National Fire Plan

America´s National Fire Plan
(IFFN No. 27 – July 2002, p. 14-16)

A Season to Remember

Every year weather and fuel specialists predict the potential for wildland fire activity across the United States based on weather patterns, drought conditions, and the dryness of the vegetation. The one factor for which its potential cannot be predicted, however, is lightning, and the amount and location of lightning may mean the difference between a mild and a severe fire season.
In the summer of 2000, the potential for a severe fire season based on weather and fuel conditions was very real when the last factor – lightning – fell into place. The result was widespread fires that were erratic, intense, and explosive. The fires not only threatened people and firefighters but destroyed property and damaged natural resources.
In early August, then-President Clinton visited the Burgdorf Junction Fire, near McCall, Idaho, to see firsthand the fire situation in the West. During that trip, President Clinton asked the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to develop recommendations on how to reduce the impacts of fire on rural communities and ensure sufficient firefighting resources for the future. They responded with “Managing the Impacts of Wildfires on Communities and the Environment: A Report to the President in Response to the Wildfires of 2000,”which is also known as the “National Fire Plan.”
Congress then supported the President’s Report with a budget appropriation for the federal agencies in 2001 of nearly $2.9 billion ($1.9 for the Forest Service and $979 million for Interior), and in 2002, nearly $2.3 billion.
The National Fire Plan is, in essence, a long-term commitment founded on interagency and intergovernmental partnerships and cooperation to enhance the wildland firefighting response, reduce the threat of fire to communities and natural resources, restore and rehabilitate lands damaged by fire and, most importantly, increase the safety of the public and firefighters. The Plan recognizes that wildlands did not deteriorate overnight to the point where fires that occur become large and threatening, but that it took many decades of effective fire suppression for fuels to accumulate and land health to suffer, and it will take many years to correct the problem. The Plan emphasizes the importance of treating hazardous fuel prior to a fire starting rather than relying on suppression efforts alone, and that accomplishing this task is along-term process.

What the National Fire Plan Looks Like

The National Fire Plan contains five key points: 1)Firefighting – ensure firefighting resources are adequate; 2) Rehabilitation and Restoration – restore landscapes and rebuild communities; 3) Hazardous Fuel Reduction – invest in projects to reduce fire risks; 4) Community Assistance -work directly with communities; and 5) Accountability.

Firefighting

Preparedness

The 2001 appropriation provided 100 percent of the funding firefighting agencies needed to respond to fires at the most efficient and safe level, while achieving resource management objectives and minimizing the cost of suppression and resource damage. The Plan included a workforce development strategy enabling agencies to hire nearly 5,500 additional firefighters. These included hiring additional seasonal and new permanent staffing fire management and related positions and converting some temporary employee appointments to permanent. Most of the new jobs are entry-level forestry aids or technician jobs assigned to firefighting positions, but some are higher graded positions in fire management and related disciplines.

Fire Facilities Maintenance and Construction

Adequate fire facilities are critical to efficient and safe fire operations. Funding was provided in the 2001 appropriation for maintenance and capital improvement of wildland fire facilities such as air tanker bases (tankers are critical to initial attack), crew facilities, engine houses and helitack bases to address and eliminate critical health and safety problems. In all, about $38 million was spent to improve or maintain 144facilities, including air tanker bases in Montana, Oregon, California, NewMexico, Utah and Arizona.

Equipment

With funding provided through the National Fire Plan and 2001 appropriation, additional equipment was purchased including 406wildland firefighting engines, 56 bulldozers, 14 tractor plows and 24 water/foam tenders. An additional 31 helicopter contracts were also issued. The equipment has been positioned across the country with the majority located in the West.

