad of check-lists, protocols, and prescriptive policies are interfering with their situational awareness, command effectiveness, are confusing, and take away from focusing on meeting the challenges at hand.
• " In order to accomplish the mission, meet agency and public expectations, and provide for safe and effective suppression operations, conscious decisions are having to be made by incident managers to violate policies even though there is close attention being consistently paid to implementing their intent. Incident managers are feeling vulnerable and unsupported by agency leadership.
• " Firefighters do not knowingly "break" or "bend" the Standard Fire Orders, nor do they ignore mitigation of the 18 Watchout Situations. In every case we examined they were focused intently on these core values. However, we have created an environment where deviation from the letter of policy is described as lack of adherence or a violation of firefighting fundamentals. It is simply not true.
• " Adherence to or deviation from prescriptive policy is the current measure against which actions are evaluated when something goes wrong. While easier for management (and OSHA) to "evaluate" performance or define "quality" or assign a "violation" in this way, it is not effective in measuring true performance or effectiveness, or deviation from principles of safe and effective firefighting. It is in fact counterproductive, as prescriptive policy begets more prescriptive policy. We have seen the phenomenon and are laded with its burden."

Conclusions: The organization is by and large behaving and operating in a safe manner, and is generally effective in meeting agency and public expectations. Prescriptive policies are forcing fire leadership to take the risk of violating them in order to complete the mission and meet agency expectations. Further, these policies divert critical attention and energy from accomplishing incident objectives in a safe and efficient manner. The disconnect is between agency expectations and the expression of those expectations through prescriptive policies, policies which are used as a measure of performance when an undesirable consequence occurs. To improve firefighter safety and performance, and to ensure continual reduction in firefighter accidents and injuries we need to implement and rely on a doctrine founded on three critical components:

1. Leadership, through policy, must express operational intent which defines acceptable risk and the decision-space available to the field commander and fireline supervisor to meet it. We must improve the ability of leadership to construct and promulgate clear intent, and resist the tendency to do so in a manner so finite as to constrain creative initiative in the field.
2. The reality on the ground requires fireline leadership to exercise initiative in meeting agency and public expectations within the confines of a broad, yet sufficiently specific and focused intent relating to performance expectations and firefighter safety, and that the individual recognizes and accepts responsibility for his/her own safety and performance. We must improve the ability of leadership to expect and require those closest to the point of friction to exercise prudent initiative in meeting that intent.
3. Fireline leadership must understand and accept their responsibility to exercise concentric * initiative to accomplish that intent. The willingness and ability of lower-level leadership to do so in a concentric * manner is the true measure of the quality of operational safety and performance.
   
   * Concentricity describes those actions that reflect the core values of the organization. Fireline leadership decisions that disregard the requirement to manage firefighter fatigue in favor of sustained operations would not be deemed concentric. However, if work-rest ratios and duty-day limitations are "violated" yet fatigue countermeasures have been designed, are in place, and are functioning as designed in view of the mission at hand, concentricity is achieved.

Finally: The agency must create an environment in which prudent initiative, concentric with "commanders intent" regarding safe and effective operational practices is not only expected, it is required. This is not a comfortable doctrine, it is in fact counter to "normal" bureaucratic thinking. It is not an easy doctrine to simply "create"; it will require a retooling of our skills-based and human performance training, a change in managerial principles, and an evolution in the definitions of success and failure. But it is a doctrine that, when fully implemented, better responds to the high-risk / high-consequence mission, improves the focus and attention of fireline leadership, results in higher performing and safer firefighters willing to be accountable for their decisions and actions, and allows the agency to reclaim it's responsibility and authority to perform its mission.

Contact: Ed Hollenshead, ehollenshead @ fs.fed.us

Good luck to everyone on this site that is battling the personal demons of what to do with their lives. Being unhappy is the worst feeling in the world, especially when it comes to your professional lives. Everyone wants to be paid what they are worth, and for a LONG time this agency has blown it. Enough is enough for me.

anonymous

Good luck to you too. Please don't be a stranger here. Ab.

The reality in California is that the situation has been building for a long time. It started in the regional office when they use to loosely distribute the budget on past years events and never really did a true cost accounting of what it really takes to run the program. We then got more efficient with our technologies and a better reporting was established.

Unfortunately, not all forests do a great job at requesting their actual needs of costs and request a budget that reflects the averages of the past. They seem to make it by playing the P Code offset game. Most forests are actually deficit before their budgets are delivered and then personnel are told to NOT deficit spend.

While our super 10 year strategic plan for healthy fuels initiatives denotes a model that says production should go up because of repeat frequency of the task, the cost should go down because people are better at it now (Obvious Think Tank Equation).

To compound the ongoing downward spiral in the region, we get (come and go) managers who rarely have intentions of staying to long (retirement or promotion) and do far more damage than good due to lack of either knowledge (or care) of the investments established in the community (sounds like maybe the Los Padres and other Southern Forests).

Not every forest employee wants to move away from their families to other places every couple of years, they may have kids in school, close community ties and are struggling to survive their economy in their community with their poor government wage.

To me it seems the FWFSA is intelligently fighting the good fight and asking reasonable questions that typically and rarely get answered with real substance.

California is a wildfire training ground, it provides incredible access to difficult to gain experience in the industry. Not everyone in our agency can pull of what these guys do everyday and unfortunately their reward is to get off of work and deal with what their regional and W.O. managers shovel to them which is typically a poor budget with little support of their well-being.

Better pay leads to better retention of quality employees (Duh!). If you don't even make enough to survive in Government Housing then what's the incentive to stay? There is probably a safety gap of experience in there on the line at this point.

Why not have a full time workforce with a steady budget at the field level that pays a decent wage? I see the pay scale and I could live like a king in Alabama on what a GS 7 makes but it appears to not go far in CA nor does there seem to be a tremendous fire occurrence in AL that would require a similar firefighting workforce (No Offence to AL, I love it there, it's just an example).

I feel for these guys in California. I don't know how they do it. I pulled up the real-estate costs in So. Cal and then their pay scale and didn't need a calculator to figure out that the Federal Government is failing their employees there. No wonder they leave!

I think it is time to put the "Operational Leadership" section of the Initial Response Pocket Guide in the shirt pocket of the USDA Leadership at all levels and focus on improving our program in all States. P.S. I just heard that a Home Depot Manager can Make a 100K if he / she runs the store well... Is that true?

Signed, Green Pants Blue

The ploy by the LPF Management, is to interpret this handbook. Making a profit on Government Lands. This is why the Mobile Home Owners cannot sell their Homes until they remove it off government lands. It is amazing they can make any interpretation when they have allowed the Selling of mobile homes for Fifty Years. The Ethics and Conduct Handbook has been around alot longer. Management failed its employees by not disclosing this information. The owners of new mobile homes had to have their Rangers sign a letter before the mortgage could go through. What mortgage company in its right mind would allow an employee a loan for 5 years on a 60 to 100 thousand dollars without that past pattern?

There are 12 houses and 19 mobile homes on the SBRD-LPF. The majority are fire folks or other fire support individuals from GS- 9 down to apprentice. A lot of the younger employees have already been transferring around to other forests due to knowing they cannot afford a home in the local communities. This makes openings for newer families along with the older retiring. Presently there are six houses available for rent due to the housing policy. You kill off the mobile home park, then you will see the Death of the SBRD.

Better PAY and RETIREMENT lead to more RETENTION and quality of employees.

scapegoat

"Trust- Hard to earn, easy to lose. The success of our agencies'
mission relies on the support and trust of the public."

I think that is something the agency leadership needs to print and enlarge
and slap on the wall where they can see it at all times.

Remember, line officers aren't any better or smarter than we are,
especially in fire, though SOME may think so. They still put their pants on
one leg at a time just like we do.

My Suegro used to have a saying en Espanol de Norteno, "Los mas vivos, son
los mas pendejos." The ones who think they are the most smart, are the most
stupid.

Battle on Friends,
KJoseph

Todd,

Here are the guiding principles for interface wildland firefighting. Don't have time to reply to the rest of your question without some research and time writing...

Mellie

Wildland Urban Interface Operating Principles

1. The first priority for all risk-decisions is human survival, both of firefighters and the
   public.
2. Incident containment strategies specifically address and integrate protection of
   defendable improved property and wildland values.
3. Direct protection of improved property is undertaken when it is safe to do so, when
   there are sufficient time and appropriate resources available, and when the action
   directly contributes to achieving overall incident objectives.
4. The firefighter’s decision to accept direction to engage in structure protection actions
   is based on the determination that the property is defendable and the risk to
   firefighters can be safely mitigated under the current or potential fire conditions.
5. A decision to delay or withdraw from structure protection operations is the
   appropriate course of action when made in consideration of firefighter safety, current
   or potential fire behavior, or defensibility of the structure or groups of structures.
6. Firefighters at all levels are responsible to make risk-decisions appropriate to their
   individual knowledge, experience, training, and situational awareness.
7. Every firefighter is responsible to be aware of the factors that affect their judgment
   and the decision-making process, including: a realistic perception of their own
   knowledge, skills, and abilities, the presence of life threat or structures, fire behavior,
   availability of resources, social / political pressures, mission focus, and personal
   distractions such as home, work, health, and fatigue.
8. An individual’s ability to assimilate all available factors affecting situational
   awareness is limited in a dynamic wildland urban interface fire environment. Every
   firefighter is responsible to understand and recognize these limitations, and to apply
   their experience, training and personal judgment to observe, orient, decide, and act in
   preparation for the “worst case”.
9. It is the responsibility of every firefighter to participate in the flow of information with
   supervisors, subordinates, and peers. Clear and concise communication is essential to
   overcome limitations in situational awareness.

