My name is Jim Hubbard and I am the State Forester of Colorado. I am here today representing the Western Governors’ Association (WGA) which is an independent, non-partisan organization of governors from 18 western states, two Pacific-flag territories and one commonwealth.

The long-term stewardship and sustainability of our natural resources and communities is of utmost importance to the membership of the WGA. As many western states witnessed during the 2000 fire season, catastrophic wildland fire poses a significant threat to both of these priorities. On behalf of WGA Chairman Dirk Kempthorne of Idaho and his fellow Lead Governor on this issue John Kitzhaber of Oregon, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Committee, and indeed the entire Congress, for heeding the Governors’ request for additional funding and prioritization of the wildland fire issue and for focusing attention on the long-term challenge of restoring our forests and rangelands to a more resilient condition.

As the extraordinary scale of the 2000 fire season became apparent, particularly in the Interior West, many Western Governors felt compelled to become more intimately involved with the recovery and response efforts being mounted by the Federal land management agencies. The Governors met face-to-face with the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior in September 2000 and emphasized that their priorities for both short and long term wildfire response are as follows:

The Governors and Secretaries left the gathering in full agreement that an active state-federal partnership would be necessary to effectively address the immediate wildfire recovery needs of the nation as well as the long-term restoration and maintenance needs of our fire-adapted forest and rangeland ecosystems. The group further agreed that local communities must play a more integral role in designing and carrying out these activities on the ground.

State governments share responsibility with their federal counterparts for the administration of many resources and public services within their boundaries. This cooperative, intergovernmental partnership is particularly crucial in providing for safe and effective response to wildland fire, especially in the wildland-urban interface where initial attack forces may be provided by volunteer, local, county, state or federal firefighters regardless of on whose land the fire started.

The Governors insisted on full state involvement in all levels of wildland fire response, including rehabilitation and hazardous fuels mitigation, because they recognized that states bring to the table valuable resources such as established networks with local governments and communities, knowledge of statewide land management priorities and access to local workers and industries. If states are closely involved in wildland fire preparedness, mitigation and response activities, they can help coordinate the efforts of diverse federal land management agencies operating within their state, ensure that opportunities for interagency collaboration are identified, and improve the understanding and support of local residents for priority land management actions.

Congress acknowledged the importance of these intergovernmental relationships in the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations Bill (PL 106-291) and accompanying Conference report. In several instances, the managers directed the USDA Forest Service and Department of Interior agencies "to work closely with States and local communities to maximize benefits" to those entities. Managers further directed the agencies to "seek the advice of governors, and local and tribal government representatives in setting priorities for fuels treatments, burned area rehabilitation, and public outreach and education."

Clearly it was, and continues to be, the expectation of Congress that the federal land management agencies would incorporate state and local representatives into all levels of their wildland fire activities. These enhanced levels of state-federal partnership are, in fact, beginning to develop in many western states as federal agencies are faced with the task of identifying projects and allocating increased levels of funding according to both Congressional and Administrative direction.

Under the leadership of Gov. Jim Geringer, Wyoming led the way in establishing an interagency state-federal team to coordinate implementation of the National Fire Plan within their state. Arizona and New Mexico have formed a similar group on a regional basis, as have Oregon and Washington. My state of Colorado has convened an interagency coordination team that we hope will improve our collective land management efforts by identifying areas of mutual importance where we can effectively focus our efforts and funding. I am sure that any of these states would be willing to help others interested in forming similar interagency groups.

It is important to note that each of these partnerships has been strengthened by the availability of increased funding to state and community assistance programs. These additional dollars for cooperative fuels reduction on non-federal lands, for training and equipping of local fire departments, and for assistance to communities impacted by wildland fire greatly increase the ability of non-federal entities to participate fully in large-scale project planning and prioritization.

The kind of intergovernmental collaboration now occurring could have happened previously but, for the most part, did not. Specific direction from Congress combined with increased funding for state and private fuels management and wildfire preparedness activities have given both sides the impetus to work together. I encourage you, on behalf of the Governors, to continue to provide both of these motivational elements – funding and direction – with the hope that this kind of cooperation will eventually become our standard way of doing business.

