The Station Fire Thread

Elwood · Post by **Elwood** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 11:43 am

And don't forget to bury it at least 8 inches deep after using it for "sanitary activities".

Post by **Hikin_Jim** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 12:03 pm

AlanK wrote:
AW wrote:"Angeles National Forest entire eastern main body of the Angeles National Forest will be closed effective 6:00 p.m. tonight until full containment of the Station Fire"
source:http://inciweb.org/incident/1856/
OK, clear enough.

Hey, we have until 6:00 tonight! Let's get out there!

(sorry, gallows humor)

mattmaxon · Post by **mattmaxon** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 1:10 pm

The fire seems stationary at Devils Cyn for now...

No apparent progression to the south into Santa Anita Cyn

If the wind doesn't pick up.....

Pacifico Mtn area seems to have NO active burning

One small area in Little-T

http://pctmap.homeip.net/data2/Fire%20P ... 200902.kml

mattmaxon · Post by **mattmaxon** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:17 pm

There is differing information about Newcomb's but I got the below information from another forum from someone who is very tied to both Newcomb's and Mt. Waterman:

Re: Angeles Forest Fires Waterman/Baldy
by snowave » Wed Sep 02, 2009 12:17 am
Here is what I am hearing. CalTrans gone. Chilao Visitor center gone. Christian camp gone. Newcomb's missed and survived. Go figure!

Also, Christian Camp is still there (just to the east of Newcomb's Ranch) and is being used as a base camp for firefighters with heavy equipment so this could be a bit of good news. Hopefully something can be salvaged in the end.

scott johnson · Post by **scott johnson** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:43 pm

This is my first comment here at this site.

My name is Scott Johnson. I was the former Camp Valcrest Manager from 1993-1996. As of this morning, Newcomb's Ranch has survived the fire. They are currently serving food and drinks to the firefighters. I talk to a LAFD paramedic at Angeles Crest Christian camp who stated that all the resident camps along Sulphur Springs Road are safe. More than 300 firefighters are using Christian Camp as a base for local fire surpression. The fire itself is in the southern end of Chilao. I talked to a couple of Forest Service guys who stated that the Bandido campground seems to be the northern edge in Chilao Flats. I will post more info here as soon as I get it.

BTW, great job on the fire maps!!

Scott Johnson

AlanK · Post by **AlanK** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:49 pm

I am glad to hear that Newcomb's Ranch survived. Sorry for posting erroneous information. In this case, I am happy to be wrong!

Post by **HikeUp** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:11 pm

AW wrote:"Angeles National Forest entire eastern main body of the Angeles National Forest will be closed effective 6:00 p.m. tonight until full containment of the Station Fire"
source:http://inciweb.org/incident/1856/

"The fire has moved into the San Gabriel wilderness and has been making active runs through various drainages in the area"

Oh. So by southern, Matt meant eastern. Clear as a bell!

AlanK · Post by **AlanK** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:20 pm

HikeUp wrote:Oh. So by southern, Matt meant eastern. Clear as a bell!

I assumed that Matt meant all of the ANF except for the rather sizable Santa Clara piece to the north and west of the San Gabriels. I was hoping that Matt was wrong. Alas, he was evidently right.

Post by **HikeUp** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:24 pm

AlanK wrote:
HikeUp wrote:Oh. So by southern, Matt meant eastern. Clear as a bell!
I assumed that Matt meant all of the ANF except for the rather sizable Santa Clara piece to the north and west of the San Gabriels. I was hoping that Matt was wrong. Alas, he was evidently right.

Yes, I kind of had figured out what he had meant by southern. The area in question is indeed both south and east of the the open part of the ANF.

It's good to see that most information being quoted here is at least accompanied by a source and is not pure conjecture and hearsay!

Post by **Hikin_Jim** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:27 pm

AlanK wrote:I am glad to hear that Newcomb's Ranch survived. Sorry for posting erroneous information. In this case, I am happy to be wrong!

I bet this is the only thread where people are overjoyed when they're wrong.

AlanK · Post by **AlanK** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:32 pm

Hikin_Jim wrote:
AlanK wrote:I am glad to hear that Newcomb's Ranch survived. Sorry for posting erroneous information. In this case, I am happy to be wrong!
I bet this is the only thread where people are overjoyed when they're wrong.

