United States Department of Agriculture WILDLAND FIRE RESEARCH Forest Service Vegetation Management and Protection Research UTURE EARCH ONFERENCE OTES Fire and Aviation Management F S C N

Washington, D.C.

Proceedings RMRS–P–1 PARK CITY, UTAH OCTOBER 6 – 8, 1997 Saveland, Jim; Thomas, Dave, tech coord. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS OUTCOMES 1998. Wildland Fire Research: Future Search Conference Notes; October 6-8, 1997; Park The USDA Forest Service funded the This conference provided an arena for City, Utah. Proceedings RMRS-P-1. Fort conference and publication of this report. No identifying common key issues that are Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, fee was charged to encourage conference shaping wildland fire research. Commonly Forest service, Rocky Mountain Research attendance. identified desired outcomes include: Station. 48 p. I thank Future Search Conference facilita- • Research, integrated across disciplines, tors, Marvin Weisbord and Sandra Janoff, for and management form partnerships. their hard work, interest, and commitment to NOTE: wildland fire research. A special thanks to the • Communication between management To quickly publish these meeting notes, the conference organizers and documentation and research is effective and continu- drafts did not receive conventional Forest team; these people are listed in Appendix A. ous. Service editorial processing. Views expressed are those of meeting attendees and not neces- Jim Saveland, Conference Organizer • Responsive and proactive research sarily those of the Forest Service or other USDA Forest Service balances long-term scientific goals with organizations represented at the meeting. Trade Vegetation Management and rapidly changing management issues. Protection Research names are used for information purposes and • The success of research and develop- do not imply endorsement or preferential ment is measured by on-the-ground treatment by the Forest Service or other implementation. organizations represented at the meeting. • Fire research is responsive to national goals and receives long-term, stable You may order printed copies of this publication by sending your mailing information in label political support. form through one of the following media. Please include the publication title and number. Action plans were developed around the Telephone (970) 498-1719 following five key themes: E-mail rschneider/[email protected] 1. Create an interdepartmental competitive Forest Service Intranet Richard.Schneider/rmrs:fs grant program. FAX (970) 498-1660 2. Create a coordinated response to Mailing Address Publications Distribution managing fire regimes for ecosystem Rocky Mountain Research Station health. 3825 E. Mulberry Street 3. Create an environment for management Fort Collins, CO 80524-8597 and research collaboration. A web page for this Future Search Conference will be located on the Forest Service home 4. Integrate social science expertise. page at http://www.fs.fed.us/land/#fire. Users may make comments and receive feedback about the conference via a chatroom that will be available spring 1998. 5. Assess ecological risk. WILDLAND FIRE RESEARCH

FUTURE SEARCH CONFERENCE NOTES

PARK CITY, UTAH OCTOBER 6 – 8, 1997

SPONSORS:

USDA Forest Service, Vegetation Management and Protection Research Washington, D.C.

USDA Forest Service, Fire and Aviation Management Washington, D.C.

PUBLISHER:

Rocky Mountain Research Station Fort Collins, Colorado Proceedings RMRS-P-1 April 1998 PREFACE

The USDA Forest Service sponsored CONFERENCE GOALS CONFERENCE STRUCTURE the Future of Wildland Fire Research Conference held in Park City, Utah, on This Future Search Conference was a Each participant was a member of two October 6-8, 1997. The participants, task-focused planning effort that relied on groups: a stakeholder group and a mixed scientists and decision and policy makers the knowledge, expertise, and experience group. The group type was appropriate to came from various government agencies of individuals interested in improving the exercise. The conference planning and non-government organizations. These wildland fire research. The goals of this committee identified eight stakeholder individuals gathered to discuss the past, conference were to: groups and eight mixed groups. The present, and future of wildland fire • discover common ground in the stakeholder groups were: research in a unique and innovative wildland fire research community; setting. The conference was an experi- • Administration/Policy (two groups) ment, a beginning. • develop a future vision of wildland • Fire Behavior/Risk Management Due to size limitations and conflicting fire research; and schedules, many who might have contrib- • Fire Behavior/Physical Science uted to this effort were unable to do so. • devise a set of action plans to We hope this report accurately expresses the achieve that vision. • Biology/Ecology/Watershed Sciences commitment and work of those attending. To accomplish these goals, all confer- (two groups) Government and non-government organi- ence attendees participated in a series of zations represented included USDA Forest activities to increase their common pool of • Air Issues Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Envi- information about wildland fire research. • Social Science/Wilderness ronmental Protection Agency, National Park Some exercises focused on the past, Service, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish others looked at the present, still others Within these groups were key stake- and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Man- projected the future. holders in wildland fire research who agement, Los Alamos National Laboratory, could commit to actions and plans. Confer- National Center for Atmospheric Research, ence participants were identified and National Weather Service, National Aero- recruited by a conference steering com- nautic and Space Administration, Canadian mittee (Appendix A) to attend the confer- Forest Service, California Department of ence. Stakeholder and mixed group mem- Forestry and Fire Protection, Colorado State bers are listed by group in Appendix A. Forest Service, Florida Forest Protection Conference participants are listed indi- Bureau, Tall Timbers Research Station, Uni- vidually in Appendix B. versity of Washington, University of Idaho, Each group generated information and University of Montana, University of Wyo- ideas on flip-charts and made presenta- ming, University of Arizona, Fire Protection tions. Two facilitators helped keep the Research Foundation, and The Nature groups focused, the tasks on schedule, Conservancy. and highlighted the major themes. CONTENTS

I. THE CHALLENGE ...... 1

II. THE PAST ...... 2

III. THE PRESENT...... 6

IV. FUTURE SCENARIOS ...... 18

V. C OMMON GROUND ...... 25

VI. ACTION PLANS ...... 27

VII. CLOSING ...... 30

VIII. CONCLUSIONS ...... 33

APPENDIX A. CONFERENCE COMMITTEES,

STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, AND MIXED GROUPS ..... 34

APPENDIX B. CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS ...... 37

APPENDIX C. TIMELINE...... 40

APPENDIX D. FUTURE SEARCH CONFERENCE PRINCIPLES ...... 48

iii ACRONYMNS

The following is a list of some of the acronyms used during this conference. No attempt was made to include an exhaustive list or to verify each meaning.

AQ Air Quality LMP Land Management Plan BEMRP Bitterroot Ecosystem Management Research LTERS Long-Term Ecological Research Site Project NGO Non-Governmental Organization BLM Bureau of Land Management NF National Forest CAA Clear Air Act NFS National Forest System DOI Department of the Interior NP National Park EPA Environmental Protection Agency NFDRS National Fire Danger Rating System FACA Federal Advisory Committee Act NSF National Science Foundation FS Forest Service OH Overhead GIS Geographic Information System PL Project Leader GPRA Government Performance and Results Act PNF Prescribed Natural Fire IMRT Interagency Management Review Team Rx Prescribed Fire ICRB Interior Columbia River Basin RD&A Research, Development, and Applications ICS Incident Command System USFS United States Forest Service I&M Inventory and Monitoring USGS U.S. Geological Survey IPA Integrated Planning and Assessment WFAS Wildland Fire Assessment System

iv I. THE CHALLENGE

The challenge for the wildland fire Management action increas- research community is to meet the rapidly ingly depends on scientific changing and diverse needs of fire manag- knowledge and on the ability ers, ecosystem scientists, and society. to mobilize scientific talents in Traditionally, this close-knit community response to on-the-ground has had a well-defined mission; to support needs. effective fire protection and the use of fire Who constitutes the wild- by land management agencies. Recently land fire research community as that mission and output have become it moves into this new era? Do more diffuse, just as the demand for they retain a common sense of traditional support has expanded. purpose, shared values, and As the importance of natural disturbance mission? What past influences, has become more widely appreciated, fire perceived trends, and future science has become increasingly relevant visions guide wildland fire to the ecological, social, and physical research? Who will take a sciences. In conjunction, fire scientists are leadership role in defining and often aligning themselves with colleagues accomplishing the needs of in other disciplines. This beneficial trend wildland fire research in future can lead to a perception that fire scientists decades? And, most critically, are unresponsive to traditional clients or what is the relationship of that they lack a common sense of purpose. wildland fire research to its Fire managers, faced with the greatest clients and how will it provide challenges in their history, struggle to: research support for the new Federal Wildland Fire Policy • restore and maintain ecosystem health; and other strategic direction? • decrease fire hazard, especially in the This conference assembled wildland-urban interface; representatives of the fire research community, along • improve cost effectiveness of suppres- with principal clients, col- sion, especially reduce the cost of large leagues, and managers of fires; research, to discuss future challenges. An personal commitments to meet future chal- • improve safety of fire operations; energetic dialogue was conducted to begin lenges. There is dedication, partly through the important work of sharing ideas, forming this document, to reach out to others • anticipate effects of global change; and relationships, and initiating action. Partici- participating in the future of wildland fire. • protect environmental quality. pants shared visions of the future and made —Conference Steering Committee

1 II. THE PAST

Participants were asked to bring to the conference items or artifacts symbolizing wildland fire research. Some items were personal, others had universal meaning. The anemometer with bullet holes (below), symbolizes the chronic problems in collecting weather data. Tree rings continue to be useful records of fire history. The BEHAVE program disks remind us how far we have come in computer modelling.

Giant sequoias in the Sierra Nevada of California contain numerous fire scars that record the years of past surface burns. These tree-ring records extend back more than 2,000 years and show that fires were frequent (at least twice per decade before circa 1860) and were often correlated with droughts. Photo by A.C. Caprio, Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.

2 II. THE PAST

Over the decades, global events, ad- global events, vances in technology, government regula- and the history of tions, and society’s expectations have wildland fire changed dramatically. To find common research. ground for the future of wildland fire When the research, it is important to look at the past timelines were not as a static chain of events, but as an completed, many evolutionary activity. themes and In the first conference exercise, mem- patterns emerged. bers of the wildland fire community were Despite the wide asked to share their histories. Single, brief range of stake- events may shape one’s future; a Rocky holders, the Mountain ski trip may lead to a long, results of this accomplished career in natural resources; a exercise empha- fleeting encounter with a charismatic sized the com- monality of leader may inspire a successful public experience and career. For many participants, looking at perspective. The the past helped identify trends, define following is a roles, detect patterns, and recall personal summary of the delights and sorrows. timelines (Appendix C). had a wide range of professional experi- The conference began with mixed ence in geographically diverse areas. groups that included at least one member Most group members were earning from each stakeholder group. The assign- advanced degrees during the 1960s and ment was to describe the past to discover PERSONAL 1970s. Several had contact with charismatic what has influenced the evolution of natural resource leaders such as Henry wildland fire research. What brought the Wright, Harold Weaver, and Harold Biswell. community to its present state? Most participants were born before 1960 In the 1980s many members’ careers The conference room walls were lined and many grew up in the Western U.S. on included bio-political experience with a with large sheets of paper used to create farms or in rural towns. Participants com- focus on and responsibility for fire timelines. Each participant listed personal, monly had significant outdoor experiences policy and research. Career tracks appear global, and wildland fire research events leading to job and career choices. Many more evolutionary than revolutionary; on a timeline. The sheets of paper were first jobs were firefighting or fire-related. few individuals had changed careers soon filled with personal recollections, key Participants had lived in many places and rapidly.

