WEST
Just as fire
season arrived in the West, the federal government touched off a
blaze of controversy. In May, citing safety concerns, the Interior
Department and the Forest Service canceled their contracts for 33
privately owned large air tankers.
The decision followed
a report from the National Transportation Safety Board, which
detailed three plane crashes in the last ten years that claimed
eight crewmembers’ lives. The planes’ worn-out wings
had cracked during flight, and the report concluded that “no
effective method currently exists to ensure continuing
airworthiness” of the aircraft, many of which are recycled military
planes from the 1940s and ’50s.
But the decision to
ground the fleet drew furious criticism from politicians bracing
for a dangerous, drought-fueled fire season.
In a letter,
Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, D, blasted U.S. Agriculture
Secretary Ann Veneman, who oversees the Forest Service, for not
developing a plan for safety inspections immediately after two
tankers crashed in the summer of 2002. In June, the Forest Service
announced it would rent 100 alternative aircraft — including
helicopters and single-engine planes — at a cost of $66
million.
Oregon Congressman Greg Walden, R, who chairs
the House Forests and Forest Health Subcommittee, asked the Federal
Aviation Administration to quickly develop an inspection system so
air tankers deemed airworthy could be used this summer.
Meanwhile, the grounded air tankers are available for hire
elsewhere; Oregon’s Department of Forestry took advantage of
the current glut to hire some to fight fires on state lands this
summer.
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline Debate rages over firefighting airplanes.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
