Glacier National Park updates wildfire response plan

A new fire management plan for Glacier National Park will incorporate prescribed burning and other forest treatments into the park’s ongoing efforts to prevent wildfires.  

Since the fire management plan’s last update in March 2003, public sentiment toward forest fires has evolved, park visitation has exploded, and about 221,000 acres of park land have burned in wildfires. Despite these shifts, Glacier National Park’s Fire Management Officer Jeremy Harker said the work on the ground remains much the same. 

“A lot of it’s in history. We’ve developed management techniques through centuries,” said Harker. “This has been a fire park in the public eye and the manager’s eye ever since 1910.” 

The 2025 fire management plan includes many of the same strategies that wildland firefighters already use to combat burns, including firelines and fuel breaks, backfires and burnouts, and the use of water and, in certain circumstances, chemical retardants. Under the new plan, crews will also undertake preventative measures in some areas of the park, all of which have been exposed to similar treatments before. 

Park officials plan to burn 400 acres of grassland and 150 acres of forest land in Big Prairie and Sullivan Meadow, mimicking management practices that indigenous peoples likely employed long before the park’s existence. Park officials completed prescribed burns in the 80s and 90s to maintain the open topography of the meadows and ponderosa pine stands, but lodgepole pines have since crept in, making the area more prone to catastrophic wildfires.  

Prescribed burns will target young lodgepole seedlings and take place during the moist spring months, when fire danger is low. An environmental assessment found that the prescribed burns would negatively impact air quality, wilderness quality, soundscapes and some wildlife in the short-term, though the effects would be minimal and localized. The burns are expected to benefit vegetation, soil health and cultural resources. 

Similar impacts are expected as crews thin forest stands around buildings and other structures. According to the plan, the complete fireproofing of historic structures and other resources is not possible, “but the probability of losing a structure to a wildfire would be reduced substantially through methods such as wrapping structures with fire resistant materials, use of water sprinklers, and the creation of defensible space.” 

Even with these measures in place, the Sprague Fire incinerated the Sperry Chalet in 2017. A year later, the Howe Ridge Fire burned several historic buildings at Kelly’s Camp and Wheeler Cabin. Harker said that the agency has not changed how it protects property in the aftermath of the Howe Ridge and Sprague fires.  

Instead, fire crews rely on an adaptive risk management approach that allows managers to make decisions based on the fire’s current behavior and predicted path. If a fire is likely to endanger property, cultural values or natural resource values, firefighters may move in to stop the blaze, but human life is always the priority. Sometimes that means pulling firefighters off the scene, even if it means a building will burn. 

“The plan allows us to do that and also to make the decision to throw everything we have at [the fire] to stop it and everything in between,” said Harker.  

The location of the fire can also play into the fire manager’s decisions. Harker said officials may be more likely to suppress wildfires east of the Continental Divide because the weather patterns can cause more dangerous conditions, especially for downwind structures.  

“We acknowledge that fire is more dangerous out there and so do our neighbors,” said Harker. “Those memories [of recent wildfires] are strong within the public on the east side.”  

The updated plan acknowledges the heightened risk by separating the park into two fire management units, with the Continental Divide as the boundary. Previously, the park had three fire management units that were largely based on the area’s level of development. 

Several specialists contributed to an environmental assessment for fire suppression and management techniques as part of the plan, which Harker said will factor into decisions on the ground. For example, in the unlikely instance a crew needs to use chemical retardants, it would be used in low concentrations and would not be sprayed near waterways to minimize impacts to bull trout and other native fish species. 

Once finalized, the new fire management plan could be the law of the park for the next 20 years, but there is still room to adapt for future unknowns, like climate change. The updated plan notes that temperatures in the park are expected to increase 2-4 F by 2050, and decreasing snowpack will likely cause more frequent and severe summer drought conditions, leading to longer and more severe fire seasons. 

“If future fire environments are warmer and precipitation patterns change, protecting life safety, and park values will become more challenging,” the plan states. 

Harker said climate change continues to be a part of intra-agency conversations and will be considered during an annual review of the fire management plan. 

The National Park Service is accepting public comments on the proposed plan and environmental assessment through March 12. The final plan will likely go into effect in early June. 

Reporter Hailey Smalley can be reached at hsmalley@dailyinterlake.com or 758-4433.