On July 22, 2016, an illegal campfire in Garrapata State Park in Big Sur ignited the Soberanes Fire, which burned 132,127 acres in three months and ultimately became the most costly firefighting effort in U.S. history to date: $262 million.

But a recent report by Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics & Ecology – a nonprofit whose mission is to promote safe, ethical and ecological fire management – argues it shouldn’t have been so costly, and criticizes several aspects of the U.S. Forest Service’s firefighting effort.

Chief among them was the use of “heavy metal” resources – mainly air tankers and dozers – that the report shows had little effect in halting the fire’s spread, and drove the firefight to an average cost of $2 million a day.

Some of that effort, the report shows, involved dropping retardant lines in areas the fire never reached, and bulldozing containment lines on remote ridges in the wilderness.

The report says initial, aggressive suppression efforts were warranted to protect people and property, but that once Cal Fire left the unified command, the Forest Service’s spending went up.

Most damning is the report’s assertion that the agency spent so much not because it needed to, but because the agency wanted to spend all the additional funding – $700 million – Congress had appropriated to it for the fiscal year ending Oct. 1. In making this argument, the report shows the total acreage burned in 2015, 10 million acres, was nearly double what burned in 2016 (a slow wildfire year) but that spending for suppression both years was about $2 billion, because the Forest Service “[drained] the remainder of its budget on the Soberanes Fire.”

The FUSEE report criticizes Congress for “essentially a blank check policy for funding for funding wildfire suppression, and fails to demand for any fiscal accountability about the agency’s suppression overspending.”

Also in the report’s crosshairs is the Los Padres National Forest’s management plan, which calls for aggressive suppression efforts of all wildfires regardless of proximity to structures.

The Weekly is powered by the generosity of readers like you, who support our mission to produce engaging, independent and in-depth journalism.

Become a Supporter
Learn More

“It is inevitable that another fire will burn in the Ventana Wilderness area sometime in the future,” the report reads. “At what point will agency administrators revise the Forest Plan to allow alternative responses to wilderness wildfires in order to spare taxpayers the costs and damages of another long suppression siege?”

Putting firefighters and contractors in harm’s way is also called out, as one dozer operator was killed in a rollover accident in the firefight, and two contractors and a firefighter were “severely injured.” Moreover, the report states, “at times there were so many aircraft operating over the fire… flying in mountainous terrain in smoky conditions” that it could have led to a mid-air collision.

The Forest Service did not respond to a request for comment before the Weekly’s deadline, but the agency provided the following statement to the Associated Press: “Protection of people first and then resources are our primary considerations. Every fire is evaluated to determine the appropriate strategy. We continually look for opportunities to improve outcomes and accountability and to find more cost-efficient and effective methods of managing wildfires.”

Become a Weekly Insider.

Join Us
Learn More

Recommended for you

(1) comment

jack sexton

The U.S. Forest Service strategy was spot on!! The USFS and the State of California, including the Governor, CalFire and Cal DGS support one vendor, who ever happens to won Phos-Chek, whose retardant is very expensive, does not extinguish wildland fires and has been responsible for fish kills.

In 2017 the #1 vendor to the USFS was ICL, which owned the Phos-Chek brand (retardant, Class “A” foam and water enhancers) at the time. Phos-Chek has a federal sole source contract for its retardant.

Phos-Chek has had a sole source mandatory use contract for all its chemicals (retardant, Class "A" foam and water enhancers) in California for at least a decade. Phos-Chek's Wildland fire division is headquartered in California.

In early 2018, ICL sold the Phos-Chek brand to investment bankers for just under $1billion. No one pays that kind of money for an extremely expensive chemical that doesn’t work and kills fish unless you have some assurances that the sole source contracts will stay in place.

Bureaucrats know that putting out fires is bad for business!! The entire wildland fire fighting business is, in my opinion, driven by the system put in place by the US Forest Service to ensure the use Phos-Chek retardant. A number of years ago, the owners of Phos-Chek had the foresight to hire three senior US Forest Service retirees. Phos-Chek patented a gum thickened retardant. Four months after the patent was approved, the US Forest Service changed the specification to match the Phos-Chek patent. This gave Phos-Chek a sole source contract. The price of the retardant tripled - its even higher now.

Phos-Chek does not extinguish fires. Phos-Chek is responsible for fish kills.

Phos-Chek supports the entire complex that fights wildland fires. Phos-Chek requires ground crews and mixing bases. Mixing bases cost $4,000 to $10,000 per day per base.

Phos-Chek requires aircraft and helicopters – I can’t even begin to do the math on what these cost to operate and fuel.

Add catering, showers, tent cities, ground equipment (dozers etc.) to support the ground fire fighters and it is easy to see that the root cause of the explosion in firefighting costs is Phos-Chek.

The US Forest Service rules only allow for the use of retardant in air tankers.

It doesn’t matter how many air tankers are available – if retardant continues to be the sole chemical used in air tankers, all that will change is how much more money will be spent in a fire season.

The sole source contract means that other cheaper, safer and more effective chemicals cannot be used.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.