By Tyler Linnebur | ConservAmerica
On Tuesday, July 30, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis declared disaster emergencies for multiple wildfires and activated the state emergency operations plan. These major fires, fueled by extreme heat and dry conditions, are raging across thousands of acres near Loveland, Lyons, and Jefferson County. Tragically, at least one person has died, and multiple homes have been destroyed.
This devastating scenario has become increasingly common in recent years because of drought, poor forest management\ and ineffective environmental policies. Massive fires cause extensive property damage, force evacuations and degrade air quality. The ecological toll is significant, destroying wildlife habitats and damaging watersheds. Several factors contribute to the severity of these wildfires, including increased drought, extended fire seasons, unhealthy forests vulnerable to insects and disease, and fuel build-up from decades of fire suppression.
One such ineffective public policy is the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which has significantly hindered forest management by causing delays and complications in related projects. NEPA mandates extensive reviews for forest restoration projects, which can extend timelines by several years because of the need for Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) and Environmental Assessments (EA). These reviews are time-consuming and resource-intensive, often resulting in significant delays.
Additionally, NEPA litigation is common, with many projects facing legal challenges that can indefinitely delay progress. A study by the Breakthrough Institute shows that land management projects, especially forest management, were the most common subjects of NEPA litigation, representing nearly 40% of NEPA cases that reached circuit courts between 2013 and 2022. The mere threat of litigation exacerbates bureaucratic challenges, as the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) spends excessive time “litigation proofing” projects. Despite NEPA’s goals of ensuring environmental consideration and public involvement, the process frequently stalls critical forest restoration efforts.
To effectively mitigate wildfire risks, it is crucial to streamline environmental reviews and support legislation for efficient forest management. Additionally, increasing private sector investment in conservation finance, nature-based solutions, and utilizing carbon markets for financial incentives in forest conservation and restoration will help protect our forests and communities from future wildfires. The Forest Service faces an 80-million-acre backlog in forest restoration, leading to potential catastrophic wildfires due to management delays.
Recent legislation, such as the Resilient Federal Forests Act and the Expediting Forest Restoration and Recovery Act, aims to expedite restoration efforts. Active management techniques, including tree thinning, clearing underbrush, and prescribed burns, are essential to reduce fuel loads and prevent wildfires. The Resilient Federal Forests Act provides categorical exclusions to speed up maintenance and reduce litigation risks, while the Expediting Forest Restoration and Recovery Act accelerates treatment and allows state collaboration for restoration.
In light of the current wildfire emergencies in Colorado, it is imperative to remember the severe impact these fires have had on our state. The tragic loss of life, destruction of homes, and ecological damage underscore the urgent need for effective solutions. As we confront these challenges, it is crucial to advocate for streamlined forest management practices, support legislative measures like the Resilient Federal Forests Act, and encourage private sector investment in conservation. By implementing these strategies, we can better protect our forests, homes and communities from the devastating effects of wildfires, ensuring a safer and more resilient Colorado for future generations.
Tyler Linnebur is a fellow at ConservAmerica and is based in Denver, Colorado. He is an accountant passionate about the environment and a prosperous economy.
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.