Local emergency!

On June 2, the Boundary County commissioners declared a “local emergency.” They are concerned, they say, about “an imminent threat to public safety, property, and local emergency response capacity” related to “the growing risk of catastrophic wildfire” (though not concerned enough, it seems, to ban one of the biggest wildfire hazards: private-use fireworks in summer).

It’s true—climate change has increased wildfire risk in Northwest forests. The fires that destroyed Paradise (California, 2018), Detroit (Oregon, 2020), and Lytton (British Columbia, 2021) were unstoppable because they moved so fast—the result of high temperatures, low humidity, and, most important, very strong winds in a drought-stricken landscape.

The county commissioners, though, say the “emergency” is due to “the lack of fuels mitigation on federally managed lands.” In other words…our national forests have too many trees!

This odd messaging comes from forest products (paper and lumber) corporations. For decades, they have warned of “sick forests” and prescribed “fuel reduction.” Large-scale logging, they insist, is necessary to “thin” national forests and, thereby, prevent intense fires that threaten public safety. The danger is so imminent, supposedly, that the Forest Service must bypass environmental laws, impact analyses, and public comment periods—never mind that national forest logging already costs the U.S. government (i.e., taxpayers) almost $2 billion annually.

Forest products corporations are major players in U.S. “pay-to-play” politics. They spend, collectively, $15 million a year on lobbying lawmakers. In the 2023-24 election cycle, they gave over $2 million to candidates.

The legal bribery is really paying off this year. The U.S. House passed, and the Senate is considering, the Fix Our Forests Act. President Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production.” The Agriculture Secretary contrived an “Emergency Situation” for 67 million acres of national forest and ordered the Forest Service to “streamline…all processes related to timber production.” Governor Little directed the Idaho Department of Lands to work with the Forest Service to “mitigate the risk of catastrophic wildfires and increase timber harvest.”

The commissioners—veterans of the timber industry—echo these “emergency” warnings (and, reportedly, are trying to bypass Endangered Species protections) because logging is a traditional way of earning a living in north Idaho, and because increased logging means more money for schools, roads, and other county expenses. A federal program of fixed annual payouts to national forest counties has expired, and the Senate recently approved only a one-year extension (House approval pending). Without that program, Boundary County’s federal payout will be 25 percent of Forest Service timber sales. Because the Idaho legislature consistently underfunds public schools, increased commercial logging has obvious appeal—in the short term.

Research by hundreds of academic scientists refutes the corporations’ self-serving claims. For example, a 2016 study of 1,500 fires in pine and mixed-conifer forests found that “fuel mitigation” actually led to more severe fires. How can this be?

An intact forest creates shade and retains moisture. By comparison, the ground in a logged forest is hotter and drier due to sun exposure. Logged ground is typically covered in “masticated” wood and other hot-burning “fine fuels,” including invasive weeds. Take a drive into the foothills and see for yourself.

Also, an intact forest acts as a windbreak; winds carry burning embers farther and faster through a logged area. That’s why decades of logging, including “hazardous fuels reduction” projects, didn’t protect Paradise. Embers blew in from miles away, jumped fuel breaks, and set houses ablaze.

An expert on wildfire and structure damage has found that “fuel is one of the least important factors in protecting a home.” The most critical factor is if your house and neighboring houses are ember-proof. Mass deaths (e.g., 86 killed in Paradise, 102 killed in Lahaina, Hawaii, 2023) result due to a combination of flying embers, highly flammable houses in dense neighborhoods, and insufficient evacuation routes.

Unfortunately, Boundary County really does face a crisis. Without an unprecedented global reduction in carbon emissions, the current climate trends in north Idaho will worsen. Soil moisture will continue to decline due to significantly warmer temperatures, drier summers, and less snowpack. One scientific model predicts that Boundary County in 2090 will resemble northern Nevada today—foothills covered in grasses, far fewer Douglas fir trees, possibly no Western larch.

The current Agriculture Department plan to log tens of millions of acres is a plan to accelerate climate change. Mature forests accumulate carbon and keep it out of the atmosphere. In the USA, forests currently absorb 12 percent of annual carbon emissions. By reducing this “carbon sink,” commercial logging increases carbon in the atmosphere, which means even hotter average temperatures.

To summarize: The “solution” to the fire danger “emergency” contributes to increased fire danger!

Try this thought experiment: Imagine that you want to keep Boundary County fiscally sound, and you want to protect homes from wildfires, and you think the well-being of future generations is more important than the current profits of multinational corporations, and you take climate science seriously. To balance these concerns, new ideas may be required. Any suggestions?

Here are a few things local residents could try:

1. With representatives from other rural communities, demand that the federal government pay county governments to preserve intact forests to reduce global heating. Call it a carbon storage fee. Call if Forest Funds for Our Children’s Future. Call it national security. (This will be more reliable than annual timber revenue, as high interest rates, economic uncertainty, and increased poverty suppress demand for lumber.)
2. Seek out state and federal grants to ember-proof every structure in the county. If U.S. taxpayers can afford to subsidize the wealthy owners of the forest products industry, they can afford to protect towns from fiery devastation. Hire local residents to do the retrofitting. Write (and enforce) strict ember-proofing requirements for future construction.
3. Develop fire-proof homes. See, for example, Super Adobe, which uses sand, not wood. Become the industry leader in the inland Northwest.

With dynamic leadership, creative thinking, and popular civic engagement, Boundary County could become a model for climate-change mitigation. That, rather than brown hills and dry creek beds, might be a legacy worth leaving to one’s great-grandchildren.

Timothy Braatz
Bonners Ferry