Category: Blog Posts on Fire

Our final recommendations and wrapping up our argument

• Severe wildfires are a growing risk amongst our federal lands and the risk is passed to those enlisted to fight them. 
• People under the title of Forestry Technician are often doing the job of wildland firefighter pointing to a source of confusion 
• Policy should look to 
  • Change or reclassify the existing job to better reflect the hazards, demands, risks, and to better compensate for those. 
  • Aim to promote longer hiring periods 
  • Increase managers’ ability to use preventative measures like prescribed burns and thinning
  • Done in tandem with reinforcing the role of local units in fire response

Why go with these policy recommendations?

• The existing policy would be more expensive in the long run as fire resources are needed at higher rates 
• Regionality would create unnecessary jobs 
  • But regional demand can be reflected in availability  and pay 
  • Resources can be shared i.e. between National Forests 
• Shifting away from federal firefighting response may be risky 
  • But stakeholders can take a larger role in the prevention and suppression of local areas

Resistance to policy change will likely be felt in terms of budgets and expenses, commitment, liability and responsibility, the grit for what it will take to institute the change, and possible political and social pressure. Most agree that we can and should do a better job taking care of our wildland firefighters.

Those arguing against policy shifts like those above claim that actions would increase the cost of firefighting and overall create a financial impact in an attempt to upgrade the entire federal firefighting workforce. There is a cost to modernizing and making improvements, but there is also a cost for doing nothing different, and we would argue that the investment into preservation and promotion of a fire-skilled workforce will cost far less than just continuing with the status quo.

Some others may argue that policy addendums may only be necessary for regions of the Forest Service where wildfire severity is increasing and forest management resources are being pooled and that a series shift should apply to only these regions where job hazard has increased at a faster rate. This could be a valid point, but you could have levels of complexity and different pay scales that accurately reflect these regional differences. While advocating the promotion of fire resources for the purpose of ensuring safety and equity on the fireline, the need for fire suppression is not the sole purpose of expanding resources and duties. Expanding resources just for fire suppression lacks ecological backing, as we know fire suppression is one small component to protect and restore our landscapes.

The expansion of the year-round workforce promotes better land management in the long run, providing work capacity with depth, knowledge, contributing to a robust and consistent workforce. Fire and Natural Resources are interdependent, so we should be creating a workforce that is trained and well-versed in each if we are to best manage our landscapes.

Those who oppose the policy recommendations may not like the shift becoming more focused on non-federal resources, which may take more of the load as communities seek to expand further into areas of the WUI. Proposed policy changes would strengthen the roles other stakeholders (private landowners, state, county, and/or municipal fire departments) have in fire suppression and land management overall. Some push-back may be encountered as burdens and responsibilities are redistributed.

• Increase the number of Wildland firefighting series as to increase pay/benefits
  • Via reclassifying the FT job series 
• Promote permanent workforce  
  • More experienced position with different duties
  • Holistic land management approach 
  • Larger role in career development
• New agreements between state and federal agencies 
  • Remove bulk of the burden from federal resources on non-jurisdiction
• Clear hierarchy for both state and federal 
  • Increase communication and efficiency

A reclassification from Forestry Technician to Wildland Firefighter Series would cause an increase in pay and improved comprehensive benefits for those in the field. In tandem, this would address a lack of mental and physical health benefits and promote career workers through a retirement plan. 

New policies would seek to rebuild and support a year-round Federal professional and skilled fire-based workforce to work fire suppression when needed. This would be with an increased focus on a more holistic approach to land management to include hazardous fuels reduction, fuel break maintenance, forest restoration, prescribed fire, etc. This would address the gap between technician duties and basic firefighter duties, as technicians will play a larger role in year-round planning, acknowledgment of experience amongst the field. 

Policies should also look to redefine and establish progressive cooperative land management agreements between federal, state, and local entities so that the bulk of the burden to suppress fires that happen off-jurisdiction does not fall on the firefighters. 

Any policy seeking to address this problem should also support and develop skilled workforces (across all levels – federal/local/state) to increase efficiency across diverse land ownerships and WUI environments for more equitable and/or sustainable, proactive land management activities. By clarifying the hierarchy both within the scope of the federal agencies and when cooperating with state agencies both suppression actions and preventive measures, like those mentioned previously, will be more effective.

• Forestry Technicians with the US Forest Service are performing the job of Wildland Firefighter 
• Does job classifications and benefits accurately reflect the demand and duties of Forestry Technicians? 
• Health and safety concerns amidst the growing need for firefighting resources

Currently, the US Forest Service employs “Forestry Technicians”, yet their primary duty is wildland firefighting. It is argued that this is a serious misclassification,  due to exponential levels of physical and mental stress, exposure to significant hazards in the wildfire environment, in addition to staggering discrepancies in pay and comprehensive benefits, in comparison to other agencies who employ Firefighters. The demand for an elite firefighting workforce is greater than ever before, yet it is in danger of collapse. The sustainability and longevity of the Forestry Technician job series are just as threatened as the western wildland landscapes themselves.