Aerial Fire Study -- Speak Out!greenspun.com : LUSENET : Smokejumpers : One Thread
This item from Jim Vietch: re: ADFF Study online at http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/adff/
I have several objections to the [Aerial Delivered Firefighter] study. First there is no distinction between the value (i.e. fireline production) of a helitack, ground pounder or a Smokejumper. If jumpers had been weighted even slightly better we would have come out even better.
Second the criteria states Smokejumper initial attack time includes "45 minutes walking to the fire!" What? And helitack are given no such penalty! The report also mentions but does not include other work related contributions such as prescribed fire activities which jumpers are now taking a lead in. Nor does it value the extra experience and the concomitant safety advantage of Smokejumpers.
So I think the study is flawed, but I can't complain too much because the outcome so clearly says that Smokejumpers are MUCH more cost effective than rotorheads. It even makes a case for increasing funds to Smokejumpers.
In any event there are going to be a lot of jumpers out there unhappy with the prospect of NCSB, West Yellowstone, Redmond or even Missoula being shut down.
Later, Jim Veitch
-- dan mccomb (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 14, 1999