Tallying the Costs of MT Fires

Nemont

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2003
Messages
4,396
Location
Glasgow, Montana
May 23, 2004

Last modified May 23, 2004 - 3:27 am


Money is no object when wildfires burn
By JENNIFER McKEE
Gazette State Bureau
and EVE BYRON
Helena Independent Record

Wildfires burned more than 250,000 acres in Montana last year. In just three months, the state’s share of the firefighting bill was more than $73 million, with federal agencies incurring the rest of the cost.

That is enough money to run the state’s six public and private prisons, as well as the state’s five prerelease centers for an entire year. But unlike the Department of Corrections, which keeps track of expenses right down to the last aspirin, no one at the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation knows exactly where the money went.

Reporters Jennifer McKee of the Gazette State Bureau and Eye Byron of the Helena Independent Record analyzed thousands of DNRC firefighting invoices that were paid between July and November 2003 and totaled about $30 million.
30-fire-expenses.jpg


Here’s some of what they found: The state paid about $20 million to rent engines and other equipment when it would have been cheaper to buy them. Out-of-state companies took home roughly $10,000 a day to bring in firefighters while thousands in Montana were unemployed. In one month alone, temporary tent offices cost the state $200,000.

All this was paid for with money the DNRC didn’t have.

Wade Campbell made just under $10,000 in one month last summer working forest fires. Some days he hauled a heavy pack and chain saw up and down mountains, felling trees or cutting through snags as part of his exhausting duties.
30-fire-expenses2.jpg

But other days Campbell and the crew played horseshoes and watched movies, getting paid to be ready just in case a fire started.

Every night the whole gang drove into town and went out to eat on the government dime.

"We did everything we could to stay busy," he said, "but there were definitely slow times."

Campbell's $10,000 is one small line in Montana's $73 million bill for the fires of 2003. It's a bill that includes $86,000 to a California company to wash, dry and fold firefighter clothes, $2,200 for company workers to drive home after 18 days on the job, or up to $35 an hour to hire one out-of-state firefighter, even as close to 20,000 Montanans were unemployed.

It's a bill that includes more than $5.8 million to rent wildfire engines at least 607 times from private contractors when the state, which maintains just 65 such engines statewide, could have purchased a fleet for the same price.

An analysis of fire spending reveals a system of fighting and paying for wildfires that seems cobbled together by a mixture of science and historical practices. With its limited fleet and firefighters who are tasked with initial attack, then pulled off fires after 24 hours, the state seems ill-prepared to battle major blazes.

To make up for this, the state spent more than $25 million leasing equipment and personnel at the height of the West's fire season, paying crisis prices for everything from water trucks to swamp coolers.

The state allocates no money for firefighting, even though Montana incurred an average $24 million bill each year for the last seven years battling wildfire. And no one at the top can say precisely where the money went, least of all the lawmakers who sign the state's checks and routinely approve after-the-fact spending.

Where the money went

Montana's Department of Natural Resources and Conservation - the arm of state government responsible for firefighting - owns 65 fire engines, five helicopters and three planes. It employs about 175 full- and part-time employees, and draws on hundreds of volunteer firefighters throughout the state to provide initial attack on small fires on around 5 million acres. The goal, DNRC chief Bud Clinch said, is to douse these fires shortly after they ignite and not to concentrate all the state's resources on one big fire. The state's firefighters are generally pulled off fires after 24 hours to be ready for initial attacks elsewhere.

By all accounts, the state's fleet and local volunteer firefighters performed admirably last summer, responding to 575 fires and dousing 96 percent of them before they grew larger than 10 acres. And they're cheap. The whole force cost only about $3.5 million, with bills ranging from $40 to put out the little-known Car on Car fire near Clearwater Junction to $26,000 for the Shoofly fire near Missoula.

It was the fires that got away that bumped Montana's fire bill to more than $70 million in 2003.

The state doesn't have the equipment or manpower to fight a large forest fire, Clinch said.

Instead, Montana leases everything imaginable. The state usually calls in federal fire bosses to manage the blaze and hires private contractors listed through a national fire dispatch center to do the work.

A sampling of the going rates includes:

• $1,330 a day to lease a wildland fire engine, plus workers to operate it. One out-of-state contractor made almost $3,000 a day for his. (EBay had an engine for sale in early May for $5,100.) Engines leased without workers go for $798 a day.

• $770 a day to lease a semi-truck flatbed trailer needed to haul a bulldozer. The state pays the contractor $770 every day, even though the flatbed trailers were mostly idle. All told, taxpayers paid more than $838,000 for such trailers.

• $106,000 on hotel rooms for people working fires who, for one reason or another, did not stay at the fire camps.

• $1.14 million to lease water tenders, trucks that bring water to the fire engines and can spray blazes. Some tenders leased by the state were relatively new, but others were as crude as a heavy-duty pickup with a metal tank bolted into the bed. A used water tender can be bought for around $45,000.

• Almost $200,000 to rent wall tents, swamp coolers and lights. A new wall tent can be purchased for $893 - made locally with fire resistant material. Swamp coolers sell for $229 at Wal-Mart.

• $39,000 to a guest ranch for making some 2,600 sack lunches at $15 apiece.

• $32,000 to rent chain saws from tree cutters, who already were paid more than $25 an hour. A new professional-grade chain saw sells for between $550 to $1,400.
:confused: Full Story :confused:

Nemont
 
Screw that! I'm getting into the rent a Firetruck business! Better yet, I'll get into the fireman laundry business!!!

