Here’s an interesting essay on pay and working conditions — and a deficit of respect? — for federal wildland firefighters. It also mentions a proposed the Wildland Firefighter Protection Act. http://wp.me/a3AxwY-45f

Stand up for wildland firefighters

By Lindon Pronto/Writers on the Range

Federal wildland firefighters make up the single largest professionally trained firefighting force in the world. We staff fire engines and earthmovers, work from helicopters and jump from planes, and move as 20-person, well-coordinated crews of “ground pounders.” We also put together incident management teams to manage many kinds of relief efforts.

Our teams have dealt with emergencies like Sept. 11, 2001, in New York City and Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. But on paper — for bureaucratic reasons — we are not called “firefighters.” Instead, we are called forestry and range “technicians.”

To us, that distinction is a longstanding joke that’s not remotely funny. The failure to recognize who we are and what we do comes at a great price.

Few Americans see a green fire engine for what it is, have any idea what hotshot crews face on the fireline, or have even heard of helitack. Even those closest to us may not fully grasp the long shifts we endure or the risks we take. But we love what we do; anyone who doesn’t soon decides that the commitments are too many and the sacrifices are too great.

The dangerous conditions encountered in wildland firefighting, combined with the rush of adrenaline and a sense of duty and brotherhood, are exactly the reasons we love our jobs. We not only accept these aspects of our work, we live for them! There are, however, other aspects of the job that are harder to accept, particularly for those who rely on the work to support families. Few Americans realize this, but federal firefighters are treated and paid considerably less well than our counterparts in private, city and state agencies. 

For example, many non-federal firefighters are guaranteed hotel rooms and 24-hour pay when they’re working away from home. Federal firefighters, though, usually sleep in the dirt, like convict crews, and we are not paid for more than 16 hours per day on incidents.

Federal firefighters regularly work 112-hour workweeks for two or three weeks at a time, yet we are not compensated for at least one-third of that time. The nickel-and-diming we face goes further: Firefighters are often required to staff fires overnight without pay, and lunch breaks are seldom paid. On prescribed fires, hazard pay is not given even though we are required to carry emergency fire shelters with us. 

These and other discrepancies in treatment and pay contribute to dismal retention rates among federal agencies. Millions of dollars are wasted annually to hire and train new firefighters, though many will leave as soon as they’re offered fire jobs with better hours, benefits, pay and pensions.

Federal firefighters are generally hidden from public view. We are stationed in the outdoors, and we are (happily) grimy, dirty, smelly and hairy during those 16-hour shifts on the fireline. The media are seldom permitted to enter our hazardous work zones. Unfortunately, this low profile means that our job is easily misrepresented and misunderstood. The public remains ignorant about who we are and what we do. As wildland firefighters, our faces and stories rarely make the news — unless we die on the job.

The problems we face should be illuminated, but constructive dialogue is hampered by the old-school “can-do” work ethic — coupled with the “shut-up-and-do-your-job” mentality. The lack of public awareness means that our working conditions remain the same, and the problems I’ve described here go unreported, and therefore unresolved. 

Still, some stalwart supporters and lobbyists have fought for decades to improve our pay and working conditions. This year, for the first time, seasonal firefighters were given access to health benefits. A recent bill introduced in Congress would address some of the other issues I’ve described, but the Wildland Firefighter Protection Act (H.R.2858) is unlikely to be signed into law if no one knows about it. That’s why I’m breaking my silence on the subject: I hope that public pressure and support for federal firefighters will carry this proposed legislation into law. Here’s a way to stand with federal firefighters: http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/wildland-firefighter/?source=search

It hurts not to be recognized for the hard work we do, and to be denied the benefits and financial support systems that other “real” firefighters automatically receive. We have no shortage of personal pride in our work, but that pride often appears to be unshared by our own government, elected officials and the public we serve.

• Lindon Pronto is a contributor to Writers on the Range, a service of High Country News (hcn.org). He has been a seasonal wildland firefighter for six years; the opinions he expresses here are his own. He lives in Auburn, California.

From the Washington Post today….

