Wilderness Society editorial in support of FLAME Act

OUR VIEW: CONGRESS SHOULD PASS FLAME ACT, HELP FOREST SERVICE SHOULDER FIRE BURDEN
Bill is good for agency, environment and public
by Tom Fry

A bill currently making its way through the U.S. House of Representatives would make a dramatic change to the way the Forest Service funds the costs of fighting wildfires – going a long way towards solving the problems the agency has been experiencing due to the fact that fire suppression now accounts for more than 45 percent of its budget. The idea is long overdue and the legislation deserves to be approved by Congress and President Bush this year.

If passed and signed into law, the Federal Land Assistance, Management and Enhancement Act, or FLAME Act (H.R. 5541), would create a separate fund to pay for those very few fires that are truly catastrophic and uncharacteristic and that eat up some 80 percent of the Forest Service’s fire budget. This would also reduce the need for the Forest Service to take money away from other critical programs and services.

The FLAME bill is sponsored by three House Committee chairmen, including Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall (D-WV), Subcommittee on Forest Natural Resources Chairman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), and Subcommittee on Interior Appropriations Chairman Norm Dicks (D-WA). The bill has already been endorsed by a wide range of people ranging from five Forest Service chiefs to governors such as Janet Napolitano of Arizona.

"Our nation will be facing longer and more intense fire seasons,” Grijalva says of the bill, which recently passed out of the House Natural Resource Committee. “This bill will help public land managers finally get ahead of the curve by having regular funding available for prevention and protection without having these accounts gutted every year by the expense of fighting catastrophic fires."

In a letter to Rahall, former Forest Service Chiefs R. Max Peterson, F. Dale Robertson, Jack Ward Thomas, Michael P. Dombeck, and Dale N. Bosworth wrote, "If money is appropriated for the FLAME fund, we believe this will create the opportunity to rebuild the capability of the Forest Service to protect and manage the resources of the National Forest System for the benefit of the American people. We urge enactment of H.R. 5541."

As an example, the 2003 Aspen Fire that burned in southern Arizona's Coronado National Forest carried a $17 million price tag. The costs of suppressing wildfires continue to increase and are estimated to consume close to half of the Forest Service's budget next year. Additionally, the Forest Service is often forced to pull funds from other programs, leaving fewer funds available for the services Americans expect, such as campground maintenance and forest restoration.

Establishing a fund separate from the Forest Service’s budget for reacting to fires once they start would also help enable the agency to focus more on preparing for the inevitable fire in advance.

"In recent years, the escalating costs have detracted from the core missions of the Forest Service and the Interior Department," Rahall adds. "In essence, leaving the agencies with no other choice than to 'rob Peter to pay Paul' simply to cover the costs of fighting fires.  I am pleased that these former Forest Service officials, who know a thing or two about the fire funding dilemma, recognize the toll this has taken on the agency. I appreciate their support."

So do the American people and the forests they love.

Tom Fry is the wildland fire program coordinator for TWS. He can be contacted at:
tom_fry@tws.org