United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

May 1, 2006 

The Honorable Charles H. Taylor 

Chairman 

The Honorable Norman D. Dicks

Ranking Minority Member 

Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 

Committee on Appropriations 

House of Representatives 

Subject: Wildland Fire Management: Update on Federal Agency Efforts to Develop a 

Cohesive Strategy to Address Wildland Fire Threats 

The wildland fire problems facing our nation continue to grow. The number of acres 

burned by wildland fires annually from 2000 to 2005 was 70 percent greater than the 

average burned annually during the 1990s, while appropriations for the federal 

government’s wildland fire management activities tripled from about $1 billion in 

fiscal year 1999 to nearly $3 billion in fiscal year 2005. Experts believe that 

catastrophic damage from wildland fire probably will continue to increase until an 

adequate long-term federal response, coordinated with others, is implemented and 

has had time to take effect. 

In the past 7 years, the federal government has made important progress in putting 

into place basic components of a framework for managing and responding to the 

nation’s wildland fire problems. Many challenges lie ahead, however, if the federal 

agencies having primary responsibility for managing wildland fire issues—the Forest 

Service within the Department of Agriculture and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and National 

Park Service (NPS) within the Department of the Interior—are to address the 

problems in a timely and effective manner. Most notably, as we reported in January 

2005,1

 the agencies need to develop a cohesive strategy that identifies the available 

long-term options and related funding requirements for reducing excess vegetation 

that could fuel wildland fires and for responding to wildland fires when they occur. 

The agencies and the Congress need such a strategy in order to make informed 

decisions about an effective and affordable long-term approach for addressing

problems that have been decades in the making and will take decades more to 

resolve. 

 1

GAO, Wildland Fire Management: Important Progress Has Been Made, but Challenges Remain to 

Completing a Cohesive Strategy, GAO-05-147 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 14, 2005). 

GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
In our January 2005 report, recognizing that the development of a cohesive strategy 

that includes long-term options and funding was itself a long-term effort, we 

recommended that the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior provide the 

Congress with a joint tactical plan outlining the critical steps the agencies planned to 

take, together with related time frames, to complete such a cohesive strategy. In 

responding to that report, officials from Agriculture and Interior said they would 

produce an initial tactical plan by August 2005. 

 

Our prior work also identified several tasks, each with its own challenges, that the 

agencies must complete prior to implementing such a strategy, including 

• finishing data systems needed to identify the extent, severity, and location of 

wildland fire threats to the nation’s communities and ecosystems; 

• updating local fire management plans to better specify the actions needed to 

effectively address these threats; and 

• assessing the cost-effectiveness and affordability of options for reducing fuels.

In this context, you asked us to provide information on (1) the progress that the 

Departments of Agriculture and the Interior have made over the past year in 

developing a tactical plan outlining the steps and time frames needed to complete a 

cohesive strategy for addressing wildland fire threats, as we recommended; and (2) 

the agencies’ efforts to address the challenges GAO believes they are likely to face as 

they develop this cohesive strategy. To obtain this information, we reviewed agency 

documents regarding wildland fire management activities and interviewed federal 

and nonfederal officials knowledgeable about the agencies’ wildland fire management 

efforts. We conducted our work in March and April 2006 in accordance with 

generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Results in Brief 

The agencies have not prepared a tactical plan outlining the critical steps and 

associated time frames for completing a cohesive wildland fire management strategy, 

as we recommended. And while the agencies completed a February 2006 interagency 

document entitled “Protecting People and Natural Resources: A Cohesive Fuels 

Treatment Strategy,” this document does not identify long-term options and related 

funding needed for reducing fuels and responding to wildland fires when they occur, 

as we called for. Agency officials initially told us that they would not be able to 

produce such a strategy because the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) does 

not allow them to publish long-term cost estimates—thus rendering a tactical plan 

unnecessary. In responding to a draft of this report, the agencies commented that 

OMB does not believe that the agencies will be able to produce credible long-term 

funding estimates until two key data systems to help identify wildland fire threats and 

allocate fire management resources are more fully operational. OMB officials stated 

Page 2 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
that they will allow the agencies to publish such estimates, but only when the 

agencies have sufficiently reliable data on which to base them. 