Here's a diagram of relationship between mission, doctrine, doctrinal principles and policy from 2005. Ab.

Does the fact that AD firefighters can get Professional Liability Insurance
mean we are now likely to get slapped with law suits? Sorry If my question
draws any negativity to me, but I'd rather plan to forestall the negativity
than have it hit me up the side of the head when I'm the Type 3 IC hired by
the forest following a big fire... and something goes south...

Larry, retired, kind of

Ab please add: First Principle for me is Maintain Situational Awareness.

If the FSM contains the guiding Principles or Rules for Line Officers,
what are the guiding Principles or Rules for Wildland Fire Fighters?

Todd

Thanks,
PJ

http://flashovertv.firerescue1.com/Clip.aspx?key=F1246C519EF3C93B

Click the link at the top right of this page to donate to our safety net, the WFF... Ab.

And here we were thinking of having an auction to auction off your moniker... Ab.

To me it just shows how out of touch our upper
management is with the needs of the people on the
ground.

ME

Mellie

• This post is not a jab or insult to anyone.
• This is not a post to attack or finger point. This is not the type of post the ab's commonly discourage and sometimes bark back at us to stop.
• This post is not to identify or "call out" any group or person.
• This post is not about R-5 vs the rest of the Forest Service Firefighters.
• This post is a call to all Forest Service and other Federal Wildland Firefighters from New Hampshire to San Diego to understand we all may have different issues and actions, however we are Borthers and Sisters and we are all in this together.
• And finally this post acknowledges some very hard work by many theysaiders and FWFSA over the past few years who have been and will continue to make sure our voices are heard.

To whom this may apply,

• To those of you outside of R-5 and a few inside, who believed and at times replied negatively wondering why R-5 Firefighters are blowing all this hot air about pay, retention, mission, respect, etc.
• To those of you who have told us to pipe down and stop the whining.
• To those of you who have told us at mid-career to go find another job if we don't like this one.

and

• To those of you who have read the Dec 10th R-5 Retention draft (which only happened because of our voices within theysaid and FWFSA) and who will soon benefit with portal to portal pay, doctrine principals for training and certifications, streamlined admin procedures, and mission clarity, I only have one thing to say to you with a calm and humble voice and that is to tell you...... You're Welcome !

Signed,

We Will Succeed Because We Are RIGHT - Keep the Chatter High, Keep Hammering Until Approval and Implementation !  Don't let up!

Government Housing ranges from $900 to $1300 a month depending on where you live. Mobile home lots on the SBRD are now at $400 a month. Just remember, if you buy a Mobile Home, in five years you cannot sell it on the government lot. You have to remove it off the forest land and sell it to a new employee who can move it back to the same lot it came from. Management is so intelligent, I guess that is where Educated Idiots come from. Too bad the majority had to work for the Forest Service.

This policy has created a lot of stress for families and a hostile working environment by management.

The saying off the day: Have you been H##NERED today? We have.

Serving the Government Not the Employees.....

signed Trailer Trash, in management's eyes

Anybody have any ideas about the new AVUE application reminder that asks you to post proof of citizenship, either in passport or birth certificate form? Is this legit or not? I've seen a few different takes on it from some unnamed sources, so I thought I'd ask folks here what they thought as well.

Cheers.

Justin

Some people in the FS over the last 4 to 5 years -- beginning with FS Firefighters -- have been concerned about criminal charges being leveled at wildland firefighters based on failure to follow the general "10 Fire Orders" and "18 Watchout Situations" and failure to adhere to checklists. The 10 and 18 and LCES are guidelines to be trained to and followed but not to be taken as absolute LAW. The fire orders are far too general to be absolute rules. Following a tragic incident, they can always be shown to have been broken.

After the 2003 SoCal Firestorm, it became abundantly clear that fires during some seasons in some parts of the country like SoCal, get moving faster than the human mind can conceive of with its limited cognitive processing and human ability to act. The expanding multitude of checklists only served to decrease firefighter safety when firefighters are making split-second risk assessing decisions in the face of volatile fire behavior, often near population centers. ("Forestry is a slow science; Firefighting is an immediate art," an old forester friend who fought fire once told me.)

Growing out of the 2003 After Action Report and the Safety Protocol Review meeting convened by R5 firefighters with Ed Hollenshead (who was, at that time, National Safety Officer at NIFC), it became clear that a "Doctrinal Approach" is the safest approach for fighting fire. This approach is also used in the military. In this approach the Commander expresses the goal he or she intends the professional firefighters (Troops) to accomplish if possible and leaves the decisions on the safe tactics used to "make it so" up to the highly trained professionals on the ground. They make their best decisions based on tried and true guidelines and best practices arrived at through lessons learned in a high-reliability learning organization. They have a flexibility in tactics arrived at through risk analysis that allows them to stay as safe as they can when working in a very high risk environment. They continue to learn from near misses, accidents and burnovers and deaths to do better next time.

More than a year ago the FS line officers who had also seen the advantage to a Doctrinal Approach began the overall revision of the Forest Service Manual (FSM). The FSM lays out Forest Service Policy (rules) for Line Officers. It says to District Rangers "These are your 'authorities' for doing your 'mandates'." It's like a Grey's Anatomy for Forest Rangers, Supervisors and Administrators. Those rewriting the FSM first began with revision of the fire section of the FSM (FSM-5100), followed by revising all the fire handbooks, manuals and guides -- containing guidelines and best practices -- that logically followed from the revision of policy. If I recall correctly, some parts of this came out last December to take effect in January '08. It's now February. In my opinion, these changes make firefighters safer.

Through the years the FSM had become overburdened with

• information that was too general to be clear policy (authorities or rules) and
• other information fell in the guidelines category and should be included in a handbook instead.

The revisions have now moved on from Fire (FSM-5100) to FSM-5120 and FSM-5130. This is good, in my opinion. Without having clear and concise policy (rules or authority) that is separate from more general guidelines (best practices, handbook material) for Line Officers, how will we ever have accountability for line officer decisions and how will we get at Latent Systemic Factors underlying tragedy that can be changed (for example as described in the Swiss Cheese Model of causation)? How do we get at the Latent stuff, if FS policy is not pretty (gosh-darn) clear!?

OK, the way this relates to lights and sirens...
The "Directive System" is the way the FS Manual is updated. When you open up a FS Manual, the first thing you see are "Directives" that address specific changes in the manual. These bring attention to what has changed in policy.

In the process of developing a Directive, different groups and specialists are consulted. An "Interim Directive" is often "the draft" of change as policy is being changed or clarified. Right now the FS is trying to get 2 Interim Directives into policy (FSM-20 and FSM-30). They're working on it. It's not done.

This is, in part, what caused the confusion. FS Engineers drafted the wording. For some reason other fire safety input didn't make it into the Interim Draft. When it was published, there was confusion upon reading the Interim Directive and word went out that "we won't do lights and sirens until this gets sorted out", and the rest is history. Luckily, we don't have really active fire season right at the moment and it can get sorted out. You know that TRANSITION is one of the many WATCHOUT situations. I think that's what we have here.

When it's all said and done, there will be a clear written policy authority that directs the line officer. Each Forest Supervisor will know Lights and Sirens are their responsibility. Each Forest Supervisor will know that how they want to handle Lights and Sirens on their forest, under their local topography, weather conditions, fire frequency, etc is their decision and their responsibility.

No doubt those of you who work for the FS at the management level know all this about FSM and the Directive System. I hope I got it right. No doubt Misery Whip or Lobotomy or OFG or any of a number of you could have done a better job of expressing it. I gave it a shot.

I know the issues with line officers supervising fire professionals still exist. My guess is that some line officers in socal may be pretty scared with the prospect of being held accountable when tragedy hits for failure to use -- or decision to use -- sirens and lights.

We'll get through this transition... Hope this helped.

Mellie

Ab note: This was Region 5's response to the lights and sirens confusion. The new version should be out on 18 Feb.

For over two years we have been working on a revised emergency vehicle operations policy.
In November a draft version of this policy was issued in error through an Interim Directive under FSM 5120 and 5130.
Recently several forest have voiced a concern over the issuance of this Interim Direction.
The issue that forests are concerned with is not being able to meet the current direction contained in the IDs.
Some forests have prohibited the use of "Red Lights and Siren" until this issue can be resolved.
I have spoken recently with Larry Sutton and Sharon AllenBrick. The correct version of 5120 and 5130 will be issued in mid February.

The draft version that was released in error is considerably different from the version that will be released this month.
Region 5 provided extensive input to the final draft which improved the directive significantly. (See attached Letter)
I will let you know as soon as I have confirmation that the correct version of ID 5120 and 5130 has been re-issued.

RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION / PAY ISSUES 1999 to 2008

Since 1999, Pay has specifically been cited as one of the key contributors to the U.S. Forest Service’s inability to retain highly skilled and experienced firefighters who often leave, clearly for better pay and compensations offered by other municipal city, county and state fire departments in California.

As to date, the perception of many personnel in Region 5 is that Management at the Regional and National Level may orchestrate a lack of response to any deadlines because there appears to be little repercussions to agency officials, and, in the event of any proposed or serious actions, timely and expeditious retirements occur to avoid addressing the issues on hand.

It would also appear that once these personnel retire, a new and invigorated pledge to collect statistical attrition data is enacted, the data is then reviewed (again), the agency develops a strategy (again) that would address agency concerns and eventually more analytical surveying and cost analysis’ are completed before it is passed to the official who has the authority of approval. The official then reviews the data, sets a date for discussion, and then retires.

In addition to these concerns, other crises are looming in the U.S. Forest Service which has been referred to as “Sounding the alarm early rather than late” in past pleas to Regional and National leaders of the agency. Some say that the alarm has long been sounded, the deployment zone is in sight and our agency has its fire shelter in hand as is performing a “Running Deployment” in a last ditch effort to save what little is left of either the workforce or its morale.

Some employees have enacted personal hardships to stop their Federal Healthcare provisions, choose to not contribute to their Government Retirement Plan and have even depleted their Retirement accounts on the grounds of financial hardships in an effort to simply survive the ongoing costs of surviving in California as one of the lowest paid fire professionals in the State.

One profound question remains clear. “Why has there been no response to the Recruitment and Retention Strategy proposal” which was due on February 1, 2008, and in addition, to this question, “Why is there no repercussion or penalty for ignoring a direct request and expectation of a congressional inquiry?”

The end result (and perception to the workforce) is that it is clearly cheaper to simply do the wrong thing (avoid any reasonable compensations for retention in R-5), than it is to do the right thing in California.

Please forward all your collected, supported, articulated, reviewed, analyzed, re-evaluated, legislative and developed documentation to the highest level decision maker who is within 90 days of retirement eligibility for immediate study and review.

Proud To Be A FWFSA Member

PAST TOPICS DATED 1999 to 2008 REGARDING RETENTION AND PAY

Congress wants to quench FS firefighters’ exit
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
retention for Southern California forests no later than. Feb. 1, 2008.” “It’s not just salaries,. it’s a multifaceted problem.

They Said, June 2006
HSA dictates retention issues, and that is our problem... retention. Did you ever hear in the past 10 years of a retention issue with CDF or maybe LACO, ...
www.wildlandfire.com/arc/2006f_jun.htm - 269k - Cached - Similar pages

MORE HERE: I've given this its own page. Here's the rest of the long list of references and concerns regarding retention and recruitment / pay.

I added this research doc in the Archives under Documents Worth Reading. Note that there's another Doc in archives from 1999: Recruitment and Retention on the Angeles National Forest. Ab.

ab- please share! giving my email address is okay!

The Shawnee NF, working cooperatively with the Illinois DNR, secured a Model 61 (Engine 20) and a prevention rig (P31) from the Angeles NF- these units have arrived in southern Illinois today and will be delivered to the Pope Co Rural Fire Dept and the Cypress FD to be given to them in a small ceremony to be attended by Congressman Shimkus on Feb 19th-

I want to personally thank Region 5 and the Angeles NF for helping us increase our wildland capability in southern Illinois/Shawnee NF-

The Pope County RFD lost a fire station due to arson in July 2007 losing a engine, tanker, brush truck, rescue truck and all gear- Almost 50% of Pope Co. has FS land and has our highest fire response-

The Cypress FD has minimal FS response but has Cypress Creek NWR (FWS) and thousands of acres of IDNR land with minimal tax base- their Type 6 was a 1966 military excess truck so getting a 1995 F-350 4x4 is a big deal to this small department-

Again, I express my gratitude to the folks on the Angeles NF and the Region 5 Fleet folks to helping us out back in Region 9-

Chris A. Peterson
Forest Fire Mgmt Officer/FAO
Shawnee NF

Last time I looked, there were 24 US States doing some kind of Primary stuff today. Please don't forget/ignore the fact that more than 95% of the States voting today that are not California but they are still are part of this Super Tuesday election. What makes you think that Wrench isn't from one of the "other" western States? Or a western state at all?

-Underfunded

I invite people to post any other Misery Index calculations or examples here or on the MI Hotlist thread. Maybe in the morning if it's buttered rum first. Ab.

PB,

I applied your misery index formula to a recent event. Other than illness it was the most miserable I had been in a long while. This event was changing a flat tire my wife had one morning last month on her way to work. The calculated MI greatly under represented the misery I experienced. This would also have been handy on some late fall Chinook driven wildfires I had been on where signs of frost bite were part of the briefing.

0 + 25 + (-18) + 5 + 0 /3.25 = 3.69 MI

Where:
Slope 0 – Flat Road
RH 25%
Temp -18 (True temp not wind chill)
RMP 5 (Changing a flat tire on the side of a very busy two lane state highway so I assumed the max value.)
C 0

I would liken your MI and my experience to the differences between NFDRS and the Canadian Fire Danger System. KBDI was added to NFDRS to address the unique situation in the SE USA. While we in the boreal forest areas of the USA have come to rely on the Canadian system. I would hope that we could amend the MI index to account for the factors we have here with out having to resort to a whole different system.

Some items and values for Correction Factor Tables
Latitude north of 42 Deg and temperatures are below 40 use this table to determine that appropriate correction factor. Use the sum of all that apply.
Inadequate clothing +50
Clothing is wet +75
Skin is wet + 400
More than 4 hours till next hot meal +50
Snow or ice pellets hitting your face + 25
Eyelevel winds in excess of 15 mph + 40
Thermos of coffee on hand – 80
Thermos of hot buttered rum on hand -1,000

Small Agency FMO

PB,

Great concept, I fully endorse your efforts. You miserable b*stard.

Misery Whip

I would like others to know how the Los Padres is helping (not) with the retention of employees. The government housing policy has just been rewritten and signed by the Forest Supervisor. It has been stated that housing can be used for recruitment but not for retention. In this policy it states that current renters of government housing have a 5 year contract with “possible” extensions of one year each.

Future renters of Gov. homes will be granted only a one year contract with “possible” one year extensions. Current mobile home owners who pay a trailer pad fee have a 7 year contract also with “possible” one year extensions. Only the owners in place now have the option of reselling the mobile home while it is on Gov. property. Future residents in the mobile home park do not have the option of selling the home on Gov. property.

Interestingly enough, the previous contracts had no length of residency as long as you were an employee of the USFS. As recently as Dec.07, new tenants purchased modular homes at costs between $40,000 and $100,000. These people were told by management that “we feel for you but…”. Hmm, do you think that anyone in their right mind would purchase a mobile home from a current owner knowing that they can not sell this home again but will have to pay to have it removed at the end of the contract? Now, this home must be hauled off site to the nearest state or private property for resale at a huge cost.

So our new apprentices and other employees who made these purchases will be stuck with payments long after they may be required to haul this home off Gov. property. It looks like our idea from the forest is to create a transient work force. Keep them a couple of years and move them out. Kind of tough to live on many parts of this forest at our GS levels. This idea seems to work for the Forest Supervisor and deputies we have had. A long tenure for “leadership” is a couple of years, then out. For others on Forests with housing, please watch out for this policy as we here on the LP hope that it does not go national and screw other employees of this organization.

Ab, add what attachments you see fit; there may need to be some editing of names.

retention/lpf-housing-assignment-plan-011008.doc (29k doc file)
fs-correspond-on-lpf-housing.doc (39k doc file)
lpf-quarters-policy011508.doc (161k doc file)

signed Doublewide Pride

I heard about this over the weekend. Zero sum gain regarding number of employees. Loss of experience... Ab.

Great, if you haven't voted yet and today isn't the day, vote when your turn comes. I voted on 1/19. Ab.

The Obituary for Marc was in Today's Longmont Times Call, Longmont,
Colorado. You can do what you want, but thought you would like to see it.

Marc was a great friend when I knew him when he was here in Boulder County.
I was a volunteer FF from Niwot and President of BCFFA at time. He was a
person to look up to, (also I was much shorter). But he always was there if
I needed his advice and he treated me and all volunteers as a firefighter of
his. I learned more from Marc in how to treat people and be a leader. I have
tried to pass that on to my son. I will miss him and will remember all the
good things that he did here in Boulder County. Thank you Marc.

CAFSMAN
Cliff Tharp (Retired)
Niwot Volunteer Fire (Mtn. View FPD)

*********************~*~*~*********************

Publish date: 2/5/2008

Sept. 16, 1957 - Jan. 28, 2008
Marc R. MULLENIX , husband, father and dear friend, died January 28, 2008, in Mancos, Colorado. He was 50 years old.

Marc was born to Robert and Charmaine Mullenix on September 16, 1957, in Downey, California. After graduating from high school, Marc attended the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, where he played basketball all four years, and completed his bachelor of science degree in geography, with a minor in coaching. After college, Marc became a hotshot in Alaska, beginning his lifelong career in firefighting. Marc then moved to Nevada, where he began working for the Bureau of Land Management. Marc worked in the Wildland Fire Service for 27 years, 15 years of which he served as Division Chief for the Boulder, Colorado Fire Department. He served as the Fire Management Officer for Mesa Verde National Park, and most recently, Division Chief for Fairmount Fire Protection District. Marc served on the Boulder American Red Cross advisory council, co-developed and managed the Rocky Mountain Wildland Fire Helicopter program, and helped start Wildland Fire Academies in several states. Marc served in the Rocky Mountain Area on Incident Management Teams for 17 years and served as the Incident Commander for 12 years with the Colorado Wildfire and Incident Management Academy. Marc also served as the Type II and Type 1(t) Incident Commander for the Rocky Mountain Region Interagency Fire Community. In addition to his leadership on wildland fire assignments, Marc helped manage the Columbia shuttle recovery, hurricanes Ivan, Katrina and Rita, and disaster response in Colorado.

Marc met his wife, Shawna Legarza, at the World Trade Center recovery efforts for 9/11. They were married in 2005 at West Hampton Beach, Long Island, New York. Marc enjoyed contributing to the communities where he worked and lived, including coaching basketball in Longmont, Colorado, and enjoyed playing golf and basketball in his free time. Marc was a dedicated mentor and colleague, passionate about firefighting, and committed to teaching others in his field. His friends and family will remember him as a person filled with love and respect for his wife, great pride in his daughter, a spirited energy, and enthusiasm for his job.

Marc is survived by his wife, Shawna Legarza, of Mancos, Colorado, and his daughter, Nicolette Mullenix, of Longmont, Colorado. Marc will also be remembered by his former wife, Karen Mullenix, of Longmont, Colorado; his mother, Charmaine Mullenix, of Orcutt, California; his brother, Norm Mullenix, of Prescott, Arizona, and all his friends in the wildland fire community. He was preceded in death by his father, Robert Mullenix.

Marc will be honored with a Fire Family Memorial Service on Wednesday, February 6, 2008, at 12:00 p.m. at Faith Bible Chapel, 6250 Wright Street, Arvada, Colorado 80004. Flowers may be sent to Fairmont Fire Protection District, 4755 Isabell Street, Golden, Colorado 80403.

Donations may be made to the Marc Mullenix Life Challenges Foundation at Wells Fargo Bank, 200 West College Drive, Durango, Colorado 81301.

Community, please go to Marc's Remembrance Page and leave a story, condolence or remembrance for his family. Ab.

Could you please go back into your AVUE account and withdraw you application for the job that you got? We will be getting the new lists tomorrow and having gone in and done an applicant search, I see applications are still in there and will more than likely show up on the lists as candidates of people who have already been offered and accepted jobs.

Just withdraw your application from the job that you took - you don't have to do anything else! This will be applying to anyone who is offered and accepting a job in the future also, but make sure you have that job first!!

Thanks a million!!

Still HeRe.......

If you don't vote, you don't have the right to *female dog* verbally.

So VOTE!!!

Wrench

Everyone, please vote...

Here's the 22 page Notes or Draft of the December '07 Region 5 Retention Meeting.

Thanks contributors, and thanks for being patient as we waited for the February 1st deadline.

Ab.

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

For reference purposes, my friend <snip> who was burned over last year in a fire shelter in Wyoming endured an MI of 143 for over an hour. (He is a remarkable specimen and his feat should be considered a statistical anomaly). At the time this took place, the MI at my position in Idaho was a mild 48.

It is my hope that continued analysis will lead to refinement of the MI such that it will become a regular part of every firefighter's toolkit. I envision correction charts (to be inserted at variable C) for special cases. For example, there could be a chart for length of assignment (day 14 is more miserable than day 2), situational awareness of firefighter supervisors (misery increases in direct correlation to incompetence of overhead), futility of firefighter assignment (misery increases with the senselessness of firefighter operations) or hours since last beer (self-explanatory). One day it may well become part of the go-no-go checklists in the IRPG, an insert in the Incident Organizer, a major component in developing engagement trigger points and a perhaps even a basis for pay-scale adjustments (think, time and a quarter for periods of MI over 72). Private contractors and hotshots, who are miserable by the nature of their work assignments would be exempt, of course.

*Work on the Misery Index began at the Krassel Workcenter, ID-PAF D-6, by firefighters <snip> and <self-snip> in July of 2006. Tragically, the original data and preliminary formulas were lost in an end-of-season dry erase board accident. It is believed that the original denominator was 42.3 but this is a subject of some debate . . . .

Anyway, Happy Fire Season '08, everybody! Wish I could be there with you.

PB

Good one. I added it to the Acronym List. Ab.

We here in R5 are all hoping that somebody higher up will see the light and stay with the tracker system. It works well and everyone involved with the hiring can see where the process is from beginning to end.

Any input from other regions just starting to use it?

Here to stay (at least for 2 more years)

Go look at the flyer, looks interesting. This community certainly knows the authors. Ab.

By Erica Werner Associated Press Writer
AP Writer Matthew Daly contributed
02/04/2008

Washington - President Bush's 2009 budget plan would slash money for fire prevention and preparedness in the wake of last fall's devastating wildfires in California, prompting an outcry from Democratic lawmakers who warned of massive layoffs at the Forest Service.

Bush did propose a slight increase in money to respond to fires.

The proposals were in Bush's final, $3.1 trillion budget blueprint, which he presented to Congress on Monday. Majority Democrats quickly indicated that they wouldn't go along with many of his plans.

"Our nation's forest are tinder dry, and drought and global warming will only compound the problem and lead to more catastrophic wildfires," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. "More needs to be done, not less."

Among the proposed cuts was a $13 million decrease in money for the Forest Service to clear debris and small trees that can pose a risk of fire.

Money for preparedness and readiness, such as firefighter training and equipment, would fall from $942 million to $866 million, according to Democratic aides.

Overall the budget for the U.S. Forest Service would decline from $4.5 billion in 2008 to $4.1 billion in 2009 under Bush's proposal.

Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., chairman of the House Appropriations Interior subcommittee, called the proposed cuts to the Forest Service "breathtaking" and said they could result in a layoff of nearly 1,200 employees—10 percent of the agency's work force. "It's bad," Dicks said.

Asked about the complaints, Forest Service spokesman Joe Walsh said only, "The budget is a starting point for dialogue during budget hearings."

A $5.9 million Interior Department rural fire assistance grant program would be eliminated in Bush's budget plan, while a Homeland Security Department program that provides federal grants directly to local fire departments and medical services organizations would be cut by more than 50 percent.

Money for responding to fires would increase by $190 million, but lawmakers want more money in prevention because once fires start they will be responded to regardless of how much money is budgeted. In recent years response costs have exceeded what's been budgeted.

Last October, nearly 2,200 homes were destroyed in simultaneous wind-driven blazes from north of Los Angeles south to the Mexican border, causing more than $2.2 billion in private insurance claims. Federal, state and local agencies spent about $100 million fighting flames that charred about 800 square miles and killed 10 people.

"When our firefighters are out there on the front lines working to protect our communities, you don't slash funding for their equipment and training," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.

Feinstein and Dicks said they'd work to restore the money. Bush has proposed similar cuts in past years but Congress has restored much of the money.

Signed,
Fishy

Fair Use Disclaimer

"The 2009 Interior budget proposes a $5.9 million reduction from the 2008 enacted level to terminate the Rural Fire Assistance program. Funding for the RFA program was zeroed out in 2007, and the program focus shifted to managing remaining fund balances and overseeing the closeout of the program.

"The Department again proposes to abolish the RFA program as a separate source of funding for assistance to local and rural fire departments. Interior will continue to use $1.2 million in Preparedness funding to provide training and personal equipment to local firefighters to help build a ready-reserve of local firefighters that can support initial and extended attack on large fires."
www.doi.gov/budget/2009/09Hilites/BH101.pdf

It sure would be nice if someone at NIFC would stand up for volunteer firefighters, instead of year after year trying to kill the RFA program.

vfd cap'n

~~ NEW ~ COUNTDOWN ~ 10 ~ DAYS ~~

ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`
-=RETENTION=--=DAY=--=RETENTION=--=STRATEGY=-
!!-=RETENTION=--=MESSAGE=--=DEADLINE=--=TO=--=CONGRESS=-!!
ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°ºø¤ ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`

PUT  THE  HEART  IN  VALENTINE'S  DAY
 

Regions 1, 2, 3 and 4, the WO and NIFC are participating in a Fire Leadership and Management Video Conference tomorrow. It goes from 0830-1530. We'll all be logging on to it from our home bases. All forests are supposed to have this teleconferencing technology. Thanks to Mark Bachi (sp?) for pressing for this need for communication on issues. Regions 2 and 3 have 14 vacancies at the top of their fire programs. We only expect to have 2 filled by fire season.

Agenda includes

FAM Emphasis for 2008 and changes in Policy - Tom Harbour
Regional Forester - Leadership Expectations
Fire Management Efficiencies (WFDSS), Lessons Learned in '07 and Considerations for '08, a walk-thru by Tom Zimmerman (Tom was regional director in R3.)
Risk Management and Safety - Bill Waterberry and Larry Sutton

Should be interesting...

