Fire Managementtoday Volume 65 ¥ No. 3 ¥ Summer 2005
PERSPECTIVES ON WILDLAND FIRE
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Fire Management Today is published by the Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. The Secretary of Agriculture has determined that the publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public business required by law of this Department.
Fire Management Today is for sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, at: Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: 202-512-1800 Fax: 202-512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
Fire Management Today is available on the World Wide Web at Mike Johanns, Secretary Melissa Frey U.S. Department of Agriculture General Manager Dale Bosworth, Chief Robert H. “Hutch” Brown, Ph.D. Forest Service Managing Editor Tom Harbour, Director Madelyn Dillon Fire and Aviation Management Editor The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communi- cation of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720- 2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Disclaimer: The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement of any product or service by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Individual authors are responsible for the technical accuracy of the material presented in Fire Management Today. Fire Management today Volume 65 ¥ No. 3 ¥ Summer 2005 On the Cover: CONTENTS America’s Wildlands: A Future in Peril ...... 4 Jerry Williams A New Look at Wildland/Urban Interface Hazard Reduction. . . 8 Jeremy A. Keller Public Perspectives on the “Wildfire Problem” ...... 12 Antony S. Cheng and Dennis R. Becker Building a Landscape-Level Prescribed Fire Program ...... 16 Joseph P. Ferguson Contrast Modeling and Predicting Fire Behavior ...... 19 Firefighters size up a blaze on James K. Barnett the Bridger–Teton National Rapid-Response Fire Behavior Research and Forest, 23 miles (37 km) south of Jackson, WY. Photo: Jed Real-Time Monitoring ...... 23 Conklin, The Spokesman Carol J. Henson Review, Spokane, WA, 2003. The ABCs of Correctly Mapping a Fire ...... 27 Ed Delaney Aboriginal Burning: Deflating the Legend ...... 31 Stephen W. Barrett, Thomas W. Swetnam, and William L. Baker Long-Term Experiment Takes Some of the Mystery Out of Crown Fires ...... 35 The FIRE 21 symbol (shown below and on the cover) stands for the safe and effective use of wild- Martin E. Alexander land fire, now and throughout the 21st century. Its shape represents the fire triangle (oxygen, heat, and fuel). The three outer red triangles represent the basic functions of wildland fire organizations (planning, operations, and aviation management), SHORT FEATURES and the three critical aspects of wildland fire man- agement (prevention, suppression, and prescrip- tion). The black interior represents land affected by fire; the emerging green points symbolize the Ecological Restoration: Two Recent Studies ...... 11 growth, restoration, and sustainability associated with fire-adapted ecosystems. The flame represents Hutch Brown fire itself as an ever-present force in nature. For more information on FIRE 21 and the science, research, and innovative thinking behind it, con- Websites on Fire...... 22 tact Mike Apicello, National Interagency Fire Center, 208-387-5460. Treatment Area Saves Ranger Station ...... 37 Paul Keller Guidelines for Contributors...... 38 Annual Photo Contest ...... 39 Firefighter and public safety is our first priority. Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 3 AMERICA’S WILDLANDS:A FUTURE IN PERIL Jerry Williams crisis is facing our public lands from the risk of Auncharacteristically severe wildfire. From the plains of the Dakotas to the Sierra Nevada, the expectations for fire protection in the Western United States have never been higher. However, when social expectations exceed firefight- ing realities, we have a problem. Despite firefighters’ best efforts— including $1.66 billion in fire sea- son spending in 2002, the most ever—the costs, losses, and dam- ages associated with wildfires have never been higher. Our experiences with these kinds of wildfires force us to look at the predisposing fac- tor: the condition of the land. Stalled in Crisis I believe that we are witnessing a Engine captain directs a hoselay on the Rowland Fire near Contansia, CA. Photo: Sue crisis in fire-adapted ecosystems in McCourt, Plumas National Forest, Quincy, CA. the United States; in fact, I believe that we are “stalled in crisis.” In the United States, our most damaging, The rate of fuel accumulation remains most costly, and most dangerous far higher than the rate of fuel reduction. wildfires usually occur in the short- interval-fire-adapted forests and grasslands. In the West, it’s in We are taking steps to address this management of public lands. But chaparral, dry-site Douglas-fir, crisis; we are using prescribed fire our current inability to find con- western larch, and long-needle pine more now than ever before. We sensus seems to go beyond mere types such as ponderosa pine. These sharpened our focus with the differences of opinion. I believe that ecosystems occupy the lower eleva- National Fire Plan in 2000, and we are stalled in crisis because we tion, warm/dry sites where people now we have new tools for stream- lack context. typically live, work, and play. This is lining the planning process, such as where fuels have built up following the Healthy Forests Restoration Our management of the land rarely decades of excluding low-intensity Act. But the rate of fuel accumula- considers ecological processes. fire. Reducing this threat is rightly tion remains far higher than the Instead, more often than not, our a USDA Forest Service priority. rate of fuel reduction. And our management objectives simply objectives for the land, as a society, derive from our wants from the Jerry Williams, the former Director of Fire are often at cross-purposes with the land. Our objectives for secure and Aviation Management for the USDA ecological dynamics of the land. wildlife habitat, clean air, visual Forest Service’s National Office in Washing- The prospects are for ever larger, quality, secluded homesites, and ton, DC, now resides in Missoula, MT. more severe wildfires. other social values often overlook The article is based on a speech by the author at the There is nearly always disagree- the disturbance regimes that shape annual meeting of the Outdoor Writers Association of America on June 22, 2004, in Spokane, WA. ment, distrust, and debate in the the land. Fire Management Today 4 Prescribed burn in the Black Hills of South Dakota, where ponderosa pine forests were historically shaped by fire. Photo: Randall Benson, South Dakota School of Mines, Rapid City, SD, 2003. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the fire-prone forests of the Our objectives for secure wildlife habitat, American West. We find ourselves clean air, secluded homesites, and other adopting resource objectives with- social values often overlook the disturbance out regard for the ecological risks involved and bargaining to sustain regimes that shape the land. those objectives by relying on the strength of our fire protection forces. In the past few years, these 3,600 homes, and spread across we can always improve strategies fire protection forces have found more than 750,000 acres. and tactics and that newer, more themselves running up against modern equipment is often a plus. their limits of effectiveness. After the fact, the fires brought Fundamentally, however, until we intense scrutiny. To oversimplify focus on the causal factors—the Two Points of View somewhat, two opposing points of fuels—that predispose large areas view emerged. One side found fault to severe wildfires, larger invest- Let me use southern California to with the fire services and argued ments in fire suppression capacity illustrate this situation. However, that the fires became so large, will realize only marginal benefits let me also make clear that the destructive, and costly due to poor and only hold temporarily. Until we losses I’ll describe are not unique strategies, poor tactics, and a lack reduce flammability potential, sup- to California; the same trends are of cooperation, coordination, or pression costs, resource losses, and observable throughout the Western communication. From this point of environmental damages promise to United States. In October 2003, view, the answer is more aggressive continue climbing as the condition within a 5-day period, southern attack, larger air tankers, bigger of fire-adapted forests continues to California experienced its worst helicopters, and more engines. deteriorate. wildfires on record. The fires killed The other side acknowledged that 24 people, destroyed more than Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 5 and desiccated fuels results in wild- fires that overwhelm all early con- trol efforts, such as: • Bel Air (1961), • Laguna (1970), • Panorama (1980), • Oakland Hills/Tunnel (1991), • Malibu/Topanga (1993), and, • Cedar (2003). When wildfires like these occur, we begin to see limits to our suppres- sion capacity. The California fire services boast an extraordinarily high initial-attack suppression success rate, nearly 99 percent. However, the 1 percent of wildfires that escape control account for a disproportionately high percentage of the total costs and losses. Nationally, only 1 percent of all One of some 3,400 southern California homes destroyed by wind-driven fires in October wildfires account for about 85 per- 2003. Photo: Rick Barton, Gunnison, CO, 2003. cent of the total suppression-relat- ed expenditures and nearly 95 per- Our strategic imperative should be directed cent of the total acres burned. The interagency fire services in toward the restoration, maintenance, and California are arguably the best we sustainability of fire-adapted ecosystems. have and they are nearly always successful, but when the rare wild- fire escapes under adverse weather Suppression Limits highly prepared to fight fire. This is and other conditions, our suppres- sion capabilities are overwhelmed There is indeed an important place a place that burns and can burn —usually with catastrophic results. for wildfire suppression—I’ve been fiercely. In answer, the fire services As large and as good as the fire in this business my whole career. at local, State, and Federal levels services are in California, they are But it should be a tactical necessity have put in place a fire suppression not always large enough. where values at risk are high, not a force that is remarkable, in terms strategic imperative where contin- of capability and capacity. On an We may have pushed reliance on ued fire exclusion will only exacer- interagency basis, the combined fire suppression about as far as we bate wildfire potential over time. wildfire protection budget in can push it when we see wildfires Instead, the strategic imperative California exceeds $2.9 billion per setting size records, as they have in should be directed toward the year. At Federal, State, and county five States since 2002 (Arizona, restoration, maintenance, and sus- levels, California fields more fire- California, Colorado, New Mexico, tainability of fire-adapted ecosys- fighters, more engines, and more and Oregon). At these scales and tems. assets than any place else in the United States—and perhaps the intensities, the wildfire problem in the United States can no longer be Let me explain why I subscribe to world. viewed as a fire operations issue, this latter point of view. Yet even with this suppression force per se. The wildfire problem in America today is a resource man- The 2003 fire siege in southern in place, severe wildfires develop. agement and land use issue. Today’s California was remarkable in a About once per decade, the conflu- land use demands fail to take the State that, more than any other, is ence of drought, Santa Ana winds, Fire Management Today 6 Firefighters should not have to be heroes because beginning to understand the we cannot agree on how to better manage the processes that shape those charac- teristics. However, even though our land, consistent with the dynamics of fire-prone fire policies have been modified to ecosystems. better align with the ecologies of fire-prone forests, our land and resource policies are at odds. They dynamics of fire-adapted ecosys- to sustain, especially in fire-prone tend to reflect social expectations tems into account. ecosystems. When we protect that are rarely consistent with the endangered species, watersheds, way fire-prone ecosystems work. Building Fire Risks recreation, visual quality, and other Despite the fact that our western values by keeping out fire, Nature Paradigm Shift forests are among the most volatile answers by burning it all. There is Needed fire regimes on earth, we are not not a fire department big enough Until we change this paradigm, managing them with an eye toward anywhere that can deny her. wildfire protection expectations will wildfire risk mitigation. We’re often force the fire services into an managing them for everything but We are, I believe, at a critical junc- untenable and dangerous position. wildfire risk. In fact, we are often ture in terms of wildland fire man- Firefighters should not have to be inadvertently building fire risks by agement in the United States. Two heroes because we as a society can- adopting resource strategies that centuries ago, Lewis and Clark not agree on how to better manage increase biomass, close canopies, described many of the physical the land, consistent with the eco- and connect fuel layers. Ironically, characteristics of our western logical processes that shape and our objectives for the resource forests; today, after centuries of sustain it. ■ imperil the very values we’re trying research and experience, we are Contributors Wanted We need your fire-related articles and photographs for Fire Management Today! Feature articles should be up to about 2,000 words in length. We also need short items of up to 200 words. Subjects of articles published in Fire Management Today include: Aviation Firefighting experiences Communication Incident management Cooperation Information management (including systems) Ecosystem management Personnel Equipment/Technology Planning (including budgeting) Fire behavior Preparedness Fire ecology Prevention/Education Fire effects Safety Fire history Suppression Fire science Training Fire use (including prescribed fire) Weather Fuels management Wildland–urban interface To help prepare your submission, see “Guidelines for Contributors” in this issue. Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 7 A NEW LOOK AT WILDLAND/URBAN INTERFACE HAZARD REDUCTION Jeremy A. Keller ederal land management agencies have long tried to A common set of definitions is needed for terms F reduce fire hazards in the relating to hazard and risk reduction in the wildland/urban interface (WUI) as wildland/urban interface. part of their mission. Their hazard reduction projects are now oriented toward ecosystem management, giving exceptional depth to their disaster. For a hazard to become a number of wildfires by reducing the fuels reduction programs. Still, we disaster, it must pose a risk to risk associated with human igni- must beware of wearing blinders something of human value. Risk is tions, whereas mitigation refers to when it comes to our role in pro- the probability that an event will hazardous fuels reduction. tecting communities. Reducing fire occur that will threaten something hazards in the WUI is not just a of value, thus elevating a hazard This terminology is often confusing land management activity. into a disaster. when using the Emergency Man- agement Cycle for WUI hazard This article proposes a new way of For those involved in wildland fire management (see the sidebar). In looking at reducing fire hazards in prevention, the concepts of hazard the Emergency Management Cycle, the WUI in the context of ongoing and risk are well known (NWCG the mitigation phase includes more efforts to protect communities 1997; Sampson and others 2000). A than what we traditionally think from all hazards. I propose a com- potential disaster is an undesired of as mitigation (hazardous fuels mon set of definitions for terms wildland fire threatening to harm reduction). It also includes risk relating to community hazard and something of value. The hazard is reduction activities, which are risk reduction and a Four-E Model an accumulation of fuels necessary traditionally considered something for WUI mitigation interventions, for a fire to occur. The values else (fire prevention). based on the familiar Three-E potentially threatened by the haz- Model of prevention interventions. ard could range from homes and When addressing a fire hazard in human life, to a stand of commer- the WUI, prevention and mitigation Hazard Versus Risk cial timber, to a sensitive watershed each play a role. Both risk and haz- or critical habitat. Risk, for the ard must be addressed, because A hazard must exist before a disas- wildland fire prevention communi- risk-reducing efforts can decrease ter, emergency, or incident occurs. ty, is associated with ignition but not eliminate the risk of a WUI The U.S. Department of Homeland sources. Because lightning and fire incident. Hazard reduction Security Federal Emergency other natural ignition sources are activities must be carried out in Management Agency (FEMA) neither controllable nor reducible, tandem with risk reduction activi- defines hazard as a source of dan- risk reduction, in this context, ties. ger and risk as a possibility of loss refers exclusively to human igni- or injury (FEMA 2001). tion. Vulnerability and Risk A hazard is a potential threat to Although the overall assessment people, goods, or the environment Clarifying Terms process is referred to as a hazard (Smith 2001). The existence of a The terms “prevention” and “miti- assessment, vulnerability and risk hazard is not enough to cause a gation” are often used interchange- are also assessed. A hazard assess- ably within the wildland fire com- ment process can be conducted at munity. Although related, these three levels of increasing sophisti- Jeremy Keller is the wildland/urban inter- terms are quite different. Fire pre- cation and expense (Deyle and oth- face coordinator for the USDI Fish and vention refers to diminishing the ers 1998): Wildlife Service in Atlanta, GA. Fire Management Today 8 poses, the vulnerability assessment The Emergency Management Cycle is the end product. The availability of funds and personnel skilled at statistical analysis are what propel hazard assessments to the vulnera- bility assessment level. Adding data gathered from structural fire safety assessments and defensible space surveys to the GIS product is the beginning of the vulnerability assessment for WUI hazard areas. Ecosystem Management The traditional Three-E Model focusing on education, engineering, and enforcement for fire prevention applies to both hazard reduction and risk reduction because the two are complementary. Both are more The Emergency Management Cycle (modeled above) deserves more effective as part of a coordinated attention in the fire management community (FEMA 2003; effort. Godschalk 1991). The emergency management community sees the management of all types of disasters and emergencies in terms of a To reduce the potential for disaster continuous cycle of four phases: mitigation, preparedness, response, from the accumulation of wildland and recovery. The model also applies to the process of managing fuels, the wildland ecosystem must wildfire incidents in the wildland/urban interface. Using the model in be effectively managed. Although the fire community would improve our ability to collaborate with an aggressive fuels reduction cam- our colleagues in the Federal, State, and local emergency manage- paign can produce impressive ini- ment agencies. tial results, plants continue to grow and the fuels will eventually return. To cost-effectively manage fuel 1. Hazard identification: Defining This hazard assessment process buildup, proven land management the magnitudes (intensities) and addresses all types of community techniques are needed that are associated probabilities (likeli- hazards. Although an all-hazards designed to maintain the ecosystem hoods) of natural hazards poten- approach should be conducted dur- within an acceptable range of fuel tially posing threats to human ing mitigation planning, it must conditions. interests in specific geographic also be applied to each individual areas. hazard. 2. Vulnerability assessment: When addressing a fire Characterizing exposed popula- Hazard identification is the level of hazard in the WUI, tions and property (values at hazard assessment most familiar to prevention and risk) and the extent of injury and the wildland fire community (see mitigation must each damage that might result from a the sidebar on page 10). At its most play a role. natural hazard event of given basic, it is simply a map of vegeta- intensity in a given area. tive cover emphasizing potential 3. Risk analysis: Estimating the hazardous cover types. Increased Therefore, a fourth “E”— probability of various levels of availability of geographic informa- “Ecosystem”—is needed for hazard injury and damage to ensure a tion system (GIS) technology has reduction (table 1) interventions in complete description of the risk made the process relatively simple the WUI. The Four-E Model for WUI from the full range of possible to initiate and maintain. hazard reduction includes the spe- hazard events in the area. For local emergency planning pur- cial expertise required during the Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 9 A Hazard Assessment in Progress To reduce the potential for disaster from the An example of a wildland/urban interface hazard assessment currently accumulation of wildland underway is the Southern Wildfire Risk Assessment (SWRA) project, fuels, the wildland led by the Southern Group of State Foresters and supported by State ecosystem must be and Federal wildland fire agencies. In spite of its title, the SWRA is actually a hazard identification assessment, with elements of a vulner- effectively managed. ability assessment. Based on satellite imagery, the SWRA project will provide a coarse description of fuel loading across 13 Southern States. Additional information is available at a Assessing risk and reducing disaster. • Wildland/urban interface code • Prescribed burning London, UK: Routledge. ■ • Local building material codes • Conversion of ecosystem types • Local brush clearance • Thinning, grazing, biomass ordinances harvest a. International Fire Code Institute 2000. Fire Management Today 10 ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION: TWO RECENT STUDIES Hutch Brown n Federal land management, eco- symptoms and causes of ecological articles by an impressive array of logical restoration has emerged in degradation; and project design, scholars on a wide range of subjects Irecent years as an alternative to implementation, and outcomes. By related to the history, sociology, poli- the intensive management for com- offering the information under a tics, and ecology of southwestern mercial resource extraction widely single cover, they hope to inspire ponderosa pine. Topics range from practiced following World War II restoration projects elsewhere and the (minimal) ecological impact of and the passive management— to help land managers plan and American Indians, to the history of “letting Nature heal herself”— conduct them. natural resource governance in rela- espoused by some environmental tion to science and politics, to eco- groups. Growing interest in ecolog- Ecological Restoration of logical processes and functions such ical restoration is reflected in Southwestern Ponderosa Pine as fuels and fire behavior, to smoke recent research, including two Forests, edited by Peter Friederici and wildland/urban interface issues, book-length studies. (Washington, Covelo, London: to project monitoring and adaptive Island Press, 2003), takes an in- management. Lists of threatened, Mimicking Nature’s Fire, by Stephen depth look at southwestern pon- endangered, and sensitive species F. Arno and Carl E. Fiedler (Wash- derosa pine, one of the most exten- supplement an extensive section on ington, Covelo, London: Island Press, sive and best known nonlethal fire restoring and protecting biological 2005), explores “restoration forestry” regimes in the Nation. Sponsored by diversity. Though useful to anyone in the Interior West. The authors the Ecological Restoration Institute interested in ecological restoration, define restoration forestry as a at Northern Arizona University in the book is especially valuable for process of recreating “a range of Flagstaff, AZ, the work comprises land managers in the Southwest. ■ conditions representative of histori- cal ecosystems” in “tree communi- ties that were in the past shaped by distinctive patterns of fire.” By treating vegetation, restoration forestry facilitates ecological restoration—restoring fire-adapted ecosystems that have been degrad- ed, damaged, or destroyed. The book covers restoration projects in various forest types of the Interior West, including pinyon–juniper, ponderosa pine–fir, giant sequoia- mixed conifer, western larch–fir, lodgepole pine, whitebark pine, and aspen–conifer. The projects described are on both private and public lands, including wilderness areas. For each project, the authors delin- eate historical site conditions; Prescribed fire roars through a dead and dying storm-damaged forest in Quetico Provincial Park, Ontario, Canada. The burn followed a regional blowdown in July 1999 Hutch Brown is a writer/editor for the that also hit the adjacent Boundary Waters Canoe Area across the border in Minnesota. USDA Forest Service and the managing An example of restoration forestry in the stand replacement fire regime, the burn was editor of Fire Management Today, designed to promote natural forest regeneration while reducing the fire hazard for park Washington Office, Washington, DC. users. Photo: Ministry of Natural Resources, Fire Management Centre, Dryden, ON, 2000. Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 11 PUBLIC PERSPECTIVES ON THE “WILDFIRE PROBLEM” Antony S. Cheng and Dennis R. Becker ust as wildland fire managers must have a working knowl- Wildland fire managers must have a basic Jedge of fire behavior, they understanding of the social dimensions of wildland must also understand the social fire to effectively work with the public. dimensions of wildland fire in order to effectively engage the public. Social scientists are therefore gath- Public attitudes toward wildland • Sense of belonging. People are ering information about public atti- fire are also influenced by the repu- part of a complex web of social tudes toward wildland fire and wild- tation of those who propose a given relationships, networks, and fire mitigation. How do people see course of action. The public fre- cooperative efforts that offer a the “wildfire problem”? What social quently judges individuals based on sense of identity, security, and values are threatened? What role do their organizational affiliations, well-being. When wildfire affects community dynamics play? How professional reputations, and social a community, whether urban or can citizens be engaged in mitigat- standing—factors that wildland fire rural, it can dramatically trans- ing the threat? And what is the managers should consider when form these social ties. Responses institutional context of wildland working with citizens and commu- might be positive (“the fire fire management? nities to build a successful wildland brought neighbors together”), fire management program. negative (“this community will A Question of never be the same”), or neutral Perception Social Values at Stake (“people are just going on with The way individuals perceive wild- The fundamental social value their lives as if nothing hap- land fire influences their proposals threatened by wildfire is human pened”). for action. Some people see wildfire life. After human life, several values • Property. People spend a lot of as a problem because a fire-prone rate about equally in surveys and effort and money to have proper- forest has too many trees, whereas interviews: ty in the woods—often in forest others see the problem as too many • Sense of place. Just as “home” is ecosystems prone to wildland people living in or near the forest. more than a physical structure fire. Losing property to a wildfire Those who see too many trees as with rooms, “place” is more than can be a devastating financial the problem will promote forest a piece of land. People often and emotional loss. On a com- thinning, whereas those who believe associate landscapes with rich, munity level, when property is that too many people and houses multilayered experiences, memo- destroyed, property taxes are the problem will focus on land ries, symbols, and meanings. decline—taxes that are needed to use and access restrictions. Each Wildland fire can transform a fund schools, roads, and other course of action includes additional landscape to the point where it is public services. questions about the size and scope not the same place, with social • Public environmental resources. of the prescriptions or regulations results that range from anger to In ecosystems that are function- to follow. deep emotional trauma. Even ing within their historical fire wildfire mitigation strategies can regimes, the fires that can affect people’s sense of place. adversely affect water, wildlife, Aggressive thinning around peo- and recreation resources in the Tony Cheng is an assistant professor in ple’s houses can undermine the short term are necessary to sus- the Department of Forest, Rangeland, and tain the same values in the Watershed Stewardship at Colorado State very reason that many people University, Fort Collins, CO; and Dennis choose to live in a particular longer term. It would be a mis- Becker is a research forester for the USDA place — a sense of seclusion take to interpret public support Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research for minimizing wildland fire as Station, on detail to Flagstaff, AZ. from living in the woods. Fire Management Today 12 support for any and all means of risk reduction. The public might lack a clear, in-depth under- standing of what mitigation efforts involve. The same people who approve the idea of doing something to reduce the fire threat might oppose the neces- sary scale of logging or pre- scribed burning. Prioritizing these values is difficult, if not impossible. The social values threatened by wildfire are intercon- nected, giving value to each other. Although wildfire mitigation pro- grams attempt to encompass sever- al values, there are often tradeoffs. Engaging citizens and communities in active, ongoing dialogue is essential when it comes to trade- offs, because managers and the public then know each other’s posi- tion and can work towards sustain- The Encebado Fire approaches Taos Pueblo in New Mexico as tribal members watch. Particularly where communities are threatened by wildland fire, the social dimensions of able improvements and outcomes. fire management are critical. Photo: Ignacio Peralta, Carson National Forest, Taos, NM, 2003. Understanding Communities riences with fire and land man- for adopting and diffusing solu- Wildfire mitigation is most success- agement stretch back countless tions. Wildfire mitigation is ful at the community level because generations in American Indian more successful in communities mitigation must be sustained communities and in Hispanic with innovative, risk-taking lead- across ownership boundaries. If communities in the Southwestern ers who are willing to try some- wildland fire management is about United States. Listening to com- thing new, adapt it to their par- addressing a wildfire before, during, munity histories and then hon- ticular circumstances, and and after the event, then managers oring and respecting longstand- spread the message to others. must understand several things ing ways of knowing are essential Utilizing these leaders and their about communities: to building effective partnerships networks is important for wild- with any community. land fire managers. For commu- • Communities are dynamic. A • Communities have different nities without them, more inten- community is a long-running capacities for self-governance sive and innovative outreach, story, and a fire is just one event and action. Some communities training, and demonstration in that story. Understanding the have enough skilled people, projects might be necessary. story will help wildland fire man- organizations, finances, and • Communities have unique social agers understand how communi- physical infrastructure to organ- and political dynamics. ties function, how they respond ize around, prepare for, and Communities have formal lead- to fire events, and what mitiga- respond to a wildfire. Others do ers—those elected to serve in tion measures might best suc- not. Communities vary in the public office—as well as informal ceed. type and amount of assistance leaders, such as ministers, news- • Communities are diverse. It is needed to cope with fire. One paper editors, long-time resi- important to understand the cul- size does not fit all. dents, prominent business peo- tural connections people have • Communities have various ple, educators, and public-inter- with the land. For example, expe- mechanisms for innovation and est activists. Some informal lead- Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 13 Engaging citizens and communities in active, wise unattainable. Collaborative ongoing dialogue is essential to successful wildfire learning is active and experien- tial, emphasizing hands-on mitigation. analysis, fieldwork, and face-to- face communication to minimize misunderstanding, establish ers have more influence on a cation. accountability, and build trust. community’s politics than the • People perceive wildfire risk in a In a collaborative process, man- formal elected leaders. Moreover, broader context. People tend to agers are facilitators, technical rumors, perceptions, and infor- worry more about their kids get- advisors, and information mation circulate through various ting into a car accident or con- providers rather than authority networks—mass media, organi- tracting an illness than about figures. zational meetings and newslet- wildfire. When it comes to allo- ters, Internet chat groups, cof- cating personal investments of Engaging citizens and communities feeshop discussions, and neigh- time, energy, and money, most requires more than mere public bor-to-neighbor conversations. people have many priorities information campaigns. To sustain Finally, although several organi- ahead of wildfire. wildfire mitigation efforts, man- zations can operate within a • Public information campaigns agers must motivate people to take community, some have stronger benefit from interpersonal com- long-term actions. Raising aware- ties and are more respected than munication. Public information ness and facilitating mutual learn- others. campaigns through mass media, ing are necessary for sustaining mailings, or other approaches motivation and action. Wildland fire managers must adapt are an important first step in their messages and practices to the raising public awareness. community; they should not expect However, the messenger is as Institutional Issues the community to adapt to them. It important as the message, if not Many institutional issues affect how is not the community that gets more so. Public persuasion cam- wildland fire managers engage the involved in wildland fire manage- paigns are only effective if people public. Being aware of the issues ment, but rather the wildland fire trust the source. To build trust, helps managers identify potential manager who gets involved with managers must initiate one-on- barriers and focus on progress. the community. one communication and public Institutional issues include: involvement programs. Engaging Citizens • People learn from their peers. • Organizational culture. Wildland fire management programs often Fire management projects can fal- Research shows that communi- have a hierarchical organization- ter if there is public opposition. ties adopt and diffuse technologi- al structure composed of techni- How do wildland fire managers sus- cal information better through a cal experts. Although these pro- tain public understanding, support, neighbor-to-neighbor or peer-to- grams effectively address the and participation? Several points peer training approach. Cooper- technical side of fire manage- are key: ative extension has successfully used this approach for years by ment, they are not always user- friendly from the public’s per- • People’s attitudes do not always connecting people with people spective. It is important for tech- predict their behavior. People like them, not with outside nically trained professionals in favorably disposed to wildfire experts. Peer relationships are these programs to encourage mitigation might not initiate also powerful motivators—when public involvement and account- mitigation activities, perhaps for people see others doing certain ability, regardless of perceived lack of technical knowledge or things, it builds confidence. delays. financial means. Public educa- • Collaborative learning helps sus- • Organizational capacity. tion and financial assistance tain productive relationships. In Attention to community assis- might help, but research shows a collaborative process, man- tance and collaborative planning that most people will not partici- agers and citizens learn from in wildland fire management is a pate in mitigation efforts, even each other, working together to recent phenomenon. Although with sufficient funding and edu- reach solutions that are other- land management agencies such Fire Management Today 14 It is not the community that gets involved in Social Dimensions wildland fire management; it is the wildland fire Are Critical manager who gets involved in the community. The growing publicity surrounding wildfire mitigation has better engaged citizens and communities as the USDA Forest Service have more work is needed (Fairbanks in planning and implementing fuels a long history of seeking public and others 2002). treatments. Budgets, interagency input, the responsibility to do so • Laws, policies, and administra- coordination, and public awareness is assigned to only a few—typi- tive rules. Myriad mandates and have all increased. However, the cally, public affairs officers, dis- procedures can slow down complexity and controversy associ- trict rangers, and interdiscipli- implementation of wildfire miti- ated with wildfire mitigation still nary planning teams. Many tech- gation strategies on Federal put many wildland fire managers in nical staffs in public resource lands. Studies by the General challenging social situations. agencies lack the training and Accounting Office and research- experience necessary to address ers at Northern Arizona Univ- It is just as crucial for wildland fire public concerns. ersity suggest that administra- managers to understand the social • Agency specialization. Federal, tive appeals and litigation might dimensions of wildland fire as to State, and local agencies vary in not have as large an overall understand fire regimes and fire their roles and responsibilities in effect on fuels treatments as behavior. How a wildland fire man- wildfire mitigation. During a sometimes claimed (GAO 2003; ager addresses the social side of wildland fire, citizens eager for Cortner and others 2003), but wildland fire will determine the information are often frustrated appeals and litigation have in sustainability of future wildfire mit- because they do not know who to some cases resulted in smaller igation programs. go to for updates. When a new projects than planned, with group of specialists arrive for adverse consequences (see, for References postfire recovery, the level of example, Keller 2004). The ongo- Cortner, H.J.; Teich, G.M.R.; Vaughn, J. frustration and confusion can ing debates about multiple man- 2003. Analyzing USDA Forest Service appeals: Phase 1, the database. Website increase. Local fire officials dates contribute to the politiciza- Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 15 BUILDING A LANDSCAPE-LEVEL PRESCRIBED FIRE PROGRAM Joseph P. Ferguson s we enter year 4 of the National Fire Plan, treat- Regardless of geographic location or agency Ament of hazardous fuels affiliation, the Nation’s largest, most successful remains a top priority for natural fire use programs have found five keys to resource management agencies. Although mechanical fuels treat- success. ments have made many communi- ties safer, we will never be able to afford enough mechanical treat- skills and knowledge. The result is Prescribed fire proposals often are ments to make a significant differ- often a dramatic increase in execu- not implemented because key indi- ence nationally. Prescribed fire can tion costs and a prevalence of no-go viduals focus only on short-term be a good alternative, provided we decisions. impacts rather than long-term ben- change our approach and focus on efits. The fate of many endangered landscape-level programs rather More than in any other program species depends on fire to maintain than developing individual projects. area, prescribed fire success and improve habitat. Any burn depends on individuals with the might harm a given individual, but Five Keys to Success vision, drive, and desire to conduct that is not necessarily a valid rea- the program. No matter where they son for no or limited action if, in Regardless of geographic location are located or what local challenges the long term, the entire species or agency affiliation, the Nation’s they face, prescribed fire champions suffers. largest, most successful fire use have broken the suppression atti- programs have found five keys to tude. Notable examples include the To develop a broad vision, trainers success. late Paul Gleason of the USDA and mentors with big-picture Forest Service and U.S. Department understanding are needed. Breaking the Suppression Attitude. of the Interior National Park