|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 15, 2002
Contact Bill Shields, (202) 347-3190
A National Academy of Public Administration
Panel has found that federal, state, and local agencies must
strike at the main causes of wildland fires in order to bring
the costs of fighting them under control. These costs have
increased dramatically with the buildup of hazardous fuels
feeding the fires, rising home construction in fire-prone
areas, and severe drought.
In a report released today, the Panel focused
on federal wildfire assistance to state and local governments
and the need to better prepare federal, state, local, and
tribal officials to work together. A key element would be
a federal incentive program aimed at reducing hazardous fuels,
improving fire prevention, and managing fires more cost effectively.
The Panel found these incentives necessary to get everyone
working together more effectively. And the costs need to be
shared among those who benefit.
The Panel found few easy answers or short-term
solutions. "Fire suppression is more than a one year,
single-incident proposition," said Phoenix, Arizona City
Manager Frank Fairbanks, who chaired the Panel. "It requires
long-term foresight and striking at the root causes of these
growing hazards. Unless the amount of hazardous fuels can
be reduced and communities made fire-resistant, wildfires
will continue to grow larger, more intense and damaging, and
even more costly to fight."
Federal budget-makers have become increasingly
aware of the growing demand for federal funds to respond to
wildfire hazards. They doubled the funds for this purpose
as a result of the severe wildfires in 2000, but were still
told that this was just a down payment. Concerned that this
program might become a bottomless pit, Congress called for
the Academy study. Meanwhile, the cost of these fires is estimated
to exceed $1.5 billion in 2002, not including the loss of
life, homes, and property.
Studies of six large fires from 2001 formed
the basis for the Panel's findings and recommendations. Each
fire illustrated a different story about firefighting strategies,
tactics, and costs.
The Green Knoll Fire, in Jackson Hole, Wyoming,
vividly demonstrated how home construction in forests influences
firefighting strategies and increases costs. It also showed
the value of federal, state, and local cooperation. The fire
burned almost 4,500 acres and cost $13.3 million. But, no
lives were lost and property damage was limited.
The Sheep Fire, in northern Nevada, burned
nearly 84,000 mostly rangeland acres and cost $2.2 million.
Few structures were threatened, but area ranchers were highly
concerned about the loss of grazing lands and future incomes.
This concern significantly affected the firefighting strategy
and increased costs.
The Virginia Lake Fire, in eastern Washington,
started when a lightning storm ignited 18 fires almost simultaneously
on the Colville Indian Reservation. It burned 74,000 acres
and cost $25.2 million. The fire spread rapidly due to weather
conditions and the lack of readily available firefighting
resources. Many of the resources had already been assigned
to other serious fires. This case demonstrated problems that
can arise when coordinating efforts of local firefighters
with federal fire management officials.
The Arthur Fire in Yellowstone National
Park burned 2,800 acres at an estimated cost of $6.3 million.
This fire in Wyoming showed how terrain adversely affects
firefighting tactics. It also demonstrated how having well-trained
local personnel can improve overall fire management and reduce
suppression costs.
The Star Fire, which began in the Eldorado
National Forest east of Sacramento, California, was the most
expensive-$28.2 million-of the cases studied. Much of the
cost resulted from a policy requirement that human-cased fires
be quickly suppressed and from the extensive use of aircraft.
The demand to protect a naturally treasured grove of Sequoia
trees also played a significant role.
The Moose Fire near Kalispell, Montana raised
issues about wildfires that cross jurisdictions. The fire
spread over lands managed by two federal agencies (the Forest
Service and National Park Service), a state forest, and private
lands protected by Flathead County. These entities took different
approaches that resulted in contention over responsibility
for some costs.
|