3 II. THE PAST

By the 1990s, this well-educated group pression and aerial detection became earth’s natural resources continued to had a significant amount of fire experience available. Use of and competition for decline. There were more competing and a high level of influence in fire man- natural resources increased as soldiers interests and a lack of common social agement and research. Responsibility for enrolled in colleges, built homes, and focus. Communication technology assisted managing large land areas and numerous worked outdoors. The spirit of controlling the fall of the Eastern bloc. The Internet published books and articles are indicators nature was prevalent. and other technologies are increasing of this group’s wealth of fire knowledge. The Soviet Union challenged the U.S. in personal freedoms but also creating a Although the group is highly influential, space exploration in the 1950s. The space dichotomy; those on the information most individuals recognize limits and race led to an infusion of research money highway and those looking for it. constraints. Some who consider their to universities and government-controlled positions bureaucratic, expressed discon- technological development. Electronic tentment stemming from the desire for equipment, such as remote sensing, aircraft, more hands-on research. Many, feeling a satellites, global positioning systems, and WILDLAND FIRE RESEARCH sense of renewed energy, were willing to infrared were being developed. Seeing the devote more of themselves toward oppor- earth from space initiated a global per- tunities for integrated problem solving. spective. Fire research is an evolutionary process. The Civil Rights and Women’s Move- Suppression has received the longest and ment gathered momentum in the 1960s. As most consistent research attention. Later the Vietnam War continued, people began came activity-fuels research. Recently, to question the government’s authority. research activities have included the GLOBAL Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring sounded the ecological role of fire and natural fuels, environmental alarm. Richard Nixon was the results of which are being applied by In the past, increased focus and concen- elected president. land managers to benefit ecosystems. trated resources helped scientists deliver The 1970s gave rise to greater environ- Fire research has historically been results promptly. The bombing of Pearl mental awareness and increased environ- tightly coupled with fire management and Harbor galvanized and focused the coun- mental actions. Love Canal, Three Mile the critical events that drive it. Research try. Research activities surrounding the Island, and other human-induced disasters projects, funding, and new management Manhattan Project, which produced the revealed our vulnerability to technological policies typically follow fire-related disas- first atomic bomb, exemplifies the urgent “accidents.” Population growth and gaso- ters. These disasters are usually followed demand for scientific answers and technol- line shortages focused attention on the by a policy review, along with increased ogy. earth’s resource limitations. The National safety awareness, increased funding, and The post-World War II period saw major Environmental Policy Act and the Endan- emphasis on the need for fire research. An technological and social changes. Much of gered Species Act were enacted. early critical event was the the 1910 fires. modern fire technology arose from the During the 1980s and 1990s, the world This event led to the beginning of fire war; surplus aircraft, improved fire sup- economy continued to grow, while the management. Following the Selway fires in

4 II. THE PAST the 1930s, the 10 AM policy (fires will be Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference and extinguished by 10 AM or a plan will be the Leopold Report on Fire and Wildlife in initiated to extinguish the fire by 10 AM National Parks. IMPLICATIONS the following day) went into effect. In There was a transition from firefighting 1988, Western fires, especially those in science to fire ecology during the 1970s. Physical, technological, and social Yellowstone, caused another examination Formalized ecological research looking at trends have implications for fire poli- of fire policy; and the extensive and the role of fire restoration, regimes, and cies: How are we a part and how will numerous catastrophic fires in 1994 and ecology became widespread. The fuels we evolve with the trends? We have 1996 were followed by further scrutiny of problem gained recognition as did the seen fire research and management fire policy and direction. natural role of fire. The environmental move toward ecosystem research and Other external drivers of fire research movement brought several new laws, management. include commodities, disaster, technology, regulations, and policies (e.g., National Political conservatism has resulted in demographics, environmental politics, and Environmental Policy Act and the Wilder- conservative fire research. Innovative budgets. These are relatively short-term ness Act) that directly or indirectly affected and creative research is often stifled by events that commonly receive short peri- fire management. ods of intense attention. Internal fire During the 1980s, the Yellowstone fires prioritization. Forced into “safe” re- research drivers include habit, tradition, ignited debate about “let it burn” policies; search, scientists are unlikely to ven- professionalism, individual bodies of the public began to question fire- ture out of traditional arenas. Because knowledge, myth, specialization, institu- management policies. fire research historically responds to tionalization, and chaos (response to Federal agency reorganization and events, there is a need to generate a short-term events; no organized approach). downsizing in the 1990s resulted in a sustained demand and proactive com- Safety awareness is fairly constant and has decreased capacity to conduct research. munication with the public and media. increased slowly over time. Simultaneously, increased public in- Communications technology has had Fire labs were opened in the 1950s and volvement in policy making and the a time-compressing effect; rapid solu- research shifted from data generalizations incorporation of social factors in research tions are expected. Although much to model simulations. Fire research pro- occurred. needed research is long-term and grams and funding continues to be reac- Fire research has become more inte- highly complex, the management tive to disaster. grated with related disciplines and inter- expectation is to produce significant The pre-1960s approach to fire research ests; yet, further integration is needed. results quickly. and management was a focused attempt to Fire research remains dominated by A nationally coordinated fire research scientifically control nature. Prediction of public-land fire management needs rather program that establishes priorities, fire potential, behavior, and danger rating than private needs. Current fire research tracks success, and builds program systems were emphasized. is increasingly complex and is incorpo- support is needed. The program would During the 1960s, seeds of the ecologi- rating various degrees of the social foster integrating and monitoring of cal use of fire were planted with the first dimension. long-term ecological changes.

5 III. THE PRESENT

Increasing social value of air quality and escalating climate change are current trends.

Increasing awareness of social issues is a key trend.

6 III. THE PRESENT

Looking at the past created a context to view the present. To analyze the present situation, participants formed eight stake- holder groups.

• Administration/Policy (two groups)

• Fire Behavior/Risk Management Wildland Urban Interface issues • Fire Behavior/Physical Science continue to • Biology/Ecology/Hydrology (two increase groups)

• Air Issues

• Social Science/Wilderness

The stakeholder groups used the analy- sis of the past to better understand the present status of wildland fire research. Looking at the present consisted of four exercises: article summaries, group mind map, stakeholder perspectives on trends, soon became a complex branched struc- The final task focused on how partici- and “prouds” and “sorries.” ture reflecting the diverse interrelated pants feel about the current situation, Participants were asked to bring a issues relevant to wildland fire research. newspaper or magazine article that re- each stakeholder’s contribution to what is Participants identified key issues and flected an event, trend, or development working, and their contribution to what is that is shaping the future of fire research. trends in wildland fire research. not working. Each stakeholder group Each person shared their article with their The next task for the stakeholder listed issues and activities that they are group and discussed its significance. groups was to identify which trends they currently associated with that they are Using this information, each group then cared about, what actions they are taking, proud of and issues and activities that focused on the trends, events, and and what actions they want to take. they are currently associated with that developments shaping wildland fire Group findings were reported back to the they are sorry about. Each group selected research today and in the future. larger group in terms of what is being their proudest “prouds” and sorriest Next, all participants gathered to create done and what needs to be done about “sorries” to present to all conference a mind map (page 8). The mind map each issue (pages 10-14). participants (pages 15-17).

7 III. THE PRESENT

A mind map illustrates a collective view of complex factors influencing a core issue. Participants determined the factors and pathways that repre- sented their individual concerns and those developed in their stakeholder groups.

8 III. THE PRESENT

KEY TRENDS IDENTIFIED ON THE MINDMAP

• Increasing wildland urban interface problems. • Increasing fuel buildup and decreasing ecosystem health. • Fire management becoming more integrated and complicated. • Data acquisition and analysis advancing faster than the ability to put the information to practical use. • Increasing air quality requirements and concerns. • Need for system integration by taking existing models and data and applying them to management decision systems. • Desire to bridge the gap between today’s fuel problems and tomorrow’s solutions. • Increasing social value of air quality at local and global scales. • Escalating climate change. • Increasing occurrence of prescribed and wildland fire. • Increasing communication and collaboration among all interested wildland fire stake- holders. • Increasing need to understand the relationship between society and wildland fire (e.g., research on fire issues such as prescribed fire and the media). • Increasing recognition of the need for wildland ecosystem restoration. • Increasing emphasis on ecosystem sustainability. • Escalating concerns about restoring natural fire regimes. • Increasing prescribed fire and fuel management treatments to affect fire hazard, regime, and restoration. • Increasing public resistance to fire, smoke emissions, resource loss, and treatments. • Lack of trust in government.

9 III. THE PRESENT

ADMINISTRATION / POLICY (GROUPS 1 & 2)

Trend What we’re doing now What we need to do

• Increasing Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) • Some assessment of conditions. • Better clarify the federal fire policy concerning problems. WUI issues. • Federal, state, and local efforts to improve awareness, training, and coordination. • Incorporate WUI into land use planning and fire management planning. • Some broad-scale public education programs. • Train firefighters to work in interface conditions. • Federal fire policy provides direction concerning the WUI. • Develop a clearer message to communities about WUI strategies.

• Increasing fuel buildup and decreasing ecosys- • Increase in funding and fuels planning and • Increase fuel treatment. tem health. treatments. • Develop fire plans that support appropriate • Gradual increase in prescribed fire accomplish- management actions. ments. • Establish a better understanding of fuel treat- • Assessment of fuel conditions, risks, and ment alternatives in relation to science, politics, priorities vary nationwide. and social concerns. • Southeastern states have enacted “right to burn” • Better understand go/no-go decision conditions laws that protect prescribed fire activities. and options. • Federal Fire Science plan established. • Fuel management strategies are being devel- oped by various agencies. • Public is more aware of and concerned about fuel management issues.

• Fire management is becoming more integrated • Not explored due to time • Not explored due to time and complicated. There is a broader recognition of social and environmental concerns including the physical and biological sciences. There is a desire to join together on an interagency basis to solve problems.

• Data analysis is advancing faster than the ability • Not explored due to time • Not explored due to time to put the information to practical use.

10 III. THE PRESENT

ADMINISTRATION / POLICY (GROUPS 1 & 2) (CONTINUED)

Trend What we’re doing now What we need to do

• Increasing air quality requirements and con- • Increasing regulatory requirements. • Create better air quality monitoring. cerns. • Measuring smoke emissions. • Establish better control measures. • Controlling emissions through smoke manage- • Develop better tools for predicting emissions ment. and impacts. • Educating the public about regulations. • Make data easily available. • Using dispersion models.

FIRE BEHAVIOR / RISK MANAGEMENT / PHYSICAL SCIENCE (GROUPS 3 & 4)

Trend What we’re doing now What we need to do

• Managers are looking for integrated systems • Using outside research for system development • Develop an integrated system using existing that are useful in land management. and integration. models and data and apply it to a management decision system. • Bringing information to the field through training. • Produce technology transfer from fire research. • Increasing participation from other stakeholders and managers. • Find more money from nontraditional sources. • Forming management alliances at regional levels.

• Fuels management is an increasing concern. • Using pilot projects and demonstrations to help • Manage the land with a consistent purpose. manage forests. • Provide quality external and internal education • Using prescribed fire as a long-term solution programs. when we may need short-term solutions. • Determine accurate science-based programs for short- and long-term solutions.

