I find the use of the FF fatality on the Mendo Complex as evidence to support their point of view as disgusting. The report lays out their argument of CAL FIRE and the USFS exposing FFs to unnecessary risk by building line on the North east side of the fire and near wilderness. They then show the well used photo of our fallen brother and dramatic video of the air tanker drops. It goes on to discuss how ineffective retardant was on large pieces of the complex. While they never say that the accident was a result of the bad line placement and poor fire management strategies, the flow of the report would definitely lead the reader to believe the fatality had a direct relationship to the poorly defined plan. It is not until several pages later does the report briefly mention that that the fatality occurred on the North Western corner of the fire on a piece of line that did hold the fire and did protect structures and private property in Potter Valley. A truly scientific and factual based report would not attempt to utilize such an emotional issue out of context to suggest a point of view was correct.
The group does point out some strategies, that if applied correctly would be of great benefit to the wildland fire service. They point out the waste and damage caused by building contingency lines in places were the fire never reaches. They also show the damaged and wasted effort caused by building fire line in places that do not contain the fire. I do think the concept of building only one line and stopping the fire at that line might be a great idea and would greatly cut down on the cost and effort required on these large fires. Because the authors are not listed, I can only assume the retired FC Obvious should get credit for this idea.
Maybe he could also suggest we should only staff fire stations on days when there will be a fire nearby to reduce waste.