Fire Science Research and Technology Development

Since 1998 the Joint Fire Science Program (JFSP) has been developing science-based, interagency approaches in fuels inventory and mapping, evaluation of fuels treatments, scheduling of fuels treatments, and monitoring of treatment effects and effectiveness. The 2001 appropriation doubled funding to $16.6 million for the JFSP, helping to fund 22 research projects focused on gathering information and developing tools to help firefighters better prepare for wildfires and allocate firefighting resources. This research included identifying smoke transport patterns, predicting fire weather conditions, and improving fire risk assessments. All of this work helps firefighters make critical safety decisions; guide deployment of firefighting forces to increase efficiency; and reduce damages to resources, people and property.

Rehabilitation and Restoration

Short-term rehabilitation projects help prevent further damage to ecosystems and communities as a result of fire, while long-term restoration projects help improve land unlikely to recover naturally from fire, prevent invasions of noxious weeds and exotic species, and reduce disease and bug infestations. Total funding for rehabilitation and restoration work in the2001 appropriation was about $246 million, allowing treatment on 2.5 million acres of land through 549 projects in 19 states. Projects in the wildland-urban interface received special consideration.

Hazardous Fuel Reduction

About $400 million was provided in the 2001appropriation for fuel management and reduction to address dense forest vegetation resulting from decades of wildfire suppression and fire exclusion on federal lands. Activities focus on wildland-urban interface areas to reduce the risks of fire to people and property. These projects helped support local communities by using local contractors and assistance. Fuel treatments were completed on more than two million acres of federal land in 2001, including611,550 acres in the wildland-urban interface.

Community Assistance

Rural, Volunteer and State Fire Assistance

Safe and effective fire suppression in the wildland-urban interface demands close coordination between rural, local, state, tribal and federal firefighting agencies. The 2001 and 2002 appropriations earmarked $10 million for a new Department of the Interior rural fire assistance program. This funding helped enhance the fire protection capabilities of rural fire departments through training, equipment purchase and prevention work on a cost-shared basis.

The Forest Service has had similar programs in place for many years. The 2001appropriation for the Forest Service targeted $75.5 million for its state fire assistance program; $13.3 million for its volunteer fire assistance program;$12.5 million for Economic Action Programs; and $35 million for community and private land fire assistance.

Fire Prevention and Education

A critical element of the National Fire Plan is to help the public understand wildland fire and the challenges it presents where wildlands intermingle with urban and suburban lands. FIREWISE, a program with an online web site, publications, videos, and training events, provides educational programs and materials to help people create wildland fire resistant homes and communities. Through the National Fire Plan, $5 million was used for development and delivery of a national series of FIREWISE workshops.

Communities at Risk

In the 2001 appropriation, Congress directed the secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to work with individual states and tribes to develop a list of communities in the wildland-urban interface at high risk from wildfire. Based on this list, 1,776 communities in the vicinity of Interior or Forest Service lands were scheduled to receive hazardous fuel treatments. Additional communities, not in the vicinity of federal land, had projects funded through Forest Service State Fire Assistance funds, VolunteerFire Assistance, and Economic Action funds.

Accountability

One of the cornerstones of the National Fire Plan is accountability. Indeed, the success of the Plan depends upon constant review of the programs and plans developed to implement the Plan. Toward this end, agencies have accomplished much in the year since the Plan was established. For example, early in 2002, the Interagency Wildland Fire Leadership Council was established to provide oversight and coordinate the efforts of the federal and state agencies. Additional opportunities to improve coordination and integration have also been explored with oversight and external organizations including theGeneral Accounting Office, both Departments’ Offices of Inspector General, theOffice of Management and Budget, National Academy of Public Administration, theNational Association of Counties, the National Association of State Foresters and the Western Governors’ Association.

