Prescribed Burn Arrest

[Elkmagnet]

How moronic? We know they’ll want the firefighters to hustle in if their property is threatened again.

Let them pay for private fire fighting. No fed involvement needed.

 

[JLS]

Let them pay for private fire fighting. No fed involvement needed.

Yep. Buy your own tankers and helicopters. Staff your own crews, buy your own engines.

Defund ‘em. #*^@#* me.

 

[Elkmagnet]

It can get a little crazy in the sticks out west. I once talked to a guy who claimed there was no need for government above the county sherif. I replied "do you want the local sheriff to negotiate foreign trade?"
The guy paused for a moment smiled and said "YES!" As if we just came up with a great idea.

 

[Nameless Range]

If anything, a situation like this needs to be treated like an air traffic control tower would treat a pilot who has violated the rules in the sky : let them f!*king land first.

As the article points out, it’s pretty damn dangerous to take a developing incident and just strip of its leadership - with handcuffs.

It does speak to something else I think about often. Controlled burns, increased fuels reduction, aggressive-as-possible initial attack - folks won’t get out of the way of any of it.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Also interesting to see how people who decided how they feel about the USFS long ago use misfortune to pad their positions. The comparisons to the defund the police movement are related.

 

[jryoung]

Portland and Grant County holding each other's beers on seeing who can be more batshit crazy.

 

[JLS]

As the article points out, it’s pretty damn dangerous to take a developing incident and just strip of its leadership - with handcuffs.

It’s easy enough to file charges after the event is done. Unless you want the theatrics for votes.

 

[Irrelevant]

I'd love to see the sheriff prosecuted... in Portland district!

 

[BackofBeyond]

Portland and Grant County holding each other's beers on seeing who can be more batshit crazy.

Then Malhuer County drops the “peoples elbow” off the top rope…

 

[sapperJ24]

I have yet to find out what the USFS is good at. This is a good example of the dipshittery they do on a regular basis like in New Mexico. Along with not doing a good job managing forests, managing grazing rights, enforcing laws on their land, running a trade school, etc the list goes on and on.

The worst part is these guys probably had an enormous amount of government training on our dime and sill managed to #*^@#* it up.

The reality of USFS fire crews is most of the time they are standing around doing nothing, like most government employees do.

The USFS needs a major overhaul on it's mission, and to lose about 90% of its' funding and employees.

well, I'll bite I guess. Among the various jobs I've help for the Forest Service, my current one would be described as wildland firefighter.

I'm curious, do you think the Forest Service would get better at managing the land with 90% less funding? Or should the Forest Service divest the land?

Yeah, on a big incident there are a lot of people standing around. There's lots of reasons for this, we can dive into it if you want. I wont defend a lot of it, but a lot of it is out of our hands. Often local politicians (county commissioner type) want to keep the FS around long after the fire is a threat for various reasons (like maybe the team can keep bringing in money to outfitters and local businesses who are supplying the fire). Do you want every person in a yellow shirt digging handline?

Have you ever worked with contract engine crews? There's a lot out there that most people would not want unsupervised at their evacuated house.

I also agree the FS isn't good at enforcing laws, and yeah, in lots of places we struggle to manage the forests the way we would like to. Often this comes down to lack of funding and litigation.

What is your vision for the FS's mission?

 

[CowboyLeroy]

I'd be pretty hot too if my pasture got. Urged up in october. There's no time for grass to come back and what feed you can find is higher than its ever been. Also, what would the penalty be if the rancher had accidentally burned up national forest land?
Ugly situation but arresting the fire boss and taking a set of working hands off the site probably not the best idea.

 

[TheTone]

I wonder if part of the reasons one of the family members didn’t speak to the press has anything to do with his criminal background. Quick search turned up a drug, felon with a firearm and wildlife convictions. I’m sure he’s a great hard working guy

 

[Salmonchaser]

The biggest problem the USFS faces in managing forest is litigation. Take it all the way back to the spotted owl. It is almost impossible to get a timber sale to go forward without the friends of something filing a law suit to stop the sale. They are good at research and they are doing research on the impact of all these law suits are having on the overall health of the forests. Over the last couple of years they have managed to get a couple of selective logging sales to move forward in the Blue Mountains, reportedly gained some momentum with some environmental groups who routinely challenge any timber sale. “It was also good hunting for us this year”
With some notable disasters they are pretty darn good a prescribed burns, while we can’t have the disasters like New Mexico, this case in Grant County did more good than harm from a scientific standpoint. Folks in the Northwest better stand by if the Forest Service decides to say F.U. regarding controlled burns.

 

[BackofBeyond]

I wonder if part of the reasons one of the family members didn’t speak to the press has anything to do with his criminal background. Quick search turned up a drug, felon with a firearm and wildlife convictions. I’m sure he’s a great hard working guy

Just good, salt of the earth folks right there.

 

[Irrelevant]

I'd be pretty hot too if my pasture got. Urged up in october. There's no time for grass to come back and what feed you can find is higher than its ever been. Also, what would the penalty be if the rancher had accidentally burned up national forest land?
Ugly situation but arresting the fire boss and taking a set of working hands off the site probably not the best idea.

I'm sure you're aware the reason for the prescriptive burn is to reduce the risk that said rancher would have all of his property burned and maybe his house too. The FS literally gets sued for not planning prescriptive measures adjacent to private lands for that very reason.

 

[44hunter45]

They should have hired the Bundy Boys. They get away with lighting Oregon on fire every time.

Here's your (Ammon Bundy for Governor) sign.

 

[CowboyLeroy]

I'm sure you're aware the reason for the prescriptive burn is to reduce the risk that said rancher would have all of his property burned and maybe his house too. The FS literally gets sued for not planning prescriptive measures adjacent to private lands for that very reason.

I am but that didn't address my question. Unfortunately for Snodgrass somebody has to take responsibility when accidents happen. He's the big man on the job and thus is his responsibility. Looking at it from the ranchers perspective he's seen gates left open, fences burned up, and now a pasture burned up. He's got a right to be mad. I'd be irate if I were in his shoes.

 

[sapperJ24]

I am but that didn't address my question. Unfortunately for Snodgrass somebody has to take responsibility when accidents happen. He's the big man on the job and thus is his responsibility. Looking at it from the ranchers perspective he's seen gates left open, fences burned up, and now a pasture burned up. He's got a right to be mad. I'd be irate if I were in his shoes.

There is an Agency Administrator/Line Officer that signed the burn plan, who ultimately bears the legal responsibility. That person was likely not on site.

Of course the rancher has a right to be mad. Arresting the burn boss doesn't bring the grass back. I'm not a rancher and not trying to downplay the potential severity, but how many cow/calf pairs can 20 acres in mid-October support?

 

[BuzzH]

I am but that didn't address my question. Unfortunately for Snodgrass somebody has to take responsibility when accidents happen. He's the big man on the job and thus is his responsibility. Looking at it from the ranchers perspective he's seen gates left open, fences burned up, and now a pasture burned up. He's got a right to be mad. I'd be irate if I were in his shoes.

Is that clown going to praise the FS when his grass is in better condition the next decade from the good these type of fires do?

We had a fire get out of hand once when I worked in Ennis. Burned about 1k acres of private. Called the rancher letting him know we had a bunch of fence posts on order to replace the ones that burned. His response was, "good, that needed to burn, grass will be awesome next year."

This sounds like political douchebaggery to me.

 

[CowboyLeroy]

Of course the rancher has a right to be mad. Arresting the burn boss doesn't bring the grass back. I'm not a rancher and not trying to downplay the potential severity, but how many cow/calf pairs can 20 acres in mid-October support?

I agree, that's why I said unfortunately for Snodgrass. He's just the fattest chicken in the hen house. As for the 20 (potentially 40) acres, it seems like it's just the most recent in a line of grievances against the state. It could have been planted in improved grazing that he has the cost of seed and all time high priced fertilizer invested in, it could open up the land to erosion, the fire could have nearly made it to his house or barn or something, he could have been the using the field for horses, anything. The fact of the matter is there are a lot of people making assumptions based off of a story that doesn't provide a lot of detail, and as per usual the assumption goes straight to "landowner man bad" when the title of the article should be "government agency responsible for damages to private property, again".

 

[BuzzH]

I agree, that's why I said unfortunately for Snodgrass. He's just the fattest chicken in the hen house. As for the 20 (potentially 40) acres, it seems like it's just the most recent in a line of grievances against the state. It could have been planted in improved grazing that he has the cost of seed and all time high priced fertilizer invested in, it could open up the land to erosion, the fire could have nearly made it to his house or barn or something, he could have been the using the field for horses, anything. The fact of the matter is there are a lot of people making assumptions based off of a story that doesn't provide a lot of detail, and as per usual the assumption goes straight to "landowner man bad" when the title of the article should be "government agency responsible for damages to private property, again".

Why demand a burn boss be arrested? Why not sit down like an adult and talk about seeding, fertilizer, fencing, weed mitigation and a truckload of hay for his stock (if he has any).

Naaa, let's just start arresting people and being an asshat.