Fire today ManagementVolume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001
REDUCINGEDUCING COSTS ON LARGE FFIRES
United States Department of Agriculture Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 Forest Service 1 GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTORS Editorial Policy information also. Authors who are affiliated of the manuscript, include clear, thorough Fire Management Today (FMT) is an interna- should submit a camera-ready logo for their figure and photo captions labeled in the same tional quarterly magazine for the wildland fire agency, institution, or organization. way as the corresponding material (figure 1, 2, community. FMT welcomes unsolicited manu- 3; photograph A, B, C; etc.). Captions should scripts from readers on any subject related to Style. Authors are responsible for using make photos and illustrations understandable fire management. Because space is a consider- wildland fire terminology that conforms to the without reading the text. For photos, indicate ation, long manuscripts might be abridged by latest standards set by the National Wildfire the name and affiliation of the photographer the editor, subject to approval by the author; Coordinating Group under the National Inter- and the year the photo was taken. FMT does print short pieces of interest to agency Incident Management System. FMT uses readers. the spelling, capitalization, hyphenation, and Electronic Files. Please label all disks carefully other styles recommended in the United States with name(s) of file(s) and system(s) used. If the Submission Guidelines Government Printing Office Style Manual, as manuscript is word-processed, please submit a Submit manuscripts to either the general required by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 3-1/2 inch, IBM-compatible disk together with manager or the managing editor at: Authors should use the U.S. system of weight the paper copy (see above) as an electronic file and measure, with equivalent values in the in one of these formats: WordPerfect 5.1 for USDA Forest Service metric system. Try to keep titles concise and DOS; WordPerfect 7.0 or earlier for Windows 95; Attn: April J. Baily, F&AM Staff descriptive; subheadings and bulleted material Microsoft Word 6.0 or earlier for Windows 95; P.O. Box 96090 are useful and help readability. As a general rule Rich Text format; or ASCII. Digital photos may Washington, DC 20090-6090 of clear writing, use the active voice (e.g., write, be submitted but must be at least 300 dpi and tel. 202-205-0891, fax 202-205-1272 “Fire managers know…” and not, “It is accompanied by a high-resolution (preferably Internet e-mail: [email protected] known…”). Provide spellouts for all abbrevia- laser) printout for editorial review and quality tions. Consult recent issues (on the World Wide control during the printing process. Do not USDA Forest Service Web at
Paper Copy. Type or word-process the manu- Photos and Illustrations. Figures, illustra- Release Authorization. Non-Federal Govern- script on white paper (double-spaced) on one tions, overhead transparencies (originals are ment authors must sign a release to allow their side. Include the complete name(s), title(s), preferable), and clear photographs (color slides work to be in the public domain and on the affiliation(s), and address(es) of the author(s), as or glossy color prints are preferable) are often World Wide Web. In addition, all photos and well as telephone and fax numbers and e-mail essential to the understanding of articles. illustrations require a written release by the information. If the same or a similar manuscript Clearly label all photos and illustrations (figure photographer or illustrator. Release forms are is being submitted elsewhere, include that 1, 2, 3, etc.; photograph A, B, C, etc.). At the end available from General Manager April Baily.
Fire Management Today is published by the Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. The Secretary of Agriculture has determined that the publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public business required by law of this Department.
Fire Management Today is for sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, at: Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: 202-512-1800 Fax: 202-512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
Fire Management Today is available on the World Wide Web at
Ann Veneman, Secretary April J. Baily U.S. Department of Agriculture General Manager
Mike Dombeck, Chief Robert H. “Hutch” Brown, Ph.D. Forest Service Managing Editor
Harry Croft, Acting Director Madelyn Dillon Fire and Aviation Management Editor
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Disclaimer: 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.
2 Fire Management Today Fire today Management Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001
On the Cover: CONTENTS Reducing Fire Suppression Costs: A National Priority ...... 4 Hutch Brown
Issues in Reducing Costs on Large Wildland Fires ...... 6 Richard J. Mangan
Equipment Standardization Reduces Costs on Wildland Fires ...... 11 A member of the Payson Hot- Richard J. Mangan shots on the 1994 Bear Creek Fire, Boise National Forest, ID. Forecasting Fire Season Severity ...... 15 Controlling the blaze was Everett M. “Sonny” Stiger relatively inexpensive; the fire scorched 4,600 acres (1,860 ha) at a cost of $357,800, or about Can the Fire-Dependent Whitebark Pine Be Saved? ... 17 $78 per acre ($193/ha). By Robert E. Keane comparison, the average large- fire suppression cost per acre Fire Ignition From Horseback ...... 21 burned in the National Forest Carlton Britton, Rob Mitchell, Brent Racher, and Ernest Fish System in 1994 was $576 ($1,423/ha); by 1999, it had Fighting Fire Without Fire: Biomass Removal reached $976 ($2,411/ha). as a Prelude to Prescribed Fire ...... 23 Reducing costs on large fires has become a growing national Stephen M. Jolley concern (see the articles by Dick Mangan in this issue). Workforce Diversity Program: A Progress Report Photo: Karen Wattenmaker, From the Payette National Forest ...... 26 USDA Forest Service, Boise Francisco Romero National Forest, Boise, ID, 1994. Tractor Plow Safety: Know Your Terrain and The FIRE 21 symbol (shown below and on the Wear Your Seatbelt! ...... 29 cover) stands for the safe and effective use of wildland fire, now and throughout the 21st Timothy G. Wyant century. Its shape represents the fire triangle (oxygen, heat, and fuel). The three outer red triangles represent the basic functions of wildland fire organizations (planning, operations, and SHORT FEATURES aviation management), and the three critical aspects of wildland fire management (prevention, suppression, and prescription). The black interior Guidelines for Contributors...... 2 represents land affected by fire; the emerging green points symbolize the growth, restoration, and sustainability associated with fire-adapted Websites on Fire...... 31 ecosystems. The flame represents fire itself as an ever-present force in nature. For more informa- tion on FIRE 21 and the science, research, and Annual Photo Contest ...... 31 innovative thinking behind it, contact Mike Apicello, National Interagency Fire Center, 208-387-5460.
Firefighter and public safety is our first priority.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 3 REDUCING FIRE SUPPRESSION COSTS: A NATIONAL PRIORITY
Hutch Brown
educing fire suppression costs has long been a priority for Since the 1980’s, Ragencies charged with wildland there has been a disturbing rise fire management in the United in both total suppression costs States. In 1993, Congress passed the Government Results and and the cost per acre burned. Performance Act, holding Federal agencies to high standards of Complex Fires in California accountability and cost-effective Seeking Solutions together consumed more than performance. As the USDA Forest Since the early 1990’s, a series of 227,000 acres (92,000 ha) at a cost Service’s Strategic Plan (2000 studies has explored the reasons of about $178 million, or about Revision) put it, “the agency is … for rising large-fire costs, culmi- 30 percent of the total Forest required to conduct its business in nating in a report in 2000 by the Service fire suppression budget the most effective and efficient Forest Service’s Strategic Overview for 1999 (F&AM 2000). manner possible, providing the of Large Costs Team under the title best possible value for the “Policy Implications of Large Fire In 2000, Congress appropriated American people.” Management: A Strategic Assess- funds to support the National Fire ment of Factors Influencing Costs” Rising Costs Plan, a blueprint for improving fire (F&AM 2000). The report contains protection, restoring fire-ravaged a detailed literature discussion. For years, Federal land managers communities and landscapes, and have grappled with a rising num- reducing the fire risk to communi- This issue of Fire Management ber of large fires (1,000 acres ties and ecosystems nationwide.* Today contributes to the discus- [405 ha] or more in size). Since New funds under the plan for fiscal sion with two thoughtful articles the mid-1980’s, the number of year 2001 included $1.1 billion for by Dick Mangan on reducing large- acres burned has been growing on the Forest Service alone. fire costs (see pages 6 and 11). A the national forestlands (table 1), future issue will further explore especially in the interior West. In However, given the scope of the the problem. Contributions of up 1987, for only the first time since Nation’s fire-related forest health to about 2,000 words are welcome; 1919, more than a million acres problem, the National Fire Plan see “Guidelines for Contributors” burned on our national forests and will require a sustained commit- on page 2. grasslands. More than a million ment. Fire managers can build acres burned again in 1988, 1994, support for the plan by showing References and 1996. In 2000, more than Congress and the American people 2 million acres burned. F&AM (Fire and Aviation Management). positive results achieved in the 2000. Policy implications of large fire least controversial and most cost- management: A strategic assessment of One result has been a disturbing effective manner—with the most factors influencing costs. Report by the rise in both total suppression costs Strategic Overview of Large Costs Team. “bang for the buck.” Finding ways Website
4 Fire Management Today Table 1—Forest Service expendituresa for emergency fire suppression on lands in the National Forest System, 1980–99 (F&AM 2000).
Year Cost Acres burned Cost per acre burned 1980 136,767,256 379,000 360.86 1981 191,011,998 325,000 587.73 1982 50,128,049 83,000 603.95 1983 56,711,069 81,000 700.14 1984 102,490,769 187,000 548.08 1985 249,250,324 741,000 336.37 1986 167,696,327 406,000 413.05 1987 368,538,256 1,281,000 287.70 1988 604,357,759 1,556,000 388.40 1989 442,166,330 597,000 740.65 1990 319,088,563 585,000 545.45 1991 163,741,389 200,000 818.71 1992 340,802,589 699,000 487.56 1993 205,616,119 330,000 623.08 1994 849,987,396 1,476,000 575.87 1995 350,635,608 376,000 932.54 1996 514,153,200 1,367,000 376.12 1997 154,246,960 241,000 640.03 1998 219,300,000 306,000 716.67 1999 $591,000,000 605,000 $976.86 Total $6,077,689,961 11,821,000 — Average $303,884,498 591,050 $582.99
a. All expenditures are expressed in terms of 1999 dollars.
