Guest Commentary

Fire Suppression, Federal Budgets, and Future Fires

By Thomas H. DeLuca, Guest Writer, 1-10-09

With fresh snow piling up on the peaks, and the 2009 Montana legislature getting underway in Helena, now is the right time to have a sensible discussion regarding wildfire and fire management in Montana.  The cool, wet spring of 2008 made last year’s fire season a mild one, but last year’s lazy summer should not lull us into forgetting that wildfire is a permanent concern for Montanans, and increasingly is the 800 pound gorilla looming over our state budgets.  Wildfire will return next summer, or perhaps the following one, and conditions are right for a big year.

Thankfully the stage was set for constructive talks about wildfire this winter when the Montana Fire Suppression Committee released its long-awaited recommended changes to fire management laws in Montana.  Although some of the proposed laws lean the wrong direction, the majority of the committee’s recommendations are needed.

At the top of any legislator’s agenda this year should be serious consideration of those proposals that are geared towards the protection of communities and firefighters.  In order to keep the Montana legislature productive and effective, it is important that we not get bogged down debating time-consuming, costly proposals that seek to stop all wildfires, because it’s simply not possible or desirable.

Like rain in Seattle, wildland fire is a fundamental part of Montana’s landscapes.  But over the last 25 years fuel accumulation, longer, hotter fire seasons, and an increasing amount of homes built in the wildland urban interface (WUI) have created a recipe for putting homes and communities at risk.

The Fire Suppression Committee identified that our best chance for protecting communities is to focus fuel reduction work around homes.  Several proposed laws would encourage fuel reduction efforts near structures and communities.  Proposed regulations would encourage smart future planning and provide incentives to help communities Firewise and thin fuels in the critical 100 – 200 feet surrounding existing homes.

Forest thinning efforts on lands far from communities is no guarantee of reduced fire threat to communities. While thinning may change fire behavior, it will not stop the spread of wildfire.  Indeed under some conditions, harvesting timber can exacerbate the spread of fire by increasing wind speeds through the forest and increasing surface fuel loading of dry woody debris. Worse, ill-placed fuel reduction efforts draw attention and funds away from homes and communities, putting people at risk. 

That said, targeted thinning and prescribed fire use in specific forest types can reduce the risk of catastrophic fire and restore the natural resilience of some forest types to fire.  However, restoration efforts cannot be done under emergency conditions and should be performed only with long-term objectives. 

Far from communities, prescribed ‘wildland fire use’ (allowing natural fires to burn where there is no threat to communities and under appropriate weather conditions) works to restore historical conditions to our forests and make them more resilient and resistant to future catastrophic fires; thus increasing public safety while reducing costs in the coming years.

With fire suppression efforts now consuming half of the Forest Service’s total budget every year, and the Fire Suppression Committee predicting an eventual $200 million liability in a single fire season, now is the time to combat wildfire smarter instead of harder.  Allowing nonthreatening fires to burn will reduce state wide fire fighting costs and allow federal and state agencies to focus efforts on the important fires that threaten communities.

Focusing only on fire suppression during a time of increasing fire occurrence will not prove sustainable or effective. Near communities, aggressive fuels treatment and active fire suppression should be our focus.  Laws should be passed that yield smart planning in exurban areas, and empower homeowners to protect themselves by encouraging them to make their communities Firesafe.  Farther from communities, prescribed and wildland fire must be used as a tool to restore forests and reduce future suppression costs. 

Montanans can work toward creating fire-resistant communities in healthy, fire-resilient landscapes.  The state Fire Suppression Committee should be applauded for coming to this important conclusion.

Thomas H. DeLuca, Ph.D.  is a senior scientist with the Wilderness Society in Bozeman where he specializes on issues in forest ecology, land resources, and environmental sustainability. 

NewWest.Net publishes guest columns of all kinds. Email your submission to editor@newwest.net.

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.