State spends nearly four times more than in the fight ... - Público.pt

government plans to spend 74 million euros to fight fires and only 20 million in prevention. For specialists, greater investment in prevention would reduce spending and increase efficiency

The state spends nearly four times more in fighting forest fires rather than prevention. The National Authority for Civil Protection (ANPC) indicates that this year’s fire fighting device has an estimated cost of 74 million euros, while the Ministry of Agriculture and Marine estimates it will spend close to 20 million in structural prevention.

Altogether, 94 million are allocated to forest fires, 79% of which will fight and only 21% to prevention.

This proportion can come to tilt the device to further combat, since the warning ANPC, the value for this year “is always subject to some adjustments taking into account mainly the weight associated with the extraordinary expenses” .

Last year, the situation was not much different, with the fighting device cost 75 million euros and 18 million structural prevention. This means that 81% of the money has been spent in fighting against 19% in prevention.

annual report concerning the fires of 2012, a document of the Institute for Nature Conservation and Forestry and the ANPC, explains the parcels included in the 18 million euros. The largest share (10.6 million euros) was intended to partially fund the 278 teams of sappers forest (1390 elements) and Group Analysis and Use of Fire (GAUF).

In

infrastructure defense against forest fires were spending close to € 3.8 million, including the improvement of water points, maintenance of forest roads and running tracks fuel management. For reimbursement of local forestry offices were allocated 3.19 million, having also been awarded 400,000 euros to raise awareness.

Francisco Rego, former director general of forest resources, the discrepancy regrets spending and advocates a more balanced distribution of resources between prevention and combat. But, above all, a teacher at the Higher Institute of Agronomy emphasizes the need to link the two structures so that the measures become more effective. “There is communicating vessels between the system of prevention and combat. Structures are very separate,” he stresses. And an example: “The opening tracks fuel should be made taking into account the accesses allow performing combat. But that does not always happen.”

professor recalls that GAUF had that goal, bringing more knowledge to combat the large fires, and regrets that the groups have been virtually dismantled. “What there are some teams assembled at the last minute just to say that there is just this,” says Francisco Rego.

Since 2011 these groups underwent a radical operation, having reduced the number of teams and also changed its composition. These now have less forest technicians specializing in the analysis of fire behavior and its use to fight fires.

Pedro Carrilho, forestry technician in Mafra Hunting Reserve, is not surprised by the discrepancy spending. “Forest management and prevention is a more difficult job that does not have much visibility,” he explains. He adds: “There are many people who want to work in the forest.’s Not paid, nor socially valued.” The engineer regrets, for example, starvation in the new Institute for Nature Conservation and Forestry. “In the forest there is a technical services per district that has no one below him.”

Francisco Rego does not challenge the merger between the Institute of Nature Conservation and National Forest Authority, but regrets that the fires have been menorizados the new structure. “Before there was a separate direction to address this area, it is now integrated with forest diseases,” he criticizes. The former director general of forest resources considers that this devaluation results ironically the success of measures taken after the tragic years of 2003 and 2005. “When there is a relative success, there has been disinvestment in trouble like he disappeared. Which is why it becomes cyclical,” he believes.

Paulo Fernandes, Professor, Department of Forest Sciences, University of Tras-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD), argues that the proportion of spending is reversed: “I should be spending more on prevention. And the long-term this would allow spending less in combat. ” The university awarded the little forest investment invisibility of this work and says, so it is easier to bet on the fight. “The forest area is extensive. Interventions mean an immense effort.’s A job that never ends and that we must continually keep.”

How

Francisco Rego, the teacher UTAD considers that there is a separation of structures for combating and prevention that makes no sense. “Often, the combat does not know how to take advantage of prevention, using, for example, areas with less fuel that were subject to actions prescribed burning,” he explains. Paulo Fernandes maintains that “firefighters confined the fire to wait on the road”, with much reluctance to intervene in forestry which makes many useless infrastructure defense against forest fires.