Senator Conrad Burns apology to FF's

[NYSmokey]

Firehouse.com Home > News Headlines

Montana Senator Apologizes for Criticizing Firefighters
Updated: 07-28-2006 09:31:52 AM
JOHN MacDONALD
Associated Press

Sen. Conrad Burns apologized Thursday for criticizing a firefighting team for their work on a blaze in southern Montana, saying his frustration came from a meeting with upset landowners.

Burns confronted members of a Virginia firefighting team at an airport and told them they had done a "poor job," according to a state official's report obtained Thursday.

"In retrospect, I wish I had chosen my words more carefully," Burns said in a statement. "My criticism of the way the fire was handled should not have been directed at those who were working hard to put it out."

Members of the "hotshot" wildfire crew said Burns confronted them in the Billings airport Sunday while they were awaiting a flight home, according to a report by Paula Rosenthal, a state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation employee.

The firefighters said Burns told them they had done a "poor job" and should have listened to the concerns of ranchers, the report said.

"My frustration came from meeting with landowners who were critical of the way the fire was handled," Burns said. "Whatever the reason, I should have simply thanked those who worked hard to put out the fire."

The hotshot crew was battling a 143-square-mile wildfire near Pompeys Pillar National Monument, east of Billings. The blaze started July 12 and was contained last week.

Rosenthal, who prepared her report at the direction of agency supervisors, said she was sent to the airport to meet with Burns after reports of an "altercation."

"The toughest part of the conversation was the point where the senator was critical of a firefighter sitting across from us in the gate area," Rosenthal wrote. "I offered to the senator that our firefighters make around $8 to $12 an hour and time-and-a-half for overtime. He seemed a bit surprised that it wasn't higher."

She said Burns also was concerned and upset about the "command and control" system for firefighting efforts and made "several comments about us `not letting ranchers fight the fire on their own land.'"

She said she responded that that safety is always a priority.

"He replied, `We're fighting a war on terror and we're concerned about safety there too, but we're out there doing it,'" Rosenthal wrote.

The superintendent of the hotshot team, Jeff Koenig based in Staunton, Va., confirmed his team encountered Burns at the airport, but referred questions to spokeswoman JoBeth Brown.

Brown said members of the team who were present "have chosen not to say anything more about this."

"They're firefighters first," she said, "and they're really just interested in fighting fire."

Bob Harrington, forestry division administrator for the state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, said Thursday that Rosenthal's conversation with Burns was cordial. However, Harrington said the firefighters reported a less cordial exchange with the senator.

"I wasn't present for that, nor was Paula, but it is my understanding from discussions that there was some level of lively discussion, shall we say?" Harrington said. He declined to elaborate.

Casey Judd, business manager for the Federal Wildland Fire Service Association, which represents federal firefighters, said he was disappointed Burns confronted the hotshot team.

"We have expressed our support for him in the past," Judd said. "But to make a point of blistering a bunch of hotshots, it's really disconcerting."

Burns, a Republican facing a tough re-election challenge this fall, said Thursday he has since addressed his concerns about the fire's handling to the proper officials.

"Please accept my apology for any hard feelings that my comments may have caused," Burns said. "I have the utmost respect for the job firefighters have done in Montana."

Maybe next time he will think before inserting his foot into his mouth

[Tann3100]

Sorry jumped off topic for a minute.

This guy is real smart ticking off firefighters during election year.............I would say he probally will not be elected to office again. I dont understand how they say they have the opmost respect for firefighters but yet they jab a knife in your back with statements like he has made. Will watch and see how this unfolds.

[NYSmokey]

I believe Mikeylikesit is all set now. I'll let the WebTeam elaborate if they want to. ;)

[webteam]

Sorry folks we took care of Mikey. It was in the middle of some others posting threads every few minutes so misread and apologize :) FOR THAT ONE, not the other legitimate ban.

Enjoy the weekend, back to the topic...

WebTeam

[MIKEYLIKESIT]

Sorry Senator Conrad Burns (R) Montana. Your lame apology dosent cut it.

[MIKEYLIKESIT]

Burns apologizes to firefighters
By GWEN FLORIO
Tribune Capitol Bureau


HELENA — U.S. Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., grappled with new criticisms Thursday after a state report said he approached a wildland firefighting crew in the Billings airport and told them they'd "done a poor job" battling area blazes.

Paula Rosenthal, a state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation employee, wrote in her report that she went to the airport on Sunday after hearing "that an altercation was occurring between Senator Conrad Burns and a hotshot crew."



"In retrospect, I wish I had chosen my words more carefully," Burns said in a statement issued Thursday night. "My criticism of the way in which the fire was handled should not have been directed at those who were working hard to put it out."

Burns' earlier remarks were seized upon both by firefighters — "Why should Burns comment to hotshots except to say 'THANK YOU VERY MUCH?'" was one missive on an Internet message board for firefighters — and Democrats, who view Burns' Senate seat as among those most vulnerable in November elections.

State Democratic Party Chairman Dennis McDonald, a rancher and volunteer firefighter, demanded an apology.

The incident with the hotshot crew, first reported Thursday in Lee Newspapers, happened a day after Burns attended a meeting of ranchers affected by fires near Pompeys Pillar east of Billings. Several of those ranchers were upset at the way the fires were managed.

Burns' spokesman Matt Mackowiak said that the senator's conversation with the Virginia hotshot crew was "part of an inquiry (about the fires) that happened at the airport. He has made additional inquiries at senior levels in Washington."

Bob Harrington of the DNRC, who handled calls about the incident on Thursday, said he'd heard the exchange between Burns and the firefighters was "lively."

Upon hearing of the exchange, Rosenthal went immediately to the airport to talk with Burns and the crew "to try and get an understanding of what was going on," he said.

"We typically don't have these types of exchanges," Harrington added.

Firefighters around the region were frosted at reports of the incident.

"Why in the backdrop of an airport in Eastern Montana, bash the brave men and women on loan to us, whose only responsibility on the fire was to take orders?" wondered Kurt E. Bushnell, president of the Montana State Firemen's Association, in a statement about the issue.

Casey Judd, the business manager for the Federal Wildland Fire Service Association, which is an employee association for federal wildland firefighters, called the incident "frustrating."

"I think it is demoralizing. These are mostly young folks," he said of the firefighters. "They could be working at some municipality and making a whole heck of a lot more money, and here they are, using hand tools and cutting line and getting blindsided."

Judd suggested that Burns "should come out and cut some line and spend a week or two away from home, off the clock, and lay in the dirt."

The association links to a Web site, www.wildlandfire.com, that contained heated comments about the incident Thursday.

Democrats, meanwhile, seized upon the incident as more proof for their contention that Burns, a three-term Republican incumbent, is out of touch with his constituents.

McDonald characterized the remarks as "outrageous insults," and Burns' Democratic opponent, state Sen. Jon Tester of Big Sandy, said that "it is the responsibility of every Montanan to support our firefighters and let them do their jobs."

Burns and Tester are in a tight race and despite his incumbency, Burns' ratings in various polls remain low.

A Survey USA poll of 600 Montana voters taken in mid-July ranks Burns last among all the senators in terms of net job approval in their home state, with only 37 percent polled liking the job he's doing, compared to 57 percent who don't. His Survey USA net approval ranking has hovered around 99 and 100 since January. Last August, he was ranked 92nd out of 100 senators.

Judd suggested that Burns sided with the ranchers because they have more political clout than firefighters.

According to Rosenthal's report, Burns told the hotshots that "running these fires out of Boise is ridiculous. The government needs to listen to ranchers."

Boise is the home of the National Interagency Fire Center, which coordinates wildland firefighting efforts.

Betty Tempero, who ranches near Pompeys Pillar, said she agrees with that assessment.

"We don't mean to criticize, but landowners know the terrain and know the area" and should be able to give suggestions as to where fires might best be fought, she said.

She and her husband, Clair, lost 75 percent of their grazing land to the fires and are shipping all of their cattle to leased land in Sand Springs, about 150 miles away, she said.

Contact Gwen Florio at 406-442-9493, or gfloriogreatfal.gannett.com

According to other published reports the actual line from the good senator was.... “See that guy over there? He hasn’t done a God-damned thing. They sit around. I saw it up on the Wedge fire and in northwestern Montana some years ago. It’s wasteful. You probably paid that guy $10,000 to sit around. It’s gotta change.’’

[hwoods]

Maryland is NOT Montana. And, I am not running for office, nor am I trying to get the Montana rancher's support for anything. Having said that, The Forest Service needs an overhaul. As one who has Been To, Fought, Watched, and Managed Wildfires, I know just a bit about them. And I am far from convinced that our present system is adequate for the job at hand. While I don't intend to monday morning quarterback a Fire, and certainly not show disrespect to some good people, I do think the current SYSTEM needs to be replaced. Following criticism from Fires some years back, promises were made, but not followed up with action. There is absolutely no reason to import Firefighters from out of the Country, when Tens of Thousands of American firefighters are sitting around unused. Same thing for Apparatus. Several years ago in Arizona, the world watched as whole towns were threatened, and some lost, as a huge Fire swept across part of the state. A constant refrain from the Fire Area was "We don't have enough apparatus to protect structures." The duration of the Fire was such that Apparaus could have been driven from Maine and Florida to Arizona, and still been used there for a week or more. Federal "Procedures" would not allow this. Stupid.

[MIKEYLIKESIT]

Harve you never blame the troops for the shortcomigs of the leadership. The Senator was way out of line.

[hwoods]

Harve you never blame the troops for the shortcomigs of the leadership. The Senator was way out of line.

We Agree. Absolutely. I hope my post wasn't taken as condoning the Senator's actions.

[MIKEYLIKESIT]

Harve ....We ALWAYS agree ...lol (at least to be agreeable when we disagree) :p

[mcfd45]

Is this guy for real. Ok people that live on the land that is burning do know the land better, but most of them don't know anything about wildfires. I myself don't know much about them but I do know that their are several factors on the growth of the fire. Factors such as heat, wind, the sun, available fuels, and many other things. If i was on a hotshot crew and some rancher started telling me what to do I would tell him to fight the fire since he knows it all. All the rancher is worried about is his house and the local TSC. After that he doesn't care what happens to the rest of the community so why should we put this guy in charge? this senator needs to apologize to the brave people that put it on the line to protect his state.
J

[MTFires]

This nut has been a senator for 18 years, is from MT originally and should know how fires are fought. I have voted for him due to lack of serious competition in the past, but that ended with this episode. Most senators would thank fire crews they encounter, but this jerk insults them? From the people i have talked to, he just single handedly turned a hotly contested senate race into a landslide for the other guy.
I wish to apologize for helping to elect this piece of work to represent MT. He is NOT representative of most of the people here.

[ChiefDog]

I think the Senator needs to take a NIMS class. If he is voting for laws that require the training so that all people from local to federal are on the same page he should be too. If he is a 18 year Senator, you would think he would know how the system works in western wildfires and who he needs to talk to with concerns. (Even without taking the NIMS Class.) You don't confront a "mutual aid" type crew that just busted butt to help matters under the direction of the Incident Commander. I hope the people of his state hold him accountable for his actions. He should be a man, take responsibility for his comments and go where ever he needs to and apologize to the actual people he talked to in the airport. Not some newpaper article in another state they will never see.

[DennisTheMenace]

Harve you never blame the troops for the shortcomigs of the leadership. The Senator was way out of line.The Senator has acknowledged that and apologized. At least his tiraid brought the real problem out in to the open a little more.

[SamsonFCDES]

Burns is a grandstanding moron politician (most of the big time ones are IMO) trying to get some cheap votes by "sticking up for" the local folks who suffered a huge fire which just happens to be sight of (literally) the only big city (not that big, 100,000 or so) in the state of Montana.

It backfired (no pun intended) to an incredible degree and likely cost him many thousands of votes in what is a tight election race.

Another factor may be that one Rancher to lost 68 of 70 sections on his ranch and 30-70 head of cattle (reports varie) is a hard core active republican and a freind of Burns.

Burns knows nothing of fighting fire, I know this from personal experience. It was 2-3 years ago when the State of Montana spent 72 million dollars on wildfire, majority of it going to contracted fire engines and crew from out of state. This really made zero sence to me and I wrote a 5 page letter stating this and outlining some possible solutions. I sent it to all 3 of MTs DC politicians, Burns being one of them. The other 2 had decent responses, with Rehburg actually discussing the issue and lamenting the buricratic momentum that has messed up the Federal Fire service and wildfire issues in general. Burns sent a responce also...ABOUT NAFTA!!!! The Jerk sent me a mass coppied NAFTA letter.

Burns knows nothing of fire fighting, ignor the moron, vote for Tester if you live in MT. I am not a political person, but this guy needs to go.

Now back to the issue at hand...widlfire, the feds, the locals...not working well at all.

1 The fire ecology is majorly screwed up on 99% of forest land. Its supposed to burn on a regular basis...supress fires for 100 years...you get what you sow. Management of forest lands needs to be fixed.

2 Feds seem to dispise locals. Before you get excited hear me out. I have been volly MT fire since 1993, I worked for Interagency (USFS, BLM, and DNRC) for 3 years while going to college, I now work in emergency management. I have seen all sides of the coin, and I have to say that the Feds approach to working with local resources and people is lacking in huge ways. Especially when you bring in an team to work a big fire from out of state. They act like the locals dont exist and like they are little kings of their temporary little world. Not NIMS or team spirit or a good way of doing business with the locals. I have scene this more times then I have seen a good situation and I believe this is the norm.

3 IA resources. The IA resources for much of the state and Fed lands in MT is lacking severly. There needs to be more people, engines, and aircraft on these fires when they are small. But its expensive...or is it? By keeping the fires small by having more IA resources on hand you would prevent the 20 Type 6 long trains of out of state contracted engines which eat up a LOT of money.

The most cost effective way of beefing up IA resources is not by getting more green or white type 6 engines with college kids sitting around waiting for the call.

The way to increase the effectiveness of IA in MT and other rural areas is form the roots up. Get the local counties, VFDs, etc...built up to the point where they can hit hard and fast and keep the catestrophic fires to a minimum.

I personally know VFDs with 40's and 50's vintage apparatus which is dangerous in every way to operate, completely unreiable, and woefully ill equiped...small wonder they loose a fire once in a while. But even with such difficult conditions I would estimate a 95% catch record with a few fires needing mutual aid and a few getting into the catestrophic category.

If they coudl get there with a little more and a little faster...then we might see a 99% catch rate.

There needs to be a lot of fixing, tweaking, changine of institutional momentum, feds working from the bottom up instead of top down, etc...

But Burns yelling at a shot crew (far from lazy, underpaid, overworked IMO) is not going to solve anything...except getting him fired from his cushy job of represeting MT in DC.

[hwoods]

Quick Question. You've been there, and you know a bit about this. USFS, BIA, BLM, etc. get rid of Engines on a regular basis. These are not worn out clunkers, they still have a lot of good years of use left in them. Are they donated to local VFDs out in your area??

[MIKEYLIKESIT]

The Senator has acknowledged that and apologized. At least his tiraid brought the real problem out in to the open a little more. What problem? That he is a jerk? He WAS way out of line and his apology was LAME-O.

[SamsonFCDES]

Quick Question. You've been there, and you know a bit about this. USFS, BIA, BLM, etc. get rid of Engines on a regular basis. These are not worn out clunkers, they still have a lot of good years of use left in them. Are they donated to local VFDs out in your area??


I am not aware of any being donated to a VFD in our area, or in the state for that matter. I believe they all go to Federal Surplus property where they are sold off or issued to second tier federal fire services. From memory I believe they keep the Type 6 engines for 6 years, the Type 3 or other larger engines for 10. You are correct that many of these vehicles are in prime condition and have a lot more fire service life in them. They are maintained to a very high degree, no leakes allowed!

Our state surplus property could possibly get ahold of them, but the system seems to have broken down. We have put in request numerous times, no luck at all.

The local VFDs do get state DNRC trucks (I am speaking about Montana here, I dont know how the other states work it), there are something like 300 of those "co-op" trucks state wide (big state though, not many trucks for the square miles covered) ranging from very nice F550s to old dodge power wagons that are nearly impossible to keep on the road. The DNRC can only replace a small amout of these units on a yealy basis so many of them are 30+ years old, but its far better then nothing...most of the time.

We have one of the co-op engines, an old Air Force Chevy 4 door 3/4 ton with a slip on unit. Its wheel base is so long that its prone to hanging up off road. We try to use this only as a last resort when we are fully committed to the battle.

I would wadger the NIOWA is the authority here for fed surplus propety and how that all works.

We did once manage to purchase a old BLM type 3 engine through surplus once, it was only $14,000! For whatever reason we had to work with Fed folks out of Florida to make the deal work!?!? :confused:

A great deal actually, we have been trying to repeat this success over the last few years, no luck yet. Its on an international Chassis with only 33,000 miles! It had a CAFS/Slurry system (yes, Slurry) that was split into a 700 gallon water, 50 gallon Class A, and 50 Gallon Slurry mix. All steel tank, heavy as heck, and very corroded. The CAFS system was hammered! The unit was 10 years old and had some very corrosive stuff in it for that whole time with questionable flushing having taken place over that time. The slurry system was completely rotted out, the CAFS was still workable but was a very complex system to work. It finally died while performing structure protection duties at a large wildfire complex so we had to renovate it.

We are lucky to be better off lately compared to other MT departments becuase we have oil and gas in our county. The coffers have been filling so we rehabed the old BLM heavy.

We put an Odin Faom CAFS on it, very simple to use. 800 Gallon poly water tank with 20 gallon foam cell. Generally cleaning up and some rhino liner work on the utility box. 36,000$ total, made a world of difference. Incredible for structure protection. We also put a Firefox front bumper/remote control monitor gun on it as we have a lot of pump and roll. It is MUCH better then running/walking beside the truck, and its a heck of a lot safer then riding on the truck (no no!!! no tailboards, no brush truck cowboys, there are better ways!).

[SamsonFCDES]

This Type 3 is the only Fed surplus engine operating in our area that I know about. As I said, $14,000 form fed surplus, then we had to put about $36,000 into it for the new CAFS, tank, and monitor plus micilaneous. It has been a GREAT unit, can crawl anywhere, and has saved at least 3 structures taht I know of becuase I was present when it happened, and probally a few more that I missed out on. All in all a great investment...I just wish we could do it again! We could use 4 of these things!!!

I do wish the Feds would use more trickle down with their surplus. I believe it could pay huge dividins by enhancing local Initial Attack strenght.

Hope that answers you question, for the intricassies of this NIOWA knows the Fed system inside and out, maybe he will notice this thread.

[NonSurfinCaFF]

I love the way people love to bash the Feds without knowing what they are talking about. The USFS typically runs light type 6 engines (1 tons) for 5 years, heavy type 6 engines (Ford F450, 550) up to 10 years and heavies type 3,4, & 5s for 15 years. When its time to get rid of the engines they are sold to local fire departments for $1, yes 100 cents. The disposal is handled through the state forestry offices so if you guys are not getting these deals look at your state, not the Feds. This only applies to the fire equipment so a slip on engine will have the truck sold at auction and the slip on unit will be passed along to the state forestry agency. This is probably the situation you will have in Montana since the Model 52 in several sizes is quite popular. Having to buy a truck for it is not as nice as getting a whole unit for $1 but a $10,000-20,000 slip on unit practically for free is still quite a deal.

As far as attitude from the teams you have to consider the wide area they cover, you know all those bone head departments people like to bash on, will how many times do you think you would like to get burned by these knuckle heads before you give up and pull known resources. While all of us have our good and bad crews, a USFS, NPS, BLM, USF&WS, BIA crew can only be so bad, unlike xyz fire department that puts any Joe Blow behind the wheel of a rolling junk pile claiming to be an engine. It is not uncommon to have departments practically tow an engine to a fire then try and get the fire to buy new tires to replace the bald ones it came with and get the fire to provide $20,000 in maintenace and repairs that were long over due before the fire started.

The Feds follow the 310-1 very closely, you don't get to serve in a position until you have demonstrated that position with a trainer who has taken the responsibility for that person by saying they are qualified. I personally know of many (including some large well respected agencies) that think if you take the class you is one or if you are a certain rank you get certain quals with the bugles.

Yes there are plenty of ways the Fed fire system can be improved but the Fed wildland agencies are at the top in regards to fighting fire, it seems our upper management can't find its own butt lately, but the folks at the district level are trying their best, if you try and work with them instead of bitching at them they can be a great resource. We had great working relationships with the majority of the with the local departments where I have worked. I know this isn't true in all places but that is a two way street.

As far as the "honorable" senator he showed his absolute ignorance of how wildfires are managed with his comments, a bad sign for a Western senator who should know at least a little about such things. Bashing on the troops whether they are firefighters, law enforcement or marines is always a bad move and poor judgement.

[SamsonFCDES]

I love the way people love to bash the Feds without knowing what they are talking about.

Ad Hominim...the figures I gave were "good enough for government work".

The USFS typically runs light type 6 engines (1 tons) for 5 years, heavy type 6 engines (Ford F450, 550) up to 10 years and heavies type 3,4, & 5s for 15 years.

The type 3 we got our hands on was 10 years old at the time of replacement, it was a BLM engine, I dont know if they have a different schedual then the USFS.

When its time to get rid of the engines they are sold to local fire departments for $1, yes 100 cents. The disposal is handled through the state forestry offices so if you guys are not getting these deals look at your state, not the Feds. This only applies to the fire equipment so a slip on engine will have the truck sold at auction and the slip on unit will be passed along to the state forestry agency. This is probably the situation you will have in Montana since the Model 52 in several sizes is quite popular. Having to buy a truck for it is not as nice as getting a whole unit for $1 but a $10,000-20,000 slip on unit practically for free is still quite a deal.

As I mentioned earlier, I have never heard of something like this happening in my state (or ND, SD, or WY for that matter)...and I also said that I believe our surplus system is BROKEN.

No surprise here when you consider our politicians expertise in regards to the fire service... :rolleyes:

Answer me this, can a MT department come to your state (or any other state for that matter) and buy a firetruck for a dollar???

If so I will be out there with 100 buckeroos (donated personally mind you) and 100 Volly guys to drive them back. :)

As far as attitude from the teams you have to consider the wide area they cover,

There is no excuse for a IC team with a bad attitude. They have to remember who they work for, who they are guests of, and that they are profesisonals.

I have very very high expectations of the IC elite, they have most often dissapointed those expectatoins.

you know all those bone head departments people like to bash on, will how many times do you think you would like to get burned by these knuckle heads before you give up and pull known resources. While all of us have our good and bad crews, a USFS, NPS, BLM, USF&WS, BIA crew can only be so bad, unlike xyz fire department that puts any Joe Blow behind the wheel of a rolling junk pile claiming to be an engine. It is not uncommon to have departments practically tow an engine to a fire then try and get the fire to buy new tires to replace the bald ones it came with and get the fire to provide $20,000 in maintenace and repairs that were long over due before the fire started.

I expect an IC team to rise above and do their job to near perfection. There is to much at stake to expect any less. Regardless of how abrasive, wild, out there the locals are the IC team still has a job to do, citizens to serve, and the public trust to uphold.

Yes there are plenty of ways the Fed fire system can be improved but the Fed wildland agencies are at the top in regards to fighting fire,

Bold Statement...The burden of proof lies you with you now! :D

it seems our upper management can't find its own butt lately, but the folks at the district level are trying their best, if you try and work with them instead of bitching at them they can be a great resource. We had great working relationships with the majority of the with the local departments where I have worked. I know this isn't true in all places but that is a two way street.

We get along just fine with the local feds, to much top down BS though. The thing is that there arnt many Fed resources around. 95% of the IA duties falls to the locals in our region, its simply a matter of numbers. An really, what the hell is a single type 6/3 man engine with 300 gallons of watter going to do to a running grass and sagebrush fire after a 75 miles drive one way to get the sence?

Not a damn thing, thats what.

The local resources here prop up the Fed and state resources far more then most reslise. Locals are the first line of defence, district Fed resources only add a minimal amount of IA power to that system (again, this is my region, results may vary), when it gets beyond that is when things get really expensive...

As far as the "honorable" senator he showed his absolute ignorance of how wildfires are managed with his comments, a bad sign for a Western senator who should know at least a little about such things. Bashing on the troops whether they are firefighters, law enforcement or marines is always a bad move and poor judgement.

Well, if we can just change all of the MT state upper management, the Fed upper managment, the surplus system, etc...

Then all will be well...not in my lifetime though.