Recommendations should be based Many topnotch fire management Service and the recently retired Jim on long-term prescribed fire effects, officers have difficulty transitioning Paxon of the Forest Service. and regulators should be apprised from a suppression mentality to a of the long-term benefits of pre- prescribed fire approach. For Better training programs will scribed fire. Although short-term instance, it is common to see hold- improve understanding of fire effects might sometimes take ing forces arrayed along every con- behavior. Additionally, developing, precedence, the broader perspective trol line, an excess of contingency using, and expanding existing train- must be evaluated. resources, and lack of basic fire ing programs will help instill confi- behavior knowledge. dence in prescribed fire planners Expanding the Burning Window. and practitioners and produce Across the country, fuel buildups Most fire managers evaluate fuel intelligent managers to place in key often keep managers from using conditions, calculate weather, and roles and positions. underburns within the historical estimate what will occur when a range of low-intensity fires. prescribed fire is ignited. But too Seeing the Big Picture. When build- Nevertheless, using such burns often these same managers default ing a landscape-level program, key should be a goal when building a to the suppression mode of think- managers and specialists with big- landscape-level program. Mother ing rather than relying on their picture perspectives should be used. Nature rarely burns large acreages Considering the whole ecosystem is with a cool backing fire alone; after Joe Ferguson is the assistant director of critical when making decisions, fuels are reduced, neither should a Fire and Aviation Management for the USDA Forest Service, Southern Region, measuring success, and evaluating prescribed burn. A true landscape- Atlanta, GA. impacts on plants and animals. level program will mimic the his- Fire Management Today 16 and starting the preburn processes even when it’s not certain that a burn will actually take place. Other project work should be planned with flexibility in mind so it won’t interfere with an opportunity to proceed with a burn. Including the Entire Workforce. Local fire organizations might burn a lot of acres, but they will never build a landscape-level fire use pro- gram without involving the entire workforce. Fire managers should recruit and maintain employees who are capable of passing the physical fitness standards. Bio- Figure 1—Prescribed fire ignition around the base of a red-cockaded woodpecker cavity logists, archeologists, recreation tree on the Apalachicola Ranger District, Florida National Forests. Photo: Susan technicians, timber markers, plan- Fitzgerald, Florida National Forests, Apalachicola Ranger District, Bristol, FL, 2004. ners, and line officers should all be incorporated into the program. All employees working on burns must To develop a broad vision, trainers and mentors sustain current prescribed fire qualifications, and fire season with big-picture understanding are needed. assignments should be planned to keep the prescribed fire program torical or natural variability with be replicated, it is important to con- going, even when some employees little effort. duct some burns during the season are away. when wildland fires naturally occur Managers of fire-adapted ecosys- in order to maintain important The four largest prescribed fire pro- tems will likely never have enough ecosystem components and to burn grams in the country are conducted perfect burning days to accomplish sufficient numbers of acres. on the Apalachicola National Forest, their goals. If 30 days are needed, it Desoto National Forest, Fort is likely that only 10 days will be Making Every Day a Burn Day. Stewart Army Base, and Eglin Air ideal. But managers shouldn’t sim- Developing an atmosphere in which Force Base. Collectively, these four ply discontinue burning. Instead, all employees support the burn pro- units typically burn 500,000 acres they should continue burning on gram and see every day as a poten- (170,000 ha) per year. Their fire another 10 days—5 that are a little tial burn day is important for fire management officers and line offi- too cool and 5 that are a little too use success. Other projects might cers understand the importance of hot. Then 10 more days of burning be just as important, but few have breaking the suppression attitude, are needed—5 with very cool burns the narrow window of opportunity seeing the big picture, expanding and 5 with very hot ones. The typical of a fire use project. In units the burning window, making every cumulative result is a program that with a successful landscape-level day a burn day, and including the comes closer to the natural range burn program, employees come to entire workforce. They make it hap- of variability than a program where work expecting to burn every day. pen and so can you. the decision to burn is delayed until a perfect day arrives. Line officers should clearly explain Taking the Next Step that prescribed fire is the top prior- The most important thing is to get Most fire use programs have pre- ity and should set an example by started. You can start moving your scribed fire seasons that rarely expecting to burn on every feasible program forward in a number of match the natural fire seasons. day. That means wearing Nomex to ways. Ten steps in particular are Although nature’s variability cannot the office even on marginal days worth considering: Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 17 In units with a successful landscape- level burn program, employees come to work expecting to burn every day. 1. Discuss the importance of land- scape-level programs with line officers. 2. Solicit the support of employees at all organizational levels. 3. Contact the planners and con- tribute to your unit’s forest Figure 2—Results of a prescribed fire on the Apalachicola Ranger District, Florida plan, refuge management plan, National Forests, include a dense wiregrass understory. Some areas on the district are comprehensive plan, or other approaching the appearance that early Spanish explorers found in Florida. Photo: Susan agency guiding document. Fitzgerald, Florida National Forests, Apalachicola Ranger District, Bristol, FL, 2004. 4. Discuss the possibility of enlarg- ing the prescribed fire program 8. Arrange for a prescribed fire For more information on building at the next leadership team workshop in your area. a prescribed fire program, contact meeting. 9. Attend the prescribed fire cours- Joe Ferguson, National Forests in 5. Contact a biologist, maybe in a es at the National Advanced Fire Florida, 325 John Knox Rd., Suite social setting, to exchange views and Resource Institute in F-100, Tallahassee, FL 32303, and foster better understanding. Tucson, AZ. 850-523-8562 (voice), jferguson@ 6. Send employees to the Pre- 10.Partner with your local State fs.fed (e-mail). ■ scribed Fire Training Center in forestry officials, volunteer fire Tallahassee, FL, or Fire Use departments, or anyone who Training Academy in Albuquerque, might be interested in pre- NM, and ask them to share their scribed fire. experience with others. 7. Contact someone you met on a wildfire and arrange to exchange personnel to help each other burn. Fire Management Today 18 CONTRAST MODELING AND PREDICTING FIRE BEHAVIOR James K. Barnett ire behavior is so complex that it often requires the Contrast modeling is a tool that ordinary F expertise of fire behavior ana- firefighters can use to identify the subtle clues lysts and fire weather meteorolo- that help predict fire behavior. gists to fully understand. Experts know that successful fire modeling is based on determining the ignored, the likelihood of tragedy provide information until after degrees of variation from homoge- increases. transition from one command neous conditions—the more con- structure to another, when the fire sistent the conditions, the more As a tool, a fire behavior model is is most dangerous and unpre- accurate the model. Conversely, similar to a charged fire hose aimed dictable. Due to the limited avail- when there is a great variation in at the flames. Both the model and ability of fire behavior analysts and conditions on a fire, it becomes the hose need constant oversight the complexity of their models, more difficult for a model to make and adjustment to ensure success. incident commanders and firefight- an accurate prediction. Fire behavior analysts use their ers often rely on their own elemen- extensive training, experience, and tary to intermediate training for Contrast modeling provides intelli- skill to supervise and modify fire basic predictive tools. gence using a single analytical behavior models. Both they and fire premise—the observation of con- weather meteorologists measure Primary Elements of trast in nine key factors associated countless factors to successfully the Fire Environment with the fire environment. The predict when, where, and how a fire There is an unlimited number of model is another tool for firefight- will burn. ers to use in identifying the subtle potential fire environments, each clues that help predict fire behavior. with an infinite number of influ- When the factors measured on a encing factors that could potential- Through contrast modeling, fire- fire are constant or homogeneous, fighters can calculate the appropri- ly produce dangerous firefighting a fire behavior model can be highly situations. Contrast modeling helps ate level of caution to use in accurate. During the 1996 Buffalo approaching a fire. firefighters focus on the primary Creek Fire in the municipal water- elements of the fire environment shed for Denver, CO, afternoon Modeling: A Fire and the most important factors that winds blew the fire 12 miles (19 influence fire behavior. Suppression Tool km) in one direction, but the fire’s There are many checklists, warn- width rarely approached a mile (1.6 The first step is to identify the ings, models, and other tools for km). In this case, the wind was the three primary elements of the fire wildland fire suppression. Tools controlling, homogeneous factor environment, together with their vary from the Ten Standard Fire that allowed firefighters to predict key subfactors. The primary ele- Orders to elaborate fire modeling the fire’s likely path. This is an ments are: techniques. In experienced hands, example of modeling in its most all the tools can provide indicators elementary form. 1. Atmosphere: interlacing air that assist in analyzing and devel- masses and contrasting weather, oping suppression plans. When Unfortunately, fire behavior model- which are most apparent at the properly used, fire suppression ing and fire weather forecasting are air mass boundaries. tools are extremely effective; when readily available only on larger, 2. Fuels: anything of tangible sub- more complex fires. Fire behavior stance capable of burning. Jim Barnett is the branch chief of fire analysts and fire weather forecast- 3. Landforms: conduits for heating, training for the USDA Forest Service, ers have limited opportunities to Washington, DC. funneling, and mixing air masses. Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 19 Contrast modeling is based on observing key Each primary element has three subfactors of the primary elements influencing fire key subfactors: behavior. • Atmosphere: windspeed, wind direction, and cloud cover. Two commonly measured factors the firefighter’s awareness of vari- • Fuels: size, amount, and type. that do not often directly affect fire ables that could contribute to • Landforms: slope, aspect, and behavior are heat and humidity. changing fire behavior. It is based type. Although heat and humidity can on observing key subfactors of the indicate where fuels will burn more primary elements influencing fire Eliminating Subfactors rapidly, they are relatively constant behavior. Key subfactors must be The second step in contrast fire and rarely change rapidly enough relatively dynamic, contributing to modeling is to lower the number of to become a primary influencing subtle change for a short distance influencing subfactors by evaluat- element (fig. 1). or period of time; and observable ing their potential impact on fire without using measuring equip- behavior. The process begins by Identifying the ment. They must also show obvious observing the fuels and landforms Subfactors contrast, with variable boundaries, within a 1,000-foot (300-m) radius from the burned or burning The contrast model is designed to colors, shapes, or sizes. perimeter. Of course, the nine sub- provide subtle clues that increase factors might not always be visible from a single location—some could be miles away. Maps, local knowl- More on Heat edge, and information from aerial observers can help identify unob- The sun’s heat is the primary influence on the Earth’s weather as it servable influences as well as deter- pushes and pulls air through the atmosphere. For example: mine distances from canyons or large bodies of water, which can • Frontal boundaries, where warm and cool air masses collide, often generate effects from miles away. cause moderate to extremely destructive winds. • Variable heating and cooling generate onshore, offshore, upcanyon, Examples of subfactor influences and downcanyon winds. are shown in tables 1 and 2. Based • Differential heating sucks cooler air laterally into the main fire on the observations made, some of front. the subfactors might be eliminated • Smoke from a campfire is drawn toward the one person generating due to their absence, uniformity, or the most external body heat, which demonstrates how the atmos- phere is influenced by heating bodies or air masses. Atmosphere Heating and cooling occur slowly and are neither dynamic nor easily observed without instruments. The primary elements of the fire envi- ronment (atmosphere, fuels, and landforms—fig. 1) indirectly include the effect of heat on fire behavior. For example: • Fuels: A uniform group of trees or vegetation can absorb or reflect Fuel(s) heat at a relatively constant rate, which