With fires raging across the west, the U.S. Forest Service's suppression budget is already dwindling - with only some $275 million left before it will be forced to tap into reserves and, beyond that, transfer money from other vital programs and services.
And it's only July: two typically costly months are still ahead of us. It's likely the dry, hot summer may even cause the service to spend a record-breaking sum suppressing more fires in 2007 than ever before.
The percentage of the annual Forest Service budget spent on fighting fires has mushroomed from 13 percent of the total agency budget 18 years ago to 45 percent today. The increase is due to more active fire seasons brought on by drought, warmer temperatures, fuels buildup and more people living in and around forests. This budget shift comes at the expense of other priorities such as providing wildlife and watershed protection and recreation opportunities.
Budget realities and the fire-prone conditions this time of year warrant another call to action for the Forest Service to continue increasing its use of Appropriate Management Response (AMR). AMR combines common sense with dollars and cents. The strategy considers an array of threats that specific fires pose to determine what the best response should be. Factors that officials using the AMR approach consider include:
- Threats to the lives of area residents
- Damage to communities
- Potential for firefighter deaths
- Costs of fire suppression
Fully armed with all the relevant facts, decision makers may opt to wage a full-scale attack on the fire, contain it, suppress portions of it that could cause damage to people and property while monitoring the other areas, or monitor the entire fire while standing ready to switch change tactics when conditions call for it.
The Forest Service's response is and should continue to be suppressing fires that put people and property at risk. One of the biggest misconceptions the general public has about fires, however, is that all fires are bad and should always be extinguished. Television images of forests in flames reinforce the notion. That view doesn't take into account the basic history, ecology and reality of fires … that forests were and are shaped by fire, and that fires in particular circumstances restore landscapes. The commonplace view that fires always need to be extinguished also fails to consider the ever-skyrocketing costs of fighting every fire every time.
Forest Service officials are using the AMR approach right now on a number of fires.
When the Fool Creek fire recently started in Montana's Bob Marshall Wilderness, for example, the Forest Service decided to monitor and observe the fire, with no intention of suppressing it. About half the new fire starts in the Bob Marshall Wilderness are suppressed because of their potential to burn toward homes and communities or other areas where the Forest Service has previously determined it did not want fire. The Fool Creek blaze, though is different. It poses no danger to people and communities. The result of not suppressing the fire will be more diversity across the landscape, including increased browse growth for wildlife. It will also make fighting future fires that do need to be put out easier because many of the fuels will be gone.
We applaud the Forest Service for increasing its emphasis on AMR and encourage the agency to make even greater use of it. If the Forest Service is forced to spend ever-increasing portions of its budget suppressing every fire, the expense will come at an unacceptable cost - the agency losing its ability to do the kinds of things we all love, such as providing recreational opportunities for people and managing habitat for wildlife.
By Tom Fry, national wildland fire program coordinator for The Wilderness Society.
Print and electronic publications are welcome to use this editorial. If you would like us to tailor the piece to your specific area, please contact Christopher Lancette, Communications Director.
