Wildfire Today

Big Pond prescribed fire in Idaho

Bill GabbertApril 5, 2012April 5, 2012Uncategorized2 Comments

The refuge Marsh Master, an amphibious fire vehicle was used to ignite the unit in wet marsh areas. The Marsh Master is also equipped with a water tank and pump.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service continues to provide excellent photos of their fire management activities. They have posted on flickr some photos taken over the last two days at the Big Pond prescribed fire in the Camas National Wildlife Refuge in southeast Idaho. The 150-acre prescribed fire was in a bulrush marsh and grassland unit on the refuge. The intent of the burn was to reduce old flammable vegetation near private residences and improve wildlife habitat.

So far there are six photos of the project — here are three of them. All were taken by Lance Roberts, Zone Fire Management Officer. (I need one of those Marsh Masters.)

Big Pond Rx at Camas NWR — The refuge fire staff was assisted by the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Idaho Department of Corrections fire crews to complete the prescribed burn.

Sand hills cranes at Big Pond Rx — Sandhill cranes feeding in the burned area, a numerous variety of waterfowl use this area for nesting and feeding.

Failed reverse-911 system may have contributed to fatalities in Colorado fire

Bill GabbertApril 4, 2012July 29, 2014UncategorizedLower North Fork Fire4 Comments

A reverse-911 system intended to robotically call residents to advise them to evacuate may have contributed to the three fatalities during the first few hours of the Lower North Fork wildfire on March 26 southwest of Denver. All three victims called 911 during the early stages of the fire and talked to dispatchers, but they were not told to evacuate. But at that point it is possible that no decisions had been made to evacuate anyone, and during one of the calls the resident was told that the smoke they were reporting was a known prescribed fire.

About 2-1/2 hours after one of the early calls, the reverse-911 system notified some residents near one of the victims, but not the home of that victim, whose home was already in flames at that time.

The Jefferson County Sheriff’s office said that the reverse-911 system malfunctioned, and that it notified only 88% of the residents that should have been evacuated.

All of this happened during the first two to three hours of the fire, while it had a rapid rate of spread and was being pushed by very strong winds. The investigation may reveal that it would have been impossible to physically go to everyone’s house to notify them to evacuate. It may also show that the technology to notify the residents failed — or maybe not. Right now accusations are going back and forth between the Sheriff’s office and the company that provided the reverse-911 system, each blaming the other.

The video below has audio recordings of some of the calls to 911, including at least one of the victims.

More information about the Colorado reverse-911 incident.

Several days ago I called our local police department and told them that I had permanently disconnected my landline telephone and would only be using a cell phone. I asked if they needed my cell phone number so they could link it with my address in their 911 system, since the landline was no longer available. I was told “no”. I asked “why?”. The officer told me that if I called 911 from a cell phone that had GPS capability, the location of my phone would be displayed on their screen. I asked “How will your reverse-911 system know my number if my neighborhood is notified about an emergency?” The answer was “We don’t have a reverse-911 system”.

So the good news is that our reverse-911 system cannot fail during an emergency — since it does not exist. And there can be no false since of security, relying on technology that may or may not work. The bad news is that robotic phone calls will not warn anyone in our town that they need to shelter in place or evacuate during an emergency.

Thanks go out to Kelly

South Dakota: structure fire at the Humane Society

Bill GabbertApril 4, 2012April 4, 2012Uncategorized4 Comments

Quite a few resources, including brush engines, were dispatched to a structure fire at the Humane Society north of Hot Springs, South Dakota today. In the windy conditions there was probably a fear that the fire could spread into the vegetation and then threaten additional structures. However the Hot Springs fire department was able to confine the fire to the structure, which appeared from a distance to be a total loss.

The dozens of dogs kept at the facility were pretty excited by all of the unusual activity.

Below is a photo taken today that gives you an idea of the wind conditions.

All photos were taken by Bill Gabbert.

Augmented reality glasses for the fireline?

Bill GabbertApril 4, 2012April 5, 2012Uncategorized3 Comments

Google is testing something they call “augmented reality glasses”. Employees at their Google X facility, which is like a Skunk Works or DARPA, that are working on “Project Glass” are wearing the glasses in public.

They look pretty cool when SHE is wearing them, but on a normal person, I can’t decide if they would be too nerdy, weird, or cool.

Would you wear them, or could you envision them being used for communicating on a wildland fire?

This video appears to show where they hope the project to be when or if it is introduced to the public.

RAND to release air tanker study next month

Bill GabbertApril 4, 2012August 21, 2013Uncategorizedair tanker, study6 Comments

Wildfire Today has learned that the RAND Corporation intends to release the air tanker study they performed for the U.S. Forest Service. The USFS has refused to release the $840,000 study even after receiving a Freedom of Information Act Request, saying “…the report is proprietary and confidential Rand business information and must be withheld in entirety under FOIA Exemption 4″. Their refusal letter went on to say: “The data, analysis, and conclusion in this report are not accurate or complete.” The USFS letter also said they wanted “to protect against public confusion that might result from premature disclosure.”

