Watchwords from the West: proposals from a recent Western Governors Association Forest Health Summit merit consideration. (Editorial).

With the 2003 wildfire season heating up in the West and Congress debating major legislation on forest health and wild fire, a recent Forest Health Summit convened by the Western Governors Association (WGA) merits particular attention. A diverse mix of nearly 400 people discussed ways to improve forest health and address wildfire risks through locally driven efforts.

The 25 recommendations presented to the WGA provide thoughtful fodder for the current debate in Congress. The WGA has played a critical role in encouraging and providing various forums for broad-based discussions about forest health and wildfire. Since the 2000 wildfire season, it has both advocated in Congress for a long-term wildfire strategy and worked with federal and state agencies, tribes, local governments, diverse interest groups, and community-based representatives to develop a collaborative approach for reducing wildland fire risks. Its 10-year comprehensive strategy and its accompanying implementation plan were developed through broadly representative, highly accessible processes.

It's true that all processes have flaws and critics, but WGA's strategy and plan are widely endorsed. That's evident in the fact that all current forest health bills in Congress reference the WGA's work.

WGA's framework builds on the concept of collaboration, recognizing local level efforts as a cornerstone. This approach is consistent with the comments that AMERICAN FORESTS and many of our community-based partners have given Congress and federal agencies. A number of the recommendations coming out of the Forest Health Summit emphasized the need for collaboration and an open, inclusive process. Under hazardous fuels reduction, for example, recommendations called for multiparty monitoring that includes mechanisms for adaptive management and information sharing, a collaborative process to achieve consensus on ranking fuels-reduction projects, and the means to work collaboratively to plan and implement fuels-reduction projects in communities around forests.

Other Summit recommendations urged WGA to create inclusive statewide and local forest health councils and establish an advisory committee for "best practices" for collaboration and fire management. Another key recommendation--identical to one advocated by AMERICAN FORESTS--requested WGA and the Administration to seek more funding for community assistance. This would allow communities to build capacity to be good long-term partners.

At the Summit, Montana Governor Judy Martz, the current WGA chair, noted that the WGA had sent a letter to the Senate that represents a consensus among the Western Governors on many of the difficult and contentious issues the Senate will soon be discussing." Unfortunately, not all the legislative proposals currently before Congress capture this collaborative spirit. Admittedly it is difficult to develop policy that calls for collaboration. Many agree that such language needs to provide guidance and incentives for innovative collaborative efforts that are based on local situations, rather than blanket requirements and prescriptions for doing so.

However, if a culture of collaboration is to be achieved, it will take significant and consistent long-term attention and support. The current debate in Congress needs to acknowledge the long-term commitment required and build upon lessons learned from existing collaborative projects. We hope these recommendations from the WGA Summit are given serious consideration as Congress moves forward on forest health and wildfire issues.