Wildfire Today

Shutdown stories from firefighters, Chapter 2

Bill GabbertJanuary 10, 2019January 24, 2019Uncategorizedshutdown, shutdown stories1 Comment

800,000 people and their families are directly affected, in addition to contractors, concessioners, and businesses.

The Great Plains Dispatch office in Rapid City, South Dakota as seen in 2012. (The person who provided the information below does not work in this state.)

The shutdown that affects 800,000 people and their families, or 40 percent of the federal government’s full time employees, continues. A meeting Wednesday afternoon of the principles in Washington about how to find a resolution to the crisis was very brief, with no progress being made. The President said a few days ago the shutdown could last up to a year.

On January 9 we published a perspective written by a federal wildland firefighter that explained how the shutdown affected his or her family. Today we have another view. It has been lightly edited for length and readability.

A U.S. Forest Service employee in California supervising a staff that provides support for wildland firefighters told us that the shutdown could lead to retirement earlier than previously expected:

“Thanks for digging into this and making folks aware”, the person wrote. “I am not politically active because I can’t be. We have been reminded that under this Administration we are under rules to not engage. We don’t have a voice and can’t speak out. Many of us are very frustrated with the way we get treated as hostages.

“I am pretty fed up with this BS. My contracts are now a mess. My contractors are about to run out of work — they will never get back pay. They are the ones that really get screwed.

“My bank is allowing interest free “furlough” loans with deferred repay for 90 days. I am taking advantage of this so I can hold out. Many others are signing up for unemployment now if they don’t have a bank as nice as mine. Some banks are attempting to make money on this with absurd costs for a loan.

“Most of us take a federal job because we care, it’s not to make money, it’s to make a difference. I know I can make thousands more elsewhere, but I love my job and I respect the work I do to protect the tax payers money. I pay taxes too. As I look to close out my career, I hope that politicians will stop using staff as pawns.

“Most Federal employees don’t make much money. They live pay check to pay check and worry about family and friends. They commit to volunteer work and support others when they are in need. It is not our choice to be off. Getting paid afterwards is an embarrassment, so much so that many of us put in 100’s of extra hours to make up the lost days. In all of the previous furloughs where we were paid afterwards I spent many hours catching up.

“A lost paycheck can impact your mortgage, credit card payment, utility bills, rent, etc. it takes up to a month to get any back pay, if it comes through, this is never guaranteed. What if you or your loved ones are sick, or you are supporting sick kids, aging parents, or friends that have lost everything? Many Federal employees lost their homes this year in fires, yet they continued to go to work with the only clothes they had — to help the recovery process. They fought fires to save other’s homes, while their own burned and their families were at risk. They continue to rebuild their communities while being on furlough. That is commitment — this is how they get treated.

“Sadly this will lead, again, to loss of quality staff, fed up with being treated as a pawn in high politics. Some will retire, some will go find other jobs, morale will again be terribly low — we don’t recover easily from these things. When you treat your staff like crap it is really hard to bring them back to feeling good about what they do.”

Firefighters describe how the government shutdown affects them — Chapter 1

Bill GabbertJanuary 9, 2019January 24, 2019Uncategorizedshutdown, shutdown stories6 Comments

Shep Canyon Fire, Black Hills South Dakota — Shep Canyon Fire, Black Hills of South Dakota. Photo by Bill Gabbert.

Beginning this week the partial government shutdown that began December 22 gets real, affecting 800,000 employees and their families, about 40 percent of the full time federal workforce. For many of the workers, checks that would normally arrive or be electronically deposited the middle of this week or next week will be missing in action. The lack of pay will continue until the President and Congress can agree to end the shutdown.

On January 4 we conducted a brief two-hour poll on Twitter, asking federal government employees if they were in favor of the shutdown. We limited it to two hours to minimize the ability of special interest groups to mobilize and flood the poll with partisan answers. It is not a scientific representative sample by any means, and we can’t guarantee that only federal employees participated, but you may find it interesting. Of the 74 votes, 81 percent were not in favor of the partial government shutdown, while 19 percent were for it.

We also asked a few federal employees to tell us in detail how the shutdown was affecting them personally. Below is one of the responses, lightly edited for length and readability. We will post more responses from furloughed employees in the coming days.