Cross-Boundary Landscape Scale Action

Anyone who has spent much time walking across a Western landscape will realize that natural forces such as insects, disease, fire, invasive weeds and flooding do not generally abide by fencelines or other jurisdictional boundaries. We must maintain this same boundary-less mindset in our efforts to rehabilitate burned areas, mitigate future fire hazards or restore watersheds to a more resilient condition.

The need to work across boundaries is important in the wildland-urban interface which is, by definition, a landscape characterized by multiple private ownerships and dispersed structures surrounded by wildland which could be under local, state or federal jurisdiction, or a combination thereof. While individual homeowners can reduce their risk from wildfire by using fire-resistant building materials and clearing defensible space around homes and structures, it takes several landowners working together across a landscape or watershed to truly impact fire behavior and improve the ability of firefighters to protect residents’ lives and homes.

Cross-boundary project planning and implementation is also important beyond the interface zone in fire-adapted ecosystems where actions are aimed at restoring natural fire cycles, protecting municipal and priority watersheds, reducing susceptibility to insect invasions or enhancing fish and wildlife habitat. All of these goals will be more effectively accomplished if land managers coordinate their efforts and improve forest and rangeland condition on a more functional landscape scale.

Both Congress and the Administration can facilitate this boundary-less concept by prioritizing federal fuels funding on projects that involve multiple landowners and/or can be implemented on a landscape scale so as to maximize positive results on-the-ground. These efforts will be further strengthened by allowing and encouraging the expenditure of federal funds across non-federal boundaries when that expenditure makes sense on a landscape or watershed scale. The continued availability of focused incentives for private landowners to participate in large-scale hazard reduction or ecosystem restoration projects will make the cross-boundary puzzle complete.

Following their meeting with the Secretaries, the Western Governors took their message and priorities to Congress, with particular emphasis on the need for a long-term, strategic response to wildland fire response rather than a one year influx of funds.

Many of us are now familiar with the General Accounting Office’s (GAO) estimate of 39 million acres of forestland in the interior West at high risk of catastrophic wildfire. What often gets lost is the realization that this number does not take into consideration the condition of federal lands not under Forest Service management, state and locally owned lands, private lands, or that vast majority of lands outside the interior West.

Clearly, the condition of fire-adapted ecosystems – and the related risks to lives, property and natural resources – is an issue of national proportions and significance. It is a situation that developed over more than one hundred years and it will take a multi-year investment of time, money and people to address.

The Interior Appropriations Committee members echoed the Governors’ sentiments in the Conference Report by stating, "the managers strongly believe this FY 2001 funding will only be of value…if it is sustained in future years." The managers further strengthened this declaration by directing the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to "work with the Governors on a long-term strategy to deal with the wildland fire and hazardous fuels situation, as well as needs for habitat restoration and rehabilitation."

The Western Governors and their staff have taken the lead in bringing this direction, and their own stated priorities, to fruition by serving as the catalyst for the development of an intergovernmental strategic plan aimed at restoring health to fire-adapted ecosystems across the nation.

The drafting team for this ambitious plan is national in scope and includes representatives from federal, state and local government, non-governmental and environmental organizations, ranching and grazing interests, the timber industry, and community forestry groups, to name a few of the stakeholders involved. The draft document that is currently being circulated for comments outlines a ten-year strategy focused on achieving the following goals:

In addition to these goals, the final strategy will include indicators for success that can be tracked through monitoring and adaptive management. Progress will be guided by yearly performance goals, objectives, budget estimates for land ownerships and state participation, and time lines that facilitate implementation of the strategy within a ten year time frame.

The draft document also calls for reviews of contracting procedures and agreements, liability issues, National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act processes and other procedures for opportunities to improve their effectiveness and efficiency in meeting the goals of the Strategy.

All activities carried out under this strategy will be based on and promote the development of the best available science (peer-reviewed science where available). Comprehensive, scientific analyses and assessments will be used to help identify at-risk watersheds and the appropriate treatments and level of activity. These practices are also useful for strategically focusing scarce human and financial resources.