The agencies have made progress on the three primary tasks we identified as 

important to developing a wildland fire management strategy, although challenges 

remain. 

• LANDFIRE, a geospatial data and modeling system, will assist the agencies in 

identifying the extent, severity, and location of wildland fire threats to the 

nation’s communities and ecosystems. LANDFIRE data are nearly complete 

for most of the western United States, with data for the remainder of the 

country scheduled to be completed in 2009. The agencies will need to ensure 

that LANDFIRE data are kept current in order to reflect landscape-altering 

events such as large fires and hurricanes. 

• About 95 percent of the agencies’ individual land management units have 

completed fire management plans in accordance with agency requirements 

promulgated in 2001. However, the agencies do not require regular plan 

updates to ensure that new data (from LANDFIRE, for example) are 

incorporated into the plans. 

• The Fire Program Analysis (FPA) system is a computer-based model designed 

to assist the agencies in cost-effectively allocating the resources necessary to 

address wildland fires. The first of FPA’s two phases is nearly complete, with 

the second phase expected to be completed in 2008. However, gaps in the 

data collected for FPA may reduce its usefulness in allocating resources. 

Given the importance of a cohesive strategy for wildland fire management that 

includes long-term options and associated funding requirements, and the need to 

understand how and when the agencies will produce such a strategy, the Congress 

may want to consider requiring the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior to 

develop a tactical plan outlining the key steps and time frames required to complete 

this cohesive strategy. Further, if the Congress believes it will need information on 

options and related funding before 2009—the scheduled completion date for 

LANDFIRE, which the agencies say they will need in order to produce credible 

funding estimates—it may wish to look to an independent source to provide interim 

information, perhaps by requiring the secretaries to contract with a third party to do 

so. 

In responding to a draft of this report, the Forest Service and the Department of the 

Interior generally agreed with our findings, and with the need for a cohesive strategy 

and an associated tactical plan. However, given the agencies’ additional comments 

about OMB’s specific objections to their publishing long-term funding estimates 

critical to a cohesive strategy, and OMB’s confirmation that it will allow the agencies 

to produce such estimates provided they have sufficiently reliable data on which to 

base the estimates, we revised the matters for congressional consideration contained 

Page 3 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
in our draft report. See the Agency Comments and Our Evaluation section, as well as 

enclosures I and II, for the agencies’ comments and our responses. 

Background 

Wildland fire triggered by lightning is a normal, inevitable, and necessary ecological 

process that periodically removes excess undergrowth, small trees, and vegetation to 

renew ecosystem productivity. However, various human land use and management 

practices, including several decades of fire suppression activities, have reduced the 

normal frequency of wildland fires in many forest and rangeland ecosystems and 

have resulted in abnormally dense and continuous accumulations of vegetation that 

can fuel uncharacteristically large and intense wildland fires. Such large intense fires 

increasingly threaten catastrophic ecosystem damage and also increasingly threaten 

human lives, health, property, and infrastructure in the wildland-urban interface. 

Federal researchers estimate that vegetative conditions that can fuel such fires exist 

on 90 million to 200 million acres of federal lands in the contiguous United States, 

and that these conditions also exist on many nonfederal lands. 

Our reviews over the last 7 years identified several weaknesses in the federal 

government’s management response to wildland fire issues, including 

• the lack of a national strategy that addressed the likely high costs of needed 

fuel reduction efforts and the need to prioritize these efforts; 

• shortcomings in federal planning and implementation at the local level; 

• the lack of basic data, such as the amount and location of lands needing fuel 

reduction; 

• ineffective coordination among federal agencies and collaboration between 

these agencies and nonfederal entities; and 

• insufficient accountability for federal expenditures and performance in 

wildland fire management. 

Because of these weaknesses, and because of the likelihood that wildland fire 

problems will take decades to resolve, we concluded that the agencies needed a 

cohesive, long-term federal wildland fire management strategy focusing on 

identifying options for reducing fuels over the long term in order to decrease future 

wildland fire risks. We also said that the strategy should identify the needed funding 

associated with those different fuel reduction options over time, so that the agencies 

and the Congress could make cost-effective, strategic funding decisions. 

