EISPIRATEN

From my blog...

In the Los Angeles Times today Paul Pringle publishes a well-researched article about that internal Forest Service review that cited rugged terrain as a reason not to order water drops on the second day of the Station Fire. Mr Pringle has been diligently on the case since the beginning of the fire and he is the only one in mainstream media that is trying to shed light on the mismanagement of The Angeles. But I will give myself a pat on the back here (actually a shameless self-promotion to keep you coming back) and tell you that I have been providing information. I sent the reporter my post on the so-called rugged terrain [here] along with some names and e-mail addresses. On November 24th I got a return email from him that simply said: "This is great. Thanks very much."

From the article: "It just irks me to see . . . that they're blaming the terrain for why no action was taken," said Don Feser, a former fire chief for the forest who retired in 2007. "They're just making excuses." Don Feser is the man that left The Angeles because of Jody Noiron's attitude [story here]. Some, namely Jody, may say that Feser's contributions to Pringle's article is just sour grapes. It's true that Don can't stand Jody, but he knows what he is talking about. He was a great asset to the forest and losing him was just one more example of how Jody Noiron is screwing-up this forest.

The article also says (please read the article) that the Forest Service is still denying that the cost-cutting memo had anything to do with the decision to wave-off helicopters. Naturally, they are lying, unless they are saying that they ignore the direction of the Regional Forester. But Jody could easily have blamed the whole thing on Randy Moore and his memo if she has nothing to hide. Something else is going on. The way this whole thing is being handled is fishy. It is a case of "the lady doth protest too much, methinks." Why is Jody Noiron so obstinate? Could it be that she has a feminist chip on her shoulder? The Forest Service does have a chauvinistic past, but that's not the case anymore. It's true that her employees call her a "bitch" because she is a woman, but if she were a man they would call her an "asshole", so it really has nothing to do with her gender. I offered an explanation of pride in a previous post, but that's not the whole story. In my next post I will tell you what is really going on.

http://sgmountains.blogspot.com/

Definite CYA on all the post fire reviews that USFS has done on itself.

I bet the Times eventually finds out who cancelled the request for air support.

I'd suppose that the ANF actually has a lot of terrain that they wouldn't send ground crews on. It is supposed to be the steepest mountain range in the world, right? But those areas to my uneducated vantage point seem like natural areas for air attack.

http://www.scpr.org/news/2009/12/22/sch ... stigation/

Schiff, Antonovich call for Station Fire investigation
5:13 a.m. | KPCC Wire Services

Rep. Adam B. Schiff and Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich are calling for a congressional investigation of the U.S. Forest Service over its response to the Station Fire.

Schiff, D-Burbank, told the Los Angeles Times he will ask Congress to begin a probe next month to include review of the Forest Service's decision to withhold water-dropping aircraft during the critical second day of the blaze.

Antonovich wrote to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., "I would like to request a congressional investigation into the Forest Service's failure to utilize water-dropping aircraft at the earliest stages of the Station Fire

before it spread — taking the lives of two firefighters, burning over 160,000 acres and destroying over 100 homes and structures...

"Originally the Forest Service reported that the mountainous terrain prohibited the use of aircraft water drops because they claim that it would not have been effective without ground support,'' Antonovich wrote.

"However, their logbooks have no evidence of this and reveal that their own incident commanders repeatedly asked for air support."

Antonovich and Schiff made their statements after the Los Angeles Times reported Monday that records contradict the Forest Service's position that steep terrain prevented the agency from using helicopters and tanker planes to attack the fire hours before it began raging out of control.

Antonovich called for "a congressional investigation into the false reports by the Forest Service and its failure to stop the fire before it spread."

Two officers responsible for directing the firefight on the ground and from the sky made separate requests for aircraft during a 6-1/2-hour period on day two, The Times reported, citing records obtained by the federal Freedom of Information Act as well as interviews .

