Welcome and look around. We hope to provide more information about the topics being considered in the legislature so you can participate in a meaningful way. Use the Contact Us page to ask us to update you on the status of your most important issue. Join in the conversation and keep it civil. There are two About pages so you can learn more about this blog and about our founding organization, Montana BASE.Follow us
by Sen. Pat Connell (R-Hamilton), a Certified Forester
The main point of the Missoulian Guest Column “Reduce wildfire risk or we’ll pay more for fire disasters” on May 28 was that the Congressional proposed Wildfire Disaster Funding Act should be passed. The authors were spot on. We in the West recognize wildfires of the type we’ve dealt with the last quarter century as disasters, and funding their control and suppression efforts by FEMA makes irrefutable common sense.
Then, unfortunately, the column got off the rails by broad-brushing certain issues while ignoring specific efforts to address the very concern that they raised. The scope and scale of fuel reduction mitigation efforts differ dramatically between the Federal and State lands, and their respective wildfire suppression responsibilities. This is particularly so in the Intermountain West. In Montana, it is inaccurate and horribly misleading to suggest that wildfire risk management has taken a back seat in the attitude of the State Legislature, or the Department of Natural Resources (DNRC) “… budgetary constraints stand in the way of such fuel management”. Historically perhaps, this was Montana’s overall perspective on the issue. However, since the massive fires of 2007 which have been the financial responsibility for the State to suppress, Montana has dramatically changed its approach for the better.
In the past, State suppression of wildfires were a collateral responsibility of DNRC, and past Legislators did not want to create what was deemed as an appropriated “slush fund” for wildfire control whose annual necessity was problematic; so wildfire costs were either floated until the following Session covered the costs via a “supplemental” appropriation, or if need be, have a very quick, one issue special session. No longer. As the State wildfire risks increased in the past, the bankers who buy Montana generated revenue bonds, whether local, school, or state looked at the wildfire liability as unfunded, and a risk to the good faith and credit of our State. HB 354, which I sponsored in 2013 created a statutory funding mechanism through reverting unspent appropriated monies within state government to fill a warchest up to $100 million for wildfires. Its effectiveness was immediate, as the warchest covered the $11 million suppression cost of the Lolo Fire later that same year. Further, the bond bankers saw this as “balancing our state books” and as a result improved Montana’s bond rating. Financing a statutory reserve account for wildfire suppression through reversion monies is unique in state government, and Montana has proven its effectiveness.
The rest of the story is fuel reduction before the fires. First, HB354 allows up to $5 million per biennium for that specific purpose. It is putting “boots on the ground” addressing fuels buildup in the Wildland Urban Interface on lands throughout the state. Second, through a series of bills that Sen Brad Hamlett (D-Cascade) and I co-sponsored these past two sessions, Montana has become a very assertive advocate supporting fuel reduction measures on federal ground for the protection of Montana’s watersheds. Montana DNRC foresters are now statutorily authorized to engage on fuel reduction work on critical watersheds to the State on federal lands, and the Attorney General has statutory authority to pro-actively intervene to support federal fuel management projects throughout Montana. Passage of the federal Farm Bill last year further opened an opportunity for Montana that the Bullock Administration utilized to identify from our State perspective 5 million federal acres at high fire risk needing fuel reduction efforts.
Combined with an extremely aggressive and effective DNRC initial attack fire plan supported by the state administration, Montana is leading the way to contain wildfires on State and private lands that is now the model that other states are trying to copy.
Now, as the authors in the column pointed out, when large fires do hit federal lands in Montana, let FEMA budgets deal with the suppression costs so that the Forest Service can stay on focus mitigating the fuel buildup.Share to