can vary greatly from the rate of heat absorption and reflection of the surrounding fuels or landforms. Landform(s) • Landforms: An ocean, sea, or lake can absorb the sun’s heat at a rate that differs measurably from surrounding landmasses. • Landforms (subfactor slope): When altitude increases, temperature Figure 1—Contrast model influences. The declines. An air mass high up a slope heats fuels and landforms dif- three primary elements of any fire environ- ferently than air masses downslope. ment provide a reference for envisioning and segregating the primary elements and subfactors. Fire Management Today 20 Table 1—Contrasting influences observable within a 1,000-feet (300-m) radius from the burned or burning fire perimeter. Subfactors Homogeneous Contrasting Atmosphere Windspeed None or steady Variable Wind direction None or steady Variable Cloud cover Fog, clear, or overcast Scattered or broken Fuels (ground and aerial) Size Uniform Variable Amount Consistent Variable Type Similar Variable Landforms Slope Flat or even grade Variable Aspect None or single direction Variable Type No influencing type in the Type within reasonable distance general vicinity Table 2—Dynamic observable contrasting influences. The process begins by Subfactors Potential Influences observing the fuels and Atmosphere landforms within a Windspeed Growth variability thousand-foot radius Wind direction Indication of multiple influencing factors and from the burned or growth variability burning perimeter. Cloud cover Localized instability due to heating/cooling variations consistency. After analyzing and eliminating them, the next step is Fuels to evaluate the remaining subfac- Size Variable drying, flammability, and intensity rates tors. Amount Variable burning speeds and intensities Rating the Type Variable heating/cooling, flammability, and Unpredictability intensity rates All nine subfactors can contribute to fire movement in unexpected Landforms directions. Several factors together, Slope Variable heating/cooling generating variable combined with a fire during transi- airflow tion—which typically takes place when the fire is around 25 acres Aspect Variable heating/cooling generating variable (10 ha) in size—can create chaos. burning intensity Tables 3 and 4 can be used to calcu- Type The closer and larger a significant landform, the late escalating levels of caution. greater the potential for localized influences Assessing the level of caution pro- Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 21 vides information about the unpre- er meteorologists cannot be replicat- can help firefighters focus on subtle dictability of a fire’s behavior. ed. However, when fire behavior environmental clues and variables analysis and fire weather modeling that can have unpredictable and dis- The experience and knowledge of are unavailable, the contrast astrous consequences. ■ fire behavior analysts and fire weath- model—another firefighting tool— Table 3—Table for calculating warning Table 4—Table for assessing level of caution based on number of warning points from points based on key subfactors of the pri- observing key subfactors of the primary elements influencing fire behavior. mary elements influencing fire behavior. Warning points Caution level Contrast? Subfactors 0–1 Low—fire should burn consistently Yes/No 2 (different primary Concern—fire shows some potential Windspeed 1/0 element areas) for variation Wind direction 1/0 2–3 (same primary Vigilance—constant subfactor Cloud cover 1/0 element area) observation needed Fuel size 1/0 3 (two or three primary Caution—initial indicators of complex Fuel amount 1/0 element areas) behavior Fuel type 1/0 4–5 Watch out—fire has high potential of unpredictability Slope 1/0 6–9 Strong warning—fire is unpredictable Aspect 1/0 Landform type 1/0 Total warning [add above points scores] WEBSITES ON FIRE* Wildland Fires in Yellowstone caused or that threaten people, property, or resource Just the facts! That’s what you’ll get when you visit values and to ensure that naturally ignited wildland Yellowstone National Park’s Wildland Fire Website. fires burn as part of an ecological process. The site The homepage is a concise summary of the current offers information about the park’s fire ecology, fire year’s fire activity, with access to a database that management, and other fire-related features and provides several types of fire maps—access, aerial, activities in Yellowstone, plus many links. cover and fuel type, and topographic—as well as links to press releases and photos for many fires. Found at Fire Management Today 22 RAPID-RESPONSE FIRE BEHAVIOR RESEARCH AND REAL-TIME MONITORING Carol J. Henson ire managers planning proj- • Prototype fire behavior research ects often evaluate the effect of on wildfires; Ffuel treatments and other land • Design equipment and test sen- use activities on potential wildfire sor operation and layout on behavior. To make these assess- selected sites; ments, managers typically rely on • Establish operational procedures fuel and fire behavior modeling and methods for collecting data; before a fire or fire research after- • Work successfully with incident ward. In 2002, the Adaptive management teams on active Management Services Enterprise fires; Team launched a unique research • Observe and measure fire behav- project: The team collected fire ior in fuel treatment areas; and behavior data during actual wild- • Measure prefire fuel conditions fires. to identify the metrics applicable to wildland fire behavior and to Figure 1—Testing a buried heat flux sen- The real-time project, funded by sor during project development on a pre- refine fuels inventories, maps, the Joint Fire Sciences Program scribed burn in California. Photo: Adaptive and monitoring data. and the Fire and Aviation Management Services Enterprise Team, USDA Forest Service Tahoe National Management Staff in the USDA Forest, Nevada City, CA, 2002. Forest Service’s Pacific Southwest A research team Region, focused on providing fire team’s technology specialist, devel- collected data during managers with quantitative infor- oped equipment to use in studies actual wildfires, a mation. Researchers, successful in on safety zones and crown fires. meeting many objectives, are unique study on fire The Development Center made spe- expanding operations and seeking behavior. cial fire-resistant boxes for video additional funding and support. cameras and a heat trigger device to safely videotape fire behavior Getting Started Evaluating a Fire during a wildland fire. The equip- Season From 1999 to 2004, JoAnn Fites- ment was tested in California on a Kaufman, team leader and the pro- prescribed fire in Yosemite National The RRT evaluated nine wildfires on ject’s principal investigator, worked Park in 2002 and on prescribed six national forests during the sum- extensively with incident manage- burns on the Tahoe and Plumas mer of 2003 (table 1). Equip-ment ment teams on wildfires. Fites- National Forests in 2003 (fig. 1). was installed and fuel plots were Kaufman became familiar with fire determined to capture fire behavior operations and developed opera- In May 2003, the Rapid Response as it passed through the research tional research procedures. and Research Team (RRT) was sites (fig. 2). The layout design was formed. The team was trained in based on successful research by In 2002, with the support of the operational and scientific proce- Professor Phil Omi of Colorado Forest Service’s Missoula Fire Lab dures, including fireline safety. State University, Fort Collins, CO, in and Missoula Technology and Team members included Fites- reconstructing changes in fire Development Center, Fites- Kaufman, firefighters, a fire behav- behavior after fires (Pollet and Omi Kaufman and Tiffany Norman, the ior analyst, and field technicians 2002). Detailed fuel plots were taken with firefighting experience. Objec- using the Brown’s Planar Intersect Carol Henson is a fire behavior analyst for tives for the 2003 fire season were method and measurements of the USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest to: crown fuels with laser devices. Region, Vallejo, CA. Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 23 Table 1—Summary of the 2003 Rapid Response and Research Team’s investigations of wildfire behavior. Fire Location Targeted sample site Results Salt Eldorado National Thinned, burned fuelbreak Fire did not reach research site Forest, CA Hidden Lake Bearverhead–Deerlodge None suitable Fire deemed unsuitable for project National Forest, MT Black Frog Bearverhead–Deerlodge Selective harvest Rain made fire unlikely to reach site Complex National Forest, MT Wedge Flathead National Forest Fuelbreak around Fuelbreak research site had already and Glacier National community and harvest burned; second site on private land Park, MT area on private property was not suitable Robert Flathead National Forest 2000 Moose Fire Sensors pulled from first site after and Glacier National 1 week due to rain; data collected Park, MT at second site as part of burnout operation below Apgar Lookout (sensor placement test) Crazy Horse Lolo National Forest, MT Shelterwood and clearcut Sensors pulled after more than 1 on Plum Creek Timber week; fire did not reach research Company lands sites due to rain Black Lolo National Forest, MT Contrasting open and Sensors moved from first site Mountain 2 closed forests after suppression forces contained fire; second site experienced extreme fire behavior with an active crown fire Codfish Tahoe National Forest, CA Selective harvest Sensors pulled after 1 week; Complex suppression forces contained fire Old San Bernardino National Wildland/urban interface Sensors pulled after several days; it Forest, CA rained, and the fire did not reach the research sites The team found sites that had expe- changes prevented the fire from removed, weather conditions rienced fuel treatments, timber reaching the research sites. changed, and the fire raged through harvest, and old fires and were suit- the abandoned research site. Based able for the project objectives. After On the Robert Fire on the Flathead on this experience, the team decid- daily assessments of expected fire National Forest and Glacier ed that better weather information behavior, changes in weather, and National Park in Montana, sensors and logistics that allowed for longer fire suppression operations, the were removed from a site in the assignments and equipment data team installed sensors at the sites Deep Creek drainage after it rained. collection were needed. thought most susceptible to fire. In The team had reached the end of a all instances, when equipment was 14-day tour, and it appeared that Reaching a Goal placed in treated areas, fire sup- the fire was contained on that edge. After limited success gathering fire pression operations or weather But 2 days after the sensors were behavior data on four of the five Fire Management Today 24 Figure 2—Schematic showing sample layout of fire behavior equipment and fuels plots used for rapid-response, real-time monitoring and fire behavior research. interface where the fire had made Team members gathered data by measuring fuel major runs toward northwestern conditions and fire behavior as fire passed Missoula. The DFMO provided the team with information about the through landscapes with different treatment fire’s spread and with maps show- histories and fuel configurations. ing the fuel treatments and other land use activities conducted. fires in Montana (table 1), the RRT blaze, and the incident commander Choosing an area with burn poten- adjusted its strategy. The Black allowed it to install the necessary tial based on forecasted weather Mountain 2 Fire on the Lolo equipment. and limited suppression resources, National Forest was started by the RRT went to Blue Mountain lightning in August 2003. Vegetation RRT leaders met with the district Road. After advising the division in the fire area was subalpine fir fire management officer (DFMO) supervisor that they would be and lodgepole pine, with some for the Missoula Ranger District. working in the area, the team con- lodgepole pine having a grass The Lolo National Forest had ducted a safety session and briefing understory. Ten days after the fire accomplished extensive fuel treat- on expected weather and potential started, the RRT arrived at the ments along the wildland/urban fire behavior. Lookouts were posted Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 25 Communication with key players who shared valuable information helped ensure project success. burned with a high intensity (fig. 4). Although the equipment was slightly damaged, the team success- fully collected video and other data, including heat flux, rate of spread, and flame length. The results of this unique study on fire behavior are expected soon. Figure 3—A site resembling a shaded fuelbreak was chosen for collecting fire behavior Future Plans data during the 2003 Black Mountain 2 Fire on the Lolo National Forest in Montana. Having met many initial objectives, Photo: Adaptive Management Services Enterprise Team, Lolo National Forest, MT, 2003. the RRT is expanding its operation and seeking additional funding and for safety as the team began The fire was very active below the collaborators to: installing equipment and measur- selected research site—lookouts ing fuels. Suppression forces suc- were posted for the RRT’s safety. • Raise the number of teams; ceeded in holding the fire above a Helicopters dropping water were • Increase the number of sensors road away from the research site. being used to hold the fire in sup- and modify the equipment to port of the hotshot crews. The RRT withstand higher temperatures; That evening, RRT leaders decided quickly installed the equipment, • Continue to focus on areas with to move the equipment to a new measured the fuels, and left the fuel treatments or other land use area to capture active fire behavior. area. Later that morning, two hot- activities; Before the next morning’s briefing, shot crews in the area disengaged • Provide data for a safety zone team leaders met with the type 1 from their assignment