The RAND Corporation has a different view, and told us that they have no problem releasing the report after they complete a quality assurance review in late May. They would have released it sooner, but there was uncertainty as to whether the USFS would ask them for additional analysis.

This was the fifth study on air tankers since 1996. A sixth one will begin in a few weeks.

Here is the timeline since October, 2009 for the air tanker Analysis Paralysis:

October, 2009:The USFS awards contract for air tanker study to the RAND Corporation.
August, 2010: RAND completes the study (according to the RAND Corporation). USFS decides they need additional analyses “in order to add details to RAND’s analytic model that were not originally requested”, (according to RAND)
May, 2011: RAND completed the additional analyses and briefed the results to USFS officials. Afterwards the USFS said even more analysis is needed in order to to re-examine the modeling assumptions RAND and the Forest Service had previously agreed to make.
August, 2011: The USFS announced that they intended to award a second contract, a non-competitive contract, to the Rand Corporation for an additional analysis of the air tanker issue.
August, 2011; two weeks after the previous announcement, the USFS canceled the solicitation, “due to the responses received expressing interest in this procurement”.
February, 2012: USFS advised RAND that no additional analysis would be requested.
March, 2012; USFS posts a solicitation for an analysis, titled “Firefighting Aircraft Study”. Responses to the solicitation due by April 20, 2012. After the contract is awarded, the report will be due near the end of 2012.
Late May, 2012: projected date for RAND to complete a quality assurance review of the final report in order to proceed with publication and the release of the document.

Below is RAND’s view of the history of the report, which they provided to us a few days ago:

=========================================================

“March 29, 2012

Comment on U.S. Forest Service study

In October 2009, the RAND Corporation competed for and was awarded a U.S. Forest Service contract to determine the number and mix of large aircraft the service requires to support U.S. wildland fire suppression. RAND completed the work in August 2010. The Forest Service and RAND agreed at that time that additional analyses were warranted in order to add details to RAND’s analytic model that were not originally requested.

RAND completed these additional analyses and briefed the results to Forest Service officials in May 2011. Afterwards, the Forest Service suggested that further analyses might be requested – not because RAND had failed to complete the planned analyses correctly, but because of a desire to re-examine the modeling assumptions RAND and the Forest Service had previously agreed to make. RAND and the Forest Service discussed the possibility of such analysis, but in February 2012 RAND was advised by the Forest Service that no additional analyses would be requested. At that time, RAND initiated a quality assurance review of the proposed final report in order to proceed with publication. We expect to release that publication by the end of May 2012.

Contrary to suggestions that may have appeared in online or other reporting, RAND does not consider its reports or briefings on this work to be proprietary or business-sensitive information. RAND distributes and disseminates its reports following completion of analysis and a thorough quality assurance review. Dissemination of the Forest Service report in question was delayed because of uncertainty as to whether the scope of the work would be expanded for additional analyses.

Andrew Morral,

Director of the RAND Homeland Security and Defense Center

The RAND Corporation”

Red flag warnings for New England

Bill GabbertApril 4, 2012April 4, 2012Uncategorizedweather2 Comments

Red flag warnings 4-4-2012 — Red flag warnings April 4, 2012

It is unusual to see Red Flag warnings for the New England states, but today the list includes most of southern New England — portions of: NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, as well as parts of the western states of NV, AZ, NM, TX, MT, ND, and SD.

Here is an example of one of the warnings issued by the National Weather Service, in this case it is for western Mass.:

============================================================

RED FLAG WARNING IN EFFECT FROM 11 AM THIS MORNING TO 8 PM EDT THIS EVENING FOR MUCH OF SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND…

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN TAUNTON [MASS.] HAS ISSUED A RED FLAG WARNING FOR MUCH OF SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND…WHICH IS IN EFFECT FROM 11 AM THIS MORNING TO 8 PM EDT THIS EVENING. THE FIRE WEATHER WATCH IS NO LONGER IN EFFECT.

AFFECTED AREA…ALL OF SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND EXCEPT FOR CAPE COD AND THE ISLANDS.
WINDS…NORTHWEST 10 TO 20 MPH WITH GUSTS UP TO 30 MPH.
TIMING…FROM LATE MORNING THROUGH EVENING.
RELATIVE HUMIDITY…AS LOW AS 13 PERCENT.
TEMPERATURES…IN THE UPPER 50S TO MID 60S.
IMPACTS…ANY FIRES THAT DEVELOP WILL LIKELY SPREAD RAPIDLY. OUTDOOR BURNING IS NOT RECOMMENDED.

===============================================================

Be careful out there New Englanders.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: