Escondeeter wrote on Feb 20, 2008 2:23 AM:What a surprise, a 'forum' without a single representative of the rural volunteer departments comes up with a plan to eliminate the rural districts. And all it'll take is money... lots and lots of money. Sheesh, guys, if we had the money, the rural departments would be spending it far more effectively than the big city departments can, they'd be operating with new apparatus and full staffing and the 'professional' departments would be depending on them to save their hides every time they lose control of a fire. We don't have the money, that's the issue.

Look, the history of the L.A. County Fire Department has some useful lessons to teach. We're currently at the point they were in the 50's. We have limited funds, and those funds are best spent getting San Diego City some reserve apparatus and bringing the rural districts out of poverty by giving them what they need to get the job done. When they reach some degree of parity, they'll start combining of their own accord and at that point we can start talking about a region-wide fire department.

If we keep trying to make the jump in one year that it took LA sixty years to accomplish, and we try to do that with inadequate funding, we'll end up throwing a lot of money away on studies, plans, committees, and proposals, and we'll have nothing left over to actually impact the current needs. In other words, we'll repeat the last four years.

And by the way, those who keep dragging out that hoary old argument about 'streamlining' management overhead ought to sit down with a copy of the LACoFD budget. Yeah, they have one chief to our 13. They also have a bunch of Deputy Chiefs, Assistant Chiefs, Division Chiefs, third special assistants to the deputy associate to the senior staff support leader for the Division Chief, and like that. All positions we don't have. When you look at the LACo. 'chief to indian' ratio, and compare it to the local districts, you'll discover we have less administrative overhead than they do.

It's really a simple process, fix what you have first, that's where you get the best 'bang for the buck'. Then we can start thinking about emulating LA. Heck, if we get enough money, we may be able to afford to get squad units with automatic transmissions, something even they, with their massive budget, still haven't found the money to do.

To Much Smoke? wrote on Feb 20, 2008 5:53 AM:Chief Bowman's plan to add 5 helicopters and 50 fire engines (and assumed staffing) cannot be funded. Without funding, any vision quickly becomes an hallucination.

fire leadership needed wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:33 AM:Not enough fire protection will be available without involving the stakeholders (homeowners). Go Early or Stay and Defend considers the HUMAN FACTOR and includes OLD and new homes. It is time for Go Early or Stay and Defend; years of proof; Australia and New Zealand fires are very much like California and other USA fires. There are positive results for well-prepared OLD homes. Fire leadership must include the stakeholders.

The report is not sufficient nor efficient because it does not consider the stakeholders (homeowners). The stakeholders need to be involved by way of defensible space, boxed eaves, cleared gutters, etc. The stakeholders need to be aware of how they can help save lives, livestock, and homes beyond the info from the above NCTimes report which includes probable tax increases and info at www.SDfiresafety.org.

Fire Leadership must include Go Early or Stay and Defend. Go Early or Stay and Defend is policy in Australia and New Zealand, and policy for more than 500,000 people in unincorporated areas of Ventura County and six of its cities. SD County people must be involved year round.

No matter how much money govt will have and spend for firefighting, it will not be enough to protect every person and every house.

Ventura County quote: "We partner with our community to identify risks and empower people with the tools to prepare and protect themselves. As part of that responsibility, we enforce fire codes and regulations, review more than 2,800 plans a year, inspect more than 4,000 homes and businesses a year, and issue roughly 300 fire code permits a year. We also work with more than 14,000 residents each year to create defensible space through our Fire Hazard Reduction Program and conduct hundreds of public education, fire prevention and safety programs for children, adults and seniors." end quote.

The Ventura County website http://fire.countyofventura.org/about_us/

tay wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:58 AM:This is something we NEED. So let's quit worrying and complaining about where we are going to get the money. Screw the studies, planning, proposals and commitees. We don't have the time or money to waste on that. We all know what needs to be done and Bowman is right, let the politicians decide where to get the money. I know that this is a huge project but let's be a little pro active, shall we?

JF wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:00 AM:Escondeeter, you stated "if we had money, the rural fire departments would be spending it ... (on) full staffing". How exactly does funding impact volunteer staffing? They're not paid! Because they're not paid, few can afford the time off from work to obtain the specialty classes and qualifications that paid folks routinely obtain.

As an example, CAL FIRE has hired training officers to assist the volunteers with basic training classes. They report only a handful of volunteers show up for classes. Meanwhile, after 20 years, I still average about 3 full weeks of training a year -- plus the day-to-day routine training. Would you find a volunteer (and poorly trained) Sheriff's Department acceptable?

I absolutely support the use of volunteers for firefighting -- as an adjunct to paid firefighters. Note that Bowman's group supports forming a reserve program, even though there are several union wags on the board. I know, shocking. Just remember that it's going to cost money to equip them. And we'll need even more officers to lead them.

You say that you have less administrative overhead? OK, do you have a paramedic program? A lifeguard service? A swiftwater rescue program? A helicopter program? A training section? A camp crew program? A haz mat program? An inspection bureau? Those are all services that could be provided by a consolidated department.

FF wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:02 AM:You all know the county has $700 million is reserve, right?

JF wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:06 AM:To Much Smoke, careful reading will show that those 50 engines are only to be staffed during times of high fire danger.

The county and city have collectively added three helicopters in the past four years -- four if you count the one just voted on by San Diego. The total requested is four, not five -- so that leaves only the three for the county to supply. Yes, that's a lot of money -- but less than the value of the properties they'd be saving.

Why won't we pay millions to save billions?

Escondeeter wrote on Feb 20, 2008 10:30 AM:JF: The issue's the LA RATIO between management and line personnel, not the total number of management personnel. The point is that the claim is being made that a giant bureaucratic county department would have a lower ratio. That hasn't proven to be true in LA.

The reference to increasing volunteer staffing is a reference to hiring people, but let the existing agencies do it, then subsidize it, 'cause they can do it cheaper.

Training? LA County gives 140 hours of training to the paid-call firefighters who man nine of their stations in areas with population densities similar to our back country. Not ideal, but even they have to 'do what they can with what they got'.

We have an existing example of what happens if you start out with an ambitious plan to re-make the world, then run out of funding before you finish. It's called the RCS radio system. The plan was to cover the entire county with sufficient capacity to handle any event. Overages caused them to run out of money, so they skimped on the east county part of the system. Guess where the radio problems were during the Cedar fire? They've now spent a small fortune getting the system up to what they wanted to have in the first place.

The same sort of thing is going to happen if we set out to create an OC level county department without having the funding. No one will want to admit they've under funded it, so we'll start scrimping on coverage. We end up with an under-funded professional department that provides worse coverage than what we now have. By upgrading what we have we keep the current coverage. Once that's accomplished and we get them to parity, they'll start professionalizing and consolidating on their own.

It'd be nice to have all the additional services you mentioned. All we need's the money. It's not there, it's not going to be there, and if we're going to get maximum value from the money we have we're going to have to set some priorities. A giant county-wide department with giant county-wide administrative overhead should be well down the priority list.

As far as most of the forum's other findings go, I fully support them.

JF wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:18 AM:Escondeeter, it seems to me that the objection to a county-wide fire department is mostly loss of "local control". None of the fire chiefs want to work for someone. To some extent that's good in that local advocacy is important.

The proposals I've seen include creating an umbrella organization to oversee local FD stations. Who does the chief of the San Pasqual FD report to now? That's right, the handful of residents in the area. That's not a regional solution.

My point in including all of those services is that much of the overhead you complain about is managing those additional services. One of the reasons you don't have them is that there is no one to manage them. One other is that volunteers typically can't commit to the training time needed to maintain specialties like the above. And, of course, the biggie -- money.

Sorry people, but you're never, ever going to have a 'real' fire department unless you raise taxes. That's just reality, though few politicians are willing to speak that now. They're interested in short sighted re-election until they term out, not long term solutions.

fire leadership needed wrote on Feb 20, 2008 11:33 AM:"go early or prepare, stay, defend."

