Sickening...

[BucksEng91]

Is anyone else as sick to their stomach at this bullsh*t as I am?:
http://www.firehouse.com/lodd/2001/wash/wa_APjul31.html

Dead firefighters so we can make sure a few random fish aren't harmed...

Anyone, and I mean ANYONE, who takes these Sierra Club fascists seriously anymore should have their head examined. These people are an amoral cancer.

[BG204]

I agree 100%.

[MrFreeze]

Don't lynch me, but I belong to the Sierra Club. I'm certainly not militant, and I'm building a big block Chebby motor to put in my '49 that I'll be disappointed if it gets more than 10-12 MPG. I would hate to think that these guys died because of that sort of red-tape. But this to me at least represents somewhat of a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument. You're a smart guy no doubt 'cuz I've seen some of your other posts. There is more to the story. How did it leak to a Republican politician from CO (was it CO?)? I think Ockham's razor isn't always the answer. If there is a strategic (i.e. should they have been fighting it v. containment) question, and it sounds like there is, then heads should roll. But the fact is they were there, they were fighting it, and they did die. In all the time that elapsed from 0530 to what, like 1700 hrs? that the bureaucracy was bickering over what to do, how come no one came up with a plan B? These guys need a water drop, we can't give it to 'em, what are we going to do instead?

[toneloc177]

Isn't this country great? 4 lives were lost because of red tape! Shouldn't preservation of life and wildland take precedence over taking a few hundred gallons of water from some pond? It's not like they were dumping crap into the water, they were just taking some in an emergency situation . . . and because of that delay, 4 brothers and sisters are dead, some not even older 20! :(

[RJE]

Mr. Freeze, maybe Bucks is painting it with a broad brush, but I still agree with him.

I've had some experience with the Sierra Club, and most of the members I encountered were pretty rational. And for years I was a member of the State of MO Conservation Society (of which 88% (at the time) were HUNTERS). Then again, while in the Navy, I swamped a Greenpeace Zodiac 3 times in one day while they kept trying to drive their boat through our live fire zone. We'd drive them off with 2-1/2" fire hoses. They'd motor off (slowly), bail them out, then come back. Now that's STUPID.

The big picture is, irrespective of eco-groups or eco-terrorists, that the Endangered Species Act has repeatedly caused loss of livelyhood (see stories about the farmers who've been run off their land because the Feds stopped selling them irrigation water promised since 1906! to save a suckerfish) to now, real loss of life.

I respect, and care for, the "environment". But I don't care what various (intentionally NOT naming names here) groups say, animals lives do not carry the same "value" as those of our fellow human beings.

Of course, a lot of the problems with "wildland" fires is because we keep trying to put them OUT. It's actually good for the forests (within reason) to burn them off once in a while, as I'm sure you all are aware.

[SilverCity4]

I almost started a thread on this very topic, but decided to wait until more information was available. But since you brought it up...

I personally believe that the perfect world for enviromental tree-huggers (excluding Mr. Freeze...if the Sierra Club finds out about your car they'll probably revoke your membership!!)is one without people. There's nothing wrong with setting aside some areas to be natural preserves. There's nothing wrong with limiting hunting on endangered species.

BUT, if I buy a home in the country, and a family of buck-toothed three-legged spotted gophers that are endangered move into my garden, I'M the one that can't do anything about it?! Don't think so, buddy. Consider nature. Natural selection, specifically. I'm bigger, stronger, smarter (maybe). Who's moving? It should be the gophers. But thanks to the feds, I probably can't do anything about it.

If more details come out, and it is determined that these four firefighters died because someone was worried about some fish (I don't care how endangered they were, and don't give me the line about "They may hold the cure to cancer, blah, blah, blah..") then someone's priorities aren't for people, or for the acres upon acres of land and animals that are now dead and/or homeless due to the progression of the fire.

However, my opinions on tree-huggers aside, if the orginal answer on the helicopter was no, then they should have come up with Plan B, as Mr. Freeze says. I'm interested to see the timeline from the request for the helicopter to the deaths of our fellow firefighters.

[MrFreeze]

Here's my take: Avoidable events led up to a point in time from which there was no escape, both literally and figuratively. Same process for ANY "accident". That point in time happened to be the decision NOT to pull water from the river/stream. If it's just wilderness, let it burn. If there is an interface, it might be questionable. If there is a threat to personnel, whether civilian or fire, pull the water.

[MrFreeze]

Oh yeah Greenpeace...Those guys are wacked. First of all, "rainbow warriors"? Whatever. Shoulda just shot 'em, swamped the boat, and called it an accident...
See my experience, albeit limited, with wildland is in Alaska, where millions of acres can burn and not bother anyone, so it's all very hands off.

[Dalmatian90]

If the water source was that environmentally sensitive, it should've be marked in advance on the maps/plans "Not usuable for tanker supply from _______ to ________ "

If you really, really need it, apologize later for, um, spilling the coffee over the map making it illegible until a new copy was brought up and when we said Rush It, somehow the mailroom thought Rushmore It, so it came by way of South Dakota. ;)

My take on it is it's a non-factor in the end that's being battered around as a political football.

After all, one could easily feign Shock, Horror, look another firefighter died because the building trades continued to oppose residential sprinklers. After all, the sprinklers would've put the fire out had they been there. It's true, but there is probably other causes that had a more direct effect.

--------------
Was thinking the other day though, could you imagine having to fight WWII over again and spend several years preparing the environmental impact studies to support the industrial and military needs!

[Althea Forhan]

Isn't it counterproductive to not dump water to save some fish, which allows the forest to burn, which destroys the habitat for the spotted owl? How ironic: The Sierra club can't see the forest for the trees!

Althea

[MrFreeze]

Ahhh, but the fire also cleans up the underbrush for the surviving owls which facilitates the snatching of the fat mice that have been feeding on all the nutrient-rich fresh growth that is fertilized by the ashes of the dead owls. Owls are cannibals. The circle of life...

[Althea Forhan]

Yeah, I know. Just thought I'd have a little fun in spite of tragedy. Some of the local Hard-core enviromentalists have protests about wildland tactics: Can't cut firebreaks on top of the ridge because that's cutting down trees: can't use retardant because it's a chemical: can't do water drops because that diturbs sediment in the lakes....it goes on. Some times they just go to far.

[PEIPat]

I agree with the plan 'B' idea. Isn't 12 hours enough time for command to figure out an alternate water source location, and plan an emergency extraction if all else fails. What went wrong? 12 hours is a long time to study such a predicament, even with other incident issues to deal with.. But then again, all the facts are not in yet are they?

PS- Our prayers and thoughts are with the families, friends, and firefighters who were close to those who have passed.

[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: PEI Pat ]

[John_Ford]

I had a roaring argument with a Ranger over policy as to weather or not I was able to send a bulldozer into an area that was enviromentally sensitive. But that person was willing to send a handcrew in. I said bull****, If you won't let me use a bulldozer to cut a line I ain't letting you put a handcrew in as he was placing them at risk by putting them in front of the fire.
Jeez guys, IT ain't worth it for a friggin' tree or a three legged black stripe gopher. Trust me, they will survive.

[bgfdchick]

Hmmm...either animals drown, or burn. What a toss-up.

I lost all my admiration to those who protect the environment after I heard of organizations that set fires "in the name of the environment". And I don't think the government has any clue on how to "save" our environment and endangered species, either.

I feel that all life deserves protection, no matter how small. However, we must look at it in a balance. As sad as it may be to lose a species off the earth, allowing a forest to burn put even more lives (both human and animal) at risk.

Why are we concerned anyway? With the advancements in cloning, extinction may not even be a problem...(just kidding!)

