If you have been interested in wildland fire for more than 10 years, you may remember when the National Interagency Coordination Center’s Incident Management Situation Report had much more data about the number of firefighting resources committed to incidents than it has today. Below is an example from the August 10, 2004 Situation Report.
On today’s Situation Report the only information about resources committed is the number of incident management teams and MAFFS air tankers that have been activated. The table with the wealth of information you see above disappeared in 2005.
It is likely that in the years before 2004 a person at NICC had to spend some time with a calculator to come up with the numbers. With the computer systems currently in use, it should be much easier to produce this data.
Last week NICC/NIFC began including the number of interagency personnel committed to large fires on their fire information page. That is a step in the right direction and is appreciated, but it should also be on the Situation Report along with the other data that disappeared in 2005.
When I was in college, a Professor said that governemnt had two roles:
1. Provide information
2. Provide services that people are unable to provide for themselves.
What a coincidence. As a Type 2 PIO I carry a sign with me which states our primary objective on incidents, I hang it at the PIO trailer so that it will hopefully be at the forefront of our minds:
“Provide timely and accurate information to the public”
Unfortunately, and I won’t go into all of the reasons why, this is often much more difficult than it should be.
Number of personnel assigned to each fire is in the Situation Report in the table for each GACC under “Totl Pers”. There’s also a field “Pers chge 24 hrs” which shows how the number increased or decreased in the last 24 hours. It’s helpful for seeing if an incident is ramping up or winding down.
Right, Tom. And if everyone reading the Situation Report took out a calculator and added up the number of people assigned to each of the 20 to 50 fires, then they would know how many are assigned nationally to large fires. OR, the total number of people assigned could simply be provided on the report, along with the other data that was discontinued in 2005.
Thank you very much for this Bill!
Last winter at the biannually occurring national meeting of airtanker base managers at NAFRI, the issue of why there is no listing of airtankers assigned to incidents (nor is there in inciweb either – big surprise) was brought up and then allowed to die.
Most of us in the ATB world are becoming used to being leaderless, not having anyone respond to emails in a timely fashion, etc. The addition of a reduced information providing AFF program which no longer provides us with the aircraft flight history (a VERY useful and necessary tool for us), absolutely no information from the NICC daily sit report continues to lead us down a path of poor communication and ultimately helps develop unsafe situations for the airtanker world.
I applaud you for bringing up the fact that in general, solid information (i.e. communication) is not being placed in high priority for those of us on the ground. Unfortunately, with there being little or no accountability at the upper levels of FS & BLM FAM leadership, who do we talk to? Sadly, it all tends to be aired once there is an accident – precisely what good communication is supposed to prevent.
A long-time FMO, and my supervisor, recently said that she has come up with two words the FS seems to shy away from: the “C” word and the “P” word. Falling for what I thought might be a trap, I asked her what they were?
Her answer: C is for communication and P is for preventative.
Too bad we won’t be seeing her move up the chain of command, she’s too honest and vocal.
Thanks again Bill!
They are leaving off a lot these days.
Such as, just today, a Type I Team committed in the SW Area, likely being charged to the fire number, although in a Search and Rescue mode of operation.