[SamsonFCDES]

Report: Burns irked by Boise fire management
Released documents include more details about senator's run-in
By CHARLES S. JOHNSON, Gazette State Bureau
More details emerged Monday from U.S. Forest Service documents about Sen. Conrad Burns' recent confrontation with firefighters, including the senator's complaints that managing fires from Boise doesn't work.

The Gazette State Bureau on Friday requested and received Monday three pages of internal Forest Service reports on what happened at the Billings airport the morning of July 23, when Burns complained about how the Bundy Railroad fire was fought.

Tom Roach, a division group supervisor on the Bundy Railroad fire, wrote he was walking on the airport tarmac past Burns, who "was staring at the NRIMT logo on my shirt." NRIMT stands for Northern Rockies Incident Team.

"He began following me as I passed and began yelling at me, 'Are you from Boise? Are you from Boise?' " Roach wrote. "I replied, 'No, sir.' He responded, 'Good, your life has been saved.' " Roach wrote that he walked away from Burns.

The Forest Service report included the criticisms that Burns made to Paula Rosenthal, a public information officer from the state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, about how the Bundy Railroad fire was fought. Rosenthal was called to the airport by Forest Service officials to talk to Burns after he criticized some members of the Augusta (Va.) Hot Shots. Her separate state report was made public Thursday.

Burns, she wrote, had these comments:
"This command/control doesn't work."
"Managing these fires from Boise does not work."
"Ranchers complaining firefighters/engines driving right by while their land is burning."

The report contained an account by Gabe Templeton, one of the Augusta Hot Shots, describing what happened to him and fellow team members Jeff Cleek and Jude Waerig. It said the three men were sitting in the Billings airport waiting for their flight when Burns approached them with an outstretched hand and asked if they were firefighters.

"I shook his hand and replied yes," Templeton wrote. "He shook my hand introduced himself and then replied, 'What a piss poor job' we were doing. I replied, 'Have a nice day.' The senator mentioned that we were 'wasting a lot of money and creating a cottage industry.' He also told us that we needed to listen more to the ranchers. I replied that 'we are pretty low on the totem pole.' Then he walked off."

In response, Burns' spokesman James Pendleton said Monday: "This indicates the level of response with the situation."

Pendleton noted that Burns issued an apology Thursday night, saying he shouldn't have criticized the firefighters, who do "the hard, tough job of battling one of Mother Nature's toughest beasts." The senator said he has nothing but admiration for firefighters.

"He freely admits he took out his frustration on the wrong people," Pendleton said, adding that Burns was upset over preparation and coordination of firefighting efforts. "There's definitely some problems that need to be addressed. He's frustrated with Boise, and he let it go."

Dan Jiron, a Forest Service spokesman in Washington, said, "Senator Burns has apologized about this. As far as we're concerned, that's the end of the story."

He said firefighters have done a great job in the field, with a 99 percent success rate with their initial attack on fires.

"The reason why we have had that success is we have been properly funded and equipped to do our jobs, and Senator Burns is the chair of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee," Jiron said. "He's always been supporting funding and the right equipment."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I doubt I would have had the paitients to take crap off of Burns, what jackass!

I wasnt going to vote for him anyway, but now I am not going to vote for him twice! :D

I think the problem is that the entire system is made out of the wrong stuff...

Governmentium: A major research institution (MRI) has recently announced the discovery of the heaviest chemical element yet known to science. The new element has been tentatively named Governmentium. Governmentium has 1 neutron, 12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy neutrons, and 224 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312. These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since governmentium has no electrons, it is inert. However, it can be detected as it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A minute amount of governmentium causes one reaction to take over four days to complete when it would normally take less than a second. Governmentium has a normal half-life of three years; it does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places. In fact, governmentium's mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause some morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes.

This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to speculate that governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as Critical Morass.

[neiowa]

The FEDS have two major surplus systems. DOD and GSA for most everything else.

DOD surplus goes they the DLA DRMS system. Fire Depts thru their state forester, thru US Forestry can request (and often get) most any DOD surplus property available (thousands of items every week) that they can justify for wildland fire protection. This includes dozens of trucks every week (80% milspec AWD from 5/4t 4x4 to 20t 8x6 & 20% civilian - mix of RWD & AWD). At least 1/2 of the DOD trucks (including many that just need batteries, fuel) get auctioned off to the public/surplus dealers. Same for many civilian model trucks. All the DOD surplus equipment is FREE to the State Foresters. It costs real $ to get from whereever it sits to the fire dept. Someone has to make it happen and pay for the transport (and needed repairs and modifications for fire use). And there are real structural fire trucks and airfield trucks in the system. The equipment is a LOAN to the FD/no title but you can do most anything you want as far as modifiying it for fire use.


If this equipment/these trucks are not reused by the Feds (as US Forestery) the 50 state Surplus Property Offices can request/get them and can transfer/sell them to gov't bodies/nonprofits/etc. I think this is where Samson got his IH 4x4. The State Surplus Property Offices get the equipment for FREE (with title) and everyone that I know then SELLS it to the end recipient. This cash pays for transportation and to operate the State Surplus Property Office in the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed. A bone of contention. Most State Surplus Property Offices run a warehouse/yard where they have inventory on hand.

GSA is supposed to receive all the surplus equipment/vehicles from all the non DOD branches (NASA is the only exception I've come across). Same process as DOD. Forester can request for loan to FD then State Surplus Property Offices can request (with title).

It's my impression that most State Foresters are brokedick when if comes to using the FEPP program. But to be "fair", in Iowa the program head has it as about her 10th additional duty and ZERO budget to do anything. The State Surplus Property Offices seem to me to be pretty poor and that is all the do and they have $ to work with. How hard is it to make a profit selling free inventory? Samson's engine costs $14K??? Spend 15-30min on the phone determining condition of a truck, 30sec doing an online req. and send a semi/trailer you got for free thru the system to pick it up in bugtussle, Mt. Perhaps ad some wrecker expense at the pickup point. Perhaps you DRIVE IT TO HOME Add in A.) an inspection before pickup or b.) get it home/decide it won't work and AUCTION it off to the public/cash in to the State Surplus Property Office.

We have used DOD surplus to rebuild our FD and has only works because I've made it work. Has worked very well. www.stanleyiowa.com

Have not used GSA because I've found no way to view listings of GSA surplus (you need a secret decoder ring and membership in the club to get a password to the GSA website).


Yeah system is broke.