Pike’s pique: A Range Rover TV ad raises some Forest Service hackles

A new ad for the 2014 Range Rover Sport shows the rugged-yet-luxurious SUV scaling the snow-crusted Pike’s Peak, which is part of the National Forest system. Up the paved roads of the mountain the truck goes. And then — as a group of impressed guys who look like a pit crew, wearing matching Range Rover jackets and hats, look on — the vehicle appears to go over the top and down the other, unpaved side.

“It clearly goes against the basic philosophy of ethical attitudes and proper driver behavior for using OHV’s [off-highway vehicles] anywhere, let alone on NFS lands,” Jack Gregory, a retired Forest Service officer, wrote to the Forest Service. (Jeff Ruch, the head of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, shared the missive with us.)

Forest Service spokesman Leo Kay, one of the few employees of the agency still in the office during the government shutdown, tells the Loop that the car did not actually go off-road on Forest Service land during filming, though it appeared to through the wonders of modern film-making.

And he says he’s unsure of the precise wording of the permit that the car company got to film the commercial there. The folks who handle those are furloughed.

“It’s kind of a ghost town around here,” he says.

But precedent exists for curtailing how film crews portray public land. When the Forest Service issues permits for crews to film in wilderness areas, for example, the agency requires them to “keep within the spirit” of the 1964 Wilderness Act, Kay explains. That might mean that they wouldn’t be allowed to depict, say, littering or tossing lit matches around.

The Forest Service isn’t up in arms over the commercial. It’s not protesting the way the National Park Service did in 2003, when a Metamucil commercial depicted a Park Service Ranger pouring some of the regularity-inducing product into Yellowstone’s Old Faithful geyser.

“This advertisement goes against all of the National Park Service’s efforts to encourage people not to put foreign objects into the thermal features,” NPS sniffed at the time.

In a statement, Range Rover tells the Loop that viewers needn’t take what they see so literally. “As is typical in much of advertising, there are scenes that are realistic but not meant to be taken literally, including both racing up the mountain, as well as driving off road back down, though the vehicle is more than capable of both.”

This passage stands out:

Jewell’s overture comes as a key House Republican today pledged to hold hearings to discuss how to facilitate more state and local authority over national parks. Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), the chairman of the Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation, said that the Obama administration has shuttered parks in an “overly political manner” and that states and localities could manage them better.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Jewell may allow some national parks to reopen with state, private funds

What do you think? Is this a political stunt, or a reasonable reaction by the Park Service?

National Forests are open to visitors, though offices are closed and most employees are furloughed. I cut firewood (with a valid permit) on the Mt. Hood NF last weekend and saw lots of folks on bikes or in cars, and lots of cars parked at trailheads. Also saw two USFS law enforcement folks. So in National Forests are open to hikers, woodcutters, and others, why not National Parks?

Steve

From Greenwire:

Park Service cites dozens of trespassers at Grand Canyon, Yellowstone

The article from Greenwire, below, and this excerpt from the USFWS’s new proposed rule, beg the question: Couldn’t, shouldn’t the agency have obtained better data before listing the Santa Cruz cypress tree as endangered?

“After more accurate
mapping (McGraw 2007, entire), we
now estimate that areal extent totals
approximately 188 ac (76 ha) (Service
2013, p. 43). Additionally, estimated
abundance of individuals in all
populations has changed over time,
from approximately 2,300 individuals at
the time of listing in 1987, to a current
range of 33,000 to 44,000 individuals
(although the latter estimate is variable
due to mortality and regeneration
following the 2008 Martin Fire that
burned 520 ac (210 ha) of land and a
portion of the Bonny Doon population)”

And maybe the cypress stands need some thinning?

Steve

Agency proposes reducing protections for Calif. cypress tree

You’ll probably see this in tomorrow’s papers — especially here in Oregon, which stands to lose $4 million.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ap-newsbreak-forest-service-taking-back-federal-funds-governor-refused-to-return/2013/08/22/9274ef6c-0b66-11e3-89fe-abb4a5067014_story.html

Forest Service taking back federal funds from 22 states

By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, August 22, 2:42 PM

JUNEAU, Alaska — The U.S. Forest Service plans to take a portion of the timber payments it has promised or paid out to 22 states, citing federal budget cuts.

Collection letters from Forest Service Chief Thomas Tidwell went out to governors around the country Monday, saying money would be taken from funds used for habitat improvement and other national forest-related projects that put people to work under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act.