[larrycook]

Here we go again with the eco people wanting to save some species that is endangered. I have noticed that many of these groups cry foul when the people who are really trying to save the land want to do good. It was pointed out about some farmers were deprived irrigation water for their crops because of endangered species. These farmers and ranchers are better stewards of the land than the seirra club will ever be. every year in Texas when hunting season rolls around, all of the eco and wildlife protection groups start yelling about the destuction that hunters do. If you look at where these groups live, ask your self how much wild habitat do they take away from animals when they built their homes. if these groups and managers were so concerned with hurting the endangered species, why didn't they go the fire and work to help the firefighters prevent the damage to the habitat. These people are the ones that urinate and deficate in the rivers and streams when they are out in the wild just so they will not have to pack out any waste.
sometomes to go forward, you must give up something. this time it was firefighters instead of something endangered.
thanks for letting me spout off. LC

[mongofire_99]

Sorry friends somebody goofed on this one - big time!

A big thank you goes out to our friends in the environmental movement for their efforts in protecting the life of a fish that wouldn't end up in a drop tank if they scooped a mile of the river.

And a special thanks goes out to all those politicians that believe somebodies vote was worth this.

I ask all of you, is your vote worth this?

Excerpt rom FoxNews.com...

Testifying before the committee Tuesday, USFS Fire Chief Dale Bosworth said that under standard procedure, firefighters would have used the Chewuch water to fight the fire and addressed any environmental violations or restrictions after the fire was extinguished. He said he was investigating why dispatch waited for approval before sending the helicopters.

"We get the water where we can get it and ask questions later," Bosworth said.

Forest Service District Commander John Newcom told Fox News last week that the Chewuch River’s population of salmon, steelhead trout and bull trout are all considered when fighting fires, but insisted helicopter permission was never delayed or denied because of the policy.

But the USFS reversed that position Tuesday with the release of a timeline of events that depicts the harrowing plight of a band of very young, inexperienced firefighters waiting desperately for helicopter relief that never came.

Read the whole damn thing and see if you still feel the same way.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,31019,00.html

So now we have USFS Fire Chief admitting that they waited for permission from some bureaucrat.

The feds could screw up an anvil with a feather, I can't believe some of us think they can solve any of our problems! Bring on government health care!

Mr. Freeze

I would hate to think that these guys died because of that sort of red-tape.

Me too, but that's what it sounds like from the testimony of the HMiC.

post hoc ergo propter hoc

Thanks for makin' me go look that one up...

How did it leak to a Republican politician from CO (was it CO?)?

Yes, it was CO and who cares how it leaked, was it a secret?

These guys need a water drop, we can't give it to 'em, what are we going to do instead?

But they could have given it to them... They were just afraid to because they might get in trouble.

Roll them heads!!!

Silver City 4

I personally believe that the perfect world for enviromental tree-huggers ... is one without people.

HERE-HERE

buck-toothed three-legged spotted gophers

Quick tip for those at home...You can catch these in a snipe sack while you're out cow tippin' if you're careful and quick. You'll find them near the jackalopes...

But thanks to the feds, I probably can't do anything about it.

If you wanna try your luck I got some trees that need cuttin' but I can't because of the friggen' golden cheek warbler or whatever the hell it's called - help me out here Larry Cook.

bgfdchick

I lost all my admiration to those who protect the environment after I heard of organizations that set fires "in the name of the environment".

Great point!

And can you believe those same idiots oppose letting you burn a house for training for your species protection?

And I don't think the government has any clue on how to "save" our environment and endangered species, either.

Then take a stand with us to get the government out of it.

I feel that all life deserves protection, no matter how small.

Then, let me ask...uh, nevermind...

Why are we concerned anyway? With the advancements in cloning, extinction may not even be a problem...(just kidding!)

You might be kidding, but it is an excellent point. As long as we don't clone people.

And I'm still waiting on my ELO report...

[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: mongofire_99 ]

[MrFreeze]

There are environmental people who do bitch about hunting and other things like that. These are the stupid ones. Hunting is a valid part of game management. The people you are referring to are griping just to gripe. These people may piss and s--t in rivers. Like I said these are the dumb ones. People who DO care about the wilds don't. And people who do care about the wilds don't care if acres of forest burn down; it's natural, and it's good. Don't lump all environmentalists together, because then I get put in some ignorant company.

Dalmatian 90 put it best: It's a non-factor. Not having that water should not have been the emergency it became. In 12 hrs., how come water wasn't pulled from somewhere else? Like one of parents of the deceased said: If they had all that time to think about it, how come they didn't helo them out of there?

Post hoc ergo propter hoc:This event because of a past one. Basically it is a Latin phrase meaning that it is wrong to think that just because something happened before a certain event means that it caused it. Chew on that for a little while.

Hopefully we will learn more about this whole mess...

[mongofire_99]

Here's the whole FoxNews story...

Endangered Fish Policy May Have Cost Firefighters' Lives

Firefighters were unable to douse the deadly fire in Okanogan National Forest in Winthrop, Wash., in July because of delays in granting permission for fire-fighting helicopters to use water from nearby streams and rivers protected by the Endangered Species Act, according to sources close to the fire.

Firefighters Tom L. Craven, 30, Karen L. Fitzpatrick, 18, Devin A Weaver, 21, and Jessica L. Johnson, 19, burned to death while cowering under protective tents near the Chewuch River, home to protected species salmon and trout. Seventeen other firefighters survived the ordeal.

Forest Service policy in the Northwest requires that special permission be obtained before fire helicopters can dip into certain restricted rivers, lakes and streams. The fear is that the dippers could accidentally scoop up protected species of fish.

A 17-member team from the Forest Service and other federal agencies is now investigating whether the four firefighters died as a result of the policy.

Rep. Scott McInnis, R-Colo., chairman of the House Subcommittee on Forests & Forest Health, said the committee is also looking into allegations that environmental policy and bureaucracy were factors in the deaths.

AP
July 13, 2001: The Thirty Mile Fire burns in the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest.
Testifying before the committee Tuesday, USFS Fire Chief Dale Bosworth said that under standard procedure, firefighters would have used the Chewuch water to fight the fire and addressed any environmental violations or restrictions after the fire was extinguished. He said he was investigating why dispatch waited for approval before sending the helicopters.

"We get the water where we can get it and ask questions later," Bosworth said.

Forest Service District Commander John Newcom told Fox News last week that the Chewuch River’s population of salmon, steelhead trout and bull trout are all considered when fighting fires, but insisted helicopter permission was never delayed or denied because of the policy.

But the USFS reversed that position Tuesday with the release of a timeline of events that depicts the harrowing plight of a band of very young, inexperienced firefighters waiting desperately for helicopter relief that never came.

According to the timeline, the first team of firefighters, an elite crew called "Hot Shots," had contained what came to be known as the "30-mile fire" by the very early morning and requested a helicopter water drop at 5:30 a.m. However, they were told one would not be available until 10 a.m.

At 9 a.m., the Hot Shots were replaced with a young "mop-up" crew expecting helicopter relief to arrive within the hour. When the mop-up crew inquired about the missing helicopter just after noon, the dispatch office told the crew field boss that helicopters could not be used in the area because the Chewuch River contained endangered fish.

AP
July 12, 2001: A team investigates the deaths of four firefighters in the Thirty Mile Fire.

Final permission to use Chewuch water wasn’t granted until 2 p.m.

Jan Flatten, the environmental officer for the Okanogan and Wenatchee Natural forests, confirmed that environmental concerns caused crucial delays in dispatching the helicopter.

"At 12:08, the dispatch office ordered the helicopter," Flatten told Fox News. "However, because there are endangered species in the Chewuch River, they wanted to get permission from the district in order to dip into the river."

However, the dispatch office could not reach anyone at the district with the authority to approve the helicopter drop. Flatten said those authorities - Newcom, Fire Manager Peter Sodoquist and the Methow Valley biologist - were actually meeting during that time to approve an exemption to the policy.