11 III. THE PRESENT

FIRE BEHAVIOR / RISK MANAGEMENT / PHYSCIAL SCIENCE (GROUPS 3 & 4) (CONTINUED)

Trend What we’re doing now What we need to do

• Increasing feeling that it is possible to develop a • Moving from art to science in terms of fire • Build a perfect fire model. systematic model that captures knowledge and behavior. Dealing with physical and social • Understand how to implement an integrated fire- integrates physical and social models. aspects of the wildland urban interface problem. weather model anywhere. Introducing local and regional fire modeling into fire operations. • Develop physically-based satellite-derived data sets. • Coupling weather and fire modeling. • Reorganize current knowledge and problems. • Studying fire dynamics. • Evaluate model-based predictions with real data • Developing a physical understanding of satellite for any time or place. data. • Develop a feedback path from behavior to data to help understand fuel-fire links. • Repackage existing knowledge for practical use by land managers and those in the field.

BIOLOGY / ECOLOGY / WATERSHED SCIENCES (GROUPS 5 & 6)

Trend What we’re doing now What we need to do

• Increasing concern about fuels. • Simulation modeling of forest fuels. • Establish comprehensive dynamic inventories of the entire fuel profile (including grasses, shrubs, • Accomplishing many isolated studies. trees). • Recognizing that we have type conversion, • Better understand historic conditions. exotic species, and structure changing fire regimes. • Clearly communicate with fire managers and help them with biological applications. • Running static fuel models. • Increase the amount of ecological work on nonforest ecosystems.

12 III. THE PRESENT

BIOLOGY / ECOLOGY / WATERSHED SCIENCES (GROUPS 5 & 6) (CONTINUED)

Trend What we’re doing now What we need to do

• Increasing recognition of the need for restora- • Producing demonstration projects. • Recognize variability. tion. • Accomplishing large-scale spatial assessments. • Communicate differences between restoration and commodity production. • Using fire as a restoration tool in local pre- scribed fire projects. • Integrate fire and other disturbances. • Establish clear communication between re- searchers and managers.

• Increasing emphasis on ecosystem • Starting to address ecosystem integrity. • Accomplish long-term studies. sustainability. • Increasing the amount of local fire projects. • Integrate fire into ecosystem management. • Beginning to define disturbance regimes. • Assess fire affects on biodiversity.

• Escalating concerns about restoring natural fire • Identifying knowledge about historic fire regimes • Increase training and professional development. regimes. in relation to vegetation and climate including • Increase fire-history database compilation. human interventions. • Increasing prescribed fire and fuel management • Compile adequate vegetation maps. treatments to affect fire hazard, regime, and • Gaining support, administratively and financially. restoration. • Engage in more long-term studies and experi- • Increasing the amount of monitoring, fuels ments. • Public resistance to fire hazard, smoke emis- mapping, and assessments. sions, resources loss, and treatments. • Evaluate the cost and benefit of post-fire • Linking fire management with land management rehabilitation efforts. • Lack of trust in government. plans. • Evaluate the post-fire potential for mass erosion on regional and landscape scales. • Develop more interagency cooperative research. • Expand the study of exotics in relation to fire affects and behavior.

13 III. THE PRESENT

AIR ISSUES (GROUP 7)

Trend What we’re doing now What we need to do

• Increasing social value of air quality at local and • Continuing to develop dispersion models that • Better demonstrate how to use models and global scales. are disjointed and lack clear guidance. obtain technical support. • Escalating climate change. • Establishing many significant, joint problem- • Directly apply tools to land management • Increasing occurrence of prescribed and solving efforts. projects. wildland fire. • Producing a proliferation of meteorological • Increase model development rather than model models. system development. • Understanding better how weather and streams • Expand public outreach for decision making. of mesoscale weather affect fire regimes. • Increase collaboration between and among • Creating source-strength models. agencies. • Linking current meteorological, fire behavior, • Foster university curriculum in mountain meteo- smoke production, and dispersion models. rology. • Better understand the role of fire in increasing or decreasing carbon sink.

SOCIAL SCIENCE / WILDERNESS (GROUP 8)

Trend What we’re doing now What we need to do

• Social components, which exist in all previously • Recognizing that a significant amount of • Identify social science researchers and build a identified trends, are being recognized. anecdotal social science evidence exists. community. • Need for increased communication and collabo- • Acknowledging the need to establish systematic • Obtain funding for social science research ration is being recognized. social science research within fire management regarding fire research issues. programs. • Increasing need to understand how society • Systematically identify social science research drives wildland fire research. needs. • Better understand how society influences wildland fire issues. • Complete field visits to observe applied re- search; obtain feedback from field users. • Identify fire lab customers and assess their needs. • Integrate social science into fire research.

14 III. THE PRESENT

ADMINISTRATION / POLICY (GROUPS 1 & 2) FIRE BEHAVIOR / RISK MANAGEMENT (GROUP 3)

Prouds Sorries Prouds Sorries

• Moving toward a balanced, national • Missed opportunities to provide fire • Building a business process that • Fire is not fully integrated in the fire management program. research leadership on emerging combines management, science, land management process. • Progress in developing the fire natural resource issues. and social aspects. • Doing things for the wrong reason; discipline and professionalism. • Connection between similar work • Effort of multiple disciplines to activity accomplishment is money • Fire is in the mainstream of national is limited. integrate fire into land manage- driven. and global ecosystem views. • Organized around functions not ment. • Prescribed fire operations are • Taking a leadership role in inter- goals. • Progress in software integration. commonly discounted as a part- agency training and cooperation. • Risk aversion makes it difficult to • Moving from macroscale support to time job that occurs between the • The Incident Command System and adapt to changing conditions and mesoscale support. primary jobs (suppression). all that has derived from it. situations. • Quality educational programs to • Using yesterday’s technology on • Budget process is more cost • Lack of fiscal accountability. increase stakeholder knowledge. today’s issues. efficient, unified, and interagency; • Do not mobilize for opportunities • Bringing tools to the field for • Unable to move faster to upgrade Choosing-By-Advantage. as well as we do for threats. application, training, and collabora- technologies. • Diversity in fire knowledge (physics, • Do not commit resources based on tion. • Some want to do business the way math, ecology, social science). long-term net benefits as is done for we used to. • Increasing use of risk analysis. short-term risks. • Management decisions are made • Fire is included in other research • Opportunities missed to contribute without adequately understanding communities. to rehabilitation and restoration. the ecological consequences. • North American fire research • A crisis is required to spur action. • Decisions are often based on community remains a world leader. • Research is not meeting manage- product attractiveness rather than on a sound scientific foundation. • Putting fuels on the national ment needs. agenda. • Not insisting on thorough fire • Serving customer needs. investigations. • Landscape and regional scale • Lack of accountability. efforts (Columbia Basin) and • Lack of integrated research and Each stakeholder group listed issues and activities integrated assessments are integrated planning. that they are currently associated with that they are occurring. • Not supporting visionaries, risk proud of and issues and activities that they are • Packaging research, development, takers, and the Federal Wildland and application. Fire Policy. currently associated with that they are sorry about. • Land managers are using research • Not burning enough acres/hectares. Each group selected their proudest “prouds” and information. • Not enough objective monitoring. sorriest “sorries” to present to all conference • Collaborating at local levels. participants. • Gaining political support and understanding.

15 III. THE PRESENT

FIRE BEHAVIOR / PHYSICAL SCIENCE (GROUP 4) BIOLOGY / ECOLOGY / WATERSHED SCIENCES (GROUPS 5 & 6)

Prouds Sorries Prouds Sorries

• Working in a cross-disciplinary • Unable to understand research • Informative demonstration projects. • Ignoring hydrologic impacts of fire. manner in fire research. complexities fast enough. • Successful new treatments. • Hazard reduction is rationale for • Initiating steps to help understand • Have not communicated model • Increased communication between prescribed fire. fire-line dynamics. limitations to nonmodelers. researchers and managers is • Inadequate communication be- • Developing a significant quantity • Model use is limited. fostering a climate of cooperation tween researchers and land and quality of models and products. • Not expressing concerns to land and collaboration. managers. • Supporting remote sensing with management agencies. • Complex and integrative projects, • Money being unnecessarily spent physical science. • Distracted by administrative policy long-term planning models, and on fire suppression. • Recognizing where technology and technological “red herring.” multiple temporal/spatial data. • Conducting expensive, unneces- stops and social science begins. • Canadian Forest Service delayed • Implementing management sary rehabilitation operations. • Canadian Forest Service has met necessary groundwork for long- programs based on research. • Limited spatial- and temporal- the current need of fire and land term work. • National key message about fire. scale work. managers. • Inability to effectively and efficiently • Increased use of natural history • Single discipline approach contin- • Attracting external cooperators to get products from research to experiments and long-term studies. ues to be the norm. research problems. users. • Increased interagency and • Lost public trust. multiagency collaboration effort. • Lack of consideration about political • Integrated resource and fire and social events related to fire. management objectives. • The five national key messages • Educating public, peers, managers. about fire are not widely known. • Improved understanding of fire and • The overhead proportion of climate relations. funding is increasing. • Leadership in fire and watershed • A small percentage of agency effects and in engaging USGS budget is obligated to research. scientists. • Rewards for innovation are few. • Successful international and • Not using field offices to help interagency cooperation on fire and identify research needs. fuels management. • Research results are influencing management.

16 III. THE PRESENT

AIR ISSUES (GROUP 7) SOCIAL SCIENCE / WILDERNESS (GROUP 8)

Prouds Sorries Prouds Sorries

• Successfully linking fire, climate, • Bureaucratic inertia / provincialism. • Human factors are being promoted • Lack of public understanding. and social values. • Weak link with social science. (ad-hoc work). • Promoting safety has negative • Joint problem solving between the • Government mistrust. • Variety of demonstrations exist. consequences. EPA and other agencies related to • Disconnected between reality and • Helping agency people work with • Firefighter safety is a third or fourth the Clean Air Act and visibility public opinion; chaotic science. media. priority. standards. • Lack of long-term focus on priorities. • Improving our professional commu- • Funding is being channeled away • High level of professionalism. • Less willing to take risks nication. from human dimensions. • Interagency cooperation on a local associated with fire. • Accomplishing much with little. • No mechanism exists to relay scale. • Lack of focus and agency • Value of and what social science research funding to the ground. expertise in monitoring. can offer is being recognized. • Inadequate social science data. • Included as stakeholders in this • Ineffective identification work. conference. • Not managing across boundaries. • Limited understanding of other disciplines. • No unified statement on the role of social scientists. • Constrained time.

“The absence of social science integration in wildland fire research is a systems problem. Communication across disciplines is rare. Misunderstandings continue.” — Social Science Group Participants

17 IV. FUTURE SCENARIOS

Participants were somewhat impressed when they realized the broad commonal- ity of their interests and concerns about wildland fire research and management. Two key questions emerged. What do we want to see in the future? What are we prepared to do to achieve this future vision? Conference facilitators asked partici- pants to imagine a future for wildland fire research and management that they would want to help make a reality. Participants were asked to design a story, a play, or some other creative way of communicat- ing their future vision. Using flip charts, participants described current events in fire research and the barriers that must be overcome to reach their envisioned future of wildland fire research and manage- ment. The assignment was to imagine 13 years into the future-October 7, 2010- and dramatize the changes in the wildland fire community that had taken place. Attendees were encouraged to exercise creative dreaming. Visions could include anything possible, desirable, or motivat- ing. The activity was challenging. Partici- pants developed outlines and made props to dramatize an often humerous story about their group's future vision. Each We dared to dream and were pleased by the commonalities of our dreams. mixed group produced its own scenario of an ideal future wildland fire research and management situation.