The agencies have several wildland fire management activities under way that will be 

important to the development of a long-term cohesive strategy. In 2003, Agriculture 

and Interior approved funding for development of a geospatial data and modeling 

Page 4 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
system, called LANDFIRE, designed to generate comprehensive maps of vegetation, 

fire, and fuel characteristics nationally and to enable comparisons of conditions 

between different field locations nationwide. When operational, LANDFIRE data and 

enhanced models of likely fire behavior thus will help identify the nature and 

magnitude of the wildland fire risks confronting numerous community and ecosystem 

resources, such as residential and commercial structures, species habitat, air and 

water quality, and soils. The agencies plan to use this information to better support 

their strategic decisions on preparedness, suppression, the location and design of fuel 

reduction projects, and other land management activities. 

Another element of the agencies’ wildland fire management strategy is the 

preparation of fire management plans, which are local plans prepared by individual 

agency management units (such as wildlife refuges or national forests) to define each 

unit’s program to prepare for and manage fires. Fire management plans are 

important for identifying the fuel reduction, preparedness, suppression, and 

rehabilitation actions needed at the local level to effectively address wildland fire 

threats. 

Finally, the agencies are implementing FPA, an interagency system intended to 

provide a single mechanism for planning and budgeting agency activities to prepare 

for, and respond to, wildland fire.2

 FPA, which will use LANDFIRE data when 

available, is designed to identify the most cost-effective allocations of annual 

preparedness funding for implementing agency field units’ local fire management 

plans, taking into account fire risk, resources to be protected, available firefighting 

assets, and other information. 

Neither a Tactical Plan Nor a Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy That Includes 

Long-Term Options and Needed Funding Have Been Completed 

Officials at Agriculture and Interior told us the agencies have not developed the 

tactical plan we called for, outlining the critical steps the agencies will take, together 

with related time frames, to complete a cohesive strategy for wildland fire 

management—despite their commitment to do so in their response to our January 

2005 report. And while the agencies completed a February 2006 interagency 

document entitled “Protecting People and Natural Resources: A Cohesive Fuels 

Treatment Strategy,” this document does not identify long-term options and related 

funding needed for reducing fuels and responding to wildland fires when they occur. 

Agency officials initially told us that they would be unable to ever produce such a 

strategy because OMB will not allow them to publish long-term cost estimates—

making a tactical plan unnecessary. In responding to a draft of this report, the 

agencies commented that OMB does not believe the agencies can produce credible 

 2

FPA is being implemented in response to a congressional committee direction to improve budget 

allocation tools. See GAO, Wildland Fire Management: Improved Planning Will Help Agencies 

Better Identify Fire-Fighting Preparedness Needs, GAO-02-158 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 29, 2002). 

Page 5 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
long-term funding estimates until LANDFIRE and FPA are more fully operational. 

OMB officials stated that they will allow the agencies to publish long-term cost 

estimates, but only when they have sufficiently reliable data to develop credible 

estimates, and that LANDFIRE and FPA will be critical to doing so. Given OMB’s 

concerns, it appears unlikely that a cohesive strategy that includes long-term options 

and needed funding will be developed before 2009, the scheduled completion date for 

LANDFIRE. 

Agency officials told us that, although their recently published cohesive strategy does 

not contain long-term options and needed funding, the agencies are taking steps to 

increase the effectiveness of their wildland fire management. The Wildland Fire 

Leadership Council is developing a comprehensive framework to monitor hazardous 

fuels reduction projects,3

 and is conducting a review of the 10-Year Comprehensive 

Strategy Implementation Plan.4 The comprehensive monitoring framework will, 

among other activities, evaluate the effect of fuels treatments intended to reduce the 

risk of wildland fire and the extent of collaboration among federal, state, and local 

entities. Similarly, the review of the implementation plan, which an Interior official 

told us will be completed by midsummer 2006, will incorporate performance 

measures to evaluate whether fuels treatment activities are meeting their intended 

objectives. However, both of these efforts focus on the effects of fuels treatment 

activities, rather than providing options and needed funding for potential future 

wildland fire management activities. 