"That time lag of about two hours was when they were trying to locate someone with the authority to tell them they could go ahead and take water out of the Chewuch River," Flatten said.

The USFS did not explain why the intra-agency team required to approve an exemption did not convene until 12 p.m., two hours after firefighters had been told the helicopter would be available.

Two former USFS firefighters familiar with the Thirty Mile Fire said getting permission to dip into the Chewuch caused the delays that led to the death of their colleagues.

"(The crew) were told that (the Chewuch River) was a protected water source and they needed to go through channels to use this water source," one of the former firefighters told Fox News.

The first load of helicopter water was dumped on the fire around 3 p.m., but the fire was by then out of control. An hour later, air tankers had to be turned back and the ground crew fled on foot to the river where they deployed their survival tents. The crew was completely surrounded by the flames with no avenue for escape.

Fox News' William LaJeunnesse and Robin Wallace contributed to this report.

[MrFreeze]

I just saw your post mongo...I was just curious about the info to the rep f/CO since the pub I saw only stated "confidential sources" smoke and mirrors crap. Thanks for the link BTW...I'm not familiar with the area, has anyone seen if there is any interface or anything like that? Could this fire have been left to run it's course? How long had the original shot crew been working it? Just thinking...

[BucksEng91]

You can give it an inoccuous sounding name like the "Sierra Club", make beautiful commericals with pictures of owls, and fish, and sunsets...but in the end, if you value the life of ANY animal over that of ANY human, you are an anti-social, anti-human aberration.

Please, all of you enviro-wackos...find me one normal every day person, just ONE, who would prefer dirty air and dirty water. We ALL want clean air and clean water. That's a freakin' no-brainer. We just don't value the lives of barely conscious 100-cell organisms over human beings. It's a question of priorities - and yours are profoundly screwed up.

The touchy,feely folks at the Sierra Club want to depopulate large swaths of the United States, and concentrate everyone in cities with a density greater than that of Manhattan. Don't believe me? Go to their web site. The real irony in all of this is that we really only use about 10-15% of the land in this country. The rest is wilderness. But that's not good enough for the saints on earth at Sierra and the more radical enviro-wacko organizations.

They would be most happy with a world devoid of humans. If that's not sociopathic, then I don't know what is.

And four young firefighters are dead. You go tell their families that there's no connection, that there should have been a plan "B". Cold f*cking comfort, knowing that their sons and daughters died because some bureaucrat somewhere couldn't decide whether it was worth the risk to a couple of fish that could end up on someone's dinner table in a week.

I'm mad. And I hope you are too. The insanity has to stop.

[CollegeBuff]

Silver City 4

I personally believe that the perfect world for enviromental tree-huggers ... is one without people.


You have no idea how right you are.

Read Rainbow Six by Tom Clancy, and find just how terrifingly plausible it is that a small group of eco-nuts could kill every human being on this planet (except themselves of course) as self-appointed saviors of the Earth.


And for another view of the environmental movement, I'll send those who want it a 14-minute George Carlin MP3 entitled "The Planet is FINE." Not what you'd expect from him.

"See, I'm not one of these people who's worried about everything. You got people like this around you? Country's full of them now. People walking around all day long, every minute of the day, worried about EVERYTHING! Worried about the air, worried about the water, worried about the soil. Worried about insecticides, pesticides, food additives, carcinogens. Worried about radon gas, worried about asbestos. Worried about saving endangered species. Let me tell you something about engangered species, alright? Saving endangered species is just one more arrogant attempt by humans to
control nature. It's arrogant meddling. It's what got us in trouble in the first place! Doesn't anybody understand that? Interfering with nature! Over 90 percent, WAY over, 90 percent of all the species that have EVER lived on this planet, ever lived, are gone. Whoosh! They're extinct! We didn't kill them all. They just, disappeared! That's what nature does! They dissapear these days at the rate of a day. And I mean regardless of our behavior. Irrespective of how we act on this planet, 25 species that were here today, will be gone tomorrow. Let them go gracefully! Leave nature alone. Haven't we done enough? We're so self-important. SO self-important. 'Save the bees, save the trees. Save the whales, save those snails.' And the greatest arrogance of all- 'Save the Planet.' What??? Are these f@cking people kidding me? Save the Planet? We don't even know how to take care of ourselves!! The planet is FINE. The people are f@cked!!!"

It gets better. I'll email it to those who want it (make sure you've got Winamp or something similar).

[ 08-02-2001: Message edited by: CollegeBuff ]

[CollegeBuff]

Arrrrrrg. I've edited that post three times and it isn't fixed yet. :mad: :mad:

::Suddenly feels like he's at "a meeting"::

"Hi, umm, my name's, umm, CollegeBuff and I'm a, umm, perfectionist."

"HI, COLLEGEBUFF."

[captstanm1]

I am with you on this one Bucks!

[BucksEng91]

Thanks, Cap!

Next time I'm in Atlanta on business, I'll make a side trip and buy you that beer.

Say safe.

[CaptainGonzo]

I have an idea on how to put out the next wildfire...let's do an airdrop of Bureaucrats and eco-whackos! If we splat enough of them, the fire in theory should go out, their remains will provide fertilizer for the next generation of forest growth!

[ 08-02-2001: Message edited by: Captain Gonzo ]

[ddvfd]

Im not saying that a fishes life isn't more important than a humans...or equal to it, but, If there is danger, why would you not just dive in with the chopper, get the water you need, and deal with the consequences from the wildlife people later? If the water is needed and available, i wouldn't think twice about getting it and then dealing with the hoop-la later

[ddvfd]

Quote From Silver City
BUT, if I buy a home in the country, and a family of buck-toothed three-legged spotted gophers that are endangered move into my garden, I'M the one that can't do anything about it?! Don't think so, buddy.

Haha, as i heard on the radio one morning about the tree-huggers, if you find a hairy-back nut scratcher on your property, shoot, shovel, and shut up

Yea it sounds cruel, but if you want to keep what is rightfully yours, what else can you do

[ 08-02-2001: Message edited by: ddvfd ]

[BucksEng91]

Here's a post from a short article by Rush Limbaugh:

"The people who want you to get rid of your SUV and put metal spikes in trees to kill loggers, are the same people who come up with these regulations that end up killing four firefighters. The people who want you to believe that global warming is real, and want us to sign the Kyoto accord when nobody else will for the express purpose of weakening this country economically and militarily, are the same people that engineered the kind of law and policy that ends up getting firefighters killed because they can't get water from a river where allegedly endangered fish might inadvertently be scooped up and thrown on the blaze themselves.

I'm talking about the militants now, not those of you, mom and pop Americans who want to have pristine national forests and beautiful fish. These people are a bunch of socialists/communists who are out to destroy capitalism by building up the federal government. They do this by promising us a utopian state, but as we saw in the USSR and Cuba and everywhere else socialism and communism are tried, there is no utopia.

Unfortunately, these extremists have disguised themselves as simply people who love nature, and have marketed themselves brilliantly. They're smart enough to couch what they believe brilliantly. If you disagree with them, you must be for dirty water! If you disagree with them, you must be for dirty air! If you disagree with them, you must not care about pollution! Everybody wants clean air. Everybody wants animals to not be treated cruelly. We've got to protect our animals! They're the very essence of innocence! They're so harmless <said tongue in cheek>.

Yes, that's all true - which is why it's despicable to use the innocence of animals to forward your socialist political goals. They roll video of trees and mountains and animals to oppose drilling in ANWAR, but that's now what ANWAR is. ANWAR is the size of South Carolina and we want to drill in an area the size of Dulles Airport! That's why God put the oil there, so we wouldn't have to disturb anything else!

