Utah Stories

Allowing Wildfires to Burn is Causing Big Problems

The recent trend to allow wildfires to burn across the West to improve forest health is hitting some fierce opposition.

|


wildfires

The recent trend to allow wildfires to burn across the West to improve forest health is hitting some fierce opposition. It has long been a matter of fire management doctrine that letting some fires burn will improve wildlife habitat, watershed conditions, reduce fuel buildup, and promote species diversity. Prescribed fires are designed with these elements in mind and many successful prescribed fires have improved conditions.

A more troubling and problematic development has been the advent of allowing wildfires to burn to meet various public land management needs. At issue is the practice of evacuating private landowners from the fire area and then lighting that private land on fire on purpose to try to control the main fire. These purposefully set, running head fires often burn every tree along with homes, outbuildings, infrastructure, fences, and anything else on the developed ground that can burn, and often with very little impact on the main fire.

The Tucker Act was meant to enable Article 5 of the US Constitution which holds that the government may not take private property without just compensation. Burning private ground without owner permission or consent is a taking of private property to meet public purposes. The government makes no provision for compensating individual property owners whose land is burned on purpose, leaving them little choice but to file tort claims or to sue the government for redress of grievances. These legal options are poor substitutes for consulting with partners and landowners in advance and working with people to find good solutions.

To make matters worse, most national forest do not have legally required documentation allowing them to let fires burn. There are no environmental impact statements, no environmental assessments, and no records of decision memorializing a public process that includes an opportunity for comment and objection. In a further twist, it is illegal to use wildfire suppression money appropriated by Congress to do anything other than suppress a fire – meaning anchor and flank perimeter control.

Because most landowners don’t know what hit them until they are combing through the ashes after the Forest Service burnouts, most don’t know how difficult recovery and rehabilitation will be. Rehabilitation of a site requires huge expenditures, lots of work, and many years. Working ranches no longer work. Dream homes in the woods become nightmares. Clean up, weed control, and flood mitigation following the fire can bleed a family dry for a decade.

The government allows affected homeowners to file tort claims to request compensation for the harm caused by these well-meaning decisions. The process can take several years, but the government does settle most claims and claimants need the money whenever it arrives. Most families who have been through these let-burn fires and the aftermath are more than willing to pursue claims. The same is not true for municipalities and counties or States who are also harmed when their land is damaged.

Not wanting to upset delicate relationships with Forest Service officials, State and local government officials often fail to seek compensation even though they ultimately must spend thousands of hours and millions of dollars over several years trying to mitigate downstream fire effects, especially post-fire flooding. This attitude is puzzling. The alternative is to saddle taxpayers and local constituents with paying the bills that the United States should pay. There is no downside to the tort claims process. It is a government creation to help right wrongs.

Damage from fires really starts after the fire is over. It is incumbent on landowners and local governments to seek compensation because they need the help, and because the government provides a way to provide the help they need.

Frank Carroll is the Managing Partner for PFMc Professional Forest Management

 

, ,

Join our newsletter.
Stay informed.

Related Articles


  • Overcrowded Classrooms, Burned-Out Teachers, and Homeschooling: A Deep Dive into Utah’s Education Crisis

    Utah’s education system is on the verge of a breaking point. With classrooms bursting at the seams and teachers leaving in droves, a growing number of parents are pulling their children out of public schools. But what are the real reasons behind this shift, and what untold consequences could it have for Utah’s future? Discover the hidden challenges inside classrooms and the rising movement of parents taking control of their children’s education in ways you won’t expect.

    To access this post, you must purchase Full Access Membership.


  • The “Monster” of Bear Lake

    Have you ever heard of Utah’s hidden lake monsters? Beyond the tourist buzz of Bear Lake, whispers of a mysterious creature have persisted for generations. Dive into the untold stories, rare sightings, and eerie folklore surrounding Utah’s most elusive aquatic legend. Are the rumors real, or just a product of overactive imaginations?

    To access this post, you must purchase Full Access Membership.


  • Frisco, Utah: The Untold Story of the West’s Most Notorious Ghost Town

    Once a wild silver mining town, Frisco, Utah, was infamous for its nightly violence and lawless streets. Known as the “toughest mining town in the West,” its fortunes changed after a catastrophic mine collapse. Today, the deserted remains of Frisco, with its decaying kilns and empty streets, tell the story of a town that lived fast and died young. The mysteries of its vanished lawman and the outlaws who once ruled the streets still linger in its desolate landscape.

    To access this post, you must purchase Full Access Membership.


  • Utah Book Bans Ignite Cultural Clash: Educator John Arthur on Local Control

    A battle over book bans is sweeping Utah’s schools, pitting state laws against local communities’ rights to shape education. Utah Teacher of the Year John Arthur steps into the fray, challenging restrictions that he believes rob students of vital perspectives and the freedom to explore. Are blanket bans the answer, or are we sacrificing young minds in a cultural clash?