Progress Has Been Made on LANDFIRE, Fire Management Plans, and FPA, 

but Challenges Remain 

The agencies have made progress in implementing three ongoing efforts that are 

critical to developing and implementing a cohesive wildland fire management 

strategy: LANDFIRE, fire management plans, and FPA. However, given the evolving 

nature of these efforts—particularly LANDFIRE and FPA—it will be important for the 

agencies to remain vigilant in ensuring that these efforts incorporate up-to-date and 

comprehensive data, in order to deliver on their promise. 

LANDFIRE 

According to agency officials, LANDFIRE data have been collected for most of the 

western United States and are currently being validated, a process that should be 

completed by the end of fiscal year 2006. Data validation includes an internal data 

 3

The Wildland Fire Leadership Council was established in April 2002 to support the implementation 

and coordination of federal wildland fire management activities. The council includes membership

from Agriculture and Interior as well as the agencies with wildland fire management responsibilities. 

4

The 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy, published in 2001 by the Departments of Agriculture and the

Interior and the Western Governors Association, and the associated implementation plan detail goals,

timelines, and responsibilities for various actions related to wildland fire management. 

Page 6 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
quality assurance and quality control process, according to these officials, as well as 

extensive work with local agency fire managers to ensure that the information 

produced by LANDFIRE accurately represents on-the-ground conditions. Data for 

the remaining contiguous states are scheduled to be completed by the end of fiscal 

year 2008, and for Alaska and Hawaii by the end of fiscal year 2009. In May 2006, 

LANDFIRE’s Executive Oversight Committee, an interagency group of managers 

responsible for overseeing the project, will be conducting a review to evaluate the 

project’s objectives, schedule, budget, data development, and data use. 

As of March 2006, according to agency officials, almost $18 million of LANDFIRE’s 

total expected cost of about $39 million has been spent. However, these officials also 

told us that, as of the same date, LANDFIRE was about 6 months behind the original 

production schedule, and agencies still face challenges regarding completion and 

implementation. The primary challenge facing LANDFIRE, according to agency 

officials, is keeping the data current in the face of landscape-altering events such as 

hurricanes and fires. Without up-to-date data, agency managers will have difficulty 

using LANDFIRE to identify existing vegetation and other landscape 

characteristics—information that is essential to developing an appropriate wildland 

fire management strategy. And while it is possible to acquire new data for particular 

areas that have undergone change, according to agency officials, integrating new data 

into the existing LANDFIRE data set can be problematic. 

Fire Management Plans 

Nearly all of the agencies’ land management units have completed fire management 

plans as called for in 2001 federal wildland fire management policy, according to 

agency officials and documents. Many, though not all, of these plans have been 

prepared within a common interagency template, which the agencies adopted to 

ensure greater consistency in their contents. Table 1 below shows the status of each 

agency’s fire management plans. 

Table 1: Completion Status of Agency Fire Management Plans Compliant with 2001 Federal Wildland

Fire Management Policy

Agency 

Number of 

plans needed

Number of 

plans 

completed

Percentage of

needed plans 

completed

Percentage of plans 

using template

Forest Service 115 115 100 100 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 353 350 99 a

Bureau of Land 

Management 72 72 100 100 

Fish and Wildlife Service 641 617 96 a

National Park Service 279 238 85 100 

Total 1,460 1,392 95 a

Source: GAO analysis of agency data. 

a

BIA and FWS officials told us that a portion of their agencies’ plans use the template, although they did not 

estimate the percentage of completed plans doing so. 

Page 7 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
If these plans are to be the principal managing instruments for identifying, budgeting 

for, and implementing the various actions needed at the local level to effectively 

address wildland fire threats, the agencies will need to ensure that the plans are kept 

current. This will involve updating the plans to incorporate available LANDFIRE data 

as well as available research on addressing wildland fire threats (such as research on 

the extent to which conducting fuel reduction treatments in certain geometric 

patterns improves the treatments’ effectiveness in reducing the spread rate and 

intensity of wildland fires). However, agency guidance does not require regular plan 

updates, instead leaving it up to land management units to determine the frequency of 

needed updates. January 2006 guidance covering the Forest Service, BLM, FWS, and 

NPS calls for these agencies to review plans annually and update them as needed; 

similarly, a BIA official told us that BIA guidance calls for plans to be updated when 

“significant changes” occur, such as large fires or changes in a particular unit’s land 

use plan. Further, the agencies may not always find it easy to update these plans; a 

Forest Service official told us that, if the introduction of new data into a fire 

management plan results in the development of new fire management objectives, the 

agency might need to conduct a new National Environmental Policy Act analysis for 

that plan,5

 requiring additional time and resources. If fire management plans are not 

updated to reflect the most current information on the extent and distribution of fire 

risks and the most promising methods for dealing with them, the plans will be of 

limited use in the agencies’ attempts to manage wildland fire problems. 