Folks, we must face this question as a nation: How many people are going to have to die because of these wacko environmentalists and their policies before you take the blinders off? How many? Give me a number. How many people is it going to take, especially firefighters, cops, and others, whose sole reason for being is to save your life and save your property? How many of them are going to have to die over inane stupidities like this?"

ddvfd: This can certainly happen - I understand where you're coming from, and I agree. But the real problem is that there is a FEDERAL LAW on the books that prohibits Forest Service choppers from scooping water out of streams that may contain endangered species without first getting approval from a review board of government biologists. THAT is how this kind of sh*t happens.

Rush said it great - how many HUMAN BEINGS have to die at the altar of environmental extremism before this country wakes up?

[ 08-02-2001: Message edited by: BucksEng91 ]

[MrFreeze]

My point (rarely do I have one) is this: How much easier is it for the powers that be to pin these ff's deaths on the fact that water was requested (multiple times), and permission was needed to pull it from that particular river? RATHER than taking any kind of responsibility for ALL the events that led up to their death. NO accident has one cause. Take a line of dominoes: Remove any one of them and the last one, the final event, won't get knocked over. Remove any one of several factors leading up to ANY FF death, and most likely the death will be avoided. In the days and weeks to come, these factors will come out.

And as far as a "Plan B", that's textbook strategy. Hell, the way I cook, I have a Plan B every night. Attention to detail...

[RJE]

Side note on the eco-terrorists - Mr. Freeze, note I said eco-terrorists, not environmentalists.

1. At the National Training Center (tank training ground in the desert SW) they found an "endangered" turtle that had its primary breeding ground next to the live fire range. So the army fenced some of it off. We're talking 50,000 acres here, and a turtle that never moves more that 500 ft. from its hatching place in its entire LIFE. The troops call it the "turtle bordello"
"So, how does a turtle make love... Well, it goes like this... IN!.........

2. The USN never had the guts to try this, but when Greenpeace's multi-million dollar yacht wandered into one of their live fire ranges - they "persuaded it to vacate" by doing a high speed near miss pass --- by 2 F-15's, 50 ft. clearance, at Mach 2! Greenpeace threatened to sue. The Japanese Self-Defense Force commander said 'next pass they drop bombs, too.' Greenpeace left! It didn't make the press in this country - Greenpeace was too embarassed, I guess. And the US press couldn't use it to make US DOD look bad, 'cause we weren't there.

3. Game management - My grandfather owns some land outside Kansas City. < 40 acres. It's technically inside the city limits - so no hunting -it's illegal to discharge a firearm inside the city limits, don'tcha' know. Last March he found 32 deer carcasses - starved or frozen to death. MO dept of conservation says the land will support about 15 - which is what they found still alive in June. So why can't we hunt there. Better yet, why SHOULDN'T we hunt there.

OUT!......

4. Did you all know that there are about 10 times as many whales as all the environmentalist have thought for years? Turns out that because they swim so far, dive so deep, hide so well, etc. that they never found most of them. But the US Navy has been tracking them for years. SONAR that can find an Ohio class SSBN can track a humpback at 300 miles. They never told anyone this while we were chasing USSR subs... classified and all. Now it's no big deal. But does the press report it? Of course not.

IN!....

[MrFreeze]

RJE give Gramps a silencer :) Or a bow...

[BucksEng91]

Mr. Freeze -

I appreciate your attempt to bring a bit of reason to this tragedy, but I think it's misguided.

When a federally-employed IC has to get permission from federal biologists in order to pull WATER from a stream, you're favoring the safety of fish over the safety of firefighters. If you see nothing wrong with that, or with the attitude that made this possible, then there's really nothing else to say. Monday morning quarterback all you want, but as I said before it's cold comfort for these people's families that the welfare of frigging TROUT were even considered for ONE SECOND over the safety of their loved ones. Would YOU be the one to tell their family members, "Well, you know the fact that we weren't allowed to pull water from a stream to drop on what was at the time a small fire has NO BEARING on what happened later." Better you than me, brother.

[Lewiston2Capt]

Now Bucks, you said in another forum: "Luckily, I'm a conservative, so I try not to make judgements based on emotion!" ;) :p Watch your bloodpressure.
I agree the fact that 4 lives were lost while this was being debated is an atrocity. However, the USFS also violated one of the rules of firefighting... "Always have a plan B." Why didnt they have a plan B? If they did why didnt they use it? I think there is enough blame to go around here.
I also agree that there shouldnt have even been an argument about whether or not to use the water. Not to "what if" this to death but, so you see my and others point, what if the air support was unavailable or unable to make it into the area for whatever reason, would those firefighters sit down and say oh well we're screwed because they can't dump water. I certainly hope not, otherwise there are more issues that need to be dealt with.

Dont get me wrong, the bulk of the blame rests with the "tree-huggers", but i still think that the USFS isnt squeeky clean in this matter either.

[comwhite]

"I agree the fact that 4 lives were lost while this was being debated is an atrocity. However, the USFS also violated one of the rules of firefighting... "Always have a plan B." Why didnt they have a plan B? If they did why didnt they use it? I think there is enough blame to go around here."

Sir,

When four, hell when one, life is a stake, Plan A, B, C,.... should all be the same, a human life comes before anything. If someone's life is jeopardized, there should be no, ifs, ands, or buts, and darn sure no red tape to go through.

I'm all for clean air and water, but if that means fish or fowl come before my life, and I'm not going to be around to enjoy the clean air and water, I'll take the amount of pollution I have to deal with.

[MrFreeze]

I dig when you can actually have a reasoned discourse here instead of YOU SUCK, YOUR IDDEAS SUCK, IM THA MAN, DOWN WITH THE ENVIORMINT!!! My wife will attest to the fact I just like to argue. I'm a big time devil's advocate, always arguing for stuff I don't even believe. She gets SO pissed! If I'm flying that helo, my Sierra Club-paper-recycling-bike-riding-catch-and-release-don't-drill-ANWR-ass is scooping up water, last yellow-warbled-black-striped-red-spotted-brown-freckled trout and all, and dumping him on the oven. It's easier to get forgiveness than permission. But you can bet I would sell out the command that got me into that predicament in a heartbeat...

[huff317]

I've got access to about 1,000 acres that my uncle owns/leases. If, during some point in time, they "discover" an animal/bird/"buck-toothed-three legged-black striped-gopher"(I absolutley LOVE that one, still giggling)that would interfere with his ranching livlihood...I can tell you exactly what would happen to this interference. Two words: 12 gauge. I know, all legal considerations aside, but it would happen!
End of problem. If it comes down to an "us" or "them" scenario, who in their right mind would vote for critters? Circular arguement with some folks, I know.....At any rate, I was wondering who it was that had that recipe for Spotted Owl stew, or even the one for Golden Cheeked Warbler kabob? I definitely agree with most poster, Ranchers/farmers take AWESOME care of their lands---it IS their life, remember? I can't tell of the number of days spent taking care of every living thing on the spread EXCEPT the livestock. Take care to all, and don't squat with your spurs on!

[MrFreeze]

A Texan Oklahoma bound? Converting ya'll one at a time!!! Change starts at the bottom!! HAHA Are you the guy moving to T-Town? Tulsa?

[FFShooty]

NOFISHING.NET (http://www.nofishing.net/)

If you'd like either A. A Good Laugh, or B. To become furious even more, click on the above link.

Just a few more fanatics that don't get it. :mad:

[BucksEng91]

Hey there, Lewiston2Capt (geez, why do I always fall afoul of CAPTAINS? he he :D )

You're right. I'm emotional about this. But you know what? When I think about it in a reasonable way, the absolute arrogance and stupidity that suffuses this whole ball of sh*t pushes me over my conservative edge.

I'm not averse to laying some blame on USFS for being beholden to the federal bureaucracy - hell, that's the whole POINT of my post - that the environmental regulations we've allowed ourselves to be placed under have gotten completely out of hand.