18 IV. FUTURE SCENARIOS

ment decisions, and they met our Make appropriate management deci- funding requests! sions and establish a better balance between prescribed fire and wildfire. Fifth person: Wow, the International Cooperative Interagency Committee has a Single interface between fire behavior, The setting: It is the year 2020. The Fire new way to obtain funding. I'll apply fire effects, etc., at all scales. Wizard walks among a group of sleeping right away! Research filters and packages informa- people. In 2997, the Fire Wizard had cast a tion and models are effectively used by sleep spell on these people. It's now the Sixth person: I wouldn't get any sleep at all if it weren't for these meetings. More managers. moment of awakening. decisions are based on high-quality More "seamless" research community; Firstperson: I must call Don Latham and risk assessments than they were 13 fire research is no longer a separate Jack Cohen to tell them how effectively years ago. Now we're relying mostly on community. the frre lab is transferring informa- remote sensing for the majority of our Public trust of management is restored. tion to the field. monitoring and inventory work. We have a reliable small-scale wind model International .cooperation is expanded Second person: Our flip charts? They've and better ability to forecast seasonal with a global focus. been updated! I'm going to accept trends. And finally, social research is Large, international research projects ecosystem change as a part of every- fully integrated with other disciplines. are ongoing. day life. The wildland urban interface is a social space, not just a geographic Seventh person: I'm meeting with the new More competitive, peer reviewed zone. Management and research Forest Service Chief today to discuss the funding is open to all. communicate well. issue of looking at biodiversity more Blurred distinction between research holistically rather than just in regard to and management funding sources. Thirdperson: My, what day is it? 2010! I'd threatened and endangered species. I better check my long-range forecast. I expect that we'll be collaborating more Prescribed fire is fully integrated into now have the ability to make better based on shared information, too! land management practices. seasonal forecasts and excellent Land managers view themselves as risk Fire Wizard:What do you think? Should I small-scale forecasts. managers. put them back to sleep? Fourth person: I just had this amazing Science is used as the foundation for a experience. We spent a day with the Additional future vision: national, natural resource policy. House Committee on Natural Re- Sustainable resource and forest manage- Interact more directly with the public. sources and they supported everything ment indicators are the accepted criteria we are doing. They understand that Discussions include below and above- used as a framework for full stake- science has a role in making rnanage- ground processes. holder involvement.

19 IV. FUTURE SCENARIOS

outside the realm of what they currently Public understanding and acceptance of do to unleash and harvest their cre- the cost of fire management. ative potential. Research has initiated work on the next Member: Good communication is very generation of problems. The setting: Five men and three women sit important. I think that good communica- around a table at the front of a room. The tion will ensure that the general public Fire community is integrated, coordi- meeting is called to order. . . continues to understand the role of nated, and flexible with a common understanding of problems and priori- The Interagency, International Coop- fire. ties. International Fire Science Plan is in erative Research Consortium is convened. Member: It seems to me that the real place. This consortium exists because many success stories from land management barriers have been broken. We're all have come from mutual, personnel united under the Department of Natu- exchanges. ral Resources. Funding barriers have been eliminated; we can use suppres- Member: My interest is building cohesive, sion money for research. Fear is gone; yet diverse communities that take we can make decisions and take risks effective action. I'm always looking for without worry. Communication barriers do management/research partnerships Setting: A freak, early-season snowstorm in not exist. This agency is funding com- that integrate management and social the year 2010 has isolated Park City, Utah. sciences. petitive grants. Isolated individuals, known as the Member: My interest in this work goes Welcome to your new board! Saveland Party, develop a new vision back to the 1990s when the cost of and establish a new land management ineffective fire suppression and the risk planning process that becomes the Additional future vision: to human health was high. Now we have "north star" for fire research. One aspect of the process defines a new fire re- cost effective, ecologically sound Institutional barriers to research/ search triangle involving federal, systems. management exchange and interdisci- state, and private entities. People are Member: I'm concerned about restoration plinary research are eliminated. ecology. I want to see competitive approaching land management as an research. I want to see research on All budget opportunities are fully an integrated, holistic process. investigated. ecosystem structures and processes to Land management objectives combine reduce hazard of catastrophic fires. Substantial progress in ecosystem research and management compo- Member: I'm interested in ways to educate restoration and reduction of damaging nents. We're evaluating the progress ourselves and others. I think people and undesirable wildfire through a made on the next generation of land should spend a year doing work that is research and management partnership. management plans.

20 IV. FUTURE SCENARIOS

We had a significant paradigm shift; it is Land management is ecosystem based. has institutionalized the concept of no longer important to achieve tenure integrative thought (beginning in National policy guides efforts but and promotion. We understand that fire university curriculums). allows local decisions. plays a fundamental land-management role. We realize that we must target our Public support for land management Additional future vision: research to the larger issue and ask, policy, specifically fire. "Does this work influence the way we Integrated atmospheric fire model is Fire manager's role is to light fires, manage our public lands?" used onsite to forecast fire behavior. aided by realtime tools. Work is accomplished in Risk takers are rewarded. Additional future vision: multidisciplinary teams. Honest, safe interaction. People meet in Teams are working on objectives that cyberspace and face-to-face. are monitored and evaluated by a wide range of disciplines. Events are not crisis driven nor are disciplines isolated. My name is Sue and I'm the legal represen- Fire impacts on watershed and vegeta- tativefor Group #4, which has been doing tion are considered when making fire subversive research for the past 15years. The setting: A group of people are sitting at management decisions. They launched a satellite to eliminate all a bar at the Intergalactic Inn . . . Monitoring air quality. unwantedfires. In 1998, they found a whippersnapper who said the use offire for Bartender: In 1997, there were many Accomplishing basic and applied rehabilitation was minimized. The fire major barriers. We didn't know how to research. research community is completely dis- project a common future and couldn't Greater firefighter safety because of banded.Just kidding! agree on what indicators to use. There increased knowledge and technology. was a lack of appreciation for science in Our future vision of an ideal organization the decision-making process. Incentives Complex models are running on laptop is one that: for monitoring, funding, and staffing were computers. uses an adaptive system that in- inadequate to support research and devel- Strong technology transfer program. cludes managers and researchers opment. So, what are the issues today? symbiotically; Land-management plans connect Group: Well, we are developing a monitoring, research, and management is based on fluid teams that identify, statement of our vision for 2020-10 years objectives with strategies and activities. sort, and prioritize problems; and from now. We decided where we want

21 IV. FUTURE SCENARIOS our terrestrial, aquatic, economic, and established an Internet site where social systems to go, but to accomplish users can visit and research any local our desires, we had to sufficiently under- area of interest. stand the systems. We designed a moni- Colin established Society's Use of Infor- toring and feedback system to track The setting: A television jeeporter p~oceeds mation as Developed by the University variables and indicators, which was with the news broadcast . . . Community. A wealth of knowledge is agreed to by all. Today's headlines: continuously mined by researchers and collected in this knowledge pool. The We now have a coordinated, balanced El Nino forecasts were successful. intergalactic approach. We discovered public and decision makers may dip forest ecosystems on Titan and are con- 990,000 acres in the Southwest treated into this pool and use information. The ducting fire and emissions tests on them for fuel hazard. information is not controlled by any government. there. We can now easily transfer We interrupt your regularly scheduled money between agencies, and agency program for a special National Weather managers conduct in-house monitor- Service report. There will be an accept- Additional future vision: ing, outside of research. able, prescribed burning window two weeks from today. Combined burns by Basic and applied science are equally valued in all communities. Additional future vision: federal and state agencies will produce smoke that will affect local areas for up to Improved climate and weather forecast Clear perception of reality and under- four hours per day. capability, with a better ability to integrate information. standing of how to think productively. (Viewer changes channel.) Weather forecasts are linked to satellite Highly effective knowledge transfer Tonight we're talking about the history of technology using a toolbox of models. from research to field users and manag- fire science and Colin Hardy's role in ers at all levels. creating an intergalactic consortium that: Neutralization of past conditioning; reduced the average response time more creativity. of research from 3 years to 9 months with no quality reduction when Institutionalized ways, techniques, and addressing management questions; procedures to establish common taught researchers to operate on paral- The setting: A gentleman sits at a table ground. lel tracks providing unpublished holding a sheaf ofpapers. He speaks . . . answers versus productivity as peer Good afternoon ladies and gentleman, this review; and is Tom Brokaw. The President will

22 IV. FUTURE SCENARIOS present the State of the Environment We are in a new era of collaboratively Research programs are fully integrated Address. Ladies and gentlemen, the setting research priorities among and interdisciplinary (including social President of the United States. states, the federal government, and non- sciences). government organizations. She speaks: Good afternoon, its wonderful Department of Natural Resources is to be here again after so many years. As I I am here at Yellowstone Natural Re- committed to long-term university close my second term, I want to reflect source Area, the site of the 1988 fires, to activities and involvement of scien- on a major Presidential accomplishment. tell you that fire is a key component in tists. My first initiative, back in 2003, was managing natural resources. Universities are committed to holisti- creation of the Department of Natural cally teaching basic natural resource Resources, which merged the Depart- management to majors and non-majors. ment of Interior and the USDA Forest Additional future vision Service. This Department is under the leadership of our Secretary of Natural Balanced approach to public, state, and Resources. Under her fine leadership, we private research needs on all wildlands, have reached a broad public consensus with a commitment for basic and ap- on management of natural resources plied research. and have created a broad public trust. Comprehensive definition of missions The setting: A group of people are at a Additionally, we developed a new inte- and goals with broad input. grated research management division meeting. The chailperson speaks . . . Balance between basic and applied responsible for natural resource Welcome to the 5th annual meeting of the research. management research in the United National Fire Research Council. We are States and international issues such as U.S. is an international leader in fire meeting to consider competitive grant global climate change. research and management. proposals. We doubled the Natural Resources Solid support for maintaining long-term Speaker: This proposal is on behalf of the budget. This larger budget allowed us to: research demonstrations representative Boise Team, a consortium of various maintain a strong, basic federal of all regional ecosystems on a land- agencies and researchers, which will research program; scape and watershed scale. develop proactive measures to protect the city from flood and fire. This team Applying results of fire and fuel re- develop an extensive network of long- wants to develop knowledge about fire, search started in the 1990s. term ecological research; and water, and geomorphological processes initiate a large, competitive grant Full collaboration and cooperation and to involve the community in taking program for rapid response to chang- among scientists, disciplines, and responsibility for managing its vegeta- ing needs. agencies. tion.

