Analysis of costs and benefits of restoration-based hazardous fuel reduction, treatments vs. no treatment: Progress report #1 June 13, 2003.

This progress report presents preliminary results of an economic analysis comparing restoration-based fuel treatments to no treatments for areas identified at high risk for fire. The with and without treatment comparison focuses on ponderosa pine and dry mixed conifer forest ecosystems in New Mexico and Arizona. The analysis provides a conservative estimate of the potential economic losses due to no action. The results for New Mexico and Arizona indicate that restoration-based fuel treatments represent a rational economic choice even if one only considers direct avoided cost of current fires suppression activities. Society could pay up to (dollars)505 dollars per acre to treat the areas of high risk, and still break even in terms of investment. This investment cost is net of any value recovered from the restoration treatment; for example if the thinning part of a restoration treatment generated (dollars)200 per acre, the total break-even investment value rises to (dollars)700/acre. This investment break-even value does not include consideration of property damage and associated losses or lost ecosystem values, such as endangered species habitat and recreation amenity values