today Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018

Pyne: Three Fires Protecting the Wildland–Urban Interface Joint Fire Science Program and more …

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Follow us at or .

USDA Forest Service Like us at .

Fire Management Today is published by the Forest Service, an agency in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Wash- ington, DC. The purpose of Fire Management Today is to share information related to wildland fire management for the benefit of the wildland fire community. No longer appearing in print, Fire Management Today is available on the World Wide Web at https://www.fs.fed.us/managing-land/fire/fire-management-today.

Victoria Christiansen, Interim Chief Kaari Carpenter, General Manager Forest Service Hutch Brown, Editor Shawna A. Legarza, Psy.D., Director Fire and Aviation Management

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA pro- grams are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD–3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office, or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter by mailing it to: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC.

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

May 2018

Trade Names (FMT) The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement of any product or service by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Individual authors are responsible for the technical accuracy of the material presented in Fire Management Today. Fire Management today Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018

On the Cover: Contents Anchor Point Asking the Why...... 4 Shawna A. Legarza, Psy.D

Redirect That Load!...... 5 Randall C. Thomas

Three Fires...... 7 Stephen J. Pyne

The Effectiveness of Community Wildfire Protection Plans: Comments From the Field...... 11 James D. Absher, Jerry J. Vaske, and Courtney L. Peterson

Social Factors in Wildland Fire Risk Management A P3–A Orion, the signature Forest Service large airtanker of the past, and Planning...... 18 between missions in 2003. In recent David Martín Gallego, Eduard Plana Bach, and Domingo M. Molina Terrén years, a new generation of large airtankers has been brought into the fleet to replace the aging P3–A The Joint Fire Science Program: An Effective Knowledge Broker...... 23 Orions. For the story behind the cover Rebecca Smith and Martha E. Lee photo, see the article by Randall Thomas on page 5. Grant Funding for Fire Districts Helps Start Their Engines...... 27 Photo: Randall C. Thomas, Forest Service, 2003. Greg Johnson

Fire Control and the 1953 Rattlesnake Fire...... 29 The USDA Forest Service’s Fire and Aviation Hutch Brown Management Staff has adopted a logo reflecting three central principles of wildland fire management: Fire Camp Overrun by Fire...... 35 • Innovation: We will respect and value Region 3 RLS Team thinking minds, voices, and thoughts of those that challenge the status quo while focusing on the greater good. Guidelines for Contributors...... 37 • Execution: We will do what we say we will do. Achieving program objectives, improving diversity, and accomplishing targets are essential to our credibility. • Discipline: What we do, we will do well. Fiscal, managerial, and operational discipline are at the core of our ability to fulfill our mission.

Firefighter and public safety is our first priority.

Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 3 Anchor By Shawna A. Legarza, Psy.D. Director, Fire and Aviation Management Point USDA Forest Service

Asking the Why

he summer of 2017 marks Second, I believe in the Forest we must do our best to meet fire a year since I have had the Service mission of sustaining the management objectives, but we Thonor of becoming the health, diversity, and productivity of can’t allow responders to risk their Director of Fire and Aviation the Nation’s forests and grasslands lives attempting the improbable. As Management for the Forest Service. to meet the needs of present and stated in the Chief’s letter of intent I say that with all sincerity, because future generations. That is not just for the 2018 fire year, “Each of us like most challenges throughout a mission statement for me. It gives must remain committed to ‘stop, my career it has given me the me so much pride to have helped think and talk’ before ‘acting’ in any opportunity to learn and grow. build some of our trails, perform circumstance that may represent hazardous fuels treatments, and unnecessary exposure.” This has to I have been interviewed numerous improve habitat for diverse species. become our new cultural norm. times about my new role and what I jog those trails, and we all reap I see as priorities as we move into the benefits of that hard work by So with that, I will ask for YOUR the future. Of course, budget, enjoying clean water, amazing help. Look after your fire family. If aviation, risk, safety, and landscape you see someone struggling, tell management have always come up. them they have a friend who will But as I continue to reflect, I realize listen and assist them to find help. that the answer always comes back We must do our best to We work in an environment with a to two areas: meet fire management high level of exposure; it’s hard work, objectives, but we can’t and we need to help each other. 1. Our work environment, and 2. The mission of the agency allow responders to risk If someone is making a decision their lives attempting that you think will unnecessarily First, I work hard every day to put you, them, or someone else influence change in our workplace the improbable. in danger, speak up. Talk about it. environment. We work in an Ask the why! We need everyone’s extremely complex system at various vigilance, experience, and levels, including boots on the recreation, hunting, and beautiful contributions to be successful. ground, dispatchers, aviators, and views. I am proud to be part of the incident management teams. I am Forest Service and contribute to Thank you for the work you do! ■ very driven to help our employees those efforts. have a workplace environment that is diverse, inclusive, and free of In the wildland fire community, discrimination and harassment. we have all unfortunately lost peers and coworkers; therefore,

Fire Management Today 4 Redirect That Load! Randall C. Thomas

he photo in figure 1 was taken priority fire. As forest aviation during the 2003 fire season at This is what I officer, Bernie made the decision, Tthe Coeur d’Alene Airtanker in conjunction with Dispatch, that Base in Hayden, ID. The airtanker would classify as there wasn’t enough time to hand is T–27, a P–3A Orion operated by a complicated and the crew a new resource order. Aero Union. complex operation. So Ed needed to direct the pilot Ed Kurowski (standing near the to properly park the airtanker for aircraft in an orange-and-yellow reloading with fire retardant. At the vest) is in communication with the same time, Bernie needed to give these people perform. As Bernie pilot of T–27. Ed is marshaling in the copilot a whole range of new explained it, the T–27 had just the airtanker. information, including the latitude dropped a load of retardant on a and longitude of the higher priority fire; the pilot was returning to base Bernie Lionberger (standing in the fire, the new frequencies that they and taxiing in, expecting what’s foreground, visible from the rear) would be using, any hazards they called a “load and return.” Instead, is talking with the copilot (on a might face, the ground contacts the aircraft was being reassigned to different frequency) concerning they would have, the tail numbers a higher priority fire. a change in the dispatch. As he of other aircraft working on the fire, described it to me, Bernie was and more. The copilot needed to The problem was this: the airtanker giving the copilot a “face-to-face program this new information while needed to get reloaded as quickly as briefing” with limited daylight left, the pilot was operating the aircraft. possible and take off for the higher redirecting air attack over a higher priority fire.

Complex Operation This is what I would classify as a complicated and complex operation. It has the challenges of an objective with a desired outcome, along with a sudden change in mission.

Years after I took the photo, I asked Bernie if he remembered anything about it, and he told me about the change in mission, making me truly understand and appreciate the complexity of the tasks

Randall Thomas is the lead fire dispatcher for the USDA Forest Service at the Coeur d’Alene Interagency Dispatch Center in Figure 1—A P3–A Orion, the signature Forest Service large airtanker of the past. Photo: Hayden, ID. Randall A. Thomas, USDA Forest Service, 2003.

Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 5 This was definitely a much more If any of the new information was incorrectly complex procedure than what a copilot and ramp person (Bernie) relayed, it could delay the suppression of an would normally have been doing emerging wildfire. to reload a large airtanker. If any of the new information was incorrectly relayed, it could delay the suppression of an emerging wildfire. Both Ed and Bernie have since I used the money to buy a Pentax retired after many years of service. film camera. Highly Experienced I had a chance to work closely with Personnel both for a few years after starting The year 2003 turned into a big work at the Coeur d’Alene Wildland fire year for the Northern Rockies Bernie Lionberger was involved Fire Center in May 1999. Bernie as well as other areas in the West. with Fire and Aviation Management and Ed both had many years of When I could get a break, I took on the Idaho Panhandle National experience and training in the pictures of airtanker operations Forest from the early 1960s until his wildland fire aviation world; both on the ramp. Bernie himself was a retirement in 2004. When he retired, were very good at and knowledgeable good photographer, and he gave me Bernie was the fire and aviation about their jobs. Bernie was the lead many tips. officer for the forest, a position he instructor at several aviation classes had held since the early 1980s. that I attended. One of the photos I took is the one shown in figure 1. The photo has Ed Kurowski was involved with Fire always had a special effect on me, and Aviation Management from the Background on the Photo and I always wanted to share the early 1960s until his retirement In spring 2003, the Northern story behind it with the wildland in 2006. Ed was a smokejumper Regional Office gave me a cash fire community. ■ out of the Coeur d’Alene Airtanker award for helping to plan and Base (which had a satellite jump implement the Resource Ordering base until 1988). In 1988, Ed was and Status System, a new computer reassigned to the airtanker base as a system for ordering and tracking mix master and ramp manager. resources for wildland firefighting.

Fire Management Today 6 Three Fires Stephen J. Pyne

odern wildland fire management effectively The policy of resistance failed as a universal strategy Mbegan in the aftermath of the Great Fires of 1910. The Big because it proved impossible to abolish fire. Blowup traumatized the fledgling Forest Service and its Chiefs for decades. One of the aftershocks, the 1911 Weeks Act, established the Policy of Resistance suppression, so far as possible (fig. basis for a national infrastructure, 1). The Forest Service connected For the next 50 years, the with the Forest Service as the Federal agencies and States. It was country pursued a strategy of fire institutional matrix. a policy of resistance—that is, it sought to eliminate the fire threat by attacking every fire before it could become big, a kind of forward strategy. Part of the appeal of the policy was its administrative clarity and unblinking rules of engagement that mandated control by 10 a.m. on the morning following a fire’s discovery. By 1960, the Forest Service had become a benign hegemon that controlled nearly every aspect of wildland fire and much of the rural fire scene.

This approach proved useful for rapidly building out a national system. It failed, however, as a universal strategy because it proved impossible to abolish fire. The reason was that fires that escaped initial attack became bigger. Moreover,

Steve Pyne is a professor in the School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ. He recently published Between Two Fires: A Fire History of Contemporary America and To the Last Smoke, a suite of regional fire surveys.

Editor’s note: This essay is based on testimony the author gave to the Senate Figure 1—Suppression of a wildland fire in 1967 by Forest Service firefighters on Idaho’s Committee on Natural Resources and Kaniksu National Forest. Photo: W.E. Steuerwald, USDA Forest Service. Energy in May 2015.

Volume 76 • No. 1 • 2018 7 many landscapes suffered from a lack The reformation in fire management begun in of fire; the strategy eliminated good fires as well as bad ones. It forced the 1960s has not achieved anything like the one agency to absorb and resolve dimensions projected or needed. all the tensions regarding how the national estate should be managed.

Strategy of Restoration The first salvos in this fire revolution from interagency programs to came in 1962. By 1968, the National intergovernmental ones, and now In the 1960s, a new strategy of Park Service had recanted the 10 they include nongovernmental restoration emerged. It sought to a.m. Policy in favor of restoration; in organizations and the private sector reinstate the good fires lost under 1978, the Forest Service achieved as well. The collapse of the old the previous regime, it wanted a complete overhaul of its fire order was remarkably swift. It was a more pluralistic oversight of mission and its financing. The new like watching the Berlin Wall fall policy than that provided by the strategy pivoted around a concept overnight—or, less dramatically, Forest Service, and it nurtured a of fire by prescription. Good fires like watching the breakup of AT&T’s civil society to counter what was would be introduced deliberately telephone monopoly, which happened becoming a de facto government on working landscapes, and natural at the same time. monopoly. Critically, it was not fires would be granted more room enough to have a stand-alone to do their ecological work in wild fire protection program: fire Stalled Fire Revolution landscapes; both kinds of fire would had to be integrated with land The new strategy has now run its be conducted under a specified set of management. Over the next 15 own 50-year course, and its problems guidelines called a prescription. years, every Federal land agency and promises have sharpened. had its mission redefined or Prescribed burning has proved more Meanwhile, interagency organizations rechartered. As the purpose of a regional than a national project. supplemented and then replaced those lands changed, so did their It works as a foundational doctrine the singular role of the Forest requirements for fire. in the Southeast and parts of the Service (fig. 2). Then they expanded Great Plains—although no one seems to get as much burning done as they believe they need—but it has not become a routine operation in the West or Alaska. The prescribed natural fire thrived in Alaska under a different set of guidelines but died nationally as a concept after the 1988 Yellowstone fires, although it continues to be reincarnated in other avatars.