FPA 

FPA is being implemented in two phases, the first of which is nearly complete. Phase 

I is intended to provide information for use in two primary areas: (1) allocating 

resources for the initial responses to fires and (2) developing estimates for the 

agencies’ fiscal year 2008 budgets. Agency officials told us that, of the 138 

interagency “fire planning units” established to submit data for FPA, 134 have 

submitted Phase I data. The agencies will validate the data during the spring and 

summer of 2006, and expect to use the data in formulating their fiscal year 2008 

budgets. Phase II focuses on additional activities, including fuel reduction, postfire 

rehabilitation, and others; data for this phase are expected to be submitted by June 

2008, followed by agency analysis and validation of the data. 

Agency officials told us that, as part of FPA’s implementation, about 600 staff within 

the agencies, including staff in each of the 138 fire planning units, have received 

training on FPA. Agency officials also are conducting a “midcourse review” of FPA to 

assess progress to date and determine what changes may be necessary as the 

agencies continue to implement FPA. Officials told us that they expect a final report 

on the results of the review in the spring or summer of 2006. According to agency 

 5

For major federal actions that significantly affect the quality of the human environment, the National 

Environmental Policy Act requires all federal agencies to analyze the environmental impact of the 

proposed action. 42 U.S.C. § 4332(2)(C).

Page 8 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
officials, as of March 2006, about $21 million of the expected overall cost of $48 

million had been spent on FPA. This is about $6 million more than the 2004 estimate 

of $42 million; a Forest Service official told us that the increase is primarily due to an 

additional year of Phase II development, as well as additional operations and 

maintenance costs expected in 2009 and 2010. 

While progress continues to be made, gaps exist in the data collected for FPA. In 

order to cost-effectively allocate federal resources, FPA was designed to incorporate 

data on both federal and nonfederal firefighting assets (such as personnel and 

equipment) because both federal and nonfederal assets might be used to fight an 

individual fire, regardless of whether the fire occurs on federal or nonfederal land. 

Nevertheless, nonfederal assets have not been consistently included in FPA because, 

according to officials and FPA documents, many states and other nonfederal entities 

have been reluctant or unwilling to provide data for FPA. Some states are concerned 

about the time and resources required to compile and submit data for FPA, 

particularly given that many states do not envision using FPA to develop their 

wildland fire budgets and thus cannot justify the additional workload required to 

participate. In other cases, nonfederal officials may be worried that federal assets 

will be reduced in areas where nonfederal assets already exist because the 

nonfederal assets may be deemed sufficient to provide the initial response to a fire—

which could potentially increase the nonfederal entities’ workload in the event of a 

fire. 

Without comprehensive data on all federal and nonfederal assets available to fight 

wildland fires, it is unclear how effectively federal resources will be allocated using 

FPA because federal resources may be directed to areas where sufficient nonfederal 

assets already exist—or, conversely, federal resources may be directed away from

areas despite those areas’ lack of available nonfederal assets. However, federal 

agency officials stated that the absence of nonfederal data is unlikely to significantly 

hamper the agencies’ ability to use FPA to make resource allocation and budget

decisions, although they have not yet fully assessed the effect of not having complete 

nonfederal data. These officials also reported that they are developing a strategy for 

obtaining nonfederal data. 

Conclusions 

The federal government is expending substantial effort and billions of dollars in 

attempting to address our nation’s wildland fire problems. If the agencies and the 

Congress are to make informed decisions about an effective and affordable long-term 

approach to the issue, they should have a cohesive strategy that identifies long-term 

options and needed funding for addressing these wildland fire problems. Because it 

likely will be at least 2009 before the agencies develop such a strategy that would 

meet standards required by OMB, we continue to believe it is essential that, in the 

interim, the agencies create a tactical plan for developing this strategy, so that the 

Congress understands the steps and time frames involved with its completion. 

However, despite our previous recommendation that the agencies develop this 

Page 9 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
tactical plan, and the agencies’ commitment to do so, they have not produced such a 

plan. 

Matters for Congressional Consideration 

Given the importance of a cohesive strategy for wildland fire management that 

identifies long-term options and needed funding, as well as the need to understand 

how and when the agencies will develop such a strategy, the Congress may wish to 

consider requiring that the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior develop a 

tactical plan that lays out the specific steps and time frames needed to complete a 

cohesive strategy. 

In the interim, while the agencies are developing a tactical plan and cohesive strategy, 

the Congress will continue to lack information regarding long-term options and 

needed funding for responding to wildland fire problems. If the Congress believes 

such information is necessary to make informed decisions in the near term, it may 

wish to consider seeking an independent source to provide interim information until 

the agencies are able to complete the cohesive strategy we previously recommended. 

This could be accomplished by, among other approaches, requiring the Secretaries of 

Agriculture and the Interior to contract with a third party. Regardless of the 

approach chosen, given both the complexity and the urgency of the wildland fire 

issue, the Congress may wish to specify certain time frames and deliverables—

including long-term options and needed funding based upon the best available 

information—in order to ensure that it is provided with timely and comprehensive 

information. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 

We provided a draft of this report to the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior for 

review and comment. The agencies generally agreed with our findings, and with the 

need for a cohesive strategy and an associated tactical plan. They provided 

additional comments that we have incorporated into the report, as appropriate. Their 

comments, along with our responses, are reprinted in enclosures I and II, 

respectively. 

Our draft report contained a matter for congressional consideration suggesting that 

the Congress require the agencies to develop a cohesive strategy including long-term 

options and needed funding, given the agencies’ initial statements that OMB would 

not permit them to produce long-term cost estimates. In responding to a draft of our 

report, the agencies provided additional comments about OMB’s specific objections 

to their publishing long-term funding estimates critical to a cohesive strategy. OMB 

confirmed that it will allow the agencies to produce such estimates provided they 

have sufficiently reliable data on which to base them. Accordingly, we revised the 

matters for congressional consideration. 

- - - - - 

Page 10 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior 

and the Chief of the Forest Service. We will also make copies available to others 

upon request. In addition, this report will be available at no charge on GAO’s Web 

site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 

512-3841 or at nazzaror@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional 

Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Major 

contributors to this report were David P. Bixler, Assistant Director; Steve Gaty; 

Richard Johnson; Chester Joy; and Matthew Reinhart. 

Robin M. Nazzaro 

Director, Natural Resources and Environment

Enclosures 

Page 11 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
Enclosure I 

Comments from the Forest Service

See comment 1.

See comment 2.

Page 12 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
Page 13 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
The following are GAO’s comments on the Forest Service’s letter dated April 21, 2006. 

GAO Comments 

1. We have modified our draft to include the agency’s statement that OMB does 

not believe that the departments can produce credible long-term funding 

estimates until LANDFIRE and FPA are more fully operational. 

2. We have modified our matters for congressional consideration based on 

statements from the agencies and OMB regarding the agencies’ ability to 

produce a cohesive strategy. 

Page 14 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
Enclosure II 

Comments from the Department of the Interior

See comment 1.

See comment 2.

Page 15 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
See comment 3.

Page 16 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
The following are GAO’s comments on the Department of the Interior’s letter dated 

April 21, 2006. 

GAO Comments 

1. In identifying the weaknesses that we found in our previous work, we do not 

intend to imply that the agencies have made no progress in addressing these 

issues. Instead, we are simply providing context for our ongoing efforts to 

assess the agencies’ wildland fire management activities. 

2. We have modified our draft to include the department’s statement that OMB 

does not believe that the agencies can produce credible long-term funding 

estimates until LANDFIRE and FPA are more fully operational. 

3. We have modified our matters for congressional consideration based on 

statements from the agencies and OMB regarding the agencies’ ability to 

produce a cohesive strategy. 

(360686) 

Page 17 GAO-06-671R Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER