Folsom Lake Veterans, a Type 2 Initial Attack Crew
Folsom Lake Veterans’ Crew. BLM photo.
By Jennifer Myslivy & Erin McDuff
It just makes sense to match our veterans’ skills with wildland firefighting. From teamwork to decisive leadership; risk mitigation to management; logistics to emergency medicine, many of the skills our veterans learned in the military translate to wildland firefighting.
The Bureau of Land Management launched a Veteran Fire Crews program in 2012 to provide more jobs for veterans while benefiting from their vast experience and increasing the number of wildland firefighters available during our increasingly severe wildfire seasons.
The Folsom Lake Veterans’ Crew in California combines military veterans with seasoned wildland firefighters to form this type 2 initial attack hand crew, which is responsible for constructing fire lines while also capable of separating into smaller squads to conduct initial wildfire suppression activities.
This crew provides an opportunity for veterans to learn about the wildland fire management field and gain critical skills that will prepare them for a full career in wildland firefighting.
Meet Conell McKinney
Conell McKinney, Folsom Lake Veterans’ Crew. Photo by Joe Bradshaw, BLM.
An Army veteran from Santa Clarita, California, Conell McKinney served in the infantry.
He now works as a wildland firefighter with the Folsom Lake Veterans’ Crew. “The self-discipline the Army instilled in me helped quite a bit with my transition to wildland firefighting and with understanding how to operate in less-than-ideal environments,” he explained.
The advice he would like to share with others that may be interested in wildland firefighting is, “Train hard. The work is like nothing you’ve done before!”
Meet Roger Hooper
Roger Hooper, Folsom Lake Veterans’ Crew. Photo by Joe Bradshaw, BLM.
During the 2021 fire season, the Folsom Lake Veterans’ Crew trained 200 active-duty Army soldiers stationed at Joint Base Lewis-McChord who were dispatched to assist with wildfire suppression operations.
Roger Hooper, a crewmember and infantry veteran from Nevada City, Nevada, noticed many military skillsets that helped the soldiers transition in firefighting, including hard work, discipline, the ability to stay calm in complex situations, teamwork, and resource management.
When asked for advice for those interested in wildland firefighting, Hooper said “Maintain good physical shape and apply for a variety of fire jobs because there is one out there that you will enjoy!”
Meet Jaime Velasquez
Jaime Velasquez is a crewmember from Sacramento, California. He’s a veteran of the National Guard and served as a water purification specialist. He came to the Bureau of Land Management with prior firefighting experience from when his National Guard unit was activated by the state to fight wildfires in 2014.
Left: Jaime Velasquez serving in the National Guard. Photo courtesy of Jamie Velasquez. Right: Jamie Velasquez serving on the Folsom Lake Veterans’ Crew. Photo by Joe Bradshaw, BLM.
During the Joint Base Lewis-McChord deployment this season, Velasquez enjoyed seeing how motivated they were to learn the job and the opportunity to hear some of their stories and experiences.
Firefighting Job Opportunities for Veterans
Are you a veteran, or do you know a veteran, who is looking for a new, exciting career? For anyone who wants to work in a field that is physically and mentally challenging, gets you outdoors, provides opportunities for travel, delivers occasional spikes of adrenaline, and serves the greater good, wildland fire checks a lot of boxes and can benefit from the expertise of veterans.
The Interior Department is hiring to fill hundreds of wildland fire management jobs this fall. The positions are located throughout the country, and more are posted on usajobs.gov each day.
The infrastructure bill passed by Congress last week will significantly change the employment landscape for federal wildland firefighters. We covered the details earlier, but it includes pay raises, a distinct “wildland firefighter” occupational series, mental health support, conversions of 1,000 seasonal wildland firefighters to permanent full-time, and many other issues — totaling $3.3 billion for fire management.
This is an unprecedented, probably once in a lifetime legislative achievement. Some of the changes are so sweeping that there may be a need to smooth out some unanticipated consequences. There could be opportunities for fine tuning in two other pending bills: H.R. 4274Wildland Firefighter Fair Pay Act, and H.R. 5631Tim Hart Wildland Firefighter Classification and Pay Parity Act. Brief descriptions of the two bills are in the article we published October 26.
All but the most cynical will look at the bill passed last week as a huge step toward improving the work environment for 15,000 firefighters and hopefully will begin to turn around issues with hiring and retention. The fire management section was drafted by legislators, as well as staffers for the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Many special interest groups provided input. One of them was Grassroots Wildland Firefighters (GRWFF).
“There is so much noise in the system around the pending legislation,” wrote GRWFF President Kelly Martin in an email last week just before the final passage. “We want to make sure it’s clear that these are not ‘our’ bills. These bill’s are the legislator’s and we’ve only served as subject matter experts for them. We really want to be clear that we are not seeking credit. The credit belongs to the wildland firefighters out busting their asses and to the families of those who have died.”
Ms. Martin submitted the statement below from the organization. She said it was written by herself, Vice President Lucas Mayfield, and Executive Secretary Riva Duncan.
Grassroots Wildland Firefighters (GRWFF) would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who is supporting the wildland fire community and fighting for long overdue reforms, and to thank Bill Gabbert for letting us use this forum for much needed open and honest dialog
We’d also like to help clarify some potential misunderstandings people might be talking about. We’ve seen a few articles, comments, posts that H.R. 5631, Tim’s Act, is “our” bill. No legislative bill is ‘owned’ by any particular special interest group, GRWFF included. Legislation belongs to the legislators and their staffs who write these bills. Rep. DeFazio (D-OR) initially introduced the “Infrastructure Bill” with wide-spread bi-partisan support in the House and Senate, and Reps Neguse (D-CO) and Porter (D-CA) and their staffs wrote “HR 5631, better known as Tim’s Act.” The GRWFF serve as subject matter experts when reviewing and drafting bill language, as do many other groups. We have been extremely fortunate legislators have reached out to us as known experts in the field of federal wildland fire workforce issues. Collectively, Grassroots Wildland Firefighters provide hundreds of years of professional experience to help educate and inform elected officials of needed federal reforms wildland firefighters deserve given the high risk and hazardous workplace conditions. We, along with many other special interest groups, will continue to advocate for long overdue reforms. We owe our elected officials a tremendousdebt of gratitude for their deep interest in these fundamental reforms which will affect federal Wildland Firefighters for generations to come.
The existing and former workforce and their families deserve the credit. To the firefighters on the firelines, whether they are ground-based, aerial delivered, or arrive by equipment, we are proud you trust us to deliver your stories; it is the fire management officers and duty officers; the dispatchers and the prevention technicians; the fuels technicians; and, sadly, it is the firefighters, and their families, who have paid the ultimate price. All of these dedicated and passionate women and men deserve the credit for the successes so far. They are the ones who face daily risks of severe injury and death; daily hazardous and often toxic environmental conditions and the ones who shoulder the mental, financial and emotional trauma of this very demanding profession. We advocate together for these needed reforms
We want no credit. We are not interested in any perceived “ownership.” We only want meaningful change and reforms. We want a cohesive effort and voice for the existing workforce that leads to lasting and positive change.
Tim’s Act builds upon the groundwork that pending legislation offers up. Unlike the Infrastructure Bill, there are no sunset provisions in Tim’s Act. These are permanent reforms that are needed for the workforce. It is the “cup trench” for the uphill battle that wildland firefighters, their families, and friends face in the coming decades. It has broad bipartisan support in the House and in the Senate. Tim’s Act is something that both Republican and Democrat elected officials can agree to. It finally addresses broad reforms as a path to modernizing the federal wildland firefighter workforce. It is bipartisan legislation which works to ensure we recruit and retain highly trained, experienced and qualified federal wildland firefighters to respond, at a federal level, to all-risk, all-hazard disasters throughout the US and when requested, provide international wildfire support as well.
We are just beginning our journey together. We will continue to speak for those who cannot. We will continue to provide our expertise and experience to those who ask for it and for those who fight alongside us. We are in it for the long-game. You and your colleagues have the ability to speak up, too. We are taught to lead up, and if we see something, we say something. The status quo is no longer acceptable. The demands of the 21st century fire environment require us to work together and commit to the hard work ahead of us. We believe this time is different. Supporting Tim’s Act is the opportunity to lead up. Let your elected officials know how the reforms identified in Tim’s Act will affect you personally if/when this bill becomes law. Your support makes a difference to our volunteers passionately dedicated to these reforms. Join our exciting movement; get engaged and stay informed.https://www.grassrootswildlandfirefighters.com/get-involved.