What Happens Next

In August 2001 the Secretaries of Agriculture andInterior joined the Western Governors’ Association, National Association ofState Foresters, National Association of Counties and the Intertribal TimberCouncil in endorsing “A Collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland FireRisks to Communities and the Environment: A 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy.”The strategy outlines a comprehensive approach to managing wildland fire, hazardous fuel, and ecosystem restoration and rehabilitation on federal and adjacent state, tribe and private forest and rangeland across the United States. The strategy emphasizes measures to reduce the risk to communities and the environment and provides a framework for collaboration to accomplish this. As soon as the strategy was signed, work began on an implementation plan, which was finalized and signed on May 23, 2002. The implementation plan outlines the goals and actions necessary to accomplish the strategy and emphasizes local decisions for local problems, collaborative decision-making, and a commitment of many groups is accountability including industry, environmental and governmental. In essence, the strategy and plan provide a long-term map and directions for implementing the National Fire Plan was established more details see:

https://www.fs.fed.us/database/budgetoffice/NFP_final32601.pdf

In August 2000, when 86 fires were burning in 12 western states and nearly20,000 firefighters were on the lines or in support positions, no one could imagine a silver lining in the cloud. Yet that’s exactly what the National Fire Plan has become. Federal wildland agencies and their state partners are more prepared than ever before to stop fires while they’re small, reduce the threat of wildland fire to people, communities and natural resources, and rehabilitate or restore land damaged by fire. No, fires that grow large, dangerous and threatening will not be eliminated overnight – it took decades for the land to deteriorate to the point where these types of fires occur –but with the National Fire Plan federal and state agencies at least have a fighting chance.

IFFN/GFMC contribution submitted by:

Nancy Lull
Bureau of Land Management
National Interagency Fire Center
Boise, Idaho 83705-5354
U.S.A.
https://www.nifc.gov

Top    
IFFN No. 27
Country Notes

/by

USA: Fire Prevention ride-along Program for Southeast Asian Children (IFFN No. 4 – December 1990)

 

Fire Prevention ride-along Program forSoutheast Asian Children

(IFFN No. 4 – December 1990, p. 13-14)

A unique fire prevention program in the Sierra National Forest teams up bilingual children of Southeast Asian descent with fire prevention personnel to help communicate with the large number of Southeast Asians expected to visit the forest, especially for the opening of tree squirrel season.

Because many adults of Southeast Asian heritage are not yet proficient in English, they often are not aware of fire restrictions in effect. The students in the program serve as interpreters for forest personnel who must ensure the restrictions are understood and followed especially in light of the dry conditions in the Sierra.

About 20 seventh- and eighth-graders from Yosemite Middle School and Fresno United School District participated last year. For three days they rode along with U.S. Forest Service, Southern California Edison, and California Fish and Game personnel on their regular patrols through the nation forest. The Ride-Along program includes a two-night camp-out at Clearwater Ranger Station, where students will receive other outdoor education.

The children were Hmong, Laotian, Cambodian and Vietnamese. Since the end of America’s involvement in the Viet Nam war, approximately 600,000 Southeast Asian refugees have come to California. In their homelands education, when available, was often limited to the third-grade level. Most were self-employed in slash-and-burn agriculture or crafts. In California, many use hunting to complement their subsistence, which has resulted in an increase in person-caused wildfires on National Forest lands.

Demographic projections indicate that 75 percent of California population growth into the next century will be Hispanic and Asian. Program organizers believed that a fire prevention program which was not responsive to the projected influx of this non-traditional forest user was destined to failure. The first effort to communicate the prevention massage was through handouts translated into Laotian and Hmong.

Much planning went into the Ride-Along program. Among the considerations were: transportation logistics for the students; sleeping arrangements; security; meals; media contact and news releases; and school district coordination. The long range goals of the program are: 

  • To provide an educational program to the Southeast Asia community on fire prevention and fish and game regulations
  • To instill in students a love for land stewardship, so it may shared with families and become a life-long pursuit
  • To provide an opportunity and experience for students and land stewards to strengthen social skills, clarify values and develop self-confidence and positive self-esteem.