An order for three air tankers that morning was canceled and a helitanker did not reach the scene in the Angeles National Forest until an hour or so after its scheduled arrival, The Times reported.

A review by the Forest Service concluded last month that aircraft would have been ineffective because the fire was burning in a canyon too treacherous for ground crews to take advantage of water dumps.

That finding has been disputed by fire commanders who took part in the battle, as well as the former fire chief for the Angeles National Forest, Don Feser, who retired in 2007.

Antonovich told The Times the Forest Service review should have addressed the commanders' desire to launch an air assault.

"Did the members of the investigative committee have access to this information? If they did, they are responsible for misleading the public," Antonovich told The Times. "As a result of the (Forest Service) leadership's failure . . . we lost two fine, brave firefighters."

The Station Fire was the largest in Los Angeles County's recorded history, scorching 250 square miles of the Angeles National Forest.

Unlike other deadly and destructive fires across Southern California this decade, particularly in the autumns of 2003 and 2007 when thousands of homes were destroyed, the Station Fire was not fueled by Santa Ana winds.

The fire, however, grew so large that it created its own weather at times, including pyrocumulus smoke columns that rose thousands of feet into the atmosphere.

I understand that it is human nature to want to lay blame somewhere, and perhaps rightly so, but it seems to me that the damage is done. Instead of wasting valuable resources in laying blame, perhaps we should look forward to restoring our beloved forest. Just my two cents.

michaelmagno wrote:I understand that it is human nature to want to lay blame somewhere, and perhaps rightly so, but it seems to me that the damage is done. Instead of wasting valuable resources in laying blame, perhaps we should look forward to restoring our beloved forest. Just my two cents.

If we don't hold them to account it will happen again

This isn't about today but 30-40 years in the future, when they come up with the same lame ass excuses.

This is the result of incompetence of the forest managers, this incompetence resulted in the deaths of two firefighters and the destruction of many many resources

I personally have been looking at what I can do restore our forest since the day the fire started

Both paths can be followed at the same time

This IMO continues the long standing pattern of Forest Service policy wreaking havoc on the environment.

This is all Monday morning quaterbacking IMO.
It seems to me more about assigning blame at this point than learning from the mistakes. There needs to be a head on a platter. There was not bad intent here, just bad judgement.
These incidents are dynamic and are not cookie cutter one size fits all. In a perfect world we would have unlimited resources and a fleet of DC10s and 747s on call 24 hours a day but we don't.
Many of you have hiked that area, and you know how steep it is. Imagine hiking those hills while cutting line in heavy brush with 30 to 50 foot flame lengths. They were not going to stop it even with air assets on the second day. What ever this Chief is saying, he was not there. There have been thousands of fires in the Angeles, and the truth of the matter is, they have been fighting em the same way this was fought. This one was extraordinary in it's destruction, and I'm sure they were thinking that it was just a vegetation fire. The biggest mistake that was made was not to hammer it from the start. I think that point has been made. I doubt there will be any release of resources now until they have control.

Bill wrote:This is all Monday morning quaterbacking IMO.

Another ash covered car day today. Air quality and the forest likely degraded for quite some time. The Morris fire was in more rugged territory and was put out. The LSA fire was certainly not in a picnic area. The Station fire burned the whole forest...at least to me given just slightly different conditions.

All the ANF has to do is fess up...but thats asking too much. Its not just the local people in charge that day, it goes all the way up the chain of command. They need to say the forest doesnt get the resources it needs..a lack of money mostly. But they didnt do that. Instead they have spun it ,when convienent ,as being good for the environment.

