National security issues should include appropriate response to forest fires and guaranteed safety for firefighters. Photo © George Wuerthner
In the wake of the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina, the level of concern about the adequacy of emergency response to a major catastrophe in the United States has been heightened. While coastal-area hurricanes are grabbing national attention, those of us in the West must be on guard against the principal natural threat confronting us; we should examine the degree to which the federal government is prepared to respond to devastating wildfires.
The persistence of forest fires in the West argues for greater attention to the threat they pose and to the scope of our ability to prevent and extinguish them. I am concerned that our existing response system is not only inadequate, but is also unsafe for emergency responders.
Adequacy
Our forest firefighters are dedicated individuals who are called upon to undertake dangerous missions. Stories of their heroic acts are widespread. But even the best troop of firefighters is limited in its effectiveness if it is not given the tools it needs to operate efficiently and safely. While our workforce is utilizing much of the latest technology to physically combat fire, our airtanker infrastructure dates back to World War II and before. Given the age of these tankers, incidences of fatal crashes should come as no surprise.
In response to fatal crashes in recent years, the National Transportation Safety Board in 2004 recommended that the U.S. Forest Service “develop maintenance and inspection programs for aircraft that are used in firefighting operations.” Today, eight World War II–era P3 aircraft are still being used in aerial firefighting operations, and nine other older P2V tankers are being evaluated for airworthiness. The Forest Service has determined the P3 aircraft to be airworthy, but ensuring the continued safe operation of aircraft of that age is a tenuous matter. Aerial firefighter safety remains an issue to be carefully monitored. In fact, earlier this year, I called for hearings on airtanker safety. I commend the Forest Service for expanding its fleet to include other aircraft, like helicopters, and hope it will continually evaluate the safety of our aerial firefighting fleet.
Funding
It is impossible to discuss fire safety without pointing out the problems with our cycle of wildfire funding. It is just common sense that we need to invest more on the front end in the name of fire prevention to avert major spending on fire suppression. While I believe there were inadequacies with the Healthy Forests Restoration Act, I do believe that we are being penny-wise and pound-foolish by cheating our budget for forest thinning. Internal agency studies indicate that the need for investment in forest thinning is multiple times more than the current funding levels. In 2005, President Bush did request more funding for forest thinning, but that funding falls far short of the targets set in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act.
The federal government must do better. We must invest more in preventing fires, especially in the wildland–urban interface, to avoid the kind of major fire suppression efforts we have had to undertake in recent years. To do so would certainly save lives, livelihoods, and communities.
Safety
The U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of the Inspector General studied three recent fires, and firefighter fatalities over the past ten years. The resulting report finds that “according to Forest Service records, during this period the rate of fatalities from entrapment declined from 3.65 deaths per year to .67 deaths per year.”
These figures would lead one to believe that forest firefighter fatalities have significantly declined and that extensive progress has been made in this area. However, these numbers only include burnover fatalities, not those from aerial firefighting. In fact, since 1994, forty-six aerial firefighters have lost their lives in the line of duty.
Another safety issue has to do with benefits for aerial firefighters. Because many aerial firefighters are contract employees, they are not eligible for federal benefits. This includes those benefits available under the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits Program. This program provides a one-time benefit payment to eligible survivors of a safety officer killed or permanently disabled in the line of duty. Because of the danger of their jobs, many of these contract aerial firefighters have difficulty obtaining their own life insurance. Since aerial firefighters are risking their lives to protect our communities from forest fires, I believe they should be eligible for some benefits.
The nation’s ability to protect itself and its citizens from disaster is under scrutiny. Hurricane Katrina raised our awareness and demonstrated that, despite the lessons learned from 9/11 and the efforts it prompted to ensure the safety of all Americans, we are still a vulnerable nation. We must do more. For those of us who reside in the West, that means buckling down against the continuing threat of forest fires. It means insisting that the dangers we face as a result of forest fires are taken seriously and addressed fully, not pushed aside as the federal government juggles competing needs. For my part, I will continue to raise the issue of forest fires and firefighter safety and to do all that I can to ensure that this threat to our citizens receives deserved attention and needed action.
Tom Udall is currently serving his fourth term in Congress, representing New Mexico’s Third Congressional District.