Forest Service Breaks Bank Fighting Fires

A new report from the US Department of Agriculture’s Inspector General shows the US Forest Service is spending too much money fighting fires. It suggests the feds get some help paying the bills from state governments. Mark Brodie reports:

Transcript

A new report from the US Department of Agriculture’s Inspector General shows the US Forest Service is spending too much money fighting fires. It suggests the feds get some help paying the bills from state governments. Mark Brodie reports:


The Inspector General report says the Forest Service went over budget four times in the last six years, spending more than a billion dollars in each of those years.


The service blames the cost increase in part on housing developments. They say more homes are being built farther into the forest.


Tom Harbour is the Forest Service’s Fire Chief.


“All of us treat protection of life as our certain first priority, and then treat the protection of communities and values on public lands as our second, and you bet it does make things more difficult.”


But some state foresters say the real difficulty comes from issues like changes in the weather and too much fire fuel on federal land. They say downed trees and excess brush make it difficult for the forest service to contain fires.


Both sides say they’ll bargain hard when it comes time to pay the bill for fighting fires.


For The Environment Report, I’m Mark Brodie.

Related Links

Tailpipe Inspection Programs Lack Oversight

A federal study is raising questions about the effectiveness of tailpipe testing programs. The programs are supposed to help reduce air pollution from cars and trucks. Chuck Quirmbach has details:

Transcript

A federal study is raising questions about the effectiveness of tailpipe testing programs. The programs are supposed to help reduce air pollution from cars and trucks. Chuck Quirmbach has details:


The inspector general at the EPA says many of the 34 states that do tailpipe tests are failing to file reports on the effectiveness of those programs. So, the EPA watchdog says it’s not sure about claims that those states are reducing emissions.


The American Lung Association is also concerned about the report. Association spokesperson Paul Billings says the findings cast doubt for the public.


“We want to make sure we’re not seeing gross emitters, vehicles that are polluting way too much, because we all suffer the consequences of too much air pollution in our cities.”


Billings urges the EPA to step up its effort to get information from the states, but he says staff cuts at the federal agency may be hampering enforcement. The EPA has to respond to its inspector general within a few months.


For the Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Epa Needs to Improve Air Toxin Monitoring

  • The Inspector General says that the EPA could improve the air toxin monitoring system. (Photo courtesy of the National Institutes of Health)

The Inspector General for the Environmental Protection Agency says the agency needs to improve its air toxin monitoring system. A new report says there are no monitors in 45 out of 50 areas where cancer risks are highest. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Celeste Headlee reports:

Transcript

The Inspector General for the Environmental Protection Agency
says the agency needs to improve its air toxin monitoring system.
A new report says there are no monitors in 45 out of 50 areas where
cancer risks are highest. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Celeste Headlee reports:


The greater Chicago area is at the highest risk for cancer from air toxins in the Great Lakes region, though residents of big cities in all of the Great Lakes states are at an elevated risk.


The Clean Air Act lists nearly 190 hazardous air pollutants the EPA must regulate. The EPA Inspector General’s report says many high-risk areas have monitors but not within the specific area where people are most vulnerable.


Jim Pew is an attorney with the activist group, Earth Justice. He says it’s important to construct more monitors, but it’s more important to act on the data the EPA already has.


“It’s not a lack of information that’s stopping EPA from acting to get these risks down, and it’s not an impossibility, there are known ways that these problems can be addressed, it’s a lack of will. The agency just doesn’t want to do it.”


Officials with the EPA say they generally agree with the inspector general’s findings.


For the GLRC, I’m Celeste Headlee.

Related Links

Epa Criticized for Slow Cleanup Progress

A recent federal report states that the EPA is not doing what it should to clean up polluted areas around the Great Lakes. And as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush reports – it’s not the first time the agency has been told about the problems:

Transcript

A recent federal report states that the EPA is not doing what it should to clean-up polluted areas around the Great Lakes, and as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush reports… it’s not the first time the agency has been told about the problems:


More than ten years ago the General Accounting Office said that the EPA should better coordinate it’s efforts to clean-up pollution hot-spots known as “Areas of Concern,” and three years ago the EPA’s Office of Inspector General also said that better coordination is needed.


So far, of these 26 polluted areas located within the U.S., none have been completely cleaned up. The most recent GAO report says that the slow progress is due increasing budget cuts, and the lack of a clearly defined department within the EPA that’s responsible for the program. Gary Gulezian is the director of the EPA’s Great Lakes National Program Office.


“I think that when the program was originally established people didn’t realize just how complicated, and complex, and expensive the problems would be to address. I think that we realize that now, and we realize it’s going to take new efforts and new coordination to get the job done.”


Gulezian
says that the EPA will lay out its roles
and responsibilities for the project in the coming months.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mark Brush.