Forest Service backs off 'fight all fires' move

2012 was $1 billion firefighting year

For decades, the U.S. Forest Service let small fires in remote areas burn naturally - in recognition that fire was part of the natural landscape, and that by letting some fires burn, larger fires could be prevented.

But last year, every fire was battled unless granted special status. That's been acknowledged as part of the reason the Forest Service spent more than $1 billion fighting fires in 2012.

Now, the agency is taking the "fight all fires" directive off the books.

Timothy Inglesbee, executive director of Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics and Ecology (FUSEE), says it means flexibility in making decisions this season.

"Our response to fire has to be tailored to the conditions of the fire and our goals for the piece of ground it's burning on," he said.

The forest official that required that all fires be suppressed in 2012 had a goal of keeping all fires small. This year's policy comes from Forest Service chief Tom Tidwell.

Last year, Oregon's fire season didn't officially end until mid-October. The biggest Oregon blazes were on Bureau of Land Management land in 2012.

Inglesbee says the blanket policy of "fighting all fires" meant some Forest Service resources were spent on smaller, lightning-caused blazes that previously would have been allowed to burn.

"Which enables fire managers to use fire to benefit the ecosystems," he says, "especially those ecosystems that depend (on) or require wildfire to maintain their ecological health and integrity."

Chris Thomas of the Oregon News Service prepared this report

By clicking Submit users are agreeing to follow the Terms of Service
comments powered by Disqus

Most Popular Stories