Bill wrote:This is all Monday morning quaterbacking IMO.
It seems to me more about assigning blame at this point than learning from the mistakes. There needs to be a head on a platter. There was not bad intent here, just bad judgement.
These incidents are dynamic and are not cookie cutter one size fits all. In a perfect world we would have unlimited resources and a fleet of DC10s and 747s on call 24 hours a day but we don't.
Many of you have hiked that area, and you know how steep it is. Imagine hiking those hills while cutting line in heavy brush with 30 to 50 foot flame lengths. They were not going to stop it even with air assets on the second day. What ever this Chief is saying, he was not there. There have been thousands of fires in the Angeles, and the truth of the matter is, they have been fighting em the same way this was fought. This one was extraordinary in it's destruction, and I'm sure they were thinking that it was just a vegetation fire. The biggest mistake that was made was not to hammer it from the start. I think that point has been made. I doubt there will be any release of resources now until they have control.

Good summary. Bottom line here is, after the fact, it's easy to go back and say what should have been done. The only person who should have authority to cancel units/air on a fire is the IC. That was, in hindsight, a mistake if it indeed happened.

However, I agree with Bill in that this fire most likely would not have been stopped even with the air support on the second day. That is also the overwhelming consensus from many seasoned wildland firefighters I have talked to and know. Also, anyone with any history in fighting fire will tell you although air support is critical, a fire is not contained from the air.

A little background on former ANF Chief Don Feser. Take his comments with a grain of pepper. While some of his statements may have some validity, he was more or less forced out of his job a couple years ago by Jody Noiron over a huge internal battle over something he did over her head. So, there is some emotion there no doubt, that may be fueling some of that criticism.

AW wrote:

Bill wrote:This is all Monday morning quaterbacking IMO.

Another ash covered car day today. Air quality and the forest likely degraded for quite some time. The Morris fire was in more rugged territory and was put out. The LSA fire was certainly not in a picnic area. The Station fire burned the whole forest...at least to me given just slightly different conditions.

All the ANF has to do is fess up...but thats asking too much. Its not just the local people in charge that day, it goes all the way up the chain of command. They need to say the forest doesnt get the resources it needs..a lack of money mostly. But they didnt do that. Instead they have spun it ,when convienent ,as being good for the environment.

I think this is the problem. The higher up the food chain this goes, the less chance of getting real answers, and in the final analysis what we really want is a better product. Pointing fingers and congressional investigation will do nothing more than cause people to clam up and get defensive. Mistakes were made, lets learn from them. These fires are like I mentioned dynamic, and decision makers need to have the backbone to make tough decisions. It is a war, and people in the battlefield need to make decisons based on real time conditions, and experience. It is a shame that the real world budget is an issue when it comes to resources, but that's how it is. I wish they would just say it.

A zoomable map of the closure area.

Hat tip to Modern Hiker.

Thank you!

Wish they'd add the yellow frog closure to it in Coopers Canyon near Eagles Roost. That "temporary" closure has been in effect too many years now.

Nice 8)

This is the latest scuttle butt

Probably true!

WAHOO!

Too Bad I'll be at work or I'd be an "April Fool"