The fire revolution overall stalled during the 1980s. The reasons are many, some within the purview of the American fire community, many not. Reforms renewed after the 1994 season, culminating in a common Federal wildland fire policy (1995) and the National Fire Plan (2000). The project has had its successes Figure 2—Prescribed fire to reduce invasive Johnson grass near Sedona, AZ. The fire was and showcase programs, but the sad part of an interagency Wildland Fire Skills Training Day on March 27, 2017, sponsored fact remains that the reformation in by the Valley Verde All Hazards Training Association, with participation by six local and fire management has not achieved Federal agencies. Photo: USDA Forest Service, Coconino National Forest. anything like the dimensions

Fire Management Today 8 projected or needed. Most observers wildland fire organizations into Moreover, the actual area involved consider that the threats are an all-hazards emergency service, is small relative to the size of outpacing responses. Moreover, effectively urban fire departments in the challenge. The threats are the institutional scene has been the woods—or, at a national level, a growing bigger and faster than overwhelmed by competing purposes kind of Coast Guard for the interior. our responses. We need flexibility and new organizations, including to operate on landscape scales, volunteer fire departments; a gamut This is happening globally, motivated not only geographically but also of nongovernmental organizations, by desires to protect structures and institutionally. We need to move from The Nature Conservancy to lives. Evidence to date suggests that beyond single projects and events. the National Coalition of Prescribed such a revival or a repurposing can There is little reason to believe that Fire Councils; and private help serve a threatened public, the country will muster the will to companies that have grown on such but it has not shown that it can rehabilitate at the rate required the a scale that critics now speak of a manage fire because it breaks the 39–58 million acres believed to be fire-industrial complex. bond between fire management out of whack. and land management. While a resistance strategy retains the Resilience. In the West, a strategy strengths of fire suppression, is emerging that accepts, in fact Burnouts under a it also retains its formidable if not in doctrine, that we cannot resilience strategy may weaknesses as a singular strategy. get ahead of the problems coming at us. Instead, it allows for the well be the future of Restoration. Restoration remains management of wildland fires prescribed fire in the an inspirational goal for many to shift from attempts at direct practitioners, either to return control to more indirect reliance on West. to a Golden Age in the past or confining and containing outbreaks to advance toward one in the (fig. 3). Of course, there are fires that future. Its motivation is a near- simply bolt away from the moment universal unhappiness with the of ignition or that need immediate Which leads to a consideration of existing scene. But restoration, suppression. But many fires offer what the next 50 years might hold. A too, has upgraded its mission to opportunities to back off and burn new strategy seems to be congealing include complex collaborations, out. It is hoped that this strategy in the West that we might label ways to supplement prescribed will prove more cost-effective and resilience. It accepts that we aren’t fire with other treatments, and a safer for fire crews while introducing going to get ahead of the problem determination to get ahead of the some degree of semicontrolled overall, that too many variables problem—to gather and apply the ecological burning. are in motion, and that the fire best science in order to restructure community controls too few of those the national estate in such a way These are not let-burns. Rather, fire causes to intervene in fundamental that we can control bad fires and officers concentrate their efforts at ways. It seeks to make the best of reintroduce good fires more easily, point protection where assets are the hand we are being dealt, even if, cheaply, and safely. most valuable, such as communities, paradoxically, American society is municipal watersheds, or sequoia the dealer. There are many projects actively groves. Elsewhere, they will try to underway. Yet if the restoration pick places—draw boxes—from Three Strategies vision still shines brightly, so, too, which they can hold with minimum its problems continue to darken. costs, risks, and damages. A given These three historical eras It has proved costly, not only in fire might see aggressive firefighting underwrite the three general money but in political and social on one flank or on one day and strategies in play today. capital. Research, reviews, protocols a more removed burning out on under the National Environmental another flank or at another time. Resistance. There remains an Old Policy Act, endless conversations Guard from the 1960s who would among stakeholders—these are a These are hybrid fires—half like a return to the former order, necessary exercise in democracy but suppression, half prescribed burn. and there are more contemporary can take years. The strategy is compatible with thinkers who want to transform Federal policy and in many respects Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 9 could become the start of a kind of fire constitution that redefines for our Federal system the roles, rights, and responsibilities of the many, many players in the American way of fire. It could do for the future what the Weeks Act did after the Big Blowup in 1910.

A Mix of Strategies So, three strategies. It’s worth pointing out that all fire strategies suffer failures and at roughly the same rate. Some 2–3 percent of wildfires escape initial attack. Probably a comparable number of prescribed fires escape or fail to do the ecological work expected. And we can expect similar rates of Figure 3—Firefighters on the 2014 Happy Camp Complex Fire, Klamath National breakdowns with managed wildfires. Forest, northern California. The lightning-ignited fire complex, managed with a resilience strategy (partly suppressed wildfire, partly prescribed burn/monitored-and- Without wishing to sound flip or managed wildfire), ultimately scorched more than 135,000 acres (54,000 ha). push an analogy too far, we might Photo: Kari Greer, USDA Forest Service (September 17, 2014). call the resistance strategy a rock, the restoration strategy a scissors, burn within a range of tolerance. and the resilience strategy a paper. At All three strategies Such burnouts may well be the any one time and place, one trumps future of prescribed fire in the West. another and is in turn trumped. All remain in play, and all If so, we need to do them better, and three remain in play, and all three three are needed. we need to understand how to build are needed. We need rocks around future landscapes out of the patchy our prize assets and communities aftermath of the megafires that when they are threatened by active define the current regime. fires. We need scissors to buffer moves in directions long urged by against bad burns and nudge toward critics and even by the Government Equally, we need a reordering of good ones as part of managing Accountability Office, although the institutional scene. In political healthy land. And we need resilience it can look like a mashup and the terms, we are witnessing the because the ideal can be the enemy outcomes will be mixed. Some American fire community’s Euro of the good, and a mixed strategy patches will burn more severely than moment. We either truly integrate, that includes boxing-and-burning we would like and some will barely we break up, or we tolerate endless may be the best we can hope for. ■ burn at all, but the rest will likely bailouts. The National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy

Fire Management Today 10 The Effectiveness of Community Wildfire Protection Plans: Comments from the Field James D. Absher, Jerry J. Vaske, and Courtney L. Peterson

ommunity wildfire protection plans (CWPPs) have been Cpromoted as key to mitigating losses from wildfire and addressing the challenges of living in the wildland–urban interface (WUI). Candid responses from professionals and residents involved in CWPP development and implementation in Colorado supplement prior quantitative results that highlighted the complex social nature of CWPPs (Vaske and others 2016). We evaluated both successes and challenges in the ongoing efforts to formulate and carry out CWPPs. These voices from the field will hopefully assist others as they focus on gaining local community support for CWPP planning and implementation. Colorado State Forest Service Volunteer Day, Colorado State University Mountain Campus. Keeping the forest properly thinned and pruned in a defensible space will CWPPs in General reduce the chances of a home burning during a wildfire. Photo: Colorado State Forest CWPPs were authorized and Service (2012). defined by the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA 2003). and community planners to public They emphasize community There are no “cookie opinions beyond expert knowledge planning for a variety of benefits and scientific inquiry. Because local to communities from a wildfire cutter” approaches for knowledge is a crucial component protection plan. A CWPP represents communities faced with of a community, social capital is an an opportunity for a community to important element of CWPPs. rise to the challenges of the WUI wildfire risk. by incorporating comprehensive The National Cohesive Wildland Fire and locally supported solutions, Management Strategy has made bringing together diverse local solution-oriented environment. fire-adapted communities a goal for interests, and offering a positive, CWPPs address challenges such as all fire-affected communities (Jewell local firefighting capability and the and Vilsack 2014). CWPPs can be need for defensible space around an integral part of fire-adapted James Absher and Jerry Vaske are, homes and subdivisions. They set communities because the plans respectively, affiliate and professor, Human priorities for land management on bring together diverse agencies, Dimensions of Natural Resources, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO; and both Federal and non-Federal land. community leaders, and residents Courtney Peterson is the wildfire mitigation The involvement of local citizens in into a cohesive whole that develops education coordinator for the Colorado community wildfire preparedness collaborative plans and sustainable State Forest Service, Fort Collins, CO. also exposes wildland fire managers programs through concerted effort Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 11 at all levels, including counties, fire Most plans tend to share a common emphasis on protection districts, and owners associations (Booz Allen Hamilton a relatively small range of activities centered on 2014; CWPP Task Force 2008; fuels reduction. Hawkins and others 2004; Jakes and others 2012).

There are no “cookie cutter” also found that CWPPs need a excluded.) A template for writing approaches for communities faced clear prioritization of implementable CWPPs is available on the Colorado with wildfire risk (see, for example, projects. Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal Cooke and others 2016; and Toman website (CSFS 2012). A list of and others 2013). Ellison and others CWPPs in Colorado completed CWPPs can be found on (2015) suggest that preparedness the Colorado State Forest Service actions tend to emphasize county- The Colorado State Forest Service website (CSFS 2017). level rather than more localized has established minimum standards community settings. Other work for the development of CWPPs in With over 200 CWPPs now in points to the importance of Colorado and has promoted the existence in Colorado, it is essential understanding and incorporating development and implementation to assess the effectiveness of these the social dynamics within a group of CWPPs as a tool to help build efforts and identify barriers to of actors (Brummel and others fire-adapted communities. Colorado participation and implementation. 2010; Jakes and Sturtevant 2013) or requires counties to complete a In Colorado, the CWPP process a community’s specific needs and CWPP for identified fire hazard must include local government, the capacities (Everett and Fuller 2011). areas within unincorporated areas local fire authority, local Colorado Studies of CWPPs suggest that of the county. Of Colorado’s 62 State Forest Service personnel, and “social learning” is important (Jakes counties with unincorporated representatives of relevant Federal and Sturtevant 2013), as are framing, areas, 49 counties have completed land management agencies as well as scale, and building sustainable a countywide CWPP. (Denver and other appropriate nongovernmental capacity (Williams and others 2012). Broomfield Counties are completely partners (CSFS 2012). Abrams and others (2014) show that incorporated and are therefore there is considerable variation in the plans’ content, despite detailed writing guidelines.