You want to see what your FD missed out on go to www.govliquidation.com This is all the LEFTOVER DOD property being auctioned off to the public.

[neiowa]

It would be very interesting to know how the Forester Type ___ engines/trucks are disposed of at the end of the Federal Service Life. There is a "loophole" that essentially allow a Fed agency the OPTION of trading in equipment to the seller of a like new replacement piece of equipment. You can bet that gets bent a bit. Called an "Exchange/Sale Authority".

So who makes these Forestry trucks used by BLM/etc? Ask the Sales agency/Mfg concerned if they are receiving the old trucks as a trade in on the new units.

[hwoods]

I love the way people love to bash the Feds without knowing what they are talking about. The USFS typically runs light type 6 engines (1 tons) for 5 years, heavy type 6 engines (Ford F450, 550) up to 10 years and heavies type 3,4, & 5s for 15 years. When its time to get rid of the engines they are sold to local fire departments for $1, yes 100 cents. The disposal is handled through the state forestry offices so if you guys are not getting these deals look at your state, not the Feds. This only applies to the fire equipment so a slip on engine will have the truck sold at auction and the slip on unit will be passed along to the state forestry agency. This is probably the situation you will have in Montana since the Model 52 in several sizes is quite popular. Having to buy a truck for it is not as nice as getting a whole unit for $1 but a $10,000-20,000 slip on unit practically for free is still quite a deal.

Bro, You and I usually are on the same side of the discussion, and I respect your position, but I can't buy this story, this time. Here's where I'm at: I can't comment on how long the Feds keep apparatus, I've never been a party to that information. However, I have what I consider a good handle on Surplus Property and I'll explain: I'm employed in Fire Protection by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Forest Service. I am also a Volunteer Fire Chief, and I chair the Legislative Committee for the Maryland Fire Chief's Association, as well as being the Chair of The Maryland State Firemen's Association's Surplus Property Committee. I have been working for over TWO YEARS trying to find a Surplus Engine from BLM, BIA, USFS, NPS, and anyone else in the Federal Alphabet soup. I have a trail of emails that make a "Get-rich-quick" chain letter look small by comparision. I still have not found a single one. None. No one can, or will, tell me where these things go. Several folks have said that I ought to hang around Long Beach Harbor (Calif.) and watch what gets loaded onto ships for the Federal Giveaway programs overseas. No one in Maryland has purchased an Engine for a dollar from a Federal agency, Period. Never. My boss has climbed all over people all thru the Fed system, no luck. The Congressman for my district is a member of a VFD, and he has been asking pointed questions, and not getting a straight answer. Something Ain't Right.

[NonSurfinCaFF]

Ok, maybe I was a bit annoyed but there is a distinct bag on the Feds theme in these forums. Some deserved (FEMA, DC) some not.

I don't expect you to know how long we run our apparatus, however the trucks are already being practically given away, if the states are taking advantage that is your states problem, not a Fed one, I know California and Arizona have functional programs in place because our equipment is out there being used by the local departments. Bashing the Feds because your own state is sticking it to you is uncalled for. Maybe the Feds should handle the door to door delivery but then I'm sure some would complain that the Feds are getting involved in a state issue, so you see its a no win situation. AS NIOWA said cheap ex Fed engines are out there, its a matter of dealing with several levels of government. I know of entire FD's outfitted with ex-fed engines structure (DOD) & wildland (USFS, BLM etc). Alot of this equipment sits because nobody takes it.

Part of the USFS mission is supporting rural fire protection so our equipment is sold for $1, what the states do with it I don't know. As far as I know a Forest can not "decide" to surplus it other than to the state forestry department. Not sure about other agencies but I understand they have similar policies.

Harv part of your problem is probably your location, the smaller Forests of the East typically lease GSA engines, when they are done with them they go back to GSA and who knows what GSA does with them.

Samson in your case I'm sure a large part is your state, obviously Montana has alot of USFS and BLM engines that could be going to you when they reach the end of their service life but I would guess part of the problem is the anti-Fed attitude so common in the area (those who might be inclined to help probably just avoid any extra dealings with the locals) and then someplace there is a break down in your state government. You need to remember Montana was one of the states that originated the idea of the USFS changing from the green to a white paint job on the trucks, they wanted to be a less obvious target.
How much effort have the departments in your area made to obtain these old engines, when I worked in Region 3 several local fire chiefs would come down and ask about the trucks we had going to auction so they knew which ones they wanted (we had all slip on units so the trucks were auctioned seperately).

As far as the teams go, when was the last time you let a homeowner make fire ground decisions on a structure fire? Not really much difference between that and letting ranchers call the shots on a large wildland fire. I know many ranchers have wildland experience but most have no real concept of the big picture strategies involved on a 40-50,000 acre fire, realistically neither do the Chiefs of small departments, when an IMT is activated it generally involves alot more than one ranchers property or even a fire districts interests, it is generally a pretty serious incident involving a large geographical area, with many conflicting interests involved (life safety, private property, cultural sites, environmental concerns etc).

The Fed IMT's allow non-Fed members, the Fed IMT's started allowing this long before any State IMT's did. I know of at least one Type 1 team that until recently was run under an IC from a County FD. State and Municipal FF's can take lead roles in the most demanding emergency management positions in the world, that doesn't really sound like the Feds being all knowing and pompus to me. They know how to bring control to chaos, sometimes they may step on a few toes, its bound to happen, you can't make everyone happy. I know I have chased some amazingly expensive political smokes all in the name of keeping the ranchers happy, then usually some "watch dog" group shows up and starts complaining about wasteful spending.

The use of locals is a tricky thing, there have been many examples of local departments doing their own thing completely outside the knowledge or control of the IC, that is not a good way to encourage a team to use you over their own agency crews that can be expected to follow the rules and to have the quality expected (ability to operate unsupported for 24 hours, available for 14-21 days, required training is met etc). Besides the locals really need to be released to protect their district, it sucks to be in sight of a major fire and not being involved but that often happens, even with our crews. When we have a major fire on the Forest it is not uncommon to have several off forest strike teams come in to the fire and the local Forest crews go back to their stations, it makes more sense to have our crews that are familiar with the area responding to new starts than it does to put some engine possibly from out of state in our stations.