>> Hi Everyone,
>> The state is currently in charge of Angeles Crest Highway between La Canada & Red Box.
>> The road is expected to remain closed for up to 3 months. If the repairs on the road can not be done by back filling the slide areas, then a bridge will have to be built and then ACH will remain closed for up to 3 years between the two locations.
>>
>> As of April 1, 2010 the forest closure in the Angeles will change. ONLY the Arroyo Seco drainage will remain closed. This means that the Arroyo, Bear Canyon, Millard Canyon, Brown Mountain, parts of Lukins & Josephine Peak will remain CLOSED!!! An updated map will be out after April 1st.
>>
>> What this means is, once the forest closure is lifted, all hiking trails outside of the new closure area will be opened to hiking. But there will be signage in place stating that you are hiking in a burn area and you are doing so at your own risk. The Arroyo drainage is to remain closed for an indefinite period of time. There are still slides occurring in there and it has the worst damage from the fire and following rains. I have been told it might not open until next year.
>>
>> All the campgrounds in the Chaleo/Charlton Flats area are scheduled to open April 1st. Red Box picnic area as well as Hidden Springs picnic area will also open then. The Charlton Flats picnic area will not open until further assessments can be done. There are a lot of dead tree's in that area that need to be removed for safety purposes. Buckhorn is still closed because the road is not even plowed that far yet.
>>
>>
>> In regards to the highways in the forest....
>>
>> Currently the only roads in the forest that are open are... Big Tujunga and Upper Big Tujunga to Shortcut on Angeles Crest Highway. Angeles Crest Highway between Red Box & Mt Waterman Ski area. Beyond Waterman and not been plowed and may not be until May. Angeles Forest Highway from Big Tujunga to Palmdale. Angeles Forest Highway from Big Tujunga to Angeles Crest Highway is expected to open in 2 weeks. This opening, AFH between Big T & ACH, will be ONLY for Forest Service personnel working @ Clear Creek as well as others with work credentials.
>>
>> The stretch of Angeles Crest Highway from La Canada to Red Box is expected to remain closed now for possibly up to 3 months. The 4 slides are so big that they require work that might not work. Back filling is what they are trying to do and if it does not work, the highway in one spot will require a bridge to be built and that is expected to take up to 3 years!!! The State is in charge and ONLY Cal-Trans workers are allowed on the highway. The work is being done Monday - Saturday. There was no word on whether or not the washout east of Colby on ACH will be repaired any time soon.
>>
>> From what we are hearing, it looks like the bridge might be the only way to go and that the highway between La Canada & Clear Creek may very well be closed for up to 3 years. Stay tuned and when we hear something new, you'll get it first right here.

Where did this come from? If true, it is great news.
Pacifico, Rabbit, Iron, Fox, Condor...all these would be open?

Or is this a pre-April 1st joke?

Terry Morse wrote:Where did this come from? If true, it is great news.
Pacifico, Rabbit, Iron, Fox, Condor...all these would be open?

Or is this a pre-April 1st joke?

Matt would not toy with us!

April 1st: "The opening date has been pushed forward to April 1st, 2395."

LOL @ Taco.

I believe Matt and his unnamed source, and am looking forward to the opening. YAY!

It actually makes sense (or is it just wishful thinking).

Gah! WTF does "...parts of Lukins & Josephine Peak..." mean? I guess I could get to Strawberry from Camp Colby or RedBox.

Ah!!! What's the new map gonna show!!! Is it even gonna be legible?

Looking forward to some real info from the Forest Service.

Thanks for the heads up Matt

Terry Morse wrote:Or is this a pre-April 1st joke?

No joke...

Just ScuttleButt no official word from any authoritative source

We'll see about highway 2, I'd heard the bridge option mentioned before... IMO since it's still on the table it doesn't sound good to me but it's just my opinion not based on any fact.

Think good thoughts and continue clean living

Matt

There will be some mega routes available if true...but I thought the trails were going to have to be repaired/examined first? Just dont want anyone dying/serious injury tis all.

The Sierra Club Trail Restoration Committee posted that they are beginning trail work on July 24th. It will continue on for weeks with work on a number of trails.

Also, The Community Hiking Club (Santa Clarita) was given permission to hike the PCT from Indian Canyon to the North Fork Station on April 3rd. That whole area is within the closure right now. Maybe that means the closure will be reduced on April 1st. I hope...I hope.

mattmaxon wrote: Buckhorn is still closed because the road is not even plowed that far yet.

I know this is old info but this was only half true as of this past saturday - Buckhorn is still under a few feet of snow and closed, but the road is for sure plowed that far. I didn't try for Islip Saddle but the signs ("road closed in 24 miles") lead me to believe its open all the way to the seasonal closure.

Are we fools yet?

A call to the Supervisor's office just now (9:30am) got me this: "We haven't been given any information about that. As far as we know, the closure is still in effect."

Granted, they often do not know their ass from their elbow, so who really knows.