Most plans tend to share a common emphasis on a relatively small range of activities centered on fuels reduction. Residential surveys in Colorado (Absher and others 2009) reveal that many “easy” defensible- space activities were commonly reported but that more expensive or technically complex activities were not reported. Community participation in planning efforts was less likely to occur than any other individual homeowner defensible space action. The Forest Stewards Guild of CWPPs in New Mexico (Evans and others 2015) found that for effective mitigation to occur, Demonstration site for a community wildfire protection plan, East Canyon, CO. people are the key. The CWPP Demonstration sites within the community can be great tools for motivating neighbors process needs to be inclusive from to engage in wildfire mitigation practices. Photo: Colorado State Forest Service (2014). the development stage. The study Fire Management Today 12 There are, however, significant associations. Interview participants would benefit from paying more differences among the Colorado were selected based on geographic attention to postfire issues such as CWPPs, beginning with who writes variability, plan level, and the year of erosion and debris removal. the document. A CWPP can apply CWPP development. • CWPPs can quickly become to any level of “community,” from outdated due to changes in an owners association or mountain Key Findings and Voices of community structure. They may town, to a fire protection district, CWPP Team Members need updating to refocus and to a metropolitan city or county. reenergize implementation efforts. County-level plans can be used as The quantitative part of this study an umbrella for smaller scale plans (Vaske and others 2016) showed Based on the open-ended comments but should not be considered a that a CWPP should not be static. It and interview responses, six key substitute, because county-level functions best as a living document themes emerged (Vaske and others plans will not provide the detail that is based on a coalescence of 2016): needed for project planning at the interests, as framed in the plan’s level of a fire protection district or guidelines and subsequently 1. Recommendations for CWPP an owners association. implemented and modified over planning, 2. Recommendations for CWPP Study Design implementation, Plans function best as 3. Challenges to community This article emerged from a larger living documents based involvement, study of CWPPs in Colorado 4. Recommendations for successful (Vaske and others 2016) focusing on a coalescence of community involvement, on communications among team interests, implemented 5. Suggestions for focusing beyond members, success in funding fuels mitigation, and and implementing their plans, and modified over time. 6. Suggestions for updating plans. progress toward CWPP goals, fuels treatments implemented, barriers This article summarizes the written to implementation, and CWPP and interview comments that outreach and education efforts. In time. As such, CWPPs will have support these themes. this article, we build on the main inherent strengths and weaknesses, results in the project reports and some of which stem from the values Recommendations for CWPP bring to light the comments from and viewpoints of the CWPP team. Planning managers and team members who Both the Healthy Forests Restoration were closely involved in the plans In particular, the quantitative survey Act and the CWPPs are flexible, but and their implementation. results suggested that: their flexibility can sometimes be a barrier for more localized plans We obtained data from a survey • The flexibility of CWPPs, though (such as for subdivisions or owners mailed to all 212 CWPPs in Colorado an advantage, can be a barrier associations) where leaders have less in spring 2014; we received 133 for owners associations that have expertise. Getting started with the responses, for a response rate limited expertise on their planning CWPP process can often be difficult. of 63 percent. The survey asked teams. One landowner, for example, said open-ended questions about CWPP • Communities report funding and that “interest cannot be from some development and implementation. time as the main barriers to CWPP official saying you have to do this.” From August 2014 to January implementation. Generating community interest in 2015, we obtained additional • Other challenges to CWPP the CWPP process must come from information through 18 indepth, implementation focus on resident the community itself. Positive and semistructured interviews with key participation, notably community forward-thinking sparkplugs from participants involved in Colorado’s involvement, communication within the community can give the CWPP process. Survey and interview among community members, and CWPP development process traction. participants represented a variety full communitywide participation. of levels of CWPPs, ranging from • Some plans would benefit from One of the CWPP contractors countywide, to fire protection greater focus on preparedness and noted that it is important to “try districts, to subdivisions or owners evacuation planning; other plans

Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 13 to make the CWPP process as easy general in terms of not specifying available as a tool to use. One as possible; don’t make it overly enough particular projects that fire chief said “there wasn’t much regulatory because it scares people needed to be done.” Detailing involvement in the planning side of away. [You] need people to do it in specific projects, such as fuelbreaks it. In fact, I would say almost nobody the first place. Things will happen along main access and egress roads in the community even knows it’s from there.” Providing guidance that or thinning projects in open spaces out there with the exception of a is accessible to people at all levels of within communities, can help serve couple specific neighborhoods that CWPP expertise can help to make as an implementation roadmap. we have discussed the CWPP with.” It the plan more usable and achievable. The right level of detail can also is also important to communicate the One landowner suggested that help with grant applications. One relevance of the CWPP to community the Colorado State Forest Service emergency manager suggested members so that they can determine “provide a template for writing a “building answers to grant how best to use the CWPP to CWPP as this makes the process application questions into your accomplish the community’s wildfire less daunting, and allows a focus on plans.” The more detail put into the risk reduction objectives. specific projects.” More outreach CWPP from the beginning, the easier must be done to communicate the it will be to apply for grants and Several interview participants location of the CWPP template on prioritize implementation projects. claimed that very few community the Colorado State Forest Service Finally, the time to carry out projects members attended meetings. For website (CSFS 2012). example, one contractor stated that “when we had the interested Recommendations for CWPP Community engagement party meeting, the only people that Implementation showed up were CSFS [Colorado Minimum requirements of the CWPP in the process is a key State Forest Service], a couple process include identifying fuels goal—but one of the county commissioners, the sheriff, the fire chief and a couple of his treatment priorities and methods hardest to achieve. and developing an implementation buddies, and myself and that was it.” plan. Based on our survey (Vaske and Members of the community that the others 2016), CWPP representatives countywide CWPP was being written faced challenges to implementing for were not present. Communities projects, such as lack of funding, outlined within a community’s CWPP must find incentives to bring all time, community involvement, and is when wildfires are in the news and stakeholders to the table; combining political support. A key message smoke is in the air. One contractor meetings with food is often helpful from the interview participants was urged the community to “build on in achieving that goal. that communities cannot depend on momentum—take advantage of grants and other funds to get work time after wildfires to get the public Another challenge to community on the ground done. One landowner involved.” When wildfires are in the involvement in the CWPP emphasized the need to “sell people news, community interest is peaking, process is a lack of engagement on the concept that it’s important to and that is the time to really push to by secondary homeowners and do the work outlined in the CWPP, get projects done. absentee landowners, which can be whether we have outside funding or extremely frustrating for full-time not.” Another landowner, a member Challenges to Community residents and property managers of an owners association, called for Involvement within communities. One landowner “a commitment that we have in our One of the main goals of CWPPs said that “it’s very hard to make an budget money to self-fund work.” is to engage the community in impression on somebody if you only That way, even without access to wildfire mitigation planning and get to have a short time, maybe a few grant funds, the community can implementation. Community weeks for them to understand what continue to accomplish the fuels engagement, however, is one of their property does and how it affects treatments outlined in its CWPP. the hardest goals to achieve. Our their neighbors.” To overcome this interviewees mentioned a number challenge, one landowner suggested Specific projects should be written of challenges to community “encouraging owners to protect their into the CWPP. One fire chief said involvement, the first being investment by taking mitigation that the “CWPP was probably too knowledge that the CWPP is actions.” If absentee landowners don’t seem interested in doing Fire Management Today 14 Recommendations for Successful Community Involvement Despite the challenges to community involvement throughout the CWPP process, interviewees had many recommendations for better engaging communities, an important component of CWPP success. Some suggested using the CWPP as an educational tool. One fire chief said that “developing the CWPP was a great way to learn more about the area we protect.” CWPPs can inform local emergency service personnel about the community values at risk, and emergency workers can in turn use the CWPP to educate newcomers to the WUI about wildfire risk in the area. “Copies of the evacuation plan are available for new residents. One family has made multiple copies for Houses in the red zone in Colorado’s wildland–urban interface (WUI). Over 2 million people live in Colorado’s WUI, making it more important than ever for communities to cabin guests,” said one landowner. engage in wildfire risk reduction through community wildfire protection plans. Photo: Colorado State Forest Service (2015). Another successful practice was to highlight properties where work had been properly done and was being maintained. “The most effective “The most effective way of educating and way of educating and informing the informing the community about the plan was using community about the plan was using my own property as an example,” my own property as an example,” said one landowner. Having said one landowner. community members tour their neighbors’ firesafe properties can help overcome misconceptions about what wildfire mitigation actually mitigation work, they can be told it is imperative to get them engaged means and looks like on the ground. of the investment they would lose if in wildfire risk reduction efforts their property burns in a wildfire. now. Specifically involving youth CWPPs should also be used to groups or younger residents to do create a sense of community and The final challenge to community mitigation work helps out elderly place. As one landowner said, involvement throughout the CWPP community members, who might “[W]e build a community, and when process was a lack of involvement find the work more challenging. you’re trying to establish either a by younger generations. “It’s As a volunteer firefighter put it, wildfire protection plan or a Firewise definitely mostly retirement age. “[G]et younger landowners involved community, community is the key I’m saying anywhere from 50 to in mitigation work by helping their word. People need to know each 75,” said one mitigation specialist neighbors do work on their land … if other and care about each other and when describing the community they’ve actually donated an hour or a talk to each other.” A best practice members directly involved in the couple of hours of their time … they is to encourage everyone in the work. Younger generations will are probably willing to stay invested community to join in developing the be the future forest landowners in in the project over the long term.” CWPP plan so that everyone feels communities with wildfire risk, so responsible for the community. That

Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 15 makes it easier to get neighbors to the CWPPs need to incorporate an “If you’re trying to get traction and take action to protect the place they evacuation and preparedness piece get a first CWPP done … it might call home. much more than [an] implementation almost be counterproductive to worry piece.” The evacuation piece people about … the aftermath. We’re Another successful approach is to is a minimum requirement in trying to get people to be positive use existing community groups Colorado for CWPPs. Each plan and forward thinking.” However, if and resources to better involve the needs to include information on the communities are truly going to be community throughout the CWPP community’s preparedness to respond prepared for a wildfire, they need to process. A contractor suggested to a wildfire and describe steps to take consider the postfire effects as a part “utiliz[ing] organized groups, events, when a wildfire occurs. of their CWPPs. community gathering places (e.g., fire station).” The momentum of people There should also be a focus on Suggestions for Updating Plans already engaged in making their postfire issues related to wildfire. As plans are carried out, the people community a better place can instill Often, postfire issues are not involved and the yearly activities interest in CWPP implementation included in CWPPs, but several will change. A 10-year planning as well. The recommendations interviewees noted that it’s cycle might not be adequate. Several that communities decide to follow important to start thinking about interviewees noted that updates should be listed in an action plan those things ahead of time. Erosion were necessary because plans were for community involvement as a is a major issue after wildfires, but outdated. component of the CWPP. the topic is typically not discussed in CWPPs. Before a large wildfire One fire chief, for example, noted Suggestions for Focusing Beyond occurs, a community should compile that “the CWPP is being updated Fuels Mitigation a list of things to have ready (such because 80 percent of the area has Although agency funding and as dumpsters for all the debris that experienced fires and flooding.” Other programs correctly emphasize fuel accumulates during a wildfire). interviewees, however, argued that issues, such issues should not be the most plans have already addressed sole focus of the CWPP. Comments Some interviewees noted that postfire the low-hanging fruit and that more from the CWPP surveys and issues might be more practical to difficult projects are not as likely to interviewees emphasized the need include in an update than in the first get done. Other suggested reasons to for more focus on preparedness and draft of a CWPP. If you are trying to update or revise a CWPP include: evacuation planning. One emergency get a first CWPP completed, it might manager said that “if anything needed be better to focus on preparedness • Community turnover—the plans to be changed, it would be that actions. As one interviewee noted, are driven by people, and as the community changes, so too should the CWPP team; SUCCESS STORIES WANTED! • Changes in community structure, especially as new houses or other We’d like to know how your work has been going! Let us share your success stories from your State fire program or your individual fire department. Let infrastructure are added; us know how your State Fire Assistance, Volunteer Fire Assistance, Federal • Changes in risk due to shifting Excess Personal Property, or Firefighter Property program has benefited your seasons or the occurrence of community. Make your piece as short as 100 words or longer than 2,000 words, drought or fires that affect the whatever it takes to tell your story! CWPP area; and Submit your stories and photographs by email or traditional mail to: • Improvements in firefighting, prevention, and mitigation USDA Forest Service techniques. Fire Management Today 201 14th Street, SW Making CWPPs More Washington, DC 20250 Effective Email: [email protected] The six themes summarized in If you have questions about your submission, you can contact our FMT staff at this article do not comprise a the email address above. comprehensive review of all the issues facing CWPPs. However, the Fire Management Today 16 experiences of those involved in behavioral studies. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW– Hawkins, J.; Jungwirth, L.; Cope, R.; Newman, Colorado’s WUI are informative and GTR–223. Albany, CA: USDA Forest Service, C. 2004. Community wildfire protection Pacific Southwest Research Station. 31 p. plans from four angles. Journal of Forestry. give practical direction for those in Booz Allen Hamilton. 2014. Quadrennial fire 102(6): 4–7. similar situations elsewhere. review. [Place of publication unknown]: HFRA (Healthy Forests Restoration Act). 2003. [Publisher unknown]; final report; on 16 U.S.C. 6501 et seq. http://www.fs.fed.us/ In general, we encourage those behalf of the USDA Forest Service, Fire emc/applit/includes/hfr2003.pdf. (October involved with CWPPs to think of the and Aviation Management, and U.S. 14, 2016). Department of the Interior, Office of Jakes, P.J.; Esposito, C.; Burns, S. [and others]. plans as ongoing and emerging. A Wildland Fire, Washington, DC. 80 p. 2012. Best management practices for broad set of actors and actions should https://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/ creating a community wildfire protection be represented in CWPP planning QFR/documents/2014QFRFinalReport.pdf. plan. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS–89. Newtown guidelines, especially with respect to (August 16, 2017). Square, PA: USDA Forest Service, Northern communication and collaboration. Brummel, R.F.; Nelson, K.C.; Souter, S.G. Research Station. 27 p. [and others]. 2010. Social learning in a Jakes, P.J.; Sturtevant, V. 2013. Trial by fire: Our findings are consistent with other policy-mandated collaboration: community community wildfire protection plans put to work done in Colorado and elsewhere wildfire protection planning in the Eastern the test. International Journal of Wildland on related topics, such as community United States. Journal of Environmental Fire. 22: 1134–1143. preparedness and fire-adapted Planning and Management. 53(6): 681–699. Jewell, S.; Vilsack, T.J. 2014. The national Cooke, B.; Williams, D.; Paveglio, T.; Carroll, M. strategy: the final phase in the development communities (see, for example, 2016. Living with fire: how social scientists of the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Leschak 2014; Stein and others 2014; are helping wildland-urban interface Management Strategy. Washington, DC: and Mowery and Prudhomme 2014). communities reduce wildfire risk. Science USDA/U.S. Department of the Interior. 93 You Can Use Bulletin. 19. Fort Collins, p. https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/projects/ Given that CWPPs were authorized CO: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain firex/2014-National-Cohesive-Wildland- Research Station. 9 p. Fire-Management-Strategy.pdf. (August 11, more than a decade ago under the CSFS (Colorado State Forest Service). 2017.) Healthy Forests Restoration Act, it 2012. Community wildfire protection Leschak, P. 2014. Fire adapted communities. is important to take stock of their plan (CWPP) template. 9 p. https:// Fire Management Today. 73(3): 7–8. impacts at various levels. County www.coloradowildfirerisk.com/Help/ Mowery, M.; Prudhomme, C. 2014. Proactive plans tend to focus on the landscape CwppTemplate. (October 14, 2016). protection: a community-wide approach to CSFS (Colorado State Forest Service). 2017. wildfire preparedness. Fire Management and cross-boundary projects. Plans led Colorado’s community wildfire protection Today. 73(3): 9–12. by fire protection districts often focus plans. http://csfs.colostate.edu/wildfire- Stein, S.M.; Menakis, J.; Carr, M.A. [and on tactical operational issues that are mitigation/colorado-community-wildfire- others]. 2014. Wildfire, wildlands, and important if a fire approaches. Plans at protection-plans/. (August 16, 2017). people: homeowners in the wildland-urban CWPP Task Force (Community Wildfire interface. Fire Management Today. 73(3): the level of owners associations focus Protection Plan Task Force). 2008. 30–33. more on local needs and projects Community guide to preparing and Toman, E.; Stidham, M.; McCaffrey, S.; (such as signage and fuelbreaks). implementing a community wildfire Shindler, B. 2013. Social science at the This article gives insight about the protection plan. [Place of publication wildland-urban interface: a compendium extent to which the goals identified unknown]: [Publisher unknown]. 26 p. of research results to create fire-adapted https://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/ communities. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS–111. by CWPPs are being carried out and communities/documents/CWPP_Report_ Newtown Square, PA: USDA Forest Service, offers some recommendations as Aug2008.pdf. (August 16, 2007). Northern Research Station. 75 p. communities continue to develop Ellison, A.; Knapp, M.; Abrams, J. [and others]. Vaske, J.J.; Absher, J.D.; Lyon, K.M.; Peterson, and update their CWPPs so that 2015. Community experiences with wildfire: C.L. 2016. Understanding community the plans might better become actions, effectiveness, impacts, and trends. wildfire protection plans in Colorado. Working Pap. 56. Eugene, OR: University [Place of publication unknown]: a key component of fire-adapted of Oregon, Ecosystem Workforce Program. [Publisher unknown]; final report; communities. ■ 24 p. http://nwfirescience.org/sites/default/ agreement 13–CA–11272131–069. files/publications/WP_56-1.pdf. (October 14, Submitted to the USDA Forest Service, 2016). Pacific Southwest Research Station, References Evans, A.; Auerbach, S.; Miller, L.W. [and Riverside, CA, with the assistance of the Abrams, J.; Ellison, A.; Knapp, M. [and others]. others]. 2015. Evaluating the effectiveness Colorado State Forest Service. 2014. Community wildfire protection of wildfire mitigation activities in the Williams, D.R.; Jakes, P.J.; Burns, S. [and plans in the American West. Briefing Pap. wildland-urban interface. Madison, WI: others]. 2012. Community wildfire 59. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, Forest Stewards Guild. 96 p. http:// protection planning: the importance of Ecosystem Workforce Program. 2 p. http:// forestguild.org/publications/research/2015/ framing, scale, and building sustainable ewp.uoregon.edu/sites/ewp.uoregon.edu/ WUI_effectiveness.pdf. (December 12, 2016). capacity. Journal of Forestry. 110(8): files/bp_59.pdf. (October 14, 2016). Everett, Y.; Fuller, M. 2011. Fire safe councils 415–420. Absher, J.D.; Vaske, J.J.; Shelby, L.B. 2009. in the interface. Society and Natural Residents’ responses to wildland fire Resources. 24(4): 319–333. programs: a review of cognitive and

Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 17 Social Factors in Wildland Fire Risk Management and Planning

David Martín Gallego, Eduard Plana Bach, and Domingo Molina Terrén

he socio-environmental dimension in wildland fire Successful wildfire risk management requires Tmanagement is critical for moving towards a baseline good governance and societal and institutional of firewise planning. Wildland involvement in management decisions. fire risk planning is a land use planning tool that should be able to keep pace with rapid rates of of risk. Extreme fire behavior settlements and infrastructure social and environmental change. is appearing even in areas not at risk can be attenuated by Changes in land use and climate historically affected by severe developing hazard mitigation bring alterations in fire regimes, wildfires. Success in adapting to strategies to create more resilient aggravating and diversifying increased risk can depend on social landscapes and communities. the range of associated impacts factors such as fire risk perceptions, For example, a combination of and leaving a vulnerable society social capacity to accept risk, agroforestry and livestock activities unprepared to take on a magnitude and identification of social actors will yield a landscape mosaic. This, (decision makers, urban planners, along with the social capacity David Martín Gallego is a doctoral research firefighters, researchers, and the to take protective measures in assistant at the Fire Safety Engineering like) who can rise to the challenge wildfire prevention as well as Group of the University of Greenwich, of land management planning as a in emergency situations, will London, United Kingdom; Eduard crucial aspect of wildland fire risk contribute to reducing overall Plana Bach is Head of Forest Policy and Environmental Governance for the Forest management. Moreover, societal community vulnerability (fig. 1). Sciences Centre of Catalonia, Solsona, and institutional involvement in Spain; and Domingo Molina Terrén is a management decisions is required What are the key social factors at professor in the Department of Vegetal for participatory risk governance. play in developing sound hazard Production and Forestry Science at The vulnerability of urban mitigation strategies? University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain.

Figure 1—Hazards-of-place model of vulnerability. Hazard potential is affected by a geographic context leading to biophysical vulnerability (site and situation of the place) and a social fabric leading to social vulnerability (the population at risk). The combination of both results in the overall place vulnerability, a dynamic factor influenced by the level of risk, the implemented mitigation strategies, and the hazard potential. Source: Adapted from Cutter (1996). Fire Management Today 18 Risk Management in the Learning to live with fire appears • The radiant heat of an approaching Wildland–Urban Interface to be the most effective strategy wildfire, prescribing an adequate all across the world. Designers, distance between vegetation and Because large wildfires are rare, developers, and builders working buildings; and wildland fire professionals should with structures in WUI areas have • The potential for spot fires near focus on the latent risk over long the opportunity to offer residents a houses and infrastructure. timespans, making sure that both home designed and constructed with citizens and policymakers remain firewise features (fig. 2). Firewise Planning for wildland fire protection aware of the risk. Fire is often planning is a valuable service that in the WUI should also incorporate excluded in the wildland–urban landscape architects and designers suitable access for suppression interface (WUI), with little or no can offer to homeowners, addressing services as well as for the safe thought given to the role of fire as a needs in two areas: the structure evacuation of residents. Public officials natural component of the ecosystem. (thinking about homes as fuels) with authority to approve planning In rural settings, the traditional use and the area around it (offering documents can review the technical of fires is maintained to some extent instructions in order to convert them but also increasingly excluded due to into mandatory technical regulations. the rising risk of wildfire spread. The WUI is one of the most Learning to live with fire controversial and challenging appears to be the most Factors Affecting Attitudes issues for wildfire suppression effective strategy all Towards Risk Mitigation and emergency services. People Psychological variables related to living in WUI areas need to assume across the world. public beliefs and attitudes affect some responsibility for protecting public support for wildland fire their property but usually remain a defensible space). Building and management strategies (Absher unaware of how fire behaves and forestry technical codes for future and Vaske 2007). Martin and others what mitigation actions are available developed areas should take into (2007) summarized the main factors (Blanchard and Ryan 2007). account: as follows:

• The perceived effectiveness of actions to reduce the risk, • Confidence in the capacity to correctly carry out actions, • The perceived responsibility for fire risk management, and • Trust in and the credibility of the institution that is calling for action.

Better public understanding of the role of fire in ecosystems will foster long-term cross-sectoral strategies based upon fuel management at a landscape level. Better knowledge of risk exposure will promote a public desire for self-protection and shared responsibility. Social factors, such as people’s perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes toward fire impacts, play a decisive part in the success or failure of fire management programs. Figure 2—Firewise planning: model of defensible space around a house. Firewise planning entails fire mitigation measures in and around areas in the wildland–urban Studies have found that those who interface. Reducing fuel loads in the nearby forest lowers the rates of radiant heat from an approaching fire. Buffer strips within homeowner property limits are necessary due to have experienced wildfire in the firebrands blowing across fuelbreaks and starting spot fires near homes. past have an increased awareness of

Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 19 risk. However, past experiences with wildfire do not automatically motivate people to undertake fire management practices (Blanchard and Ryan 2007). According to Sims and Bauman (1983), experiencing wildfire increases risk awareness only for a relatively short period. Therefore, mitigation measures and statutory change are most likely to succeed immediately following an event.