23 IV. FUTURE SCENARIOS

Question: How does that fit into the Additional future national goals that we've set as re- vision: search priorities? Fire research is an inte- Group chair Let's review those priorities. gral part of national Nationally, fire research supports policy and program goals forest, rangeland, and aquatic ecosys- for natural resource tems. Annual goals drive this support. management. Priorities are developed Bringing the best of collaboratively with stakeholders. Fire science to decisions that research is proactive and responsive are applied on the to issues. ground is valued. chair: Group The Research, Development Fire research program and Application Program has been modi- attracts the best scientists fied to: by its clear focus, a implement specific integrated multi- renowned program, and agency objectives that 'are respon- support for innovative sive to national goals within specified solutions. time frames; be jointly funded from research design through applied technology implementation; and - make a difference.

"The time is right for things to come together." -Susan Conard

24 V. C OMMON GROUND

ORGANIZATIONAL VISIONS DECISION–MAKING VISIONS DESIRED OUTCOMES

• Establish a Department of Natural • Science, fire science in particular, has a • Research, integrated across disciplines, Resources to eliminate interagency role in management decisions. and management form partnerships. competition and foster interdiscliplinary • Prescribed fire is part of resource man- • Communication between management collaboration. agement, which creates a better balance and research is effective and continuous. • Create an integrated research structure to: between prescribed fire and wildfire. • Responsive and proactive research - increase communication and collabo- • Risk assessment is a primary decision- balances long-term scientific goals with ration between researchers and making tool. rapidly changing management issues. managers among federal, state, and • Remote sensing is a major tool for • The success of research and develop- private entities; integrating state-of-the-art weather fore- ment is measured by on-the-ground - foster research and management casting into decision making and for implementation. integration; and monitoring. • Fire research is responsive to national - address issues across boundaries and goals and receives long-term, stable from regional to global scales. PROCEDURAL VISIONS political support. • Establish an oversight council to: • Make competitive research money - eliminate institutional and organi- available to all researchers to: zation barriers and initiate seamless - emphasize integrated research and management structures; - allow greater discretionary fund use. - enact an adaptive management system with long-term research; and • Construct a feedback process with stakeholders to: - use research results in adaptive management, develop a true learning - improve communication; community, and relay results to the - provide better technology transfer; ground. - improve research implementation • Develop a common and compelling through the use of feedback from definition of wildland fire research and stakeholders; and management to: - filter, package, and disseminate - bring wildfire researchers together and findings. - establish universal coordination of all • Fully integrate social research into fire wildfire research. research and management.

25 V. C OMMON GROUND

• Adapt National Science Foundation or • Develop technology transfer mecha- an equivalent process for competitive nisms. POTENTIAL PROJECTS grants. • Institutionalize technology transfer. Participants began brainstorming poten- • Lobby for support (dollars, program • Seek money for more technology tial projects based on the identified changes). transfer. common ground. Projects ranged from • Establish an International Wildland Fire • Integrate remote sensing. administrative reorganization to discipline- Academy. specific programs and included the fol- • Obtain support for long-term monitoring lowing. • Adopt a long-term, integrated research and research of social and adaptive plan that supports long-term goals. • Federal land agencies establish a re- management. search branch for collaboration and • Charter a committee of national fire • Apply EPA Ecological Risk Assessment increased effectiveness. managers to define national fire re- guidelines to fire management. search goals and coordinate fire re- • Establish a Department of Natural search. • Develop long-term, landscape-scale Resources. vegetation management research in • Establish an interdepartmental science • Devise a reward system to credit selected ecosystems. team. researchers for working with manage- • Survey public values related to pre- ment and vice versa. • Develop large, field-research cam- scribed fire and wildfire. paigns involving multiple institutions. • Establish a national, competitive grant • Use the newly created council or program, with integrated research as a • Produce an interagency budget initia- institute for natural resource inventory requirement. tive. and monitoring including fuels inven- tory and fire monitoring. • Support long-term research. • Develop a shared vision of a “seam- • Multiagency research development and less” learning community. • Develop an internal and external outreach campaign. applications that are issue-driven with • Evaluate existing processes, programs, specific objectives and are jointly and models. • Study firefighter behavior. funded, designed, and implemented by research and management. • Finish information databases (GIS). • Complete a Wildland Fire Assessment System-integrated modeling system. • Project responsive to issues articulated • Establish a geographical fire research by Congress and the White House (e.g., library, information, and communication • Develop a short- and long-term fire global change, catastrophic fire). system on the World Wide Web. modeling project.

26 VI. ACTION PLANS

groups working in tandem to establish a learn from other successful, competitive NEXT STEPS national coordinated research agenda and grant processes such as those at the award funds accordingly. The first group National Science Foundation. They hope would include participation from many to submit a plan to agency leadership With common themes and potential stakeholders at multiple levels and within a year. projects identified, participants were would meet at least annually. The pur- Although similar efforts have been asked to begin planning action steps for pose of this first group would be to made and have failed, this group feels the items they felt strongly about. Five define a 10-year vision and update it strongly that a mechanism for coordinated groups organized around the following annually. agenda setting and awarding of funds is themes: This vision would be conveyed to a necessary. They see a renewed commit- 1. Create an interdepartmental smaller working group, a Fire Sciences ment to this end, especially among those competitive grant program. Team, consisting of high-level managers in attendance at the Future Search Confer- and researchers who would transform the ence. 2. Create a coordinated response to vision into a workable grant program that managing fire regimes for ecosystem invites and reviews proposals, awards health. 2. Create a coordinated response funds, and provides useful performance to managing fire regimes for 3. Create an environment for management feedback to funding agencies. ecosystem health and research collaboration. The group will convene an ad hoc team including themselves and represen- 4. Integrate social science expertise. (Group members: Sandberg, Swetnam, tatives of other agencies, such as the Sutherland, Agee, Ferry, Alexander, 5. Assess ecological risk. Department of Defense, Environmental Bossert, Sugihara, Fujioka, Gorski, Protection Agency (EPA), Federal Emer- Blackwell, Atkinson, Hardy, Carlile) 1. Create an interdepartmental gency Management Agency, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration, on competitive grant program This group outlined key researchable November 5th. At that time, they will questions that could be addressed by a begin to detail a strategy to obtain a coordinated research program considering (Group members: Bell, Leehouts, commitment from the leadership of the Cahoon, Sieg, van Wagtendonk, Biehl, management sector needs. The questions interagency partners. Brennon, Hutto, Mitchell, Conard, were: Any new mechanism will require Botti) control of a substantial portion of research • What were the historical fire regimes? This group determined a preliminary dollars to affect the direction of the • How have the historical fire regimes framework for an integrated program system. Thus, agencies must be willing to changed over time? function and outlined some chief ob- cede some of their authority and re- stacles to overcome. Their framework sources. Legislative action may be neces- • What are the benefits and risks of fire/ consisted of two new organizational sary. The ad hoc team will examine and nonfire management alternatives?

27 VI. ACTION PLANS

• What are the spatial and temporal (Group members: Parsons, Anderson, also recognized that the absence of social relationships? Patton-Mallory, Hubbard, Braun, Cohen, science integration in wildland fire research Maloney, Williams, Sweet) is a systems problem. Social science is • How do we prioritize the use of fire currently not well represented in the among other manipulations? This group outlined many of the general strategic obstacles that prevent greater system. Funding and opportunities for • How will fire regimes look in the future? collaboration. They suggested that a general communication across disciplines are rare. The group devised a preliminary plan lack of consensus about the role of basic Misunderstandings continue to occur. For for action after the Future Search Confer- research versus applied research and the example, of the many different disci- ence. They will form an ad hoc manage- absence of an overall common agenda at plines within the social sciences, which ment and research team at the national the top hampered communication. Spe- are the most relevant and germane to level to articulate the issues collaboratively cifically, they asked, “What is the research wildland fire research and management? and to define end products. Team agenda, and how does it support land The group is committed to identify, membership will include federal, state, management planning objectives?” within three months, an ongoing research/ and private land managers and federal The group suggested further action to management project as a candidate for researchers and academics. The group identify instances of better coordination new collaboration. They hope social will be organized by geographic region among managers and researchers at local scientists will collaborate to discover what and commonality of objectives. The goal levels. needs could be met through their involve- of this group will be to define two or ment. For example, although the physical parameters of smoke, inherent in pre- more options based on time, resources, 4. Integrate social science expertise and success probability. scribed burning, are known and are the In the first three months, efforts will be subject of continuing research, the social (Group members: Sorenson, Iverrson, parameters, such as its affect on neighbor- made to assemble the team and link its Shaw, Putnam, Wood, Osterstock, work to current administrative and land hoods, the likelihood of community Smith, Saveland, Thomas, Latham, opposition, and how best to educate and management activities. They will define Driessen) the problem subsets, identify what is use the media, are not well understood. known, and determine the commonality This group agreed that the wildland fire This group sees social/physical science of different issues. Members envision that research community had crossed some integration as a process that requires the coordinated team will eventually significant thresholds in its understanding sufficient time for members of the differ- undertake specific research problems and of social issues and the potential benefit ent disciplines to communicate effec- provide valuable feedback nationwide. of social science expertise. There exists a tively. By the end of the year, they group growing recognition that ecosystem hope to produce a case study that reports management includes people and their the successes and failures of one such 3. Create an environment for behavior. Technical solutions alone are integration. They will continue discussing management and research not sufficient to deal with the social potential projects until they have identi- collaboration aspects of implementation. However, they fied a few candidates.

28 VI. ACTION PLANS

5. Assess ecological risk will use the EPA framework to begin identifying research needs consistent with (Group members: Morgan, Quigley, the framework. This activity will be part PERSONAL INTENTIONS Miller, Betancourt, Wills) of an ongoing refinement of national This group focused on the problem of issues and research needs concerning Jim Douglas—“The actions listed today ecological risk assessment in watersheds. post-fire storm probability, hydrophobic- are NOT the only actions that will be They determined that a national theoreti- ity, nitrification of water, and the effects taken. The short time didn’t allow us to cal framework that assesses ecological of post-fire rehabilitation. fully develop actions.” risk, capitalizes on regional differences, Other action items include the incorpo- Enoch Bell—“On November 5, 1997 at focuses on ecological integrity, and ration of the EPA framework within 1 PM in Riverside, CA, Bill Leenhouts, permits analysis at multiple scales should current continuing education classes and Sue Conard, and myself will discuss be a goal. the Forest Ecosystem Management Assess- ways to coordinate fire research nation- The group noted that work on such a ment Team watershed assessment. Within ally. All are invited.” framework had begun under the auspices a year, the group hopes to have as- Kathy Malone—“I will work harder with of the EPA. On October 19, 1997, Julio sembled sufficient information to write research folks and try to be a catalyst for Betancourt began a series of watershed proposals and obtain funding for specific connectivity and cohesion.” tours for the U.S. Geological Survey. He research. Lori Osterstock—“I’ll share this informa- tion with fire people. A lot of people really care about fire research but don’t know how to provide input; I’ll try to facilitate the process.” Jim Saveland—“I will get documentation of this conference out for review and establish an Internet site where these “...people fail to adapt because of the distress provoked by the problem groups can work.” and the changes it demands. They resist the pain, anxiety, or conflict Conrad Smith—“I will apply my knowl- that accompanies a sustained interaction with the situation. Holding edge in a research team. I’m available to onto past assumptions, blaming authority, scapegoating, externalizing serve on any of the teams resulting from the enemy, denying the problem, jumping to conclusions, or finding a this conference.” distracting issue may restore stability and feel less stressful than facing Curt Topper—“I will conduct a second and taking responsibility for a complex challenge.” survey to assess changes and determine where action items have gone. I will summarize trends and disseminate —Ronald Heifetz, Leadership Without Easy Answers results in the spring.”