A Bureau of Land Management firefighter in the Western United States said sometimes people that don’t know who he works for tell him it’s not a big deal federal employees are not getting paid:

“I try and explain”, he told us, “that even though people work for the federal government it does not mean that they are not like everyone else out there in the US that work paycheck to paycheck. These people have lives, bills, expenses, and medical issues that everyone else has. Is it the public’s perception that because one works for the government that they are paid well, and don’t have the same struggles as everyone else does?

“[The shutdown] is politically motivated. For the president and Congress to hold the country hostage is completely wrong and misguided. I am married, my wife does not work, except to take care of our [children]. I depend on my job to provide for the family. It’s why I went full time after being the typical hotshot employee, where it was just me. I knew then my job was part time and I always had [another job] to get me through until Spring when we would ramp back up with the shots. It’s not like that now — it’s family and long term job stability that I/we want.

“We have savings we are living on now, savings that were meant to go towards the land and house we are buying that now is on hold. Not knowing how long this will last is the hard part. The complete uncertainty of when it will happen again leaves me to question if this is the time to buy anything? I haven’t mentioned it to my wife, but I can’t have uncertainly in my life now, I have people depending on me, something I didn’t have before. Is it fair of me to continue in a job where even during the best of times, I am gone, literally for a minimum of 4 months out of the year? Add this crap shutdown, yes, I am home, but without a paycheck, it leaves very little for a family to be able to do. Sure as hell cant run down for a Disneyland vacation.

“As far as the office, no winter work is getting done, fuel reduction projects are all on hold, no hiring, not being able to start looking at who wants to come to work. [Incident Management] Team nominations are due. Who applied and when will we be able to notify those people that they were accepted onto a team? Will those people still be around, or did they move on because of the shutdown? Team meetings need to be planned. This year all Great Basin teams, type 1, 2, and 3 are meeting in Reno, will that networking happen, or when government reopens will the backlog of missed work take precedence? Training is on hold, with some of the classes completely out of the question of being made up, thereby delaying needed training for employees, and adding to the stress of this job. How much time will we have to get the refresher and pack test done before fire season is once again upon us?

“I also think the tactic that Trump used to deny the 2% pay increase [for 2019] was chickens***. One thing I hear over and over is that retention is related to the amount someone is paid. A GS 3/4 making $12 an hour won’t be coming back without something more in the paycheck. To deny that minimal 2% to the hard working federal employees is nothing but a kick in the ass.”

President renews his attack on California and “forrest” management

Bill GabbertJanuary 9, 2019August 25, 2019Uncategorized17 Comments

A dozer tender on the Pilot Fire in Southern California, August 7, 2016. Jeff Zimmerman photo.

This morning when I saw a tweet that appeared to be from President Trump that threatened to “send no more money” to California at first I thought it was sent by a parody account. The fact that “Forrest” was misspelled, not once but twice, and capitalized, made it seem unlikely that the leader of the free world could misspell the word. Then I saw the little blue checkmark, indicating that it is a verified account.

I made a screengrab of the tweet in case it was deleted, and shortly after that, it was. Here is the original version:

Trump President forrest — Tweet by President Trump which was deleted Jan. 9, 2019.

About 50 minutes after sending the Forrest tweet he deleted the first version and sent a revised copy that was exactly the same, but this time spelling “Forest fires” correctly.

If our President is going to try to influence how state or federal land management agencies manage their forests, he needs to know enough about the issue to spell the word correctly.

Mr. Trump has made the threat of cutting off funds to California related to wildfires on other occasions, including November 10, 2018 and October 17, 2018.

On November 27 Mr. Trump expanded on his wildfire management opinions in a lengthy interview with two reporters from the Washington Post, Philip Rucker and Josh Dawsey. Below is a portion of what he said to them about fires, according to the Post:

I was watching the firemen and they’re raking brush — you know the tumbleweed and brush and all this stuff that’s growing underneath. It’s on fire and they’re raking it working so hard, and they’re raking all this stuff. If that was raked in the beginning, there’d be nothing to catch on fire.

It sounds like the firefighters were mopping up, using tools to stir duff and burning materials so that it can cool, or so water can be more efficiently applied. He also has advocated raking the forest floors. But reducing the threat of wildfires is much more complicated than raking. On December 28, 2018 I wrote about some of the complexities involved in preventing homes from burning during a wildfire, and the fact that home owners, planners, and local jurisdictions have the responsibility to design structures, infrastructure, and communities that can live with wildfires. Treating fuels near residential areas using mechanical methods or prescribed burning is also necessary. More logging is not the answer.