900 1000
800 900 800 700 Cost per acre burned (dollars) 700 600 600 500 500 400 400 300 300
200 200 Suppression costs (millions of dollars) 100 100
0 0 1980 1985 1990 1995 Year
Figure 1—Forest Service expenditures for emergency fire suppression on lands in the National Forest System, 1980–99 (F&AM 2000); all costs are in 1999 dollars. There is no correspondence between total costs and cost per acre burned. Both figures fluctuate greatly from year to year, but both show an overall rising trend. Illustration: Gene Hansen Creative Services, Inc., Annapolis, MD, 2000.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 5 ISSUES IN REDUCING COSTS ON LARGE WILDLAND FIRES
Richard J. Mangan
Editor’s note: This article is based on a paper presented by the author at the symposium “Fire Economics, Planning, and Policy: Bottom Lines” on April 5–9, 1999, in San Diego, CA. The article still has broad applica- bility. However, readers should also refer to more recent studies, particularly the 2000 report by the Forest Service’s Strategic Overview of Large Costs Team under the title, “Policy Implications of Large Fire Management: A Strategic Assessment of Factors Influencing Costs” (on the World Wide Web at
ildland fires are big busi- ness. Every year, fires burn Every year, hundreds of aircraft W millions of acres in the and tens of thousands of firefighters United States. Numerous contrac- are needed to suppress wildland fires tors, hundreds of aircraft, and tens of thousands of firefighters sup- in the United States, at a cost press the fires at a cost of hundreds of hundreds of millions of dollars. of millions of dollars.
From June 1 to July 22, 1998, The Large-Fire • Escaped prescribed fires and Florida experienced 2,282 wildland Problem escaped natural fires designated fires that burned 499,477 acres Large fires are not a new phenom- for wildland fire use in wilder- (202,138 ha), mostly on State- enon in the United States. In 1910, ness and parks; protected land. More than 10,000 vast areas of the country were firefighters from 47 States con- burned over. Statistics published structed more than 1,000 miles by the National Interagency Fire (1,600 km) of fireline to suppress Center in Boise, ID, show that these fires. One hundred and fifty- large fires have again been on the six aircraft supported them. Sup- rise since the mid-1980’s. pression costs were estimated at $160 million. In recent years, several factors have changed fire suppression Across the United States in 1998, methods (especially on the largest 81,043 wildland fires burned wildland fires): 2,329,704 acres (942,831 ha). Those figures are based only on • The reduced Federal workforce what agencies reported to the in natural resources agencies; National Interagency Fire Center • Changing forest health condi- in Boise, ID; actual figures are tions, often the result of previous certainly higher. Suppressing the fire exclusion practices; 1998 fires might have cost more • Changes in the fire camp envi- than $1 billion. ronment to meet the needs and expectations of the 1990’s The 1994 North Fork Fire, part of the workforce; Idaho City Complex on the Boise National Forest, ID. The Idaho City Complex took Dick Mangan is the program leader • Public and media expectations; weeks to suppress at a cost of tens of (retired) for Fire and Aviation Manage- • Large-scale climatic events, such millions of dollars; fuel loadings were a ment, Missoula Technology and Develop- as El Niño and global warming; contributing factor. Photo: Karen ment Center, USDA Forest Service, Wattenmaker, USDA Forest Service, Boise Missoula, MT. National Forest, Boise, ID, 1994.
6 Fire Management Today • The public’s intolerance of • From 1991 to 1995, Forest structures; and firefighter avail- lingering smoke; and Service fire costs increased 15.5 ability, quantity, and quality. • The politics of wildland fire at percent per year. the local, State, and national Operations Section levels. An excellent example was Schuster and others (1997) exam- Costs the 1995 Long Island Fire in New ined costs on 171 medium and Under the Incident Command York. Although the fire burned large fires, paying particular System (see sidebar on page 8), the only about 5,000 acres (2,000 attention to 20 of the largest, most operations section of an incident ha), it drew the attention of New expensive fires in 1994. Costs management team on a large York’s governor, the State’s broke down as follows: wildland fire includes some of the senior U.S. Senator, the Director highest cost items in recent years, of the Federal Emergency • 56.6 percent—aviation re- particularly personnel, equipment, Management Agency, the Deputy sources, equipment, food, and aviation. Under Secretary of Agriculture showers, and toilets; for Natural Resources and the • 31.7 percent—personnel (mostly Personnel. Personnel costs are a Environment, and the personal overtime pay for regular employ- big part of total fire suppression adviser to the President. ees and pay for casual employ- costs. Base pay, hazardous-duty ees); and pay, and premium overtime all All of these factors, often in • 11.7 percent—all other expenses. figure in. Personnel costs have combination, require fire manag- recently mushroomed on large ers to take actions (and spend The authors also surveyed incident wildland fires, because natural money) that might not have been commanders on large wildland resource agencies have lost locally needed in previous years. fires in 1994 to identify factors that available personnel. It is not drive up costs. Of the 34 factors uncommon to send crews and Cost Factors on listed in the survey, the incident overhead personnel across the Large Fires commanders rated only two country to large fires, allowing for Fire-related expenditures, espe- (“weather during fire” and “ac- up to 2 days’ travel time each way. cially for large fires, came under cess”) as very important. According This travel time incurs substantial increased scrutiny in the 1990’s, to the survey, other factors that personnel costs, with no corre- partly as a result of the long and increased costs included terrain; sponding fireline action during costly fires in the greater Yellow- fuel loadings; protecting lives and transit. stone area in 1988. Comptrollers were introduced on incident management teams to advise line officers on cost issues specific to a given fire. Oversight reviews and studies were done to examine individual fires, season-long expenditures, and long-term trends in suppression costs.
These studies offer important insights into large-fire expendi- tures. For example:
• Many large fires are managed by national incident management teams that spend more than $1 million per day. • From 1970 to 1995, USDA Forest Flagstaff Hotshots constructing fireline on the 1994 Rabbit Creek Fire, Boise National Service fire expenditures were Forest, ID. According to one study, personnel accounted for almost a third of large-fire costs in 1994. Photo: Karen Wattenmaker, USDA Forest Service, Boise National Forest, nearly $7.9 billion. Boise, ID, 1994.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 7 INCIDENT COMMAND SYSTEM
Since the mid-1980’s, large wildland fires in the made by the incident commander. The other United States have been managed under the sections provide supporting information, equip- Incident Command System (ICS), an organiza- ment, supplies, transportation, and personnel for tional structure similar to the military organiza- suppression. The operations section includes: tion for combat. Under the ICS, the basic structure of an incident management team includes sections • Personnel (crews, supervisors, aircraft manag- for command, plans, operations, logistics, finance, ers, etc.); safety, and information. • Equipment (engines, dozers, water tenders, lowboys, etc.); and The operations section is responsible for on-the- • Aircraft (airtankers, helicopters, lead planes, ground implementation of strategic decisions and air attack).
Equipment. Equipment such as Future Conditions teams.* The seasonality and engines, dozers, and water tenders Before considering options for uncertainty of contract work is also expensive. Costs can easily reducing costs on future fires, we generally make contract re- exceed $1,000 per day for each must first forecast conditions that sources higher priced than piece of contract equipment will affect our expenditures. Recent regular agency personnel and mobilized to a distant wildland fire trends on large wildland fires give equipment. and placed in around-the-clock us a fairly accurate picture of • The availability and efficiency of operational status. Other costs future conditions: large type 1 helicopters will might include salaries of operators increase their use on large or crews hired under casual labor • Continued staff reductions in the authority. natural resource agencies will * Under the National Fire Plan signed by the President increase the use of contractors in 2000, Congress appropriated fiscal year 2001 funding for hiring new Federal employees for wildland Aircraft. Aircraft are the most for crews, equipment, and fire management, including 3,500 new Forest Service visible symbol of our fire suppres- employees (permanent and temporary), helping to possibly incident management reverse the shortage of Federal personnel. sion efforts and our single most expensive resource on a large wildland fire. Agencies pay for availability guarantees and per- hour flight costs when employing aircraft. Aircraft costs alone can account for more than one-third of the total suppression costs on large wildland fires.
Both equipment and aircraft require personnel to manage and supervise them. Those personnel and the crews assigned to the fire need three meals per day, often in a remote setting a long way from food service facilities. Daily meal costs under the 1998 fire food service contracts averaged $35 to $40 per day per firefighter. Dozers for wildland firefighting. Engines, dozers, and other contract equipment can drive up costs on wildland fires. Costs can easily exceed $1,000 per day for each piece of contract equipment. Photo: USDA Forest Service, Missoula Technology and Development Center, Missoula, MT.
8 Fire Management Today wildland fires. These helicopters shift times, flight time, and Fireline Operations. Constructing are very expensive, costing in postfire operations. and holding fireline is a major excess of $100 per minute of function of the operations section. flight time. Strategies and Tactics. During Opportunities to reduce fireline • Modernization of the airtanker periods when extreme fire behavior costs include: fleet by private contractors will conditions are forecast, cost increase the costs of using reduction opportunities include: • Using natural barriers instead of airtankers on large wildland constructed fireline. fires. • Thoroughly analyzing the • Choosing the proper fireline • As more people move into the implementation of fire suppres- construction method (handline, wildland–urban interface and as sion efforts. If crews, equipment, dozer line, or fireline explosives). news is broadcast with ever- and aircraft cannot take safe, • Considering the required mopup increasing speed, interest in effective actions during periods standards in light of the current wildland fires will increase for of extreme fire behavior, take and forecasted weather and fire the general public, media, and them off line and off shift. behavior conditions. “Let it burn politicians. • Returning crews to base camp out” is often safer and more cost- • The 1995 Federal Wildland Fire after 8-hour shifts. Keeping a effective than “put it out.”* Policy will increasingly affect 20-person crew at the GS–4 level • Constructing spike camps closer State and county agencies and on a fireline costs $1,900 more to the fire work area when travel local fire departments involved for 14 hours than for 8 hours. If time will result in long shift in large interagency wildland extreme fire behavior is likely to times. Transporting crews fires. force crews to retreat to safety becomes a large cost factor when zones, it is better to return them travel times approach 2 to 3 Cost Reduction to the incident base camp for hours per operational period. Opportunities additional rest, safety, and cost Significant savings on large fires savings. Contract Equipment. Contract will not come from shaving costs • Keeping airtankers and water- equipment is another large cost at the edges (see sidebar below). To dropping helicopters on the center in the operations section on really save money, we must address ground. It is inefficient and a large wildland fire. The need for spending by the operations sec- dangerous to fly airtankers and 24-hour double shifting and tions of our incident management helicopters under extreme fire around-the-clock availability of teams. Opportunities for cost conditions. prime movers and lowboys reductions in the operations • Placing dozers, engines, and (trucks used to move dozers) section fall into several categories: water tenders off shift. Such must be carefully weighed against equipment might not function strategies and tactics, fireline * For a description of a burnout strategy, see Tom operations, contract equipment, very effectively under conditions Leuschen and Ken Frederick, “The Consumption of extreme fire behavior. Strategy: Increasing Safety During Mopup,” Fire Management Today 59(4): 29–33.
