Firefighter Blog

Amusing but disappointing. The LAT set out to tell a useful story, but faltered. Indeed, it is very complex nut to crack.

By way of casual observation, the biggest share of modern fire suppression costs are the aircraft, by far.

The least cost are the line crews, who in the case of the feds work for absurdly low wages.

All in all, my favorite part of the story was YOUR pics of the modern firecamp. I thought that was what was happening, but now I know.
 

Hi Mike D.--

You say, "...the biggest share of modern fire suppression costs are the aircraft, by far."

I agree, and worth every single penny!
 

On closer inspection I think those pictures are of Al Gore's daughter's wedding and NOT firecamp at Santa Barbara. But I could be wrong.

Cost/benefit is one those very tricky questions the LAT dodged. It all depends on the context. However, air tankers dumping retardant quiet fires like nobody's business, no doubt about that. And they save lives and property. All things considered, though, pre-treatment before the fire might be the most cost effective way to go. Second is rapid initial attack with intent to douse.

PS This site is Type I. Kudos. KUTGW.
 

Anytime you have unlimited financial resources thrown your way for the sake of an "emergency," - particularly when that emergency is never ending - there is going to be fraud, waste and abuse. What has happened in the fire financial scene mirrors the misnamed "war on drugs" in addition to the Iraq War.

You'd think LE / Fire personnel responsible for health, life and safety would know better.

BTW: Thanks for the blog. Very helpful to our family as Midpines residents.
 

I'd also like to add to my above comment, if I may, that the most cost effective way to fight fire is through fuels reduction.

The Bush Administration "Healthy Forests Initiative" did not include areas like the Sierra foothills in it's fuels reduction scheme - nor has the state other than to pressure land owners to clear to 200'.

IMHO, the BLM/USFS should have had crews in here long ago doing fuels reduction work in the Merced drainage - CALFIRE could do the same; grants should have been given by federal and state entities to private individuals to help clear their land.

Unfortunately, the greasewood, manzanita, bull pine, and other scrub doesn't command a dollar and, therefore, is "cost effective" to clear.

Thanks again for your helpful blog.
 

Dittos to what Anon wrote. Defensible space must extend to the furthest reaches of the watershed. 200 feet of clearance will not stop a firestorm fueled by dense brush/forest and driven by strong winds.
 

night before last a load of mre's dropped, ended up a midnight snack for the bears. good news -drop zone was well sorta cleaned up!
the really good news is less bears should be chasin the fire rigs!
 

Great Article. I'm looking forward to the next one. I've spent my fair share of time on the fireline eating 3 MRE's a day and sleeping in the dirt. Sometimes its nice to go into fire camp after 7 days or even 14 days and taking that hot shower and eating hot food. But at the same time, it's a hard thing to take knowing 90% of the other forces fighting fires are taking hot showers, sleeping in mobile sleeper trailers, having hot food everyday while you're out there 100 yards from the fire sleeping in the dirt covered in poison oak because you cant wash it off.

There are definitely costs I believe that can be cut quick and easily for unnecessary items for firefighters. Number one being hotel rooms for state firefighters who will spend up to 2 hours driving to a hotel room just for the night when they could easily just throw up a tent and save all that time and money.
 

Great comment Raleigh.
Just before my time ended with CDF the union had negotiated motel stays when available for us.

I remember the first night I spent in a hotel room on a fire. I thought I was getting away with something...