 This information was taken from “Wildfire News and Notes”, Vol. 4, No. 3 (May/June 1990), published by:

 

 

National Fire Protection Association

1 Batterymarch Park
P.O. Box 9101
USA-Quincy, MA 02269-9101

Top
Country Notes

 

/by

USA: Class A Foam is on the Shelf (IFFN No. 9 – July 1993)

 

Class A Foam is on the Shelf

(IFFN No. 9 – July 1993, p. 21-22)

Information

The National Wildfire Coordination Group Fire Equipment Working Team is producing two series of publications on the use of Class A foam for wildland fire management.

Video

A videotape series introduces the basic principles of foam chemicals, explains the function of mixing and foam generating equipment, and demonstrates suppressive and protective applications. Videotapes that are now available through the Publications Management System are:

INTRODUCTION TO CLASS A FOAM, a brief introduction to Class A foam technology discussing chemistry, generating equipment, and examples of application. 1989, 13:00, VHS only, NFES #2073.

THE PROPERTIES OF FOAM, explains how Class A foam enhances the abilities of water to extinguish fire and to prevent fuel ignition. Basic foam concepts including drain time, expansion, and foam type are presented. 1992, 15:00, VHS only, NFES #2219.

CLASS A FOAM PROPORTIONERS, explains how common mixing systems, including eductors and direct injection devices, add a measured amount of foam concentrate into a known volume of water. Advantages and disadvantages are also discussed. 1992, 23:10, VHS only, NFES #2245.

ASPIRATING NOZZLES, explains how aspirating nozzles work and introduces the variety of nozzles available. 1992, 10:13, VHS only, NFES #2272.

Videotapes that will be available in the near future include:

COMPRESSED AIR FOAM SYSTEMS, explains the basics of compressed air foam systems; discusses options for water pumps, air compressors, and power sources; demonstrates safe operation. Available Spring 1993.

TACTICS I: INDIRECT ATTACK, discusses the primary objective of raising fuel moisture; demonstrates applications for protection of vegetation and structures, and for constructing line from which to burn. Available Fall 1993.

TACTICS II: DIRECT ATTACK, discusses the primary objective of achieving the critical flow rate; demonstrates applications of suppression including flame knockdown, extinguishment, and mop-up. Available Fall 1993.

User Guide

A basic user guide series presents introductory and comprehensive explanations of foam properties, equipment, ground applications, and aerial applications. User guides that are now available through the Publications Management System are: 

FOAM VS. FIRE, CLASS A FOAM FOR WILDLAND FIRES, 1992. This 28-page publication explains how to get the most firefighting punch from water by converting water to class A foam. Discusses how and why foam works. Explains drain time, expansion ratio, foam type, proportioning, aspirating nozzles and compressed air foam systems. Also discusses application for direct attack, indirect attack, mopup, structure protection, and safety considerations. NFES #2246.

FOAM VS. FIRE, PRIMER, 1992. This 9-page publication covers the basics of using class A foams and discusses their adaptability to present application equipment. NFES #2270.The third user guide will address aerial delivery of class A foam including foam properties, and equipment for helicopter and fixed-wing applications. This publication is under development.

These videos and publications can be ordered from the Boise Interagency Fire Center. The estimated price for each videotape is $3.00; each user guide is $.75. To order, provide document name and NFES number and mail or fax a purchase order or requisition to:

 

Boise Interagency Fire Center
ATTN: Supply
3905 Vista Avenue
USA-Boise, Idaho 83705

Phone: (++1) 208-389-2542
Fax:     (++1) 208-389-2573

 

 Training

The Bureau of Land Management is presenting a workshop on Class A Foam entitled “Class A Foams, Generating Systems, and Tactics”. The workshop demonstrates the properties of water and foam for fire suppression, examines proportioning and foam generating devices, and describes applications and tactics. Case studies from actual fires are used to suggest tactics for direct and indirect attack, mop-up/overhaul, and structure and resource protection. Instruction is a combination of lecture, hands-on demonstration, and live fire exercises. The next course is scheduled as follows:

19-21 October 1993.

