Forest Service officials address misconceptions about AMR and structure protection
Thursday, March 06 2008 @ 01:03 AM MST
Contributed by: Admin
by John Q. Murray
U.S. Forest Service officials will not formally respond to recommendations that Montana fire chiefs offered last month to the legislature's interim study committee. But officials emphasized to the Chronicle that the protection of homes and outbuildings--structure protection--remains near the very top of firefighters' priorities.
The top priority, always, is life safety--the safety of firefighters and the public, explained Chuck Stanich, the fire management officer for the Lolo National Forest.
"Life safety we hold in highest regard on every fire, every time, everywhere," Chuck said. "Once we take care of that, then we go to the next priority."
The next priorities are typically protecting the community's "values at risk," which usually include structures, and other cultural and natural resources, such as watersheds.
Those objectives and priorities are established in discussions long before the first start of the fire season, documented in formal plans and agreements, and communicated across a wide range of federal, state, and local firefighting partners, Chuck explained.
Frenchtown Fire's Scott Waldron appeared in Helena earlier this month to present the state fire chiefs' report, and offered his perspective on the Black Cat Fire in response to the committee's questions. He alleged that Forest Service firefighters were not allowed to engage in structure protection, and testified that the agency's policy of "Appropriate Management Response" could endanger communities.
Without directly addressing Waldron's statements, Forest Service officials said they hoped to clear up any possible misconceptions about Forest Service policy.
"Appropriate Management Response is not new policy. It really didn't change anything," Chuck explained.
Under the AMR policy, fire officials have had the ability to allocate resources flexibly on different flanks of the fire. When a fire is burning away from communities, they can choose to let that flank burn and accomplish fuel reduction objectives.
"On suppression fires, some parts of the fire perimeter may be allowed to spread while firefighting resources are being deployed in the higher priority areas along the fire perimeter. Again, it’s a function of the values at risk," Chuck said.
Ninemile District Ranger Garry Edson pointed out that this occurred during the 2004 Cedar Log Fire, part of the Fish Creek Complex. The southwestern edge of that fire was allowed to burn away from communities into the Great Burn area.
"We didn't take suppression activities on those flanks of the fire because it was burning away into the Great Burn and there were limited resources," Garry explained. "Some of the teams wanted to go fight it but we said, 'No, we're going to let it go that way. If it's burning into the Great Burn, it's not threatening anybody.'" Firefighters instead focused on the eastern flank of the fire, moving in the direction of Petty Creek and Alberton.
Another type of approach is called "fire use," a classification given to the entire incident. Although firefighters can employ "fire use" in wilderness areas such as the Bob Marshall and the Great Burn, that does not mean that they always will, the officials emphasized. In fire use, the entire fire is monitored and allowed to burn, as it would in a fire-dependent ecosystem.
Given the extreme fire conditions in 2007, however, officials chose not to allow any fire use fires on the Lolo, said Forest Supervisor Debbie Austin.
The overall picture sketched out by the three Forest Service officials suggested the increasing complexity in managing fires with a wide variety of agencies--as well as private contractors--with different jurisdictions and different responsibilities.
"With the issues and problems we currently have in our ever-expanding wildland-urban interface, there's no single agency that has the capabilities to resolve all the issues," Chuck said. "Our strength is operating collectively together to bring all of our capabilities, all of our resources to the table, and work together to resolve those problems. And when I say together, I don't just mean wildland fire agencies or the structure protection agencies or the contractors, I mean the public as well. It's our problem and it's going to take all of us to resolve it."
Big fires cost a lot of money, and all of the state and federal agencies involved are always interested in reducing costs, Chuck said.
One of the new initiatives is to improve how authority is delegated from the agencies to the incident command team on the fire. The IC teams need to be able to make decisions rapidly as conditions change, yet each agency is still accountable for its areas of responsibility.
In the past, each agency has written its own letter delegating authority to the firefighting team.