29 VII. CLOSING

“Let’s integrate research into the established management processes. The timing is right, and the issues are dead-on. The opportunity exists to cast a wide net across the scientific community.” — Jerry Williams

“We have to accept the time limitations of this conference. Personally, I had no idea that things were so disorganized. ” — Lori Osterstock

“The success of this conference will be determined by the ripple effect in the fire community over the coming months.” — Conference facilitators “We met in a microcosm that gave us a glimpse of the macrocosm. Although I saw movement in the conference, many stakeholders avoided or were hesitant to make a personal commitment. We’re all wrestling with that. This group is a reflection of society at large.” — Jim Saveland

30 VII. CLOSING

This conference provided an opportu- be spent to develop and nity to identify and refine wildland fire communicate research to research and management issues and to the ground. determine how science can contribute to Researchers stated these issues. More common ground had that they must convince been discovered than some thought was managers to obtain possible. But there was also a sense of research funding for frustration and confusion. Acknowledging what they need. Manag- that this meeting was only a beginning, ers expressed concern participants asked: How can we best take that fire management advantage of this meeting of stakeholders? staffs do not have an The Future Search method forced organized way to collect participants to admit that they often did the data and the quali- not understand the needs of many of the fied crews to accom- other disciplines. What is our understand- plish the work. They ing of the state-of-the-art in each disci- believe that it is the pline? How is collaboration possible responsibility of re- without fully understanding what others search to ensure that are doing and what their needs are? local units are supplied Participants admitted that organizational with what they need. structures and processes have been Managers expressed the A process was initiated, new allies formed, and barriers to achieving desired results, and importance of mobiliz- directions taken. some felt that duplication and “hobby” ing to meet the chang- research should stop. Several specialists ing needs of society. in attendance expressed disappointment They are concerned that integration will ence. Others believed that those in that the workshop did not provide a plat- diffuse their energy and focus. attendance were notable members of their form to resolve many critical scientific Some participants felt that the decreas- disciplines and represented a sufficiently issues such as evaluation of the use or nonuse ing budget is a myth. They believe suffi- complete spectrum of stakeholders. of fire history information. Identification cient funding exists but is being shifted Opinions about the action plans were of the difference between application around. There was concern that the mixed. The degree of agreement, needs and the research of problems is fun- survival of research is threatened. How commitment, and closure within each damental. Too often the focus of research will research obtain money to survive over group was variable. A positive result of is long-term and is concentrated on future the long term? Also, some participants felt the action plans is that no action items fundamentals. Some thought funding must that a deliberate, broad consideration of were assigned to people not in atten- stakeholders was absent for this confer- dance.

31 VII. CLOSING

Many participants were frustrated by the process because of thelimited time available, not knowing the desired out- come, or being unsure of the actual outcome. Regardless of the issue addressed, the process must be interdisciplinary and coordinated. The question remains, “What is the role of fire research in the context of future natural resource management?”

— Marvin R. Weisbord and Sandra Janoff, Future Search: An Action Guide to Finding Comming Ground in Organizations and Communities

A Future Search Conference requires us to explore different aspects of our perceptions, intellect, and emotions. In “contentment” we accept things the way they are. Unfamiliar experiences disturb the status quo. When we’d rather not admit or deal with change, we go into the “denial” room where we act as if things are okay. At some point though we admit that we are frustrated and unsure; we have entered the “confusion” room. Roughly half of Future Search Conference “Things get fixed because leaders take personal is spent in “confusion”, which creates high anxietyand a responsibility. Integrating research is crucial for the readiness for new opportunities. Renewal becomes a success of our ability to manage the land.” welcome possibility after identifying a common future and — Jerry Williams beginning action plans.

32 VIII. CONCLUSIONS

The rapidly changing fire research future. Quality science must be used to • Will participants as individuals and in environment, competition for existing solve real problems. new alliances, do what is necessary to resources, and new client expectations set Looking toward the future: achieve what was jointly envisioned? the stage for an energetic exchange of • Will better competitive interagency A need exists to find a way to coher- ideas in a compressed, two-day forum. mechanisms to solicit new ideas and Fire scientists, colleagues from other disci- fund integrated research be implemented? ently respond and adapt to changing plines, and fire managers, met to envision conditions such as climate change and the and chart the course of wildland fire research • Will a sharper definition of the future of role of fire in response to ecosystem and to commit to its successful future. wildland fire actually emerge to guide change. In addition, there is a need for a Each participant carried personal frus- the direction of creative thought, scien- coordinated expression of how land trations and ideals and found others who tific investigation, and the development managers view research problems and shared or challenged their beliefs and of knowledge systems? where the lack of information limits feelings. They gained a better understand- decision making. • Will the integration of social sciences ing of why some things are not working The process of dialogue and competi- into the fire research community pro- and brain-stormed possible solutions. tion for ideas will take months and years vide better alignment to rapidly chang- Success stories were shared and ways to to be fully translated into action. There ing social values with regard to ecosys- capitalize on them were discovered. New are many tactical results that will come approaches to research administration, tems, fire safety, air quality, the global out of this conference; specifically, funding, and accountability were dis- environment, and economic efficiency? communicating and organizing. cussed. Attendees gained a better under- • Will the integration of fire research with A modest set of actions were identified standing of the major strategic decisions other science disciplines and emerging and individual commitments were made. that are being weighed by managers and technologies add quality and efficiency formed new research alliances to support The new relationships formed and the to our delivery of knowledge systems? the decision process. The group was visions shared will lead to significant future action. Several events over the invigorated by an intense and rapid • Will the science community be able to next few months will bring the wildland exchange of ideas. Many participants mobilize in support of the new dimen- fire research community a few steps became more aware of the positive trends sions of fire management? that will affect the future. closer to a shared vision of the future. The success of the conference, and the • Will we be able to better anticipate the This conference was not conceived as a success of the research community, can future and plot a course for fire research, single event but instead as a small, critical only be measured by what occurs in the or will we continue to be reactive? part of a lifetime process.

33 APPENDIX A — CONFERENCE COMMITTEES, STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, AND MIXED GROUPS

CONFERENCE COMMITTEES

Steering Committee Report Committee

Jim Saveland, Chair Dave Thomas Karen Mora Jim Saveland USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service Vegetation Management and Region 4 Rocky Mountain Research Vegetation Management and Protection Research Fire, Aviation, and Air Station Protection Research Washington, DC Management Fort Collins, CO Washington, D.C. Ogden, UT Leslie Anderson Madelyn Dillon David (Sam) Sandburg USDA Forest Service Denny Truesdale USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service Bitterroot National Forest USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Pacific Northwest Research Stevensville, MT Fire and Aviation Management Station Station Washington, DC Fort Collins, CO Corvallis, OR David (Sam) Sandberg USDA Forest Service Ellen Eberhardt Curt Topper Pacific Northwest Research Station USDA Forest Service H. John Heinz II School of Corvallis, OR Pacific Northwest Research Policy and Management Station Carnegie Mellon University Corvallis, OR Philadelphia, PA Linda Wadleigh James Stone Major Organizers USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service Region 4 Region 4 Ogden, UT Ogden, UT Leslie Anderson, assisted by Dave Thomas (USDA Forest Bitterroot National Forest, Service, Region 4) assisted by Dave Thomas Stevensville Ranger District staff Trish Haines (Wasatch-Cache USDA Forest Service National Forest), Jody Farrell Region 4 Marvin Weisbord and Sandra (USDA Forest Service, Region 4), Fire, Aviation, and Air Janoff, conference consultants and and Charlene Reed (USDA Management authors of Future Search: An Forest Service, Region 4). Ogden, UT Action Guide to Finding Common Ground in Organizations and Communities

34 APPENDIX A — CONFERENCE COMMITTEES, STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, AND MIXED GROUPS

STAKEHOLDER GROUPS

Administration/Policy (Group 1) Fire Behavior/Physical Science Air Issues

Agee, James Alexander, Marty Acheson, Ann Botti, Steve Bossert, James Atkinson, R. Dwight Carlile, Lyle Cahoon, Don Ferguson, Sue Iverson, Dave Coen, Janice Gorski, Carl Maloney, Kathryn Cohen, Jack Sandberg, Sam Patton-Mallory, Marcia Fujioka, Francis Sorenson, Winnie Sommers, William Latham, Don Sweet, William Williams, Jerry Wood, Larry Biology/Ecology/Watershed Administration/Policy (Group 2) Sciences (Group 1) Social Science/Wilderness

Bell, Enoch Anderson, Leslie Braun, Curt Blackwell, Melissa Hardy, Colin Driessen, Jon Douglas, Jim Hull-Sieg, Carolyn Parsons, Dave Hubbard, Jim Morgan, Penelope Putnam, Ted Leenhouts, Bill Sugihara, Neil Saveland, Jim Osterstock, Lori van Wagtendonk, Jan Schmidt, Gordon Quigley, Tom Wills, Robin Smith, Conrad Webb, Jim Thomas, Dave Biology/Ecology/Watershed Fire Behavior/Risk Management Sciences (Group 2)

Albright, Dorothy Betancourt, Julio Biehl, Gary Brennon, Lenny Ferry, Gardner Conard, Susan Goens, David Hutto, Richard Mitchell, Wayne Miller, Melanie Mulhaupt, Rick Sutherland, Elaine Kennedy Shaw, Bodie Swetnam, Tom Thomas, James

35 APPENDIX A — CONFERENCE COMMITTEES, STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, AND MIXED GROUPS

MIXED GROUPS

Group 1 Group 4 Group 7

Anderson, Leslie Driessen, Jon Agee, James Douglas, Jim Ferguson, Sue Cahoon, Don Goens, David Iverson, Dave Conard, Susan Hutto, Richard Latham, Don Ferry, Gardner Sandberg, Sam Leenhouts, Bill Parsons, Dave Sommers, William Mulhaupt, Rick Shaw, Bodie Thomas, Dave Sugihara, Neil Wood, Larry Wills, Robin Thomas, James Group 8 Group 2 Group 5 Bell, Enoch Acheson, Ann Blackwell, Melissa Biehl, Gary Alexander, Marty Botti, Steve Bossert, James Carlile, Lyle Cohen, Jack Gorski, Carl Oserstock, Lori Miller, Melanie Maloney, Kathryn Saveland, Jim Putnam, Ted Morgan, Penelope Swetnam, Tom Quigley, Tom Schmidt, Gordon van Wagtendonk, Jan Sorenson, Winnie Sutherland, Elaine Kennedy

Group 3 Group 6

Braun, Curt Albright, Dorothy Brennon, Lenny Atkinson, R. Dwight Coen, Janice Betancourt, Julio Fujioka, Francis Hardy, Colin Hubbard, Jim Mitchell, Wayne Hull-Sieg, Carolyn Patton-Mallory, Marcia Sweet, William Smith, Conrad Williams, Jerry Webb, Jim