A central question is this: Who owns the risk? Is it really individual Figure 3—Risk ownership in a wildland–urban interface area. The blue dashed line homeowners? After all, homeowners indicates the limit of the homeowner’s lot. The arrows indicate the level of intensity of a fire originating in a forest (case 1: responsibility of the forest owner) versus the level of pay taxes to public authorities, intensity of a fire originating on the lot of a private homeowner (case 2: responsibility of who give permits to build houses the homeowner). From a legal point of view, risk ownership is a controversial question that in wildlands. Moreover, the main is difficult to sort out. risk factor does not come from fires starting on a homeowner’s property to wildfire risk planning. Reducing criteria and local synoptic situations. but rather from heat transfer coming uncertainty makes decision making Such approaches create an from fuel loads in wildlands. And more consistent. Costa and others opportunity to incorporate wildfire the wildlands typically belong to (2009) described new systematic risk into land management planning a State or Federal government, to approaches to determining the (Plana and others 2015). Likewise, a municipality, or to other private most likely fire spread patterns as economic arguments can build landowners (fig. 3). a function of physical geographic support for wildfire mitigation Cross-Sectoral Risk Planning and Societal Involvement Figure 4 shows the risk cycle, including the interrelationships between its components: The more a community prepares in the context of these interrelationships, the fewer efforts are necessary to protect it from wildfire. All public and private actors should be involved in the causal chain, from territorial to forest and home management scales across multiple sectors (a cross- sectoral approach is where forests, agriculture, livestock, and urban and spatial planning policies meet). Making a political arrangement creates a framework for operational cooperation and coordination among private stakeholders and public agencies.

It is important to reduce uncertainty Figure 4—Components of the risk cycle. Various actors can work together at each stage and give strength and legal status in the cycle to mitigate risk. Source: Adapted from PLANAT (2011). Fire Management Today 20 measures as cost-effective. In any Psychological variables related to public beliefs case, risk assessment should take into account the physical criteria and attitudes affect public support for wildland for fire spread patterns, which are fire management strategies. highly influenced by topography, weather, and fuel load distribution. Risk assessment should adapt such criteria to the spatial scope of credibility. A new and enhanced risk Creating debate about levels of municipal prevention plans. culture should emerge for the WUI. vulnerability and about alternatives for mitigating risk offers citizens a Municipalities and other local At the community level, even a chance to interact with fire agencies governments can play a key partial perception of risk can build in making management decisions. role in wildfire risk planning as local capacity for cooperation in Community participation in decision intermediaries between homeowners prevention and self-protection. Fire making promotes democratic and planners at higher levels of education and outreach programs development and implementation of government. Local planning processes should be designed to change management actions. When proposals can promote stakeholder awareness people’s attitudes, behavior, and level come from homeowners, social and establish responsibilities among of knowledge. But program delivery acceptability is higher, as are social homeowners while building trust and should be effective enough to build commitment and sustainable activism local engagement and commitment. on behalf of firewise management.

Furthermore, the conjunction of local and scientific/management perceptions contributes to a broader understanding of natural/social systems and processes by giving rise to an interactive and two-way learning process among participants (Paveglio and others 2009). Participation programs foster contacts among neighbors, helping to form a sense of community (McDaniel 2014). People come to understand that wildfire hazards affect everyone and that cooperation is required to tackle the common challenge.

To help communication processes succeed, messages should be tailored to different groups and specific social contexts. Some authors have proposed tailoring educational programs to specific groups, such as property owners, year-round residents, chambers of commerce, local realtors, and schools (MacGregor and others 2008; McDaniel 2014).

MacGregor and others (2008) explained that the goal of the message should be not only to make Figure 5—Sequence of stages in the process of communication and factors that influence public acceptance of wildland fire management. Source: Plana and others (2015). people aware of risk but also to Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 21 get them to understand the severe Taking Social Factors Into Costa, P.; Castellnou, M.; Larrañaga, A. [and consequences they could suffer and, others]. 2011. Prevention of large wildfires Account using the fire types concept. Barcelona, most importantly, the effectiveness Wildfire risk assessment and Spain: Departament d’Interior de la of their efforts to manage and Generalitat de Catalunya. 88 p. reduce risk. Furthermore, the aim of wildland fire management analysis, Cutter, S.L. 1996. Vulnerability to communication processes should be especially in the current global environmental hazards. Progress in to give communities the appropriate change context, need to include Human Geography. 20(4): 529–539. MacGregor, D.G.; Finucane, M.; González- capability and tools (such as room for interpretations from the social sciences. Such interpretations Cabán, A. 2008. The effects of risk guidelines offered by fire management perception and adaptation on health and authorities) to take effective fire should include the new forms of safety interventions. In: Martin, W.E.; prevention actions. interaction between wildland fire and Raish, C.; Kent, B., eds. Wildfire risk: society, particularly the impacts of human perceptions and management implications. Washington, DC: Resources Pedagogical strategies are also fire on expanding WUI communities. for the Future: 142–155. instrumental in the communication Martin, W.E.; Raish, C.; Kent, B., eds. 2007. process. As a core premise, The synergistic effect of working Wildfire risk: human perceptions and communication should not cause fear in partnership might encourage management implications. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. 310 p. or discomfort within the community. learning and the exchange of knowledge, which should be robust, McDaniel, J. 2014. Building trust, The general misperception of reality establishing credibility, and (including a reluctance to cut trees homogeneous, harmonic, and communicating fire issues with the public. and a false sense of safety) teaches transferable. Knowledge exchanges Fire Science Digest. Boise, ID: Joint Fire the importance of educating while in group settings can systematically Science Program. 17 (January): 1–11. Paveglio, T.B.; Jakes, P.J.; Carroll, M.S.; communicating. The goal is to give improve approaches to wildfire risk planning. Williams, D.R. 2009. Understanding people a better approach to actual social complexity within the wildland– wildfire hazard and risk prevention urban interface: A new species of human planning. Communication processes should be habitation? Environmental Management. targeted at the local level to engage 43: 1085–1095. homeowners in planning processes. Plana, E.; Martín, D.; Font, M. [and others]. A lack of trust and credibility 2015. Wildfire risk communication constitutes the main barrier to Effective communication is designed and governance: managing societal effective risk communication to increase local understanding of involvement and multi-stakeholder cross- (Steelman and McCaffrey 2013). the need to take responsibility for sectoral planning. In: Plana, E.; Font, M.; Green, T., eds. Operational tools and According to McDaniel (2014), creating and maintaining defensible spaces around homes. ■ guidelines for improving efficiency in personal contact through interactive wildfire risk reduction in EU landscapes. events such as workshops, field FIREfficient Project. CTFC Editions. trips, and demonstration sites can Acknowledgments Solsona, Spain: Forest Sciences Centre of show openness, giving experts Catalonia: 19–25. This work was part of David PLANAT (National Platform for Natural the chance to substantiate and Martín Gallego’s master’s thesis Hazards). 2011. Why do we need clarify their actions while giving in wildland fire science and integrated risk management? Switzerland. the public the opportunity to ask integrative management (see www. http://www.planat.ch/en/specialists/risk- management/. (August 16, 2017). questions and express concerns. masterfuegoforestal.es) with support Moreover, the credibility of the Sims, J.H.; Bauman, D.D. 1983. Educational from the FIREfficient Project (see programs and human response to natural information provider and the clarity http://firefficient.ctfc.cat). hazards. Environment and Behavior. 15(2): of the message will influence the 165–189. acceptability of the message and References Steelman, T.A.; McCaffrey, S. 2013. increase the likelihood that people Best practices in risk and crisis communication: implications for natural will practice wildfire mitigation. Absher, J.D.; Vaske, J.J. 2007. Examining the sources of public support for wildland fire hazards management. Natural Hazards. policies. Fire Management Today. 67(1): 65(1): 683–705. Reducing community vulnerability 35–39. means integrating the social Blanchard, B.; Ryan, R.L. 2007. Managing the dimension into risk management wildland–urban interface in the Northeast: planning, thereby building trust and perceptions of fire risk and hazard reduction strategies. Northern Journal of credibility while properly assigning Applied Forestry. 24(3): 203–208. risk ownership responsibilities to private and public actors (fig. 5). Fire Management Today 22 The Joint Fire Science Program: An Effective Knowledge Broker Rebecca Smith and Martha E. Lee

knowledge broker is an Facebook, email, print, blogs, and organization or individual The JFSP is a the program’s website. Through A that translates and these channels, the JFSP notifies disseminates research findings to knowledge broker that individuals of funding opportunities working professionals (Konijnendijk distributes current, for projects related to fuel treatment 2004). Knowledge brokers effectiveness, the effects of smoke, participate in a variety of activities, credible, and useful the fire social sciences, and the including translating, spreading information to fire compatibility of fire and fuel and commissioning research, and treatments with wildlife (JFSP 2014). packaging science to meet the professionals. preferences of their readers (Cheng There are 14 Knowledge Exchange and others 2008; Ward and others Consortia within the JFSP (fig. 2009). The goal of knowledge 3. To solicit proposals from 1). The consortia help connect brokering is to help individuals scientists; and managers, practitioners, and acquire new information and suggest 4. As research is completed, to scientists working in a specific ways of using new information deliver research through a variety geographic area. The consortia in their decision making and of channels so that managers are sponsor conferences, webinars, practices (Michaels 2009). The Joint aware of, understand, and use and workshops, and they describe Fire Science Program (JFSP) is a the information in management and list relevant research on their knowledge broker that distributes decisions. websites. Each consortium uses a current, credible, and useful variety of methods to disseminate information to fire professionals. The channels of communication information about new publications, used by the JFSP include Twitter, webinars, and upcoming events. Mission and Structure Congress established the JFSP in 1998 to provide a scientific basis and rationale for fire and fuels management activities. The mission of the program has four parts:

1. To provide credible research that is relevant to the needs of fire and fuels managers; 2. To listen to the needs of managers and then respond to those needs;

Rebecca Smith worked as a graduate research assistant at the School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ; and Martha Lee is a professor in the School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Figure 1—The 14 Joint Fire Science Program Knowledge Exchange Consortia. Source: Flagstaff, AZ. JFSP (2017). Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 23 The JFSP is effective as a knowledge broker the writing on a scale ranging from –2 to 2, with –2 being “too because most survey respondents found its elementary” and 2 being “too publications to be trustworthy, useful, easily technical.” • The ease of access to each accessible, and understandable. publication: Respondents were asked to rate ease of access on a scale ranging from –2 to 2, with –2 being “very difficult to obtain” and Delivery methods include email, Survey of Fire 2 being “very easy to obtain.” Twitter, blogs, Facebook, YouTube, Professionals and • Comments about each publication: and Vimeo. Respondents were asked to say Researchers what they found appealing and The JFSP currently publishes We conducted a survey among fire what they would change. the Fire Science Digest, eNews, professionals and researchers who and Synthesis of Knowledge. belong to the 14 JFSP Knowledge A web link to the survey was given The Fire Science Digest, written Exchange Consortia to determine to nine of the consortia to distribute by science writers, summarizes the effectiveness of the JFSP in through their list-serves. Three research on particular topics. The distributing current and useful consortia provided us with email Digest has covered topics such as information. The consortia gave lists to send the web link to survey smoke, climate change, knowledge us contact information for fire participants. Three consortia did exchange, and new tools for professionals and researchers to not participate in the distribution of planning. It is published several be surveyed. In 2013, we used the survey web link. The survey link times a year and is available in SurveyMonkey to conduct an online was sent to about 8,433 individuals. print, online, and as an electronic survey created and distributed in Individuals on multiple list-serves publication for e-readers/tablets. collaboration with the JFSP. The might have received more than one approximately 15-minute survey invitation to survey. The web link eNews is a biweekly newsletter that included multiple-choice questions to the survey was also posted on the is emailed to subscribers and is and open-ended questions. We JFSP’s Facebook page, blog, and available on the JFSP website. eNews designed the survey to determine: Twitter account. We do not know notifies subscribers of new JFSP how many people saw the invitation publications, funding opportunities, • Trust in each JFSP publication to take the survey in addition to the and current research. as a source of information: participants contacted, so we cannot Respondents were asked to rate calculate an overall response rate. A The Synthesis of Knowledge covers each publication on a scale total of 494 respondents completed one broad topic per issue, with ranging from –2 to 2, with –2 the survey. chapters that contain information being “totally mistrust it” and 2 on specific subtopics. It is published being “totally trust it.” Respondents represented a variety of periodically and is available online. • Usefulness of each publication: age groups. Thirty-five percent of the Past topics have included fuels Did respondents learn anything 494 respondents were between the management, fire management, the new? Did the publication enhance ages of 50 and 59 years of age, and wildland–urban interface, fire effects, their understanding of fire 26 percent were between 40 and 49. and postfire treatments. ecology and/or fire management? Four percent of respondents were Was it relevant to their job? Did between 18 and 29 years of age. The JFSP no longer publishes Fire respondents use the information in Science Brief, but past issues are day-to-day management decisions? Respondents were well educated, available on the JFSP website. Fire The scale used ranged from 0 to 2, with a lot of experience as fire Science Brief is a news story written with 0 being “never” and 2 being professionals or in fire science. by science writers who summarize “always.” About 52 percent held a graduate research on a single topic. Each issue • Understandability of the degree, 58 percent held a 4-year is about six pages long and highlights information presented in each degree, and 10 percent held a one to three scientists’ research. publication: Respondents were degree of less than 4 years. About asked to rate the technicality of 65 percent had 11 or more years Fire Management Today 24 Digest and Fire Science Brief were short—quick and easy to read. They also liked the topics and information. The two publications have a similar purpose: to give brief summaries of research on a single topic.