THESE ARE NOT THE SOLUTIONS
Recent attempts to reduce costs on large wildland • Avoiding the use of national incident manage- fires have produced a long list of simplistic sugges- ment teams because they spend too much tions for saving money. Recommendations include: money; and • Keeping trainees, human resources specialists, • Supplying fewer newspapers to incident base and union representatives off large fires. camps; • Using canteens with water from large potable- These “easy answers” reduce the total fire suppres- water trucks instead of bottled water; sion bill by a small percentage but do not address • Using National Guard trucks instead of school the bigger cost centers and therefore fail to buses for crew transportation; produce significant savings.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 9 production efficiency and cost per Many large fires are managed hour. Accountability for actual by national incident management teams hours worked should be empha- that spend more than $1 million per day. sized, with single-resource unit leaders assigned to monitor time performance, as appropriate. directors must work closely with Cost Savings Shift Times. Managing shift times the regional and national fire Wildland fires will always be on the fireline can be an effective coordinators to ensure that damaging and costly, even when tool for reducing personnel costs. actual and projected needs— well managed. But opportunities When a 12-hour operational period rather than flight hours do exist for significant cost savings extends to 15 hours, costs increase logged—determine helicopter by making the operations sections by 24 percent. When this happens, resource assignments. of our incident management teams for example, a 20-person crew at more efficient. To realize savings, the GS–4 level costs an additional Declaring Control. Deciding to the agency administrator and $940. declare a fire “controlled” results incident commander on a fire in a major cost reduction, because must work together to make cost Flight Time. Managing flight time personnel no longer receive hazard reduction a clearly stated priority for aircraft, both fixed and rotary pay. For a 20-person crew at the and to strongly support all neces- wing, offers these cost-saving GS–4 level working 14-hour sary actions. opportunities: operational periods, savings can exceed $600 per period. For Reference • Using airtankers earlier in the 30 such crews, savings can reach Schuster, E.G.; Cleaves, D.A.; Bell, E.F. burning period, thereby dramati- nearly $19,000 per operational 1997. Analysis of USDA Forest Service cally increasing their efficiency period. Similarly, deciding to fire-related expenditures 1970–1995. and reducing their costs. demobilize resources, both person- Res. Pap. PSW–RP–230. Albany, CA: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest • Reducing airtanker flights nel and equipment, can result in Research Station. ■ ordered for public and media large savings in salaries and in visibility rather than for fire support costs such as contracted suppression effectiveness. food services. • Ordering the right resource for the job. Large airtankers, single- engine airtankers, and type 1 and type 2 helicopters all have their own unique advantages. Depend- ing on conditions, each can be the most effective and efficient tool to use. • Using type 1 and type 2 helicop- ters as needed rather than merely to retain them. During periods when incident manage- ment teams are competing for scarce resources, they might have helicopters log flight time just to prove they are needed. At costs that can exceed $7,000 per hour of flight time, such use is highly wasteful. Incident com- Firefighters mopping up on a wildland fire. Choosing the right strategies and tactics, manders, operations section including feasible alternatives to mopup, can help reduce large fire costs. Photo: USDA chiefs, and air operations Forest Service, Missoula Technology and Development Center, Missoula, MT.
10 Fire Management Today EQUIPMENT STANDARDIZATION REDUCES COSTS ON WILDLAND FIRES*
Richard J. Mangan
t the beginning of the 20th century, equipment develop- Today, the two Forest Service equipment Ament for wildland firefighting development centers are responsible was an informal, backyard affair. for more than 200 design specifications. Farmers, ranchers, and loggers developed equipment for their specific needs, often sharing their best ideas with neighbors. After HISTORICAL HIGHLIGHTS IN EQUIPMENT 1905, when the fledgling USDA DEVELOPMENT FOR WILDLAND FIREFIGHTING Forest Service took the lead in wildland firefighting nationwide, • The Transfer Act of 1905 Greeley emphasized the equipment development gradually brought focus to equipment importance of inspecting, became more focused and system- development for the USDA inventorying, and distributing atic (see sidebar). Forest Service by making firefighting equipment. wildland fire suppression and • In 1936, an equipment stan- Standardization associated equipment develop- dardization conference at Benefits ment Forest Service priorities. Spokane, WA, brought addi- Ranger Malcolm McLeod tional focus to wildland fire In 1960, the Forest Service char- headed the initial efforts by equipment development. tered two equipment development developing several handtools • In 1960, the Forest Service centers, now known as the on the job. established equipment develop- Missoula Technology and Develop- • In 1910, when Ranger Edward ment centers in Montana and ment Center in Missoula, MT, and Pulaski’s heroic actions saved California. the San Dimas Technology and the lives of 35 firefighters • In 1976, the Michigan Depart- Development Center in San Dimas, during the Big Blowup in the ment of Natural Resources CA. For the first time, Federal northern Rocky Mountains, established the Forest Fire wildland fire management agencies the need for better firefighting Equipment Center in started seeing the benefits of equipment became clear. In Roscommon, MI. equipment standardization on a the next few years, Pulaski large scale. refined a firefighting tool that became widely popular and The equipment development still bears his name. centers designed more and more • In 1912, a fire shield was equipment, tested it in the field, developed that allowed and completed it with design firefighters to get closer to a specifications and drawings. Today, fire. • In 1920, the Forest Service Dick Mangan is the program leader awarded the first commercial Early supply cache for wildland (retired) for Fire and Aviation Manage- firefighting. From its inception in 1905, ment, Missoula Technology and Develop- contract for production of the Forest Service has made equipment ment Center, USDA Forest Service, pulaski tools. development for fire suppression a high Missoula, MT. • In 1921, at the Mather Field priority. Photo: USDA Forest Service, Conference near Sacramento, Missoula Technology and Development * The author presented a version of this article at the Center, Missoula, MT. symposium “Fire Economics, Planning, and Policy: CA, Chief Forester William B. Bottom Lines,” 5–9 April 1999, San Diego, CA.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 11 the two Forest Service centers are Through the Forest Service’s equipment responsible for more than 200 development centers, Federal wildland fire design specifications. The General management agencies started seeing the benefits Services Administration (GSA) procures items that meet these of equipment standardization on a large scale. specifications for Federal wildland fire management agencies, their State partners, and other coopera- Cost Savings Though In addition to contracting, the GSA tors. The equipment is distributed Standardization performs quality assurance at nationally and to other countries The Government works with the vendor plants to ensure that design during emergencies (see sidebar private sector to procure equip- specifications are rigidly followed. on page 13). ment of a consistent quality at the The GSA also maintains large fire best price to the taxpayer. Design equipment warehouses in Stock- How big has the GSA program specifications prepared by the two ton, CA, and Fort Worth, TX, to grown? From 1994 to 1998, total Forest Service centers are for- meet short-term emergency GSA sales based on specifications warded to the GSA wildland fire equipment needs by firefighting and drawings produced by the two equipment program in Fort Worth, agencies nationwide and to supply Forest Service centers averaged TX. There, procurement contract international support missions, nearly $26 million per year. In specialists solicit proposals and such as to Mexico and Mongolia in 1994, when large fires burned award contracts to commercial 1998. throughout the Western United vendors for the production of States, sales topped $34 million. clothing, tools, and equipment Each year, the GSA publishes and needed by wildland firefighters. distributes a catalog of wildland In 1993, standardization of wild- Because the GSA bidding process fire PPE and supplies. Because land fire equipment in the United provides vast economies of scale, each item in the catalog is stan- States reached a new milestone manufacturers are able to offer dardized, firefighting units know with the adoption of the first low, “most-favored-customer” that they will receive exactly what National Fire Protection Associa- prices, resulting in huge cost they expect and that it will be fully tion (NFPA) standard on personal savings for the taxpayer. interchangeable or compatible protective equipment (PPE). The standard, known as NFPA 1977, established minimum performance requirements for helmets, shirts, trousers, gloves, boots, and fire shelters. The standard enabled commercial vendors to supply PPE outside the GSA program. Updated in 1998, NFPA 1977 helps provide all firefighters with minimum levels of protection from the dangers of wildland fire.
In the mid-1990’s, the Canadian General Standards Board com- pleted the first Canadian standard for wildland fire PPE. In addition, the International Standards Organization is working on a standard for PPE that will have Equipment specialist designing new equipment for wildland firefighting at the USDA international standing under the Forest Service’s Missoula Technology and Development Center, Missoula, MT. Today, the General Agreement on Tariffs and two Forest Service equipment development centers are responsible for more than 200 design specifications. Photo: USDA Forest Service, Missoula Technology and Development Trade. Center, Missoula, MT.
12 Fire Management Today with equipment already in the Across the board, firefighting Standardized production runs field. agencies save about 25 percent by often fail to meet the clothing procuring clothing and equipment needs of those who are very tall, Do standardization and large-scale through the GSA. Applying the short, heavy, or thin—perhaps purchasing really result in cost 25-percent savings rate to the 10 to 20 percent of all firefighters. savings? In 1997, a study by the average annual GSA sales of Fortunately, the wildland fire Missoula Technology and Develop- $26 million in firefighting equip- community has found suppliers ment Center compared prices in ment suggests that average savings who cater to large and tall sizes. the GSA fire equipment catalog to for the taxpayer amount to those in catalogs for major com- $6.5 million each year. Another consideration is that mercial suppliers. Prices charged standardized equipment used by by the commercial suppliers were Standardization wildland firefighters, such as averaged and compared to the GSA Drawbacks handtools and backpacks, leaves prices to show the potential Despite its advantages, standard- little room for individual expres- savings. Table 1 shows the results ization does have drawbacks. Cost sion. The proliferation of special- for fire shelters and Nomex shirts, efficiencies through standardiza- ized handtools—the Super P, the indicating that lower GSA prices tion are greatest for large produc- Reinhartski, and similar tools— resulted in significant savings. tion runs, especially for clothing. and of firefighter field packs shows
HOW DO WILDLAND FIREFIGHTERS OBTAIN EQUIPMENT?