“The USFS and BLM has many career-focused employees working without a professional career environment”
File photo, by McCall Smokejumper Base.
by John Culbertson
Wildland firefighter pay and work conditions are in the national dialog.In the October 2021 issue of SMOKEJUMPER I commented that smokejumpers and hotshots that want better pay and benefits are finding jobs with local agencies.I wondered what those who had recently taken these jobs thought. After talking it over with SMOKEJUMPER Editor Chuck Sheley, we agreed that for the public good a survey should be conducted and the results made available to the public and decision makers in addition to publishing this article in the April, 2022 issue of SMOKEJUMPER.
To remain unbiased I used a fixed set of questions similar to those used in business when interviewing for needs or solutions.The respondents were kept anonymous.
Twenty ex-smokejumpers who worked at U.S. Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management bases were interviewed. Of those, 17 have left the federal government to take jobs with local agencies in Southern California and the Sierra Nevada. Three have transferred to other Forest Service fire management positions. All smokejumper bases were represented, as are all Southern California Counties with significant fire activity.
Eight jumped within the last five years. Seven within the last ten years.The other five jumped within the last twenty years and are in management positions.
It has been a busy fire season and all were working when interviewed.Ninety percent of those interviewed either got a call while we were interviewing, had just returned from a call or were on an overhead assignment.Most interviews involved multiple phone calls, many over multiple days.The persistence, positive attitude and cooperation of the jumpers has been remarkable. What I found has been both encouraging and surprising.
The Smokejumpers averaged six years of crew experience prior to jumping for the Forest Service or BLM.Experience includes Initial Attack crews (2IA or IA), Interagency Hotshot Crews (IHC) and Helitack crews.Prior work with the Forest Service, BLM, NPS, state and local fire agency crews is represented in this survey.
Contact with an ex-jumper, frequently a supervisor or fire manager was part of the path to jumping for almost all.
Over half had taken a decrease in pay, GS grade or resigned an appointment in order to jump in the GS-5 rookie position. Most had been at crew overhead level and had an AA degree, professional certificate or higher.Less than half were veterans.
Years jumped averaged three.There were two distinct groups.About half jumped one or two seasons while the rest jumped three to six seasons with one significantly more.
All spoke highly of their smokejumper experience and prior hand crew experience.
All expressed strong loyalty and hopes for the best for the Forest Service and BLM. Many expressed a patriotic belief in helping to take care of their country. Reference to conservation principles needed for forest management and the history of public lands was brought up by over half the jumpers. There was considerable expression of desire to not leave jumping or the agencies and concern for the future of jumping mixed with frank consideration of their own situation.
Family needs and salary were intertwined as a subject most voiced as the top reason for leaving jumping with all but one respondent who voiced career development as his reason.
Almost all had discussed leaving jumping in detail with a spouse, ex-spouse or significant other.Time away on fire assignment, the need for significant overtime to support a family, desire to purchase a house, a stable location for family and schools, lack of employment opportunity for spouse in jumper towns and the lack of upward movement in the jumper organization or back at a home forest unit were all frequently cited as issues discussed.
Seven hundred and fifty hours of overtime was the average families depended on while jumping.Due to Federal pay structure, this equals about fifteen hundred hours away from home. Time away from family figured into this issue.
Job location was a factor for a spouse or significant other as it related to school choice, professional opportunity and home purchase.
The majority of jumpers brought up professional development. There is little upward movement in the jump organization.Career development, mentoring and interest in fire management were not given enough consideration by supervisors during evaluations and career counseling at the bases.
Using jumping as a pathway to fire management was a desire of many.About half the jumpers expressed a desire to work in a home forest unit in either fire management or on a district ranger path.
Many had hope of a future in the Forest Service, BLM or NPS and were willing to compromise and receive less pay than local agencies to make this happen but were thwarted by the federal hiring system. A typical comment was that they received no replies to inquiry’s regarding positions with Federal Agencies. The centralized federal hiring and personnel management system was frequently mentioned as frustrating to deal with.
An exception to this was jumpers on detail and one who sought out an apprentice program appointment. After leaving jumping, everyone in this group worked towards fire management positions within the Forest Service.This took an average of six years moving between positions and physical locations. These jumpers showed considerable adaptability in taking on a Forest Service career, including postings to the Washington office and international assignments. All had purchased homes and carried that equity with them on assignment.
