Lawsuit around the use of aerial fire retardants could change US forest firefighting
感谢您选择 Automatic Translation。目前,我们提供从英语到法语和德语的翻译,不久的将来还会增加更多翻译语言。请注意,这些翻译是由第三方人工智能软件服务生成的。虽然我们发现这些翻译大部分都是正确的,但并非每种情况下都完美无缺。为确保您阅读的信息正确无误,请参考英文原文。如果您发现翻译中有错误,希望引起我们的注意,请告诉我们,这将对我们大有帮助。我们一旦发现任何文字或章节有误,都会及时更正。如有任何翻译错误,请及时与我们的网站管理员联系。
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