But, at the risk of sounding hypocritical, I'm not going to Monday morning quarterback this thing. How do you, or I, or anyone know that the IC *didn't* have a "Plan B" which simply didn't work. My point is that before there was NEED for a Plan B, there was a Plan A, a time-tested method and a safe one - when the fire was still relatively small, and it WASN'T TAKEN BECAUSE WE AS A NATION HAVE PUT THE WELFARE OF FISH OVER THE SAFETY OF FIREFIGHTERS. I can't say it much clearer than that.

And don't even get me started on what happens when you hover a helicopter over fish (they tend to swim the hell away, thereby negating any danger the precious little suckers would have faced), or the fact that most of these potential victims could very well wind up as dinner next week anyway.

My whole point, whether you see a direct causal link between the Endagered Species Act and the deaths of four firefighters or not, is that for there even to have BEEN an issue over scooping water for firefighting tells me that we've finally gone completely insane. Enviro-wackos are sociopaths, and we're LISTENING to them. We actually have policy based on their screwed-up priorities that has led, directly or indirectly, to the deaths of firefighters.

That's not OK with me.

[RADFIRE]

I agree with Bucks. Althea had it right when saying that the club can't see the forest from the trees.
It's an emergency! People are in imminent danger. There is no excuse for the incident commander not ordering water to be aquired from another source or getting it from this one. Take the political wrist slapping after you get your people to safety.
Deaths of firefighter are bad enough to deal with...this is worse because of the circumstances that caused them.
My opinion....
Stay low.

[1261Truckie]

After reading all the discourse, two thoughts:
1. If there is no life hazard, let the damn forest burn. That runs contrary to what we as firefighters believe, but it's nature's way.
2. Place firefighters on the endangered species list. That way politicians will have to protect US rather than screw us.

Be careful out there !

[Lewiston2Capt]

Comwhite:
"When four, hell when one, life is a stake, Plan A, B, C,.... should all be the same, a human life comes before anything. If someone's life is jeopardized, there should be no, ifs, ands, or buts, and darn sure no red tape to go through."

You will get no arguement out of me on the point that life safety should be the primary goal of any fireground operation. My thinking is that when things go wrong more than one way out of a bad situation is a good thing. But as Bucks said, it is not my place to monday morning quarterback. Instead of playing the shoulda, coulda, woulda game, the focus should be on why was the policy set up to allow this situation to come to pass?

BucksEng91:

"You're right. I'm emotional about this. But you know what? When I think about it in a reasonable way, the absolute arrogance and stupidity that suffuses this whole ball of sh*t pushes me over my conservative edge."

Me too. I have some background in the environmental science field. Mostly in an effort to preserve peoples/ businesses rights to work on their own property. Believe me I understand that of which you speak.

I would also like to ammend my earlier statement: The entire blame rests in the bureaucracy that caused one faction to feel that requesting permission was more important than people, and then wait 10 hours to get an answer while a contained fire progressed to a conflagration that killed four of our brothers and sisters.

[rds3604]

When I read this story I about hit the roof. As I recall fish know how to swim and would most likely get out of the way when a 2000gal tank on a huge machine like a sky crane gets that close, but what do I know. A few years back a company near my home town had a problem like this. At a tire and Hazmat fire crews were held from fighting the fire and Hazmat ops because some idiot was worried that a flock of ducks near by might get harmed, Throw some water in that direction they'll move, Instead it took a few hours, while toxic fumes are drifting around town, for them to come up with a plan to round up the ducks and move them to a safe location. Don't get me wrong, I love animals as much as the next guy, I don't kill them for sport and only fish or hunt for what I'll eat, but fires have been apart of wild life since we first crawled out of the ocean and I'm pretty sure they know when it's time to go. I think these idiots who sit around and whine about save the animals need to sit through what those four fire fighters had to see coming at them, or maybe put their sons or daughters there and see if they decide to move their back sides then. I can't believe we live in a time when the the life of brave men and women, who put their lives on the line everyday for these people who get them killed, are worth less than a wild animal, who, by instinct knows when to run. We don't get the luxury to say " I'm not going today 'cause I don't feel like it" and we don't get to run like the wild life, SO WHERE THE HELL IS THE PROTECTION FOR THE ONE'S WHO CHOSE TO TRY AND KEEP OUR HOMES AND FOREST SAFE? :mad: :mad:

[ggtruckie]

i wonder how many endagered animals were burned in the fire. save 2 fish but destroy a forest and kill firefighters. some people have thier head stuck up thier ...

[pahoseboy]

Just another bright and shining example of a government out of control!!!!! :mad:

[FFLEEMS]

Once we get all the environmentalists who have killed firefighters let's go after everybody else who has ever killed a firefighter. My first choice would be whoever invented the light weight truss. Then anyone who installed them. Once we are done with them, those people who build and install propane tanks would be next. Let's see whose next? Truck manufacturers, how many rollovers have killed firefighters? Wait it's not the truck, it's the person driving it right, so let's go after all the firefighters who have ever killed a firefighter. No, that would never work, that would be ridiculous, firefighters don't kill each other do they? So by now you're saying what is your point? It would be that I don't see how anyone can blame deaths on laws or groups of people yet not blame the people who were there. For example, my crew and I are waiting for our hose to be charged at the front door of a burning building. When all of the sudden the pump fails, I say the heck with it, we'll be alright we don't need water let's go get it. Now who would be responsible for our deaths? The pump manufacturer right? They did or didn't do something that caused my death. How about the pump operator? It must have been their actions that caused my death.
Now before you call me some callus SOB, I don't like the fact that four firefighters are dead any more than you do, but I can't blame their deaths on some tree huggers. My question is, if they couldn't get a water drop why did they stay there? Answer me that.

[BucksEng91]

Originally posted by FFLEEMS:
<STRONG>Once we get all the environmentalists who have killed firefighters let's go after everybody else who has ever killed a firefighter. My first choice would be whoever invented the light weight truss. Then anyone who installed them. Once we are done with them, those people who build and install propane tanks would be next. Let's see whose next? Truck manufacturers, how many rollovers have killed firefighters? Wait it's not the truck, it's the person driving it right, so let's go after all the firefighters who have ever killed a firefighter. No, that would never work, that would be ridiculous, firefighters don't kill each other do they? So by now you're saying what is your point? It would be that I don't see how anyone can blame deaths on laws or groups of people yet not blame the people who were there. For example, my crew and I are waiting for our hose to be charged at the front door of a burning building. When all of the sudden the pump fails, I say the heck with it, we'll be alright we don't need water let's go get it. Now who would be responsible for our deaths? The pump manufacturer right? They did or didn't do something that caused my death. How about the pump operator? It must have been their actions that caused my death.
Now before you call me some callus SOB, I don't like the fact that four firefighters are dead any more than you do, but I can't blame their deaths on some tree huggers. My question is, if they couldn't get a water drop why did they stay there? Answer me that.</STRONG>

So you want to Monday morning quarterback this, FFLEEMS? Why don't you find out what was done between the time that the team called for water, and the time that they burned to death, and YOU answer the question.

If you're having a hard time seeing how slavelike devotion to this so-called "Endangered Species Act" led to the deaths of four firefighters, then so be it. I think it's as obvious as the nose on your face.

But yes, let's instead bandy about irrelevant and unrelated concerns like buildings with truss roofs. The fact of the matter is, FF, if there were not such a sociopathic preoccupation with "animal rights" (cough...cough...choke), this situation would likely not have occurred. What needs to happen is this unconstitutional, anti-human law has to be struck down before anyone else's home, livelihood, or very life is sacrificed at the altar of environmental extremism.

[FFLEEMS]

BucksEng91

No I don't want to Monday morning quarterback this, I do want to find out what happened so that lessons can be learned from this.

You are right I am having a hard time understanding how the deaths of four firefighters can be blamed on fish. I think there is a much bigger issue here than water being dropped on a fire. I would like to see that come out.