For those taking local agency fire jobs, most mapped out a course and began a transition while still jumping.This included completion of online college and fire academy classes and contact with potential employers.The average transition time was three years with 60% taking transitional wildland fire or EMS jobs with local fire agencies.
Those taking transitional jobs with local agencies on IA, vegetation management programs (VMP) and EMS crews all took on positions of responsibility such as lead, squad or foreman.This allowed them to be available for interviews, become known locally and complete training classes such as fire academy or EMT classes.
Many local agency fire managers assisted these jumpers in their transition to full time local agency fire jobs even when employment was found at another agency. For many, this filled the mentoring and career planning need they had not found at the jump base.
Full time paramedic training and internship was a considerable undertaking. Three couples lived on the spouse’s earnings while the ex-jumper used savings from jumping to go through a year and a half of classes and internship.
Department of Defense (DOD) fire employment was another avenue of transition.Designation as a firefighter and DOD pay structure provided a living wage for a family without the lengthy overtime requirements cited above for the Forest Service and BLM.
With a few exceptions the local agency fire jobs required the smokejumper to go through the same highly competitive application and testing process with all other applicants.Smokejumping was simply an added plus to meeting the education, academy, EMT, written and physical test requirements. Contact with local agency managers and local wildfire transition jobs also helped.
Adapting to this process was noted as an adjustment by many.In particular, interview skills were something that had to be developed. Once hired as firefighters the smokejumpers, like all recruits, had to meet stringent probationary requirements that included frequent testing and evaluation.Pay structure during probation varied by agency but was greater than that received as a smokejumper. Average age on obtaining local agency probationary status was thirty-three with average interview age of thirty-seven.
On completion of probation the new firefighters starting salary averaged about $80,000 plus significant benefits. The range of starting salary was $68,000 to $92,000. All noted the salary was sufficient to support the family without overtime.
Adjustment to the new job was noted by most.These adjustments were to the call load, witnessing human tragedy, sleeplessness, need to study, commuting and working with people that lacked the camaraderie of crew and smokejumpers the firefighters had worked with in the past. This was not a criticism but an acknowledgment of the reality of living in a fire station.In some cases jumpers considered a return to a natural resource agency job for a simpler life although none did.Discussion with a spouse or significant other was described as part of this process.
All noted the clear-cut mission and service to the public of local agencies.
Some choose to compete for and take wildfire or vegetation management program related jobs within these local agencies.Some aspect of vegetation management programs, prevention, IA crew, dozers and helicopter operations exist with many of the local agencies. After completion of probation some were able to return to their transitional crew in a leadership position. Multiple jumpers noted that local agency VMP and IA crews are both efficient and increasing in number.
All noted the importance of the portal-to-portal pay structure with a huge factor being fewer hours spent away from home and simplicity of paperwork.Local agency overtime is compensated on a portal-to-portal basis, be it for shift work, filling in at a station, short term call back to cover draw down or out of town assignment.
While on probation all were used for out of town wildfire assignments with engine strike teams.All were able to use their qualifications for overhead assignments on completion of probation and most interviewed had been on multiple extended attack and large fires this season as overhead or had occupied back fill positions at the station for the wildfire draw down.
Looking back at their smokejumper jobs, all felt improvement in pay was in order and this extended to their thoughts about crews in general.Inconsistency of jumper use for Initial Attack between bases and agencies was noted by most. “Sitting on the ramp at PL5 (Highest national fire preparedness level),” was a repeated phrase.This extended to winter work for those on some form of permanent status, “Sewing canteen covers (in the winter) is not meaningful work.”
All wanted the best for Federal wildland firefighters and many felt re-classification to firefighter from forestry tech was important.Parity with state wildland agency pay was frequently mentioned as was looking at other Federal fire models such as DOD.
Flexibility in use of employment status and under utilization of existing appointments was mentioned by more than half the jumpers.This related to both the need to retain jumpers that had other things to do during the winter such as ski patrolman as well as the needs of those that wanted permanent jobs and the importance of mentoring those that desired a return to the districts with fire management and district ranger tracks in mind.