Like Yakof Smirnoff says...."What a country!!!"
 
JohnSWA,
I thought I would go into the Semi truck flat bed trailer rental business. I found a couple in the local paper for $3,500 a piece. Would have them paid for in less then 5 days. Let them sit out on the fire lines for 90 days a summer would gross me $59,400 per unit.

Nemont
 
ok, here is how much money they waste...just working in fire camp, I make about $377 a day Monday through Friday, and $459 per day on the weekend. That is $2803 in one week! Just for sitting around camp and generally only actually working 4 or 5 hours out of the 15 I get paid for. I am sure Elkchsr knows all about the waste of money as well.
 
Here I am finally to wade into this one.. ;)
You guy's have to take into consideration, that the Government isn't allowed to have that much equipment sitting around for long leangths of time. The news media also jumps all over that like flies on sh1t. "Oh My God.... Look at all of this equipment that is just sitting around and not being used, what a waste".
It is cheaper, even at those rates to have it sitting in some one elses yard, they pay insurance on it, they pay payroll to man it when it is on the fires. They pay all the equipment costs.
Yes it may sounds like a ton of money, but if one looks at the logistics of even the "full" cost of some thing like a type 6 engine, think of how much it would actually cost if we had the governments fingers into all of the forementioned equipment costs, it would be phenomanal. They would have to do a ton more hiring. When the fire seasons are good and great, there is lots of money for every one. If the fire seasons crash, which they will sooner or later, because this is nature we are talking about, nothing stay's static, not even rocks. Those years will be lean and the equipment won't be sitting at tax payers expence, it will be at the expence of the individual that owns it.
These "idiots" that are in the news media are only out to make a name for themselves off the backs of any one. It doesn't matter who or what expence.
Here is some thing I think is so very funny-
One of the posters above thinks that any one else sucking off the governments tits should be cut off, because their jobs aren't needed....
Heres where the full blown hypocrocy come in,
In reality that individuals whole existance is based on speeding up what nature would have done any way if just left alone, just so that some people would have an eyesore for less time, and that is an eyesore to only those that fully understand what they are looking at. Otherwise that particular job and all of it's trappings isn't really needed at all, it is a total extravagance that the tax payers are paying full bore for and getting in reality nothing in return...
At least by putting these fires out, it is taking huge sums of tax dollars proportionally, from the coasts that have the most amount people and re-infusing large areas of the West with moneys that have been robbed by other losses i.e. timber/mining/agricultural by their insessent need to dictate what should go on. It is only fair turn about in my book.... ;)
 
It is a bothersome situation. I have proposed that Federal, state, and local governments pool and cache' seldom used gear in regional areas kind of like the GSA is doing with government vehicle POV pools. Economically smart. With respect to the firefighters though; remember these guys don't always work a straight 40 hour week for which they are paid a continuing salary.
There are periods of "no pay at all" and even firefighters, smoke eaters, etc. need to eat. In the meanwhile there are some good bucks to be had for you young, full of P&V bucks who want to build a little nest egg or bankroll a special project. :D
 
Yep..
That's exactly right.
If we want to do this, and the Government doesn't want to expend the money to keep a force on line and paid, they have to go to the volonteers. But since we as volonteers have to keep up our training on our own dollar for the most part, and also maintain a crew at the ready level but not get paid until we go out, then we must be compensated some where for the massive amount of time that is expected to be ready.
It is funny that all of these people throwing stones already have theres, and if any one else try's to make a living, they jump up and down throwing stones with out knowing the full story. I suppose others are out there as glory hounds looking at stomping on others backs to make a name on themselves...
So gunner, what tit do you suck on to be able to do what you do?
Or are you so afraid of others jumping to conclusions and pelting you with stones because you are a maggot sucking the system dry also, one shouldn't throw stones in a glass house should they... ;)
 
Elkchser,
I am not trying to pick on you here but could you drill down a little more on what you are saying. I have read this a couple of times and still wondering what exactly you are saying. What eyesore are you talking about and why is it an eyesore to "only those who fully understand what they are looking at ?" I don't understand.
Heres where the full blown hypocrocy come in,
In reality that individuals whole existance is based on speeding up what nature would have done any way if just left alone, just so that some people would have an eyesore for less time, and that is an eyesore to only those that fully understand what they are looking at. Otherwise that particular job and all of it's trappings isn't really needed at all, it is a total extravagance that the tax payers are paying full bore for and getting in reality nothing in return...
At least by putting these fires out, it is taking huge sums of tax dollars proportionally, from the coasts that have the most amount people and re-infusing large areas of the West with moneys that have been robbed by other losses i.e. timber/mining/agricultural by their insessent need to dictate what should go on. It is only fair turn about in my book
Nemont
 
I agree, letting it burn is the way to go. As for all the houses that burn up along with the forests, that's why homeowners have insurance.

What I would like to see is all that money being spent on controlled burns in the Spring, when the weather is cooler and wetter.
 
Nemont
Eyesore means just what it implies, if you look at some thing and don't like it, then it is an eyesore. Some look out at a well eaten field and see some thing on the kin of a park, if you know and understand what you are looking at, it isn't a park at all, it isn't even healthy, it has been overgrazed. Now I can take you to a number of places I am guessing have been over grazed in the past, and are now left fallow. It really all boils down to the eye of the beholder thing...

:rolleyes: gunner :rolleyes:
 
Gastro Gnome - Eat Better Wherever

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,603
Messages
2,026,465
Members
36,243
Latest member
asgmiami1
Back
Top