It makes sense that Western governors present a united front to urge passage of a Clinton administration initiative that could result in $1.6 billion in fire relief for the West.
Wildfires burned more than 6.7 million acres in 11 states this past summer. Even as the leaves have begun to change in the Rocky Mountains, fire has threatened homes near Boulder, Colo., in recent days. Some 31 fires were still burning in nine states this week.
There is a definite need to replenish federal fire suppression funds, restore burned lands and protect watersheds, and Congress should address this issue before it recesses.
But money is only part of the issue. The states have committed to develop a long-term strategy to reduce the dangers of fast-spreading wildfires. Now the federal government needs to step up and revamp its range and forest management practices.
Something's amiss when land managers are not permitted under federal policy to extinguish even minor wildfires. Worse yet, underbrush has been accumulating for years, which fueled most of the wild blazes. It's abundantly clear that forests need to be thinned and prohibitive policies that have curbed grazing need to reviewed.
There remains considerable debate how forests and other public lands should be managed. Land science — not politics — should carry the day and there is a dire need for more involvement from state and local officials in an effort that is now largely orchestrated by the federal government.
As the smoke clears from what Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt describes as the worst fire season since 1910, constructive talks are occurring. Credit the Western governors and Babbitt and Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman for coming to consensus on funding issues during a brief meeting hosted by Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt at the Governor's Mansion.
Contentious issues such as prescribed burns, logging and roadless areas should be addressed after the November elections. But there needs to be thoughtful debate on these issues based on science. Too often, these discussions are dominated by special interests groups — environmentalists and businesses that make their living off federal lands.
They need a place at the table, but so do people who don't usually have a voice in these issues — locally elected officials and people who live in and around national forests and other federal lands. They have had to live with the impact of the fires that have ravaged the West this past summer. They, more than anyone, need to be heard.