    Wildland Fire Management: Update on Federal Agency Efforts to
    Develop a Cohesive Strategy to Address Wildland Fire Threats
    (01-MAY-06, GAO-06-671R).

    The wildland fire problems facing our nation continue to grow.
    The number of acres burned by wildland fires annually from 2000
    to 2005 was 70 percent greater than the average burned annually
    during the 1990s, while appropriations for the federal
    government's wildland fire management activities tripled from
    about $1 billion in fiscal year 1999 to nearly $3 billion in
    fiscal year 2005. Experts believe that catastrophic damage from
    wildland fire probably will continue to increase until an
    adequate long-term federal response, coordinated with others, is
    implemented and has had time to take effect. In the past 7 years,
    the federal government has made important progress in putting
    into place basic components of a framework for managing and
    responding to the nation's wildland fire problems. Many
    challenges lie ahead, however, if the federal agencies having
    primary responsibility for managing wildland fire issues--the
    Forest Service within the Department of Agriculture and the
    Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Bureau of Land Management (BLM),
    Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and National Park Service (NPS)
    within the Department of the Interior--are to address the
    problems in a timely and effective manner. Most notably, as we
    reported in January 2005, the agencies need to develop a cohesive
    strategy that identifies the available long-term options and
    related funding requirements for reducing excess vegetation that
    could fuel wildland fires and for responding to wildland fires
    when they occur. The agencies and the Congress need such a
    strategy in order to make informed decisions about an effective
    and affordable long-term approach for addressing problems that
    have been decades in the making and will take decades more to
    resolve. In our January 2005 report, recognizing that the
    development of a cohesive strategy that includes long-term
    options and funding was itself a long-term effort, we recommended
    that the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior provide the
    Congress with a joint tactical plan outlining the critical steps
    the agencies planned to take, together with related time frames,
    to complete such a cohesive strategy. In responding to that
    report, officials from Agriculture and Interior said they would
    produce an initial tactical plan by August 2005. Our prior work
    also identified several tasks, each with its own challenges, that
    the agencies must complete prior to implementing such a strategy,
    including finishing data systems needed to identify the extent,
    severity, and location of wildland fire threats to the nation's
    communities and ecosystems; updating local fire management plans
    to better specify the actions needed to effectively address these
    threats; and assessing the cost-effectiveness and affordability
    of options for reducing fuels. In this context, Congress asked us
    to provide information on (1) the progress that the Departments
    of Agriculture and the Interior have made over the past year in
    developing a tactical plan outlining the steps and time frames
    needed to complete a cohesive strategy for addressing wildland
    fire threats, as we recommended; and (2) the agencies' efforts to
    address the challenges GAO believes they are likely to face as
    they develop this cohesive strategy.
    -------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
    REPORTNUM:   GAO-06-671R
        ACCNO:   A52819
      TITLE:     Wildland Fire Management: Update on Federal Agency
    Efforts to Develop a Cohesive Strategy to Address Wildland Fire
    Threats
         DATE:   05/01/2006
      SUBJECT:   Disaster planning
    	     Disaster recovery
    	     Emergency preparedness
    	     Funds management
    	     Geographic information systems
    	     Interagency relations
    	     Natural disasters
    	     Strategic planning
    	     Wildfires
    	     Wildland fires
    	     Forest Service/Dept. of the Interior
    	     LANDFIRE System

    ******************************************************************
    ** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
    ** GAO Product.                                                 **
    **                                                              **
    ** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
    ** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
    ** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
    **                                                              **
    ** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
    ** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
    ** document's contents.                                         **
    **                                                              **
    ******************************************************************
    GAO-06-671R

         * Number of plans needed
         * Number of plans completed
         * Percentage of needed plans completed
         * Percentage of plans using template
         * Enclosure I
         * Comments from the Forest Service
         * GAO Comments
         * We have modified our draft to include the agency's statement
         * We have modified our matters for congressional consideration
         * Enclosure II
         * Comments from the Department of the Interior
         * GAO Comments
         * In identifying the weaknesses that we found in our previous
         * We have modified our draft to include the department's state
         * We have modified our matters for congressional consideration
         * PDF6-Ordering Information.pdf
              * Order by Mail or Phone