Unlike structural firefighters, State agencies, such as the 250 firefighters, is distributed who get their equipment almost California Department of For- nationwide. exclusively from commercial estry and Fire Protection, for the sources, agencies that fight manufacture of clothing for For the increasingly used wildland fires have multiple firefighters). contract crews, which cannot types of sources: buy from Federal sources, Federal agencies equip firefighters commercial suppliers have • Commercial suppliers (avail- with standard equipment that can begun to supplement stocks able to all agencies, regardless be used by all agencies. On project during fire seasons. Firefighters of size); fires, 11 national fire caches on multistate wildland fires • The General Services Admin- (9 managed by the Forest Service carry only two sets of clothing, istration (GSA) (available to and 2 by the USDI Bureau of Land exchanging them as needed at Federal agencies and their Management) and 2 GSA ware- the supply unit—a method cooperators); and houses are available for equipment similar to the direct exchange • Organizations such as prison supply. In addition, a fleet of fire widely used by the military industries (available to larger cache trailers, each able to equip services.
Table 1—Cost savings to the taxpayer through procurement of two items from the General Services Administration (GSA) in fiscal year 1998.
Item GSA price Average commercial price Savings per item Items procured Total savings
Fire sheltera $39.34 $89.98 $50.64 28,370 $1,436,657
Nomex shirt $43.43b $74.12b $30.69 27,888 $855,883 a. The only commercially manufactured fire shelter, built to Forest Service specifications. b. The GSA shirt weighed 5.5 ounces (155.9 g), whereas the commercial shirt weighed 4.5 ounces (127.6 g).
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 13 that many firefighters insist on The NFPA standard for personal protective expressing their individuality. Cost equipment helps provide all firefighters efficiency is unimportant to those with minimum levels of protection trying to establish independent identities in the world of wildland from the dangers of wildland fire. firefighting. Fortunately, those who refuse to use standardized equipment are still a small per- Wildland firefighter on a centage of the total workforce. fireline, equipped with a McLeod tool and standard personal protective equipment The Future of such as Nomex clothing. Using Equipment Supply standardized clothing and equipment helps reduce costs What changes will the 21st century on large fires. Photo: Ravi Miro bring to the supply system for Fry, USDA Forest Service, Boise wildland fire equipment? Predic- National Forest, Boise, ID. tions can be made about the future of wildland firefighting worldwide:
• The problem of wildland fires will increase in scope and complexity. • Wildland firefighters will no longer be able to count on unlimited Federal funding. • Fire suppression will become ever more interagency. • International standardization through the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs and the International Standards Organi- zation will affect equipment procurement for wildland fire management agencies worldwide.
Growing interagency cooperation at the national and international levels, especially at a time of stagnating or declining Federal budgets, will require more equip- ment standardization to maximize cost-effectiveness and safety for wildland firefighters. ■
Supply depot at Warm Springs Base Camp on the 1994 Rabbit Creek Fire, Boise National Forest, Boise, ID. The General Services Administration works with the private sector to procure equipment of a consistent quality at the best price to the taxpayer, saving about 25 percent of costs for firefighter clothing and equipment. Photo: Bob Nichols, USDA Forest Service, Boise National Forest, Boise, ID, 1994.
14 Fire Management Today FORECASTING FIRE SEASON SEVERITY*
Everett M. “Sonny” Stiger
ach year, wildland fire manag- ers prepare for the coming fire Prior to the 2000 fire season, Eseason based on factors such as I was able to make a fairly good prediction long-range weather forecasts by of fire season severity in the area the National Interagency Fire Center in Boise, ID (through the around Helena, MT. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Marshal Wildernesses. The first winter of 1999–2000, I became Service). Adequate preparedness is plans went into effect in the early increasingly alarmed by indica- vital to successful wildland fire 1980’s. tions that the coming fire season management, as the severity of the 2000 fire season showed only all It quickly became obvious that too well. conventional, long-range weather forecasts were insufficient for FIRE SEASON Prior to the 2000 fire season, I was predicting the severity of the SEVERITY able to make a fairly good predic- upcoming fire season. Something INDICATORS tion of fire season severity in the else was needed to help managers feel confident that a June decision area around Helena, MT. My Fire season severity can be to designate a lightning fire as a forecasting method is based on a predicted with reasonable wildland fire use would not result procedure I developed to help accuracy based on: wildland fire managers decide in an escaped fire if unusually severe fire conditions developed by whether to let a lightning fire burn • Snowpack size (i.e., the August. as a wildland fire use in a desig- percentage of the average nated wilderness area. snow water equivalent); I had been toying with a procedure • Cumulative winter precipita- that was put to the test during the Beginnings tion (i.e., the percentage of 1988 fire season, the year of the I began my career with the USDA the normal level); Yellowstone Fires. In 1988, Forest Service in Colorado in 1959 • The thousand-hour fuel Yellowstone National Park had one and quickly found my niche in moisture level (in relation to of its wettest Mays on record. The wildland fire management. In the average level); wet spring weather gave no hint of 1977, I transferred from the Rocky • The energy release compo- the severe fire season to come. I Mountain Region to the Northern nent (in relation to the believed that a wet spring was only Region as a fuel and fire manage- average and to the 80th and part of the picture; if winter ment specialist for the Beaverhead, 90th percentiles); and precipitation was only 50 percent Deerlodge, Helena, and Lewis and • Climatology (in a very of normal, a wet May might not be Clark National Forests. One of my simplified sense; for example, of much help by August. Ensuing first tasks was to develop and the area near Helena, MT, events proved me right. implement fire management plans tends to dry out from late for the Anaconda–Pintler and Bob June through late August or The 2000 Fire Season early September). Sonny Stiger is an associate with Montana After retiring from the Forest Prescribed Fire Services, Inc., Wolf Creek, Service, I continued to test my This information combined MT. procedure in the area around gives one a good idea by early * The procedure outlined in this article was published Helena, MT, by monitoring local May of what the fire season will by the author in the proceedings of the 11th Confer- indicators (see sidebar). In the ence on Fire and Meteorology, 16–19 April 1991, be like in July and August. Missoula, MT.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 15 would be the most severe since and the energy release compo- A Valuable Prediction 1988. By February 2000, I felt nent was at an all-time high. Tool compelled to warn our county fire • The weather forecast for June The past 15 years have shown the council and the Tri-County Fire was for normal precipitation and severe consequences of long-term Working Group that a severe fire above-normal temperatures. fuel buildups in the interior West. season might be in the making. I However, we would have needed We all know what the future holds continued to monitor conditions several times the normal precipi- until our fuels are recycled, and report on a monthly basis to tation in June to get us out of whether through management groups that included the Helena the hole, and climatology told us actions or through fires ignited by National Forest staff. By June 1, we would dry out in July and careless people or natural events. I was convinced that a severe fire August. A look at the ground Wildland fire managers will need season was imminent: confirmed the dry conditions: all the help they can get to stay on Springs and ponds that had top of a serious situation. • The snow water equivalent was never gone dry were drying up or “extremely below average” (less already dry. Awareness by managers early in than 50 percent) for two-thirds the year of the potential for a of the mountains in Montana In early June 2000, I began waving severe fire season can improve and “much below average” (50 to a red warning flag based on fire preparedness and reduce losses. 70 percent) for the remaining season severity indicators, data Too many of us in the wildland fire one-third. comparisons to 1988, and a good business are unwilling to stick out • Cumulative precipitation for the historical feel for the weather in our necks and make predictions for winter of 1999–2000 was seri- our area. I believed that the Helena fear of being ridiculed. However, ously below normal for many area and particularly the Belt we do have enough information valley stations in central and Mountains would be in for a tough available to make reasonably good southwestern Montana—about fire season. By midnight on July predictions. It’s time to use it! the same or less than for the 23, there was no doubt. Before the same period in 1988 (i.e., since 2000 fire season was over, more For more information on forecast- October 1 of the preceding year, than 150,000 acres (60,000 ha) ing fire season severity, contact the beginning of the water year). had burned in the Helena area, Sonny Stiger, 1555 Beartooth • At our Helena Fire Weather along with many homes and Road, Wolf Creek, MT 59648, 406- Station, the thousand-hour fuel outbuildings. 235-4337 (voice), 406-235-4374 moisture was at an all-time low (fax), [email protected] (e-mail). ■
Snowpack on the Gunnison National Forest in Colorado. Snowpack size and cumulative winter precipitation are some of the indicators that can be used to predict a severe fire season. Photo: R.E. Grossman, USDA Forest Service, Grand Mesa, CO, 1992.