I'm waiting to wake up and find out that the whole damned thing was just a nightmare!

Post by **Hikin_Jim** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:35 pm

AlanK wrote:
Hikin_Jim wrote:
AlanK wrote:I am glad to hear that Newcomb's Ranch survived. Sorry for posting erroneous information. In this case, I am happy to be wrong!
I bet this is the only thread where people are overjoyed when they're wrong.
I'm waiting to wake up and find out that the whole damned thing was just a nightmare!

I knew I shouldn't have had that spicey mustard right before bed.

mattmaxon · Post by **mattmaxon** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:37 pm

HikeUp wrote:
AlanK wrote:
HikeUp wrote:Oh. So by southern, Matt meant eastern. Clear as a bell!
I assumed that Matt meant all of the ANF except for the rather sizable Santa Clara piece to the north and west of the San Gabriels. I was hoping that Matt was wrong. Alas, he was evidently right.
Yes, I kind of had figured out what he had meant by southern. The area in question is indeed both south and east of the the open part of the ANF.

It's good to see that most information being quoted here is at least accompanied by a source and is not pure conjecture and hearsay!

I guess this is what I get for directly quoting the Forest Supervisor!

AlanK · Post by **AlanK** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:47 pm

mattmaxon wrote:
HikeUp wrote:
AlanK wrote: I assumed that Matt meant all of the ANF except for the rather sizable Santa Clara piece to the north and west of the San Gabriels. I was hoping that Matt was wrong. Alas, he was evidently right.
Yes, I kind of had figured out what he had meant by southern. The area in question is indeed both south and east of the the open part of the ANF.

It's good to see that most information being quoted here is at least accompanied by a source and is not pure conjecture and hearsay!
I guess this is what I get for directly quoting the Forest Supervisor!

That'll teach you, Matt!

Post by **HikeUp** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:50 pm

cougarmagic · Post by **cougarmagic** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:52 pm

Well there's yer problem right there. They have the map turned sideways. No wonder they can't contain this thing. Dumping water all over Barstow!

mattmaxon · Post by **mattmaxon** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:04 pm

cougarmagic wrote:Well there's yer problem right there. They have the map turned sideways. No wonder they can't contain this thing. Dumping water all over Barstow!

Stop it it you're killing me!

mattmaxon · Post by **mattmaxon** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:10 pm

scott johnson wrote:This is my first comment here at this site.

Hey welcome aboard!

You're info is a great relief to everyone here...Thank you so much for the update

scott johnson wrote:BTW, great job on the fire maps!!

I endeavor to persevere

Glad to be of service

Layne Cantrell · Post by **Layne Cantrell** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:10 pm

AlanK wrote:I am glad to hear that Newcomb's Ranch survived. Sorry for posting erroneous information. In this case, I am happy to be wrong!

Are we/should we be worried about Buckhorn? Newcomb's is awfully close - too close for my comfort.

I've been going to Buckhorn since I was about five (I'm 26 now) with my dad. The site has become something of a spiritual place for me, one of the few constants in my life as I've grown. Its hard to explain really without coming across a bit "loopy."

mattmaxon · Post by **mattmaxon** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:18 pm

Layne Cantrell wrote:Are we/should we be worried about Buckhorn? Newcomb's is awfully close - too close for my comfort.

Until this thing is out everything is in danger

But Buckhorn is quite a distance away, even if the wind was to pick up I'd venture a guess that it is 2-3 days away

Layne Cantrell wrote:I've been going to Buckhorn since I was about five (I'm 26 now) with my dad. The site has become something of a spiritual place for me, one of the few constants in my life as I've grown. Its hard to explain really without coming across a bit "loopy."

Don't worry where all a bit "loopy" here esp when it comes to our beloved San Gabriel Mtns!

It isn't hard to explain to us

Matt

cougarmagic · Post by **cougarmagic** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 4:36 pm

http://cbs2.com/firewatch/Fire.Brush.Go ... 60321.html

Federal authorities failed to follow through on plans earlier this year to burn away highly flammable brush in a forest on the edge of Los Angeles to avoid the very kind of wildfire now raging there, The Associated Press has learned.

