Connect with us

Politics

California firefighting aircraft stymied by U.S. Forest Service policy, local chiefs say

Published

on

California firefighting aircraft stymied by U.S. Forest Service policy, local chiefs say

An aerial firefighting task force has been thwarted — and sometimes grounded — by a new interpretation of a U.S. Forest Service policy that prohibits contractors from providing flight supervision over federal lands, according to Southern California fire chiefs.

“I don’t understand why they’ve chosen this time to reinterpret this longstanding procedure,” said Los Angeles County Fire Chief Anthony Marrone. “Why are they moving the goalposts now, during fire season? The timing couldn’t be worse.”

The dispute is the latest to have local fire authorities at odds with the Forest Service amid a punishing season that’s seen more than a million acres of land burn across the state. Some county chiefs have also spoken out about Forest Service staffing shortages they say resulted in delayed federal responses to recent fires, including the Airport fire that destroyed homes in Orange and Riverside counties.

Orange County Fire Authority Chief Brian Fennessy has written to Congress requesting an investigation into the issue.

Advertisement

“This policy application defies common sense at a time when we all know wildfire is, if not the worst threat to public safety in the state of California and throughout the West, pretty close to the top,” he said.

The Forest Service said the policy is a longstanding business rule that applies to aviation operations nationwide. “We had a lack of clarity on the policy, so some people were using it inappropriately,” said Adrienne Freeman, an agency spokesperson.

At the heart of the dispute is the Quick Reaction Force, a 24/7 aerial task force staffed by the fire departments of Los Angeles, Orange and Ventura counties. Its fleet consists of three night-flying helitankers, a mobile base that can mix 18,000 gallons of retardant per hour and an intelligence helicopter that is typically staffed by pilots under contract with the Orange County Fire Authority who manage the airspace and tell the other helicopters where to make drops.

The task force has been operating for several years without issue. But in July, the local agencies received word from the Forest Service that contractors could no longer provide aerial supervision over fires burning on federal land. When the QRF is deployed to these fires, it generally must be overseen by an aerial supervisor who is an agency employee.

The Forest Service has 11 aircraft capable of performing this supervision in California, but only one — an airplane — can do so at night, Freeman said. That plane is at times unavailable because it’s already deployed, has logged too many flight hours, needs to refuel or requires repairs or maintenance.

Advertisement

“As a result of that, we’ve had to pull off of some fires that were threatening communities,” Fennessy said.

For instance, as the task force fought the Bridge fire the afternoon of Sept. 11, the Forest Service airplane supervising the effort, AA-52, had to return to base, according to Fennessy and a written statement provided by Ken Craw, an aerial supervisor who was flying Copter-76 under contract with the Orange County Fire Authority.

Rather than call in Copter-76 to relieve the plane as supervisor, all air operations — six helicopters and two water scoping air tankers — were shut down until another Forest Service plane could arrive a short time later, Craw wrote.

“In my opinion the choice of AA-52 to shut down the aerial firefighting operations instead of using Copter-76 put the public and firefighters at risk, and reduced the efficiency of the efforts to contain the Bridge Fire,” he wrote.

A similar situation resulted in a two-hour delay in QRF helicopters dropping retardant on the Fork fire in the Angeles National Forest on July 19, Fennessy said. Helicopters also were released from the Borel fire in the Sequoia National Forest the night of July 28, even though they had hours of flight time left, he said.

Advertisement

Fennessy and other Southern California fire chiefs have met and exchanged letters with Region 5 Director Jaimie Gamboa, sharing their concerns.

The requirement that an agency employee supervise night operations is impractical when that employee is flying a plane, which circles thousands of feet above helicopters and has limited visibility into what’s going on below, some of the county chiefs said.

“The helicopter coordinator position is more beneficial during nighttime helicopter operations than a fixed-wing aerial supervision platform that’s way too high above the fire,” said Marrone, who was previously in charge of the county’s air operations.

Robert Garcia, fire chief of the Angeles National Forest, has called on the QRF many times, as he has just one night-flying helicopter — the Forest Service’s only night-flying helicopter in the nation, he said.

Garcia said the Forest Service plane can provide adequate nighttime supervision to helicopters because it has technology on board to monitor the effectiveness of drops.

Advertisement

Still, he said, he’s expressed concerns about the policy interpretation to others in the Forest Service because of his forest’s reliance on the QRF intelligence helicopter to provide relief when the Forest Service plane is unavailable.

“I think it’s worth taking a hard look at this policy, because the QRF is really, to my knowledge, a singular example of this particular scenario,” he said. “But the consequences are high.”