36 APPENDIX B — CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS

Ann Acheson R. Dwight Atkinson James E. Bossert Janice Coen Air Resource Specialist Director, Multimedia Analysis Meteorology Team Leader Scientist, National Center for Fire, Aviation & Air Management EPA Mail Stop D401 Atmospheric Research Northern Region 401 M St., SW Los Alamos National Laboratory 3450 Mitchell Lane USDA Forest Service Mail code 2123 Los Alamos, NM 87545 Boulder, CO 80301 P.O. Box 7669 Washington, DC 20460 (505) 667-6268 (303) 497-8986 Missoula, MT 59807 (202) 260-2771 (406) 329-3402 Steve Botti Jack Cohen Enoch Bell Fire Program Planning Manager Research Physical Scientist James Agee Assistant Station Director National Park Service Intermountain Fire Sciences Laboratory Professor of Fire Ecology USDA Forest Service 3833 S. Development Ave. P.O. Box 8089 College of Forest Resources Pacific Southwest Research Station Boise, ID 83705 Missoula, MT 59807 University of Washington P.O. Box 245 (208) 387-5210 (406) 329-4821 P.O. Box 352100 Berkeley, CA 94701 Seattle, WA 98195-2100 (510) 559-6316 Curt Braun Susan Conard (206) 543-2688 Assistant Professor of Psychology Fire Ecologist, Vegetation Manage- Julio Bentancourt University of Idaho ment and Protection Research Dorothy Albright Physical Scientist Moscow, ID 83844-3043 USDA Forest Service Fire GIS Program Manager U.S. Geological Survey (208)885-2540 201 14th St., SW Fire and Aviation Management Desert Laboratory Washington, DC 20250 USDA Forest Service 1675 W. Anklam Rd. Lenny Brennan (202) 205-1561 Pacific Southwest Region Tucson, AZ 85745 Director of Research 3735 Neely Way (520) 670-6821 ext 112 Tall Timbers Research Station Jim Douglas Mather, CA 95655 Route 1, Box 678 Fire Policy, Dept. of the Interior (916) 364-2823 Gary Biehl Tallahassee, FL 32312 Office of Managing Risk and Public Fire Planner (850) 893-4153 ext 229 Safety Marty Alexander USDA Forest Service 1849 C St., NW; MS 7356 Fire Research Officer Stanislaus National Forest Don Cahoon Washington, DC 20250 Canadian Forest Service 19777 Greenley Rd. NASA Satallite & Remote Sensing (202) 208-7963 5320 122nd St. Sonora, CA 95370 Research Edmonton, Alberta T6H355 (209) 532-3671 ext 315 Atmospheric Sciences Div Jon Driessen (403) 435-7346 Radiation Sciences Branch Chair, Dept. of Sociology Melissa Blackwell Mail Stop 420 University of Montana Leslie Anderson Management Analyst Hampton, VA 23681 Missoula, MT 59812 Asst. District Fire Management USDA Forest Service (757) 864-5615 (406) 243-2855 Officer Wasatch-Cache National Forest USDA Forest Service 125 S. State Street Lyle Carlile Sue Ferguson Stevensville Ranger Station Salt Lake City, UT 84138 Fire Use Specialist Atmospheric Scientist 88 Main St. (801) 524-6501 Bureau of Indian Affairs USDA Forest Service Stevensville, MT 59870 Natl. Interagency Fire Center Seattle Forestry Sciences Laboratory (406) 777-7425 3833 S. Development Ave. 4043 Roosevelt Way NE Boise, ID 83705 Seattle, WA 98105 (208) 387-5640 (206) 553-7815

37 APPENDIX B— CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS

Gardner Ferry Jim Hubbard Bill Leenhouts Lori Osterstock Senior Program Analyst Director, Colorado State Forest Ecologist District Ranger Bureau of Land Management Service/National Association of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USDA Forest Service 3833 Development Ave. State Foresters Colorado State 3833 S. Development Ave. Espanola Ranger District Boise, ID 837055354 University Boise, ID 83702 Santa Fe National Forest (208) 387-5161 Fort Collins, CO 80523 (208) 387-5584 Expanola, NM 87532 (970) 491-6303 (505) 753-7331 Francis Fujioka Kathryn Maloney Project Leader, Fire Meteorology Carolyn Hull–Sieg Director, Resources Program and Dave Parsons USDA Forest Service Research Wildlife Biologist Assessment Director, Aldo Leopold Pacific Southwest Forest Fire Lab USDA Forest Service Forestry USDA Forest Service Research Institute 4955 Canyon Crest Drive Sciences Laboratory P.O. Box 96090 USDA Forest Service Riverside, CA 92507 S. Dak. School of Mines and Tech. Washington, DC 20090-6090 P.O. Box 8089 (909) 680-1552 501 E. St. Joseph Street (202) 205-1031 Missoula, MT 59807 Rapid City, SD 57701 (406) 542-4193 David Goens (605) 394-1960 Melanie Miller Meterologist in Charge Ecologist Marcia Patton–Mallory National Weather Service Richard L. Hutto Bureau of Land Management Assistant Director for Research 1320 Beechcraft Ave. Professor, Division of Biological 3833 Development Ave. USDA Forest Service Pocatello, ID 83204 Sciences Boise, ID 83705-5354 Rocky Mountain Research Station (208) 232-9306 University of Montana (208) 387-5165 240 W. Prospect Road Missoula, MT 59812 Fort Collins, CO 80526 Carl J. Gorski (406) 243-4292 Wayne Mitchell (970) 498-1157 Western Region Fire Weather Fire Protection Planner Program Manager Dave Iverson CA Dept. of Forestry & Fire Protection Ted Putnum National Weather Service Social Science Coordinator P.O. Box 944246 Equipment Specialist/Psychologist Western Region Headquarters Planning, Appeals, and Litigation Sacramento, CA 94244-2460 USDA Forest Service 125 South State Street, Room 1235 USDA Forest service (916) 653-7472 Missoula Technology and Develop- Salt Lake City, UT 84138-1102 Intermountain Region ment Center (801) 524-4000 324 24th St. Penelope Morgan Building 1, Fort Missoula Ogden, UT 84401 Associate Professor Missoula, MT 59804 Colin Hardy (801) 625-5278 Dept. of Forest Resources (406) 329-3965 Supervisory Research Forester University of Idaho USDA Forest Service Don Latham Moscow, ID 83844-1133 Tom Quigley Intermountain Fire Sciences Project Leader, Fire Behavior Unit (208) 885-7507 Program Manager Laboratory Intermountain Fire Sciences USDA Forest Service Forestry and P.O. Box 8089 Laboratory Rick Mulhaupt Range Sciences Laboratory Missoula, MT 59807 USDA Forest Service President, Fire Protection 1401 Gekeler Lane (406) 329-4978 P.O. Box 8089 Research Foundation La Grande, OR 97850 Missoula, MT 59807 One Batterymarch Park (541) 962-6534 (406) 329-4848 Quincy, MA 02269 (617) 984-7282

38 APPENDIX B — CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS

David (Sam) Sandburg William Sommers Tom Swetnam Research Forester, Team Leader Director, Vegetation Management Associate Professor Jerry Williams Fire and Global Change Research and Protection Research Dendrochronology and Watershed Director; Fire, Aviation & Air Man- USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service Management agement, Northern Region Pacific Northwestern Research Station 201 14th St., SW Laboratory of Tree Ring Research USDA Forest Service Forestery Sciences Laboratory Washington, DC 20250 University of Arizona P.O. Box 7669 3200 SW Jefferson Way (202) 205-1561 Tucson, AZ 85721 Missoula, MT 59807 Corvallis, OR 97331 (520) 621-2112 (406) 329-3402 (503) 750-7265 Wilhelmina “Wini” Sorenson Fire Planning Specialist Dave Thomas Robin Wills Jim Saveland USDA Forest Service Regional Fuels Specialist California Fire Program Manager Fire Ecologist Intermountain Region Fire and Aviation Management The Nature Conservancy Vegetation Management and 324 25th St. USDA Forest Service 13700 Monte Vista Road Lake Protection Research Ogden, UT 84401 Intermountain Region Elsinore, CA 82530 USDA Forest Service (801) 625-5403 324 25th St. (909) 329-3402 201 14th St., SW Ogden, UT 84401 Washington, DC 20250 Neil Sugihara (801) 625-5505 Larry Wood (202) 205-1561 Fire Ecologist Chief, Forest Protection Bureau Pacific Southwest Region James P. Thomas 3125 Conner Blvd. Gordon Schmidt Fire and Aviation Management Aviation and Fire Staff Officer Tallahassee, FL 32399-1630 Deputy Director, Fire and Aviation USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service (904) 488-6595 Management 3735 Neely Way Superior/Chippewa National Forests Pacific Northwest Region Mather, CA 95655 Minnesota Interagency Fire Center USDA Forest Service (916) 364-2854 402 11th St., SE P.O. Box 3623 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 Portland, OR 97208 Elaine Kennedy Sutherland (218) 327-4568 (503) 326-2391 Research Ecologist USDA Forest Service Jan van Wagtendonk Bodie Shaw Forestry Sciences Laboratory Research Scientist Forest Manager for Confederated Northeastern Forest Experiment U.S. Geological Survey Tribes Station Yosemite Field Station Bureau of Indian Affairs 359 Main Road P.O. Box 700 1110 Wasco St. Delaware, OH 43015-8670 El Portal, CA 95318 Warm Springs, OR 97761 (614) 368-0090 (209) 379-1885 (541) 326-2391 William Sweet Jim Webb Conrad Smith FMSO Forest Supervisor Professor and Chairperson, Com- USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service munication and Mass Media Dept. George Washington & Jefferson San Juan/Rio Grande National University of Wyoming National Forests Forest P.O. Box 3904 5162 Valleypoint Parkway 1803 W. Hwy 160 Laramie, WY 82071-3904 Roanoke, VA 24018 Monte Vista, CO 81144 (307) 766-6273 (540) 265-5210 (719) 852-6247

39 APPENDIX C — TIMELINE

Time period Personal Global Fire

Pre-1960 Learn to ski and become aware Soldiers back from WWII; going 1910 Fires in northern Rockies of forests, mountains and to school; working in forests; 1922 Forest Service hires Harry snow increased use of natural Gisborne as fire scientist resources; major events driven by regional overpopulation Beginning of fire prevention; suppressing “all” fires; aerial Rock and roll lives Federal agencies (USFS, NPS) firefighting born 1925 Fire research at Priest River 1910 Weeks Act Travel around the world Gisborne develops fire danger meter 1933 10 AM policy Fire environmental studies National planning and manage- Born! 1912 Plummer compiles fire ment statistics and maps of 1910 fires and lightning fire mono- 1930s public works projects in graph the West Growing up babyboomer 1910 Frederick Clements studies Industrial revolution and publishes reports on fire and succession on lodgepole pine Growing up in a small, safe Sand County Almanac by Aldo Swedish community Leopold Pulaski and radios used in firefighting Fires in the Selway Gandhi dies 1937 Journal of Forestry states Basic values in a small, rural Holocaust that lightning-caused fires are community <5%