What most appealed to respondents about Synthesis of Knowledge was that it brings together a lot of information and resources into one place, is comprehensive, has relevant information, and contains Figure 2—Survey responses regarding the trustworthiness, accessibility, and current research and information. understandability of Joint Fire Science Program publications were on a scale of –2 to Synthesis of Knowledge appealed to 2. Survey responses for usefulness were on a scale of 0 to 2. For understandability, the respondents because its purpose is to mean score of almost 0 signified that the writing was just right (neither too elementary nor too technical). provide indepth and comprehensive information about a single topic. of experience in fire science or as a The JFSP is effective as a knowledge fire professional. Researchers made broker because most survey What Respondents Would Change up the largest job category (24 respondents found its publications We asked respondents what one percent), followed by fire managers to be trustworthy, useful, easily thing they would change about each (14 percent), staff and line officers accessible, and understandable. JFSP publication. Three suggestions (11 percent), and fuels planners/fuels emerged: managers (8 percent). The “other” What Respondents Liked category (35 percent) included We asked respondents what one 1. Make it easier to find and access silviculturists, wildlife biologists, thing appealed to them about JFSP publications on the Internet, field technicians, and foresters. Fire Science Digest, Synthesis of 2. Improve distribution to the field Knowledge, and Fire Science Brief. because it might be difficult for Survey Results Responses were similar. Respondents some employees to obtain a copy of a particular publication, and JFSP Publications as Information liked the fact that both Fire Science 3. Advertise a publication before it is Sources made available to make individuals Participants indicated that all aware of an upcoming issue or three JFSP publications contained topic that might be of interest. trustworthy information. The mean trust level for all three publications Recommendations for was about the same (fig. 2). Most respondents said that they used the Improving Information information some of the time but Dissemination not all of the time. The Synthesis The JFSP uses a variety of methods of Knowledge was considered to be to make its publications accessible, slightly more useful than the Fire including the JFSP website and Science Digest and Fire Science Brief. links on social media and emails. Our survey results suggested ways Participants found all three to improve and expand information publications to be easily accessible, dissemination to fire professionals. with the Fire Science Digest the easiest to obtain. The information The program might consider using presented in each publication the formats preferred by most survey was written at the right level; Figure 3—Formats preferred by survey respondents (fig. 3)—printable the information was neither too respondents for getting information on fire pdfs, print publications, and videos. elementary nor too technical (fig. 2). ecology and fire management. Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 25 Survey respondents also preferred the more traditional delivery methods—such as print, email, and the JFSP website—to social media (fig. 4).

The JFSP could advertise an upcoming topic and/or publication on its website or through email and social media so that individuals know when and where to look it for it. The JFSP could also encourage those who receive notifications of new publications to let others Figure 4—Delivery methods preferred by survey respondents for getting information on know. In addition, publishing new fire management and fire ecology. publications in a consistent manner would make it easier to advertise them because readers would know References Konijnendijk, C.C. 2004. Enhancing when to expect them. the forest science-policy interface in Cheng, D.; Claessens, M.; Gascoigne, T. Europe: urban forestry showing the way. [and others], eds. 2008. Communicating It is important for the JFSP to Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research. science in social contexts. Dordrecht, 19(4): 123–128. regularly evaluate whether readers Netherlands: Springer. 320 p. Michaels, S. 2009. Matching knowledge still find its publications to be useful, JFSP (Joint Fire Science Program). 2014. brokering strategies to environmental trustworthy, easily accessible, and Our mission. Boise, ID. http://www. policy problems and settings. firescience.gov/JFSP_program_info.cfm. Environmental Science and Policy. 12(7): understandable and to know the (August 16, 2017). preferred delivery methods and 994–1011. JFSP (Joint Fire Science Program). 2017. Ward, V.; House, A.; Hamer, S. 2009. formats. As demographics and Fire Science Exchange Network: connect Knowledge brokering: The missing link technology change, attitudes and to local experts. Boise, ID. http://www. in the evidence to action chain? Evidence preferences might change as well. firescience.gov/JFSP_exchanges.cfm. and Policy. 5(3): 267–279. (August 16, 2017). The JFSP needs regular updates to assess its effectiveness as a knowledge broker and to find areas that need improvement. ■

Fire Management Today 26 Grant Funding for Fire Districts Helps Start Their Engines Greg Johnson

s the first responders to a mileage of only 5,166 miles (8,266 wildfires, local fire districts Stevens County Fire km), it was picked up from Ft. Lewis A and departments need to Army Base by Stevens County Fire be ready to battle fires with good District #5 was able District #5. The dumptruck was equipment that helps protect lives to obtain a “new” fire converted into a wildfire tender with and property in rural areas. One the help of fire district volunteers, a example is Stevens County Fire tender through the local auto parts and repair business, District #5. Firefighter Property and a $49,800 fire district assistance grant from the DNR. A converted This small fire district in Addy, WA, program. tender costs significantly less than a serves about 5,000 people over 75 similarly built new tender. square miles. The district runs five stations, all staffed by volunteers, with Within days of completion, the a structure engine, a brush truck, and of acquiring vehicles that can be tender was called into action. On a fire tender. About 40 percent of the converted into wildland firefighting August 26, 2016, it was used to district’s calls are for wildfires. equipment. With assistance from help suppress a wildfire caused by a the Washington State Department motor vehicle accident. Fire Tender Acquisition of Natural Resources (DNR), Stevens County Fire District #5 was able to The State of Washington’s Fire District Assistance obtain a “new” fire tender through Firefighter Property Program gives The DNR’s Fire District Assistance the Firefighter Property Program. A fire districts like Stevens County Program is the conduit for fire tender is an important piece of Fire District #5 a cost-effective way Washington fire districts and equipment used to transport water departments to participate in the to a fire scene. Tenders can also draft Forest Service’s Firefighter Property water from a stream, lake, or hydrant. Greg Johnson is a fire district assistance and Volunteer Fire Assistance specialist for the Wildfire Division, Programs for grants as well as in This fire tender started out as a 1997 Washington State Department of Natural State-funded fire district assistance Resources, Olympia, WA. M–1090 military dumptruck. With

An M–1090 military dumptruck (left) acquired by Stevens County Fire District #5 through the Washington State Department of Natural Resources Firefighter Property Program and converted into a water tender for wildland firefighting (right). Photo: Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 27 grants. These programs can reduce Local fire districts and departments are able to costs for taxpayers and improve local and State agencies’ response obtain used excess military equipment and receive to wildfires. Local fire districts and financial assistance to pay for its conversion to departments are able to obtain used excess military equipment and wildland fire use. receive financial assistance to pay for its conversion to wildland fire use. Eligible fire districts can apply to DNR for assistance from these programs. from Federal Excess Personal 10,000 residents; and have a current Property equipment to Firefighter agreement with the DNR. In 2016 alone, through the Property equipment. Firefighter Property Program, DNR The DNR’s Fire District Assistance obtained 25 vehicles for districts and Two more funding opportunities Program can help districts through departments across the State to help are also available to fire districts. some of their most difficult times, them get ready for firefighting. At a The federally funded Volunteer such as when they are newly formed, substantial cost savings, the vehicles Fire Assistance grants and the when they have annexed unprotected were converted into engines and State-funded fire district assistance lands, and when they have tenders for wildland fire use. grants provide critical funding for unexpectedly lost equipment. Most retrofitting firefighter property vehicles acquired under this program Fire districts that receive the and other equipment, acquiring can be converted in less than 6 vehicles are required to convert personal protective and general fire months and for much less than it them and place them into service equipment, and assisting with fire would cost to buy a new fire engine. within 1 year. After the vehicle prevention and fire training. These is in service for 1 year, the fire grants are open to all Washington You can learn more about the district takes ownership with full fire districts and departments that programs at the Washington title. With this in mind, many fire deliver wildland fire protection to State DNR Fire District Assistance districts in the State of Washington private, State, or Federal landowners; webpage (http://www.dnr.wa.gov/ are using the Firefighter Property serve communities with less than FireDistrictAssistance). ■ Program to convert their fleets

Fire Management Today 28 Fire Control and the 1953 Rattlesnake Fire Hutch Brown

he Forest Service’s wildland all career firefighter fatalities from fire journal, Fire Management Could a change in the 1994 to 2013. Wildland firefighters T Today, has featured the seem to be at much greater risk same safety slogan since 1997. You way decisions are than their counterparts in structure can find it on page 2: “Public and made to suppress a firefighting. firefighter safety is our first priority.” wildfire result in fewer Burnovers are the leading cause of Early issues of the journal had a firefighter fatalities? Federal firefighter fatalities (NIFC very different slogan. Every issue 2016b). Explanations for wildland from 1936 to 1964—the year of the firefighter entrapments leading to Wilderness Act—called for using “the burnovers tend to focus on local technique of fire control” to help stop conditions and tactical failures, such the Forest Service strengthened its “the appalling wastage by fire.” as changing weather conditions or focus on firefighter and employee a failure to give firefighters clear safety. Under Chief Tom Tidwell, for The fire control slogan disappeared direction (see, for example, Safety example, safety became the first of when the Forest Service and other Matters 2014). However, the single five agencywide focus areas for the land management agencies began greatest common denominator for Forest Service (Tidwell 2012). exploring alternatives to fire control wildland firefighter fatalities, no in the 1960s. The safety slogan took matter what the proximate cause, is its place after the 1994 fire season, Rising Firefighter Fatalities the presence of firefighters on a fire. when 35 wildland firefighters Yet wildland firefighter fatalities perished, the most during a single have persisted; indeed, their number That begs a series of questions: Why do fire season in 84 years. has grown. From the 1970s to the firefighters try to control a particular 2000s, the number of wildland fire? What values are they protecting? In 1995, the National Wildfire firefighter fatalities per decade rose Are the values worth the risk? Coordinating Group adopted from 90 to 193 (NIFC 2016a), an an interagency wildland fire increase of 114 percent. By contrast, It might be worth exploring such management policy for the five the average annual number of questions in relation to past “tragedy Federal land management agencies, structure firefighter fatalities fell: fires”—wildland fires with firefighter with safety as its first guiding the number of “on-duty firefighter fatalities. I hope to do so, starting principle: “Firefighter and public deaths” for structure firefighters with this issue, for several tragedy safety is the first priority in every fire (not counting those who died on fires selected from hundreds (NIFC management activity” (USDI/USDA 9/11) decreased from 174 in 1978 to 2016a). Although hindsight is always 1995). In the decades that followed, 68 in 2015, a decline of 61 percent twenty-twenty, in each case the (Fahy and others 2016). According question pertains: Could a change to Guenthner (2014), wildland in the way decisions are made to firefighters make up only about 5 suppress a wildland fire result in Hutch Brown is the editor of Fire percent of all “career firefighters” fewer firefighter fatalities? Management Today and a program in the United States, yet they specialist for the Forest Service’s Office of Communication, Washington Office, accounted for about 27 percent of Washington, DC.

Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 29 The only thing worth protecting in Powder House Canyon was the lives of the firefighters themselves.

A Desolate Canyon In 1953, at about 2:30 p.m. on a hot July afternoon, an arsonist started a fire near the eastern boundary of the Mendocino National Forest in northern California, on the western edge of the Sacramento Valley. According to the accident Figure 1—Extent of the Rattlesnake Fire, July 9–11, 1953 (in gray). Triangles = five investigation report, the fire began stops on the Rattlesnake Fire Staff Ride (a training exercise). Stand 1 = mouth of Powder House Canyon at the edge of the national forest; stand 2 = point of origin of the fire at a point along Alder Springs Road (Oleta Point) on Alder Springs Road; stand 3 = overlook of the fatality site; stand 4 = (Cliff and others 1953). The road overlook of the area where the nighttime spot fires ignited, including the fatal one; stand follows Powder House Creek upslope 5 = approximate location of the Missionary Spot Fire. Source: Wildland Fire Leadership onto the forest from the mouth of Development Program (n.d.). Powder House Canyon at the forest boundary (fig. 1, stand 1).

The fire was burning in the dry– mesic chaparral that grows in northern California in a band of vegetation at elevations just above the Sacramento Valley floor in the rain shadow of the Coastal Range (fig. 2). Such landscapes naturally burn every 50 to 75 years in stand replacement fires (MFSL 2012). At least 42 years old at the time of the fire (and possibly much older) (Cliff and others 1953), the dense chaparral in Powder House Canyon was coming due—was perhaps already overdue—for another severe wildland fire.

Winds from the east/southeast, normal in such canyons on July afternoons (Snook 1992), blew the fire upcanyon toward the west from its point of origin near Alder Springs Road (fig. 1, stand 2; Cliff and others Figure 2—Powder House Canyon, with dense chaparral and the Sacramento Valley 1953; WFLDP, n.d.). Firefighters in the distance. To this day, the canyon has no development other than a paved road. appeared within an hour. Under Source: Wildland Fire Leadership Development Program (n.d.). Fire Management Today 30 the direction of Forest Service Suppressing the Rattlesnake Fire only postponed “fire officers” (incident managers and crew bosses), the volunteer the inevitable: mature chaparral is extremely firefighters worked at first from combustible, and sooner or later it will burn. the fire’s point of origin, digging fireline along the fire’s flanks. When the south flank of the fire escaped control, the fire officers gave up shifted direction, as they often do fires started near the head of the on direct attack and decided on an on summer evenings in the area canyon, just below Alder Springs indirect approach. (Snook 1992). Turbulent winds Road (fig. 1, stand 4). Firefighters drove embers from the fire upslope, soon suppressed most of them, but Driving west up Alder Springs starting a spot fire north of Alder no one noticed one particular spot Road, the fire crews got well ahead Springs Road at about 8 p.m. (fig. 1, fire until too late (fig. 3). of the fire and fought it indirectly stand 5). After fire officers scouted by building firelines at the head of the fire, they deployed 24 firefighters At about 10:15 p.m., as the shifting the canyon and burning out fuels beginning at about 9 p.m. on what nighttime winds started blowing downslope (fig. 1, stand 4). By was dubbed the Missionary Spot downcanyon, the unseen spot fire, about 8 p.m., they seemed to have Fire, which was slowly burning hidden in a hollow just above the succeeded. Fire activity had lessened, upslope. The firefighters soon had it road, sent a flaming front burning to and the fire seemed to be contained under control. the north and east toward the within the canyon south of Alder 24 firefighters on the Missionary Springs Road. As nighttime temperatures Spot Fire (fig. 1, stand 5; fig. 3). A continued to drop, the shifting winds fire officer raced to their position As temperatures dropped, the created more turbulence. Shortly and ordered them out. Nine upcanyon winds calmed and after 10 p.m., at least six more spot firefighters escaped by retreating upslope to a firebreak at the top of the ridge (fig. 3).

The other 15 firefighters, including two fire officers, moved eastward along the slope, away from the Missionary Spot Fire (fig. 3; Cliff and others 1953; WFLDP, n.d.). They thought they were safe, not knowing that the main fire had shifted direction and was no longer burning upslope. Instead, driven by downcanyon winds, the flaming front had turned 180 degrees from its direction during the afternoon. Now it was coming straight east at the firefighters and moving much faster than they could through the dense chaparral.

The fire caught them within about Figure 3—Location of the Missionary Spot Fire (marked “SPOT FIRE”) and the unseen 30 minutes, and all 15 firefighters fatal spot fire at about 10:13 p.m. below the sharp turn on Alder Springs Road (upper left, Powder House Turn). The fatal spot fire spread initially upslope toward the firebreak. Nine perished. After the Griffith Park firefighters on the Missionary Spot Fire escaped uphill (line of arrows) to the firebreak. Fire in 1933, the Rattlesnake The other 15 firefighters fled east (solid black line), roughly parallel to the slope. Driven by Fire was the worst tragedy fire in nighttime downcanyon winds, the fire turned east to follow the firefighters, overrunning California history. the Missionary Spot Fire by about 10:30 p.m. and catching the firefighters by about 10:40 p.m. Source: Wildland Fire Leadership Development Program (n.d.).

Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 31 The accident investigation report To be sure, the fire was human into towns such as Wallace, ID. attributed the burnover mainly to caused, but humans have been Trapped by firestorms in the “the action of the fire in changing causing wildland fires, accidentally mountains, 78 wildland firefighters its direction of travel and burning or not, for millennia, contributing gave their lives in service to the intensity,” and it called on Forest to the evolution of fire-adapted people whose lives and homes they Service researchers to develop ecosystems across North America were trying to protect. The tragedy “additional knowledge of fire- (Pyne 1982). On the Rattlesnake shocked the Nation, and Pinchot weather and fire-behavior” (Cliff Fire, fire managers worried mainly barnstormed the country on behalf and others 1953). Factors such as that the fire might burn into the of the Forest Service, claiming that changing weather and fire behavior next drainage (WFLDP, n.d.)—not the agency could have stopped the have appeared in subsequent because there was anything there to fires with enough resources (Egan studies as common denominators of protect, either, but because it was 2009; Pyne 2001). tragedy fires (Safety Matters 2014; “inaccessible” (roadless). In other Sutton 2011; Wilson and Sorenson words, suppressing the fire was an As a result, Congress appropriated 1978). However, studies of common end in itself. more funds for firefighting, and denominators often overlook the Nation went to war against the most fundamental common How did that come to be? wildland fire. The aftermath of the denominator of all: the decision Big Blowup of 1910 gave the Forest to put firefighters on a particular The Policy of Fire Control Service license to lead the way in fireground. fire control, and for the next 60 The Forest Service was founded years, the agency enthusiastically The accident investigation in 1905 by its first Chief, Gifford embraced its leadership role, report for the Rattlesnake Fire Pinchot, who served until 1910. His setting fire policy for the Nation. never explained the decision. In was arguably the single greatest presenting the “history of the legacy in the history of the Forest In 1935, the Forest Service adopted Rattlesnake Fire,” the report folded Service (Miller 2001; Pinchot 1947; a policy of putting out all fires by “discovery and initial action” into Steen 1976; Williams 2000), and it 10 a.m. on the morning after they was marked during his tenure as a single section, with initial attack were first reported. The 10a .m. on the fire immediately following Forest Service Chief by a single- Policy seemed realistic at the time its first reporting and without minded determination to control all because the Federal agencies—and comment—as though it were a fires—to exclude wildland fire from the Forest Service in particular— matter of course (Cliff and others the Nation’s forests (Pyne 1982, could draw on the Depression- 1953). Contemporary news reports 2001, 2015). era Civilian Conservation Corps, echoed the same theme. “Here’s the throwing legions of firefighters story,” began one (Gleeson 1953). Pinchot wrote the first set of field into the field. The watchword “The blaze broke out alongside the directives for the Forest Service, for the wildland fire community road about 2:30 o’clock yesterday the so-called Use Book (Pinchot became, “Put ’em out, put ’em all afternoon. By 7 o’clock about 100 1905). The “greatest single benefit” out, put ’em all out fast!” (Tidwell men were on the scene.” The “blaze from the national forests, the Use and Brown 2010). broke out,” and so “men were on Book avers, is “insurance against the scene”—as though it were all a the destruction of property, timber So in 1953, in accordance with resources, and water supply by matter of course. the 10 a.m. Policy, wildland fire fire.” Forest Service line officers, suppression was indeed a matter Yet there was nothing in Powder according to the Use Book, have “no of course. The decision to suppress House Canyon to protect, not duty more important than protecting every wildland fire was automatic, even timber (fig. 2). No people, the reserves from forest fires.” and Cliff and others (1953) homes, or infrastructure (other wasted no time in their accident than the road) were anywhere In 1910, in an episode known as investigation report explaining nearby. The fire ultimately burned the Big Blowup, wildland fires what firefighters were doing in a total of 1,200 acres (480 ha) of burned about 1 million acres in Powder House Canyon. Focused fire-adapted shrublands primed the Northern Rockies, costing at instead on the effectiveness of for burning on natural cycles that least 92 lives and burning through fire control, they concluded with had lasted for thousands of years. countless homesteads and even satisfaction that “the general Fire Management Today 32 strategy, tactics, and generalship Fatal Consequences (fig. 2), which cannot viably be employed on the fire were in thinned and needs periodic severe Yet every recommendation made by conformance with acceptable fire fires to thrive (Keeley 2003). Cliff and others (1953) presumed suppression principles.” Suppressing the Rattlesnake Fire, the validity of fire control and the even had it gone entirely according 10 a.m. Policy. After the disastrous Still, Cliff and others (1953) to plan, would have only postponed wildfires of 1910, putting out all were appalled by the tragedy and the inevitable: mature chaparral is fires seemed a matter of course for deeply concerned about firefighter extremely combustible, and sooner the good of the Nation; firefighters safety, and their report made or later it will burn in a stand- simply needed to get smarter safety-related recommendations replacing fire—just like it did on and safer about it. Until the still relevant today. Indeed, that fateful California afternoon 1960s–1970s, except for prescribed one recommendation—using in 1953. fires in places such as the pineries the Rattlesnake Fire tragedy of the South, the Forest Service for training—anticipated the So why postpone the inevitable and presumed that all wildland fires Rattlesnake Fire Staff Ride, a potentially make fuel conditions were bad for both people and the later training opportunity for fire even worse? The only thing worth land, with the fire-free forests of managers (WFDLS, n.d.). Other protecting in Powder House Canyon northern Europe widely regarded as recommendations helped to was the lives of the firefighters a model. change the course of wildland fire themselves. And a reflexive policy management in the United States. of fire control deliberately put Such thinking reflected widespread Together with reports from other firefighters in harm’s way. ■ ignorance of fire ecology during the tragedy fires from 1937 to 1956, era of official fire control (1905– the accident investigation report 1978). Indeed, one recommendation References for the Rattlesnake Fire led to by Cliff and others (1953) was Cliff, E.P.; Price, J.H.; Lindh, C.O. [and adoption of the 10 Standard Fire for “brushland management,” a others]. 1953. The Rattlesnake Fire: July Orders, a tremendous advance in dubious proposition for chaparral 9, 1953. Washington, DC: USDA Forest safety for wildland firefighters. Service. 28 p. http://www.fireleadership. gov/toolbox/staffride/downloads/lsr2/ lsr2_resource4.pdf. (August 16, 2017). Egan, T. 2009. Teddy Roosevelt and the fire that saved America. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 324 p. Fahy, R.F.; LeBlanc, P.R.; Molis, J.L. 2016. Firefighter fatalities in the United States-2016. FFD10. Quincy, MA: NFPA Research, Data and Analytics Division, CONTRIBUTORS WANTED! National Fire Protection Association. 30 p. http://www.nfpa.org/news-and- We need your fire-related articles and photographs for Fire research/fire-statistics-and-reports/ Management Today! Subjects of published material include: fire-statistics/the-fire-service/fatalities- and-injuries/firefighter-fatalities-in-the- • Aviation • Firefighting Experiences united-states. (August 16, 2017). • Communication • Incident Management Gleeson, C.J. 1953. 13 of dead were from • Cooperation/Partnerships • Information Management New Tribes Missionary Camp. The • Ecological Restoration (including Systems) Willows Journal. July 10. • Education • Personnel Guenthner, D. 2014. Putting wildland • Equipment and Technology • Planning (including Budgeting) firefighter fatalities into perspective. • Fire Behavior • Preparedness Safety Matters: A Wildland Firefighter Forum for Change. http://ffsafetymatters. • Fire Ecology • Prevention org/putting-wildland-firefighter-fatalities- • Fire Effects • Safety into-perspective/. (August 16, 2017). • Fire History • Suppression Keeley, J.E. 2003. Fire and invasive plants in • Fire Use (including Prescribed • Training California ecosystems. Fire Management Fire) • Weather Today. 63(2): 18–19. • Fuels Management • Wildland–Urban Interface MFSL (Missoula Fire Sciences Laboratory). 2012. Information from LANDFIRE Contact the editor via email at [email protected]. on fire regimes of California chaparral communities. Fire Effects Information

Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 33 System. Missoula, MT: USDA Forest Pyne, S.J. 2015. Between two fires: a fire Tidwell, T.; Brown, H. 2010. A fire protection Service, Rocky Mountain Research history of contemporary America. Tucson: triangle for the wildland–urban interface. Station. https://www.fs.fed.us/database/ The University of Arizona Press. 512 p. Fire Management Today. 70(2): 6–9. feis/fire_regimes/CA_chaparral/all.html. Safety Matters. 2014. Main position paper. http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/naldc/download. (August 16, 2017). Safety Matters: A Wildland Firefighter xhtml?id=45391&content=PDF. (August 16, Miller, Char. 2001. Gifford Pinchot and the Forum for Change. http://ffsafetymatters. 2017). making of modern environmentalism. org/main-position-paper/. (August 16, USDI (U.S. Department of the Interior)/ Washington, DC: Island Press. 384 p. 2017). USDA. 1995. Federal wildland fire NIFC (National Interagency Fire Center). Snook, J.P. 1992 (March 3). Rewrite of management policy and program review. 2016a. Wildland fire fatalities by year. Rattlesnake weather information. National Boise, ID: National Interagency Fire Boise, ID. 23 p. https://www.nifc.gov/ Weather Service, Reading Weather Center; final report. 45 p. https://www. safety/safety_documents/Fatalities-by- Service Office, Reading, CA. On file with: forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/ Year.pdf. (August 16, 2017). Wildland Fire Leadership Development documents/foundational/1995_fed_ NIFC (National Interagency Fire Center). Program, Rattlesnake Staff Ride. http:// wildland_fire_policy_program_report.pdf. 2016b. Wildland fire fatalities by type www.fireleadership.gov/toolbox/staffride/ (August 16, 2017). of accident. Boise, ID. 28 p. https:// downloads/lsr2/lsr2_resource9.pdf. (August WFLDP (Wildland Fire Leadership www.nifc.gov/safety/safety_documents/ 16, 2017). Development Program). N.d. Rattlesnake Fatalities-Type-of-Accident.pdf. (August Steen, H.K. 1976 [reprinted 2004]. The U.S. Fire Staff Ride. Staff Ride Library. https:// 16, 2017). Forest Service: A history. Durham, NC: www.fireleadership.gov/toolbox/staffride/ Pinchot, G. 1905 [reprinted 2005]. The Forest History Society. 432 p. library_staff_ride2.html. (August 16, 2017). use of the national forest reserves: Sutton, L. 2011. Common denominators Williams, G.R. 2000. The USDA Forest Service: regulations and instructions. Loveland, of human behavior on tragedy fires. Fire The first century. FS–650. Washington, DC: CO: Western Heritage Company. 80 p. Management Today. 71(1): 13–16. https:// USDA Forest Service. 156 p. Pinchot, G. 1947 [reprinted 1998]. Breaking www.fs.fed.us/fire/fmt/fmt_pdfs/FMT71-1. Wilson, C.C. ; Sorenson, J.C. 1978. Some new ground. Washington, DC: Island pdf#commondenominatorsofhuman common denominators of fire behavior on Press. 542 p. behaviorontragedyfires. (August 16, 2017). tragedy and near-miss forest fires. Broomall, Pyne, S.J. 1982. Fire in America: a cultural Tidwell, T. 2012. Five focal points for the PA: USDA Forest Service. 31 p. history of wildland and rural fire. Seattle: future. Speech, Forest Service Chief. University of Washington Press. 680 p. Forest Service Orientation for Presidential Pyne, S.J. 2001. Year of the fires: the story of Management Fellows, Washington, DC. the great fires of 1910. New York: Viking. https://www.fs.fed.us/speeches/five-focal- 322 p. points-future. (August 16, 2017).

Fire Management Today 34 Fire Camp Overrun by Fire* Region 3 RLS Team

he Turkey Fire on New Mexico’s Gila National “When I saw him [the least experienced crew T Forest was reported on June 5, 2016. The fire was burning in member] digging line around camp, I should have a wilderness area, and the local helped him, not stopped him.” ranger district had decided not to suppress fires in the area but –Incident Commander rather to use them for resource benefits. But the Forest Service typically monitors such fires to make sure they don’t threaten actions. At about 3 p.m., the Another consideration was the anything of value. incident commander decided where location of the Turkey Fire itself. The to camp based on factors such as fire had reached the western edges Deciding Where to Camp safety, logistics, and comfort. One of two large green meadows that of the driving considerations in did not burn (fig. 1). The incident On June 7, a three-person crew rode commander thought that if they horses into the area to monitor the choosing the camp location was water for the horses. camped across the meadows, on the fire’s growth and plan contingency far side of the fire, their campsite would be safe.

The campsite was just off a National Forest System trail in a small stand of ponderosa pines. The pines gave shade, and a nearby creek had water for the horses. The camp area had a light layer of needlecast on the ground.

As the crew set up camp, the least experienced crewmember began to dig line around camp as a precautionary measure. The incident commander, who had spent 17 years on the local hotshot crew, told him

The Region 3 RLS Team is a team for Figure 1—Location of the Turkey Fire (inside black border), the firefighter campsite rapid lesson sharing in the Forest Service’s (yellow triangle), the meadow shielding it (inside green borders) and the firefighters’ Southwestern Region, Albuquerque, NM. activity away from the fire (yellow arrow).

*The piece, published in 2016, is adapted from Rapid Lesson Sharing, a website maintained by the interagency Wildland Fire Lessons Learned Center. Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 35 not to bother, explaining that the The fire had managed to find a narrow strip of meadows would act as a firebreak. needlecast that led across the green meadow On the morning of June 8, the crew grass into the camp area. mounted up and set out to size up a cabin in the area and create a protection plan in case the fire threatened it. The cabin was located along the same trail as the campsite, to the southwest.

As the crewmembers rode down the trail, they noticed that the fire had remained parked at the meadow edges (fig. 1). The only active piece of the fire was located along the fire’s western edge. Therefore, the IC believed that the fire posed no threat to the camp.

Fire Pulls Off Big Surprise The crew rode down the trail to the cabin and spent most of the day designing a detailed protection plan and compiling a list of supplies for carrying out the plan if the need arose. In midafternoon, they headed back up the trail toward camp. Figure 2—The Turkey Fire spread into the firefighters’ campsite under ponderosa pines. Photo: USDA Forest Service. As they approached the fire area, they saw that the fire’s western edge had remained active and But, as the group rode into camp, the needlecast led across the green grown. The fire also appeared to everyone’s jaw dropped. Everything meadow grass into the camp area. have backed steadily to the south in camp had burned (fig. 2)! and then eastward underneath Lessons Learned the area that had already burned The incident commander had been Put line around your camp. (fig. 1). The incident commander correct. The green meadows did When choosing where to camp, was unconcerned because he had not burn. But the fire had managed consider being well away from the seen earlier that the meadows had to find a narrow strip of needlecast fire area, even if it’s inconvenient. stopped the fire, which he assumed maybe 6 inches (15 cm) wide. Remember how often we are had continued. Coming from an oddly angled tree, surprised by what fire can do. ■

Fire Management Today 36 today Guidelines for Contributors

Fire Management Today (FMT) For all submissions, include Photographs is an international quarterly the complete name(s), title(s), and Illustrations magazine for the wildland fire affiliation(s), and address(es) community. FMT welcomes of the author(s), illustrator(s), Figures, illustrations, and clear unsolicited manuscripts from and photographer(s), as well photographs are often essential readers on any subject related to as their telephone number(s) to the understanding of articles. fire management. and email address(es). If the Clearly label all photographs same or a similar manuscript is and illustrations (figure 1, 2, Submissions being submitted for publication 3; photograph A, B, C). At the elsewhere, include that end of the manuscript, include Send electronic files by email or information also. Authors should clear, thorough figure and photo traditional mail to: submit a photograph of themselves captions labeled in the same way or a logo for their agency, as the corresponding material USDA Forest Service institution, or organization. (figure 1, 2, 3; photograph A, B, C). Fire Management Today Captions should make photographs 201 14th Street, SW and illustrations understandable Washington, D.C. 20250 Style without reading the text. For Email: Authors are responsible for using photographs, indicate the name [email protected] wildland fire terminology that and affiliation of the photographer conforms to the latest standards and the year the photo was taken. Submit electronic files in PC set by the National Wildfire format. Submit manuscripts in Coordinating Group under the Release Authorization Word (.doc or .docx). Submit National Interagency Incident Management System. FMT uses Non-Federal Government authors illustrations and photographs as must sign a release to allow their separate files; do not include visual the spelling, capitalization, hyphenation, and other styles work to be placed in the public materials (such as photographs, domain and on the World Wide maps, charts, or graphs) as recommended in the U.S. Government Printing Office Web. In addition, all photographs embedded illustrations in the and illustrations created by a non- electronic manuscript file. You Style Manual, as required by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Federal employee require a written may submit digital photographs in release by the photographer or JPEG, TIFF, EPS, or other format; Authors should use the U.S. system of weight and measure, illustrator. The author, photograph, they must be at high resolution: and illustration release forms at least 300 dpi at a minimum size with equivalent values in the metric system. Keep titles concise are available upon request at of 4 by 7. Include information for [email protected]. photo captions and photographer’s and descriptive; subheadings and name and affiliation at the end of bulleted material are useful and the manuscript. Submit charts and help readability. As a general rule of graphs along with the electronic clear writing, use the active voice source files or data needed to (for example, write “Fire managers reconstruct them and any special know…” and not “It is known…”). instructions for layout. Include a Give spellouts for all abbreviations. description of each illustration at the end of the manuscript for use Tables in the caption. Tables should be logical and understandable without reading the text. Include tables at the end of the manuscript with appropriate titles.

Volume 76 • No. 2 • 2018 37