Informing the Network: Improving Communication with Interface Communities During Wildland Fire

Special Section on Fire Human Ecology Informing the Network: Improving Communication with Interface Communities During Wildland Fire Jonathan G. Taylor U.S. Geological Survey, Retired Fort Collins Science Center1 Shana C. Gillette Journalism and Technical Communications Department Colorado State University2 Ronald W. Hodgson Adaptive Management Services Enterprise Team US Forest Service3 Judith L. Downing Assistant Director, Cooperative Fire Liaison Pacific Southwest Region US Forest Service4 Michele R. Burns U.S. Geological Survey Fort Collins Science Center5 Deborah J. Chavez Pacific Southwest Research Station US Forest Service6 John T. Hogan U.S. Geological Survey Los Alamos County Fire Mitigation Project Jemez Mountain Field Station7 Abstract fire, widespread evacuations disrupted many of the local informal communication networks. Residents’ needs were for An interagency research team studied fire communica- “real-time,” place-specific information: precise location, tions that took place during different stages of two wildfires severity, size, and direction of spread of the fires. Fire man- in southern California: one small fire of short duration and agement agencies must contribute real-time, place-specific one large fire of long duration. This “quick-response” re- fire information when it is most needed by the affected pub- search showed that pre-fire communication planning was lic, as they try to make sense out of the chaos of a wildland particularly effective for smaller fire events and parts of that fire. Disseminating fire information as broadly as possible planning proved invaluable for the large fire event as well. through multiple pathways will maximize the probability of Information seeking by the affected public relied on locally the public finding the information they need. convenient sources during the small fire. During the large 198 Human Ecology Review, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2007 © Society for Human Ecology Taylor et al. Keywords: fire, communication, wildland urban inter- The purpose of this study was to begin to better under- face, quick response research, sense-making stand how communities communicate and seek information to cope with the threat of disaster, specifically wildfire in the Introduction wildland urban interface where flammable wildland vegeta- tion intermingles with people and their property. Sense-mak- Increases in the severity and frequency of wildland fires ing theory guided the questions asked and the interview during recent drought years in the West have coincided with methods used. growth in both housing developments and recreation in wild- In organizations, as for the individual and the communi- land areas (Rudzitis 1999). The results of such convergence ty, sense-making involves a continuing search, on the part of in 2003 were large composite wildfires, especially in south- individuals, the community, and within organizations, for ern California, that damaged communities, strained fire fight- plausible stories that create order out of a chaotic situation ing resources, necessitated evacuations from many cities and and serve as a foundation for action (Weick et al. 2005). towns, and caused several deaths. The intensity, size, and “Sense-making begins in Chaos,” (Wieck et al. 2005, 411) proximity to populated areas of these wildfires required un- when one or more people recognize a situation that is con- precedented levels of communication among agencies and fusing, attracts curiosity, and may be perceived as potentially between agencies and the general public. dangerous. Danger elevates emotional arousal. When high During natural disasters, such as wildfire, the affected arousal is combined with an anticipation of injury or loss and public seeks information in their attempt to understand the a sense of lacking control over what is happening, people ex- disaster and its dangers, to make sense of a chaotic and perience negative emotions of fear or anxiety (Mehrabian frightening situation. They try to obtain information from of- 1995; Mehrabian and Russell 1974). ficial sources, such as agencies, but also from informal To control growing fear or anxiety, people can find ways sources such as family, friends, community members, and to impose order and structure on the chaos and make it more websites (Fitzpatrick and Mileti 1994). During a crisis, the predictable. Seeking information helps. However, before it most critical communication role for the managing agency is can be used, the information has to be constructed into a to respond quickly with accurate, timely information in open plausible story or theory that explains what is happening. communication (Dougherty 1992; Barton 1993; Fitzpatrick Constructing the plausible story is a social process achieved and Mileti 1994). Disaster managers have a legitimate and through communication among the members of the commu- often mandated interest in encouraging public behavior that nity (Weick et al. 2005). In disasters, getting the story right increases public and firefighter safety and reduces fire costs and doing so quickly can mean the difference between safety and losses. Disaster managers, however, must be part of the and injury or death and the protection or loss of property or community dialogue so that their views and perspectives con- other significant values-at-risk. tribute to the construction of the plausible stories emerging Communication needs emerge rapidly and change quick- from communities trying to make sense of the disaster situa- ly during a wildfire event, therefore research that takes place tion. Furthermore, the messages that agencies send to the during the event is crucial. This type of research has been public must be ones that the public can understand. This en- termed “quick response” by investigators of other natural dis- tails using everyday language, instead of government asters (Michaels 2003). Quick response research is conduct- acronyms, jargon, or “officialese” and distributing informa- ed during and closely following a disaster event. Preplanning tion through many communication channels (Fitzpatrick and and rapid implementation of this kind of research is impor- Mileti 1994; Waugh 2000). tant to ensure that events critical to the study are captured, but This study focused on communication at all stages of without interfering with emergency response teams or jeop- wildland interface fire because this topic represents a gap in ardizing public safety. This quick response research study of both the fire social science and disaster response research lit- two wildfire events in the San Bernardino Mountains in erature. Social science researchers of natural resource fire southern California evaluated the communication needs of have studied public knowledge of wildfire (Cortner et al. the public in this wildfire context and explored current 1990) and public perceptions of risk, responsibility, and agency responses to those needs. blame (Taylor and Daniel 1984; Gardner et al. 1987; Carroll et al. 2000). A study, closely related to this one, looked at Background how blaming behavior affects communication between agencies and the public during wildfire (Kumagai et al. 2004). The San Bernardino National Forest (SBF) experienced However, very little research has studied information-seeking an extreme drought over at least five years that resulted in behavior during and immediately after a wildfire event. tree mortality from insects and disease (Dietrich 2003). In Human Ecology Review, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2007 199 Taylor et al. response to the tree die-off, which one Fire Management Officer termed a “slow-moving disaster,” the USDA Forest Service (USFS) initiated several fuels reduction projects. Coordination of these projects and other fire mitigation ef- forts enlisted a diverse range of agencies and community groups and served as a catalyst for community discussion about wildfire and forest health. An important development in the SBF area was the or- ganization of two types of fire collaboration: interagency and community-based. These two types of collaboration are important in wildfire preparedness planning and response because they allow communities to better mobilize and coordinate resources and to communicate with everyone involved during a wildfire event (Sturtevant et al. 2005). One organi- zation that was created in the San Bernardino Mountains area was the Mountain Area Safety Taskforce (MAST), which in- cluded representatives from federal, state, and local government agencies as well as various community service organizations. The MAST helped many participants, who would be in charge at various stages of a natural disaster, to understand how to deal with shifting authority during wildfire, and how all entities involved would coordinate and communicate. In Figure 1. Extent of Old Fire Burn at Time of Containment addition to the MAST, Fire Safe Councils (FSCs) were orga- nized in several mountain communities. Since 1993, FSCs have been created throughout California to help communities southern California that fall. The Old Fire/Grand Prix Fire protect their physical and natural resources from wildfire Complex burned 150,729 acres in two weeks, which greatly using a multiple stakeholder, locally-based approach (Fire affected residents of the San Bernardino Mountain communi- Safe Council 2005). In San Bernardino, the FSC organiza- ties (Figure 1). More than 1,000 structures were lost and tions were linked to the MAST and developed networks with- 45,000 residents were evacuated from their homes. in their

Load more