YOUR AD HERE »

Pitkin County supports wildfire plane refuels at airport

The intergovernmental agreement would hasten wildfire response times

With a capacity of 820 gallons, single-engine airtankers would be used at the refill station should Pitkin County approve the agreement.
Courtesy photo

Pitkin County may allow firefighting planes to refill their water tanks at the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport.

Rather than refill in Rifle, Grand Junction, or the Front Range, the agreement would give single-engine airtankers access to the Aspen hydrant system via the airport, giving them a quicker fire response time, according to Captain Andrew Treat of the Sardy Field Fire Department, the airport’s firefighting agency. The airtankers carry 820 gallons of water.

“(The agreement would) provide an extra layer of safety for our community in regards to wildfire,” Treat said in a county work session Tuesday. 



The agreement would include Sardy Field Fire Department, the Aspen Fire Protection District, and the City of Aspen. 

The state has two, single-engine airtankers on contract throughout the year, along with “Call when needed” airtankers it can rely upon, according to Jake Anderson, Aspen Fire Protection District Deputy Chief.




“If we’re able to get two or three aircraft in the pattern, that’s about as fast as you can use them.” Anderson said.

As it stands, both Rifle and Grand Junction offer water refills for single-engine airtankers, but only for the peak fire season, according to Treat. During other times of the year, the tankers must refill on the Front Range. 

The approval would not have a major impact on the airport, he said. The planes would be used mostly for rapid responses to major fires, such as the Lake Christine Fire, first dropping fire retardant, then using the airport to refill with water as needed. 

The use could put the airport under a temporary flight restriction for one to three days. Other emergency aircrafts and teams would retain the ability to use the airport during the flight restriction, such as Aircraft Rescue Firefighting, which responds to aircraft incidents. Longer-term use of the airport with other wildfire fighting crafts would have to be negotiated between the county and state or federal partners, Treat said.

A wildfire response requiring the use of the airport to refill would have only happened once in the last ten years, according to Anderson.

Air crews flying over the Lake Christine Fire on July 3, 2018. The Pitkin/County refill station for single engine airtankers would have been used to fight the fire, according to the Aspen Fire Protection District.
The Aspen Times archives

Though use of the hydrant system depends on the amount of local demand on a given day, Treat doesn’t anticipate air tankers to have a negligible impact.

“I don’t see that being a large impact on the water system,” he said. 

Commissioner Francie Jacober asked if filling at the airport would be more efficient than scooping water out of the Ruedi Reservoir. 

“If we have a fire in this valley, something that has to scoop out of Ruedi and then climb over that mountain to get out here,” Anderson said. “It makes it actually pretty inefficient, as opposed (to) if they can just land, taxi, refill and head back out.”

But in the event of a large, local wildfire, Treat predicted that the single-engine airtankers would respond first to the fire before “super scoopers” were brought in to supplement the fight by scooping from Ruedi.

The three entities involved in the agreement would split responsibilities in the event of a wildfire, he said.

The Sardy Field Fire Department would be tasked with staffing and training their own firefighters to refill and operate the station. They would notify the city when preparing to use the system and report the plane’s water usage. The Aspen Fire Protection District would provide equipment and help staff the tanker base. The City of Aspen would supply the water, if demand allows.

Commissioner Greg Poschman raised the question of furthering their fire fighting ability by including resources for planes dropping fire retardant. 

“For a lot of our areas, water would be the preferred medium anyways; it is not as effective, but it is safer for the other environmental concerns,” Anderson said. 

He added that the county could consider putting infrastructure in place to allow for a fire retardant tank to be connected to the airport in the event of a wildfire but advised against keeping a tank on hand because it’s difficult to manage.

The commissioners agreed to review the Intergovernmental Agreement for approval in March.

Share this story
Local