Wildfire Prevention, Preparedness, and Expenditure Review

DNR’s wildfire and forest health plans provide a strategic approach to fire prevention and preparedness. The approach is grounded in science and the planned activities are consistent with best practices.

Terms used in this report

For purposes of this report, we use the following terms to describe DNR's activities: Prevention activities are aimed at reducing the number of human caused fires. Preparedness activities are intended to improve forest health and help communities adapt to wildfire. Preparedness does not include suppression-related activities that extinguish or control the spread of fire (e.g., training, placing staff and equipment near anticipated fires).

In 2019 and 2020, the Legislature considered bills that would create a new funding source for the Department of Natural Resources' (DNR) wildfire suppression, prevention, and preparedness activities. DNR stated that the proposal would reduce "wildfire damage and cost by investing in proven wildfire prevention and preparedness strategies."

The bills did not pass and the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) directed its staff to:

• Review the Department of Natural Resources’ wildfire prevention and preparedness activities and related expenditures.
• Identify whether there is evidence to show how effectively the activities reduce the impacts and costs of wildfire.

DNR developed long-term wildfire and forest health plans

While there are many factors that contribute to wildfire, there is broad agreement among many scientists and land managers that historic forest management practices and fire suppression policies at the federal and state level have led to an unnatural buildup of fuelsThese include grasses, shrubs, woody debris, and small trees. on the landscape. Dense, unhealthy forests create fuels that make fires harder to control and more expensive to suppress.

DNR developed long-term forest health plans, as required by state and federal law. It also developed a 10-year plan to address wildfire. The plans set forth strategies to achieve healthy forests, resilient landscapes, fire adapted communities, and safe wildfire response. Since the plans were written in 2017 and 2018 and have 10-20 year implementation timelines, DNR is still in the early stages of implementation.

Exhibit 1.1: DNR's plans provide a strategic approach to achieve prevention and preparedness goals

Forest Health Strategic Plan and Implementation Strategy
	20-Year Forest Health Strategic Plan: Eastern Washington (2017) Overarching framework for addressing forest health needs on all forest lands in eastern Washington, regardless of ownership.		Strategy to Restore Forest Health on State Lands in Eastern Washington (2017) Implements the 20-Year Forest Health Strategic Plan on DNR-owned lands.

Wildfire Strategic Plan and Forest Action Plan
	Washington State Wildland Fire Protection 10-Year Strategic Plan (2018) Strategy and implementation plan to address wildland fire issues across the state. Aligns with the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy.		Forest Action Plan (2017) Strategy for using DNR’s forestry programs to address threats to forest resources and advance federal goals. DNR published an update in the fall of 2020, after the field work for this study was complete.

Source: JLARC staff analysis of DNR planning documents.

DNR used a scientific approach to identify 33 initial priority areas for preparedness activities in eastern Washington

StatuteRCW 76.06.020 defines healthy forests as sound in ecological function, sustainable, resilient to insects, diseases, fire, and other disturbances, and able to meet landowner objectives. DNR's Forest Health Plan identifies priority areas to focus forest health treatments, as state law requires (see Exhibit 1.2).

• DNR identified 33 initial priority areas in eastern Washington based on data that includes fire risk, wildland urban interface, drinking water, wildlife habitat, climate change, timber volume, and aquatic resources. DNR's methodology is included in the Plan. DNR plans to identify additional priority areas each biennium.
• After identifying priority areas, DNR conducted landscape evaluations to assess forest health conditions and determine treatment needs. The evaluations summarize vegetation changes compared to historical conditions, current fire and drought risk, and wildlife habitat needs. This information is used to identify specific actions needed to move the landscape into a more ecologically resilient condition and reduce fire risk.

Exhibit 1.2: The 33 priority areas in eastern Washington cross multiple ownership boundaries

Source: JLARC staff analysis of DNR data.

DNR compiled agency and partner data about forest health treatments into a database. The database includes information from 2017 through 2019 and shows that treatments took place on state, federal, and private land in the 33 priority areas. Treatments include fuel reduction projects such as thinning, chipping, piling and burning vegetation.

DNR is developing a tracking system to monitor forest health accomplishments, as described in Section 3.

Activities identified in DNR's plans align with federal guidance and best practices

DNR's plans and activities are consistent with national guidance. For example, the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management StrategyFederally mandated strategy that sets national-level direction for fire preparedness and management across all lands. has three goals: restore and maintain resilient landscapes, create fire adapted communities, and respond to wildfires safely and effectively. DNR's Wildfire Strategy adopts the same goals and identifies similar activities such as fuel reduction treatments, prescribed fire, reduction of human-caused ignitions, and community action. DNR's Forest Health Plan provides an approach for creating healthy, resilient landscapes in eastern Washington.

The activities in DNR's plans also are consistent with best practices identified in scientific literature. For example, research shows that activities such as thinning, chipping, and prescribed fire reduce the fuels that allow fires to grow and spread. More information is in Section 4.

Exhibit 1.3: DNR's plans identify a variety of prevention and preparedness activities for itself and its partners

Source: JLARC staff analysis.

DNR spends more on preparedness activities than prevention

DNR spent a total of $70 million on preparedness and prevention in fiscal years 2018, 2019, and 2020. Of this, $63 million was spent on landscape preparedness activities such as forest health and fuel reduction.

Sources include state, federal, and non-appropriated funds. State budget provisos and federal grants have directed more funding to preparedness (e.g., forest health, hazard reduction) than to prevention (e.g., public education).

DNR uses unique accounting codes to differentiate prevention and preparedness spending from other DNR activities including wildfire suppression. The codes also provide details about its spending, such as the type of activity (e.g., forest health, prevention education), specific projects, and the region where funds were spent.

Additional detail for fiscal year 2020 is in Appendix B.

❮ Previous    Next ❯   

Currently, DNR cannot systematically show how much it has spent on forest health treatments in a specific area. However, it is developing a tracking system that could provide this information.

Research indicates that preparedness activities can reduce fire intensity and severity, and may decrease suppression costs for individual fires

Exhibit 4.1: Preparedness activities reduce fuels on the landscape

Source: JLARC staff depiction based on diagrams created by the U.S. Forest Service.

Prescribed fire is a best practice for removing surface fuels

Fuel reduction projects are most effective when they combine thinning and the removal of surface fuels. When appropriate, prescribed fireThe controlled application of low to moderate intensity fire under specific weather conditions to meet management objectives. is one way to reduce surface fuels, and is generally less labor intensive and costly than other methods.

Research that is generally applicable to forests in eastern Washington shows that fires are less severe in areas that have been treated with thinning and prescribed fire compared to similar areas without these activities.

• Researchers studied areas burned during the 2014 Carlton Complex fire in north-central Washington. They found that areas with fuel reduction treatments that included thinning and prescribed fire burned with less severity even when there was high wind and temperatures.
• Computer models that simulate the effect of fuel reduction activities confirm the effectiveness of thinning combined with prescribed fire for reducing fire intensity and severity in forests like those in eastern Washington.

The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is taking steps to increase the use of prescribed fire in Washington. For example, DNR's planning documents provide goals and strategies for the use of prescribed fire. At the Legislature's direction, DNR conducted a prescribed fire pilot project (2016 HB 2928) and is developing a certification program for prescribed fire (2018 HB 2733).

Exhibit 4.2: Thinning and prescribed fire reduced fuels and fire impacts

Source: JLARC staff analysis. Photographs taken by Justin Haug, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW).

Research indicates landscape preparedness may have ecological, public safety, and economic benefits

By reducing fire intensity and severity, fuel reduction activities can provide ecological benefits and improve public safety. The activities can also provide economic opportunities. The research cautions that these types of benefits are often site-specific and the experiences from one location may not directly apply to another.

Ecological: Research has found that fuel reduction can improve habitat for some species (e.g. deer, elk) and preserve water sources that could be affected by high severity fire.

Public safety: Fuel reduction activities may modify a fire's behavior, allowing firefighters safer access and improved suppression opportunities. Less intense and severe fires produce less harmful air quality impacts and smoke emissions than more severe fires.

Economic: Landowners and management agencies often hire contractors to perform fuel reduction activities such as thinning and chipping. This may provide jobs in rural economies and marketable timber products.

Models predict that preparedness activities may reduce suppression costs for individual fires

The relationship between prevention, preparedness, and suppression spending is complex. Without extensive and detailed information on costs and benefits, it cannot be simplified to an equation (e.g. a dollar spent on preparedness equates to reducing suppression costs by $X). This cost and benefit information is often unavailable or unknown.

Instead, researchers use two key methods to evaluate the effect of fuel reduction activities on fire suppression costs: case studies and computer simulations.

• Case studies compare actual suppression costs in areas with and without fuel reduction activities. This approach is uncommon and some researchers show reduced suppression costs in areas with past fuel reduction activities, while others find no significant relationship.
• Computer simulations assess the effect of fuels on fire growth, behavior, and size, and the subsequent effect on suppression response and costs. The simulations suggest that preparedness activities that reduce fuels may lower suppression costs for individual fires when they occur in a treated area.

DNR's ability to relate prevention, preparedness, and suppression spending is further complicated by the agency's data systems (see Section 3 and below).

DNR's systems cannot yet identify costs for individual fires

JLARC directed its staff to evaluate DNR's progress in implementing the recommendations from the 2018 JLARC report Wildfire Suppression Funding and Costs. The three recommendations instructed DNR to:

• Refine its collection of key data elements.
• Improve the accuracy and reliability of the key data elements.
• Develop a systematic and verifiable way to identify the costs of individual fires.

DNR concurred with each recommendation and has taken some steps towards implementation. However, it did not meet the implementation deadlines, and as of August 2020, DNR reports that implementation is "in progress."

Preparedness activities are among many factors that may influence overall suppression costs

Rising suppression costs have led researchers to study the factors driving suppression costs. It is important to note that a small percentage of fires each year typically account for a large percentage of suppression costs.

Some of the many factors that affect suppression costs include:

• Fire size and behavior: costs increase with fire intensity and severity and the area burned is often correlated with annual suppression costs.
• Development in the wildland urban interface (WUI): there is wide recognition among fire managers and researchers that increased development in the WUI has led to higher suppression costs.
• Climate and weather: long term climatic patterns that increase temperature, produce drought, and lengthen the annual fire season increase fire suppression costs. Specific weather patterns that produce high winds and low relative humidity can also increase fire severity and suppression costs.
• Fuels: the widespread buildup of forest fuels on the landscape makes fires more intense, severe, and costly to suppress.
• Fire management decisions: resource allocation and suppression strategies can affect costs.

Some of these factors may be influenced by DNR's and other entities' preparedness activities (e.g. fuel reduction, community preparedness), while others, such as suppression management decisions and weather patterns, are not.