40 APPENDIX C — TIMELINE

Time period Personal Global Fire

Pre-1960 See houses along mountains Atomic age; U.S. bombing of 1937 Blackwater Canyon fire, 15 from Denver to Pueblo Japan; “stop, drop and hide” dead, leads to research and, after WWII, to professional firefighting 1940s & 1950s Harold Weaver See father’s dissatisfaction with 1957 Sputnik testing in New works on the relationships social perception that all fire is Mexico between fire and ponderosa bad; father a district ranger pine ecosystems 1949 Mann Gulch 1950s Modern Wildland Fire Atomic testing in New Mexico Science born Immigrate from Cuba 1950s droughts in Southern U.S. affect fire policy Fire labs established Smokey Bear 1954 Southern Fire Lab started Grow up in New York City; experience Eastern U.S. Regional fire danger systems forests Chainsaw and brush hook Technology to attack fire 1959 Forest Fire: Control and Use published NFDRS Fight forest fires Application of WWII technology Large fire events shape fire to fire suppression management policy 1958 Tall Timbers founded

41 APPENDIX C — TIMELINE

Time period Personal Global Fire

1960-1974 College graduation, marriage, Jet aircraft Sleeping Child fire and children Cooper’s fire ecology paper Teach at universities Bay of Pigs published JFK; Peace Corps in Nepal Early 1960s CE Van Wagner Reality check begins experimental crown Education; anti-war demonstra- fires at Petawawa tions; learn about agent orange and tropical forest U.S. civil rights movement 1962 First Tall Timbers Fire destruction. begins Conference MS fire science; ties to fire lab Northern Fire Lab dedicated Kennedy assassination Ph.D fire 1964 Synoptic Weather Types Associated with Critical Fire First position in the Forest Apollo program Weather published Service Rx burning, Vietnam style Attend Biswell Field Day at Scientific proof of global change Retarded drops, helitorch Whitaker Forest NPS and USFS experiments on Silent Spring by Rachael Carson Fight first wildfire as a 15-year prescribed natural fire old Boy Scout Leopold report on fire and Wilderness Act Hot Shot Crew job wildlife in parks Permanent position in fire First “Let Burn” policy in West research Vietnam; distrust of large organi- zations; belief that government Controversies: FS clearcutting Graduate high school, head (authority) would lie and that Rothermel fire model West those not in authority could Clean Air Act Dad takes me on my first wildfire challenge effectively

42 APPENDIX C — TIMELINE

Time period Personal Global Fire

1960-1974 Career appointment Johnson “credibility gap” FIRESCOPE ICS due to fires in California Live in South Africa; see how influential culture is to the Flower children vs. mainstream First university fire programs choices we make Fire shelters; foam; Nomex First fire jump Feminist movement America Burning report issued Ph.D. in fire ecology by National Fire Protection Feminine Mystique by Betty and Control Administration Leave Chicago; begin to experi- Friedan ence outdoors firsthand First wilderness fire manage- ment plans Beckwith fire escapes First humans on the moon NPS fire program challenged Start smokejumping Research moves into large-scale Job in Yosemite Environmental laws fire systems Work on USFS Fire Crew Fire Danger Rating System in Start of a lifetime friendship Earth Day use Kessell’s gradient modeling College textbook learning Satellites, reality of earth limits research at Glacier NP Find natural science; leave home AVHRR monitoring of fire events Camping in the Rockies Population Bomb by Paul Ehrlich DMSP-OLS mapping of active Burn with Henry Wright’s crew fires Still teaching atmospheric Love Canal Fire histories developed in SW science Pine barrens in New Jersey Chance to do things FIRESCOPE and Interagency burned regularly to manage cooperative fire management pitch pine ecosystems Meet some of the “gods” of fire research Effects of Fire series published

43 APPENDIX C — TIMELINE

Time period Personal Global Fire

1975-1985 Raise 2 children; conduct re- AVHRR launched Luke & McArthur (1978) publish search; USFS appointment Bushfires in Australia Increase in sensitivity to tropical forest destruction BEHAVE system First fire season Nixon, first confirmation that the government lied; government FIRECAST credibility declines Finish college Sustained economic growth Peak funding for fire research erodes sense of individual Active fire research responsibility New fire policy recognizes natural role 1976-1997 Pacific has higher Graduate high school average SSTs; tropical land masses drying out and accel- Interdisciplinary research em- erating deforestation phasis, mostly site focus First FS job, fire lookout Computer Age, PCs give com- 1981 first woman smokejumper puting power to the masses Involved in snow and avalanche forecasting and control; FS Consumption increases Recognition of “exotics” problem management CFCs tagged to ozone decline 1982 S. Pyne begins publishing 1981 U.S. has huge budget fire info Begin physiology/fire effects deficits; Graham-Ruddman Act Exploding interest in and funding Star wars/Space shuttle for fire ecology research Decide upon career with FS 1982-1983 El Nino alters climate and biomass burning Urban interface issue escalates

44 APPENDIX C — TIMELINE

Time period Personal Global Fire

1985-1990 Career change Booming economy 1986 Urban interface, “Wildfire Strikes Home” Domestic use of space technol- Crow’s 1988 Forest Science ogy Seasonal job with FS paper on fire and oaks Persian Gulf War, burning oil 1988 news coverage of Yellow- On first overhead team wells stone fires shows lack of understanding of fire as a Terrorism natural process and sets back Move to Missoula, begin study- the reintroduction of the Global awareness increases ing lightening and fire natural role of fire Recognition of climate change, Major wildland/urban interface Global Change Program trials began to rollback “good Master’s degree in forestry samaritan” protections for fire Clean Air Act managers Work with pine beetle crew in Earth Summit at Rio, growing Satellite maps, fuels, and NFDRS Colorado Front Range recognition of deforestation Integration of fire/vegetation concerns and global intercon- research interest nections Grand Canyon Visibility Trans- Move to DC port Commission Iron curtain falls, define a new Dude fire enemy Mop-up fires at Moose Creek Major reorganization of FS Fire Access to former USSR and Research China opens More complex ecological models Build house incorporating disturbance Global economy develops Development of fire remote Bull stockmarket sensing approaches accelerates

45 APPENDIX C — TIMELINE

Time period Personal Global Fire

1991-Present Teach ecosystem management Clean Air Act, 1990 amend- DOI Wildland Fire Research and disturbance regimes ments Initiative Real-time georeferenced infor- mation on fire spread avail- able, but rarely used Join FS research; shift emphasis South Canyon fatalities from snow to fire Republicans take over House Major interface fires; Spokane, and Senate; contract with Oakland America Record fire seasons Firefighters trapped at Dome Discover whole system and Sheppard dynamics Fire policy recognizes natural National Defense drive for role; leads to more confusion science declines Public distrust of FS ecosystem management goals Kids are gone! Wide recognition of paradox: suppressing fires now means more intense fires later Human population growth curve Integration of human values with steepens fire effects begins Fire effects project leader Focus on global effects of fire/ fuel/climate interactions Landscape context of fire begins to be considered One child out of college, one to Softening of nationalism Basic behavior research and go education

46 APPENDIX C — TIMELINE

Time period Personal Global Fire

1991-Present Become fire management staff Laptop computers; Internet; GIS, Recognition of human factors in officer GPS; information overload accidents and fatalities IMRT Reports WFAS on net FARSITE; 3D fire Start work in Russia 1995 hurricanes Recognition of relationship between oak regeneration failure and fire suppression recognized Competitive grants Grand Canyon Visibility Trans- Increased micromanagement by port Commission Congress (prescribed fire, fire Application of GIS to land-based suppression, and commodity observations of fire history and Moved to Washington Office, FS production) fire behavior Fire Research Reintroducing fire to ecosystem Fire shelter study Tridata study of firefighter culture Brazil and Indonesia on fire Fire Policy Review Plan for second half of career SNEP AVIRIS fuels database NWT Crown Fire Experiment El Nino Regional-scale estimates of change in fire regimes EPA; FACA air quality

47 APPENDIX D — FUTURE SEARCH CONFERENCE PRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLES CONFERENCE STRUCTURE REFERENCES

1. An attempt is made to get the “whole 1. At the Wildland Fire Research Future Bunker, Barbara Benedict and Billie T. system” into the same room. The whole Search Conference, participants were Alban. 1997. Large Group Interventions: system consists of stakeholders from asked to focus on their individual Engaging the Whole System for Rapid inside and outside government fire history and as a fire community. This Change. Jossey-Bass Publishers. San research. Whereever they are from, all history was recorded on a wall chart in Francisco. stakeholders should have a stake in the the meeting room. Weisbord, Marvin and Sandra Janov. 1995. outcome of the Future Search Conference. 2. Fire Research stakeholders were asked Future Search: An Action Guide to 2. Stakeholders are asked to think globally to view the present. A large “mind Finding Common Ground for Organiza- but act locally. map” with all the fire research trends tions and Communitites. Berrett- on it was produced. The stakeholders Koehler, San Francisco. 3. Stakeholders, through participation in were asked to vote on the most impor- the conference, seek “common ground” — tant issues. issues that everyone agrees on. The only issues that move forward are issues 3. The Future Search Conference facilita- “Certainly the most exciting and richly that can be labeled “common ground.” tors asked the stakeholders to construct textured organizational event I have a list of “prouds” and “sorries”—things participated in recently are “Future 4. The Future Search Conference is divided they feel good about and things they Search Conferences . . . ” The richness into smaller working groups. These of interpretations and the multi-layered feel sorry about in relation to the trends groups are “self-managing” in that they complexity of the future scenarios that previously identified. come up with their own methods of are created have convinced me of the time and conflict management. 4. An ideal future scenario for fire re- powers of observation and perception search was developed and presented as that participation brings forth. In these 5. Even though there are experts at the a skit by each mixed stakeholder group. conferences, wave functions collapse conference, no one person or group is into all sorts of strange and powerful seen or used as an expert. 5. From the ideal future scenarios, com- interpretations because the whole mon themes were listed. 6. A Future Search Conference is not a system is in the room, generating traditional problem-solving meeting. 6. Action plans were developed from the information, thinking about itself and The goal of a Future Search Conference list of common themes, but only if the what it wants to be.” is to produce “ideal future scenarios” fire research stakeholders were willing — Margaret Wheatley, Leadership and the that stakeholders are willing to work to individually commit to working on New Science: Learning about toward in the future. them. Organizations from an Orderly Universe

48 “To be a bureaucrat is to experience ourself as a victim. It takes strength and courage to acknowledge that the success and failure of our project, our function, our business, in fact our lives, is our own creation. . . . Having the courage to see the part of the problem that we have created, that is our rake we have stepped on, empowers us to take action to fix it.” — Peter Block, The Empowered Manager: Positive Political Skills at Work

“Don’t get too prepared . . . . A lot of people who want to go into business want to know everything. They never do anything. My idea . . . is get out on the damn field and start kicking the ball . . . . All I had was the inspiration. I didn’t know that much about soccer. I didn’t know there were even two sizes of soccer balls . . . . So the next thing with inspiration is “get out and start doing some- thing.” The doing part of it is picking up the phone, calling a few friends, and saying, “Why don’t you meet me over on Mercer Island and I’ve got an idea here. I really feel it.” So when they come over, I pull out the soccer ball. They already have their crutches, and we start kicking it . . . . Then things start hap- pening.” — Don Bennett, businessman and first amputee to climb Mount Ranier, on the Founding of the Amputee Soccer League; from The Leadership Challenge The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimina- tion in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or familial 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, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Printed on recycled paper