R2 fire techie

WFDSS=Wildland Fire Decision Support System, replaced WFSA

Research on Casey's part -asking 5 fire planners and FMOs from R5 and one from R6- indicates that fire planning has not deviated from the norm. Hope this dispels speculation and rests people's minds on the part of "not commanders intent" and others.

Thanks Casey. Ab.

Latest info from Ed. H is that WO is backing R5. Probably will redefine
the fire mission as it relates to our cooperators and Urban/Interface, will
look at several options on the pay discrepancies from all sides. Direction
will be a ways down the road.

This was via our lotus notes this a.m.

NonameFire

(name withheld)

ASC is Albuquerque Service Center.

There was some discussion of this several weeks ago when ASC and some Fire Human Resources on R5 Forests were informed. Anyone having any experiences with how 52 Tracker is performing so far? Ab.

noname

I know you don't like speculation, but if the Forest FMOs are not being
included in fire budget planning and they usually are, could the FS be
exploring giving the fire budget to CalFire et al?

not commanders intent

I hope there's someone out there from the FS who can clearly answer that budget question. Where are the FS communicators? Tom Harbour? Rose Davis? FMOs?

As I understand it, FS Fire cannot be outsourced, although this was considered in the Tim Melchert FAM Cross-Boundary letter prior to the Omnibus Appropriations Bill which excluded outsourcing of any kind. Ab.

UPDATE:
Rumor Control: Read the 4th post above. Multiple, reliable sources report there is no deviation from normal in the way the fire budgeting process is proceeding. Ab.

There's lots of quietly seeking information and hush-hush
planning going on between the FS and CalFire, but it's
unclear what that is. Anybody know?

SoCal CalFire

We had one CalFire inquiry on the lights and sirens issue over the weekend. At least one socal area is organizing across fire agencies and community support groups to contact congressional representatives and media. Aside from that, I don't know. Anyone? Ab.

The week of 2/18 is when CalFire Chiefs go to Sac to make their Captain selections.

MA

Is the FS likely to loose more people after that, just before fire season, as happened last hiring go-round? Thanks. Ab.

ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`
-=THREE - DAYS - AFTER - RETENTION - DAY - DEADLINE=--=NO - RETENTION - STRATEGY=-
!!!-=NO - FOREST - SERVICE - RETENTION - MESSAGE - TO -CONGRESS=-!!!
ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°ºø¤ ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`

~~~~~~~~~~  STILL NO JOY, Firefighters planning their exit  ~~~~~~~~~

Your thoughts are right on for Region 4. Unfortunately, Region 5 is a rather large WUI-intensive beast. So even though we are not Calfire, LAFD, SFFD, Kern County, or any other Municipal organization, we are expected to cooperate with them nonetheless and alot of the times act like them to get the job done correctly. I seriously believe Region 5 is leading the Fed fire programs into a new century of service. Where else would "All risk" benefit the tax payers more than in some of the far reaches of Montana, Nevada, Wyoming where the nearest volunteer department station could be 45 mins away and the nearest paid department 2, 3, 4, 24 hours away. Yet the forest service station with and engine is a 1/4 mile down the road. The reality as it is these days is that in Region 5 it is unrealistic and more expensive and time consuming to have a chief running this way and that in their POV to get their GOV and then respond back by their house to the scene. It is especially unrealistic to expect that kind of driving when there are houses threatened, which is commonly the case here. At least the chief could be on scene helping keep the volunteers safe and protecting homes while it takes me the 45 mins to drive from home to the station to respond.

Sincerely,
Gone but not forgotten

Ab,
 
How did you know it had a name? I change it frequently. Right now it is
"g** d***! been broke down for the last month and might be fixed soon"
truck!!!

In all honesty, I am trying to help out by showing that there is an AD form
for home-to-work that the duty officers can fill out. Make sure it is beneficial
to the government to allow you to take your ride home and it should work
out. That's all i got ta say about that.

guns n hoses

AB.

Yes the ship is going down, and we are still only 0462 forestry techs.
Here is what some past R-5 Captains Chairs put in their reports to sound the alarm.

FISCAL YEAR 2005 REGION 5 ENGINE CAPTAINS' REPORT

We as a collective group have expressed these concerns at both the 2004 and 2005 Division Chief’s workshop as well as through written response directly to our Regional Leadership that directly addressed commentary between the Federal Wildland Fire Service Association and Regional Forester (2004) Jack Blackwell.

Our group of dedicated Fire Engine Captains remains true to the U.S. Forest Service and have developed this comprehensive report which identifies alarming character patterns of concern which we believe are adding to the economic failure of our infrastructure of the United States Forest Service here in California.

We, as the middle ground of the employee base, feel we are an exceptional barometer of what our employees seek and desire to achieve. We have seen many factors that now contribute to the unstable workforce trend and send word of caution to both the Regional and Congressional leadership who weigh, monitor and balance the budgetary capabilities of the Disaster Ready workforce here in California.

Two specific contributors to our growing failure are that of

• un-affordable housing costs in California Region 5 and the other is the
• poor pay scale that plagues and cripples our workforce for a better family dynamic.

2006 REGION 5 ENGINE CAPTAINS' REPORT

Our efforts of this report are to define both accomplishments of our group as a whole as well as to cause alarm to any situation that undermines our ability to deliver safe, productive and professional results in the dangerous profession of wildland fire suppression in the urban interface of California’s most affected communities within or adjacent to Federal and National Forest Lands.

We as a collective group have expressed ongoing concerns across the State in regards to reduced safety as a result of high vacancy and attrition rates that have near crippled our firefighting workforce in all 18 of our National Forests in California. Our group continues to provide this comprehensive report to assist our Regional and National Leaders in an effort to identify these alarming character patterns of concern which continues to add to the economic failure of our infrastructure of the United States Forest Service in California.

As in our 2005 report, We as Management Middle Ground of a large workforce send caution and warning of a workforce who is struggling to meet the demands of a high vacancy rate and crippling housing costs in the region as well as the loss of Engine 57, and many other factors diminishing the duty, integrity and structure which each of us has worked so hard to maintain, in benefit of the United States Forest Service in Region 5.

In 2004 and in 2005 we sounded the alarm of a mass exodus of quality employees leaving the USFS to accept better paying jobs with City, County and State Departments to better provide for their families all together.

We have continuously collected and provided adequate data to support the claims of mass attrition and vacancy amongst our organization and are still awaiting some type of resolve that will assist us in retaining a highly effective workforce as was intended when we implemented the (MEL) "Most Efficient Level" buildup in 2001 till present.

Our collective group still provides our Regional Leaders with a "Can Do!" oriented group, but I must admit, it is getting much harder to provide the level of service required with the current and unimaginable vacancy rate here in Region 5.

Our request continues to be our unanswered plea for equal pay incentives commensurate to our cooperative agencies, as well as a new request that a more thorough review of our State of California situation affecting USFS Federal Employees be reviewed by the Washington Office and congressional administrators.

Our Regional Workforce has provided excellent and dynamic leadership in what was possibly one of the most difficult fire seasons to date. In a few short months this meeting will be far away from the tasks that we will be asked to perform in what is sure to be another busy 2007 California Fire Season. We will perform, we will respond and we will make calculated and educated decisions in regards to risk versus gain management.

We will be held accountable at the highest level, for the young men and women we lead into these dangerous assignments as firefighters…. It is during these times that we, as the voice of the Fire Engine Workforce, ask that something be done to relieve the on going strain and burden of a deteriorating workforce.

We thank our Regional Leadership for these opportunities to assist in the detection and elimination of these catastrophic workforce issues and we pledge our continued commitment to improving our organizational efforts to reflect a professional, dynamic and goal oriented group serving the best interests of both our employees and the public we serve.

So, now where do we stand?

The meeting is this month in RENO and it will be up to the R-5 Captains Group to pull together and get some answers to what the h*ll is going on with our Leadership.....

Good Luck Steve.

/s/ 5150.

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably
the same object evinces a design to resolve them under absolute
despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government,
and to provide new guards for their future security." (Declaration of
Independence).

Sign me as RockinW

Nice, L. Welcome.
Folks, tell your stories of Marc. Make him come alive to his family as a leader, mentor and fun loving guy. He was those things. Families crave every bit of good memory they can get. We can help out. Like the time he broke the "rules", slept in a motel and his team decorated his Fairmont FD rig with stickers, reeled out his hoses, put his portable FD gear up for "sale" and wore his Fairmont FD t-shirts in camp. Had me busting a gut to hear that one... There is so much good stress releasing humor on fires. Marc enjoyed that. If you have a story or simply condolences, please express it. If anyone has a story they want to share but want to run it by a "grammar king" first, please sent it in here. I'd be happy to read it over and make sure grammar, punctuation spelling, etc is fine and dandy. Ab.

Don't grab the wheel - PLUG THE HOLES! It isn't a one-person job.
It is a crew/team job. While grabbing the wheel may allow one to run
the ship aground, it is still sinking. Once aground, it is easier to dismantle
than refloat.

What I am seeing is a lack of management and absence of leadership.
Management is doing things right - I don't see that.
Leadership is doing the right thing - I don't see that happening either.

Someone in my immediate family has been in the FS since 1925. Watching
the deconstruction of a once respected organization is hard to watch.

But I am on the outside looking in.

Keep pluggin away.

Steve LCES

Don't worry Guns, we won't let them take your patrol vehicle away. Does it have a name? Ab.

Thanks B3.
Readers, we have a WildWeb Dispatch Center listing on the News page, also accessible via the button at the top of this page. Scroll down to WildWeb Dispatch Center to access the map of dispatch centers. This is another page like the links and IMT pages that we work at keeping updated. If anyone has updated links, we appreciate knowing. Ab.

ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`
-=TWO - DAYS - AFTER - RETENTION - DAY - DEADLINE=--=NO - RETENTION - STRATEGY=-
!!!-=NO - FOREST - SERVICE - RETENTION - MESSAGE - TO -CONGRESS=-!!!
ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°ºø¤ ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`