Jumpers that had advanced to management roles including those that returned to the Forest Service were particularly concerned with the potential use of solutions already available.Making incremental but meaningful change kept coming up.Retention of GS grade (or equivalent) and appointment status when training as a jumper was considered important.Second year (GS-6) jumpers automatically receiving a 13 and 13 appointment (if they did not already come on board with one) and starting to accrue retirement and access to the TSP (Thrift savings) program were frequently mentioned as possible solutions.All those now in management roles felt there was a strong need for local hiring and administration of personnel matters at the Forest, District and Program level.This included local administration of injured firefighters.
Frustration was frequently voiced over the encouragement of and even counseling jumpers on how to sign up for unemployment.Jumpers wondered why that money was being wasted by the agencies on unemployment when so much could be done with the money by simply running programs that further employment and well being of crews.
A repeated phrase in the interviews was that those that stay with jumping in the Forest Service feel stuck and not valued.
What stood out to me on completion of these interviews was that these jumpers represent skilled, experienced and motivated of people with high agency loyalty and an outstanding positive outlook.If I were seeking people to manage our National Forests and public lands, or any fire agency, I could not find better candidates.
Any loss to the agencies in training dollars and administrative costs when jumpers leave for other fire jobs is small in comparison to the loss of talent and initiative.
It is my opinion that the Forest Service and BLM are dealing with career-focused employee’s (in this case) and yet not providing a professional career environment for them to work in. Pay is one of several significant factors.
One could take a blunt view and say the Forest Service took a simple job and made it complicated with no net gain in efficiency.Something seems wrong. And I think there is some truth to this as it relates to the work force and agency needs. I was left wondering what the Forest Service mission for jumpers is.
My more pragmatic view is that with the exception of pay and a cumbersome personnel management system, things are OK.Smart people within the Forest Service and BLM including the jumpers, Interagency Hotshot Crew overhead, and fire managers at the district and forest level, are working to make things better.The Forest Service and BLM continue to attract talented motivated individuals that receive excellent training and experience and then go out into the world of fire and enrich many agencies efforts in this most important work.For this the Forest Service and BLM should be proud.
* I want to note that in the process of tracking down jumpers I talked with a number of IHC and IA overhead as well as fire managers from many agencies.Many expressed similar concerns and made thoughtful comments. I feel surveys of these highly skilled and experienced people would be meaningful to any agency seeking improvement.There are many solutions and great strength in the diversity of thought I encountered.
This article is scheduled for the April, 2022 edition of Smokejumper magazine. It is published here with the permission of author John Culbertson and the magazine’s Managing Editor, Chuck Sheley.
And allow them more time at home during the fire season
Inyo Hotshots on the KNP Complex of fires, Sept. 29, 2021. InciWeb.
Guest post By Tim Swedberg
On September 26, Wildfire Today published an article titled, Survey of Wildland Firefighter Spouses Finds the Job Creates Stress for the Family. The Survey tabulated responses from 1,841 persons including 1,599 from the Forest Service. One of the findings was “78.1 percent of respondents feel stress due to wildland firefighters’ absence.” Respondents also identified the need for “less demanding work schedule that provides for more days off.”
The critical issue is fatigue and its effects
Much of the work/rest research was completed over 20 years ago at the Missoula Technical Development Center (MTDC) and the University of Montana. The Spring 2002 MTDC No. 5 Health and Safety Report provided recommendations focused on: work/rest, assignment length, shift length, and much more.
From this research the National Wildfire Coordinating Group provided a guidance letter dated February 6, 2004, which states, “for fatigue management purposes and in line with credible research recommendations, a 2-day-off-after-14-day assignment standard (exclusive of travel) has been adopted”.
The 2002 research recommendations were a step forward, but (to the best of my knowledge) there has been little or no new wildland firefighter fatigue research commissioned or developed that could drive revision of the current policy.
Considering the increased deployment tempo, fire intensity, and size of current-day fires, it is both prudent and essential to revisit and validate or update the existing 20-year-old work/rest/fatigue recommendations with new and on-going research information. The Joint Fire Science Program, Forest Service Research Stations, and universities can lead in the development of critical new information to update fire management policy.
Is there a way to address the concerns of 78 percent of families that “feel stress due to wildland firefighters’ absence”? The answer is YES!