    May 1, 2006

    The Honorable Charles H. Taylor

    Chairman

    The Honorable Norman D. Dicks

    Ranking Minority Member

    Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies

    Committee on Appropriations

    House of Representatives

    Subject: Wildland Fire Management: Update on Federal Agency Efforts to
    Develop a Cohesive Strategy to Address Wildland Fire Threats

    The wildland fire problems facing our nation continue to grow. The number
    of acres burned by wildland fires annually from 2000 to 2005 was 70
    percent greater than the average burned annually during the 1990s, while
    appropriations for the federal government's wildland fire management
    activities tripled from about $1 billion in fiscal year 1999 to nearly $3
    billion in fiscal year 2005. Experts believe that catastrophic damage from
    wildland fire probably will continue to increase until an adequate
    long-term federal response, coordinated with others, is implemented and
    has had time to take effect.

    In the past 7 years, the federal government has made important progress in
    putting into place basic components of a framework for managing and
    responding to the nation's wildland fire problems. Many challenges lie
    ahead, however, if the federal agencies having primary responsibility for
    managing wildland fire issues-the Forest Service within the Department of
    Agriculture and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Bureau of Land
    Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and National Park
    Service (NPS) within the Department of the Interior-are to address the
    problems in a timely and effective manner. Most notably, as we reported in
    January 2005,1 the agencies need to develop a cohesive strategy that
    identifies the available long-term options and related funding
    requirements for reducing excess vegetation that could fuel wildland fires
    and for responding to wildland fires when they occur. The agencies and the
    Congress need such a strategy in order to make informed decisions about an
    effective and affordable long-term approach for addressing problems that
    have been decades in the making and will take decades more to resolve.

    1GAO, Wildland Fire Management: Important Progress Has Been Made, but
    Challenges Remain to Completing a Cohesive Strategy, GAO-05-147
    (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 14, 2005).

    In our January 2005 report, recognizing that the development of a cohesive
    strategy that includes long-term options and funding was itself a
    long-term effort, we recommended that the Secretaries of Agriculture and
    the Interior provide the Congress with a joint tactical plan outlining the
    critical steps the agencies planned to take, together with related time
    frames, to complete such a cohesive strategy. In responding to that
    report, officials from Agriculture and Interior said they would produce an
    initial tactical plan by August 2005.

    Our prior work also identified several tasks, each with its own
    challenges, that the agencies must complete prior to implementing such a
    strategy, including

               o  finishing data systems needed to identify the extent, severity,
               and location of wildland fire threats to the nation's communities
               and ecosystems;

               o  updating local fire management plans to better specify the
               actions needed to effectively address these threats; and

               o  assessing the cost-effectiveness and affordability of options
               for reducing fuels.

    In this context, you asked us to provide information on (1) the progress
    that the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior have made over the
    past year in developing a tactical plan outlining the steps and time
    frames needed to complete a cohesive strategy for addressing wildland fire
    threats, as we recommended; and (2) the agencies' efforts to address the
    challenges GAO believes they are likely to face as they develop this
    cohesive strategy. To obtain this information, we reviewed agency
    documents regarding wildland fire management activities and interviewed
    federal and nonfederal officials knowledgeable about the agencies'
    wildland fire management efforts. We conducted our work in March and April
    2006 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

    Results in Brief

    The agencies have not prepared a tactical plan outlining the critical
    steps and associated time frames for completing a cohesive wildland fire
    management strategy, as we recommended. And while the agencies completed a
    February 2006 interagency document entitled "Protecting People and Natural
    Resources: A Cohesive Fuels Treatment Strategy," this document does not
    identify long-term options and related funding needed for reducing fuels
    and responding to wildland fires when they occur, as we called for. Agency
    officials initially told us that they would not be able to produce such a
    strategy because the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) does not allow
    them to publish long-term cost estimates-thus rendering a tactical plan
    unnecessary. In responding to a draft of this report, the agencies
    commented that OMB does not believe that the agencies will be able to
    produce credible long-term funding estimates until two key data systems to
    help identify wildland fire threats and allocate fire management resources
    are more fully operational. OMB officials stated

    that they will allow the agencies to publish such estimates, but only when
    the agencies have sufficiently reliable data on which to base them.