All sessions will be held at the Boise Interagency Fire Center, Boise, Idaho. To place nominations please contact

 

Ron Rochna,  
Course Coordinator
Boise Interagency Fire Center
3905 Vista Avenue, 
USA-Boise, ID 83705

Phone: (++1) 208-389-2432

 

A 16-hour Class A foam S-course is also under development for training. The course is expected to combine material from the videos, publications, and workshop exercises to enable students to successfully use foam for fire management.

 

 

From: Paul M. Schlobohm
Address:
Boise Interagency Fire Center
Bureau of Land Management
3905 Vista Avenue
USA-Boise, Idaho 83705

Top
Country Notes

 

/by

USA: The 1993 Southern California Fires (IFFN No 10 – January 1994)

 

The 1993 Southern California Fires

(IFFN No 10 – January 1994, p. 21-22)

Southern California suffered another disastrous series of fires in October and November, 1993. The fires started on 26 October under severe Santa Ana Wind conditions, some by arson and other accidentally. Preliminary data indicate that a total of 21 fires covered 197,225 acres (almost 84,000 ha) injuring 162 people and killing three. The fires destroyed 1241 structures, and damage was preliminarily estimated to be $500 million, although that figure could rise as damage is further assessed and the aftermath of heavy rains, mudslides, and floods after the fires takes its toll.

The fires were in six southern California counties – Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura. Total acreage and structure loss by county is:

 

County

Number of Fires

Area Burned (ha)

Structures Destroyed

Los Angeles

3

9,996

562

Orange

2

7,034

368

Riverside

6

24,955

188

San Bernardino

2

1,914

5

San Diego

5

9,084

43

Ventura

3

26,832

75

 

Data from California Office of Emergency Services

Although the immediate causes of the losses were arson and accidental fire starts, we must look at the long-term need for fuels management to reduce California’s fire losses. Our data clearly indicate the need to modify both structures and vegetation. Between 1920 and 1989, California lost about 3,500 structures to wildfires. In the first 4 years of the 1990s we have now lost almost 4,500 structures. Also, in the last 25 years we have seen the wildfire acreage just about double from ca.1 ha burned per 400 ha (ca.1,000 acres) protected to almost 2 ha. Loss of human lives has also increased dramatically.

A specific example of the need for structural and vegetation modification is the 1990 Santa Barbara “Paint” Fire. About 488 structures were lost and over 800 threatened. Analysis of 75 factors showed 21 to be statistically significant in whether or not a structure was lost. However, three factors were most significant. First, if any roofing other than wood shakes or shingles were on the structure, survival rose from 19% to 70%. Adding to this, if flammable vegetation were cleared beyond 30 feet (9 meters), structural survival rose from 15% to 90%, finally, both the other factors tend to make a structure more defensible, so that if anyone were present to defend the structure, the three factors then increased structure survival from 4% to 99%. This analysis is the subject of Ethan Foote’s MS thesis, which should be completed in the near future.

 

 

From: Robert E. Martin
Address:
University of California
College of Natural Resources
145 Mulford Hall
USA – Berkeley, CA 94720

Fax: ++1-510-643-5438
Phone: ++1-510-642-7931

Top
Country Notes

 

/by

USA: The 1994 Calendar Year Fire Report (IFFN No. 12 – January 1995)

 

The 1994 Calendar Year Fire Report

(IFFN No. 12 – January 1995, p. 17-24)

The winter of 1993-1994 was another mild winter with below normal precipitation and snowpacks over much of the Western United States. A persistent deep trough over the East Coast brought bitterly cold weather to much of the East. Several locations suffered record cold temperatures and snowfall. Out West, a strong high pressure ridge blocked most Pacific storms from moving inland. By 1 March, the snowpack for the West was: California, 65% of normal; Arizona, 88%; New Mexico, 93%; Nevada, 66%; Utah, 77%; Colorado, 88%; Oregon, 76%; Washington, 85%; Idaho, 67%; Montana, 76%; and Wyoming, 81%.High pressure prevailed in the West during March with an upper trough over the Great Lakes area. Even though a number of storms tracked across the country, only the Great Lakes and Northeast areas reported a colder and wetter than average March. Areas of severe and extreme drought (Palmer Drought Index) increased significantly in the Northern Rockies, Great Basin, California, and the Northwest. The wildland fire protection agencies began preparations for another busy year.