Back to the roots of Hot Shot crews
In the late 1940’s El Cariso, Del Rosa, and the Los Prietos Hot Shots were created as 30 person crews. In those early days all 30 firefighters would deploy to an incident.
1970 El Cariso Hot Shots
Today, I suggest a return to the 30-person (3 modules) Interagency Hotshot Crew (IHC) strength. Rather than dispatch all 3 modules, only 2 modules would respond. This leaves a 10-person module at home for a week of quality rest exclusive of travel. After 7 days the module left at home would replace one of the modules on the fire and one of the modules on the fire would return home for a week. This weekly rotation would continue throughout the fire season and could be accomplished without exceeding the 14-day assignment standard as no crewmember would work beyond 14 days. The rotation provides certainty for families that once every three weeks the firefighter will be working at their home unit.
Adoption of this suggestion means that Incident Management Teams will always receive a full two-module IHC Type 1 crew as is common practice today. The rotation also provides the IHC crew with 10 fresh replenishments every seven days exclusive of travel.
Clearly existing work/rest policies are detrimental to both firefighters and their families as evidenced by the Wildfire Today reporting of November 4, 2017 Suicide Rate Among Wildland firefighters is “astronomical.” The good news is, a fix could be developed and adopted without legislation. Let’s see if the rotating 30-person crew can diminish stress at home and on the fireline. I look forward to your thoughts.
—
Tim Swedberg is a retired Palomar Hotshot firefighter and captain, fuels manager on the Mt. Hood National Forest, and during his last 10 years served as Communications Director for the Joint Fire Science Program — for 40 years of total service.
Prescribed fire in Yosemite National Park. Merced River and moon. NPS photo by Isaiah Hirschfield.
By Steve Pyne
The Pleistocene epoch that began 2.6 million years ago sent ice in waves through Yosemite.
Glaciers gouged out great valleys along the Merced and Tuolumne rivers, ice sheets rounded granite domes, cirques sculpted the High Sierra. John Muir traced virtually every landscape feature of Yosemite to its legacy of ice.
Now the residual ice is melting, the streams and waterfalls are drying and the living landscape is burning. In 1990, the A-Rock fire closed the park for the only time in its history, so far. The 2013 Rim fire burned around the Hetch Hetchy reservoir; the 2018 Ferguson fire burned along the park’s Wawona Road. Where the fires didn’t spread, their smoke did.
Add in the industrial combustion of fossil fuels, with its climatic impacts, and virtually every management issue of Yosemite today traces back to fire.
~
Humans have always used fire: It’s our ecological signature.
The end of the last glaciation allowed us, a fire-wielding species, to interact with an increasingly fire-receptive planet. Our pact with fire was mutual. Fire allowed us to flourish; in return, we have taken fire everywhere, even to Antarctica.
The pact had to operate within boundaries set by living landscapes. After all, fire was a creation of life, which furnished its oxygen and fuel and established ecological barriers. Then we discovered an immense reservoir of combustibles buried in geologic time. It was as though we had found a new world –- a fossilized, “lithic” landscape –we could work the way we did living landscapes. The only constraints were those people chose to impose on themselves.
Add up all the burning that people now do in living, and it would seem we are refashioning the Earth with the fire-informed equivalent of an Ice Age, complete with a change in climate, rising sea levels, a mass extinction, major shifts in biogeography and smoke palls. Little on Earth is unaffected.
Fire is driving off the last vestiges of the Pleistocene, from its ice to its mammoths. We have been creating a Pyrocene for millennia, but binge-burning fossil fuels put the process on afterburners.
Fifty years ago Yosemite recognized that its fire scene was out of whack. The problem then was not too much of the wrong kind of fire but too little of the right kind. The park sought to restore pre-settlement fire regimes. Among targeted sites was Illilouette Creek, an elevated basin southeast of Glacier Point.
The park recognized that suppressing fire had stockpiled fuels from the foothills to the crestline, caused Yosemite Valley and the Mariposa Grove to overflow with invasive conifers that blocked views, and prevented the fabled sequoias from regenerating. The park introduced prescribed fire and learned to loose-herd wildfires. The Illilouette basin shuffled toward something like its former fire regime.
No place has the fire program it wants, but Yosemite seems better positioned than the national forests and private lands around it to cope. The issue is no longer to restore natural fire but to find the right mix of fires suppressed and prescribed, and of wildfires managed, to ward off the megafires that are plaguing everyplace else.