~~~~~~~~~~  STILL NO JOY, Firefighters planning their exit  ~~~~~~~~~

Finally we have new management in the RO and WO that have taken a new approach to retention and other issues in R5. My hat is off to them, they rock. In my thirty+ years I could never have imagined to take this approach to solve problems. Knowing that things are hard to change in the Federal Government workplace and take a long time to do so, they have brilliantly came up with a plan in a matter of a couple of weeks. They have cleverly formulated a plan to stir up a hornets' nest that will bring a lot of attention and focus on the issues we have long been trying to address. Imagine if Sixty Minutes or 20-20 did a report on this, they would be like shinning in the spot light. What a wonderful attention getter.

Now they need our support. You need to contact your Congressessional Rep and your Senator, State and local politicians and, of course, the media. Don't let these Fire Managers down, give them the all the attention you can.

And PLEASE go out and VOTE.

Casey, what do you think now of "mission statement review"? It was nice meeting you in SoCal.

Batgirl12 you want to start a car pool?

Be alert, Keep calm, Think clearly, Act decisively.

firefighting forestry technician

Fresno
2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4290
Fresno, CA 93721
Phone: (559) 485-7430
Fax: (559) 485-9689

The following counties are served by the Fresno office: Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Mono, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Stanislaus, Tulare, Tuolumne.

Energy and Natural Resources Committee Office- Senator Jeff Bingaman, D-New Mexico
304 Dirksen Senate Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-4971
Fax: (202) 224-6163

House of Gov't Reform led by Rep. Waxman of CA

In Washington, D.C.
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-3976 (phone)
(202) 225-4099 (fax)

In Los Angeles
8436 West Third Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90048
(323) 651-1040 (phone)
(818) 878-7400 (phone)
(310) 652-3095 (phone)
(323) 655-0502 (fax)

NonameFire

Do we have talking points? Ab.

signed,
What the ----

Good summary.
Contributors, including DR (who is indeed one of those older'n'dirt theysaiders who hasn't written in in years), let's keep this about issues, not about personalities. What's clear from DR's post is that one issue on theysaid is that for other Fed (BLM, NPS, FWS and BIA) firefighters and FS firefighters outside of R5 who do not live in expensive interface areas, it probably is difficult to boot up theysaid every day and read what's posted here that doesn't seem relevant to you. Those others can easily say "move if you don't like it" because they don't have the same issues that you've summarized so well. I say to those who have the greatest vested interest in change, continue to "show up" and say your piece, talk to your congressional reps and your local media. Superbowl is tomorrow. Relax, party hardy, then back to participating in the change process. Ab.

DR, range tech fed in NV

Anyone else see something wrong with our Chief and Fire Director remaining quiet in this time of crisis? I was visiting with a well-known They Said poster at the McClellan WFTC a couple of days ago, we were both wondering why Tom Harbour had not fallen on his sword yet. We both speculated that Tom has probably put up with a ton of abuse from Mark Rey but feels he can do more good from the inside than the outside. Tom has done a lot of good things for the fire organization despite having to work under the Worst Administration Ever, and neither of us had any doubts that Tom is a decent and honorable guy. But the question needs to be asked, is it time for him to go to the media with this story?

In the past few years, there have been a couple of cases of government employees standing up and surviving despite the best efforts of this administration’s appointed political hacks to muzzle, discredit or fire them. James Hansen from NASA is gaining a sort of cult status for his refusal to let Bush’s minions silence the science on global warming. Other brave government employees have put their careers on the line by not allowing obvious wrongs to be permitted.

The slime layer of anti-government political appointees that has been suffocating the government will be gone in less than a year. There will be a major toilet-flushing in which Mark Rey, Lynn Scarlett, and the rest of their filthy ilk are sent packing to the Corporate Lobbyist Retirement Home, where they can reminisce on the good old days when W let them rape the government. Ho, ho, ho.

I don’t doubt that Tom would like to survive the current regime and lead our fire organization under a friendlier administration, but it seems almost immoral to ask our firefighters to support Doctrine and High Reliability Organizing while allowing Mark Rey to load us up with latent organizational failures without sounding an alarm.

Who knows, if Tom went public, he might find what James Hansen did; that many people, including an increasing number of politicians, are outraged at the Bush administration’s mismanagement of vital government institutions and would gladly support such a courageous act. If nothing else, Tom would earn the eternal respect of me and many others who are sick of being pawns of this administration’s henchpersons.

Misery Whip

I don't know what I'm going to do with myself now that I can drive to work without being flipped off, flagged down to help with tire chains or to call a tow truck. I can drive right by vehicle accidents and sit in traffic in my POV and play Scrabble on my phone while we wait for CHP and a tow coming out of Riverside instead of Hesperia. I can't wait for the next 18 wheeler trying to skip the scales by traveling the mountain highway and gets stuck in the sharp hair-pin turns or stuck in the snow without chains. It usually takes hours to get the road open again and that's with me making notification to Dispatch, now that I travel off duty, I don't have to call if I don't want to. No guilty feelings here.

I can now leave at my lunch hour (too bad my nail lady is 45 minutes away) and I will take my two 15 minute breaks and drive somewhere just for the heck of it, in my POV of course. Wow, stopping at a gas station won't be the same. I can't imagine not being cursed at first thing in the morning over some new agency policy that I don't know about or could give a hoot about, but I defend it anyway. Have you ever been approached (ten years later) by a Vietnam Vet in a wheel chair who is still pissed off that his house burned down in the Willow fire? My fault that the fire started and my fault that he didn't have insurance. He actually stood up to lecture and poke his finger in my arm. I didn't say a word out of Honor and Respect to him for his service to the country. I cannot tell a lie, I did think about kicking the wheel chair out from under him. Hummm won't miss that either.

Now that I'll be in my POV and in my PJs, I can't imagine that happening anymore. My all time favorite thing is going to be taking up another parking spot in our all ready over crowded parking lot. I am going to get to work early just to insure that my POV and my GOV are parked side by side. I am not going to miss the late night, early morning calls from dispatch especially those that start out with "Girl you aren't going to believe this one" okay, I will miss those. Getting out of bed, washing my face, brushing my teeth, throwing on the uniform (well most of it), covering the hairdo with a hat as I ran out the door to respond, no more. Now I have time to shower, shampoo and shine, the hairdo won't be covered by a hat because I'll have time to perfect it. I'll even have time to put my boots on and lace them up!

If we get the "privilege" of home storage again which will come with the night call, I will consider that ORDERED STANDBY and I will be compensated. I didn't do that before, I considered it an equal trade, my life, your vehicle. I can't wait until I have the call four nights in a row. That'll be enough to buy a new Dooney and Bourke purse, the big one!

Now my big question is besides being WO employee's how do they justify Law Enforcement continuing with home vehicle storage? Just wondering.

BatGrl12 & Blossum (aka 5928) my beloved sidekick.......

PS The local dogs aren't going to be happy having to travel to Big Bear to take a leak on Blossums tires.

BatGirl12,
If you have to give Blossum's tires a shot of fertilizer now spontaneous donations have dried up, be sure and charge that to the FS. Ab.

POV = Privately Owned Vehicle; GOV = Government Owned Vehicle

Gone but not forgotten

Tahoe Terri, it is the Empereer, not the Empress. She is just along for the ride and window dressing. Be safe, be strong, be supportive of the valuable voice you have, and support that voice. While you don’t have them totally on the run, they are, figuratively speaking, circling their horses looking for a way out of the box canyon.

God bless and give you strength, resolve and guidance too. This forum is the cohesive factor and use it judiciously too. The coordinators are as hurt as you are I feel.

Normbc9

It is interesting that theysaid feels more and more like a historical record of a transition away from the old and toward the new. We simply don't know yet what the new is. It's clear to fire and, I think also, to the Forest Service that we can't continue as in the past. Ultimately, it may take FAM Chief Harbour and the FS Chief Kimbell petitioning Congress and the President -- new President? -- for new streamlined marching orders for the FS and for Fire. I think they're going to have to kick the problem up the chain of command. That action may not come until after the Presidential and Congressional Elections of Nov '08. I only hope the R5 fire organization isn't gutted before we get to that request. Some of our highest fire and FS managers are now writing their historical legacy. Will they be recorded here as "famous and leading" or as "infamous"... Time will tell. I will be curious to see the outcome and the new trajectory. Ab.

