One of the things I noticed about these people is that they are largely transient. I think that this is a large part of the problem. They don't put down roots and connect with the local communities. They swoop in for a year or two (sometimes driving white Lincolns) and could care less how the local rabble feel about things.
When there is no connection, these people don't feel responsible to the true stewards of the land-the ones that live there, work and raise families there. They really only see the locals as obstacles to their career. After a while they move to another National Park and never look back.
Local governments should take more control because it matters to them what happens in their own back yard. The USFS and NPS have been miserable failures because they just don't care.
Your rental car anecdote made me think that many of them are of a short term rental mentality in a community. I would like to see almost any other agency take charge of wildland fires. It would be a good umbrella for Homland Security to provide, with States, themselves having more control of the use of resources.
You said:
Local governments should take more control because it matters to them what happens in their own back yard.
So true.
Yesterday, we took a look at the DenverChannel item again. Immediately, we contacted Colorado Springs City Management expressing pleasure and thanking them for becoming a part of the accountability loop. Recall the City contacted Colorado's governor in writing on the waterbomber.
Mr. Kovaleski's report stands as a clear reference point for precisely the sort of local interest and involvement in civil defence you address.
Disappointing that the governor didn't take them up on a challenge to the Forest Service and the political Fed to bring on the IL-76. Recall what happened to President Putin, politically, when he refused help for 'The Kursk'.
Another anecdote on local involvement:
Up here in Alberta, a wood products plant manager was on
the radio addressing his company's losses. We caught what he said. When we contacted him, asking him why his wood products association hadn't insisted that the govt here
use the Il-76 as we had written them, he told us the Forest Service had told his association the IL-76 couldn't be used out of the airport serving his area.
Not only was this just plain wrong, EVEN IF that particular airport couldn't be used, there will always be the prospect of using ANOTHER airport as the IL-76 makes up for in speed and liquids volume capabilities what it may lose in not being able to use the local airport in some places, a rare thing for the IL-76 as it is has STOL capabilites under less than max gross takeoff weight (per Janes 'All the World's Aircraft').
North American Smokies should not have out-and-out lied to the people on the IL-76. There are numerous instances of lying on the record. They seem to know they can get away with saying anything with impunity. Disgraceful, especially in civil defence matters.
We took our business plan to a rich oil corporation much involved in the Russian oil business. They complimented us on our business plan, wished us the best and, anticipating trouble with the Smokies, said they "had more confidence in the Russians than they did in their own government's Smokies."