Oregon stands to lose the most in the move, with nearly $4 million in reductions. That would leave the state with about $3.4 million under that program.

California would lose nearly $2.2 million, leaving it with about $1 million for the program. Idaho is set to lose $1.7 million, Montana nearly $1.3 million and Alaska, about $930,000 — nearly half the total allotment it had been expecting.

Earlier this year, Tidwell sent letters to 41 states, asking for the return of $17.9 million in timber payments used to pay for schools, roads, search and rescue operations in rural counties and conservation projects.

“We regret having to take this action, but we have no alternative under sequestration,” Tidwell said in his letter to Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell, dated March 19.

Alaska was given the option of having about $826,000 the state had received or expected under the act reduced from its so-called “Title II funds,” for habitat improvement and other projects, or getting a bill for the money that had already been paid out under other sections of the act. Parnell refused, saying there was no basis in law for the request.

It wasn’t immediately clear why the agency was taking a greater share of funds from Alaska now.

Parnell spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said by email that the state will be exploring all options to address the agency’s actions, “as an individual state and in concert with other states.”

The Western Governors’ Association, in a letter to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in May, said the budget act that triggered the automatic federal budget cuts, known as sequestration, does not include language authorizing “retroactive application of the spending reductions or limitations. Nor does it contain language requiring reimbursement of funds that were already distributed in order to satisfy spending limitations.”

The Forest Service falls under the Department of Agriculture.

The Associated Press reported Wednesday that the Forest Service was diverting $600 million from other areas to put toward wildland firefighting efforts.

Agency spokesman Larry Chambers said the Forest Service had been dealing with the issue of collections under the Secure Rural Schools act since March, “well before any decision was made regarding transfer of fire funds.”

___

Came across this ad on Salon.com today. I’ve seen a few other forestry-oriented web ads before, such as those featuring Smokey Bear and from the USFS’s DiscoverTheForest.org. I’m collecting such ads, so please let me know when and where you find them — [email protected]. Thanks!

FYI, clicking on this ad takes you to:

http://oclands.org/post-card?gclid=CN2X-5jvjrkCFQdxQgodvmMAmg

Agency to accelerate NEPA reviews for soil, water restoration

From Greenwire today. Note the use of “Enviros” in the headline — this is the sort of abbreviation/shorthand I mentioned in another post, rather than a generalization. Is this use of “Enviros” offensive?

Interesting bit: “”This settlement is a positive development, but it shouldn’t be lost on anyone that the state of Utah has 29 other active lawsuits claiming more than 14,000 other dirt roads and trails — totaling more than 36,000 miles…”

Utah, enviros reach rare agreement on disputed wilderness roads

Since wolves have been the subject of so much discussion here, I thought you-all might enjoy this item from High Country News:

ALASKA

William “Mac” Hollan, 35, of Sandpoint, Idaho, was riding his bike ahead of two friends on the Alaska Highway, halfway through an epic 2,750-mile trip to Prudhoe Bay, when the unthinkable happened. A wolf emerged from the trees and started nipping “at the bike’s rear packs the way it would bite the hamstrings of a fleeing moose in the drawn-out ordeal of subduing large prey,” reports Rich Landers in the Spokane Spokesman-Review.” Hollan sped up, and whenever the wolf got close, he blasted it with bear spray. But the wolf loped ever closer even as the drivers of four different vehicles gawked but did not stop. When he realized a hill lay dead ahead, Hollan later said, “It was a surreal moment to realize that I was prey” and that there was no way he could beat his pursuer to the top of the incline. As Hollan got ready to jump off and use his bike as a shield, a Hummer suddenly pulled over. “I saw the panicked look on the biker’s face — as though he was about to be eaten,” said driver Melanie Klassen. Another vehicle also pulled up, and as the wolf leaped on Hollan’s bike, pulling at the shredded remains of his tent bag, Hollan jumped into the front passenger seat of Becky Woltjer’s recreational vehicle, shaking and cussing uncontrollably, he recalled. Meanwhile, Klassen yelled at the wolf and beaned it with a water bottle, but it didn’t retreat until other cars stopped and people began throwing rocks. An Environment Yukon spokeswoman called the incident “a new one for us,” although a similar incident happened June 8 in British Columbia, when a wolf gave chase to a motorcyclist. And you thought the Tour de France was exciting.