ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES 



No uniformly acceptable method for assign- 

 ing monetary values to damage by wildfire has 

 ever been developed. Most fire control agencies 

 use empirical formulas for estimating losses of 

 such tangible items as timber, forage, and im- 

 provements. But there is no reliable means of 

 estimating losses of such intangible values as 

 watershed, wildlife, recreation, and potential 

 industry. The final evaluation also depends on 

 several controlling factors such as severity of 

 burn, weather and fuel conditions at the time of 

 burn, topography, and even the time of year. 



The Battelle Institute states in the conclu- 

 sion and recommendations of its report on the 

 cooperative forest fire control problem that no 

 statistically supportable method is now avail- 

 able for evaluating the impact of fire on natural 

 resources, and that further studies on the conse- 

 quences of wildfire to watersheds, including 

 downstream effects, should be encouraged 

 (Swager, Fetterman, and Jenkins 1958). 



The annual reports of the Director of the 

 Bureau of Land Management show assigned 

 estimated damage from wildfire. For the years 

 1950-58 the average estimated dollar value of 

 damage amounted to approximately 10 cents 

 per acre in Alaska compared to 8.6 cents per 

 acre for all other land protected by BLM person- 

 nel. 



Three questions arise: (1) How realistic are 

 the present damage estimates? (2) By how much 

 would damage be reduced if the expenditure 

 for protection were doubled or even quadrupled? 

 (3) How much research is warranted to help 

 bring these two figures into a proper economic 

 relationship, bearing in mind the values at stake 

 discussed earlier in this chapter? 



Table 44 lists three categories of tangible 

 damage — timber, reproduction, and forage. 

 Since the money value of timber and reproduc- 

 tion in Interior Alaska is now only a potential 

 one, the value assigned to destroyed timber can 

 also be only potential. Persons concerned with 

 developing an assured future supply of wood 

 and fiber know that it is necessary to protect 

 the present crop, but without adequately devel- 

 oped procedures they cannot prove it in actual 

 dollars and cents. 



Values for immediate loss of forage can be 

 computed within reasonable limits of accuracy. A 

 more difficult task is estimating the impact on 

 animals that have to graze on other ranges and 

 the hardship on local residents when the game 

 or reindeer that they depend upon for food move 

 out of their area. 



Losses of homes, farm property, and busi- 

 ness establishments are both tragic and costly 

 to owners. Computation of monetary loss from 

 such misfortunes, however, is rather simple since 

 accepted methods of damage appraisal have 

 been used for many years and are available for 

 that class of property. 



No one knows how much employment and 

 revenue may be lost because interested poten- 

 tial investors tend to shy away from establishing 

 businesses or industries in an area where a con- 

 tinuing source of raw material cannot be reason- 

 ably assured. This problem certainly exists or 

 will exist in the near future for the wood fiber 

 industry in Interior Alaska. Research and de- 

 velopment must aim at establishing and main- 

 taining standards of fire control commensurate 

 with the need for industrial security. 



19 



