A federal judge hears arguments today at A lawsuit in Montana is seeking to limit the US Forest Service’s use of airborne fire retardants over concerns that the chemical mixture is polluting waterways.
The suit was Apply in October 2022 Through US District Court in Montana by Forest Service employees for environmental ethics. in filingThe environmental group argued that the Forest Service’s “discharge of atmospheric fire retardants into navigable waters in the United States” is a violation of the Clean Water Act. The environmental nonprofit has requested a court order that could stop the Forest Service from using fire retardant chemicals.
If you see pictures of a little-plane flying Dropping red clouds Powder over fire, this is a fire retardant. It “reduces the intensity and rate of spread of wildfires, reduces risks to firefighters, and enables them to safely establish a line of fire,” according to Forest Service.
But the plaintiffs in the lawsuit argued that the mixture of materials could be harmful to the environment. The inhibitor is consisting of water, salts and fertilizers, according to the US Department of Agriculture. a A report from the US Department of Agriculture analyzed 148 aquatic species and found that 32 Marine animals “You could potentially be adversely affected by using inhibitors delivered from the air.” This is concerning because the Forest Service used more than 102 million gallons (386 million liters) of airborne fire retardants between 2012 and 2019, according to the USDA.
After the lawsuit was filed, the Forest Service asked the EPA to develop a permit that would allow it to continue using the fire retardant chemicals, the Los Angeles Times reports. mentioned. But according to the EPA, it would take more than two years for that permit to be created. Worried about that gap in the face Recent catastrophic fire seasonsSeveral groups attempted to intervene in the lawsuit. A coalition made up of California communities, including Paradise, ca that was hit by a A catastrophic wildfire in 2018 claimed the lives of 86 peopleAnd I hopeMr. Dr On behalf of the Forest Service. they said Reducing the use of fire retardants could put lives at risk, the Associated Press reported mentioned. A federal judge denied the coalition’s request.
tForest fire season in the country getting worse by climate change; hotter and drier conditions It caused more devastating wildfires. Officials argued that the inability to use fire retardants could compromise their ability to stop quickly.Moving Fires out of control. “It saves you time,” Scott Upton, a former firefighter with the California State Fire Agency, told the Associated Press. “We live in a densely populated country — there are people everywhere. It’s a high priority for us to be able to use a damper, to start fires when they’re small.”
But the Forest Service’s environmental ethics staff insist it’s not worth the risk to the environment. “There is no scientific evidence that it makes any difference to wildfire outcomes,” Andy Stahl, the organization’s executive director, told the Los Angeles Times. “It’s like throwing money out of planes, except it’s toxic and you can’t buy anything with it because it doesn’t work.”
The arguments that a federal judge will hear this week are part of a series of lawsuits from Forest Service employees for environmental ethics against the US Forest Service. The Los Angeles Times reported that the organization first sued the service in 2003.
Want more climate and environment stories? Check out Earther’s Guides to Decarbonize your homeAnd Divestment of fossil fuelsAnd Go bag packing is a disasterAnd Overcoming climatic dread. And don’t miss our coverage of The latest IPCC climate reportthe future of Carbon dioxide removalUn-greenwashed facts about Bioplastics And Plastic recycling.