Idaho fire spotlights new ‘let it burn’ philosophy
Posted on August 24th, 2007By Dan Berman
Greenwire: On the evening of July 16, several dozen lightning strikes sparked fires in central Idaho forests. One blaze, however, was allowed to burn as Forest Service officials attempt to train themselves not to put every fire out.
The Trapper Ridge Fire still burns about 28 miles northeast of Idaho City, Idaho, as a wildland fire use (WFU) fire designed to benefit the Boise National Forest by allowing fire to play its natural role in the ecosystem, reducing ladder fuel in the understory and consuming dead and downed trees that could otherwise create a larger blaze in the future.
The fire has burned almost 18,500 acres and continues to smolder, but current activity is minimal and the Forest Service now is in a monitor-only mode.
Managers consider the benefits to the ecosystem and cost savings against risks to firefighters and the potential for the fire to get out of control or spread into a community or desired natural resource such as a watershed.
“It’s been pretty positive,” said Lowman District Ranger Neil Bosworth. “It’s burned in a pretty good mosaic.”
Environmentalists have pushed federal land managers to allow more fires to burn in certain areas, rather than suppressing them immediately.
“This is really a good matchup of science, policy and on-the-ground management,” said John McCarthy, Idaho forest campaign manager for the Wilderness Society. “It’s safe, it’s getting good ecological results and it just makes sense.”
McCarthy spent two days inside the fire lines earlier this month and said the mentality of firefighters has changed. “These guys have turned a corner. They’re not struggling with the traditional firefighter role of keep your head down, put it out and move on to the next one,” McCarthy said.
“It’s not like they’re pyros and they’re burning up the forest,” McCarthy added. “They just have an interest and a curiosity about how the forest works.”
Risk vs. reward
Forest Service officials stressed that they don’t simply let fires burn on a whim.
“We have to have pretty clear objectives about what we want to accomplish there,” said Bosworth, son of recently retired Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth.
Boise National Forest Supervisor Dick Smith made the final call to let the Trapper Ridge Fire burn but had to endure some tense moments as firefighters worked to prevent the fire from spreading into the Payette River Drainage.
“In this particular case, we needed to take some very aggressive action on the northern flank,” Smith said. “We were very anxious about that — until we got that controlled, we were anxious how that would be. Since that time, the fire has behaved the way we hoped and planned.”
Before Smith made the final decision, several aspects had to be in place. The forest plan, last revised in 2003, divided the Boise National Forest into three areas, one of which allows wildland fire use. A fire management plan identifies criteria, such as weather and fuel conditions, that must be present.
Some skeptics remain, as the idea of letting a wildfire burn goes against decades of the Smokey Bear philosophy that humans must intervene to prevent forest fires.
In the summer wildfire season in particular, lawmakers consistently lament the rising costs of firefighting and the millions of acres lost to fires. More serious fires have seen firefighters killed and homes destroyed, further increasing pressure on federal land managers.
About 6.8 million acres of land have burned this year, well above the 10-year average of 5 million acres, according to the National Interagency Fire Center. Of that total, about 335,000 acres have been WFU fires managed by the Forest Service and Interior Department.
The discussion with the public on WFU begins long before the fire starts. “A fairly critical piece is the best time to have that dialogue is not the day the fire’s started,” Smith said. “We try to have this discussion throughout the year … so they understand why we are doing it.”
Equally as important is pointing out where the Forest Service is not letting fires burn, such as near communities, private property and structures. “I think one of the misconceptions is that we are doing it everywhere, and that is clearly not the case,” Smith said.
There are risks, however. The fire could burn too hot and defeat the management objectives of letting it burn. In addition, the fire could escape the maximum manageable area and spread to an urban interface and threaten structures or homes.
“We’re developing a fairly good experience and a fairly good track record using this technique, but there’s always risk there,” Smith said.
The forest plans and other information allowed the agency to set a maximum manageable area of 175,000 acres for the Trapper Ridge fire on the Boise and Sawtooth national forests. That does not mean the fire was expected to reach that size, however.
Cost-effective, but limited WFU use
Thus far, the Trapper Ridge Fire has cost about $3 million to fight, or about $180 per acre.
WFU fires tend to be more cost-effective, since officials generally rely on fewer firefighers and equipment, which is one reason Forest Service officials and advocacy groups want to see the technique used more.
While Smith and Bosworth expect the number of WFU fires to increase, there are limits. One example is the number of personnel trained in fire behavior modeling is far outweighed by those trained as firefighters.
Idaho, with its 4 million acres of wilderness and 9 million inventoried roadless acres, is a likely target for additional WFU fires, but that does not mean the agency wants the entire state burning all at once. “There is only so much fire we want on the landscape in a given point in time,” Smith said. “The fire may be beneficial on the ground, but there’s a human health risk for the smoke.”
Officials want WFU to be a part of the agency’s toolbox, along with prescribed burns, suppression and actions prior to a fire such as thinning and clearing fuels.
WFU fires have an advantage over prescribed burns because they tend to be larger. “There’s a lot of constraints — budget constraints and workforce constraints,” Bosworth said. “Treating this much land in one shot is a good use.” The Trapper Ridge fire treated about five to ten times more land than Bosworth would normally be able to reach, he estimated.
Prescribed burns and WFU fires are different animals, however. WFU fires, by definition, are naturally occuring, while prescribed burns are set by agency personnel generally when weather conditions are less extreme. In 2007, the Forest Service has managed 1.1 million acres with prescribed burns, according to NIFC, about five times the number of acres managed by WFU fires.
In addition, a prescribed burn will have larger or additional control lines to ensure the fire does not escape containment, while WFU fires outside wilderness acres rely more on firefighters on the ground and helicopter drops.
During the Trapper Ridge event, firefighters remained in constant radio contact with aerial units, providing localized, specific information about hotspots or weather conditions on the ground, McCarthy noted. They can call in water drops if necessary or dig lines around specific sites to be protected as well.
The Trapper Ridge fire also spread very quickly after the initial lightning strike. “If it had been a prescribed burn and it got that big that fast they probably would have had to put a line around it,” McCarthy said.