    The agencies have made progress on the three primary tasks we identified
    as important to developing a wildland fire management strategy, although
    challenges remain.

               o  LANDFIRE, a geospatial data and modeling system, will assist
               the agencies in identifying the extent, severity, and location of
               wildland fire threats to the nation's communities and ecosystems.
               LANDFIRE data are nearly complete for most of the western United
               States, with data for the remainder of the country scheduled to be
               completed in 2009. The agencies will need to ensure that LANDFIRE
               data are kept current in order to reflect landscape-altering
               events such as large fires and hurricanes.

               o  About 95 percent of the agencies' individual land management
               units have completed fire management plans in accordance with
               agency requirements promulgated in 2001. However, the agencies do
               not require regular plan updates to ensure that new data (from
               LANDFIRE, for example) are incorporated into the plans.

               o  The Fire Program Analysis (FPA) system is a computer-based
               model designed to assist the agencies in cost-effectively
               allocating the resources necessary to address wildland fires. The
               first of FPA's two phases is nearly complete, with the second
               phase expected to be completed in 2008. However, gaps in the data
               collected for FPA may reduce its usefulness in allocating
               resources.

    Given the importance of a cohesive strategy for wildland fire management
    that includes long-term options and associated funding requirements, and
    the need to understand how and when the agencies will produce such a
    strategy, the Congress may want to consider requiring the Secretaries of
    Agriculture and the Interior to develop a tactical plan outlining the key
    steps and time frames required to complete this cohesive strategy.
    Further, if the Congress believes it will need information on options and
    related funding before 2009-the scheduled completion date for LANDFIRE,
    which the agencies say they will need in order to produce credible funding
    estimates-it may wish to look to an independent source to provide interim
    information, perhaps by requiring the secretaries to contract with a third
    party to do so.

    In responding to a draft of this report, the Forest Service and the
    Department of the Interior generally agreed with our findings, and with
    the need for a cohesive strategy and an associated tactical plan. However,
    given the agencies' additional comments about OMB's specific objections to
    their publishing long-term funding estimates critical to a cohesive
    strategy, and OMB's confirmation that it will allow the agencies to
    produce such estimates provided they have sufficiently reliable data on
    which to base the estimates, we revised the matters for congressional
    consideration contained

    in our draft report. See the Agency Comments and Our Evaluation section,
    as well as enclosures I and II, for the agencies' comments and our
    responses.

    Background

    Wildland fire triggered by lightning is a normal, inevitable, and
    necessary ecological process that periodically removes excess undergrowth,
    small trees, and vegetation to renew ecosystem productivity. However,
    various human land use and management practices, including several decades
    of fire suppression activities, have reduced the normal frequency of
    wildland fires in many forest and rangeland ecosystems and have resulted
    in abnormally dense and continuous accumulations of vegetation that can
    fuel uncharacteristically large and intense wildland fires. Such large
    intense fires increasingly threaten catastrophic ecosystem damage and also
    increasingly threaten human lives, health, property, and infrastructure in
    the wildland-urban interface. Federal researchers estimate that vegetative
    conditions that can fuel such fires exist on 90 million to 200 million
    acres of federal lands in the contiguous United States, and that these
    conditions also exist on many nonfederal lands.

    Our reviews over the last 7 years identified several weaknesses in the
    federal government's management response to wildland fire issues,
    including

               o  the lack of a national strategy that addressed the likely high
               costs of needed fuel reduction efforts and the need to prioritize
               these efforts;

               o  shortcomings in federal planning and implementation at the
               local level;

               o  the lack of basic data, such as the amount and location of
               lands needing fuel reduction;

               o  ineffective coordination among federal agencies and
               collaboration between these agencies and nonfederal entities; and

               o  insufficient accountability for federal expenditures and
               performance in wildland fire management.

    Because of these weaknesses, and because of the likelihood that wildland
    fire problems will take decades to resolve, we concluded that the agencies
    needed a cohesive, long-term federal wildland fire management strategy
    focusing on identifying options for reducing fuels over the long term in
    order to decrease future wildland fire risks. We also said that the
    strategy should identify the needed funding associated with those
    different fuel reduction options over time, so that the agencies and the
    Congress could make cost-effective, strategic funding decisions.

    The agencies have several wildland fire management activities under way
    that will be important to the development of a long-term cohesive
    strategy. In 2003, Agriculture and Interior approved funding for
    development of a geospatial data and modeling

    system, called LANDFIRE, designed to generate comprehensive maps of
    vegetation, fire, and fuel characteristics nationally and to enable
    comparisons of conditions between different field locations nationwide.
    When operational, LANDFIRE data and enhanced models of likely fire
    behavior thus will help identify the nature and magnitude of the wildland
    fire risks confronting numerous community and ecosystem resources, such as
    residential and commercial structures, species habitat, air and water
    quality, and soils. The agencies plan to use this information to better
    support their strategic decisions on preparedness, suppression, the
    location and design of fuel reduction projects, and other land management
    activities.

    Another element of the agencies' wildland fire management strategy is the
    preparation of fire management plans, which are local plans prepared by
    individual agency management units (such as wildlife refuges or national
    forests) to define each unit's program to prepare for and manage fires.
    Fire management plans are important for identifying the fuel reduction,
    preparedness, suppression, and rehabilitation actions needed at the local
    level to effectively address wildland fire threats.

    Finally, the agencies are implementing FPA, an interagency system intended
    to provide a single mechanism for planning and budgeting agency activities
    to prepare for, and respond to, wildland fire.2 FPA, which will use
    LANDFIRE data when available, is designed to identify the most
    cost-effective allocations of annual preparedness funding for implementing
    agency field units' local fire management plans, taking into account fire
    risk, resources to be protected, available firefighting assets, and other
    information.

    Neither a Tactical Plan Nor a Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy That
    Includes Long-Term Options and Needed Funding Have Been Completed

    Officials at Agriculture and Interior told us the agencies have not
    developed the tactical plan we called for, outlining the critical steps
    the agencies will take, together with related time frames, to complete a
    cohesive strategy for wildland fire management-despite their commitment to
    do so in their response to our January 2005 report. And while the agencies
    completed a February 2006 interagency document entitled "Protecting People
    and Natural Resources: A Cohesive Fuels Treatment Strategy," this document
    does not identify long-term options and related funding needed for
    reducing fuels and responding to wildland fires when they occur.

    Agency officials initially told us that they would be unable to ever
    produce such a strategy because OMB will not allow them to publish
    long-term cost estimates-making a tactical plan unnecessary. In responding
    to a draft of this report, the agencies commented that OMB does not
    believe the agencies can produce credible

    2FPA is being implemented in response to a congressional committee
    direction to improve budget allocation tools. See GAO, Wildland Fire
    Management: Improved Planning Will Help Agencies Better Identify
    Fire-Fighting Preparedness Needs, GAO-02-158 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 29,
    2002).

    long-term funding estimates until LANDFIRE and FPA are more fully
    operational. OMB officials stated that they will allow the agencies to
    publish long-term cost estimates, but only when they have sufficiently
    reliable data to develop credible estimates, and that LANDFIRE and FPA
    will be critical to doing so. Given OMB's concerns, it appears unlikely
    that a cohesive strategy that includes long-term options and needed
    funding will be developed before 2009, the scheduled completion date for
    LANDFIRE.

    Agency officials told us that, although their recently published cohesive
    strategy does not contain long-term options and needed funding, the
    agencies are taking steps to increase the effectiveness of their wildland
    fire management. The Wildland Fire Leadership Council is developing a
    comprehensive framework to monitor hazardous fuels reduction projects,3
    and is conducting a review of the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy
    Implementation Plan.4 The comprehensive monitoring framework will, among
    other activities, evaluate the effect of fuels treatments intended to
    reduce the risk of wildland fire and the extent of collaboration among
    federal, state, and local entities. Similarly, the review of the
    implementation plan, which an Interior official told us will be completed
    by midsummer 2006, will incorporate performance measures to evaluate
    whether fuels treatment activities are meeting their intended objectives.
    However, both of these efforts focus on the effects of fuels treatment
    activities, rather than providing options and needed funding for potential
    future wildland fire management activities.

    Progress Has Been Made on LANDFIRE, Fire Management Plans, and FPA, but
    Challenges Remain

    The agencies have made progress in implementing three ongoing efforts that
    are critical to developing and implementing a cohesive wildland fire
    management strategy: LANDFIRE, fire management plans, and FPA. However,
    given the evolving nature of these efforts-particularly LANDFIRE and
    FPA-it will be important for the agencies to remain vigilant in ensuring
    that these efforts incorporate up-to-date and comprehensive data, in order
    to deliver on their promise.

    LANDFIRE

    According to agency officials, LANDFIRE data have been collected for most
    of the western United States and are currently being validated, a process
    that should be completed by the end of fiscal year 2006. Data validation
    includes an internal data

    3The Wildland Fire Leadership Council was established in April 2002 to
    support the implementation and coordination of federal wildland fire
    management activities. The council includes membership from Agriculture
    and Interior as well as the agencies with wildland fire management
    responsibilities.

    4The 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy, published in 2001 by the Departments
    of Agriculture and the Interior and the Western Governors Association, and
    the associated implementation plan detail goals, timelines, and
    responsibilities for various actions related to wildland fire management.

    quality assurance and quality control process, according to these
    officials, as well as extensive work with local agency fire managers to
    ensure that the information produced by LANDFIRE accurately represents
    on-the-ground conditions. Data for the remaining contiguous states are
    scheduled to be completed by the end of fiscal year 2008, and for Alaska
    and Hawaii by the end of fiscal year 2009. In May 2006, LANDFIRE's
    Executive Oversight Committee, an interagency group of managers
    responsible for overseeing the project, will be conducting a review to
    evaluate the project's objectives, schedule, budget, data development, and
    data use.

    As of March 2006, according to agency officials, almost $18 million of
    LANDFIRE's total expected cost of about $39 million has been spent.
    However, these officials also told us that, as of the same date, LANDFIRE
    was about 6 months behind the original production schedule, and agencies
    still face challenges regarding completion and implementation. The primary
    challenge facing LANDFIRE, according to agency officials, is keeping the
    data current in the face of landscape-altering events such as hurricanes
    and fires. Without up-to-date data, agency managers will have difficulty
    using LANDFIRE to identify existing vegetation and other landscape
    characteristics-information that is essential to developing an appropriate
    wildland fire management strategy. And while it is possible to acquire new
    data for particular areas that have undergone change, according to agency
    officials, integrating new data into the existing LANDFIRE data set can be
    problematic.

    Fire Management Plans

    Nearly all of the agencies' land management units have completed fire
    management plans as called for in 2001 federal wildland fire management
    policy, according to agency officials and documents. Many, though not all,
    of these plans have been prepared within a common interagency template,
    which the agencies adopted to ensure greater consistency in their
    contents. Table 1 below shows the status of each agency's fire management
    plans.

    Table 1: Completion Status of Agency Fire Management Plans Compliant with
    2001 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy

                      Number of Number of                           Percentage of
                          plans     plans      Percentage of needed   plans using
    Agency            needed completed           plans completed      template
    Forest Service       115       115                       100           100
    Bureau of            353       350                        99             a
    Indian Affairs
    Bureau of Land
    Management            72        72                       100           100
    Fish and
    Wildlife             641       617                        96             a
    Service
    National Park        279       238                        85           100
    Service
    Total              1,460     1,392                        95             a

    Source: GAO analysis of agency data.

    aBIA and FWS officials told us that a portion of their agencies' plans use
    the template, although they did not estimate the percentage of completed
    plans doing so.

    If these plans are to be the principal managing instruments for
    identifying, budgeting for, and implementing the various actions needed at
    the local level to effectively address wildland fire threats, the agencies
    will need to ensure that the plans are kept current. This will involve
    updating the plans to incorporate available LANDFIRE data as well as
    available research on addressing wildland fire threats (such as research
    on the extent to which conducting fuel reduction treatments in certain
    geometric patterns improves the treatments' effectiveness in reducing the
    spread rate and intensity of wildland fires). However, agency guidance
    does not require regular plan updates, instead leaving it up to land
    management units to determine the frequency of needed updates. January
    2006 guidance covering the Forest Service, BLM, FWS, and NPS calls for
    these agencies to review plans annually and update them as needed;
    similarly, a BIA official told us that BIA guidance calls for plans to be
    updated when "significant changes" occur, such as large fires or changes
    in a particular unit's land use plan. Further, the agencies may not always
    find it easy to update these plans; a Forest Service official told us
    that, if the introduction of new data into a fire management plan results
    in the development of new fire management objectives, the agency might
    need to conduct a new National Environmental Policy Act analysis for that
    plan,5 requiring additional time and resources. If fire management plans
    are not updated to reflect the most current information on the extent and
    distribution of fire risks and the most promising methods for dealing with
    them, the plans will be of limited use in the agencies' attempts to manage
    wildland fire problems.

    FPA

    FPA is being implemented in two phases, the first of which is nearly
    complete. Phase I is intended to provide information for use in two
    primary areas: (1) allocating resources for the initial responses to fires
    and (2) developing estimates for the agencies' fiscal year 2008 budgets.
    Agency officials told us that, of the 138 interagency "fire planning
    units" established to submit data for FPA, 134 have submitted Phase I
    data. The agencies will validate the data during the spring and summer of
    2006, and expect to use the data in formulating their fiscal year 2008
    budgets. Phase II focuses on additional activities, including fuel
    reduction, postfire rehabilitation, and others; data for this phase are
    expected to be submitted by June 2008, followed by agency analysis and
    validation of the data.

    Agency officials told us that, as part of FPA's implementation, about 600
    staff within the agencies, including staff in each of the 138 fire
    planning units, have received training on FPA. Agency officials also are
    conducting a "midcourse review" of FPA to assess progress to date and
    determine what changes may be necessary as the agencies continue to
    implement FPA. Officials told us that they expect a final report on the
    results of the review in the spring or summer of 2006. According to agency

    5For major federal actions that significantly affect the quality of the
    human environment, the National Environmental Policy Act requires all
    federal agencies to analyze the environmental impact of the proposed
    action. 42 U.S.C. S: 4332(2)(C).

    officials, as of March 2006, about $21 million of the expected overall
    cost of $48 million had been spent on FPA. This is about $6 million more
    than the 2004 estimate of $42 million; a Forest Service official told us
    that the increase is primarily due to an

    additional year of Phase II development, as well as additional operations
    and maintenance costs expected in 2009 and 2010.

    While progress continues to be made, gaps exist in the data collected for
    FPA. In order to cost-effectively allocate federal resources, FPA was
    designed to incorporate data on both federal and nonfederal firefighting
    assets (such as personnel and equipment) because both federal and
    nonfederal assets might be used to fight an individual fire, regardless of
    whether the fire occurs on federal or nonfederal land. Nevertheless,
    nonfederal assets have not been consistently included in FPA because,
    according to officials and FPA documents, many states and other nonfederal
    entities have been reluctant or unwilling to provide data for FPA. Some
    states are concerned about the time and resources required to compile and
    submit data for FPA, particularly given that many states do not envision
    using FPA to develop their wildland fire budgets and thus cannot justify
    the additional workload required to participate. In other cases,
    nonfederal officials may be worried that federal assets will be reduced in
    areas where nonfederal assets already exist because the nonfederal assets
    may be deemed sufficient to provide the initial response to a fire-which
    could potentially increase the nonfederal entities' workload in the event
    of a fire.

    Without comprehensive data on all federal and nonfederal assets available
    to fight wildland fires, it is unclear how effectively federal resources
    will be allocated using FPA because federal resources may be directed to
    areas where sufficient nonfederal assets already exist-or, conversely,
    federal resources may be directed away from areas despite those areas'
    lack of available nonfederal assets. However, federal agency officials
    stated that the absence of nonfederal data is unlikely to significantly
    hamper the agencies' ability to use FPA to make resource allocation and
    budget decisions, although they have not yet fully assessed the effect of
    not having complete nonfederal data. These officials also reported that
    they are developing a strategy for obtaining nonfederal data.

    Conclusions

    The federal government is expending substantial effort and billions of
    dollars in attempting to address our nation's wildland fire problems. If
    the agencies and the Congress are to make informed decisions about an
    effective and affordable long-term approach to the issue, they should have
    a cohesive strategy that identifies long-term options and needed funding
    for addressing these wildland fire problems. Because it likely will be at
    least 2009 before the agencies develop such a strategy that would meet
    standards required by OMB, we continue to believe it is essential that, in
    the interim, the agencies create a tactical plan for developing this
    strategy, so that the Congress understands the steps and time frames
    involved with its completion. However, despite our previous recommendation
    that the agencies develop this

    tactical plan, and the agencies' commitment to do so, they have not
    produced such a plan.

    Matters for Congressional Consideration

    Given the importance of a cohesive strategy for wildland fire management
    that identifies long-term options and needed funding, as well as the need
    to understand how and when the agencies will develop such a strategy, the
    Congress may wish to consider requiring that the Secretaries of
    Agriculture and the Interior develop a tactical plan that lays out the
    specific steps and time frames needed to complete a cohesive strategy.

    In the interim, while the agencies are developing a tactical plan and
    cohesive strategy, the Congress will continue to lack information
    regarding long-term options and needed funding for responding to wildland
    fire problems. If the Congress believes such information is necessary to
    make informed decisions in the near term, it may wish to consider seeking
    an independent source to provide interim information until the agencies
    are able to complete the cohesive strategy we previously recommended. This
    could be accomplished by, among other approaches, requiring the
    Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior to contract with a third
    party. Regardless of the approach chosen, given both the complexity and
    the urgency of the wildland fire issue, the Congress may wish to specify
    certain time frames and deliverables-including long-term options and
    needed funding based upon the best available information-in order to
    ensure that it is provided with timely and comprehensive information.

    Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

    We provided a draft of this report to the Secretaries of Agriculture and
    the Interior for review and comment. The agencies generally agreed with
    our findings, and with the need for a cohesive strategy and an associated
    tactical plan. They provided additional comments that we have incorporated
    into the report, as appropriate. Their comments, along with our responses,
    are reprinted in enclosures I and II, respectively.

    Our draft report contained a matter for congressional consideration
    suggesting that the Congress require the agencies to develop a cohesive
    strategy including long-term options and needed funding, given the
    agencies' initial statements that OMB would not permit them to produce
    long-term cost estimates. In responding to a draft of our report, the
    agencies provided additional comments about OMB's specific objections to
    their publishing long-term funding estimates critical to a cohesive
    strategy. OMB confirmed that it will allow the agencies to produce such
    estimates provided they have sufficiently reliable data on which to base
    them. Accordingly, we revised the matters for congressional consideration.

                                       - - - - -

    We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of Agriculture and
    the Interior and the Chief of the Forest Service. We will also make copies
    available to others upon request. In addition, this report will be
    available at no charge on GAO's Web site at http://www.gao.gov.

    If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact
    me at (202) 512-3841 or at nazzaror@gao.gov. Contact points for our
    Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the
    last page of this report. Major contributors to this report were David P.
    Bixler, Assistant Director; Steve Gaty; Richard Johnson; Chester Joy; and
    Matthew Reinhart.

    Robin M. Nazzaro

    Director, Natural Resources and Environment

    Enclosures

    Enclosure I

                            Comments from the Forest Service

    See comment 2.

    See comment 1.

    The following are GAO's comments on the Forest Service's letter dated
    April 21, 2006.

    GAO Comments

               1. We have modified our draft to include the agency's statement
               that OMB does not believe that the departments can produce
               credible long-term funding estimates until LANDFIRE and FPA are
               more fully operational.

               2. We have modified our matters for congressional consideration
               based on statements from the agencies and OMB regarding the
               agencies' ability to produce a cohesive strategy.

    Enclosure II

                      Comments from the Department of the Interior

    See comment 2.

    See comment 1.

    See comment 3.

    The following are GAO's comments on the Department of the Interior's
    letter dated April 21, 2006.

    GAO Comments

               1. In identifying the weaknesses that we found in our previous
               work, we do not intend to imply that the agencies have made no
               progress in addressing these issues. Instead, we are simply
               providing context for our ongoing efforts to assess the agencies'
               wildland fire management activities.

               2. We have modified our draft to include the department's
               statement that OMB does not believe that the agencies can produce
               credible long-term funding estimates until LANDFIRE and FPA are
               more fully operational.

               3. We have modified our matters for congressional consideration
               based on statements from the agencies and OMB regarding the
               agencies' ability to produce a cohesive strategy.

    (360686)

    This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
    protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
    its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
    work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
    copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
    separately.

    GAO's Mission

    The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
    investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
    constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
    accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
    examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
    and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
    Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
    commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
    accountability, integrity, and reliability.

    Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

    The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
    is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts newly
    released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To have
    GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
    www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."

    Order by Mail or Phone

    The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
    each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
    Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
    copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
    be sent to:

    U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
    D.C. 20548

    To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
    512-6061

    To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

    Contact:

    Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
    Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

    Congressional Relations

    Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 U.S.
    Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
    D.C. 20548

    Public Affairs

    Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.
    Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington,
    D.C. 20548
    *** End of document. ***