The risk of wildfire is growing across the United States. Political battles continue over wildfire resources, such as whether Cal Fire resources were adequately allocated to fight the catastrophic Los Angeles wildfires. As the risk of wildfire grows, the cost of prevention efforts also grows. The question of who pays for these expensive wildfire prevention efforts has not yet been answered.
Rural communities almost always need additional state or federal funding to facilitate wildfire prevention projects. For example, the state of Colorado and its rural populations are prone to catastrophic wildfire events. At the same time, the Colorado legislature is looking “to cut nearly $1 billion in state spending this session.”
This drastic cut in budgeting is concerning to Colorado representatives who represent rural areas with high wildfire risk. Many legislators, like Rep. Elizabeth Velasco, D-Glenwood Springs, are concerned that “budget shortfall could impact wildfire mitigation efforts that they say are becoming more needed — and expensive.”
Velasco is sponsoring House Bill 1078 to address the concerns of the rural communities she represents. House Bill 1078 would create a “workforce of foresters and firefighters with grants for certifications, training initiatives, and an outreach campaign to promote job opportunities.” These foresters and firefighters are crucial to getting wildfire prevention projects off the ground and the funding would come directly from the state. Currently, there are not enough foresters and firefighters to help manage the millions of forested lands in the United States.
However, the Colorado Legislature may not want to spend an additional $3 million on House Bill 1078. Supporters of House Bill 1078 are concerned as party leaders are only supporting bills that have a $0 price tag. Wildfire prevention projects are expensive, but rural communities, like those that Velasco represents, desperately need state funding, and the people to advance such projects.
Rural communities in Colorado are already facing extreme wildfire risk. With recent trends in the number of wildfires across the United States, it's not a question of if Colorado will experience a catastrophic wildfire, but it's a question of when.
In another state facing the same wildfire issues, federal money is going to citizen-led nonprofit groups to help mitigate wildfire risk. Citizens in the state of Oregon have formed nonprofit groups, like the Lomakatsi Restoration Project. Based in Ashland, Oregon, the Lomakatsi Restoration Project sends crews out into the mountains with chainsaws and other equipment to clear underbrush and ladder fuels. The crews have one goal, to “protect the valley from wildfire.”
The Lomakastsi Restoration Project traces its roots back to Hoedads Inc., which is commonly referred to as simply “the Hoedads.” The Hoedads was a large worker cooperative that began in the 1970s and planted trees following logging operations across the Pacific Northwest. The Hoedad's numbers grew and they were “eventually performing a good portion of tree planting in the country, getting millions in federal contracts with hundreds of workers organized into crews.”
Slowly, the Hoedads began to die out as private companies took over. Private logging companies hired cheap migrant labor and the Hoedads couldn’t compete. By the mid-1990’s the Hoedad project was over.
Although there are no more official Hoedad groups, the Lomakastsi Restoration Project is “carrying the torch.” The Lomakastsi Restoration Project receives federal funding but instead of planting trees, they focus on wildfire prevention by removing brush and other high-hazard fuels.
Federal and state funding allows rural communities to implement wildfire prevention projects. Clearing brush and creating fuel breaks is expensive and needs to be done on millions of acres. Over the next decade, the National Forest Service plans to manage 20 million acres in an effort to reduce the severity of wildfires.
Without funding, rural communities across the nation will continue to live in fear of the next catastrophic wildfire event. The destructive power of wildfires continues to grow with climate change. Hopefully, in the coming months, federal and state governments allocate more funding to wildfire prevention projects before fire season returns.
Tuesday, January 28, 2025
Rural areas need wildfire prevention funding, but who provides the funding?
Labels:
environment,
labor,
land,
land use,
natural disaster,
wilderness
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Very thought provoking piece Paul! I was surprised to learn about the Colorado legislature's commitment to $0 price tag legislation. I would hope that Colorado's representatives would make an exception to this commitment for bills like HB 1078 that seek to increase public safety. In light of the tragedies unfolding in Los Angeles, $3 million in funds to reduce fire risks does not sound like that much. I also found it interesting that federal money was being allocated to private organizations in Colorado. Generally, I think of services like fire risk mitigation as belonging solely to state and/or local governments. I would be curious to know more about the implications of delegating what is usually a public service to the private sector.
This is an extremely relevant piece! The reluctance to spend money on wildfire prevention makes me think that perhaps the Colorado would turn to using incarcerated people to prevent fires, as I know that California frequently uses incarcerated firefighters. While I don't think this is entirely a bad thing , I think it can get exploitative when incarcerated people are used for this labor, learn the skill, but then are not permitted to work in that field after they are released. Perhaps, states can further develop a program that allows incarcerated people to help prevent wildfires and then have a job in that space once they are released.
This is a great article! I feel like Colorado is a very interesting case study into how wildfires are being fought. Over the past few years, some of the largest wildfires the state has ever seen have been happening in the western slope, and many times (from the outside looking in) it appears that the state is content to let the fire burn itself out, instead of sending the resources necessary to combat the flames. I wonder if recent fires, both in Colorado and specifically the ones in California this year will adjust politicians views on needing to increase resources dedicated to fighting fires, instead of just focusing on the State's bottom line.
Post a Comment