Wildfire Costs Spark Debate Over Rural Sprawl

ROCKY MOUNTAIN LAND USE GROK

By David Frey, 1-04-07

Growth is a fiery topic in West, as the New York Times reports this week. An issue like wildfires might not seem like it has much to do with sprawl, but tell that to a homeowner living on the fringe where town and wild lands collide. And tell that to the Agriculture Department. Its office of inspector general has decided the feds shouldn't be picking up the tab for protecting those houses from burning when wildfires get too close.

That's touched off, well, a firestorm with state and local governments who are complaining that forest fires are so out of hand because the federal government has screwed them up for decades.

“The forest is very dry and primed for fires started by lightning, and when that occurs in a forest not managed as well as it could have been, it soon gets out of control and meets the community,” Ken Mesch, the Stillwater County, Mont., disaster and emergency services coordinator, told the Times. “If the federal government started pulling back money for fire suppression, they would be hanging us out to dry.”

The issue was sparked by an OIG report issued in November, after wildfires burned more acres -- over 9.8 million-- across the country than any year since 1960. About half the damaged land was in the hands of the state, county or private individuals. The problem, says the report, is that Westerners have come to expect the Forest Service to put out any wildfire, no matter the cost, whether the blazes pose a real threat to the forest or not. Meanwhile, protecting private property at the edges of public lands cost the agency possibly as much as a billion dollars in 2003 and 2004 -- the fastest growing section of the nation's firefighting budget.

Some states say they're paying more to fight these fires too. Headwaters News points out that Montana legislators are considering Senate Bill 51, a measure that would tie counties' growth planning to access to state wildfire-fighting dollars.

Lori Faeth, a policy advisor to Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, says it shouldn't be the states' responsibility.

“Our forests are in the condition they are because of poor federal management,” she tells the Times. “They’ve put us in this position, and they have the responsibility to pay for it.”

If fire is a big Western issue, water is a bigger one, and growth and water woes often go hand-in-hand. Enter Moriarty, N.M., where a study found the town's growth could exceed its water supply by 2013. Is that a problem? According to a Mountain View Telegraph story that appeared in the Albuquerque Journal, Moriarty, population 1,800, could surge to over 15,000 in 40 years. Based on current rates, the city would run out of water by 2013. Skimp a little and the town might make it to 2015. Not to worry. Moriarty has passed an ordinance that requires new developments to turn over .336 acre feet of water for each new home. If that happens, the report says, the town can float new development just fine.