Use all tools — including fire — to restore forest resiliency
Fire can cause wonder or fear, renewal or destruction — and, at this moment, there is considerable fear in some of our communities.
While current wildfires started from various sources, their impacts on our communities and ecosystems were determined well before the ignitions. The unnaturally large amounts of fuel in our forests resulted from societal choices over the past 100 years as we actively worked to exclude even natural beneficial fires from our forests. The current megadrought has been made worse by our widespread and prolonged burning of fossil fuels, and the resulting warming climate has conditioned forest fuels so they are more flammable. Just add an ignition and an extreme wind event, and impactful wildfire can ensue.
We provide this larger context because it is central to recognize that we are all in this together because of our collective choices over the past century. As we, here in New Mexico and across the Western United States, work to reduce the wildland fire problems we have created and the risks they pose to our communities, we have to accept that our problem-solving tools, mechanical thinning and prescribed fire, are not without their own sets of challenges and risks.
A century-long policy of putting out all fires helped cause our widespread forest and fire problems in the first place, and for many reasons, we can’t fix the fuels problems solely with chainsaws. Beneficial fire is the most cost-effective, practical and ecologically appropriate way for restoring many of our forests.
Escaped prescribed fire like the Hermits Peak Fire calls for careful investigation and reevaluation of decision processes, and adjustments as needed. But arm-chair quarterbacking and clamoring for accountability before a proper after-action review will not improve prescribed fire use. Instead, it will only serve to reinforce the already existing risk aversion of land managers, leading to inaction and further increases in our risk from wildfire.
Prescribed fire escape is extremely rare, and abandoning its use as a tool to restore forest resiliency because of an escaped fire would be akin to abandoning medical interventions because sometimes doctors make mistakes.
We face a wildfire problem fueled by fire suppression and climate change. The fire season is lengthening as winter shortens. Fires are burning hotter and moving faster as our winter snowpack decreases. Fire suppression crews used to make considerable progress on containing fires at night because they slowed and became less active due to lower temperature and higher relative humidity; this often is no longer the case.
Some wildfires are burning as actively at night as they do during the day. Even seasoned wildland fire professionals and research scientists, like us, have been surprised by how quickly wildfire behavior has changed. We are all in this together because we live, recreate and are sustained by these fire-prone forest watersheds.
Maintaining New Mexico’s forests requires restoring fire, which will help make our forests resilient to climate change. We need to acknowledge and accept that fire managers working to restore our forests and decrease wildfire risk are doing so on our behalf within many constraints to address a substantial problem that we have collectively created.
When a prescribed fire escapes, learning is essential — we should be patient and let a thorough review determine any avoidable errors or needed changes to our decision systems. We need to carefully choose the times and places to use fire, as well as know when and where not to burn.
In any case, it is clear we need all available tools to restore forest resilience and protect communities in the face of climate change, including the judicious use of fire.
Matthew Hurteau is a professor, Department of Biology, University of New Mexico; Tom Swetnam, a regents professor emeritus, University of Arizona; and Craig Allen, adjunct professor, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of New Mexico.