due to study; and team branch director, who recom- unsafe conditions. • Install sensors and equipment in mended a location susceptible to wildland/urban interface areas. active fire. After assessing the The next day, the RRT found that weather and fire behavior forecast the area around the equipment had For additional information, contact for that day, team leaders decided JoAnn Fites-Kaufman at 530-478- that, although there were no fuel 6151 (voice) or [email protected] treatment sites in the area, they (email). would attempt to capture data on sites with contrasting vegetation Reference conditions. Pollet, J.; Omi, P.N. 2002. Effect of thinning and prescribed burning on wildfire fire The RRT moved to a new site to severity in ponderosa pine forests. International Journal of Wildland Fire. determine whether it could put 11(1): 1–10. ■ direct handline along the fire’s edge. The team leaders selected a site below a midslope road. Part of Figure 4—Research site on the 2003 the area resembled a shaded fuel- Black Mountain 2 Fire after fire burned break (fig. 3), and another part was through the area. The camera was dam- aged due to the fire’s severity. Photo: similar to an untreated area. Adaptive Management Services Enterprise Team, Lolo National Forest, MT, 2003. Fire Management Today 26 THE ABCSOFCORRECTLY MAPPING A FIRE Ed Delaney ildland firefighters know tion in space, both are relative to era before global positioning sys- the importance of accu- the shape of the Earth, which is tems (GPSs) and geographic infor- Wrately pinpointing a fire represented in a datum. The word mation systems (GISs), NAD27 pro- location. Retardant drops must hit datum is the singular of data, and vided sufficient accuracy and mini- the correct target. Climate and ter- in mapping it represents the point mal confusion because it was the rain can dramatically affect a fire or line of reference that is used as a standard on USDI U.S. Geological management plan. Now a new starting location for measurement. Survey (USGS) topographic maps. budget system, Fire Program As our understanding of the shape Analysis (FPA), has boosted the of the Earth has changed, the frame As satellite and electronic survey significance of fire location data of reference (i.e., datum) for map- equipment increased the accuracy beyond successful firefighting (see ping has changed, and the “starting of surveys, the USDI National the sidebar on page 28). Under the point” from which we measure has Geodetic Survey introduced NAD83 new plan, fire report accuracy, and changed as well. to serve as the new standard for especially the fire locations on mapping in the United States. The those reports, will influence where The concept of a map datum is easy lower left corner of USGS 1:24,000- the system indicates that equip- to understand if you think about scale topographic quadrangle maps ment and positions are needed. the average of tides on an ocean produced after the mid-1980s often beach. Over a long period of time— offers a set of coordinate ticks that Everyone involved in the record- perhaps 20 years—an accurate show the difference between NAD27 keeping chain—from initial alarm average of low or high tides can be and NAD83 positions. to dispatch, from data entry to developed. If average low tide is an budget analysis—needs to know indicator of where ocean ends and Unfortunately, the difference in the subtleties of coordinate systems land begins, it gives a horizontal locations from one datum to anoth- to obtain the correct data and to frame of reference. It is actually er is not constant. In the lower 48 keep the FPA budgeting system used on hydrographic charts. The States, this shift is usually within working smoothly. This article is datum provides a frame of refer- the range of 10 to 100 meters (11 designed to help. ence for where to put the “0,0” to 109 yards). In Alaska, the differ- coordinate in grid space. ence can be as much as 200 meters Dealing With Datums (219 yards) and in Hawaii up to 400 The two prominent location refer- In the United States, wildland fire- meters (437 yards). encing systems used for fire loca- fighters are most likely to encounter tions on fire reports are latitude/ three horizontal reference map With a shift from NAD27, based on longitude (lat/long) and Universal datums: optical surveys, to NAD83, based on Transverse Mercator (UTM). a mathematical model of the Earth’s Lat/long comes in a number of • The North American Datum of shape, the coordinates recorded for variants, and UTM is a system that 1927 (NAD27); a specific point on the landscape is based on narrow, north/south • The North American Datum of can take on multiple meanings. A strips of the earth, with a separate 1983 (NAD83); and difference of 100 meters (109 grid for each strip. • The World Geodetic System of yards), about the length of a football 1984 (WGS84). field, might seem insignificant but Because both lat/long and UTM can easily move the location of a have their axis at an abstract loca- NAD27 was the most widely used fire from Federal lands to private, or datum in the 20th century. It had from land into water. its reference point in northern Ed Delaney is the fire program data manag- er for the USDI National Park Service at the Kansas and was based on actual Many datum settings are available National Interagency Fire Center, Boise, ID. U.S. surveys. For mapping in the on GPS units, each with its own Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 27 New Importance of Fire Location We know where fires are when they occur, yet fire ed coordinates fall in the Pacific Ocean near the occurrence databases have later misplaced many Galapagos Islands (UTM zone 16, zero Easting and fires for various reasons, including errors in writing zero Northing). the reports, errors in data entry, and confusion of latitude with longitude. A report in 2002 by the Jobs Depend on It Desert Research Institute found that about 10 per- Avoiding these errors is crucial under Fire Program cent of the USDA Forest Service fire records were Analysis (FPA), the new Federal fire budgeting sys- unusable for reasons that included incorrect loca- tem slated to take effect in fiscal year 2005. Under tion and that nearly 30 percent of agency records in FPA, the accuracy of fire records will affect Federal the U.S. Department of the Interior were similarly allocation of equipment and jobs. Instead of agen- unusable (Brown and others 2002). cies allocating funds according to their traditional practices, the interagency system will use the loca- Where’s the Fire? tion of historical fires in the fire occurrence data- Often, locations are strangely misplaced. For bases to model hypothetical fires. instance, when maps were made from fire occur- rence databases, numerous fires were reported in In the past, the location data on fire reports (such as the South Atlantic Ocean off the west coast of those completed using the U.S. Department of the Africa. A point on the equator near the Galapagos Interior’s DI–1202 form) were not formally used in Islands appears to be a tinderbox, and Greenland decisionmaking in some agencies. When errors were and the Black Sea have erupted in flames, according found, they sometimes were corrected at the local to fire occurrence databases. level, though not at the national level. Fires show up all over the map partly because of With the new program, the recorded location of his- recordkeeping systems. If a person leaves a numeric torical fires will be part of the system that deter- field blank, the systems automatically enter zero mines where funding will go in the future. Under coordinates. If a system is using latitude/longitude FPA, location will also be used to tie together fuel coordinates, zero longitude falls on the Greenwich characteristics, topography, and a weather station Meridian, running through England. Zero latitude for fire weather data. Incorrect location information falls on the equator. In combination, the coordinates can sabotage these critical associations and influ- put the location off of the west coast of Africa (zero ence the allocation of fire management resources. latitude, zero longitude). If zero/zero Universal For more information on FPA and its development Transverse Mercator coordinates are picked up for a progress, check the FPA website is trying to map the perimeter of a Incorrectly mapped fire locations could distort the fire in California, it might be hard allocation of money and jobs. for the fire GIS specialist on the incident to figure out what’s wrong. The best practice is to standardize specific point in space for “0,0”. knowledge, but NAD83 has not. For equipment with the GIS specialist. The standard datum for the GPS all but the most sensitive survey When an incident team is involved system is WGS84. The primary dif- equipment, including a “recreation- and there is no GIS or GPS special- ference between NAD83 and al-grade” GPS unit, NAD83 and ist, the plans section should con- WGS84 is that experts now know WGS84 are functional equivalents. firm the datum being used. Either that the center of the Earth’s mass way, complete records should be is about 2.2 yards (2 m) away from GPS users should know their units’ kept and transferred with the data, where it was thought to be when datum settings. If a GPS unit is set including user’s name; position; NAD83 was developed. WGS84 has to a datum intended for use in date and time; type of GPS unit; changed to accommodate this new Nepal or New Zealand, but the user mode of travel (foot, vehicle, heli- copter, etc.); and the datum setting Fire Management Today 28 in the GPS unit. It’s a good practice The two prominent location referencing systems to take a GPS point at a known used for fire locations on fire reports are location, like a benchmark, just to provide a good reference point for latitude/longitude and Universal Transverse the GIS specialist. Mercator. Books that cover coordinate systems, onds north of the Equator and 122 errors, I prefer thinking “long/lat” map datums, and mapping in gener- degrees, 20 minutes, and 57 sec- instead of the more common al include Muehrcke and Muehrcke onds west of the Greenwich “lat/long.” It helps me remember X, (1992) and Campbell (2000). Meridian, using NAD83. If the Y coordinates, consistent with the datum is shifted to NAD27, the UTM “Easting, then Northing.” Map Coordinate same coordinates for the Space Systems Needle move the location about 690 Universal Transverse Mercator. feet (210 m) to the southeast. UTM is a worldwide system that Only in the last 120 years has there uses meters as its unit of measure. been international agreement on The lat/long notation used in GIS is When two nearby locations are where the zero line of longitude decimal degrees (DD). For each identified by UTM coordinates, (the prime meridian) is. Prior to coordinate, you take the whole computing the distance in meters 1884, the zero meridian in the degrees (e.g., 47°) and add minutes between them is simple. United States went through divided by 60, plus seconds divided Washington, DC. The UTM zone by 3,600. For the Space Needle, lat- When using the UTM system, east system is based on latitude and lon- itude would be: 47 + (37/60) + is recorded first (“Easting”), then gitude, so that locations can be (21/3,600), or 47.62249. Longitude north (“Northing”). The coordinate identified based on distance from a would be 122 + (20/60) + pair is the distance in meters east reference point. (57/3,600), or 122.3349. This is a from a zero point, or coordinate Cartesian coordinate system, with axis, and the distance in meters Latitude/Longitude. Lat/long is a the Equator serving as the zero axis north from the Equator in the spherical coordinate system, so the for latitude, and the Greenwich Northern Hemisphere. There are 60 length of a degree of latitude is fair- Meridian serving as the zero axis zones, so the zone being measured ly constant from the Equator to the for longitude. For a location in in must be recorded. In North Earth’s poles, but the length of a North America, the latitude coordi- America, it is safe to assume that degree of longitude changes with nate is positive whereas the longi- the coordinates are referring to the latitude. At the Equator, a degree of tude is negative, because the loca- northern half of the UTM zone. latitude and a degree of longitude tion is in the upper left quadrant of are both just under 70 miles (113 Cartesian space. Thus, the Space Coordinates for the Easting km). At the poles, a degree of lati- Needle in DD would be 47.6225, (Cartesian X-coordinate) have six tude is still nearly 70 miles (113 –122.3349. When working with digits to the left of the decimal km), but a degree of longitude con- decimal degrees, firefighters should place. A coordinate without any verges to zero length at the North provide a minimum of four signifi- digits to the right of the decimal and South Poles. Although lat/long cant digits to the right of the deci- place has the accuracy of one is a coordinate system, it is not a mal place. meter, or about one yard. A rectangular grid with even spacing Northing (Cartesian Y-coordinate) in the X and Y dimensions. The Cartesian “X” coordinate in for locations in the United States, lat/long is longitude and the “Y” is measured north from the Equator, Lat/long can be noted in several latitude. The highest value latitude will have seven digits to the left of formats. The most common is can have is 90° (North or South the decimal place. USGS topo- degrees, minutes, and seconds Pole), whereas the highest value graphic quadrangles (1:24,000- or (DMS). The location of the Space longitude can register is 180° (mid- 1:25,000-scale maps) will have one Needle in Seattle in DMS is 47° 37’ dle of the Pacific Ocean). Reversing full UTM coordinate along each 21” North latitude, 122° 20’ 57” coordinates is a common error on axis, with six digits for the Easting West longitude (NAD83). This is 47 fire report forms, especially east of along the top and bottom margins, degrees, 37 minutes, and 21 sec- the 90th Meridian. To avoid such and seven digits for the Northing Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 