And to use your words, let's bandy about irrelevant issues, such as truss roofs or other ways firefighters are killed. For years fire officals have fought to get rid of truss roofs, but have we? No, and why? Because builders say it cuts into their (guess what) livelihood. I guess one man's livelihood is another man's death.

By the way, for the record, I like chainsaws and like to hunt those fuzzy little animals when ever I can.

[monte]

I responded in another forum to this same kind of post. Since I've been doing this job for 34 years ... I can't believe you would believe the stupid inuendos from a newspaper reporter. :eek: Their lives are so shallow how could they possibly get anything right. Nobody, loses their life over a helicopter or bucket of water. A helicopter on that fire would have done nothing to stop or hold it. The only benefit might have come from pilot observations to the crew. And that was already happening from another aircraft. There is no wildland fire tragedy that stems from a single action; it is a culmination of many actions from many people. When they all align, the tragedy occurs. We have seen this in wildland fire since before 1910, and in other professions like aviation, the Challanger is a classic example, mining disasters, railroads, etc. This is a pervasive condition that has it's roots from the bottom to the top. Management and blue collar alike contribute to this mess and it will only change when we see through the political horse dodo and focus on the job of fighting fire. Been there, done it, and have watched it work successfully for years; and the practice of successful fire fighting does not closely resemble s.o.p. that we teach or encourage.

[MrFreeze]

And if ya can't trust a guy from Missoula on wildland, who can ya trust? Testify, Monte, testify.

[SilverCity4]

I wholeheartedly agree that the delay in an air drop doesn't seem to be the direct cause of these four deaths, just by the extended time between the orginal request and the fatalities. But it sure sounds like it could be a factor.

The point is, protected water or not, if water was needed for fire suppression, then it should have been made available immediately. I'll bet that this has happened before, but we didn't hear about it because nobody got hurt or killed.

At any rate, in any LODD, an investigation is performed to determined what happened and why. This will be done on the Washington fire, and I'm willing to bet there's more than one reason that this happened.

[BucksEng91]

Yeah, those newspaper reporters really have an agenda to push with this one, no doubt. They must have fabricated this one from the very start, right guys? Pathetic.

Fish over humans. It's as simple as that. Klamath Falls, Thirty Mile Fire...what's next?

Please feel free to continue to ignore the fact that water was asked for, and the ONLY reason that it was not provided was because of an immoral and anti-social law called the Endangered Species Act. Blame it on the IC, downplay the importance of water drops (where you got that, I don't know!), Monday morning quarterback all you want with the luxury of time and post-incident knowledge, make excuses, but it just doesn't change the fact that in this case, the lives of fish meant more than the safety of fire fighters.

[mongofire_99]

Mr. Freeze

My wife will attest to the fact I just like to argue.

The politically correct term is debate. And you'll find good company among some, but be careful, a few are really thinned skinned.

I'm a big time devil's advocate, always arguing for stuff I don't even believe.

Hey, do you ever argue for stuff you don't believe and say a lot of pure BS about it and see if any of the believers jump in and say "yeah, what about that" with you?

BucksEng91

How do you, or I, or anyone know that the IC *didn't* have a "Plan B" which simply didn't work.

All the water around there is protected from what I understand, the nearest unprotected water is called the Pacific Ocean.

Plan B should have been extraction, it may not have been possible for whatever reason.

RADFIRE

There is no excuse for the incident commander not ordering water to be aquired from another source or getting it from this one.

The first head to roll should be this one or the dispatcher.

rds3604

I love animals as much as the next guy,

Me too - TASTY!

pahoseboy

Just another bright and shining example of a government out of control!!!!!

YEP!

And all a whole bunch of us want to do is give them more of it.

FFLEEMS

Once we get all the environmentalists who have killed firefighters let's go after everybody else who has ever killed a firefighter.

We already do. Lawsuits against building owners are becoming common for injuries and LODDs.

Truck manufacturers, how many rollovers have killed firefighters?

Lawsuits happening...

BucksEng91

What needs to happen is this unconstitutional, anti-human law has to be struck down before anyone else's home, livelihood, or very life is sacrificed at the altar of environmental extremism.

TESTIFY BROTHER!!

FFLEEMS

I do want to find out what happened so that lessons can be learned from this.

Lesson one: Firefighters and all people are more important than fish and wildlife and trees.

For years fire officals have fought to get rid of truss roofs, but have we? No, and why? Because builders say it cuts into their (guess what) livelihood. I guess one man's livelihood is another man's death.

Dear Mr. Building Owner/Occupant/Builder

Our recent preplan of your building indicates you have truss roof construction (or review of your construction plans)

City ordinance XYZ requires that you put the enclosed sign(s) on all entrance doorways, in the bottom right hand corner of the door, visible from the outside.

In the event of a fire at your establishment firefighters will not enter except under the circumstance to save a viable human life. In any event, the authority to enter rests with the on-scene incident commander. His authority and decision will not be second guessed by the city.

Thank you and remember to insure your property.

Sincerely,

The guys at the fire department.

I like chainsaws and like to hunt those fuzzy little animals when ever I can.

Kinda messy hunting with a chain saw isn't it?

monte

I can't believe you would believe the stupid inuendos from a newspaper reporter.

Yeah, stupid us, Chief Bosworth was only testifying before congress. Maybe he was lying. Did clinton appoint/hire him?

Their lives are so shallow how could they possibly get anything right.

You got me there, I tend to agree. I mean look at all the BS they've been putting out about ANWAR, the environment, tax relief, Florida Election, gun control, socialized medicine and all that other namby-pamby crap.

I wonder why they didn't try to hide this one as it affects one of their pet projects? Oh wait, it took Fox News (Fair and Balanced) to report it initially. Maybe the rest did try to hide it by not reporting it and then the cat was out of the bag...

There is obviously more to the story, but it seems this is a significant factor.

[ 08-02-2001: Message edited by: mongofire_99 ]

[comwhite]

Gentlemen,
Call me stupid, but there's something that's really bothering me about this whole thing. If there was a helicopter there, and it had a bucket for lifting that water out, why couldn't that helicopter have picked up those four firefighters when they knew their lives were in danger?

[CaptainGonzo]

Mongo...you didn't like my idea of doing an air drop of bureaucrats and eco-whackos?

[larrycook]

Most everyone have raised and made some good points, i really think that this incident commander had too many people trying to run that fire or give him advice and he forgot that the saftey of the firefighters was of the utmost imortance. he made need to go back to the front lines again and get some education and remember that you can have all kinds of technolgy and equipment to fight the fire, but if you do not have firefighters, you ain't got nothing. sometimes the protection of human lives means the sacrificing of something else.
We should all learn a lessen here and place steps to prevent another incident. I know that we cannot always prevent the death of firefighters, but we must always try.

Larry

[mongofire_99]

comwhite

...why couldn't that helicopter have picked up those four firefighters when they knew their lives were in danger?

Several factors involved. Did the helo have a hoist? If heavily wooded, the hoist would need a jungle penetrator. Was there a crewman on the helo that could run a hoist? If not, was there room to land? And so on...

There are really too many factors to list in getting these guys out. Otherwise, it is almost certain that they would have gotten out.

Also, the firefighters were ordered back to shelter at a road - Plan B perhaps?

Crews were pulled back to a road at 1558 and ordered sheltered at 1724 at 1725 the accident investigation team was ordered..

Read the published chronology here:
http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/oka/071901.pdf

Captain Gonzo

you didn't like my idea of doing an air drop of bureaucrats and eco-whackos?

I LOVED IT! Didn't mean to slight you Cap.