Once finalized, this strategy will help facilitate the achievement of both the Congress’s and the Governors’ priorities by serving as a blueprint for intergovernmental and multi-stakeholder action at the national, state or regional, and local levels.

As the Governors have frequently pointed out, this represents a significant shift in the way we traditionally allocate public funds in response to wildland fire. Rather than seeking significant emergency supplemental appropriations to "clean up" after fires, we should be investing dollars up-front in restoring the health of our forest and rangeland ecosystems.

Before concluding, I would like to re-emphasize the importance of reducing the risk to lives and vital community resources in the wildland-urban interface. As we begin implementing projects and carrying out activities in response to the recent fire season, addressing the interface challenge must be among our top priorities.

The USDA Forest Service and the Department of Interior agencies have each produced documents outlining their priorities and actions in conjunction with the National Fire Plan. Congress established additional direction and goals through Appropriations language. The states have expressed their priorities through communication with the Secretaries and Congress, interstate resolutions, and the draft ten-year strategy. Each of these documents and expressions of intent acknowledges the critical importance of reducing risk and improving protection capability in the interface.

One way that Congress conveyed this message was by dedicating $240 million in federal hazardous fuels dollars to "projects within the wildland-urban interface on federal lands or adjacent non-federal lands." Congress complemented this funding with $50 million in State Fire Assistance for cooperative state and private efforts. The states are focusing this funding through a competitive grant program for private land incentives, hazardous fuel reduction, and public outreach and education.

Appropriations Committee members also highlighted the importance of addressing the interface by directing the federal agencies to work with the states and tribes to develop and jointly publish in the Federal Register a "list of all urban wildland interface communities…within the vicinity of federal lands and at high risk from wildfire."

The initial version of this list, published in December 2000, was developed under a very short timeline without an adequate level of consistency from state to state. A team of federal and state representatives has since developed a standard set of definitions and criteria and outlined a revision process that will be used nationwide by interagency state-level teams to refine the original community lists.

Although difficult, the development of these lists has served to connect state, federal, and, often local land managers and has furthered conversation and information exchange on the status of the interface across the nation. The revision of these lists will necessarily be an ongoing process as the needs of various communities are addressed, but the version provided for the May 1, 2001 publication should provide a meaningful display of the enormity of the problem facing us and should also serve to highlight those areas where we can most effectively work together.

Finally, Congress underscored the importance of safe and effective initial attack in the interface by providing nearly $20 million in additional funds for assistance to local and volunteer fire departments. According to the conference committee, "effective management of fire related issues in the wildland urban interface requires strong commitment and resources from state, tribal and local government. Fire readiness capability must be on an equal par between state, local and federal organizations."

The Western Governors’ vision for successful response to the 2000 fire season revolves around full state involvement, implementation of land management projects across boundaries on a landscape scale, and the development and funding of a long-term strategy for the restoration of fire adapted ecosystems.

The partnerships necessary to implement this vision are beginning to form, state by state, as disparate field personnel work to realize the common goals laid out for them by Congress and by their own agency leadership. In Colorado, we are further refining this vision by concentrating our initial efforts on reducing risks in the wildland-urban interface. By focusing our planning and activities on an issue of relative common ground, we hope to build trust among our partners and constituents. We hope to build support for the more complex actions we will need to carry out in the long term.

But the success of Colorado’s efforts, like those of every other state, will depend on the sustained commitment of both Congress and the Administration to provide the necessary long-term funding and program direction. The WGA has met with Secretaries Norton and Veneman and expressed their belief that the level of funding needed for the land management agencies in FY 2002 and beyond to implement the ten-year strategy will be consistent with funding received for FY 2001.

The devastation of the 2000 fire season has resulted in the emergence of several opportunities that hold promise for helping land managers and interested stakeholders find and implement mutually agreeable solutions to the wildland fire and ecosystem restoration challenge. Focused and consistent leadership from both Congress and agency administrators will enable us realize this promise.