Firefighting forces cannot protect the thousands of homes that are often simultaneously threatened by a wildfire.

Communities threatened by wildfire need to know about their choice: instead of evacuating their homes during a fire, residents may wish to prepare, stay, and defend.

The prepare, stay, and defend approach is based on research in the United States and Australia that shows how houses actually burn during a wildfire. These studies revealed that it is not a dramatic wall of flames that consumes properly prepared homes during a wildfire. Instead, these disasters are usually caused by flying embers, also called fire brands, that precede a fire and land on vulnerable portions of homes and landscapes. Fire brands can precede the flaming front of a wildfire by considerable distances; a quarter of a mile is not uncommon, and occasionally they fly more than a mile. These chunks of burning wood can be easily extinguished with a garden hose, bucket of water, shovel, or even a wet towel. But a fire brand left unchecked in the corner of a wood deck, in a rain gutter, or on flammable roofing material, is all that is needed to ignite a house.

Further reasons to prepare, stay, and defend, are the hazards involved in evacuation. Many wildfire fatalities occur when victims leave their homes at the last minute and are overrun by the fire while on foot or in their cars. Car crashes caused by smoky conditions and traffic jams are also a serious concern during evacuations.

Stay and Defend is only advisable if considerable preparation has been done before the fire arrives. In both the United States and Australia those living in the wildland-urban interface (wui) are urged to get ready for a wildfire by creating and maintaining a large defensible space around their home that is free of flammable materials. Because they stay and defend, other preparations are necessary, such as setting aside equipment and clothing for fighting the fire and maintaining adequate water sources.

Families with young children or elderly persons need to consider evacuating instead of staying to defend their homes. These evacuations must take place early; hours before the fire arrives. Leaving at the last minute is one of the most dangerous things a family can do during a wildfire.

Residents who stay and defend must wear all cotton or wool clothing; long pants, eye protection, boots, gloves, and masks over their mouths, etc., as they move throughout the property, inside and outside the home, checking for embers to extinguish. As the fire passes over the property, being inside the home can protect individuals from radiant heat.

Complaining again wrote on Feb 20, 2008 1:08 PM:Imagine that! All of the Fire Chiefs who never would allow their departments regionalized while they were still working are now wanting everyone else to do it after they have grabbed the golden ring. Save the money and get aggressive with fuel mitigation, fuel breaks and proper clearance around homes. Go back to managing the fuel in the winter, so the fires are smaller in the summer. When was the last time you saw a controlled burn in San Diego County?

JF wrote on Feb 20, 2008 2:31 PM:Complaining,
There was a controlled burn in San Diego County Monday and Tuesday of this week.

Fuel mitigation only works so much. Beyond 100' from your house, you're pretty much wasting your time. Embers can start new fires more than 1/2 mile away. We simply can't have bare earth for a half mile around houses. Once the fire gets in the houses, they are simply another fuel type.

Fuel modification does have it's place, but it's virtually useless in a wind driven fire -- note the Witch Fire jumped Interstate 15. Strict codes regulating building and landscape design will help more. Ban palm trees, wood fences, cypress and other evergreens and you'll do a world of good.

In Harms Way: wrote on Feb 20, 2008 3:11 PM:The County allowed building in the rural areas with full knowledge they could not provide fire coverage. Now we all have to pay to defend the right for individuals to build in a hazardous area. Well let’s allow the rural property owners to decide whether they want to fund a fire district or allow their homes to burn. It is by choice that I do not live in a flood zone or a high hazard fire area. I do not think it is fair that I would have to pay to protect individuals that purposely place themselves in harms way.

the real answers wrote on Feb 20, 2008 3:12 PM:We must learn and copy from Ventura County Fire Dept and Australia and New Zealand. Some reports indicate that USA expects govt to do everything for us. That we are too lazy to get involved in Go Early or Stay and Defend.

Wake up time. We all need to be involved with fire protection and firefighting. Contact your Fire Chief or Fire Captain.

Most CalFire Chiefs don't like Go Early or Stay and Defend. That probably means it is something very good for USA homeowners. Hope Go Early or Stay and Defend becomes policy beyond Ventura County.

Contact your Fire Safe Council to learn what you can do to REDUCE YOUR RISK. Wildfire Zone has 12 tip boards (both sides have tips); tips to REDUCE YOUR RISK; excellent information.

Includes signs, roads, driveways; trees; plants, shrubs; smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers; fireplaces, wood stoves; roofs, gutters; eaves, vents, siding; decks; windows; outdoor structures, outdoor storage; pets, livestock: planning and evacuation; personal preparedness.

These tips will help save you / family, pets, livestock, homes.

Get your TIP CARDS from Wildfire Zone. Wildfire Zone exists by way of SD County and UC Cooperative Extension Farm and Home Advisor.

"For more information visit the County of San Diego Wildfire Zone Web site at wildfirezone or call toll free 877 357 7705."

Brian wrote on Feb 20, 2008 3:14 PM:Part of the cost of living in southern California is realistic fire protection. If we won't pay the increased taxes for fire protection, we will get the same tragedies that we've always had. These pathetic brush clearing programs are a farce invented to make government look like it is doing something. Brush grows back. Fix your house and fund the fire department adequately. That's all that really matters.

To In Harms Way wrote on Feb 20, 2008 4:13 PM:Sorry to tell you this but, you, me and everyone else is paying to protect those that have placed themselves in harms way. They move to or build in the east county and then refuse to fund local fire protection because they know our firefighters will respond through mutual aid and fight their fires for free. They then laugh all the way to the bank. Tell your city manager and city council you do not want your paid for fire protection leaving your city. When that happens the freeloaders and County Board of Supervisors will be force to provide and pay for fire services. Until then nothing will change.

Common Sense wrote on Feb 20, 2008 4:27 PM:"The County allowed building in the rural areas with full knowledge they could not provide fire coverage."

Homes burned in Escondido, Rancho Bernardo, and Poway, none of which were allowed by the county. The entire city fire department cannot protect all the city neighborhoods at the same time.


"Now we all have to pay to defend the right for individuals to build in a hazardous area. Well let’s allow the rural property owners to decide whether they want to fund a fire district or allow their homes to burn."

We do pay our way. Local fire districts and water districts bring bond measures all the time. If they pass I pay you don't. Where have you been? Spouting off, blaming others?


"It is by choice that I do not live in a flood zone or a high hazard fire area. I do not think it is fair that I would have to pay to protect individuals that purposely place themselves in harms way."

When a quake hits and you need help, let's talk.

To Brian wrote on Feb 20, 2008 4:30 PM:Yes, we must create defensible space, clean gutters, etc.etc. Every homeowner must participate.

However, there will never be enough money to get all the equipment and firefighters we would need to save SD County, especially if there are multiple fires in SD County at the same time.

If other Calif counties have fire(s) at the same time we have SD County fires, same problem.

We will never have enough equipment and firefighters.

That's why we have to follow Ventura County. Go Early (keep in mind this means that they have defensible space, clean gutters, box eaves, etc.etc.). Or prepare and Stay and Defend.

It works. It offers a choice (Human Factor).

To Common Sense wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:29 PM:Homes burned in Escondido, Rancho Bernardo and Poway because the city resources had responded to your unprotected neighborhoods. You said it all about your bond measures when you say "if they pass". They don't. When the quake hits how do you propose you are going to help? You have nothing to offer and will be looking for our help, again. Let's talk when you have something to offer.

and Escondeeter wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:31 PM:Get over the volunteer thing. It is the problem, not the solution.

To Common Sense: wrote on Feb 20, 2008 7:48 PM:The houses that burned in Escondido, Rancho Bernardo, and Poway were in rural areas of those communities and look very similar to the County housing development. All were adjacent to wild land areas with major fuel loads nearby. The difficulty in fighting these fires is the men and equipment necessary to protect the property while the wildland burns. It is not worth the risk of lives and not worth my tax dollars to save the property of those who choose this rural lifestyle. The County and rural Cities should place a moratorium on housing in wildland areas until a fire response plan is in place.

Reardon wrote on Feb 20, 2008 9:54 PM:There is no way to provide sufficient manpower to handle a three-day wildfire every four years! Only the rapid deployment of existing assets from other areas, as far away as the East Coast can work. If the military can provide early warning during high risk periods through Unmanned Aero Vehicles, then delivery of professional fire teams to San Diego with huge airlift capability, we can do this. I note with interest that the Firefighters Union was part of the “team” and most of the members of the team were also members of the Firefighters Union – and I understand that their ideal scenario would be tens of thousands of full-time firefighters, sitting in firehouses and drinking coffee for years, waiting for a wildfire every four years that lasts for 3 days -- but that is not going to happen. Use what we got! We’ve got the military!

FF wrote on Feb 21, 2008 10:01 AM:Reardon, how do you come up with this stuff? From Rider? Has anyone ever seen Reardon and Rider at the same time?

fires are costly wrote on Feb 21, 2008 11:46 AM:Calif state has big money problems. SD County and cities are also in financial trouble. Indian gaming money will not make a dent. The federal govt has overspent and may never recover after our current war. Federal govt war on drugs also wasted taxpayer monies.

Firewise there is not enough money at any level of govt now or in the future to protect all lives and homes.

Defensible space up to 200 feet (when necessary) is part of the answer.

All stakeholders (homeowners) must get involved in the firefighting protection process. Need to make our own communities safer.

Get involved, educated, and plan your Escape (must leave early) or Prepare, Stay and Defend.

JF wrote on Feb 21, 2008 1:05 PM:Reardon, I don't want departments to staff for the "hundred year fire" that seems to happen every few years now. Neither do the union folks on the board. That's why you saw recommendations for reserves, etc.

However, I do want departments to be staffed for day to day emergencies. SDFD is currently 20 engine companies short each and every day. That's a needed 50% increase every day. When you add in the reserve capability of 20 engines, we might have been able to staff 30 extra engines during the recent fires. And that would have made a difference.

I'd love to use the military to move staff and equipment from other parts of the country, but that costs big money as well. The state probably spent $10 million on the Thanksgiving Day Santa Ana troop movement.

The only solution that will not cost tax money is requiring removal of many types of vegetation from private property, requiring structural changes to homes, etc. Think you can get that passed? A ten thousand dollar cost to each and every homeowner in hazard areas?

People simply need to get their heads out of the sand. The fire service needs more money -- that's all there is to it. I don't care if it comes from cutting existing programs or raising taxes, but there are not too many solutions that don't cost money.

JK you insult and then ask for more money wrote on Feb 21, 2008 3:54 PM:You must involve the stakeholders (homeowners) who are also the tax payers. We do not have our heads in the sand. We are being sandbagged by govt agencies. We are not represented. Our ideas and messages are incinerated (burned).

Fire leadership does not exist unless the 'leaders' can work with and for the stakeholders taxpayers.

Who sits on these various fire forums. Individual name and contact info is seldom listed.

Go Early (very early) or prepare, Stay and Defend. Works for old homes, for new homes. "Houses protect people, and people protect houses."

It's government policy in Ventura County Calif USA, Australia, and New Zealand.

Money to educate the public is necessary. Do it. Fire politics continues to waste money and time. Thank goodness for the Missoula Fire Sciences Lab (Montana), for AFAC in Australia, and the many USA universities studying fire.

JK you insult and then ask for more money wrote on Feb 21, 2008 3:56 PM:You must involve the stakeholders (homeowners) who are also the tax payers. We do not have our heads in the sand. We are being sandbagged by govt agencies. We are not represented. Our ideas and messages are incinerated (burned).

Fire leadership does not exist unless the 'leaders' can work with and for the stakeholders taxpayers.

Who sits on these various fire forums. Individual name and contact info is seldom listed.

Go Early (very early) or prepare, Stay and Defend. Works for old homes, for new homes. "Houses protect people, and people protect houses."

It's government policy in Ventura County Calif USA, Australia, and New Zealand.

Money to educate the public is necessary. Do it. Fire politics continues to waste money and time. Thank goodness for the Missoula Fire Sciences Lab (Montana), for AFAC in Australia, and the many USA universities studying fire.

JF wrote on Feb 21, 2008 9:35 PM:The group in question has every member listed on it's website as well as a contact email.

You claim that residents don't have their heads in the sand. Do any of your neighbors have Fan Palm trees? Italian cypress? Unboxed eaves? Wooden fences? Any of them have homes in chimneys? After the 2003 fires, residents of Scripps Ranch fought against a strengthening of fire codes. To me, that's having their heads in the sand.

I've been a huge advocate for the very things you are. But that's only part of the puzzle. The fire service can never (and should never) staff for the worst case scenario. BUT -- I'm talking every day increases here. The San Diego FD is short 20 eangines (80) firefighters each and every day. Bringing those folks to the battle will help every day and during large disasters.

By the way, it would help if you stuck with one name.

FF wrote on Feb 22, 2008 8:22 AM:I love this argument from the county residents. You blame everyone else for your problem. Your fires are not the cities problem, the militaries problem, the forestry's problem or even Calfire's problem. Your problem is you don't have a county fire department! And fairly soon you will figure that out when all of you good neighbors quit coming to your rescue. When was the last time the volunteers came west to help any city department? You are the bad neighbor that keeps borrowing the lawnmower until it breaks and the tells the owner he needs to buy a new one.

To FF wrote on Feb 22, 2008 10:38 AM:Mutual aid is a statewide program. San Diego's mutual aid system is nationally recognized as a model. No such thing as a perfect model in a disaster. I am a county resident and I have a fire protection district. I pay for it.

Your assertion that these rural fire districts never come west to help out is plain wrong. You are making inaccurate blanket statements to make your points. It is not that black and white. My fire department is not volunteer. Santa Ana driven fires typically break out in rural east or north county and burn westward. That is why "your" fire departments move into "our" areas to help.

And for the sake of discussion, let's say we get a county fire department. It will still never be large enough to stop/fight fires like the ones we have seen in recent years. We will still need/use mutual aid in the east to save us and prevent it running west. Once it does take that course and break west you will need county fire (or our existing fire districts) to chase that fire and help you.

You could add 2500 fire fighters and 500 trucks and you still could not stop a confligration like 2003 and 2007.

Get off your "us and them" high horse.

FF wrote on Feb 22, 2008 11:20 AM:First, note I said volunteers, I did not say fire protection districts of paid firefighters. Secondly, I question your statement about San Diego's mutual aid system being a nationally recognized model. It is the state program that is nationally recognized and San Diego is recognized as the weak link in that system. I fault no one who pays and provides fire protection and participates in the "mutual" aid system.

I agree with your statement that 2500 firefighters and 500 trucks could not stop a conflagration, but they may have stopped the fire before it became a conflagration. Look at LA county; same fuel, same geography, much worse winds. They stop many more fire than we do.

And I don't own a horse, I live at the beach

To FF wrote on Feb 22, 2008 3:21 PM:Google and find me one quote saying SD's mutual aid is the weak link or that SD's mutual aid is being criticized.

And where present day LA is most like SD with regards to topography and development is through the Malibu area. I call that a wash as a comparison.
The other area most commonly compared is back in the Santa Clarita Valencia area. Again, a wash.

FF wrote on Feb 22, 2008 6:20 PM:We are the only urbanized county without a county fire department, our firefighter to population ratio is so low the last time I looked it was not given. But, the reason why was; no county fire department.

Olaf wrote on Feb 25, 2008 1:48 PM:FF lives at the beach... he he... make more money then me!...I can't afford the beach. Can I be a FF???