16 Fire Management Today CAN THE FIRE-DEPENDENT WHITEBARK PINE BE SAVED?
Robert E. Keane
igh atop the western ranges traversed by some of America’s Fire exclusion has allowed fir and spruce Hmost intrepid explorers, the to displace whitebark pine as the whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) dominant species in many subalpine forests. is making a last desperate stand. Captains Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, passing through the mountain hemlock (Tsuga surface fuels, fires burn at low Bitterroot Mountains in 1805–06 mertensiana) (Arno and Hoff severities, killing the smallest trees on their historic expedition to the 1990). and the most fire-susceptible mouth of the Columbia River, saw overstory species, often subalpine the whitebark pine in its prime. Three types of fire regimes govern fir; severities increase in areas with Gifford Pinchot, who later became whitebark pine forests (Morgan high fuel loads or where winds the first Chief of the USDA Forest and others 1994; Arno and Hoff drive the fire into tree crowns. Service, noted the tree while 1990). The most common is the Mixed-severity fires can occur at surveying the forest reserves in mixed-severity fire regime, where intervals of 60 to 300 years (Arno 1897. fire intensity and frequency vary and Hoff 1990; Morgan and others widely, creating complex patterns 1994). Burned patches are often In recent decades, whitebark pine of tree survival and mortality. Most 2.5 to 120 acres (1–50 ha) in size, has been declining due to epidem- fires in the mixed-severity regime depending on topography and fuels ics and fire exclusion (Keane and include both nonlethal underburns (Norment 1991; Tomback and Arno 1993; Kendall and Arno and stand-replacing blazes (Mor- others 1990). 1990). In the northern Rocky gan and others 1994). In sparse Mountains, a project is underway to explore the feasibility of using fire and silviculture to restore the tree’s high-elevation habitat. WHITEBARK PINE: AN INVALUABLE Fire Ecology HIGH-MOUNTAIN RESOURCE Whitebark pine historically com- Whitebark pine (Pinus cache the seeds in loose moun- prised about 10 to 15 percent of albicaulis) is an important tree tain soils, particularly on burn the forests in the Western United in upper subalpine forests of the sites, where unclaimed seeds States (Arno and Hoff 1989) (fig. northern Rocky Mountains, germinate and grow to form the 1). Although long-lived (the oldest Sierra Nevada, and Cascades next generation of whitebark identified living individual is more (Arno and Hoff 1990). Of limited pine. Squirrels cache whitebark than 1,300 years of age), whitebark commercial value, whitebark pine cones in places called pine is eventually replaced, in the pine produces large seeds that middens; in summer, bears absence of fire, by more shade- feed at least 110 different travel to the high country in tolerant species, such as subalpine species, including the threat- search of the middens. fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Engelmann ened grizzly bear (Ursus arctos Whitebark pine also protects spruce (Picea engelmannii), and horribilis), the red squirrel snowpack in high-elevation (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus), and watersheds and delays snow- the Clark’s nutcracker melt, providing high-quality Bob Keane is a research ecologist for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain (Nucifraga columbiana) water to valleys below (Arno and Research Station, Fire Sciences Labora- (Tomback 1989). Nutcrackers Hoff 1990; Hann 1990). tory, Missoula, MT.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 17 Whitebark pine is more capable of surviving fires than its competitors due to its thicker bark, thinner crowns, and deeper roots.
when other foodstuffs become rare. northwestern Montana, northern Essentially all regeneration comes and central Idaho, and the from unclaimed nutcracker Cascades. caches, where seeds eventually • In the 1930’s and 1940’s, the germinate and grow into seedlings. native mountain pine beetle Nutcrackers prefer open sites with (Dendroctonus ponderosae) many visual cues for seed caching. killed many whitebark pines in Burn sites are ideal. western Montana and central Idaho. Figure 1—Historical range of the white- Whitebark Pine bark pine. More than 60 years of fire The epidemics had a cumulative exclusion have allowed fir and spruce to Decline displace whitebark pine as the dominant More than 60 years of fire exclu- impact: The rust weakened many species in much of its historical range. sion have allowed fir and spruce to trees, preventing them from Illustration: Arno and Hoff (1990). replace whitebark pine as the defending themselves against beetle attack. Both the rust and the Some whitebark pine stands dominant species in many subal- pine forests (Arno 1986; Keane and beetle kill mature, cone-bearing experience recurrent nonlethal trees, thereby accelerating succes- underburns due to sparse fuel others 1994). The successional process in these slow-growing, sion to the more shade-tolerant fir loads, mostly in the southern parts and spruce. of the pine’s range in the Rocky high-elevation forests was acceler- ated by two types of epidemics: Mountains. By contrast, most Adapted to cyclical beetle epidem- whitebark pine forests in north- • In the 1930’s, white pine blister ics, the whitebark pine ecosystem western Montana, northern Idaho, could easily have recovered if fires and the Cascades originated after rust (Cronartium ribicola), an exotic disease from Europe, had been allowed to burn the large, stand-replacing fires that beetle-killed forests. But, coupled occur at intervals of 250 years or started killing whitebark pines in more (Morgan and others 1994). Stand-replacing fires are usually wind driven and often start in lower elevation stands.
Whitebark pine is more capable of surviving low-severity fires than its competitors due to its thicker bark, thinner crowns, and deeper roots (Arno and Hoff 1990). Whitebark pine readily recolonizes large, stand-replacing burns because its seeds are transported from great distances by Clark’s nutcracker (Nucifraga colum- biana)—up to 100 times farther than wind can disperse the seeds of fir and spruce (Tomback and others 1990). Nutcrackers cache Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) ecosystem. An important upper subalpine forest tree in much of the West, whitebark pine has declined in recent decades due to epidemics and fire whitebark pine seeds on the exclusion. Photo: Steve Arno, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, ground for future consumption Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT, 1996.
18 Fire Management Today with the lack of fire as a recycling Restoring Whitebark was conducted on a treatment unit agent and the introduction of the Pine Ecosystems in each of the four study areas. The exotic rust, the epidemics have On five research sites in or near primary objective was to kill all fir caused a major shift in landscape the Bitterroot Mountains of and spruce, sparing as many white- composition and structure from Montana and Idaho, the Forest bark pines as possible. early-seral whitebark pine to late- Service’s Fire Sciences Laboratory, seral fir and spruce. In Montana’s Rocky Mountain Research Station, Parts of the Musgrove, Beaver Glacier Nat-ional Park, for exam- is investigating methods of restor- Ridge, Coyote Meadows, and Bear ple, whitebark pine is down to ing whitebark pine (Keane and Overlook study areas did not have 5 percent of its historical range; Arno 1996) (fig. 2). Researchers are sufficient fuels to carry the fire to in places near Missoula, MT, 60 to using prescribed fire and silvicul- all parts of the stand. Therefore, an 80 percent of the trees have died tural harvest to counter the effects adjacent treatment unit was creat- (Kendall and Arno 1990). of blister rust and advancing ed in each area where standing firs succession. The sites represent were cut and left on the ground to different biophysical environ- augment fuel beds. Then fire was ments, degrees of rust infection, applied at the intensity appropriate and stand structures. for each site.
Prescribed Fire. Four study areas Silvicultural Cuttings. In three (Smith Creek, Beaver Ridge, study areas (Smith Creek, Beaver Coyote Meadows, and Bear Over- Ridge, and Bear Overlook), Keane look) are in the mixed-severity fire and Arno (1996) designed silvicul- tural cuttings to mimic patchy Clark’s nutcracker (Nucifraga columbi- regime, where fires before 1900 ana). Nutcrackers cache whitebark pine occurred at intervals of 100 to 200 mixed-severity burns. On parts of seeds in loose mountain soils, particularly years. Keane and Arno (1996) the Smith Creek site, all trees were on burn sites, thereby planting the next commercially cut except for generation of whitebark pines. Photo: designed treatments to mimic Steve Arno, USDA Forest Service, Rocky historical fire effects. A low- to healthy, cone-bearing whitebark Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences moderate-severity prescribed burn pine, creating quarter-acre (0.1-ha) Laboratory, Missoula, MT, 1996. circular openings where nutcrack- ers could cache whitebark pine seeds (Norment 1991; Tomback
