California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Director Ken Pimlott retired last week but only after giving interviews in which he called for sweeping changes in how state officials and the public think about wildfire risks. He also challenged conventional wisdom on the state’s attitude about forest thinning and on who was most responsible for starting most fires.

Pimlott told the Associated Press that local and state planners should only approve new housing projects in wilderness and canyon areas if far more efforts are made to guarantee there are easy evacuation routes and unless home fire defense measures are mandatory. He also called for much tougher building standards in so-called wilderness “interface” areas to make it more difficult for homes and commercial and government structures to burn.

“We’ve got to continue to raise the bar on what we’re doing, and local land-use planning decisions have to be part of that discussion,” Pimlott said.

His remarks were seen by some as a comment on Los Angeles County officials giving their final approval last week to a 19,000-home project at Newhall Ranch near Interstate 5, about 70 miles north of the city of Los Angeles. Project opponents said the county didn’t go nearly far enough in imposing conditions that would reduce fire risks.

Public urged to take ‘red flag’ warnings more seriously

Pimlott also said more civil defense-type programs and emergency alarm systems are needed in communities in wooded areas. And he said the public in areas at risk of wildfires needed to take “red flag” extreme danger warnings far more seriously – not as a vague and unlikely threat but as an imminent personal risk.

“The reality of it is, California has a fire-prone climate and it will continue to burn. Fire is a way of life in California and we have to learn how to live with it, we have to learn how to have more resilient communities,” he told AP.

At least if Pimlott’s warnings are taken seriously, the push for tougher building regulations in fire-prone areas will only make addressing California’s housing crisis more difficult. That’s because a mantra of housing reformers has been to reduce, not increase, state housing regulations to bring down costs. By some accounts, the Golden State has the nation’s costliest construction rules.

In an interview with the New York Times, the retiring fire official said that President Donald Trump’s assertion that poor forest management was behind the state’s awful run of monster wildfires since 2015 was misleading. He said state officials are hardly ignoring the problems caused by dead trees and thick undergrowth.

“Over the next five years, there’s over a billion dollars invested in both forest thinning and forest health projects,” Pimlott said.

Blame public, not stressed utilities, for ‘95%’ of fires

At a time when Pacific Gas & Electric and, to a lesser extent, Southern California Edison, have faced lawsuits seeking hundreds of millions in damages or more because of allegations that poorly maintained utility equipment triggered wildfires, Pimlott said there is an insufficient appreciation of how much bigger the fire threat is than just a decade ago.

“There has been negligence in some cases,” the 30-year firefighter told the Times. But he said that in most cases, “folks have complied with everything and you have winds that are blowing at 80 miles an hour, you have infrastructure that was never designed to function in these extreme conditions that we are now seeing.”

Who is most to blame for fires in the Golden State? Pimlott said the answer is the same that it’s always been.

“In reality, 95 percent of fires in California are caused by people – welding, grinding, pulling a car off the edge of the road, weeding at the wrong time of day,” he said.

Pimlott told the Times that he intends to spend much of his time in retirement on a 70-acre parcel in a heavily forested area in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada. The parcel was badly scorched by a 2014 wildfire.

“The general fund amount is $122.6 billion, up by 6 percent over this year. Other special funds and spending outside the Legislature’s direct control bring the expected total to $170.7 billion,” the San Francisco Chronicle noted. “The rocket fuel behind these sums is the state’s volatile capital gains tax, paid by the wealthy in good times. It’s a feast or famine levy that rides with economic swings and right now it’s coining money for Sacramento.”

Fire from both sides

But while Brown’s budget upped the ante on public schools, basic entitlements and the Golden State’s rainy-day fund, his unyielding insistence on guarding against the economic worst left his party’s liberal ambitions unfulfilled once again. “Advocates for the poor cheered the governor’s proposed increases to cash aid for the aged, blind and disabled — the first time such grants would go up in 10 years,” as the Los Angeles Times reported, but “anti-poverty advocates said they were disappointed that there was no proposed increase to CalWorks, which provides cash payments to the working poor.” Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León, D-Los Angeles, praised Brown for “historic investments in our children’s education that will make a tremendous difference,” according to the Sacramento Bee. But he complained that “we still have to take a closer look at strengthening our health care system for the poor and developmentally disabled that has been starved for far too long.”

Sen. Ted Gaines, R-El Dorado, said SB168 would indemnify emergency responders who damage a drone during firefighting, air ambulance or search-and-rescue operations.

Earlier this month, aerial fire crews responding to a blaze that swept across Interstate 15 north of San Bernardino had to pull back after five drones were spotted above the fire.

It was the fourth time in a month that a drone had disrupted wildfire response in the region, according to a spokesperson for the U.S. Forest Service. Gaines introduced SB167 earlier this summer to increases fines and introduces the possibility of jail time for drone use that interferes with firefighting efforts. Assemblyman Mike Gatto, D-Glendale, co-authored both bills.

“Private drones don’t belong around these emergencies. That is the first message I want to get out,” Gaines said in a news release. “But if one gets damaged or destroyed because it’s in the way then that can’t lead to financial penalty for the people trying to save lives and property. It’s unfortunate, but that’s all it is. People can replace drones, but we can’t replace a life. When our rescuers are risking their own lives to protect us, I want them thinking about safety, not liability.”

Gaines also said it’s his hope that the advent of effective “jamming” technology could keep drones away from emergency response areas and flight paths.

He went on to say that “public education efforts could ensure that the safest, least-damaging methods for avoiding or disabling unauthorized drones will be the primary methods used in these crises.”

In a phone interview on Friday, Gaines said its his understanding that the federal government is working on a technology that would jam a certain frequency used by private drones.

Some government agencies are already using drones, or have plans to do so, to monitor areas including wildfires.

Contact reporter Chris Nichols at chris@calwatchdog.com or on Twitter @ChrisTheJourno

CHULA VISTA — A California Highway Patrol officer handcuffed and detained a Chula Vista firefighter for refusing to move his engine out of traffic at a crash scene Tuesday night, prompting a nationwide storm of online commentaries on Wednesday.

The firefighter had parked the engine behind an ambulance in the fast lane of Interstate 805 near East Naples Drive, where a sedan had flipped over a concrete guard rail and two people were reported injured.

Chula Vista Fire Chief Dave Hanneman said fire crews are trained to position their rigs to block oncoming traffic.

“I know clearing the freeway is a priority for the CHP,” Hanneman said. “Our No. 1 priority is the safety of our firefighters and patients.”

The average death rate in 2011 was 3.5 per 100,000 workers for the average American worker. Fishermen had the most dangerous jobs with 121 deaths per 100,000, followed by loggers and pilots. Firefighters die at a rate of 2.5 per 100,000 workers, which is slightly above the rate for cashiers (1.6). Yet not many cashiers — or loggers or fishermen or taxi drivers, for that matter — receive “3 percent at 50” retirement plans courtesy of taxpayers. Police officers died at the rate of 18.6 per 100,000, which is significantly below farmers and just above construction workers, although well above the national average. About half of the police deaths are because of car accidents.

By the way, the government considers it an “on the job” death when a firefighter or cop dies from heart attacks, cancer and other common ailments. These are referred to as presumptions. It’s a presumptuous standard, but one that unlocks myriad benefits for surviving family members.

Police and fire also argue for their millionaires’ pension — one would need several million dollars in the bank to receive a lifelong six-figure payout for employee and spouse — based on the idea that they die shortly after retirement. Union officials repeat that falsehood, but even the union-friendly California Public Employees’ Retirement System released a presentation showing that the longest-living category of public employee is a cop followed by a firefighter. They tend to live well into their ’80s which, if you think about it, is why there are those huge unfunded pension liabilities.

All jobs have their dangers and stresses and I don’t wish to minimize those faced by public safety officials, but their unions promote an outsized sense of danger for disturbingly political reasons, just as their unions exploited the 9/11 tragedies for cheap political gain. I wish everyone a long and healthy life, but it would be nice if public-safety unions stopped overplaying the dangers they face in order to hit up the public for more cash. It’s time to stick to the facts.

By Chriss Street

California is one of the worst fire zones in the nation.  As we go to press, there are at least 10 major fires and more than 55,000 acres of California burning.  Major incidents include the Robbers Fire in Placer County, Mill Fire in Colusa County, Flat Fire in Trinity County, Panorama Fire in San Bernardino County, Sites Complex in Colusa County, Twin Fire in Riverside County, Seven Fire in Tuolumne County, La Grange Fire in Tuolumne County, Turkey Fire in Monterey County and the Fish Fire in Inyo County.

Every year thousands of acres burn, causing billions of dollars in damages and often the loss of life.  According to statistical studies of fires, geography is the most important factor.  Simply put, your home will be more likely to burn down if you build a home in a wind corridor, on a steep slope or in a remote location surrounded by wilderness.

But sometimes entire suburban communities burn down.  In preparing for this year’s fire season, I hope the following suggestions help protect your family from financial or personal loss this year:

RESILIENCE STARTS WITH COMMUNITY SELECTION  

1. Going it alone puts you at greater risk than living near other people. Living in a place that’s frequently dangerous isn’t smart.
2. Most fires are started by flying embers carried by winds up to a couple of miles ahead of the fire front, not by radiant heat or the fire front itself.  If your home is vulnerable to fires started by embers, your home will be much more likely to burn.
3. Homes surrounded by improperly maintained vegetation are more likely to burn.

THREE WAYS TO CORRECTLY MAINTAIN VEGETATION

• Remove vegetation that touches or is very close to the home.
• Plant and maintain non-native landscaping or grow vegetables for “foodscaping” in the area around your home.  Keep native “brush” at a distance.
• Trim trees of dead branches and remove dead grass.

CREATING  “DEFENSIBLE SPACE”

Defensible Space is the landscape between your house and the potential fuel source (dense stands of native or naturalized vegetation) that is your responsibility as a homeowner to maintain to reduce fire risk.  It is important to create two Brush Management Zones with different requirements.  It is common for municipal building codes to require a total of 100 feet of defensible space from the structure.

BRUSH MANAGEMENT ZONE 1 typically extends 35 feet out from the structure towards the flammable vegetation on the level portion of your property:

* Generally must be permanently irrigated to maintain succulent growth.
* Should consist primarily of low-growing plant material, less than four feet in height with the exception of trees.  lants should be low-fuel and fire-resistive.
* Other than the trunk, all portions of trees which extend within ten feet of a structure or the outlet of any chimney should be cut back.
* Trees adjacent to or overhanging any building must be free of dead wood.
* Roof and rain gutters of any structure must be free of leaves, needles, or other dead vegetative growth.
* Fences, gazebos and decks should be non-combustible and/or have a minimum one-hour fire resistance rating.
* Irrigation from Zone 1 must not run onto Zone 2, because it will encourage growth of flammable vegetation.

BRUSH MANAGEMENT ZONE 2 is the remaining 65 feet that extends beyond Zone 1 and is usually comprised of  native and/or naturalized vegetation:

* Should have NO permanent irrigation.
* Must be thinned and pruned on a seasonal basis to reduce the fuel-load of vegetation greater than 24 inches in height.

HOW TO THIN AND PRUNE BRUSH IN ZONE 2

Step 1:  Remove as much dead wood/vegetation along with all weeds as you can within the Brush Management Zone areas.

Step 2:  Thin the entire Zone 2 area.  Start by cutting down 50 percent of  the plants over two feet in height to a height of  six inches. Don’t go any lower than six inches so the roots remain to control soil erosion.  The goal is to create a “mosaic” or more natural look, so do your cutting is in a “staggered” pattern.  Leave uncut brush in groupings up to 400 square feet — that’s a 20 X 20-foot area, or an area that can be encircled by an 80-foot rope — separated by groupings of plants cut down to 6 inches.

Step 3:  Thinning should be prioritized as follows:

1. Invasive non-native species = weeds;
2. Flammable native species;
3. Native species;
4. Non-native species.

Remaining plants, four feet or more in height, should then be cut and shaped into “umbrellas.”  This means pruning one half of the lower branches to create umbrella-shaped canopies.  This allows you to see and deal with what is growing underneath.

Upper branches may then be shortened to reduce fuel load as long as the canopy is left intact. This keeps the plant healthy, and the shade from the plant canopy reduces weed and plant growth underneath.  Non-woody vegetation that is less than four feet in height, like coastal sage scrub, should be cut back to within 12 inches of the root crown.

Step 4:  Dispose of the cuttings and dead wood by either hauling it to a landfill; or, by chipping/mulching it on-site and spreading it out in the Zone 2 area to a depth of not more than 6 inches.

Step 5:  Thin & Prune annually, because plants will grow back.

These fire prevention preparations will not guarantee that you do not suffer damages from fires.  But being prepared will dramatically increase the likelihood that your family will be safer than your neighbors if a fire burns in your community.  For further information, please contact your county fire authority or city fire department.

Be Safe!

As a tragic San Francisco fire that claimed the life of at least one firefighter Thursday has shown, public safety jobs at times can be very dangerous. But an incident from earlier in the week across the bay in Alameda has also shown, public safety agencies also can be so mired in bureaucracy that safety officials fail to act decently, let alone heroically.

Not only did Alameda firefighters and police stand around, watch and do nothing as a suicidal man, Raymond Zack, spent an hour neck-deep in the waters of San Francisco Bay, they didn’t even go into the water to retrieve his body when he died. They left that work to a bystander. To make this incident on Memorial Day even more infuriating, police and fire officials defended the inactions of their employees and blamed budget cuts and city policy for this inhumane behavior by those who often claim to be selfless protectors of the public.

Public safety “first responders” play the hero card whenever they are negotiating for higher pay, better pensions and other bigger budget items and, again, sometimes they are. When it comes time to actually behave like heroes, they sometimes act like bureaucrats. The Alameda tragedy is by no means an unusual situation.

MSNBC reported: “Interim Alameda Fire Chief Mike D’Orazi said that due to 2009 budget cuts his crews did not have the training or cold-water gear to go into the water. ‘The incident yesterday was deeply regrettable,’ he said Tuesday. ‘But I can also see it from our firefighters’ perspective. They’re standing there wanting to do something, but they are handcuffed by policy at that point.'”

Blaming budget cuts is reprehensible especially given the large chunk of local budgets that firefighting services consume. Simple decency required some effort – rather than these highly paid professionals standing around and gawking – to save a troubled man. The bystander who fished out the body didn’t have cold-water gear (let alone a big pension from the fire department), but he jumped into the water anyway and acted like an actual human being. The water was chilly (54 degrees) but it’s not like they were in, say, Alaska.

A local resident was quoted in the story, and he made a sensible point: “This just strikes me as not just a problem with funding, but a problem with the culture of what’s going on in our city, that no one would take the time and help this drowning man.”

The Alameda police showed an even deeper cultural problem. “Certainly this was tragic, but police officers are tasked with ensuring public safety, including the safety of personnel who are sent to try to resolve these kinds of situations,” Alameda police Lt. Sean Lynch told the San Jose Mercury News. “He was engaged in a deliberate act of taking his own life. We did not know whether he was violent, whether drugs were involved. It’s not a situation of a typical rescue.”

Police agencies always say that officer safety is their first priority. But the job entails some risk to help the public. Helping troubled people is part of the job description. Blaming the victim is wrong.

The whole scenario seemed like something from the Three Stooges, except with tragic results. According to the MSNBC report, “The Coast Guard was called to the scene, but the water was too shallow for its boat. A Coast Guard helicopter arrived more than an hour later because it had been on another call and had to refuel.”

The firefighters, cops and Coast Guard, with all their personnel and top-of-the-line equipment, were incapable of even trying to save the life of a man who stood neck deep in water for an hour. Something definitely is wrong with this picture. It reminds me of an incident in Philadelphia I wrote about a few years ago:

“In a videotaped ‘rescue’ along the Schuylkill River last May [police and firefighters] did nothing other than watch for a half-hour or so as a troubled man clung to the side of a bridge, then jumped off and drowned. … [T]hey were joking around as the tragic event transpired. It took a roller-blading passerby and another bystander to attempt a rescue. … And the officials wouldn’t touch [the dying man] or try to resuscitate him until the rubber gloves and other safety equipment was on the scene. They left the dirty work for the brave volunteers. This infuriating response didn’t merit a rebuke from the police commissioner, who actually praised the assembled cops for their efforts after a public outcry ensued.”

Instead of getting punished, Alameda officials will get rewarded – with additional training dollars. But who really believes that, even if that money had been available and the policy been different, that these first responders would have done the right thing? The local resident quoted in the story was right. The problem is a deep cultural one, something I see to be endemic in the government agencies that always claim to protect and serve us.

Police and fire agencies are bureaucracies and, as such, they end up functioning in a similar manner to the Department of Motor Vehicles, the IRS and any other alphabet-soup agency you can name. As author and economist Thomas Sowell put it, “You will never understand bureaucracies until you understand that for bureaucrats procedure is everything and outcomes are nothing.”

And so normal people stand around wondering how we can end up with such a bad outcome – a preventable death – while the bureaucracies, stuck as they are on procedure, tell us they acted appropriately.

It’s about time the public starts rethinking our public safety policy and starts wondering whether the creation of big costly bureaucracies, encumbered by ridiculous rules and designed mainly around the convenience and safety of those working in the agencies, is the best way to protect the public’s safety.

By JOHN SEILER

Fire and police rescue crews stood by — for a full hour — while a man drowned in S.F. Bay. What kind of people are these?

MSNBC reports (the link includes a video):

Interim Alameda Fire Chief Mike D’Orazi said that due to 2009 budget cuts his crews did not have the training or cold-water gear to go into the water.

“The incident yesterday was deeply regrettable,” he said Tuesday. “But I can also see it from our firefighters’ perspective. They’re standing there wanting to do something, but they are handcuffed by policy at that point”….

Policy? What about plain old human decency? With all the surfers in California, didn’t somebody have a wet suit? I just don’t believe them. They had an hour to figure something out to save this man.

They probably were standing there talking about their padded pensions.

“This just strikes me as not just a problem with funding, but a problem with the culture of what’s going on in our city, that no one would take the time and help this drowning man,” KGO quoted resident Adam Gillitt as saying.

I remember back in 1982, a plane crashed into the 14th Street Bridge over Potomac River. A blizzard turned the water icy. According to Wikipedia:

Roger Olian, a sheetmetal foreman at St. Elizabeths, a Washington psychiatric hospital, was on his way home across the 14th Street Bridge in his truck when he heard a man yelling that there was an aircraft in the water. He was the first to jump into the water to attempt to reach the survivors.

At the same time, several military personnel from the Pentagon — Steve Raynes, Aldo De La Cruz and Steve Bell — ran down to the water’s edge to help Olian.

He only traveled a few yards and came back, ice sticking to his body. We asked him to not try again, but he insisted. Someone grabbed some short rope and battery cables and he went out again, maybe only going 30 feet. We pulled him back. Someone had backed up their jeep and we picked him up and put him in there.

One of the passengers who survived the crash was Arland D. Williams Jr. His name was not known for some time later. Reported the Washington Post of his heroism, :

He was about 50 years old, one of half a dozen survivors clinging to twisted wreckage bobbing in the icy Potomac when the first helicopter arrived. To the copter’s two-man Park Police crew he seemed the most alert. Life vests were dropped, then a flotation ball. The man passed them to the others. On two occasions, the crew recalled last night, he handed away a life line from the hovering machine that could have dragged him to safety. The helicopter crew — who rescued five people, the only persons who survived from the jetliner — lifted a woman to the riverbank, then dragged three more persons across the ice to safety. Then the life line saved a woman who was trying to swim away from the sinking wreckage, and the helicopter pilot, Donald W. Usher, returned to the scene, but the man was gone.

That’s what humans do. We sacrifice for each other. Without worrying about our pensions. Or the regulations.