[monte]

There is a difference between reporting news and embellishing to create a situation. I disagree with this part of reporting, if it's discovery and facts that are being reported, that is the resposibiltiy of the news organizations. Let me try this one; a fire starts in a narrow canyon; it's during a summer drought period, and part of a registered long term drought. The fire is in a fuel type that historically burned often, in recent memory we know this canyon and adjacent ones have burned, large fires, on both sides of the canyon. We know the current weather is hot and dry, and the predicted weather for the next several days will also be hot and dry. The fire is relatively close to the bottom of the canyon, and the canyon alignment goes with the prevailing wind. Fire resources are not readily available, and we have another large fire going on the district. This is a recerational area with a dead end road and a trail head at the end of the road. It's called a river but it's not that wide. There are water use restrictions because of the T&E Act. One road in, one road out. Other than the restrictions placed by federal law, is there anything that bothers you regarding human safety? There is, and every item on the list, including the T&E crap was known before firefighters were ever committed to the fire ground. Managers had the opportunity to be analytical and decide if engagement of this fire was safe. We calculate these probabilities all the time. Like, If we have x amount of control forces, water use to a predetermined capacity we can engage. We have to be in true mopup by 1200 hr the following day, or we fall back to the least intrusive tactic until a better plan can be implemented. Instead we entrust out least experienced people with the most difficult management decisions at this level of complexity. The T&E issue is part of the whole sick political scenarios we deal with every year. If it's not water, it's road use, mountain caribou habitat, "light hand on the land" during drought periods, smoke into a city, a senators house, a celebrities trophy home, a pipeline, it goes on. At any point in this matrix, managers have to shoulder the load of responsibility and determine what they are willing to give up. If human life is not on the list, something else has to go. T&E issue is real, but it had nothing to do with the tragedy on this fire.

[redmedusa41]

Many points have been made here. If the IC was supposed to in charge, he should have had to ask noone for a water drop. And all the people involved with the decisions need to attend the next forrest fire and give them exactly what those 4 ff had. and give them a small shovel. When they are done sh*ting there pants, send them to the nearest burn center, to the peds unit, and see some of the kids that are there. and if the b*st*rds don't cry, lock them in the room with the parents of the fallen 4. We are supposed to protect life and property, not the other way around, and who the h*ll is going to protect us?

[toneloc177]

oops, had a seiz. - hit da wrong key!

[ 08-03-2001: Message edited by: toneloc177 ]

[ 08-03-2001: Message edited by: toneloc177 ]

[ 08-03-2001: Message edited by: toneloc177 ]

[toneloc177]

woo-hoo, page 5!!!

ffleems - Now before you call me some callus SOB, I don't like the fact that four firefighters are dead any more than you do, but I can't blame their deaths on some tree huggers. My question is, if they couldn't get a water drop why did they stay there? Answer me that.

Yes, their deaths are related in some way to those 'treehuggers'. Same as their deaths are directly related to the IC's decision NOT to override the order that the water be pulled from the pond/lake/stream/body of water. I learned something not too long ago about following through with ones decisions. . . 'if you feel something is right, DO IT! and deal with the consequences later.' I'm not saying that pulling water from that area would've saved their (the four kids / FF's) lives, but it atleast wouldve given them a fighting fukin CHANCE!!! Maybe they didn't have time to retreat . . . I'm sure they didn't just "STAY THERE", as you stated FFLEEMS. Who in their right mind would stay anywhere that the were gonna die? Ever think that conditions changed so fast and so drastic, that they didn't have a shoe box of options? I'm not sure what your babbling was all about . . . blaming others for mistakes that you got yourself into, or what. As i've said before, sh*t happens, accident's happen, people die. However, accident's can at times be avoided, you can sometimes reverse death, but sh*t still happens!

Is that good enough of an answer for you?

I ain't a stump jumper, haven't been extensively trained as one or in relation to brush type fires, because my neck of the woods doesn't have large brush fires on a regular basis which require more than 1 or 2 engines, or 1000 gal's of water. I have seen some videos of brush fires, and along with many others, have seen how fast the conditions on the fireground have changed with a little wind, change of wind direction, etc.


MONGO, good point on the truss construction. In NY, they are trying to start such a legislation to have all truss constructed buildings marked universally in some way. Hope it becomes law. We kinda know of most buildings constructed w/ truss, and are all on the same page when it comes to an aggressive interior attack w/o a life hazard . . . let it burn! :D

[ 08-03-2001: Message edited by: toneloc177 ]

[FP&LS Guy]

[ 08-04-2001: Message edited by: FP&LS Guy ]

[ 08-04-2001: Message edited by: FP&LS Guy ]

[BucksEng91]

I see a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking of this incident, I see people trying to claim that the story has been "embellished" (I don't know exactly how you "embellish" a chronology of events...that's a new one on me), and I see people trying to bring politics into the discussion.

All that bullsh*t aside, the simple fact is that THE WATER WAS NOT AVAILABLE BECAUSE OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT. Whether the IC should have told the Feds to go f*ck themselves, whether there was a plan "B" (and Mongo addressed that issue nicely, I think - there were commands given to fall back and shelter), is immaterial to the central issue. Does it really matter that the Rep who got wind of this story is Republican? Does it really matter that the IC decided to toe the line and not scoop water? Why was there a line to toe in the first f*cking place?

We're talking about FISH versus PEOPLE...AGAIN. If they're not taking your home, land, or livelihood, now it seems that the environmentalists don't mind taking your LIFE if the alternative is threatening to one of their precious 'endangered' animals.

Talk all you want about the IC's decisions, about Republicans (nice attempt at spin, by the way, FP&LS, although I question your judgement and/or taste in trying to spin firefighters' deaths into a political issue...everyone else - you won't see FP&LS' post, because he deleted it), about whatever the hell you want. The simple fact is that absent the Endangered Species Act, the water would have been scooped and dropped all day long, and the strong indication is that it would have stopped or even extinguished this fire, which was characterized as "small" early in the day.

As it is, no water was scooped or dropped, and we're left with four young firefighters dead. Spin THAT.

[ 08-04-2001: Message edited by: BucksEng91 ]

[BucksEng91]

Here's another example of the anti-human campaign being waged by environmental extremists, from Fox News:

Tiny Minnow Could Send Cattle Ranchers Out to Pasture

Saturday, August 04, 2001
By Mike Tobin

OKLAHOMA CITY — An endangered two-inch minnow called the Arkansas River shiner could drive farmers off their land because the federal government is making efforts to preserve the fish’s habitats.


The U.S. Department of Fish & Wildlife has begun designating 1,100 miles of riverbank in four states as "critical habitats" to protect the threatened shiner.

Some say the minnow isn’t even a significant link in the food chain, and fishermen don’t like to use it as bait.

"Its value is not necessarily economic," said Jerry Brabander, an Oklahoma ecological field supervisor for the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. "The value really is [that it’s] telling us there is something wrong in the river system."

Cattle rancher Eldon Ridenour worries that his farm along the Canadian River in Oklahoma will be among the properties facing restrictions because of the designation.

"I do not have much control over what the government does — which is very scary," he said.

The irony of the situation is that U.S. Fish & Wildlife didn’t even want to establish the lands and riverbeds as critical habitat. The department was forced to make the designation because of a lawsuit filed by an environmental group called the Center for Biological Diversity.

"The shiner is like a canary in a coal mine," said Peter Galvin, a conservation biologist with the center. "As the fish declines, we see the decline of the overall river system — which we as humans ultimately depend on."

So the habitat designation was made to include riverbanks the shiner calls home that cut across swaths of land where the Beaver, Cimarron, Canadian and Arkansas rivers wind through four different states.

Farmers fear that those little minnows will force their cows to roam in other pastures — though Fish & Wildlife officials say they’re not going to start telling ranchers they can’t let their cattle graze on the riverbanks, or tell farmers they can’t fertilize. But the Oklahoma Farmers Union, for one, doesn’t trust the organizations involved in the lawsuit over the designation.

"Basically, a lot of those groups just want to get cattle off the land," said union vice president Terry Deitrich.

