Forest Fire Is A Natural Component Of The Ecosystem
Over the last couple of years, the discussion of forest fire and its implications to fire policy, public land management and protection of private property has been a topic of great public concern.
The debate, which began in earnest following the fires of 1994, has often taken on a more confrontational tenor. Although many people agree that suppressing forest fires is a leading cause of fuel buildup, disagreement prevails on how best to correct the problem. Some argue that logging is the cure. Others say logging significantly increases highly combustible fuel buildup. The latter proponents see no point in continuing to use the same old, ineffective medicine.
In August 1994, before the smoke had settled, the timber industry launched an aggressive advertising campaign extolling the virtues of logging to prevent or moderate the influence of fire. One ad blamed “the irresponsible actions of a few radicals” for creating the conditions leading to forest wildfire, attempting to link firefighter deaths in Colorado to dispassionate environmentalists’ actions.
Even though the timber industry admitted that not all forest fires can be prevented, the seed was planted in the public’s mind that fire can be prevented by logging.
One need only to look at different forest species to recognize the historical role fire plays in the landscape. Ponderosa pine, for instance, is “resistant” to fire, producing thick bark early in its development to protect against fire. These forests are adapted to frequent “cool” fires that burn mostly grass and shrubs, maintaining open stands.
Lodgepole pine, a “resilient” species, is dependent and adapted to hot, stand-replacing fires that open its cones, which are held together by resins until fire breaks bonds, and release the seeds.
It is important to recognize that most so-called forest health management activities under way by the Forest Service are focused in roadless areas proposed for wilderness. These areas are in higher-elevation forest stands which are made up of resilient species.
With few exceptions, these areas are far from private property where the greatest threat of wildfire to human health exists. Most private property is located in areas with historically higher fire frequency and, therefore, resistant species such as Ponderosa.
Recent scientific research offers a new look at forest wildfire and its impacts. The Forest Service in its Eastside Forest Ecosystem Health Assessment asserts that logging increases fire danger.
The Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project, a study conducted by over 100 independent scientists, found that “timber harvest, through its effects on forest structure, local microclimate, and fuel accumulation, has increased fire severity more than any other recent human activity.”
Timber industry ad campaigns often greatly oversimplify the forest wildfire discussion to the point where people are confused and frightened. This media posturing may benefit the industry economically, but it does little to increase the awareness of the public or alleviate concerns surrounding public forest land management and their implications with respect to forest wildfire.
University of Idaho scientist Leon Nuenschwander said recently, “It is not a case of whether forest fire will occur, but when.” Fire is one of the primary elements shaping the landscape of the Pacific Northwest. The forests and grasslands of the region are adapted, and even dependent, on fire.
As a community, we must step away from the divisive underpinnings of the wildfire discussion and recognize the valuable role fire plays in the ecosystem. Where threats to private property exist we must act to reduce or eliminate fire danger, yet where it applies, fire should be viewed as an inevitable and important natural function of the ecosystem.
xxxx