(The map above is an example of how the Waldo Canyon fire spread into the Flying W Ranch area on the west side of Colorado Springs June 26, 2012. HERE is a link to a map that can zoom in to see more details. MODIS/Google)
Judging from the titles of the bills announced Thursday that may be introduced in the Colorado legislature related to wildfires, it appears that there will be few if any changes that will actually improve the on-the-ground suppression of wildfires, especially initial attack. The bills are about taxes, disasters, agricultural burning, fireworks, loans, prescribed fires, an information center, and death benefits, but we don’t see much to help the firefighter at the sharp end of the spear.
In October the Colorado State Fire Chiefs organization submitted to the Joint Legislative Wildfire Matters Review Committee a detailed list of their seven highest priorities. We can’t see where their recommendations fit into the proposed legislation. The specifics are HERE, but below are the headlines of their recommnedations, with the first three being the most important:
- Insure the stability and reliability of the current Colorado state-wide emergency radio system.
- Continue to invest in the development, expansion and implementation of the State resource mobilization plan.
- Expand the current local, regional and state command, control, and coordination capabilities.
- Provide sufficient funding to the Division of Fire Prevention and Control to fulfill its stated missions.
- State aviation resources are an essential and integral part of the initial attack on WUI fires.
- Develop measurable and clearly articulated performance goals for response to WUI fires to guide the response of local, mutual aid and State resources.
- Recognize that while community and individual homeowner mitigation is an essential component of a comprehensive WUI strategy, it is not an effective immediate or mid-term solution to our State’s immediate threats.
Their recommendations close, in part, with this:
The costs associated with fire mitigation and firefighting need to be measured against the real and total costs of fires in the WUI. As expensive as fighting a fire is, the cost of recovery is even greater. Even if the loss of life is not considered, the ensuing flood damage to water quality, roads, bridges, utilities, and private property dwarf the cost of effective fire suppression.
Thanks and a hat tip go out to Bean
I find it disappointing that the State Fire Chiefs are belittling mitigation in the WUI. It is paramount to safe and effective firefighting that the fuels are reduced, homes are hardened, access and addressing are adequate, and that homeowners know how to get out quickly and safely with what is important to them. What good is an incredible communication system that can reach into any canyon, if firefighters cannot go into those canyons anyway because of hazardous fuels and access? Retardant dropped from planes doesn’t stop fire. It slows it down. So do fuel breaks. Maybe Fire Department involvement is another critical element that has been missing from the Fire Adapted Community standpoint, because if FPDs aren’t willing to promote and encourage homeowners responsibility for living in the Wild-land/Urban Interface, it will only make their jobs harder as wildfires become more widespread and intense.
You bring up some fair points, Rebecca, but I hope you read the 9-page document produced by the Fire Chiefs. I don’t interpret what they wrote as “belittling mitigation”, just that they are realistic — relying on the personal initiatives of all of the homeowners to take mitigation action on their property is not going to solve the WUI problem in the near or mid-term. Action to regulate or require mitigation is necessary.
If they “belittled” anything, it was homeowners who do nothing to reduce the fire hazards around their structures, or governments and insurance companies who do nothing to encourage or require it.
It’s all political blah blah blah. Until R2 decides they want a Region wide initial attack protocol, or even a region wide culture of aggressive IA nothing will actually change. Most IA resources are still dispatched through the local duty officer instead of a Wildcad based run card. A Colorado state agency is a good first baby step. But how do you get around the Sheriff being responsible for wildfire? How many county sheriffs are there in the state? If you have the state take over wildland fire you begin to build that cohesive plan state wide. Maybe you would see that bleed into the rest of the region. South Dakota is close, but still has far to go. Colorado has the most to lose in the region but has not seen enough of a push from the general populace to bring them more in alignment with the 21’st century. Dare I say a modified California model? I know nothing good comes from the left coast but man do they bang out a good IA response on every fire every time. You can’t continue to send 1 Type 6 engine and no air assets to your IA’s. It doesn’t hurt to send more, they can be cancelled. Aerial assets are most effective with timely and aggressive dispatch. Often R2 waits until there is a ground contact before launching any air assets at all. Your fuel conditions and fire behavior has changed, it’s time to adjust.
Yes, Yes, Yes! We all cringe when we hear California da da da.
Fact is they do ATTACK wildfires and with enough resources to get the job done. The Colorado Chiefs Assn. objectives are relevant to the entire mountain west !
We all know that fire season migrates. Why can’t we move more IA resources as fire season migrates through the west?