[NYSmokey]

Another tragedy because of some stupid government officials who don't know their ass from their elbow. It annoys me to no end that a piece of legislation meant to protect animals from hunting/poaching dictates how we fight a fire.

Now 4 families have to deal with the horror of losing a loved one. How would those politicians fare if we threw them or their loved ones in the middle of a similiar situation? Not very well. And I'm sure that the law would change real fast. But you see these dumbasses we have in power were brought up with silver spoons in their mouths. They wouldn't have the guts to be firefighters.

Just another reason why when it comes time to vote, get these bums or whoever appointed them out!!!!

AS FOR THE FAMILIES OF THE FALLEN, I AM TRULY SORRY FOR YOUR LOSS :(

Stay safe out there!

[ 08-04-2001: Message edited by: NY Smokey ]

[toneloc177]

bucks, I'm not trying to 'monday morning quarterback' this, because bottom line I WAS NOT THERE! Is it a shame that four ff's lost their lives trying to protect some patch of brush, absolutely! It's a shame that politics (and i could care less from which party it came from) played a big role in the final outcome.

All in all, smokey said it best with regards to the deceased. May God bless, and keep them close.

[killerb]

We can all agree that there's a problem. But what can we DO about it? Expressing our opinions in this forum makes us all feel better, but does it do anything constructive toward actually DOING SOMETHING about the problem? No.

We are OUTRAGED that environmental regulations may have contributed to four firefighter deaths, but the government that imposed these regulations is the same one that presented us with the $100 million pie that we're all drooling over, so to what or whom do we direct this outrage?

Environmental regulations often deprive individuals of the use of their property without compensation. Reference the California farmer who was prosecuted a couple of years ago because he inadvertantly plowed up a colony of endangered rats on his own property.

The Fire Act grants have CREATED a demand. That demand will be used as justification to increase the supply. That additional supply will create more demand, and on and on, ad infinitum. Many of you support this additional supply (YAY! Looks like $200 million next year!).

(Actually a 90% return is pretty efficient for the Federal Government--Social Security should be so efficient.)

This is fine and good, and for myself, whether i agree with the larger issues or not, if the money is available, I have a responsibility to my fire department to access it if I can.

But remember that this money was confiscated from taxpayers under threat of force, and the more money the government "needs", the more will be confiscated.

The people that so graciously made this this money available are the same people that just ate up a $280 BILLION surplus ($1000 for each person in this country) by tacking pork legislation onto existing bills (we've got it, so why not spend it?). They are the same people that are whining and bitching on the "talking head" TV shows that the measly tax refunds to the 50% or so of us who actually PAID income taxes are threatening the "surplus".

Our legislators (as a group) are BUYING VOTES with property and money that is confiscated from others. The recipients of this cornicopia of government goodies now almost outnumber those who actually produce it. (50% of the taxpayers in this country pay 95% of the taxes).

This is rather a larger issue than the topic of this post, but the issue under discussion is a symptom of a larger problem.

Pay very close attention to the people you elect to represent you. The ones who are really looking out for you are few and far between.

Asst. Chief Bill

[BucksEng91]

KillerB -

Great, great post. Couldn't have said it better myself, either about the enviro-wacko agenda, or about the vote-buying scheme we call the FIRE Act.

Hear, hear!

[Althea Forhan]

Hey, Larry Cook!

Were you referring to the Klamath watershed crisis in your post on page two? That particular incident is a couple hours from where I live, and let me tell you--it really sucks--the farmers are on their way to financial ruin--and as one homemade sign pointed out--"No water, no barley, NO BEER!" :eek: I really feel sorry for those guys...

Althea

[Dalmatian90]

Yes, their deaths are related in some way to those 'treehuggers'

Yes, it is.

But not today's environmentalists.

The 'treehuggers' whose actions since the early part of the 20th century have led to combustible forests are the commercial forestry interests which adopted a suppress all fires by 10am policy.

We recognize now the problem with that, that it has allowed fuel loads to reach levels unprecedented in forests that used to burn regularly and slowly.

Had we not as aggressively and effectively fought fires for most of the last century, today's fires would be significantly less intense.

Even if you believe (and I don't) that environmentalist concerns delayed drawing water to put on this fire, such environmentalist concerns are no more or less responsible (which I believe is nill) in the deaths of those firefighters than the last century's practices of the US Forest Service and commercial logging interests that created unusually dangerous woodlands.

[mongofire_99]

From the information given to us this far, it is obvious that environmental BS played a significant part in this event. Whether there was an actual ban on using the water, or it was implied they couldn't use it or just wrongly percieved by the dispatcher or IC that they had to have permission to use it makes absolutely no difference.

The actual/implied/percieved threat of trouble raining down on whoever gives the go-ahead to use that water was obviously there or this wouldn't be an issue - the water would have been dumped when it was aked for.

But instead, the dispatcher had to find some bureaucrat to say "YES." And that in and of itself leads to the logical conclusion that he/she was concerned about the treehugging aspects of the use of the water. (And probably his/her own ass if he/she said "go-ahead and get that water from on top of those endangered fish" without proper approval.)

There should have never been (and there isn't supposed to be) any question about it. You need water - you get water.

But there was...

I wonder why...

[RJE]

This is a little unrelated, and it probably happens all over, but...

Combination of example of envirowackos, lack of knowledge of "endangered species" and disregard of/disrespect for property owner's rights.

Background:
Suburb of Tulsa, on the edge of developed area. Primary road has a strip mall on one side of street. Other side is a small ranch. Ranch owner wants to sub-divide and develop the road frontage.

Problem:
There are prairie dogs on his land. Note that in this area, prairie dogs are common (by no means threatened, let alone endangered). They are also distructive. They are on the list of "pest animals" and can be hunted as "varmints". But not in this area, because he's in the city limits of Bixby, and the limits of Tulsa Co., both of which have laws regarding discharge of firearms. Also, this wouldn't be safe, because of nearby housing.

So he tried to bring in an animal control company to live-trap and remove them.

Then the protestors showed up.

Later (last week some time) the organizer (I think) tried to get a fundraiser together to raise $30,000 to "relocate" the prairie dogs. She raised about $5000 (not many people around here are sensitive to these pests!). So the landowner prepared to bring his "exterminators" (the protestors word) back in.

Yesterday, the protestors were out in force (50 or so - yeah right) blocking access to the land.

Last night, there was a "rally" at a restaurant across the street. The landowner crashed the party. Net result - a (verbal) fight and ends with him peeling out of the parking lot. Unfortunately, he hit a news camera man on the way (maybe intentionally - the news portrayed it as such).

Now I can't condone the assault with a deadly pickup truck (I personally think the guy should be in jail on assault charges - remains to be seen whether that happens) --- but what's up with these people trying to deny him use or (lately) even ACCESS to his own land!?!?

Over a stinking rodent, no less!

[SilverCity4]

I find this whole prairie dog story very amusing (I'm just west of Tulsa and Bixby), and would find it even more amusing if it was happening somewhere besides here.

BUT, it does illustrate how nuts people go over freakin' animals. Something RJE didn't mention, is that this animal removal company was moving the whole colony of prairie dogs to a location down by OKC, where they can frolic and do prairie dog things. It's not like they were going to be harmed.

The alternative that was presented after the first protest was to move them out in the country by Broken Arrow (suburb of Tulsa) but apparently, that's also met with some resistance.

And another point: it's not like the prairie dogs have been living there for decades. A pair escaped from a petting zoo about five years ago, and took it upon themselves to create a little family. The area residents have been feeding them so much junk from the local pizza place that there is some concern about how overweight and unhealthy they are, so they would actually BENEFIT by moving away
.
This whole situation is ridiculous, but it's been making for a good laugh.

[RJE]

Yeah, it's funny Silver...except when they start trying (allegedly) to run people over!