The U.S. Forest Service said that months before the huge blaze erupted, it obtained permits to burn away the undergrowth on more than 1,700 acres of the Angeles National Forest. But just 193 acres had been cleared by the time the fire broke out, the agency said.

The agency defended its efforts, saying weather, wind and environmental rules tightly limit how often these "prescribed burns" can be conducted.

Also, Forest Service resource officer Steve Bear said crews using machinery and hand tools managed to trim 5,000 acres in the forest this year before the money ran out.

Layne Cantrell · Post by **Layne Cantrell** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 5:07 pm

mattmaxon wrote:
Layne Cantrell wrote:Are we/should we be worried about Buckhorn? Newcomb's is awfully close - too close for my comfort.
Until this thing is out everything is in danger

But Buckhorn is quite a distance away, even if the wind was to pick up I'd venture a guess that it is 2-3 days away

That's what I figured/hoped. It was also comforting to hear about the firefighters at the Christian camp nearby. My biggest fear was that they'd simply let the eastern flank go since there aren't a lot of structures there (which to me is what makes the place so wonderful!).

Layne Cantrell wrote:I've been going to Buckhorn since I was about five (I'm 26 now) with my dad. The site has become something of a spiritual place for me, one of the few constants in my life as I've grown. Its hard to explain really without coming across a bit "loopy."
Don't worry where all a bit "loopy" here esp when it comes to our beloved San Gabriel Mtns!

It isn't hard to explain to us

Thanks man. I've been lurking here since I read about 39 possibly re-opening to 2 and I figured if anyone understood my over-the-top love for the SGs it was you guys. Its been a great comfort reading this board the last few days.

edenooch · Post by **edenooch** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 5:14 pm

now its all being burned for them

Mike P · Post by **Mike P** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 5:18 pm

Layne Cantrell wrote:Thanks man. I've been lurking here since I read about 39 possibly re-opening to 2 and I figured if anyone understood my over-the-top love for the SGs it was you guys. Its been a great comfort reading this board the last few days.

Careful there, Layne. This board has been known to cause severe intellectual or emotional setbacks!

Ze Hiker · Post by **Ze Hiker** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 5:27 pm

current cam near Baldy:

Layne Cantrell · Post by **Layne Cantrell** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 5:28 pm

Mike P wrote:
Layne Cantrell wrote:Thanks man. I've been lurking here since I read about 39 possibly re-opening to 2 and I figured if anyone understood my over-the-top love for the SGs it was you guys. Its been a great comfort reading this board the last few days.
Careful there, Layne. This board has been known to cause severe intellectual or emotional setbacks!

I'm having enough of an emotional setback trying to figure out what's going on up there.

mattmaxon · Post by **mattmaxon** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 6:47 pm

The data shows the Beast at the head of Santa Anita Cyn

If no effort is made here it's likely gone, since there are no transmitters or homes in there......

Pray for rain as the FS won't do a thing

http://mattmaxon.homeip.net/data/Fire%2 ... 200902.kml

Post by **Hikin_Jim** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 6:50 pm

mattmaxon wrote:The data shows the Beast at the head of Santa Anita Cyn

If no effort is made here it's likely gone, since there are no transmitters or homes in there......

Pray for rain as the FS won't do a thing

http://mattmaxon.homeip.net/data/Fire%2 ... 200902.kml

Crap. The NPS in the San Gabriels is looking better all the time.

Mike P · Post by **Mike P** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:22 pm

Hey Jim, it looks like I was wrong yesterday. According to Matt's map Castle Canyon is getting hit now

Does anyone have visual confirmation of this?

Post by **HikeUp** » Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:12 pm

mattmaxon wrote:The data shows the Beast at the head of Santa Anita Cyn

If no effort is made here it's likely gone, since there are no transmitters or homes in there......

Pray for rain as the FS won't do a thing

http://mattmaxon.homeip.net/data/Fire%2 ... 200902.kml

I listened to the press conference at 5:00 pm this afternoon with all the big muckity mucks. They stressed that their main concern/area of concentration was now the southeast front of the fire and that one of their priorities was protecting Santa Anita Canyon. The FS says they are doing something. I hear two sides of the story at every turn.

Did I hear it wrong?