This past summer, Chuck said, he and Debbie began talking about a joint delegation of authority. "We focused on how to communicate our leaders' intent to the teams we're hosting and be more clear and concise, make it more free of misunderstanding and confusion. We decided we were going to tear up our delegation of authority and put it back together, and really focus our attention on the leader's intent."
He said they met with their partners and are currently developing a joint delegation of authority letter to the team.
"We're hoping to improve on spelling out our expectations of the team, and how they will manage that incident. That's agreed to by all the parties. Oftentimes it can be two, three, or four parties that sign that particular agreement," Chuck said. "The reason agency administrators focus so much attention on them is that we hold ourselves accountable and that's how we are going to measure our successes. Were we successful in clearly explaining our expectations to the team? Did they implement and do what we asked them to do? Those are going to be our discussion points as we move through the incident."
That joint delegation letter will likely roll out during the next fire season, he said, emphasizing that improved communication is the key to protecting safety and saving money.
"That's what it is all about--having that clear understanding of roles, responsibilities, and capabilities. You have to maintain that dialog. You just can't just do it for the 20 minutes before that incident and during the incident. It has to occur all year long and that's how we're going to be successful as cooperators," he said.
Clear and concise communication is also essential in maintaining the safety of firefighters out on the line.
"We want all our firefighters to do a little bit of thinking before they start chinking," he said. "We want them to develop a plan, whether verbal or in writing, identify the hazards and the values at risk, mitigate those, clearly communicate the leaders' intent to all the people working with and for them, and then boldly engage in their mission. Those are the things we talk about on each and every fire, if it's just a tenth acre spot, or a huge multi-jurisdictional multi-agency event."
The agency also will continue to rely on a rapid and aggressive initial attack to contain and control wildfires as quickly as possible, he said.
"That's our most efficient and effective strategic option," Chuck said, pointing out that Forest Service firefighters were 98 percent successful in initial attack on 197 wildland fires on the Lolo National Forest during 2007. "That's pretty phenomenal."
He praised the Superior Ranger District in particular, which successfully managed 18 fires using a Type 3 organization, extinguishing them in a very timely manner. "We're asking a lot more of our local units in today's firefighting environment."
###
U.S. Forest Service officials will not formally respond to recommendations that Montana fire chiefs offered last month to the legislature's interim study committee. But officials emphasized to the Chronicle that the protection of homes and outbuildings--structure protection--remains near the very top of firefighters' priorities.
The top priority, always, is life safety--the safety of firefighters and the public, explained Chuck Stanich, the fire management officer for the Lolo National Forest.
"Life safety we hold in highest regard on every fire, every time, everywhere," Chuck said. "Once we take care of that, then we go to the next priority."
The next priorities are typically protecting the community's "values at risk," which usually include structures, and other cultural and natural resources, such as watersheds.
Those objectives and priorities are established in discussions long before the first start of the fire season, documented in formal plans and agreements, and communicated across a wide range of federal, state, and local firefighting partners, Chuck explained.
Frenchtown Fire's Scott Waldron appeared in Helena earlier this month to present the state fire chiefs' report, and offered his perspective on the Black Cat Fire in response to the committee's questions. He alleged that Forest Service firefighters were not allowed to engage in structure protection, and testified that the agency's policy of "Appropriate Management Response" could endanger communities.
Without directly addressing Waldron's statements, Forest Service officials said they hoped to clear up any possible misconceptions about Forest Service policy.
"Appropriate Management Response is not new policy. It really didn't change anything," Chuck explained.
Under the AMR policy, fire officials have had the ability to allocate resources flexibly on different flanks of the fire. When a fire is burning away from communities, they can choose to let that flank burn and accomplish fuel reduction objectives.
"On suppression fires, some parts of the fire perimeter may be allowed to spread while firefighting resources are being deployed in the higher priority areas along the fire perimeter. Again, it’s a function of the values at risk," Chuck said.
Ninemile District Ranger Garry Edson pointed out that this occurred during the 2004 Cedar Log Fire, part of the Fish Creek Complex. The southwestern edge of that fire was allowed to burn away from communities into the Great Burn area.
