 |
|
Wildland Urban Interface Study Comments TO: FIRE SUPPRESSION INTERIM COMMITTEE
FROM: MONTANA FOREST OWNERS ASSOCIATION, Debra Foley, President
DATE: February 22, 2008
RE: WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE STUDY
A study that only looks at expenses associated with wildland fire fighting in the WUI (as defined by the space allocated as WUI by the federal assessment) will naturally show significant expenses allocated there. First, the WUI as defined is an area within 1-mile of homes regardless of ownership. That means any expenses that are incurred within 1 mile of a home or structure will be added to the total, even if it is on federal lands. Second, containment lines are built where fuels are limited and a fire can be contained with minimal risk to fire fighters. If a specific ownership consistently has lower fuels and good access, then this is where fire containment lines will be built and fires fought. This is also where the bulk of the expense will appear to occur. Naturally, this is in the WUI. Hence, a fire that burns out of federal lands onto private lands will usually be fought on those private lands and it will appear that most of the expenses are incurred there and, thus by association, the fault of the private lands. To fairly assess the true cost/benefit, the analysis should start with the amount or percentage of fire containment/control that occurred on actual private lands. This further needs to be separated by forest fires on private lands versus grass/range fires on private lands. There is a big difference between the two. This percentage then needs to be further adjusted by the amount of primary containment line that held on private lands versus the amount of containment line that held on federal and state lands. This can be further broken down into manpower and equipment time allocated towards fighting the fire on public lands versus time and equipment allocated towards fighting fire on private lands. As stated before, since fires are successfully contained on private lands more easily than on public lands, then it is natural that this is where the fire will be fought and the expenses appear to be incurred. The reality of most large fires is that most of the expenses are allocated towards containing fire on public lands since it is very unsuccessful there (lines built and retardant drops that are ineffective thus the process is repeated multiple times before any control is established). This is opposed to private lands where usually the line holds the first time, yielding a much more cost effective fire containment process. In the case of the 2007 Black Cat fire (Missoula), containment lines on NIPF lands were easy to establish and easy to contain with minimal manpower and equipment even during the worst fire conditions. In dense timber on federal lands, most of the personnel spent 3 weeks building and then trying to hold the fire. However, most of the effective fire lines were on private lands that only required a few days to hold and consider contained. Depending on how the analysis goes, 80% of the fire perimeter was on private lands and thus could be blamed for 80% of the cost when in reality 90% of the cost occurred trying to hold the fire on the 20% of the perimeter – federal and tribal lands. Without these considerations and analysis the results will naturally and obviously show that fighting fires in the WUI incur the most cost. This is a no-brainer when you understand how fires are fought. The real question is: How cost effective (successful fire containment versus resources allocated) has it been to fight fires on NIPF lands versus public lands. Thank you for your consideration. |
|
©
2005 Montana Forest Landowners Network
|