The Forest Service may deviate from the policy when it’s in a unified command, or if there’s imminent threat to life or property, he said. Garcia has done so at least two or three times since July, enabling him to use the QRF helicopter for aerial supervision. Such supervision is needed only if more than two aircraft are flying over a fire, he added.

Garcia acknowledged that confusion over the new policy interpretation has at times resulted in some delays in decision-making, but said that hasn’t affected the outcome of any fires in Angeles National Forest. The probability of success in keeping the Bridge fire small was low from the start because of hot, dry conditions and steep, rugged terrain that hadn’t burned in more than 100 years, and the Fork fire was contained relatively quickly at 301 acres, he said.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection also prohibits the use of contractors as aerial supervisors, a policy that was formalized this year but was in practice for a couple years before that, said Nick Schuler, deputy director of communications for Cal Fire.

Advertisement

But that hasn’t posed as much of an issue to the QRF because Cal Fire has agreements with Los Angeles, Orange and Ventura counties for them to provide initial attack fire suppression in many areas where the task force does its night flying work, Fennessy said. As a result, the counties dictate operations within those areas, he said.

The timing of the Forest Service’s change in policy interpretation has left him scratching his head. The contract pilots are “the best of the best,” with all the appropriate training and qualifications, and no one has raised safety concerns about them, Fennessy said.

He wonders whether the shift was retaliation for a 2022 60 Minutes episode in which he said the Forest Service was slow to use the QRF to fight the Caldor fire in Northern California and only greenlighted its use when he threatened to take the helicopters back home.

“It caused a lot of tension between the agencies — L.A., Ventura, Orange — and the Forest Service,” Fennessy said. “That’s the only thing I can think of because why now, years into this?”

Freeman of the Forest Service vigorously disputed that allegation. “No one gave that a thought, and we continue not to,” she said.

Advertisement

The Forest Service has been working to beef up its night flying operations, including by changing policy in Region 5 so that its employees can fly in contract aircraft to gain experience in nighttime aerial supervision, she said.

“We have worked incredibly hard to try to get to a place where we can utilize the QRF as well as all the resources in these counties,” she said. “This shouldn’t be about who has what. This is about trying to figure out ways to work together.”

Politics

Trump takes unusual step, lets bipartisan housing bill become law unsigned amid SAVE pressure campaign

Published

on

Trump takes unusual step, lets bipartisan housing bill become law unsigned amid SAVE pressure campaign

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A bipartisan housing bill became law Saturday at midnight after President Donald Trump declined to sign it, capping a weeks-long saga over whether the president would veto the measure amid frustrations with Congress over his stalled agenda.

Trump refused to sign the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act — legislation aimed at expanding the nation’s housing stock and lowering costs — in an attempt to pressure Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, despite the housing bill clearing both chambers with overwhelming majorities.

“I will not sign the Housing Bill, which has been fully approved by Congress and sent to the White House, in PROTEST over the fact that the United States Senate is not capable of passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT, which is polling at 97% with the Republican Party, and very high with the non-politician Dumocrats,” he declared on Truth Social Friday morning. 

The Trump-backed election measure, which would require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections and impose voter ID requirements, has struggled to overcome the Senate’s 60-vote threshold. 

Advertisement

Meanwhile, the House has not passed a version of the bill that includes the president’s proposed crackdown on mail-in voting and banning men from women’s sports.

President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, June 3, 2026, in Washington. (Alex Brandon/AP)

HOUSE CONSERVATIVES DERAIL GOP AGENDA IN SAVE AMERICA ACT SHOWDOWN

Under the U.S. Constitution, Trump had 10 days, not including Sundays, to sign or veto the housing measure after the House formally transmitted the legislation to the White House in late June. The president ultimately chose neither option, allowing the measure to become law without his signature.

Though Trump declined to veto the legislation, he sharply criticized elements of the bill and argued it should not have been a legislative priority in recent weeks.

Advertisement

“It’s so unimportant … compared to the SAVE America Act,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office in late June. “I think the SAVE America Act is exactly what it says. It’s saving America from crooked elections.”

Trump went on to call the housing bill “a yawn,” adding, “compared to the SAVE America Act, just about everything is a big yawn.”

It would have taken a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override a veto — a margin the House and Senate exceeded when they passed the legislation. However, it remains unclear whether so many Republicans would have defied the president had he vetoed the bill.

Trump also appeared to criticize the bill over a provision restricting Wall Street investors from purchasing single-family homes — a policy he first proposed during his January State of the Union address and later urged Congress to pass. Trump previously argued the investor ban would give individual homebuyers a leg up against private equity firms in the housing market.

“I don’t want to hurt people that own houses, too,” Trump later told reporters, appearing to reference the provision. “These people, for the first time in their lives, they have valuable houses. They’ve become rich. I don’t want to hurt them either. What you want to do is what’s good for everyone, get the interest rates down.”

Advertisement

The law also aims to boost housing supply by streamlining federal environmental reviews, loosening rules around the construction of factory-built homes, and incentivizing local governments to modify their zoning laws to allow more housing, among roughly 60 provisions.

Trump’s souring on the legislation created headaches for Republicans, who touted the bill as an affordability win as voters grapple with high housing costs.

“It’s irresponsible to postpone signing the Housing bill due to the SAVE Act,” Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., a retiring lawmaker who lost re-election to a Trump-backed challenger, wrote on social media. “We need to start delivering relief to people for the high cost of housing ASAP!!”

Construction workers stand on the roof of homes under construction at a new housing development on June 24, 2026, in Valencia, Calif. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

WARREN TELLS TRUMP TO ‘SIGN THE DAMN BILL’ AS BIPARTISAN HOUSING PACKAGE REMAINS STALLED IN WASHINGTON

Advertisement

Trump abruptly canceled a signing ceremony for the legislation at the U.S. Capitol in June with GOP leaders. The stage had already been set, with at least one senior Republican arriving unaware the president had called off the event shortly before it was scheduled to begin.

The president then declared he would not sign the legislation until Congress passed the SAVE America Act, despite Senate GOP leaders insisting the votes do not exist to advance the measure.

Trump has also expressed frustration with the Republican-controlled Senate for declining to weaken the legislative filibuster, which requires 60 votes to advance most legislation in the upper chamber.

“GET SMART REPUBLICANS, IF YOU DON’T, YOU WON’T BE IN OFFICE FOR LONG!” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Sunday.

Before Trump came out against the bill, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called it “one of the most significant pieces of housing affordability legislation in American history” and said it included an array of policies “long championed” by Trump.

Advertisement

House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 15, 2025. (Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Meanwhile, Trump political operative James Blair touted the legislation for including the president’s Wall Street investor ban, which he referred to as a “signature commitment.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has argued that Republicans will still promote the landmark housing bill ahead of November.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“We’ll still celebrate it, but he’s trying to make a point, and I think he’s making it very effectively,” the speaker recently told reporters, referring to Trump. “And the fact that you all ask me every three steps down the hallway illustrates that he has achieved the desired objective, and that is to make SAVE America the number one thing, because if we don’t get that right, everybody’s concerned about what happens next.”

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump administration clears path for controversial Mojave Desert water pipeline

Published

on

Trump administration clears path for controversial Mojave Desert water pipeline

The Trump administration has signed off on a company’s plan to convert an oil and gas pipeline to pump groundwater from the Mojave Desert to thirsty California cities for the first time, a lucrative venture that critics say threatens natural springs and wildlife.

The federal Bureau of Land Management released documents Thursday saying that Cadiz Inc.’s plan to repurpose 162 miles of the pipeline to transport water “will not significantly affect” the environment.

“We’re excited to achieve this pivotal milestone. After many years of planning and environmental review, the project has now reached the construction stage,” said Susan Kennedy, chair and chief executive of Cadiz.

Environmental advocates and leaders of Native tribes, who have been fighting the project, criticized the decision.

Advertisement

“This groundwater mining proposal would drain the desert and rob the Mojave of its rare springs and wildlife habitat,” said Chance Wilcox, California desert associate director of the National Parks Conservation Assn. “It’s indefensible that the Trump administration would once again try to revive the pointless Cadiz project, by defying decades of scientific warnings and refusing to conduct an environmental review of the groundwater mining.”

The application for the federal authorization was filed by the Fenner Gap Mutual Water Co. The documents say the company plans to build seven pump stations, three of them located on federal land managed by the agency.

The 30-inch steel pipeline runs underground from Cadiz’s desert property, near the town of Amboy, northward to the town of Mojave.

The BLM said in its authorization that repurposing the pipeline for water “would comply with all applicable statutes and regulations.” The agency said it has “reasonably determined that the impacts of groundwater withdrawal associated with Cadiz’s groundwater extraction project are outside the scope of analysis.”

Cadiz’s attempts to export water from its property 200 miles east of Los Angeles have drawn controversy for decades.

Advertisement

In 2019, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation that requires the project to undergo scientific study and gain approval from the State Lands Commission before it can take water from the Mojave and sell it to California cities.

Activists opposing the company’s plans include civil rights leader Dolores Huerta.

“Cadiz spells destruction for water, sacred lands, and the desert economy,” Huerta said in a statement. “It is exactly this type of greed and injustice that I have dedicated my life to oppose.”

Leaders of nearby tribes have also objected to Cadiz’s plans to pump from the desert aquifer near the Mojave Trails National Monument and Mojave National Preserve.

“It is the living heart of the desert,” said Daniel Leivas, chairman of the Chemehuevi Indian Tribe. “To drain it would be to drain the life out of the entire desert. No profit is worth such desecration.”

Advertisement

Chairman Timothy Williams of the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe said the company’s plan “to pump and sell 25 times more groundwater each year than the aquifer can replenish would desecrate our traditional territories.”

“Pumping more groundwater than is sustainably replenished is not only negligent, but dangerous to the American Desert Southwest,” he said in the joint statement with other opponents of the project.

For years, while pursuing its plan to sell water far away, the company has been using wells on its property to irrigate nearly 2,000 acres of farmland growing lemons, grapes and other crops. It has drilled more wells in anticipation of being able to export water once the government approved its pipeline.

The company intends to pipe water to communities in San Bernardino County and says it’s “expected to provide one of the lowest-cost sources of new water in the drought-plagued Southwest.” It says the federal permit “marks a key milestone as we finalize project financing with prospective investors.”

Cadiz bought the 220-mile pipeline from El Paso Natural Gas in 2020. Once construction is completed, the company says the pipeline will be able to transport up to 25,000 acre-feet of water per year — about 5% of what Los Angeles uses each year.

Advertisement

The Los Angeles-based corporation is also seeking to build a new pipeline along a railroad right-of-way to transport water to the south.

Environmental groups have repeatedly filed lawsuits challenging the project.

Ileene Anderson, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, called the Trump administration’s decision “a green light for environmental destruction.”

She said six of the proposed pumping stations slated to be built are in the habitat of desert tortoises, a species in decline.

“We’ve successfully fended off this project before and we’ll continue to fight to stop this zombie from coming back,” Anderson said.

Advertisement

In 2021, the Biden administration reversed a Trump administration decision that had cleared the way for Cadiz to pipe water across public land. In 2022, a federal judge scrapped the pipeline permit that the Trump administration had issued.

But during President Trump’s second term, the company has again made headway on its plans. In February, Cadiz announced that the federal Environmental Protection Agency had invited it to submit an application for a $194-million low-interest loan for the northern pipeline project.

The company said in May that it reached an agreement with the federal Bureau of Reclamation to provide funding for a review of its potential role in “augmenting water supplies” along the shrinking Colorado River.

The company has also been lobbying the Trump administration. The group Public Citizen said in a recent report that Cadiz, through its nonprofit Fenner Gap Mutual Water Co., enlisted former Interior Secretary David Bernhardt’s new lobbying firm, the Bernhardt Group, and has spent at least $330,000 on lobbying in 2025 and 2026.

Records show lobbyist Luke Johnson has repeatedly accompanied Kennedy at meetings with Interior Department officials.

Advertisement

“The extensive influence of David Bernhardt’s boutique lobbying firm on the agency he formerly led highlights how insider firms staffed with former Trump officials have grown in recent years,” said Alan Zibel, a research director with Public Citizen. He said Bernhardt and his lobbyists “have learned how to master influence-peddling in the anything-goes era of Trump 2.0.”

Earlier this month, an Arizona water agency announced it signed an initial “memorandum of understanding” agreement to buy up to 10,000 acre-feet of water per year from Cadiz’s Mojave Groundwater Bank. The Central Arizona Irrigation and Drainage District provides water to farmlands in Pinal County, where growers are dealing with water cutbacks.

The company said that for this to happen, it would need to build pipelines and reach deals to exchange water across state lines.

Members of California’s congressional delegation have raised concerns. In a recent letter to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla called for a thorough environmental review, saying that federal agencies and peer-reviewed scientific analyses have “warned of the significant and irreversible impacts that Cadiz’s project could have on federal lands and surrounding communities.”

Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Indio) said in a letter to Burgum that he is concerned about the company’s long-standing effort to extract and export groundwater.

Advertisement

“The area I represent cannot afford to absorb the long-term costs of a commercially driven groundwater export scheme,” Ruiz said.

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump Promotes ‘Freedom Fuel’ Gas Stations as Gas Prices Rise Again

Published

on

President Trump has promoted a chain of newly rebranded gas stations across the Philadelphia area with lower gas prices. The New York Times has not been able to get detailed information about who is behind the stations. The Trump administration says it did not fund or subsidize the company.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending