Wildland fires establish a major crisis in American environmental policy created by an age-old policy which has become unsuccessful. This Case Study goes deep into the political procedures that produced and implemented this policy decision over the course of time and addresses the policies as “failures”. This study found that a policy was implemented to suppress the wildfire crisis and was consequently reinforced for more than five decades.
This policy lacked a complementary program to counter the steady accumulation of flammable organic materials, or in other words fuels that befallen in many ecosystems when fires were repressed. In consequence, the resulting fuel buildups have significantly increased the risk of destroying, high-intensity wildfires in a variety of American wildlands. New programs will be needed for fire suppression and fuel reduction programs to control this risk in the future. Wildland fires carry destructive threats to many ecosystems and communities in America today, which can be seen in 2017 with the large-scale wildfires happening in California. Wildfires are having the capacity to burn millions of acres of land in a single year. One instance in the past, the wildfires of 2000 burned an estimated 8.
4 million acres of land in the United States and recently, the California fires burned 91 thousand acres of land in 2017. The wildfire crisis in America was produced by an old policy decision. For more than nine decades, the main purpose of American wildfire policy was to guard natural resources and human communities from damages caused by wildfires. However, the concerns of this wildfire policy greatly increased the danger of wildfire damages in America. The main objective of the case study is to explore the political procedures that steered to the failure of American wildfire policy.
It is inevitable for some policies to fail to achieve their objectives. Policy errors are defined as a situation where policies did not meet the desired goals. The progression of policy failures is described as the procedure in which policy errors continue with increasing impacts over an extensive period of time.
The case study propositions that unsuccessful policies are created from decisions of policy makers who focus mainly on one angle of a multangular policy issue. The Wildfire Suppressions policy was proposed during the critical years 1905 until 1911. The policy established arrangements that would permit the policy to be implemented throughout the country.
Congress had passed a policy to create an economic tool that supplied funds to the forest service to stop wildfires at a national scale. From the start, wildfire suppression policy formed a good amount of opportunities and reason for the Forest Service to rationalize the increase of its resources and influence. Nevertheless, these opportunities alone cannot fully justify the choice of the wildfire suppression policy. The Forest Service had the opportunity to increase its capitals and influence through an alternate policy that balanced wildfire suppression with wildland fuel reduction. For instance, a policy highlighting light burning would have needed vast amount of resources for fire planning and fire control because of the continual threat of light burns escaping control