Clear as mud:

As early as April 1st many picnic and day-use areas may be opened. Trails will most likely be marked as “unmaintained, use at your own risk” before the closure is lifted.

http://corbamtb.com/news/2010/03/17/ang ... st-update/

cougarmagic wrote:Clear as mud:

As early as April 1st many picnic and day-use areas may be opened. Trails will most likely be marked as “unmaintained, use at your own risk” before the closure is lifted.

http://corbamtb.com/news/2010/03/17/ang ... st-update/

Latest info from that website, which is not official.

Angeles National Forest Update

Tonight CORBA volunteers attended a meeting with ANF Volunteer Coordinator Howard Okamoto. We received some encouraging news from Howard. While the theme of the news is good, nothing is definite, and planned dates may change if we get another round of storms or inclement weather.

Right now the forest closure remains in effect, unchanged since it was first imposed after the fires. However, the FS hopes to open much of the forest to the public in mid to late April. The area that will definitely remain closed is the Arroyo Seco Canyon, roughly the area from Switzers to JPL, between Brown Mountain and Mt. Lukens.

Highway 2 through that canyon, between Clear Creek and La Canada will likely remain closed for some time as repairs in some of the larger slide areas will entail major construction. However, the Forest is currently accessible via Big Tujunga Canyon. Angeles Forest Highway is open from Big Tujunga to Palmdale; Upper Big Tujunga is open to Shortcut Saddle, and Highway 2 is open between RedBox and Mt. Waterman. The RedBox-Mt. Wilson road is also open. The roads will be closed any time there is a significant weather event, as the hillsides above the highways are still subject to major slides.

As early as April 1st many picnic and day-use areas may be opened. Trails will most likely be marked as “unmaintained, use at your own risk” before the closure is lifted. Some may be signed as closed if there is significant damage. In any case, by May we expect to be able to begin surveying damage to trails, and start doing trailwork in the ANF.

We’re looking forward to getting back to our beloved forest. Many trails will have changed significantly and may not be viable without extensive repairs. CORBA is not alone, and many other groups have an interest in seeing trails restored.

Trailwork has been proceeding on many trails under FS supervision, including the Sam Merrill Trail and Sunset Ridge Trails. The AC100 crew will start surveying and repairs on El Prieto on April 24. Outward Bound are currently working on the Condor Peak trail and the Stone Canyon trail.

So while this may change depending on the progress of Caltrans road repairs, weather, and other factors, it is encouraging news to say the least. Keep an eye on the CORBA calendar for upcoming trailwork days in the ANF and more announcements.


As of Friday 4/2, from the LA River Ranger Dist. Recreation, no word on updates on the revised closure. All campgrounds and trails in the original closure are still in effect until further notice.

Any more news? I was thinking of taking some kids up to Tom Lucas trail camp next month.

Don't know - the damage in Bear canyon/Switzer was obviously much worse than they expected. That's gonna be closed for a long time, I would think. There was a large group doing work in the Big T area last weekend for National Trails Day. I believe they worked on the Condor Peak trail, Stone Canyon trail, and probably some work along the river. One of my friends was there - I haven't heard from her what it was like, but when I do, I'll post if she got an idea of plans for that area.

Trail Canyon was never a real high-use trail though, and since a lot of it was canyon-bottom, like Switzer, I think that would be a high damage/low priority trail, unfortunately. (I always liked it myself!)

Trail Canyon is also one of my favorites. The location of the trailhead mitigates some of the parking risks on Big Tujunga, and it's a great way to head for parts north, like Upper Pacoima Cyn and Messenger Flat. Jake was considering some recon of the area.

I've got a friend who's a CE (civil engineer) whose company is doing contract work for Cal Trans. He's basically said the same thing about the lower stretch of ACH -- that it's pretty torn up and may need to have a bridge built if "first response" approaches don't work. I'll ask him next time I see him how things are going.

HJ