Rating: 
Summary: Haven't read it...won't read it
Review: I'm sorry to say that, based on the editorial this writer had on Slate (an MSN site), I will not read this book. His disrespect for firefighters are prejudicial to a group, rather than aimed at the individual who might deserve disrespect. I cancelled my order for the book after reading the article. I'm ashamed I ever considered ordering it.
Rating:
Summary: Reply to "Excellent book - ignore these dishonest 1-star rev
Review: Ignore this review. This person is the one without a clue. If you want to read a real, good book, check out Young Men and Fire, by Norman Maclean, or Fire on the Mountain: The True Story of the South Canyon Fire, by John N. Maclean. Douglas Gantenbein is a disgrace. 1 Star is more than this book deserves.
Rating: 
Summary: More Like a First Draft...
Review: It is difficult to be the least bit convinced of Mr. Gantenbein's argument for a scaled down approach to firefighting, when his premise is so full of glaring errors: a pulaski as combination hoe and pick; Missoula as the headquarters for Forest Service Region 6. I'm not sure where he got his information on the Storm King Mountain tragedy, but his implication that ground crews were informed of the Red Flag warnings is far from true. He also mentions how fresh the Prineville crew looked after their "stiff hike in." They were ferried in by helicopter. This may sound horribly nitpicky, but you cannot be expected to make a convincing argument for anything until you have your most basic facts straight.
Rating: 
Summary: an important book
Review: It's hard to write about this book without wanting to go on for pages and pages, sharing the information Gantenbein has presented.This is an excellent, well-researched book, fated to be ignored by those who make policy decisions. It's hard to think of a government pursuit, aside, perhaps, from the "war on drugs" more poorly thought out, doomed to failure, expensive, and with as many adverse side effects, as the way forest fires are managed by the Forest Service. Anyone who has looked into the issue of forest fires knows, small frequent fires contribute to the health of a forest in a number of different ways, either by stimulating new growth of tree species who's seeds require heat for germination, or by clearing out the bushes and burning off lower limbs of larger trees, making for, paradoxically, more valuable timber. Fire suppression also has the effect of encouraging large numbers of unhealthy trees, which are both less valuable as timber, and more likely to burn (and to encourage insect infestations.)
But fighting fires is the one thing that the Forest Service is "supposed" to do - for them to announce that they're not fighting fires, no matter the scientific justification, would cause a media-orchestrated outrage as loud as if a city police department announced they were no longer arresting rape suspects. More importantly, in these days of environmental impact statements and bureaucracy, fighting fires is about the only thing a local Forest Service office CAN do without endless red tape. As he demonstrates, the largest forest fires consume the great majority of the money spent fighting fires (which are becoming an ever-larger portion of the forest service budget) while it's exactly those large fires that we're least able to control. Over the last 50 years, fires have gotten much, much, bigger as fire control as suppressed small burns, and it's the biggest burns which end up burning, no matter how many tons of fire retardant and water are dumped on them, and how many lives are lost, until the rainy season starts.
And, fighting the smaller fires, which can be managed, can cause more damage to the forest than the fire itself: ditches dug to form fire breaks last for years, and provide an excellent starting point for water erosion. But we HAVE to fight fires to protect homes, right? Turns out that the statistics used to bolster this argument refer to "structures," and a structure is anything from an abandoned outhouse to a woodshed to an actual house, and most "structures" that are lost in forest fires are not houses at all. It does seem odd for those who can afford first or second homes nestled in the forest, to expect fire fighters to risk (and lose) their lives to indulge their back-to-nature whims. Salvage logging: internal Forest Service memos show that the FS is eager to cede as much forest, burned or not, as possible to logging companies under the guise of "salvage logging." At the same time, a genuinely burnt forest is especially fragile and exactly where logging companies with their bulldozers should NOT be operating. Unfortunately, it's taken us a century of forest mismanagement to paint ourselves into this corner, and a few months of remediation will do little to fix the problem. And, it's the long view which exactly what politicians and politically-driven agencies are unable to focus on. Read this book - it's well written and informative, and there is literally no one in this country who shouldn't be interested in this issue.
Rating:
Summary: one star is too much
Review: Save yourself the time, money and frustration of reading this book.My copy has a permenent place next to my toilet, but its not for reading. Its a little ruff at first but gets the job done. The most expensive toilet paper I have ever bought.
Rating:
Summary: Must read for Westerners who enjoy the outdoors
Review: The 'Perfect Storm' of forrest firefighting-only better. After reading the book you not only have a much better appreciation for the people fighting the fires, but also for the science of fires and Mother Nature herself. A thought provoking read that will have you never look at a hike in the forrest the same way again. Also a very interesting look inside the politics of modern firefighting. Highly recommended for anyone who lives in the West and enjoys hiking or camping in our wonderful wilderness.
Rating:
Summary: 0 STARS ...NOT WORTH THE MONEY OR TIME
Review: The author clearly has bitter feelings towards firefighters and this book would be more suitably titled if it was called, "Why I Hate Firefighters". The author's own profession is so "cushy" that he even has time to contact the reviewers to mock their opinions.
Rating:
Summary: Superb and balanced
Review: The author, whose writing style is smart yet easy to follow, gives a balanced and thoughtful examination of fires in the West. His descriptions of the fires puts the reader in the forest with the fire fighters and at the same time gives the perspectives of all involved. With no pat or political answers, Gantenbein shows real depth and understanding for such a complex and fascinating issue. Great summer read.
Rating:
Summary: Superb and balanced
Review: The author, whose writing style is smart yet easy to follow, gives a balanced and thoughtful examination of fires in the West. His descriptions of the fires puts the reader in the forest with the fire fighters and at the same time gives the perspectives of all involved. With no pat or political answers, Gantenbein shows real depth and understanding for such a complex and fascinating issue. Great summer read.
Rating:
Summary: There are far better books to read than this one
Review: The only positive thing I can say about this book is that I feel fortunate not to have spent any money to obtain a copy; on the other hand I feel that the time I spent reading 'A Season of Fire' was time robbed from me forever. Douglas Gantenbein demonstrates in this book and in other writings that he in fact has very little understanding of the true nature of the fire service. My copy of his book was a gift; I'd certainly not have paid money for it myself. If you're looking to read about wildland firefighting, get a copy of Sebastian Junger's 'Fire' instead.
| 