Yosemite deals with fires that can threaten small and not-so-small villages. Its specialty is working with wildland fire.
By Aug. 20 of this year the park had coped with 54 fires, 43 from lightning and 11 from people. Some were put out. Some were confined within natural barriers. And a few burning in Illilouette Basin were tweaked as nature’s invisible hand massaged them into five decades of layered burning. The legacy of past fires had altered the conditions for the fires that followed, softening the shock of tougher, meaner burns.
Yosemite has long been celebrated for distilling into near-crystalline state the magnificence of the Western landscape. As it moves from ice to fire, it is showing that it may also serve as a proxy for some of what the Earth needs to do to survive our deepening fire age. There is no way we can’t not manage fire.
Firefighters on the Monument Fire in Northern California, August, 2021. USFS photo.
By Steve Pyne
Fire in the West is expected, and not so long ago, it seemed something the West experienced more than anywhere else. Nationally, big fires were treated as another freak of Western violence, like a grizzly bear attack, or another California quirk like Esalen and avocados.
Now the wildland fires flare up everywhere. There are fires in Algeria and Turkey, Amazonia and Indonesia, and France, Canada and Australia. Last year even Greenland burned.
Fire seasons have lengthened, fires have gotten meaner and bigger; fires have begun not just gorging on logging slash and prowling the mountainous backcountry, but also burning right into and across towns. Three years ago in northern California, the Camp fire broke out along the Feather River and, burning southwest, incinerated the town of Paradise. Now, the Dixie fire, starting 20 miles north in the same drainage, is burning in the opposite direction, taking out the historic town of Greenville. The fires have us coming and going.
The causes have been analyzed and reanalyzed, like placer miners washing and rewashing tailings. Likewise, the solutions have been reworked and polished until they have become clichés, ready to spill into the culture wars.
The news media have fire season branded into their almanac of annual events. Scientific disciplines are publishing reports and data sets at an exponential rate. So far as understanding the fire scene, we’ve hit field capacity. What more can we say?
One trend is to go small and find meaning in the personal. But there is also an argument to go big and frame the story at a planetary scale that can shuffle all the survival memoirs, smoke palls that travel across the continent, melting ice packs, lost and disappearing species, and sprawling frontiers of flame, in much the way we organize the swarm of starlight in a night sky into constellations.
~
I’m a fire guy. I take fire not just as a random happening, but as an emergent property that’s intrinsic to life on Earth.
So I expect fires. All those savanna fires in Africa, the land-clearing fires in Brazil and Sumatra, the boreal blowouts in Siberia and British Columbia, the megafires in the Pacific Northwest — all the flames we see.
But then there are fires that should be present and aren’t — the fires that once renewed and stabilized most of the land all over our planet. These are the fires that humanity, with its species monopoly on combustion, deliberately set to make living landscapes into what the ancients termed “a second nature.”
But it was not enough. We wanted yet more power without the constraints of living landscapes that restricted what and when we could burn. We turned to fossil fuels to burn through day and night, winter and summer, drought and deluge. With our unbounded firepower we remade second nature into “a third nature,” one organized around industrial combustion.
Our fires in living landscapes and those made with fossil fuels have been reshaping the Earth. The result is too much bad fire and too little good, and way too much combustion overall.
Add up all those varieties of burning, and we seem to be creating the fire equivalent of an Ice Age, with continental shifts in geography, radical changes in climate, rising sea level, a mass extinction, and a planet whose air, water, soil and life are being refashioned at a breakneck pace.
It’s said that every model fails but some are useful. The same holds true for metaphors. What the concept of a planetary Fire Age — a Pyrocene — gives us, is a sense of the scale of our fire-powered impact. It suggests how the parts might interact and who is responsible. It allows us to reimagine the issues and perhaps stand outside our entrenched perspectives.
What we have made — if with unintended consequences — we can unmake, though we should expect more unknown consequences.
We have a lot of fire in our future, and a lot to learn about living with it.
The Folsom Lake Veterans’ Crew in California combines military veterans with seasoned wildland firefighters to form this type 2 initial attack hand crew, which is responsible for constructing fire lines while also capable of separating into smaller squads to conduct initial wildfire suppression activities.
