Lawsuit around the use of aerial fire retardants could change US forest firefighting
Thank you for choosing Automatic Translation. Currently we are offering translations from English into French and German, with more translation languages to be added in the near future. Please be aware that these translations are generated by a third party AI software service. While we have found that the translations are mostly correct, they may not be perfect in every case. To ensure the information you read is correct, please refer to the original article in English. If you find an error in a translation which you would like to bring to our attention, it would help us greatly if you let us know. We can correct any text or section, once we are aware of it. Please do not hesitate to contact our webmaster to let us know of any translation errors.
A lawsuit filed in Montana by the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, a group headed by Andy Stahl, is looking to stop the US Forest Service from dropping fire retardant into water, an act they claim is polluting rivers and streams.
According to the Los Angeles Times, a federal lawsuit in the state of Montana seeks to stop the U.S. Forest Service from dropping retardant into water could reshape how the agency battles wildfires throughout the western United States.
The case is being watched particularly closely by officials in California, where an extremely wet winter is likely to stoke the growth of so-called connecting fuels — grasses that can carry small flames from a spark on a roadway to chaparral and forested areas.
The lawsuit, filed by the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, of which Andy Stahl is executive director, accuses the Forest Service of violating the Clean Water Act, which prohibits the discharge of pollutants into U.S. waters without a permit.
“There’s no scientific evidence that it makes any difference in wildfire outcomes,” said forester Andy Stahl. “This is like dumping cash out of airplanes, except that it’s toxic and you can’t buy anything with it because it doesn’t work.”
While retardant is meant to coat vegetation to slow and lessen the spread of fires, the ammonium phosphate-based chemical is harmful to aquatic life. As a result of active fire seasons, more retardant is being used than ever before. In 2021, 52.8 million gallons of retardant were dumped on federal, state and private land, compared with a 10-year average of about 39 million gallons per year.
Forest advocates claim that wildfire retardant additives are expensive, ineffective, and harmful to the environment, while officials argue that halting the use of retardant would deprive firefighters of a crucial tool in battling forest fires. A coalition of interest groups and communities, including Paradise, Butte, and Plumas counties in California, as well as the timber, firefighting, and agriculture industries, have petitioned to intervene in the case.
Photo Credit: A MAFFS-equipped Air National Guard C-130 Hercules drops fire retardant on wildfires in Southern California. Public Domain photograpph by By U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Daryl McKamey - http://www.af.mil; VIRIN: 050729-F-0000S-106, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=263091