As far as contract engines that is a political issue far removed from the IMTs, it is a big can of worms that can be as heated as any smoothbore vs fog, paid vs volly, or lights on povs topic, so I'll decline to go there.


As far as how useful a single type 6 is? For one thing that is a bit of an exageration You have to remember those engines are there for the Forest, BLM land etc, not to protect the entire state. They put out alot of fires you never hear about, they also are there to make contact with the public, enforce regulations, educate etc, most have level 2 law enforcement powers (meter maids ;) ) they also do alot of resource improvement work (including putting up fences so the ranchers cows can graze on Federal land), its not your typical image of career FF's sitting around waiting for the bell to go off, we are on duty for 8 hours / day and we are expected to get alot of work done in that time.

As far as the college kid comment, that is probably still true in your area but that is changing, R3 (AZ/NM), R5 (California) and R6 (OR/WA) have developed a real career path for the firefighters, our salaries still have a long way to go but the crews are largely career positions. In the other regions it is still not uncommon to find captains who only work 6 months a year but at least most are no longer temp employees.

As far as the quality of the crews, I stand by that, the Fed wildland agencies have some of the best crews out there. The Fed agencies (USFS, BLM, USF&WS, NPS, BIA) respond to 15,000-20,000 fires / year on Federal lands, I don't know what the numbers are when you add in mutual aid, but I would guess it doubles at least, so the experience base is certainly there. Training is pretty much unmatched by any agency I've seen, we get alot of training and we are required to meet the training requirements or we don't go to fires. I doubt very much any firefighters from any agencies can match the fire experience of the Hotshot crews, very few will see that kind of fire in their careers.
I'm not saying that other agencies don't have crews as good as the Fed crews simply they are among the best. Sure some are slugs and we have our culls, with about 20,000 FF's you will have some slip by, but they are the exceptions.


As far as loading up a bus with drivers armed with dollar bills, :D I'll see if I can get more information about our excess property, I was in Sacramento last year and there were 20-30 of our old engines, Model 42 type 6 (90 gpm, 285 gallon tanks), Model 51 & 60 Type 3's (150 & 350 gpm, 300 & 500 gallon tank) and several patrol trucks sitting there waiting for someone to claim them.

[hwoods]

NonSurfin' Thanks for clearing up a few points for us. I, for one, am in the position of responding to Wildland or Structure Fires, with Wildland or Structural Apparatus. I am also a Chief Officer in a Large Combination department. My point was not that I expected 10 Engines from a Big City Department to end up on a Mountain top in Montana, with their crews out on the Fire Line, digging. I do feel strongly that those 10 engines and crews could be protecting structures in towns threatened by the Fire. Here, The comment that "We don't have enough Engines" would be cause for someone being sent home, we do not have a limit on apparatus. Someone recently did some work on a disaster plan, and found that we could get 100 Engines assembled at a central location in Less than 3 hours, WITHOUT LEAVING ANY STATION EMPTY. We send apparatus out of state from time to time, most memorable was the 30 Pieces from Maryland that went to Florida about 5 or 6 years ago.

[SamsonFCDES]

Good dicussion gentlemen, I can see we are all heading the same direction but along different roads which all seem rather bumpy at times.

I admit that I am guilty at times for being hard on the Feds, but I am only 1/10 as hard on them as most people I know! I used to work for BLM fire crews, engine/helitak district crew, so I know that the system at the grunt level works pretty well, its the management ant top down issues that I have a problem with.

I am amazed with what NIOWA has done with surplus and a lot of elbow greese! I have tried to learn from what he has done, but I have not been able to dedicate enough time to it at this point.

Montana is totaly FUBAR on the surplus systems. The needs to change ASAP as we do have a very serious and worsening (global warming, logging issues, interface growing) wildfire problem. We need to get better equipment in the hands of the VFDs and we need more full time career federal/state firefighters.

I am planning on studying the surplus system more as time allows. NIOWA has done great things in a state that seems to have some of the same surpluss problems we have, so there has to be a way!

Again, I do wonder if its possible to cross state lines on the surplus thing? I have that Benji set aside just in case! :)

Edit: Went back and got rid of the pics of the Mean Green Machine as I relized it was screwing with the width of the forum!

[hwoods]

Samson, Neiowa, and anyone else that is interested - Send a letter to the Chairman, National Volunteer Fire Council, asking what they can do to help make the Surplus program work better for us. I'm starting a letter today, I'll post it when I'm done.

[SamsonFCDES]

NIOWA, question for you.

Can you suggest any resources or further reading to pursue to gain a better understanding of how this all works?

It seems like a dream come true, to good of a deal, etc...

We have a lot of apparatus to udate, etc...this would be by far the most afordable way to do it!

[SamsonFCDES]

Nope, looks like the systems broke.

[SamsonFCDES]

Well, here is the verdict for MT...no way to do FEPP or the like at this time. This is the answer from the top of the food chain. Maybe someday soon..I hope. I really like the look of NOIWAs brush truck!

[SamsonFCDES]

Which still makes me wonder if its possible to cross state lines and use FEPP through another state...Iowa or Cali!!??!!?!? :D

[neiowa]

Sampson

I know you're aware of the way FEPP works (surplus is available, state forester requests, GSA allocates to one of the requesting state foresters, ownership transfered to US Forester (who "owns" the FEPP program), who loans to the state forester, who loans it to the local FD.

http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/partners/fepp/

According to the US Forestery website the Mt FEPP contact is

Duane Erickson
Montana DNCR
Division of Forestry
2705 Spurgin Road
Missoula, MT 59804-3199
(406) 542-4273
Fax: (406) 542-4208
duerickson@mt.gov

The DOD DRMS (mil surplus system) is going thru some major changes (closing 2/3 of their warehouse/yards) that have somewhat interupted the supply of equipment and made a major PITB to inspect/transport (longer distances). However one of the 18 remaining (or new sites) is at Great Falls, MT. There are three other sites in your "area' Colorado Springs, Co; Minot, ND; and Tacoma, WA. There is no change in the FEPP process where your forester requests (freezes) online DOD or GSA surplus equipment. If allocated to him away you go. Now my understanding is Mt has a shop set up to inspect/maintain/modify/paint DOD vehicles and then they issue (loan) to FD. That may be good or perhaps bad. Depending on if the charge you for the work they do (I think so) and if they will ALLOW you to obtain vehicles outside of their shop system (I don't know).