According to a 2015 report by the Congressional Research Service the federal government manages 46 percent of the land in California. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection manages or has fire protection responsibility for about 30 percent.

In August the President tweeted about California,“Must also tree clear to stop fire spreading!”

Below is an excerpt from an article in the Sacramento Bee on August 7, 2018:

The Trump administration’s own budget request for the current fiscal year and the coming one proposed slashing tens of millions of dollars from the Department of Interior and U.S. Forest Service budgets dedicated to the kind of tree clearing and other forest management work experts say is needed. And it’s just one example of how the federal government is still not prioritizing fire mitigation to the scale that is needed, according to forestry experts.

“I think for a number of years the feds were more ahead of this dilemma, at least in discussions,” said Scott Stephens, a professor of fire science at the University of California, Berkeley. But “I have to say right now, I think the state is moving ahead. It’s certainly being more innovative, it’s doing more policy work.”

Firefighters from NSW assist with Tasmania bushfire

Bill GabbertJanuary 8, 2019UncategorizedAustralia, Gell River Fire, Tasmania1 Comment

Firefighters in New South Wales have traveled across the Bass Strait to assist their brothers and sisters in Tasmania. The five personnel will be working with the Tasmania Fire Service, specifically on the Gell River Fire in the southwest part of the state. The deployment of five arrived Sunday to assume specialist aviation roles operating out of Hobart and Strathgordon.

Map Gell River Fire in Tasmania, Australia — *Map showing the location of the Gell River Fire in Tasmania, Australia.*

The Gell River Fire has burned 50,600 acres (20,500 ha) primarily in Franklin-Gordon Wild Rivers National Park. Portions of the fire are burning in peat, which means the deep-seated blaze will likely persist for months and continue to produce smoke.

Below is an update on the fire from the Tasmania Fire Service:

The fire continues to burn in buttongrass and mixed forest vegetation in the Vale of Rasselas, approximately 10 kilometres northwest of Tim Shea and along the Denison Range and Gordon Range. A sprinkler line around the northern side of Lake Rhona was successful in protecting fire-sensitive vegetation communities. Fire fighters and aerial water-bombing also managed to protect these vegetation communities in other areas. Specialist remote area fire fighters are working in rugged terrain to extinguish the fire. Although the fire is still uncontained, suppression operations conducted by fire fighters and water bombing aircraft have been successful to date, with many active fire edges minimised. An increase in smoke may be visible in the Greater Hobart area, Derwent Valley and Huon Valley on Tuesday evening and Wednesday due to increased fire activity, particularly at the southern end of the fire. Resources currently deployed to the Gell River bushfire include 60 personnel and eight aircraft. Tasmania Fire Service

This image of smoke from the Gell River Fire was captured by a satellite on January 4, 2019. Since then the activity has decreased due to a change in the weather. The red dots indicate heat detected by the satellite.

Gell River Fire Tasmania helicopter — *Photo by Andrew MacDonald*

Initial attack on Woolsey Fire was hampered by shortage of resources

Bill GabbertJanuary 7, 2019January 9, 2019UncategorizedCalifornia, Hill Fire, Woolsey Fire

The quickly spreading Hill Fire started 21 minutes before, 15 miles to the west

3D Map Woolsey Fire Ventura County Los Angeles d-D — 3-D Map of the Woolsey Fire. The red line was the perimeter. Click to enlarge.

No wildfire starts at the right time, but the fire that Los Angeles County describes as the worst in the county’s modern history began at a particularly bad time. The Woolsey Fire was reported on November 8, 2018 21 minutes after the Hill Fire about 15 miles to the west. Both began in Ventura County in Southern California while strong Santa Ana winds were blowing out of the north and northeast. The Camp Fire which started about 8 hours earlier in Northern California had already destroyed thousands of homes in the Paradise area.

The incident commanders decided that the Hill Fire had the greatest immediate potential to affect lives and property — there were fewer homes close to the point of origin of the Woolsey Fire.

Progression map Woolsey Fire — Progression map of the north side of the Woolsey Fire, prepared by the Incident Management Team. Click to enlarge.

With resources flooding in to the Hill Fire, the first unit to arrive at the Woolsey fire got there almost 20 minutes after it was reported. In a densely populated part of the country where it is common to have hundreds of engines on a rapidly spreading wildfire within hours, after 60 minutes only 11 engines were on scene.

About 12 minutes after it was reported, the quickly growing Hill Fire jumped the 101 Freeway but 2 hours later it hit an area that had burned in 2013 and slowed, allowing firefighters to make significant progress. By midnight the incident commander shifted some resources over to the Woolsey Fire which had spread to Agoura Hills.

By 4 a.m. on November 9 pushed by increasing winds gusting to 70 mph, the Woolsey Fire crossed the 101 Freeway and at the end of the day had spread to the Pacific Ocean, 20 miles from where it started a little more than 24 hours before.

Map Woolsey Fire Ventura County Los Angeles — Map of the Woolsey and Hill Fires.

Stats: Hill Fire / Woolsey Fire

Acres: 4,500 / 97,000
Structures destroyed: 4 / 1,500
Fatalities: 0 / 3
Length (miles): 4 / 20

The Hill Fire had far more firefighting resources assigned during the first six hours, compared to the Woolsey Fire which was starved of engines and aircraft during that period. But the Hill Fire spread into a previous burn and slowed which made the firefighters’ jobs easier.

Below are excerpts from an article in the Los Angeles Times about the fire.

…Veteran firefighters say it was a once-in-a-lifetime event.

“In my 30 years of experience, I’ve never seen a fire that explosive,” [Los Angeles Fire Department Deputy Chief Trevor] Richmond said. “Seeing how quickly that fire traveled to Agoura Hills and Oak Park and Thousand Oaks and jumped the freeway the next morning, and in four hours, it’s burning kelp beds in the Pacific Ocean — that’s pretty incredible.

“This one was the big one,” he said.

[…]

[Ventura County Fire Assistant Chief Dustin] Gardner said he was repeatedly on the phone begging the state to send more tankers to Ventura County, arguing the Woolsey fire had the potential to hit Malibu, not realizing how bad the Camp fire had become. Within the first hour of the Hill fire, the incident commander doubled his order from four to eight air tankers.

Soon after, a dispatcher asked him if they could divert one of his fire’s tankers to the Woolsey fire, which was potentially going to threaten homes and businesses in Simi Valley.

“You can divert one of the air tankers,” Ventura County Fire Assistant Chief Chad Cook, the Hill fire incident commander, said. “We’ll keep the rest of them here.”

About 40 minutes later, at 3:37 p.m., a dispatcher told the Hill fire incident commander two air tankers and two helitankers would soon arrive to fight the blaze. Only a few minutes later, the Woolsey incident commander was told by a dispatcher that the region had no more air tankers it could send, but that there were multiple helicopters available.

About an hour later, the Woolsey incident commander seemed to be frustrated by his tanker requests going unfilled.

“I’d like to talk to my neighboring fire (commander) and see if I can get some from him,” the Woolsey incident commander told his aerial coordinator over the radio at 4:26 p.m.

“Correct, sir,” the aerial coordinator said. “We’ve been trying to negotiate resource sharing. We’ll see how that goes.”

But the Woolsey fire began spreading at a much faster pace — with far fewer firefighters on the ground than were battling the Hill fire…

Thanks and a tip of the hat go out to Tom.
Typos or errors, report them HERE.

Forecasters expect the West to be warmer and drier than average later in January

Bill GabbertJanuary 6, 2019Uncategorizedoutlook, potential, weather

The east should be cooler, while the Drought Monitor shows Severe to Exceptional drought in the Four Corners area.

outlook for precipitation January — The outlook for precipitation in the second half of January.

The three to four-week outlook issued January 4 for the second half of January predicts warmer and drier conditions in the Western United States. Areas east of the Rocky Mountains should be cooler. According to the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center this is tied to tropical teleconnection responses and a building 500-hPa ridge forecast over northwestern North America.

Probably as a result of the partial shutdown of the federal government the Predictive Services section at the National Interagency Fire Center has not issued an updated Wildland Fire Potential Outlook at the beginning of the month as is customary.

outlook for temperature January — The outlook for temperature in the second half of January.

Below is the Drought Monitor released January 3, 2018.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: