Background
The
wildfire threat facing communities in the western United
States is undisputed. According to the United
States General Accounting Office (GAO) fire suppression
policies on public lands coupled with population growth
in wildland areas created increased risk to communities
from wildfire disasters. Over the past decade, scores of
lives were lost, tens of thousands of square miles of land
was devastated, and thousands of homes and other structures
were destroyed from damage inflicted by wildfire. Increases
in population in the inland West coupled with the appeal
of living in closer proximity to public lands create situations
that expose more people, property and infrastructure to
the risk of wildfire than at any time in recent history.
The GAO estimates 60-100 million acres of public land and
hundreds, if not thousands, of communities in the public
land interface are at risk.
While
many factors contributing to the intensity of wildfires
cannot be controlled—wind, weather, humidity, temperature,
and drought conditions—there are many actions that
can be taken in the long and short term to respond to the
threat of wildland fire hazards. The two dominant national-level
policies to address the risks posed by wildfires, the
National
Fire Plan and the Western
Governor's Association (WGA)10-Year Comprehensive Strategy
Implementation Plan, identify four common goals for wildfire
management to address long term threats posed by wildfire:
1) improving fire prevention and suppression, 2) rehabilitating
and restoring fire-adapted ecosystems, 3) reducing hazardous
fuels, 4) promoting community assistance. With these goals
in mind, communities are urged to thin, conduct controlled
burns, restore forests, suppress fire, create defensible
space around homes and communities, undertake public education
about wildfire and create markets for skilled work forces
capable of removing and processing small diameter timber
and forest restoration byproducts to respond to the threat
of wildfire. But little is known about what is being accomplished
on the ground or what combinations of responses are used
at the community level.
Great
uncertainty surrounds the scope and success of community
responses and why some communities manage to foster constructive
responses to wildfire risks while others fail to do so.
In the past decade a natural experiment has occurred in
the inland portion of the western United States as communities
have taken different approaches to responding to the threat
of wildfire. This research investigates the scope of actions
taken to adapt to wildfire risks in New Mexico. The goal
is to supply baseline data for what communities are doing
on the ground while also providing an overview of statewide
action.
Project
Methods
The
work in this study took place in two phases—1) a state-level
analysis of wildfire risk to communities and their responses;
2) community-level case studies of responsive practices.
New Mexico's "Twenty Most Vulnerable Areas" served
as a state-level sample  frame.
National Fire
Plan grants awarded to each area for 2001 and 2002 were
compiled to determine relative levels of responsiveness
. Since many of New Mexico's Twenty Most Vulnerable Areas
are a group of communities, case study selection focused
on the single community areas. Silver City, Ruidoso and
Red River were chosen based on their high level of responsiveness
while Santa Fe Watershed was chosen for its relative lack
of response to its wildfire threat. Wildland
urban interface type and recommendations from agencies
within New  Mexico
were also considered. The research entailed site visits
to each community, in-person interviews, document and photographic
analysis, participant observation and on-site tours. View
Summary of Data Collection Techniques as PDF. The case
studies were analyzed according to the four goals identified
by the Western Governor's Association 10-Year Comprehensive
Strategy Implementation Plan.
Site
visits to case study communities took place from June 2002
to January 2003; Silver City, June 22-26, 2002 & September
26-27, Ruidoso, September 23-26, 2002, Santa Fe Watershed,
January 5-11, 2003 and Red River, January 27-30, 2003.
Project
Findings
|