29 Everyone involved in the recordkeeping chain must know the subtleties of map coordinate systems. along the left and right margins. Other UTM gridlines are shown with the trailing three zeros delet- ed. Thus, the Space Needle is locat- ed at about 548,900 E, 5,274,100 N, Zone 10 North (fig. 1). In the UTM system, there are 60 zones that create north/south strips from about 80° North latitude to about 80° South latitude, bisected Figure 1—Map location of Seattle’s Space Needle using the Universal Transverse Mercator. by the Equator. Each zone is 6° of The X coordinate (longitude) closest to the Space Needle is 549. The superscript indicates that the trailing zeros are not shown. The number of the gridline, 549,000, is larger than longitude wide, and the zones are the coordinate for the Space Needle longitude because measurement is from west to east. numbered from 1 to 60, starting in The Y coordinate (latitude), without trailing zeros, is 5274 for 5,274,000 meters north. the Pacific Ocean (the west edge of the first zone is at 180° Longitude) play “Trivial Pursuit,” the X, Y ori- Accuracy Is Critical! and counting up toward the east. gin for the southern portion of Maps seem pretty simple, but the Thus, zone 1 is in the Pacific each zone is a little different. The coordinate systems can be confus- Ocean, Seattle is in Zone 10, New X-axis zero point is still 500,000 ing. Although map reading is now a York is in zone 18, and Greenwich, meters west of the central meridian standard part of wildland firefighter UK is in zone 30. for the zone. The Y-axis zero point is training, using map coordinates 1 million meters south of the and map datums can still be a chal- Each zone, split at the Equator, has Equator. In polar regions, there is a lenge. It is critical in the field to a northern portion and a southern different system. Therefore, even in identify the correct location on the portion. Each zone is also bisected the Southern Hemisphere, all UTM map to call in resources, to find the by a meridian, or line of longitude. coordinates are still positive num- most efficient access, and to identi- Zone 1, starting the system at bers, measuring Easting first, fy safety zones. about 180°, straddles the 177° West Northing second, and then specify- Longitude meridian. Zone 10 strad- ing zone and hemisphere (southern). Now, a new budgetary system dles 123° of West Longitude. For makes correct fire location data the northern portion of each zone, Because the system ultimately is even more critical. Inaccurate there is a coordinate axis (known as based in lat/long, a spherical coor- reports might mean money is sent a “false origin”) that is placed on dinate system, coordinates must be to the wrong places. It is imperative the equator and to the west of the measured in the correct order that firefighters continually review actual west boundary of the zone. (Easting first, then Northing). The map coordinate essentials and This is so any measurement within length of a degree of longitude gets improve their skills. the zone will be a positive number shorter when moving from the (east is measured only on the X- Equator toward either of the poles. References axis and north on the Y-axis). If north from the equator were Campbell, J. 2000. Map use and analysis. measured first, and then east from New York: McGraw Hill. The actual location of the “0,0” a point 500,000 meters west of the Muehrcke, P.C.; Muehrcke, J.O. 1992. Map point for each zone is 500,000 central meridian in the zone, coor- use. Madison, WI: J.P. Publications. ■ meters west of the central, or dinates would be consistently to the bisecting, meridian for the zone, on west of where they should be on a the Equator. For those who still map. Fire Management Today 30 INDIAN FIRE USE: DEFLATING THE LEGEND Stephen W. Barrett, Thomas W. Swetnam, William L. Baker or many years, the importance of fire use by American Indians The case for landscape-level fire use by American Fin altering North American Indians in all parts of North America has been ecosystems was underappreciated dramatically overstated. or ignored. Now, there seems to be an opposite trend, as exemplified in the pages of Fire Management Today (Summer 2004, volume 64[3]).* It is common now to read or hear statements to the effect that American Indians fired land- scapes everywhere and all the time, so there is no such thing as a “nat- ural” ecosystem. A myth of human manipulation everywhere in pre- Columbus America is replacing the equally erroneous myth of a totally pristine wilderness. We believe that it is time to deflate the rapidly spreading myth that American Indians altered all land- scapes by means of fire. In short, we believe that the case for land- scape-level fire use by American Indians has been dramatically over- stated and overextrapolated. Scant Historical Record Early-day accounts by Euro- Americans provide a weak basis for interpreting precontact Indian cul- tures. As Williams (2004) points out in Fire Management Today, “European explorers and settlers rarely saw or understood the cause- Lightning activity over the town of Thompson, Manitoba, Canada, where extreme weather Stephen W. Barrett is a consulting fire conditions sparked a number of wildfires in 2003. In presettlement times, did lightning ecologist based in Kalispell, MT; Thomas W. fires maintain most fire regimes in the West—or was it fires set by American Indians? Swetnam is a Professor of Dendrochronology Photo: Ministry of Natural Resources, Fire Management Centre, Dryden, ON 2003. at the University of Arizona in Tucson, AZ, and Director of the Laboratory of Tree-Ring * The Summer 2004 issue of Fire Management Today (volume 64[3]) contains several articles on fire use by Research at the university; and William L. American Indians: Karl Brauneis, “Fire Use During the Great Sioux War,” pp. 4–9; Gerald W. Williams, “American Indian Fire Use in the Arid West,” pp. 10–14; Jon E. Keeley, “American Indian Influence on Fire Regimes in Baker is a Professor of Geography at the California’s Coastal Ranges,” pp. 15–16; and Hutch Brown, “Reports of American Indian Fire Use in the East,” University of Wyoming, Laramie WY. pp. 17–22. Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 31 The vast majority of written and oral accounts on burning seems to have been highly Indian fire use are anecdotes fraught with localized and unpredictable (Kaye and Swetnam 1999; Swetnam and uncertainty, subjective opinion, and bias. Baisan 1996; Swetnam and others 2001). Moreover, purposeful burn- and-effect relationships between tra- cause of fires in the West, and ing was probably rare to absent in ditional Indian land use practices and many Euro-Americans might have wet or cold forest types, where cli- the landscapes they found.” Clearly, therefore erroneously attributed mate seems to be the limiting fac- their anecdotal vignettes were often fires to Indians, or perhaps they did tor for fire regimes (Agee 1993; heavily biased (Baker 2002). They do so out of racism (Bahre 1994; Kaye Baker 2003; Barrett and others not bear out Williams’ (2004) sweep- and Swetnam 1999). 1991; Buechling and Baker 2004; ing assertions that: Johnson and Larsen 1991). Most oral history and biological evi- • “ecological impacts were exten- dence of Indian fire use has been Lightning fires, including sive,” irretrievably lost with the passage • “Indians carefully chose where of time (Baker 2002; Barrett and onsite ignitions and and when to burn,” Arno 1999; Kaye and Swetnam lightning fires spreading • “most of the acres burned were 1999). What little remains seems from other areas, [likely] due to Indian-set fires,” woefully inadequate for deriving were well capable of and the overly broad conclusions pre- • “[i]t seems highly unlikely that sented by Williams (2002, 2004) maintaining most fire the extensive fire effects observed and Pyne (1982). regimes in the West. in the presettlement West, espe- cially at lower elevations, can be Physical Record attributed to lightning.” We prefer to address the issue from Role of Lightning scientific and ecological perspec- Such general assertions are based tives. To date, we have conducted Lightning fires, including onsite on a scant historical record. the only studies that provide statis- ignitions and fires spreading from Williams (2004) repeats Pyne’s tically based empirical data from other areas, were well capable of (1982) overgeneralization that “the tree rings to supplement informa- maintaining most fire regimes in modification of the American conti- tion from oral and written accounts the West.* In remote locations in nent by fire at the hands of (Barrett and Arno 1982; Kaye and the Southwest and adjacent areas in [American Indians] was the result of Swetnam 1999). The evidence cer- Mexico, for example, fire history repeated, controlled surface burns tainly suggests that both purposeful studies have found no perceptible on a cycle of one to three years.” and unintentional burning by decline in fire frequency after the The certitude and vast geographic American Indians occurred in par- removal of American Indians in the sweep of this statement (“the ticular places and times, but not on late 1800s (Swetnam and others American continent”) is unjustified. scales as extensive or as continuous 2001). In those landscapes, lightning The vast majority of written and as some would suggest. fires continued to burn well into the oral accounts by Euro-Americans 20th century, particularly in areas are not dispassionate observations Burning occurred in some locales, without intensive livestock grazing of the presettlement West, but apparently with some predictability, and organized fire suppression. rather anecdotes fraught with such as in well-traveled valleys of uncertainty, subjective opinion, and the Northern Rockies (Barrett and Even where onsite ignitions were bias (Baker 2002). For instance, Arno 1982, 1999). However, Indian rare, free-ranging (and potentially many early travelers evidently did fires might have been less frequent long-burning) lightning fires pre- not recognize lightning as a major in other areas, even those dominat- sumably contributed to many site ed by ponderosa pine forests. fire histories. Because modern soci- ety has little experience with unhindered fires, some writers * Although Barrett and Arno (1982) might have inadver- In the dry ponderosa forests of the tently contributed to the “inadequate lightning” myth, seem to incorrectly assume that those authors were referring only to lightning potential Southwest, for example, purposeful in the context of wilderness restoration. Fire Management Today 32 site fire history depended on local Describing the Indian role in presettlement fire ignition sources. regimes will remain a highly speculative venture for ecologists and historians alike. Contrary Evidence If Indian fire use was indeed ubiq- uitous, how does one explain the Fire practices also likely differed Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University broad mix of presettlement fire among tribes. Factors influencing Press: 50–64. regimes (Arno 1980; Agee 1993; Barrett, S.W.; Arno, S.F.; Key, C.H. 1991. fire use probably included environ- Fire regimes of western larch–lodgepole Barrett and Arno 1999; Swetnam mental variables (such as vegeta- pine forests in Glacier National Park, and Baisan 1996)? In the Inland tion types and climate change), Montana. Canadian Journal of Forest Northwest, for example, up to 10 Research. 21: 1711–1720. evolving lifeways (for example, Bessie, W.C.; Johnson, E.A. 1995. The rela- different regimes have been identi- before and after the acquisition of tive importance of fuels and weather on fied (Barrett 2004; Morgan and oth- horses), shifting tribal territories, fire behavior in subalpine forests. ers 1998). Clearly, presettlement Ecology. 76: 747–762. and demographic changes (such as Buechling, A.; Baker, W.L. 2004. A fire his- fires ranged from low-severity depopulation by disease). tory from tree rings in a high-elevation underburns to high-severity crown forest of Rocky Mountain National Park. fires, and site fire frequencies Regrettably, most accounts of Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 34: ranged from less than 10 years to 1259–1273. Indian fire use are vignettes allow- Johnson, E.A.; Larsen, C.P.S. 1991. greater than 500 years. ing little more than speculation Climatically induced change in fire fre- In our view, writers such as about the spatial and temporal quency in the southern Canadian Williams (2002, 2004) and Pyne Rockies. Ecology. 7(1): 194–201. scales of burning (Baker 2002). Kaye, M.W.; Swetnam, T.W. 1999. An assess- (1982) often create the misimpres- Consequently, describing Indians’ ment of fire, climate, and Apache history sion that Indians burned every last role in presettlement fire regimes in the Sacramento Mountains, New acre of the West. Consider, for Mexico. Physical Geography. 20(4): will remain a highly speculative 305–330. instance, the suggestive title of venture for ecologists and histori- Pyne, S.J. 1982. Fire in America: A cultural Williams’ (2002) article, “Aboriginal ans alike. history of wildland and rural fire. Use of Fire: Are There Any ‘Natural’ Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Plant Communities?” Yet most Morgan, P.; Bunting, S.; Black, A.; Merril, References T.; Barrett, S.W. 1998. Fire regimes in the early-day accounts suggest that Interior Columbia River Basin: Past and Agee, J.K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific present. In: Fire management under fire Indian fire use occurred largely in Northwest forests. Washington, DC: grasslands and adjacent dry forests. (adapting to change). Proceedings of the Island Press. Interior West Fire Council Meeting and For perspective, consider that dry Bahre, C.J. 1985. Wildfire in southeastern Program; 1–4 November 1994; Coeur forest types comprise only about 25 Arizona between 1859 and 1890. Desert d’Alene, ID. Fairfield, WA: International Plants. 