"We didn't take suppression activities on those flanks of the fire because it was burning away into the Great Burn and there were limited resources," Garry explained. "Some of the teams wanted to go fight it but we said, 'No, we're going to let it go that way. If it's burning into the Great Burn, it's not threatening anybody.'" Firefighters instead focused on the eastern flank of the fire, moving in the direction of Petty Creek and Alberton.
Another type of approach is called "fire use," a classification given to the entire incident. Although firefighters can employ "fire use" in wilderness areas such as the Bob Marshall and the Great Burn, that does not mean that they always will, the officials emphasized. In fire use, the entire fire is monitored and allowed to burn, as it would in a fire-dependent ecosystem.
Given the extreme fire conditions in 2007, however, officials chose not to allow any fire use fires on the Lolo, said Forest Supervisor Debbie Austin.
The overall picture sketched out by the three Forest Service officials suggested the increasing complexity in managing fires with a wide variety of agencies--as well as private contractors--with different jurisdictions and different responsibilities.
"With the issues and problems we currently have in our ever-expanding wildland-urban interface, there's no single agency that has the capabilities to resolve all the issues," Chuck said. "Our strength is operating collectively together to bring all of our capabilities, all of our resources to the table, and work together to resolve those problems. And when I say together, I don't just mean wildland fire agencies or the structure protection agencies or the contractors, I mean the public as well. It's our problem and it's going to take all of us to resolve it."
Big fires cost a lot of money, and all of the state and federal agencies involved are always interested in reducing costs, Chuck said.
One of the new initiatives is to improve how authority is delegated from the agencies to the incident command team on the fire. The IC teams need to be able to make decisions rapidly as conditions change, yet each agency is still accountable for its areas of responsibility.
In the past, each agency has written its own letter delegating authority to the firefighting team.
This past summer, Chuck said, he and Debbie began talking about a joint delegation of authority. "We focused on how to communicate our leaders' intent to the teams we're hosting and be more clear and concise, make it more free of misunderstanding and confusion. We decided we were going to tear up our delegation of authority and put it back together, and really focus our attention on the leader's intent."
He said they met with their partners and are currently developing a joint delegation of authority letter to the team.
"We're hoping to improve on spelling out our expectations of the team, and how they will manage that incident. That's agreed to by all the parties. Oftentimes it can be two, three, or four parties that sign that particular agreement," Chuck said. "The reason agency administrators focus so much attention on them is that we hold ourselves accountable and that's how we are going to measure our successes. Were we successful in clearly explaining our expectations to the team? Did they implement and do what we asked them to do? Those are going to be our discussion points as we move through the incident."
That joint delegation letter will likely roll out during the next fire season, he said, emphasizing that improved communication is the key to protecting safety and saving money.
"That's what it is all about--having that clear understanding of roles, responsibilities, and capabilities. You have to maintain that dialog. You just can't just do it for the 20 minutes before that incident and during the incident. It has to occur all year long and that's how we're going to be successful as cooperators," he said.
Clear and concise communication is also essential in maintaining the safety of firefighters out on the line.
"We want all our firefighters to do a little bit of thinking before they start chinking," he said. "We want them to develop a plan, whether verbal or in writing, identify the hazards and the values at risk, mitigate those, clearly communicate the leaders' intent to all the people working with and for them, and then boldly engage in their mission. Those are the things we talk about on each and every fire, if it's just a tenth acre spot, or a huge multi-jurisdictional multi-agency event."
The agency also will continue to rely on a rapid and aggressive initial attack to contain and control wildfires as quickly as possible, he said.
"That's our most efficient and effective strategic option," Chuck said, pointing out that Forest Service firefighters were 98 percent successful in initial attack on 197 wildland fires on the Lolo National Forest during 2007. "That's pretty phenomenal."
He praised the Superior Ranger District in particular, which successfully managed 18 fires using a Type 3 organization, extinguishing them in a very timely manner. "We're asking a lot more of our local units in today's firefighting environment."
###