Frankly the email you pasted in doesn't make a lick of sense. I think they are telling you you can't get a 5t truck for wildland use (as an engine) unless you get it thru them with mods. I'd call BS on that and contact my elected reps.

There is a new program (not widely known about) thru US forester called the "Firefighter Program" (FFP) where FD will be able to get equipment and an earlier/higher issue priority (equal to what the cops have long had with their LESO program). Recipient will also receive title to the equipment. Seperate discussion perhaps but I'm not convienced that the title transfer piece is a good idea (apparently a bunch of cops stand to be going to the bid house over longtime use of LESO to fund the donut/scholarship funds). The Fire Service does NOT need to be going down that road. In any case this new program is only operational in a few states. This may be what your contact is refering to. However and "purchase" price is something your forester is pulling out of their butt. There is no requirement by the US Forester of DOD that the equipment go thru any particualar maint facility before issue to you. Maybe a good idea but not typically the case across the nation. In Iowa (as in most states) is issued to FD as recieved from the Feds/DOD.

I'm sure you know you can (as has been the case for many many years) obtain surplus equipment thru your state surplus office (for cash). You get title and the $ go (typically to cover transportation of the equipment to Mt and to maintain the lifestyle to which the employees of the state surplus office have become accustomed.

What do you need right now? I'll send you a info on a couple of likley vehicles that could be worthwhile to any FD. I have not had them inspected or checked actual condition with the units that turned them in. We can do that after the MT forester gets off their butt, requests them and/if they are allocated to MT and to you. I'll send PM as there no doubt are others that would be very interested and point is to test your state forester. Ill send you info for a very nice semi tractor for tanker chassis, a civilian model pickup, and for a 6x6 for wildland, and something else not vehicle. Will try to get a PM off to you today.

[hwoods]

The DOD DRMS (mil surplus system) is going thru some major changes (closing 2/3 of their warehouse/yards) that have somewhat interupted the supply of equipment and made a major PITB to inspect/transport (longer distances). However one of the 18 remaining (or new sites) is at Great Falls, MT. There are three other sites in your "area' Colorado Springs, Co; Minot, ND; and Tacoma, WA. There is no change in the FEPP process where your forester requests (freezes) online DOD or GSA surplus equipment.


neiowa - could you post the revised list, or a URL for those who are interested in this subject, so they can find other sites around the Country?? Thanks. :)

[LVFD301]

Just as an aside,

Although we can participate in the FEPP program,
we have been advised by GSA that we cannot
participate in the federal surplus program, other than
using govdeals.com or such.

The reasoning behind it is we are not a department
supported by "public funds". When asked for a defination
of "public funds" they advised that only a tax based
fire department was considered to be supported
by "public funds".

[SamsonFCDES]

Thanks for the info niowa, I did get the emails as well. I have been out of town for CEDAP, I will dig into them as soon as I can and see if I cant get something moving. I kind of have the feeling that the state wants to sit still until fall and the new program, but they could surprise me...not likely.

Thanks!

[NJFFSA16]

BOISE, Idaho (AP) - Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said
Tuesday a verbal attack by U.S. Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., on
federal firefighters for their work in quelling a Montana wildfire
was unfair, adding that he was proud of the job being done by the
10,000 U.S. Forest Service firefighters he oversees.
Johanns' comments came while visiting the National Interagency
Fire Center in Boise, which manages 15,000 firefighters from five
federal agencies, including the Forest Service and Bureau of Land
Management.
Burns made his criticisms during a July 23 confrontation at the
Billings, Mont., airport with firefighters from Virginia. He told
them they'd done a "piss-poor job" of fighting a 143-square-mile
eastern Montana wildfire and said Boise was a "ridiculous" site
from which to coordinate national firefighting strategy, the Forest
Service has said.
Johanns was in Boise to attend the World Potato Congress, a
symposium on Idaho's No. 1 agricultural crop, but he made a
sidetrip to the fire center for an update on extreme fire
conditions in the West, where more than 50 large fires are burning.
National Weather Service meteorologists predict the next three
months will be warmer and drier than usual.
"To be quite candid, I think it's very unfair to the
firefighters," Johanns said of Burns' comments. Johanns praised
them for their determination in dangerous situations - such as an
Aug. 13 helicopter crash near Yellow Pine, Idaho, that killed four
people, including three firefighters from the Payette National
Forest.
"It's been a tough season, from a number of standpoints," he
added. "But that loss of life makes it especially difficult."
Burns, who is locked in a tough re-election battle with farmer
and state Sen. Jon Tester, has since apologized for his outburst.
Through a spokesman, Burns said he was merely giving voice to
frustration of Montana ranchers who lost valuable grazing land in
the Bundy Railroad blaze.
The cattlemen blamed firefighters for not fighting the fire more
aggressively.
"It was evident the level of frustration his constituents had
in Yellowstone and Big Horn counties," said James Pendleton, a
Burns spokesman in Billings. "They (firefighters) would surround
the fire, and let the center area burn out. That's grazing land,
and it can't be insured."
Despite Burns' criticism of the operation in Boise, Pendleton
said Burns - a member of a subcommittee that helps negotiate the
National Interagency Fire Center's budget - isn't pushing to move
the center elsewhere.
"The key here is, there needs to be more local input," he
said. "We need to look at communication issues, both interagency
and communicating with the locals."
Fire officials in Washington, D.C., who oversee the Boise
center, which employs 500 people during fire season, say they also
have no plans to change the mission of the center, which last
September stepped in to coordinate relief efforts for U.S. Gulf
Coast hurricane victims and rescue crews.
"We are satisfied with our interagency coordination," said Tom
Harbour, the Forest Service's director of fire and aviation
management, in an interview with The Associated Press. Harbour was
also in Boise Tuesday.
Nonetheless, Harbour said anytime a U.S. senator complains, his
agency takes note.
Animosities such as those that arose in Montana might have been
avoided if there had been a more open dialogue between firefighters
and ranchers who feared for loss of fields, he said. Instead of
burning out grass to prevent spread of the fire, an alternative
might have been considered to preserve more private acreage needed
for grazing.
"Burning out is something we commonly do on public land,"
Harbour said. "On private land, ranchers depend on that forage for
income and to feed their families. There's quite a difference. The
senator was reacting to concerns of private landowners."

(Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)