It's only 1 day. Yesterday was the deadline. Ab.

Hi AB,

Ken Kremensky is also on Molumby's CIIMT.. He's a great guy!!
His retirement party is at Barona Resort, Lakeside Ca. on Friday Feb. 8th
Not sure if it was posted but deadline for reservations is Monday Feb 4th

Call Karen Kuss at Lakeside Fire Dept. 619-390-2350 x 301

Thanks for all you do keeping us informed..

"fires4you2"

I think the RO and WO are getting back at us here in R5 regarding the code 3 crap and not letting our chiefs take their vehicle home when congress told the FS to do something about the Retention issue in R5. I know we can't strike but I think we should do something. I might contact my local Media stations about this. As well to Senator Feinstein. This is unreal, why are we going backwards? We might as well start wearing jeans instead of nomex. Have a Fire shelter and a canteen and one Ht per engine. Get rid of 10 and 18's.

Wake up Leadership or whatever you call yourself. You're just pushing folks out the door even more.
Ab sorry for speaking my mind.

fsff

Speak your mind. Call your congressional reps. Alert the news media. Join FWFSA and work collectively. Ab.

hawhawhawhaw, Joatmon, you are too much. Ab.

It has been in the works that if the deadline came and went there would be more coming. Key will be getting it into a form to share here. Ab.

ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`
-=ONE - DAY - AFTER - RETENTION - DAY - DEADLINE=--=NO - RETENTION - STRATEGY=-
!!!-=NO - FOREST - SERVICE - RETENTION - MESSAGE - TO -CONGRESS=-!!!
ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°ºø¤ ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`

~~~~~~~~~~  NO JOY, Firefighters planning their exit  ~~~~~~~~~

The call I got today...

I worked with Marc 20 years ago. I learned a great deal from him, enjoyed his company, and was proud to work for him. He watched over his people, and went out of his way to help in whatever way he could. We kept in touch over the years, and he was recently trying to guide me with some advise and assistance with a possible instructing opportunity. Even after all the years, he was still trying to help! But that's the kind of guy he was. On a personal note, he gave me sound advice when I was going through a tough situation, and I appreciated it more than he knew.

We lost a good one. My heart goes out to Shawna, Nicki, the rest of his family, Karen, and all the others who knew and loved him.

Clay

Here are the info (documents, info & forms) that were available to download
from the Los Padres NF.

Local Union 2023 president is willing to help the forest user obtain the
corrected action needed to help the application get the approval from their
recommending staff on the departmental regulations to have a new validated
agreement in place.

I am the Local union President 2023

JLD

012508use-of-gov-vehicle-home-use.doc
020108use-of-gov-vehicle-lpf.doc
ad-728.doc
home-to-work-law-reg-policy.doc

Thanks. Nothing like an EASY button. Ab.

Good to see your input.
Years of experience, excellent credentials listed.....what would be the specifics of your proposal?
Share with us an "If I were in charge, I'd......"
Time to move the dialogue on this site from "I'm not happy with what "They" are doing." We get that.
Who has some specific solutions or recommendations?

Ab,
Does anyone go to the FireChat site anymore? Are there regular discussions at a specific time?

OFG (ret)

I don't know. Folks, you could go to fire chat and discuss issues. Button at the top of the page. Ab.

Todd

I have but one question, ok, a couple. Isn't it against the law (Federal, state etc) to ask a employee to basically volunteer their time if not on duty? From my understanding it violates FSLA law to even ask a seasonal or fulltime employee to not get compensated during a "standby" scenario. I understand "evening staffing patterns" (compensated) or two hour callback to gather for strike team or to get the crew together for a assignment during "days off " (compensated). But, FLSA law prohibits any non compensative acts such as night duty without pay or forcing a person to live closer to his/her duty station to meet two hour offduty timeframe callbacks. Nor does it state that it is mandatory for any seasonal, part-time, intern, apprentice, probational or fulltime person to work and NOT GET COMPENSATED; it's illegal. I had to do a shift change to respond to the Angora fire as we were not in a mandatory staffing pattern at my station. I also understand that if there are certain staffing patterns in place all bets are off and you will be at work, but compensated. Without me being scheduled or called back on a emergency status, I cannot work without compensation. I have tried to "volunteer my time as a fulltime employee and have been HAMMERED for going against FLSA. If my station calls me in the early morning, on a day off or in the middle of the night, then I'm on "call back" and I report and will be compensated for my time. Maybe I'm wrong here (most likely) but it is illegal to enforce rules that completely contradict FLSA.

As for our Batt chiefs or higher, they need their vehicles all the time, period. Patrol types of engine captains on a 40 hour week should be able to take their utility and/or patrol rigs home. Their jobs require them to respond after normal duty hours frequently. I think that the issues raised regarding un-compensated standby need to be heavily scrutinized and fought over. How can we do our jobs, regardless the time of year, if our leaders have to drive from their homes, get their rigs and then IC a incident that has already been going for 30-40 minutes plus. We DEPEND on our coops and they do the same for us. Without each other we are really cheating our customers.

The way it reads to me is, you work from 0930-1800 unless you are on a compensated staffing pattern. Your shift ends, you go home (within 2 hours of your duty station, of course). Have your pager on you at all times because you might get a call at anytime. Don't have a drink because we need you 24/7/365 but you won't be getting paid for stopping your normal home life rituals. Your days off, not really there "MIGHT" be a fire. If you aren't within a 2 hrs range you will be held "accountable" even if it's not during normal duty hours or on a day off. Basically you need to work 14 days on an assignment to be able to have enough freedom to have a beer and get paid for it (the beer thing, just one example). The pager/cell phone thing, if you don't have one then you are in violation of you duty to act or availability? Weird...

I am a proponent, especially during fire season, of making myself as available as I can. I have a pager, they have my home and cell #'s. But if I'm on a day off and they can't get hold of me, #1 there is a reason for it, #2 I'm not available or I decide to have days off and let someone else go on assignment. 9/10 my captains and above understand and if I am on mandatory callback, I'm paid for it. I come in and work. They don't get pissed and hold me to a standard that is illegal. If we want our folks to sacrifice their time away from their families, then darn it we should compensate them, not threaten with vague SOGs, not SOPs. Again I'm probably wrong and wasted all of your time here. GO GET EM' CASEY!!!

Have a good weekend!!

Driver51

As of now Congresses dead line has not been addressed, do they really
think that Congress is not going to act and man date the agency to comply.

Or are the pencil pushing non-fire management and leadership hoping to
destroy a great agency fire program and what R-5 has lead the other regions
in innovation and setting the standards. We are the beat in what we do
and lead the Nation in fire suppression. ES, you said it, It is no longer
a Cal Fire issue, it is changing careers, leaving what we know and we do
best, leaving this agency high and dry. I personally have 28 years in this
agency, OPS 2, ICT3, OPBD, DIVS, on down the line of invested time in
training and qualifications and time that towards every other person that
has had enough of the cr#*p that has been shoveled out. Shame on our
agency to force our hands to bail, shame on them to break apart the fire
program in region 5, to think that they gotten away with not taking care of
its employees.

I'd hoped that with all the controversy going on, and in the lime light of
news and in Congresses hand, that they would have come up with a
resolution to fix the problem. High hopes.

Capt34...

Does the Forest Service want to fight fire by the 10:00 am policy?

Without Chief Officers storing their emergency vehicles closer to home, that may
be exactly what happens. This policy would not allow for any responses other
than 930 to 6.

I know it is not the original policy, this one wasn't thought of by fire personnel.

Maybe that is what the Land Managers want. At 930 I'll roll into the District
Office (shorts and Hawaiian T-shirt) and turn on the radio. I'f there was any
activity from my off-time that requires a response, I'll don my nomex and begin
my Duty.

It is ridiculous that Duty Officers even take night 'Duty' in the first place. This is
uncompensated stand by! In this struggle of Land Managers & Fire equality you
don't see any ologists stuck at home committed to night responses and filling
resource orders for other people.

Does this "Night Duty" deserve a class action against the Forest Service? I think
it might be worthy. It sure doesn't seem right to have a job duty that requires work
off the clock. There may be an era of a Fire Settlement Agreement in our future!

Sign me,
What the ----

I forwarded your email on. Ab.

• Am I required to leave a telephone number or
  carry an electronic device for the purpose of being
  contacted?
• Am I required to remain within a reasonable
  callback radius?
• Will I be held accountable for responding to
  calls?

If the answer to all of those questions is yes, you
should ask your supervisor to put these conditions in
writing, or otherwise document them. When Management
imposes these conditions on an employee to meet a
mandatory coverage need, it is placing the employee on
standby for such a purpose and is required by the MA
to consider such time as hours of work. This is
especially the case if no other employees are
available to cover Management's need.

So request standby pay if they want you to be
available off duty.

NFFE Document on Standby Assignments (165K doc file)

COMT

Thanks for the compliment on the story, Firescribe. I tried to get OSHA to
comment but they wouldn't return calls from DC. As I scrolled down, Ab,
I saw your blinking light note about Feb 1 Retention Day. I laughed out loud
so loud everyone turned.

Nice job. My compliments!!

JP

Thanks for keeping the socal journalist torch burning, JP. Firefighters appreciate it. Ab.

That's today! Happy Retirement, Shirley! Ab.

By a circuitous route, originally the link came from Larry Sutton
Fire Operations Risk Management Officer
U.S. Forest Service - NIFC

Near miss data in Aviation being used to reduce accidents
www.washingtonpost.com

Code 3

Emergency Light Use

Headlights and taillights will be illuminated at all times while the vehicle is in motion. Emergency lighting will be used only during on site wildland fire operations or to mitigate serious safety hazards. Overhead lighting and other emergency lighting must meet state code requirements, and will be illuminated whenever the visibility is reduced to less than 300 feet. Blue lights are not acceptable for wildland fire operations.

Light Use Visibility
Headlights and taillights shall remain illuminated at all times while the vehicle is in operation. Overhead lighting (or other appropriate emergency lights) shall be illuminated whenever visibility is reduced to less than 300 feet.

Chapter 14
14-3

Interagency Standards for Fire and Aviation Operations
BLM, NPS, FWS, FS
January 2008
NFES 2724

I forwarded your email. Ab.

OSHA issues final report on Esperanza
By J.P. Crumrine, Assistant Editor
www.towncrier.com/stories/story.1.20080131.html

Did anyone take a close look at those various directive letters and documents.
Were the sent to Congress as part of the R5 retention message? Maybe the
Region met its deadline????

Tahoe Terrie

Haw Haw Haw, Ab.

Been wanting to post for a long time...had a few things on my mind.

I see a pattern here again...Feb 1st is going to come and go with no new info. The carrot is dangling again, and we continue to try and catch it. Management is taking away our collar brass, the ability to take rigs home for night calls, and the ability to use lights and sirens when we actually need them. Why do we allow this agency to keep taking advantage of us like this? There is really nothing more that they can take away from us. This isn't b*tching, this is stating the fact that we as Emergency Responders are being stripped of all our tools. We have a hard enough time proving to other agencies that we are competent professionals as it is.

What the higher ups need to understand is that people are not just leaving for Cal Fire jobs. People are going to leave for any other job they can find. People I talk to are starting to look for jobs that are 180 degree change from what they do now. It isn't worth the liability and time away from family to do this job anymore. I feel there is zero support, and watch on this site everyday that some Forester or regional manager is taking something else away from the dirt pounders. I hope something good comes from all this, but I just don't see it happening. It's a huge bummer.

ES

Welcome. We hear you. Ab.

When I used to leave my house at O'Dark Thirty (Rescinded by Regional Forester letter, R5), I often left my residence with the red lights on and without the siren (didn't want to offend the neighbors who were sleeping).

As I rounded my turn, I would either activate the siren or turn off the red lights based upon road conditions and congestion (Doctrine). If I needed to "request right of way" I utilized both the emergency vehicle lighting and siren to comply with both the California Vehicle Code and FSM direction at the time.

The new FSM direction only seems to be info that was "incorporated by reference" to existing best known procedures for safe emergency vehicle operation that is already addressed by most state vehicle codes.

I guess the foresters and biologists need to decide what "emergent" means and what the repercussions are when responding to emergencies and the consequences. They sure as he*l don't listen to the folks who have been doing it for 20+ years as wildland firefighters anymore.

Arroyo Toad down... Tijuana Slough inlet 7.... proceed Code 3... or was that Code 2.. or Code 1? (That is why there are wildland firefighters who should be making sound wildland fire decisions, and why biologists, foresters and others WHO think they are making sound decisions need to be replaced in the leadership of the fire program.)

What scared me most was when the District Rangers started going code 3 (1987) (Sorry Gabe, you are the exception and a shining star of Line Officer involvement with fire experience who listens to the fire managers).

/s/ Noname Forestry Technician Fire Manager

I am sensing some historical irony here. In " Fire in the Forest, A History of Forest Fire Control on the National Forests in California, 1898-1956 " by Robert Cermak, sanctioned and published by the USFS. On page 347 in the epilogue he writes:

" In the fifty years ( 1956-2005 ) following the end of this history, fire control would become so complicated, so intertwined in controversy, legislative battles and the overwhelming impact of huge population growth that it should be considered not as just new chapters for this history but an entirely new volume of historical inquiry.

In Region 5, the agency built it's reputation on controlling fire and still receives support for its fire control program. For several decades after 1955, fire management moved from a starring role in the agency to one of the supporting cast for timber, wildlife, recreation and other resource management. In 2005 it may again be on the rise, perhaps because the old axiom of forestry, that a resource must be protected before it can be managed, still holds true today."

Considering Cermak's summary of where it has been, where it is and where it is going. Could we be witnessing the last gasp of the foresters trying to hold onto a program (let's face it, the money) when they have no idea what the new paradigm is in regards to modern fire control?

The latest decrees coming from the Regional Office are coming in loud and clear to us on the ground, especially amplified by the R6 collar brass issue and it is "You are not a fire department so quit acting like one. .

Well here is a decree coming from the boots and backs on the ground that make all those political appointees, foresters and line officers look so good on their performance ratings "you are not fire managers so quit acting like you are ".

Well, my Forest Service paradigm shift is completed, this is not what it used to be, it is just a JOB now. This summer, if I am still around, I will gladly park my truck at the district office every night, leave my cell phone and pager in it, designate the district ranger as the duty officer, take my scanner to the thrift store, leave my HT in the truck on my weekend, change my home phone number and finally get some days off and good nights sleep through the months of May through November.

On my weekends, I can make up for the 17 lost summers with my wife and children after blindly devoting myself to "caring for the land and serving the people" since all this time I have assumed I was valued and respected by the agency, not just my peers. This really is the 1-way loyalty street.

apologies to my friends and peers for the rant, sting

Re: It sure ain't rocket science.... or forestry.

Ab,

Years ago... many years ago, this issue was addressed. I remember this completely when I provided comments as a former District Vehicle License examiner and was asked to make comments for the Region 5 Code 3 program (1991). Most of the laws and regulations haven't changed. I taught this subject (among others) for 6 years as a cadre member (1998-2004) of the South Zone Fire Engine Academy.

The California Vehicle Code is complex, but easily understood if folks read all of the chapters pertaining to emergency vehicle operation before jumping in to make policy or provide direction. Once again, the wildland firefighters are the experts, the land managers are the barriers to successful delivery of the program.

Folks often misquote the California Vehicle Code as requiring a siren to be activated during emergency response.
See bolded area below. It is a common mistake by folks who "skim".

Most importantly within the California Vehicle Code is "Duty of driver, 21807." (Below in reference)

Exemption of Authorized Emergency Vehicles

21055. The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle is exempt from Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 21350), Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 21650), Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 21800), Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 21950), Chapter 6 (commencing with 22100), Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 22348), Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 22450), Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 22500), and Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 22650) of this division, and Article 3 (commencing with Section 38305) and Article 4 (commencing with Section 38312) of Chapter 5 of Division 16.5, under all of the following conditions:

(a) If the vehicle is being driven in response to an emergency call or while engaged in rescue operations or is being used in the immediate pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law or is responding to, but not returning from, a fire alarm, except that fire department vehicles are exempt whether directly responding to an emergency call or operated from one place to another as rendered desirable or necessary by reason of an emergency call and operated to the scene of the emergency or operated from one fire station to another or to some other location by reason of the emergency call.

(b) If the driver of the vehicle sounds a siren as may be reasonably necessary and the vehicle displays a lighted red lamp visible from the front as a warning to other drivers and pedestrians.

A siren shall not be sounded by an authorized emergency vehicle except when required under this section.

Reference

California Vehicle Code
Go to: Authorized Emergency Vehicle

AUTHORIZED EMERGENCY VEHICLE

Ambulances, see AMBULANCE
Bicycle paths, 23127
Color, 27605
Defined, 165
Device changing traffic control signals, 21464
Duty of driver, 21807
Emergency area, 21707
Equestrian trail, 23127
Equipment, 2418.5, 24003-24004, 25102, 25251, 25252-22525.5, 25258-25259, 27000, 27002
Hiking trails, 23127
Liability, 17004
Load provisions, applicability of, 35002
Permit, 2416-2417
Policy, legislative intent, 30
Right-of-way, 21806
Rules of road applicable to, 21055, 21056
Size provisions, applicability of, 35002
State park vehicle, 2416
Vehicle following, 21706
Weight provisions, applicability of, 35002

By the way,

Did I tell you that a bunch of Battalion Chiefs, Division Chiefs, Deputy Chiefs, and Forest Fire Chiefs had to "hitchhike" home today?..... and that much of the Forest Service in Region 5 now has no night coverage by Chief Officers?

I've always wondered what would happen if the Forest Service had a fire and nobody responded..... I guess we'll see the results.

Ken

ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`
-=RETENTION=--=DAY=--=RETENTION=--=STRATEGY=-
!!-=RETENTION=--=MESSAGE=--=DEADLINE=--=TO=--=CONGRESS=-!!
ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°ºø¤ ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`°º¤ø ø¤º°`