7: 190–194. percent of the forested terrain in Association of Wildland Fire: 77–82. Baker, W.L. 2002. Indians and fire in the Swetnam, T.W.; Baisan, C.H. 1996. the Northern Rockies (Barrett Rocky Mountains: The wilderness hypoth- Historical fire regime patterns in the 2004). The remainder supported esis renewed. In: Vale, T.R.(ed.). Fire, Southwestern United States since A.D. native peoples, and the natural landscape. 1700. In: Allen, C.D. (ed.). Fire effects in widely varying forest structure, Washington, DC: Island Press: 41–76. composition, and fire regimes, with southwestern forests. Proceedings of the Baker, W.L. 2003. Fires and climate in Second La Mesa Fire Symposium; 29–31 scant evidence of Indian-set fires. forested landscapes of the U.S. Rocky March 1994; Los Alamos, NM. Gen. Tech. Mountains. In: Veblen, T.T.; Baker, W.L.; Rep. RM–GTR–286. Fort Collins, CO: Montenegro, G.; Swetnam, T.W. (eds.). USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Speculative Venture Fire and climate change in temperate Research Station. ecosystems of the western Americas. Empirical evidence might allow us Swetnam, T.W.; Betancourt, J.L. 1990. Ecol. Studies 160. New York: Springer- Fire—Southern Oscillation relations in to infer which ecosystems and Verlag: 120–157. the Southwestern United States. Science. Barrett, S.W. 2004. Fire regimes in the 249: 1017–1020. which geographic locales might Northern Rockies. Fire Management have been most affected by Indian- Swetnam, T.W.; Baisan, C.H.; Kaib, J.M. Today. 64(2): 32–38. 2001. Forest fire histories in the sky set fires. However, the ecological Barrett, S.W.; Arno, S.F. 1982. Indian fires islands of La Frontera. In: Webster, G.L.; evidence suggests that such fires as an ecological influence in the Bahre, C.J. (eds.). Changing plant life of Northern Rockies. Journal of Forestry. were probably rare or absent in La Frontera: Observations on vegetation 80(10): 647–650. in the United States/Mexico borderlands. many areas. Barrett, S.W.; Arno, S. F. 1999. Indian fires Albuquerque, NM: University of New in the Northern Rockies: Ethnohistory Mexico Press: 95–119. and ecology. In: Boyd, R.T. (ed.). Indians, fire and land in the Pacific Northwest. Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 33 Williams, G.W. 2002. Aboriginal use of fire: Are there any “natural” plant communi- Additional Reading ties? In: Kay, C. (ed.). Wilderness and political ecology: Aboriginal influences Editor’s note: The following works also pertain to the debate over practices and and the original ecological impacts associated with fire use by American Indians. state of nature. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press: 179–214. • Boyd, R., ed. Indians, fire, and the land in the Pacific Northwest. Williams, G.W. 2004. American Indian fire use in the arid West. Fire Management Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press. Today. 64(3): 10–14. ■ • Lewis, H.T.; Ferguson, T.A. 1988. Yards, corridors, and mosaics: How to burn a boreal forest. Human Ecology. 16(1): 57–77. • Stewart, O. 2002. Forgotten fires: Native Americans and the tran- sient wilderness. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. • Pyne, S. 2001. Fire: A brief history. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. • Pyne, S. 2003. Review of Thomas Vale, ed., Fire, Native Peoples, and the Natural Landscape. Restoration Ecology. 11(2): 257–259. Fire Management Today 34 LONG-TERM EXPERIMENT TAKES SOME OF THE MYSTERY OUT OF CROWN FIRES Martin E. Alexander he August 2004 issue of the Canadian Journal of Forest TResearch (volume 34[8]) is devoted to a special topic: “The International Crown Fire Modelling Experiment (ICFME) in Canada’s Northwest Territories: Advancing the Science of Fire Behaviour.” Running from 1994 to 2001 at a site about 30 miles (50 km) north of Fort Providence, the ICFME was a major international wildland fire research effort organized by the Canadian Forest Service and the Forest Management Division in the Department of Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development (DRWED) of the Government of Northwest Territories (GNWT), with substantial cooperation from the USDA Forest Service. “What you guys envisioned and so many of us worked on will make fire history. Lots of excellent work, data, concepts and techniques to stoke the research fires for a long time to come.” – Dr. Ted Putnam (2004) The special issue features 10 arti- • Several aspects of crown fire Dr. Marty Alexander is a senior fire behav- cles. The first article presents an behavior (Butler and others ior research officer with the Canadian overview and introduction to 2004a, 2004b; Stocks and others Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, ICFME (Stocks and others 2004a). 2004b; Taylor and others 2004); Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. At the time of this writing, he was on assignment as a The other nine articles focus on • Firefighter safety (Putnam and senior researcher with the Wildland Fire some of the main research studies Butler 2004); Operations Research Group, Forest carried out during the course of the • The wildland/urban interface Engineering Research Institute of Canada, Hinton, Alberta, Canada. ICFME, including: (Cohen 2004); Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 35 “And I believe that the fire pioneers, wherever they Fire in Temperate, Boreal, and Montane Ecosystems; 2001 October 15–18; may be, would have to share some awe (and Kananaskis, AB. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station. perhaps some envy) over the International Crown Lavoie, N.; Alexander, M.E. 2004. Fire Modelling Experiment…” Experimental reburns 1–4 years after high-intensity crown fire. In: Engstrom, – Dr. Phil Omi (2004), closing address at the 22nd Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference R.T.; Galley, K.E.M.; de Groot, W.J., eds. Proceedings of the 22nd Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference: Fire in Temperate, Boreal, and Montane Ecosystems. 2001 • Smoke chemistry (Payne and ICFME project, one should consult October 15–18; Kananaskis, AB. others 2004); Alexander and others (2004). A Tallahassee, FL; Tall Timbers Research • Tree regeneration (de Groot and copy can be ordered through the Station: 229 Lynch, J.A.; Clark, J.S.; Stocks, B.J. 2004. others 2004); and Canadian Forest Service online Charcoal production, dispersal, and depo- • Charcoal deposits in lake sedi- bookstore at Fire Management Today 36 TREATMENT AREA SAVES RANGER STATION Paul Keller hen the Rodio-Chediski To create the treatment area, the The openings created within the Fire raced toward the district removed the smaller trees… treatment area were clear of brush WBlack Mesa Ranger District every tree up to 16 inches (41 cm) and ground fuels. That, said on Arizona’s Apache-Sitgreaves in diameter…and then prescribe- Maurer, “enabled us to burn out in National Forest, the outlook for the burned. The treatment method a fairly safe manner.” He added, ranger station and other buildings reduced the basal area of the forest “There’s no question that this stand was grim. Suddenly, the crown fire from 250 square feet (23 m2) to 40 [treatment] contributed to stopping dropped and skipped and burned its square feet (9 m2) per acre. the fire from entering the ranger way through the trees past the “If we had only thinned up to 12 station.” ■ buildings. inches [31 cm] in diameter, these stands would still have been too dense,” said Maurer. “They would The district removed have carried the fire.” smaller trees and prescribe-burned, saving the ranger station from crown fire when Rodeo- Chediski burned through. District Forester Dave Maurer cred- ited the 100-acre (41-ha) Southside Demonstration Treatment Area with altering the fire’s behavior and saving the buildings. The treatment area was a public showcase to illus- trate the function and appearance of managed stands. Saving the ranger station was an unexpected bonus. A 100-acre (41-ha) treatment “thinning and burning” saved these ponderosa pines from Rodeo-Chediski by keeping the fire out of their crowns. Photo: Tom Iraci, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, OR, 2002. Paul Keller, a former hotshot and journal- ist, is a contract writer/editor for the USDA Forest Service’s Fire and Aviation Management Staff, Washington Office, Washington, DC. Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 37 GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTORS Editorial Policy author(s), as well as telephone and dards set by the National Wildfire Fire Management Today (FMT) is fax numbers and e-mail informa- Coordinating Group under the an international quarterly maga- tion. If the same or a similar manu- National Interagency Incident zine for the wildland fire communi- script is being submitted elsewhere, Management System. FMT uses the ty. FMT welcomes unsolicited man- include that information also. spelling, capitalization, hyphen- uscripts from readers on any sub- ation, and other styles recommend- ject related to fire management. Release Authorization. Non-Federal ed in the United States Government Because space is a consideration, Government authors and coauthors Printing Office Style Manual, as long manuscripts might be must sign a release to allow their required by the U.S. Department of abridged by the editor, subject to work to be in the public domain Agriculture. Authors should use the approval by the author; FMT does and on the World Wide Web. In U.S. system of weight and measure, print short pieces of interest to addition, all photos require a writ- with equivalent values in the met- readers. ten release by the photographer. ric system. The author and photo release forms Submission Guidelines are available from General Manager Try to keep titles concise and Melissa Frey. descriptive; subheadings and bullet- Your manuscript may be hand-writ- ed material are useful and help ten, typed, or word-processed, and Logo. Authors who are affiliated readability. As a general rule of you may submit it either by e-mail should submit a camera-ready logo clear writing, use the active voice or mail. If you submit your manu- for their agency, institution, or (e.g., write, “Fire managers know...” script by e-mail, send it to either organization. and not, “It is known...”). Provide the general manager or the manag- spellouts for all abbreviations. ing editor at one of the following Electronic files. If you are mailing a Consult recent issues (at Fire Management Today 38 PHOTO CONTEST ANNOUNCEMENT Fire Management Today (FMT) Rules Forest, AZ. Photo: name, profes- invites you to submit your best fire- • The contest is open to everyone. sional affiliation, town, state, related images to be judged in our You may submit an unlimited year image captured. annual competition. Judging begins number of entries taken at any • A panel of experienced judges after the first Friday in March of time. No photos judged in previ- determines the winners. Its deci- each year. ous FMT contests may be entered. sion is final. • You must have the right to grant • We will eliminate photos from Awards the Forest Service unlimited use competition if they are obtained All contestants will receive a CD of the image, and you must by illegal or unauthorized access with the images remaining after agree that the image will become to restricted areas; lack detailed technical and safety reviews. public domain. Moreover, the captions; have date stamps; show Winning images will appear in a image must not have been previ- unsafe firefighting practices future issue of FMT and will be ously published. (unless that is their express pur- publicly displayed at the USDA • We prefer original slides or nega- pose); or are of low technical qual- Forest Service’s national office in tives; however, we will accept dupli- ity (for example, have soft focus or Washington, DC. Winners in each cate slides or high-quality prints show camera movement). category will receive: (for example, those with good • You must complete and sign the focus, contrast level, and depth of release granting the USDA Forest • 1st place—Camera equipment field). Note: We will not return Service rights to use your worth $300 and a 20- by 24-inch your slides, negatives, or prints. image(s). Mail your completed framed copy of your image. • We will also accept digital images release with your entry or fax it • 2nd place—A 16- by 20-inch if the image was shot at the high- (970-295-5815) at the same time framed copy of your image. est resolution using a camera you e-mail digital images. • 3rd place—An 11- by 14-inch with at least 2.5 megapixels or if framed copy of your image. the image was scanned at 300 Mail entries to: • Honorable mention—An 8- by 10- lines per inch or equivalent with USDA Forest Service inch framed copy of your image. a minimum output size of 5" x Fire Management Today Photo 7". Digital image files should be Contest Categories TIFFs or highest quality JPGs. Madelyn Dillon • Wildland fire • You must indicate only one com- 2150 Centre Ave. • Bldg. A, Ste. 361 • Prescribed fire petition category per image. To Fort Collins, CO 80526 or • Wildland/urban interface fire ensure fair evaluation, we reserve e-mail images and captions to: • Aerial resources the right to change the competi- [email protected] • Ground resources tion category for your image. and fax signed release form to • Miscellaneous (fire effects; fire • You must provide a detailed cap- 970-295-5815 (attn: Madelyn Dillon) weather; fire-dependent commu- tion for each image. For example: nities or species; etc.) A Sikorsky S–64 Skycrane deliv- Postmark Deadline ers retardant on the 1996 Clark First Friday in March Peak Fire, Coronado National Sample Photo Release Statement Enclosed is/are (number) image(s) for publication by the USDA Forest Service. For each image submitted, the contest category is indicated and a detailed caption is enclosed. I have the authority to give permission to the Forest Service to publish the enclosed image(s) and am aware that, if used, it/they will be in the public domain and appear on the World Wide Web. Contact information: Name Institutional affiliation, if any Home or business address Telephone number E-mail address Volume 65 • No. 3 • Summer 2005 39