Figure 2—Sites in Montana and Idaho where Forest Service researchers are Whitebark pine ecosystem in decline. White pine blister rust often weakens individual investigating methods of using prescribed trees, preventing them from exuding enough sap to defend themselves against attack by fire and silvicultural treatments to restore the mountain pine beetle. In beetle-killed forests, fire exclusion has eliminated fire as a whitebark pine. Illustration: Bob Keane, recycling agent, accelerating the succession from early-seral whitebark pine to late-seral USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain fir and spruce. Photo: Bob Keane, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Research Station, Fire Sciences Labora- Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT, 1996. tory, Missoula, MT, 1996.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 19 1998). In the forested areas be- Fire exclusion prevents large Arno, S.F.; Hardy, C.C., eds. The Use of Fire in Forest Restoration: A General tween the openings, all fir and natural openings from forming. Session at the Annual Meeting of the spruce were removed, leaving Without fire, there are fewer places Society of Ecosystem Restoration, some healthy lodgepole pine and where seeds from rust-resistant “Taking a Broader View”; 14–16 September 1996; Seattle, WA. Gen. Tech. all living whitebark pine. The trees (up to 5 percent of the Rep. INT–GTR–341. Ogden, UT: Inter- purpose was to limit wind-dis- whitebark pine population) can mountain Research Station: 51–54. persed seed from competitor grow into viable, seed-producing, Kendall, K.C.; Arno, S.F. 1990. Whitebark pine—an important but endangered species. rust-resistant individuals. The wildlife resource. In: Schmidt, W.C.; most important management McDonald, K.J., comps. Proceedings— Symposium on Whitebark Pine On the Beaver Ridge site, similar action for conserving and main- Ecosystems: Ecology and Management “nutcracker openings” were taining vital whitebark pine forests of a High Mountain Resource; 29–31 created by cutting all fir, spruce, is to avoid extinguishing all fires in March 1989; Bozeman, MT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT–270. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest lodgepole pine, and dying white- wilderness areas and other remote Service, Intermountain Research bark pine in patches of 2.5 to settings. Station: 264–274. 5 acres (1–2 ha). The felled trees McCaughey, W.W.; Schmidt, W.C. 1990. Autecology of whitebark pine. In: were left onsite, with their branches For more information on the Schmidt, W.C.; McDonald, K.J., comps. piled to clear the ground for nut- whitebark pine restoration project, Proceedings—Symposium on Whitebark Pine Ecosystems: Ecology and Manage- cracker seed caching. Half of the contact Bob Keane, USDA Forest ment of a High Mountain Resource; 29– 75-acre (30-ha) harvest area was Service, Rocky Mountain Research 31 March 1989; Bozeman, MT. Gen. then burned, and half of all nut- Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Tech. Rep. INT–270. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research cracker openings (burned and P.O. Box 8089, Missoula, MT Station: 85–95. unburned) were planted with rust- 59807, 406-329-4846 (voice), 406- Morgan, P.; Bunting, S.C.; Keane, R.E.; resistant whitebark pine seedlings. 329-4877 (fax), [email protected] Arno, S.F. 1994. Fire ecology of whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) forests (e-mail). in the Rocky Mountains, USA. In: On the Bear Overlook site, a Schmidt, W.C.; Holtzmeier, F.-K., treatment unit was thinned to comps. Proceedings of the International References Symposium Subalpine Stone Pines and remove all lodgepole pine, fir, and Arno, S. 1986. Whitebark pine cone Their Environment: The Status of Our spruce, leaving healthy whitebark crops—A diminishing source of wildlife Knowledge; 5–11 September 1992; St. food? Western Journal of Applied Moritz, Switzerland. Gen. Tech. Rep. pine uncut. The purpose was to Forestry. 1: 92–94. INT–GTR–309. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest enhance whitebark pine cone Arno, S.; Hoff, R. 1990. Pinus albicaulis Service, Intermountain Research production. Engelm. Whitebark pine. In: Burns, Station: 136–142. R.M.; Honkala, B.H., tech. coords. Norment, C.J. 1991. Bird use of forest Silvics of North America. Vol. 1: patches in the subalpine forest–alpine Natural Fire Needed Conifers. Ag. Handbk. 654. Washington, tundra ecotone of the Beartooth DC: USDA Forest Service: 268–279. Mountains, Wyoming. Northwest Labor-intensive restoration efforts, Hann, W.J. 1990. Landscape and ecosys- Science. 65(1): 1–10. such as those described here, are tem-level management in whitebark Tomback, D.F. 1989. The broken circle: pine ecosystems. In: Schmidt, W.C.; Fire, birds and whitebark pine. In: possible only in small, easily McDonald, K.J., comps. Proceedings— Walsh, T., ed. Wilderness and wildfire. accessible areas. In most of the Symposium on Whitebark Pine Misc. Pub. 50. Missoula, MT: University whitebark pine’s range, inacces- Ecosystems: Ecology and Management of Montana, School of Forestry, Montana of a High Mountain Resource; 29–31 Forest and Range Experiment Station: sible stands will likely continue to March 1989; Bozeman, MT. Gen. Tech. 14–17. decline unless natural fire is Rep. INT–270. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Tomback, D.F. 1998. Clark’s nutcracker allowed to return. Nutcrackers like Service, Intermountain Research (Nucifraga columbiana). In: Poole, A.; Station: 335–340. Gill, F., eds. The birds of North America. to cache white-bark pine seeds in Keane, R.; Arno, S. 1993. Rapid decline of No. 331. Philadelphia, PA: The Birds of openings, especially those created whitebark pine in western Montana: North America, Inc. Evidence from 20-year remeasurements. Tomback, D.F.; Hoffman, L.A.; Sund, S.K. by wildland fires (Tomback and Western Journal of Applied Forestry. 1990. Coevolution of whitebark pine and others 1990). The chances for 8(2): 44–47. nutcrackers: Implications for forest whitebark pine seedlings are best Keane, R.E.; Morgan, P.; Menakis, J.P. regeneration. In: Schmidt, W.C.; 1994. Landscape assessment of the McDonald, K.J., comps. Proceedings— in large burned areas where decline of whitebark pine (Pinus Symposium on Whitebark Pine competition is minimal albicaulis) in the Bob Marshall Wilder- Ecosystems: Ecology and Management (McCaughey and Schmidt 1990). ness Complex, Montana, USA. Northwest of a High Mountain Resource; 29–31 Science. 68(3): 213–229. March 1989; Bozeman, MT. Gen. Tech. Keane, R.E.; Arno, S.F. 1996. Whitebark Rep. INT–270. Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Pine (Pinus albicaulis) ecosystem Service, Intermountain Research restoration in western Montana. In: Station: 118–130. ■
20 Fire Management Today FIRE IGNITION FROM HORSEBACK
Carlton Britton, Rob Mitchell, Brent Racher, and Ernest Fish
uccessful use of prescribed fire on western rangeland depends Unlike ATV’s, horses do not get flats, S on an abundance of fine fuel do not consume gasoline, and do not tip over and a rapid, safe, and effective head in rocky, steep areas. fire (see sidebar). Preserving safety, maintaining control, minimizing costs, and meeting ecological rapid ignition of head fires on (1,150-ha) pasture, with an average objectives are key to a successful rough rangeland. The ranch was elevation of about 2,900 feet (880 prescribed burn. an ideal location because the m); 24 percent of the pasture is at quality of its horses and cowboys is a slope greater than 10 percent On rough western rangeland, land unsurpassed in the Western United (fig. 1). managers have few options for States, and the land is dominated rapid, efficient head fire ignition. by rough rangeland infested with Even in dense juniper, two cow- Head fire ignition by hand crews is redberry juniper. This working boys mounted on horseback effective, inexpensive, and usually ranch has 165,000 acres (67,000 skillfully followed fine fuels along safe; moreover, it affords access to ha), with about 5,000 cows, 250 plowed firelines at a lope, igniting most areas. However, it is also time bulls, and 120 horses. Our evalua- the range (fig. 2). By contrast, consuming and sometimes fails to tion occurred in February, March, ignition by hand crews and ATV’s ignite a continuous fire front. and April 1998 on a 2,844-acre failed to light a continuous fire Helitorch ignition is efficient even front. The horses were sure-footed where poor grazing management in the rough terrain, and we did has minimized fine fuel loads; but AREFUL URN not have to stop to change any flat it is expensive, especially when C B tires or fill up a gas tank! Drip used on small burns of 1,000 to PLANNING IS KEY torches, modified with 28-inch 3,000 acres (400–1,200 ha). Four- (71-cm) spout extensions to get wheel all-terrain vehicles (ATV’s) Successful prescribed fire use the wick close to the fine fuel are successfully used for head fire on western rangelands (fig. 3), were easy to handle on ignition on rough rangeland, but requires abundant fine fuels. horseback and did not excite the safety concerns, steep slopes, and Land managers, recognizing horses. We used three horses in restricted use on some public lands the need, wisely defer grazing 2 days of head firing, and the often make their use inappropriate. for all or part of the year. burning torches did not make any Consequently, some rugged, inac- Then, even in semiarid of them nervous or uncomfortable. cessible areas require an alterna- grasslands, fine fuels will tive to head fire ignition by hand accumulate with careful Horseback ignition was safer and crews, helitorches, or ATV’s. advance planning, including a at least three times faster than burning delay until the using ATV’s. It was also three times Horses Handle conditions are suitable. faster than hand crew ignition and Head Firing Containing fire within the nearly as accurate. Although On the Pitchfork Ranch, Dickens boundaries of a prescribed slower than helitorch ignition, County, TX, we tested horses for burn means installing horseback ignition proved signifi- blacklines on the leeward cantly more cost-effective. Carlton Britton and Rob Mitchell are directors and Brent Racher is the fire boss edges of the unit that are wide of the Texas Tech University Fire Ecology enough to stop the head fire. Capable Cowboys and Center, Lubbock, TX; and Ernest Fish is Safety is paramount—the Calm Horses Are Key the director of the Geospatial Technologies time invested in planning and Laboratory and the chair of the Depart- Our experience using horses for ment of Range, Wildlife, and Fisheries executing prescribed burns is head fire ignition was successful Management, Texas Tech University, well spent. Lubbock, TX. and added no expense to the
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 21 prescribed fire ignition. Total cost for labor, torch fuel, mileage, and food on this prescribed fire was $3.07 per acre. Using a helitorch for head fire ignition on this pasture would cost at least $5.07 per acre, increasing pre- scribed fire application costs by 65 percent.
Taking the time to train proficient horseback riders to use drip torches is better than trying to teach ignition crews to become skilled riders. We encourage using well-trained horses and skilled riders to ignite head fires in rough rangeland. Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank the Dr. Leon Bromberg Charitable Trust Fund and the Pitchfork Ranch for their support of this project. ■
Figure 1—Slope map derived from a digital elevation model of the 2,844-acre (1,150-ha) pasture burned from horseback in 1998 on the Pitchfork Ranch in Dickens County, TX.
Figure 3—Drip torches modified with a 28-inch (71-cm) extension to get the wick close to the fine fuel from horseback. Photo: Wyman Meinzer, Benjamin, TX, 1998.
Figure 2—Lighting juniper-infested rangeland from horseback on the Pitchfork Ranch in Dickens County, TX. Photo: Wyman Meinzer, Benjamin, TX, 1998.
22 Fire Management Today FIGHTING FIRE WITHOUT FIRE: BIOMASS REMOVAL AS A PRELUDE TO PRESCRIBED FIRE
Stephen M. Jolley
ederal forestland managers recognize that the level of fuel Reducing heavy fuel buildups Floading is unnaturally high on in the Western United States will require tens of millions of wildland acres the use of every available tool, throughout the Western United States (Dombeck 2000). Many including biomass removal. individuals and organizations are striving to find effective, economi- cal solutions to the western forest Two scenarios entail removing tion to meet prescribed criteria for fuels problem. Proposed solutions excess biomass using mechanized stand density and crown closure. vary greatly in their methods, thinning. In scenario I, trees are costs, and timelines. To do the removed and marketed, generating In scenario II, merchantable trees greatest good at the least cost, land revenues to offset operational are not removed, but revenues managers should consider, for each costs. No diameter limit is set for generated from removed small- solution, the economics involved the size of trees to be removed; the diameter materials offset some and the number of years necessary guiding principle is to modify the expenses. Depending on the to achieve the desired conditions types and distribution of vegeta- location of the activity, markets on the ground. Comparing Methods Let’s assume that the goal is to manage fuel loads to minimize the possibility of losing a forest to a stand-replacing wildfire. Let’s further assume that after the desired condition is achieved, prescribed fire will be used to maintain the stand structure. Figure 1 shows three scenarios for converting 500 acres (200 ha) of overstocked forest on gentle terrain (with a slope of less than 30 percent) to a fire-tolerant stand. Each scenario is based on a differ- ent method of initial fuel load reduction before prescribed fire is introduced. Figure 1—Costs and timelines using three different approaches to initial fuels reduction on 500 acres (200 ha) in western forest ecosystems. Under scenario I, biomass removal would include harvesting merchantable trees; the desired stand condition would be reached in 3 to 6 years at a profit of $70 to $75 per acre. Periodic underburns would then begin. Under scenario II, biomass removal would not include harvesting merchantable trees; the desired condition would be reached in 3 to 6 years at a cost of $315 to $365 per Stephen Jolley is a fuel manager for the acre. Under scenario III, only prescribed fire would be used; the desired condition would be Wheelabrator Shasta Energy Company, reached in 25 to 30 years at a cost of $375 to $750 per acre. Illustration: Stephen M. Inc., in Anderson, CA. Jolley, Wheelabrator Shasta Energy Company, Anderson, CA, 2000.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 23 might already exist for small- Biomass removal as a prelude to prescribed fire diameter materials used to manu- has often been overlooked and underrated. facture particle-board furnish, pulp chips, biomass fuel, mulch, com- post, or landscaping material. The sheer volume of treatments needed substantial costs from escaped is likely to generate new markets fires. BIOMASS REMOVAL: even where none currently exist. ROS AND ONS Scenario III is not only more P C Scenario III relies exclusively on expensive than scenarios I and II, prescribed fire, the method often but also costlier in terms of the Opponents of biomass removal preferred by Federal land manag- time required to achieve the make several arguments: ers in the West. Because prescribed desired stand condition. The burning generates no revenues, timeline in scenarios I and II is • Biomass removal requires the number of treatable acres is 3 to 6 years, whereas in scenario an adequate road system. limited by the amount of appropri- III, it is 25 to 30 years. It could be True, but so do most forms of ated funding. more; the number of years re- active land management, quired to achieve the desired including most prescribed fire Prescribed Fire: Costs condition is uncertain in scenario use. Anyway, vast road systems and Delay III, because multiple burns are already exist on public lands required. From the standpoints of that are usable to reduce fuels Scenario I yields a profit that could without building new roads. be used to fund other resource both cost and timeline, scenario III is the least attractive alternative. management operations, whereas • Biomass removal is scenarios II and III both require impractical on steep slopes. appropriated funding. Scenario III Prescribed fire has other draw- backs as well: True; for the time being, fire has higher costs than scenario II use without mechanized (ranging from $10 to $435 more pretreatment is probably the per acre). • Air quality. Smoke is a growing concern in the West, for health, only viable solution on steep economic, and other reasons. slopes. Therefore, mechanized Prescribed fire cost estimates are pretreatments should focus based on information from a The surest form of smoke management is to seek alterna- first on relatively gentle contractor who plans and executes terrain. Eventually, however, prescribed burns for private tives to burning. • Community stability. Prescribed new technology development landowners and public agencies. might enable the safe treat- The estimates take into account fire does not generate the level of economic activity associated ment of steeper slopes by the hidden costs of prescribed mechanical means. fire—costs associated with un- with biomass removal, which can produce much-needed jobs in counted personnel, planning and • Markets are insufficient preparation, having more engines rural communities. Indeed, prescribed fire can harm the for the removed biomass at a burn than originally planned, material. final cleanup, and damages from local recreation industry by filling the air with smoke and Many areas have established escapes. For example, the 1999 markets for sawlogs and less Lowden Fire near Lewiston, CA, keeping away recreational users. • Resource risk. Exposing a forest valuable biomass, marketable and the 2000 Cerro Grande Fire in as particleboard furnish, pulp Los Alamos, NM, were both es- stand to multiple prescribed fires risks each time losing the stand chips, and boiler fuel. However, caped prescribed burns associated history teaches that markets with enormous unanticipated to an escaped fire. The more years required to achieve the respond to opportunities. A costs. Given the size of the fuels sustained flow of biomass problem in the West, it is reason- desired future condition, the higher the resource risk. materials will stimulate new able to assume that continued investment and markets. prescribed fire use will engender
24 Fire Management Today Using prescribed fire alone is not only tool. Biomass removal as a prefire more expensive than biomass removal, treatment has often been over- but also costlier in terms of the time required looked and underrated. A thorough analysis will reveal that initial fuel to achieve the desired stand condition. reduction goals can be achieved most quickly and cost-effectively, with the least risk to the environ- Benefits From Mecha- tion (scenario I), changed a forest ment, through mechanized pre- nized Pretreatments within 8 years following a single treatment as a prelude to pre- scribed fire. Only then can a Figure 2 shows the result of using treatment. The resulting fuel load prescribed fire maintenance prescribed fire in a stand without can be safely maintained using program be safely and effectively first thinning (scenario III). More prescribed fire. adopted. fires will be required in the future. Figure 3 shows how biomass The severe problem of excess fuels harvest, including sawlog produc- in the Western United States Reference demands the use of every available Dombeck, M. 2000. How can we reduce the fire danger in the interior West? Fire Management Today. 61(1): 5–10. ■
Figure 2—Young, unthinned forest where prescribed fire has been used with unacceptable results. Photo: Stephen M. Jolley, Wheelabrator Shasta Energy Company, Anderson, CA, 1999.
Figure 3—Forest stand near Viola, CA, 8 years after thinning. This fuel load can be managed with prescribed fire at little risk. Photo: Stephen M. Jolley, Wheelabrator Shasta Energy Company, Anderson, CA, 1995.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 25 WORKFORCE DIVERSITY PROGRAM: A PROGRESS REPORT FROM THE PAYETTE NATIONAL FOREST
Francisco Romero
ecognizing the need to inte- grate underrepresented groups The custom-tailored training program Rand minorities into its fire provides students with a blend of management organization, in 1994 the Payette National Forest (NF), formal instruction and on-the-job skills McCall, ID, began its Developmen- to reach target qualifications. tal Assistant Fire Management Officer Workforce Diversity Pro- gram. This program helps the fiscal accountability, hiring, initial attack coordination. After a USDA Forest Service accomplish purchasing, crew management, year, the trainee graduates to workforce diversity by providing and project planning. another district and the focus is qualified candidates with the shifted to provide the most holistic training and experience they need In addition to the training in fire experience possible. To broaden to become fire management suppression and prescribed fire their knowledge and experience, officers (FMO’s) or assistant FMO’s required by the Forest Service, the trainees are also encouraged to (AFMO’s) at the district level—an Developmental AFMO program seek short-term suppression organizational level that has encourages students to use a assignments and prescribed underrepresentation by minority variety of other teaching sources. burning opportunities throughout groups. Depending on the qualifications the United States. and education of each apprentice, The Program instructional opportunities include On the Payette NF, a diverse fire Forest Service district FMO’s and enrollment in agency-sponsored program and an average of 170 AFMO’s receive on-the-ground continuing education programs fires each season provide many experience and in-the-classroom such as Technical Fire Manage- opportunities for program appren- education in fire suppression and ment or Continuing Education in tices to experience on-the-ground prescribed fire techniques. The Ecosystem Management. The suppression operations and district Payette NF uses the suppression program also provides funding to management and logistic tech- and prescribed fire qualifications of pursue advanced degrees in fire niques. A variety of prescribed fire division supervisor and intermedi- science and fire ecology from needs—fuel reduction, reforesta- ate burn boss as targets in design- accredited universities. tion, ecological maintenance, and ing each apprentice’s training and support of endangered species development plan. This means that Education and training in fire habitat—completes the appren- program graduates are qualified to suppression and prescribed burn- tice’s fire management experience. manage complex assignments— ing provide a solid foundation for a such as emergency response career in this discipline. But the Candidates and activities—and to plan and imple- heart and soul of the Developmen- Funding tal AFMO program is the experien- ment prescribed fire. The custom- In 1997, Kelly Martin, the first tial learning that occurs when an tailored program provides students program apprentice, graduated apprentice is integrated into a fire with a blend of formal training and from her 3-year individualized management staff on a selected on-the-job skills to reach target Developmental AFMO program. Forest Service district. Spending qualifications and to learn about Since then, Martin has successfully approximately 1 year per district, competed for her job as a district each apprentice is immersed in the FMO on the Manti–La Sal National Frankie Romero is a zone fire manage- facets of fire management—fuels, ment officer for the Upper Colorado River Forest, Price, UT. Suzanne Acton prescribed fire, project planning, Interagency Fire Management Unit, Rifle, and I followed, beginning our CO. wilderness fire management, and
26 Fire Management Today The heart and soul of the program is sion, and planning—specifically, the experiential learning that occurs National Environmental Policy Act analysis. when an apprentice is integrated into a fire management staff on a Forest Service district. On the Payette NF, my experiences ranged from managing wildland- fire-use fires in the Frank Church apprenticeships in 1998. After the prescribed fire arena. I worked Wilderness, to performing initial completing my program in March with the Payette NF’s fire manage- attack coordination under multiple 2000, I accepted my current ment staff, and together we identi- fire starts, to planning and imple- position, while keeping my career fied four areas to emphasize in my menting fuel work related to sights focused on a fire ecologist or program: timber harvest and natural fuel district FMO or AFMO position. complexes. Because the Payette Acton, in the final year of her 1. Wilderness fire management; NF’s suppression organization is program, is looking forward to a 2. Initial attack coordination; robust, the full spectrum of fire ecologist, FMO, or AFMO 3. Fuel management and pre- suppression resources—hand position. The Payette NF has scribed fire; and crews, engines, helitack, heli- received funding for and will soon 4. District-level fire management, rappellers, helicopters, smoke- select two candidates who will including budget, crew supervi- jumpers, and retardant aircraft— begin their Developmental AFMO programs in 2001.
A competitive grant process administered by the Forest Service, Washington Office, Fire and Aviation Management, funds the Developmental AFMO program. Grants supporting workforce diversity projects are awarded to forests based on the objectives of their program and their ability to meet those objectives. The Payette NF successfully competed for and was awarded a diversity program grant in 1994 and 1998. Based on the success of the program, the Intermountain Region of the Forest Service and the Payette NF will contribute matching funds to augment future allocations from Fire and Aviation Management. My Experience When I started the program in 1998, I was a lead firefighter with 13 seasons of type 1 firefighting experience, a master’s degree in forest fire science, and a desire to advance my career by moving into fire management. Fire suppression was the focus of my career experi- Suzanne Acton, an apprentice in the Developmental Assistant Fire Management Officer ence, so the Developmental AFMO Workforce Diversity Program, igniting a March 2000 prescribed fire to maintain migra- program was an opportunity to tory waterfowl habitat on the Quivira National Wildlife Refuge in Kansas. Acton was onsite to gain experience burning in a less familiar fuel type. Photo: Bill Qualm, U.S. Fish diversify my knowledge base into and Wildlife Service, Quivira National Wildlife Refuge, Stafford, KS, 2000.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 27 were readily available. This type of ecuted more than 30 prescribed Although the Developmental fire organization, combined with fires, including landscape-scale AFMO program was established to relatively frequent fire occurrence, natural fuel treatments, hazard build diversity in the fire manage- gave me the opportunity to “sit in fuel reduction, and site preparation ment workforce, the program is a the driver’s seat” during several burning. The quality of the experi- model for training all prospective fire outbreaks, to learn how to best ence and training that I received in FMO’s or AFMO’s as they take their use all the available resources to this program prepared me for a first steps into wildland fire achieve suppression objectives, and career in fire management management. For more informa- to ecologically manage naturally through a concentrated program tion on the Developmental AFMO ignited fires. I planned and ex- of work on a fire-active forest. program, contact Merrill Saleen, aviation/training officer, Payette National Forest, P.O. Box 1026, McCall, ID 83638, 208-634-0746 (voice), msaleen/r4,payette@fs. fed.us (e-mail). Acknowledgments The author wishes to thank Merrill Saleen (aviation/training officer), Nikki Dyke (forest fuels specialist), Gene Benedict (forest FMO [re- tired]), Sam Hescock (Krassel district FMO), Dennis Winkler (Weiser district FMO), Monte Hurd (Weiser district AFMO), Randy Swick (Krassel/McCall district ranger), and John Baglien (Weiser district ranger) for the opportuni- ties they provided and for sharing Site of a September 1997 hazardous-fuels burn conducted by program apprentice Frankie their wealth of experience. ■ Romero to prepare the site for reforestation on the Council Ranger District, Payette National Forest, ID. At a time of shrinking workforces, the Developmental Assistant Fire Management Officer Workforce Diversity Program is training underrepresented groups and minorities for integration into fire management organizations. Photo: Frankie Romero, USDA Forest Service, Payette National Forest, McCall, ID, 1997.
CONTRIBUTORS WANTED
We need your fire-related articles and photographs for Fire Management Today! Feature articles should be up to about 2,000 words in length. We also need short items of up to 200 words. Subjects of articles published in Fire Management Today include: Aviation Firefighting experiences Communication Incident management Cooperation Information management (including systems) Ecosystem management Personnel Education Planning (including budgeting) Equipment and technology Preparedness Fire behavior Prevention Fire ecology Safety Fire effects Suppression Fire history Training Fire use (including prescribed fire) Weather Fuels management Wildland–urban interface To help prepare your submission, see “Guidelines for Contributors” in this issue.
28 Fire Management Today TRACTOR PLOW SAFETY: KNOW YOUR TERRAIN AND WEAR YOUR SEATBELT!
Timothy G. Wyant
he 2000 fire season was the worst in memory in LaSalle Suddenly the dozer’s lights dropped out of sight, T Parish, located in north- and then I heard a crash. central Louisiana. On February 17, the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry office in firefighter with more than 10 years • Always were your seatbelt. Olla dispatched several tractor of experience. As my boss contin- • Always keep the 18 Watchout plow units to help fight the Nebo– ued cutting line, I could see the Situations in mind. Two of them Goodpine Fire, which burned 25 dozer’s lights dancing in the pines applied on the night of the acres (10 ha) of private forestland ahead of us. incident: and took 2 hours and 20 minutes – #2—You are in country not to contain. The area is densely Suddenly the dozer’s lights seen in the daylight. wooded, mostly under pine; the dropped out of sight, and then I – #5—You are not informed of terrain is generally flat, but creek heard a crash. I thought my boss strategy, tactics, and hazards. beds form occasional ravines. We was gone! I rushed forward to find • Know your terrain in advance. soon discovered just how danger- a yawning dropoff that appeared The Fireline Handbook (NWCG ous such conditions can be, espe- out of nowhere. In the cially at night. darkness, I could barely make out the dozer at the Nighttime Dozer bottom of the ravine. Incident The call for dozers came at 10 p.m., It was a dry creek bed. well after nightfall. We found the With pines growing fire actively burning; our units straight up the sides, the were quickly assigned to different ravine had been impos- parts of the fire. Together with my sible to see in the dozer’s boss, the assistant parish supervi- headlights until it was too sor for the Louisiana Department late. After plunging off of Agriculture and Forestry, I took the edge, the dozer my John Deere 450 tractor plow turned over twice before unit to the north flank of the fire. coming to rest 40 feet The other units were some distance (12 m) below. away, on another flank of the fire. Luckily, my boss was In the pitch dark, I started plowing wearing his seatbelt, fireline while my boss set backfires. which kept him from On our two-person tractor plow being thrown from the crews, we periodically relieve each dozer. He escaped with a other on backfire duty to prevent bruised head and a 2-inch fatigue for the person setting (5-cm) gash in his arm. backfires. After 30 minutes, The seatbelt saved his life. I started backfiring and turned the The Saint Maurice Fire on November 15, 1999, near unit over to my boss, a veteran Lessons Learned the town of Saint Maurice, LA. The fire burned 617 acres (250 ha) of private and national forestland in What lessons can dozer Louisiana’s Winnfield Parish, where the Kisatchie Tim Wyant is a tractor fireplow operator operators learn from our National Forest is partly located. Photo: Tim Wyant, for the Louisiana Department of Agricul- Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry, ture and Forestry, Olla, LA. harrowing experience? Olla, LA, 2000.
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 29 1998) instructs dozer and tractor ditches, and other obstacles that into was practically invisible at plow operators to “Watch out for might stop the equipment.” night in the pines, watching out wetlands, steep slopes, rocks, Because the ravine our dozer fell was not enough. Before working a fire, operators should study a current contour map for any breaks in the terrain or other signs of safety hazards.
One of the most important func- tions of fire managers on the fireline is to recognize when Watch Out Situations and Standard Fire Orders are excessively compro- mised, and to take immediate corrective action to ensure firefighter safety. Tractor plow unit operators and managers should bear in mind that unknown terrain can pose unexpected, potentially life-threatening hazards. Reference NWCG (National Wildfire Coordinating John Deere 450 tractor plow after falling into a ravine during nighttime fireline opera- Group). 1998. Fireline handbook. PMS tions. The unit plunged about 40 feet (12 m) down the slope at right, flipping over twice. 410-1, NFES 0065. Boise, ID: National The operator escaped with light injuries thanks to wearing his seatbelt. Photo: Tim Wyant, Interagency Fire Center. ■ Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry, Olla, LA, 2000.
LOUISIANA FIRE CREW
Louisiana is proud of its wildland firefighting heritage. on the team goes home safely. Safety courses are a The fire crew from the Louisiana Department of routine part of the district’s training curriculum. The Agriculture and Forestry, District 3, in Olla, LA, is a firefighters are trained to care for their equipment to fine example. These firefighters work together as a ensure reliability. They are trained to coordinate with team in the battle against wildland fire. The older folks pilots overhead, who track the tractor plow operators on the crew pass on by numbers painted the benefits of their on their roofs and years of experience to contact them to warn the younger folks. them of danger. They Each one is proud to are trained in how to be a firefighter, proud deal with pipeline to know they are hazards to tractor protecting lives, plow operators, such homes, and forests as gas, ammonia, and from fire. oil lines. And they learn proper backfir- The first priority for ing techniques. The the District 3 crew, as crew’s motto is: for all wildland Members of the fire crew from the Louisiana Department of Agricul- “Never let your guard firefighters, is to ture and Forestry’s District 3 in Olla, LA, pose in front of a tractor down on a fire!” make sure everyone plow used for wildland firefighting. Photo: Tim Wyant, Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry, Olla, LA, 2000.
30 Fire Management Today WEBSITES ON FIRE* Wilderness Manager’s Toolbox Living With Fire As with every toolbox, the more complete the array of Sponsored by the Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire tools, the better and easier it is to get the job done. The Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT, this Website lets visi- Wilderness Information Network has recently added a new tors play a game—based on research and tools used by tool to its already impressive Website—Fire Management fire managers—in managing wildland fire in a ponderosa in Wilderness. The site is a compilation of references and pine ecosystem. Players choose different fuel treatment resources to help managers make decisions about fire options, learning about the effects of their choices. Fire management and restoration. Recently created in response behavior, suppression, and ecology are just a few of the to the 2000 fire season, this site offers visitors links to topics that visitors can explore, based on materials Federal agency fire staff sites, Federal wildland fire policy prepared by such notables as Steve Arno, Jean Hoadley, documents, case studies, and current research findings. and Rich Lasko. Educators will enjoy the online teaching tour and lesson plans provided for presentations and Found at
ANNUAL PHOTO CONTEST Fire Management Today invites you to • Ground resources the USDA Forest Service (see sample submit your best fire-related photos to be • Miscellaneous (fire effects; fire weather; statement below). Include your full judged in our annual competition. Judging fire-dependent communities or species; name, agency or institutional affiliation begins after the first Friday in March of etc.) (if any), address, and telephone number. each year. • Photos are eliminated from competition Rules if they lack detailed captions; have date Awards stamps; show unsafe firefighting • The contest is open to everyone. You may practices (unless that is their express All contestants will receive a CD–ROM with submit an unlimited number of entries purpose); or are of low technical quality all photos not eliminated from competition. from any place or time; but for each (for example, have soft focus or show Winning photos will appear in a future issue photo, you must indicate only one camera movement). (Duplicates— of Fire Management Today. In addition, competition category. including most overlays and other winners in each category will receive: • Each photo must be an original color composites—have soft focus and will be slide. We are not responsible for photos eliminated.) • 1st place—Camera equipment worth lost or damaged, and photos submitted • Photos are judged by a photography $300 and a 16- by 20-inch framed copy of will not be returned (so make a duplicate professional whose decision is final. your photo. before submission). • 2nd place—An 11- by 14-inch framed • You must own the rights to the photo, copy of your photo. and the photo must not have been Postmark Deadline • 3rd place—An 8- by 10-inch framed copy published prior to submission. First Friday in March of your photo. • For every photo you submit, you must give a detailed caption (including, for Send submissions to: Categories example, name, location, and date of the fire; names of any people and/or their job USDA Forest Service • Wildland fire descriptions; and descriptions of any Fire Management Today Photo Contest • Prescribed fire vegetation and/or wildlife). Attn: Hutch Brown, 2CEN Yates • Wildland–urban interface fire • You must complete and sign a statement P.O. Box 96090 • Aerial resources granting rights to use your photo(s) to Washington, DC 20090-6090
Sample Photo Release Statement (You may copy and use this statement. It must be signed.) Enclosed is/are ______(number) slide(s) for publication by the USDA Forest Service. For each slide submitted, the contest category is indicated and a detailed caption is enclosed. I have the authority to give permission to the Forest Service to publish the enclosed photograph(s) and am aware that, if used, it or they will be in the public domain and appear on the World Wide Web.
Signature Date
Volume 61 • No. 3 • Summer 2001 31 5614
subscription(s) to Fire Management Today for $ 13.00 each per year ($ 16.25 foreign).
4/95