Fuel Reduction or Response? How Best to Spend the Taxpayers Money?

The recent discussions about forming a federal wildfire response agency have generated a lot of discussion and opinions from experts  on where to focus our taxpayer money. Should we increase our response capacity or increase fuel modification?

As is usual the answer is a bit of both. Our wildlands are in such poor condition we are going to be facing catastrophic fires for a generation no matter how much we spend on fuel modification and climate action.

Fire jumped a large fuel modified area, entered private property and threatened a community. Good work by crews to hold it and limit damage to critical infrastucture and business’s

Fuel modification works but the current delivery model renders it almost cost prohibitive. It is seldom conducted on private property.

Very low intensity fire in fuel modified area. Crews could safely work right at the fire edge.

We can’t afford to have enough specialized crews available to meet all our response needs all the time.

Awsome folks. Trained, fit, equipped and motivated but expensive.

Photo courtesty BCWS

Our government has a lot of pressing priorities (Hungry kids, homeless people, criminal activtiy, the drug crisis, long health-care wait times, crowded classrooms, etc.) that require tax dollars. In all honesty, to me these take priority. We need to figure out how to get this fuel modification completed and increase our response capacity more efficiently and cost-effectivly so the government can keep providing these other valuable services.

I think there is a common set of solutions to both problems.

Fuel Modification Suggestions:

• Simplify and streamline the planning and prescription process
• Include maintenance and long-term treatments in the plans
• Ensure that reducing fuel load cost effectively remains the main, over-riding objective even when other social and environmental concerns are raised
• Revise or eliminate stumpage to continue to encourage utilization of materials from fuel mod projects whenever possible
• Award multi-year fuel modification contracts to proven contractors in each BC Wildfire Zone. Safety, quality, and production records should be the leading criteria for evaluating contractors with price being a lower factor.
• Long term agreements will enable contractors to provide more cost effective services to private land owners

Response Suggestions:

• We already have a federal centralized firefighting coordination center. (CIFFC). Rather than a federal response agency it is likely more effective to have CIFFC standardize the requirements for existing fire crews across Canada so we know what we are getting when we request help from other provinces. From my experience the higher up the bureaucratic food chain the more ponderous and indecisive the government is. Keeping the response as local as possible is preferable.
• Include Response Services in the proposed long-term Fuel Modification Contracts described above. Most of the skills are transferable between the two sectors. This would ensure that a pool of properly trained, experienced, equipped, physically fit, local crews were available as supplemental fire fighters in every Zone when needed. They would still be doing valuable and productive work in periods of reduced fire danger.
• Establish a training center in every BCWS Fire Zone so we can continue to improve wildfire training for folks in all industries, government agencies and communities

One of my best fire crews ever.

Local Contract Silviculture Crew turned contract fire fighters. Trained, fit, equipped, safe, production oriented, versatlie, self sufficient, with local knowledge.  Already have long term relationships with local forest companies.

No fires = no expense to taxpayers as they have other projects on the go.

Photo courtesy A&G Reforestation

Lets get away from debating either/or when considering whether increasing fuel modification or  increasing response capacitiy is “the” solution to our current problem. We can acheive both in a much more cost effective and efficient way.

Our taxpayers deserve this.

Doug