January-April

The Southeastern United States experienced their fourth consecutive below average spring fire season. While there was some fire activity, most large fires were contained by the following day. A Type II Incident Management Team (Type I Incident Management Team: A team made up of 33 people that are trained in specific areas of expertise in the command, logistics, operations, and finance functions to manage a complex incident: high value resources and/or life and property at risk and generally more than 1,000 people working in the incident. Type I Incident Management Team: The same as Type I Team but the incedent is not as large or complex and the number of people working on the incednt id between 200 to 1,000.) was mobilized on 8 April for the Sunset Fire on the Wichita Mountain NWR in Oklahoma which burned 960 ha (2,370 acres) before being controlled. The Fifth Army was requested to provide a transportation unit to transport firefighters to and from the fireline.

A Type I Incident Management Team was mobilized on 18 January for the Northridge Earthquake in Southern California. The team was assigned to manage a receiving and distribution centre. Another Type I Team was mobilized on 24 January to assist the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) with disaster response and recovery assessments. Both teams were released by the end of January.

Areas in the Northern Rockies and the Southwest experienced very active fire conditions for March and early April. In addition, a great deal of prescribed burning was accomplished much earlier than normal.

A Type I Incident Management Team was mobilized for the County Line Fire on the Huron-Manistee National Forest on 24 April. This fire threatened the community of Baldwin, Michigan, and burned eight mobile homes before being controlled at 330 ha (820 acres).

By 1 May, the western mountain snowpacks were well below average with the worst conditions in California, Nevada, and Oregon where snowpacks were less than half of normal. By the end of April, the Southern area’s spring fire season was winding down except for areas in Texas and Southern Florida that were still experiencing significant fire activity.

May

Just as the Southern area’s spring fire season was coming to a close, significant fire activity occurred in Florida and North Carolina. On 5 May, lightning started the Basshole Fire on Florida State lands near Miami. The fire origin was in a remote, swampy area. A 16,000 ha (40,000 acres) backfire operation was completed on 7 May and the fire was controlled after burning ca. 32,00 ha (80,000 acres). All wildland fire protection units in Florida were busy during the month with initial attack and extended attack fires because of a persistent drought condition.

Areas in North Carolina were also very busy because of drought conditions. The Angola Bay Fire, North Carolina State, which was started by lightning on 18 May, burned 3,500 ha (8,647 acres). A Type II Incident Management Team, 27 tractors, and 170 people were mobilized for this fire. On 25 May, the State mobilized their two National Guard MAFFS air tankers for this fire. (MAFFS=Modular Airborne Fire Fighting System: A 3,000 gallon pressurized tank that is fitted into a C-130 aircraft, used to deliver fire retardant to a fire.)

During the last week of the month, fire conditions continued to worsen in North Carolina. The Fish Day Fire, National Forests of North Carolina, burned 10,000 ha (24,600 acres) before being contained on 2 June. A Type I Incident Management Team, five air tankers, seven Type II helicopters [Type II helicopter: a medium lift helicopter. Types include: Bell 204, 205, 212, for up to 14 people (including pilot) and up to 2,500 pounds payload], one infrared aircraft, 27 tractors, 43 engines/tenders, and 560 people were mobilized. This fire exhibited very erratic behaviour and because of its remote location was very difficult to control.

The two MAFFS air tankers that were mobilized for the Angola Bay Fire were only used on the Fish Day Fire. They flew 95 missions, flying 31.4 hours and dropped 1.13 million litres of retardant.

Fire activity in the Southwest was well below normal for the month. A series of low pressure systems dominated the weather for much of the month which kept temperatures and precipitation in the near normal range. On 8 May, the Mother’s Day Fire, Saguaro National Monument, burned 458 ha (1,157 acres) before being controlled. During mid-month, the Arizona Strip and Las Cruces Districts, Bureau of Land Management (BLM); Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS); Gila National Forest, US Forest Service (USFS); Salt River and San Carlos Agencies, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA); and Arizona and New Mexico State all responded to extended attack fires. At the close of the month, the Southwest Area had sent three airtankers to the Southern Area and four air tankers to California to support large fire activity in those areas.

On 21 May, the National Interagency Coordination Center (NICC) sent five crews to the Eastern Area which was experiencing critical fire conditions and a lot of initial attack activity. No large fires were reported during this period.

On 27 May, the Brown Fire, California Desert District, burned 410 ha (1,012 acres) before being contained the next day. Four air tankers and 400 people were mobilized for this fire.

The remainder of the West experienced cool, moist conditions for much of the month with no significant fire activity being reported. Areas of extreme and severe drought as depicted by the Palmer Drought Index continued to expand in the West. As the summer months approached, the potential for a busy fire season became more probable.

June

Major fire activity occurred in many areas in the West during June. The Southwest experienced a very active month. Large fires occurred on a daily basis. On 1 June, the Mackenzie Fire, Phoenix District BLM, burned 507 ha (1,252 acres) before being controlled. A Type II Incident Management Team and 350 people were mobilized for this fire. Three people deployed shelters on this incident but they were not injured.

On 7 June, the Silver City Smokejumper base was activated. By the end of June, 108 smokejumpers had been assigned to the Southwest Area.

Between 4 and 16 June, Type I Incident Management Teams were mobilized for the Miller Fire, Coronado National Forest, 1,200 ha (2,970 acres); Bridge Fire, Lincoln National Forest, 2,180 ha (5,380 acres); Ryan Complex, Cibola National Forest, 10,000 ha (24,800 acres); Pigeon Fire, Gila National Forest, 2,500 ha (6,250 acres). A Type II Incident Management Team was mobilized for the Marcus Fire, Guadalupe National Park, which burned 2,500 ha (6,250) acres before being controlled. Type II Incident Management Teams were also mobilized for several other fires.

The Rocky Mountain and Great Basin Areas also had large fire activity. Type II Incident Management Teams were assigned to the:

 

Boy Scout Fire Wasatch-Cache National Forest 172 ha (425 acres) Coalbed Fire Moab District, BLM 243 ha (600 acres) Buniger Fire Grand Junction, BLM 648 ha (1,600 acres) Bitter Creek Moab District, BLM 1,546 ha (3,820 acres)

 

The Garlick Fire, Sierra National Forest, was reported on 18 June which burned 253 ha (625 acres) before being contained. A Type I Incident Management Team was assigned to the White Fire, Sequoia National Forest. Forty-eight crews and over 1,500 people were mobilized for this fire before it was contained at 1,014 ha (2,505 acres). Type II Incident Management Teams were mobilized for the Scout and Shooting Fires, Angles National Forest, which burned 1,140 ha (2,820 acres) and 1,416 ha (3,500 acres) respectively.

The eight military airtankers (MAFFS) were mobilized on 27 June for the Shooting Fire on the Angeles National Forest. They performed 26 missions (45.1 flight hours) and dropped 340,000 l of retardant in support of several fires before being re-assigned to Phoenix, Arizona on 1 July.

On 29 June, Type I Incident Management Teams were mobilized for the Lucas Complex, Sequoia National Forest, and the Second Fire, Cleveland National Forest. These fires burned 4,031 ha (9,960 acres) and 2,072 ha (5,120 acres) before being contained on 1 July.

On 27 June, an escaped prescribed fire burned 80 ha (200 acres) on the Modoc National Forest. On 28 June, an arsonist started five fires on the Winema National Forest and Oregon State lands which burned 600 ha (1,500 acres) before being contained on 1 July.

By mid-month, fire danger increased in Alaska because of very warm temperatures. Lightning started several fires and 25 smokejumpers and several overhead personnel were mobilized from the Lower 48. (“Lower 48”: A slang term from Alaska. the 48 states that make up the contiguous continental United States. Alaska and Hawaii are separated by Canadian territory and/or water.) Type II Incident Management Teams were committed to fires on lands protected by the State of Alaska. By 20 June, fire activity moderated in Alaska because of cool, unsettled weather which dominated their weather picture for the remainder of June. By the end of the month, all overhead personnel and smokejumpers had been returned to the Lower 48.

Due to widespread fire activity in the Southwest, California, and the Rocky Mountain Areas the National Interagency Coordination Center raised the National Fire Preparedness Level to III on 27 June.

July-September

The fire situation in the Southwest and the Rocky Mountain Areas had reached a critical level by 1 July. Dry lightning and strong winds caused many fires to spread rapidly. The Hour Glass Fire, Roosevelt National Forest, which was fanned by strong thunderstorm winds on 1 July, travelled more than three miles in one afternoon. Several structures on the Colorado State University Forestry Campus at Pingree Park were burned. A Type I Incident Management Team and over 600 people were mobilized for this fire before it was controlled at 500 ha (1,200 acres). There were five shelter deployments on this fire but there were no injuries.

The West Slope of Colorado also had major fire problems from several dry lightning storms. Type II Incident Management Teams were committed to:

 

Squaw Mountain Fire

1 July

Casper District BLM

1,469 ha (3,630 acres)

Sheep Mountain Fire

3 July

Big Horn National Forest

98 ha (242 acres)

Wake Fire

5 July

Montrose District, BLM

1,400 ha (3,460 acres)

Mitchell Lake Fire

6 July

San Juan National Forest

109 ha (270 acres)

North Fork Fire

12 July

Uncompahgre N. F.

219 ha (540 acres)

2-Road Fire

13 July

Grand Junction Dist. BLM

1,467 ha (3,625 acres)

Larimer Complex

13 July

Roosevelt National Forest

191 ha (473 acres)

Wray Fire

14 July

Montrose District BLM

623 ha (1,540 acres)

Black Ridge Fire

15 July

Southern Ute Agency BIA

4,856 ha (12,000 acres)

 

A Red Flag Warning (A term used by the National Weather Service Fire Weather Forecasters to bring attention to a weather component expected in the forecast period that could cause severe fire danger or activity on fires that already exist. Examples: low relative humidity, strong gusty winds, dry lightning or a combination of any of these components.) was issued 6 July for Colorado for strong winds associated with a frontal passage. At about 5:00 p.m., strong winds fanned the South Canyon Fire, Grand Junction District, BLM, which was then about 50 ha (130 acres) in size. The fire spread rapidly and overran the firefighters on the lines, resulting in 14 fatalities. A Type I Incident Management Team and 650 people were mobilized for this fire which was contained at 751 ha (1,856 acres). On 14 July, a Type I Incident Management Team was mobilized for the Ute Creek Fire, White River National Forest. This fire burned 1,200 ha (3,000 acres) before being contained on 23 July. By late June, extreme fire danger was being reported throughout the Southwest because of record breaking temperatures. Dry lightning storms ignited several hundred fires. By 1 July, over 20 project fires were being battled by about 150 crews, 20 airtankers, and 18 helicopters. A Type I Incident Management Team was assigned to the Rattlesnake Fire, Coronado National Forest on 1 July. This fire burned 10,330 ha (25,525 acres) before being contained on 24 July. Type II Incident Management Teams were assigned to several large fires in New Mexico and Arizona. These included the Catclaw Complex, Prescott National Forest, 3,882 ha (9,592 acres); Big Rock Complex, Lincoln National Forest, 2,839 ha (7,015 acres); Redington Complex, (Arizona State, Coronado National Forest, Saguaro National Monument) 8,387 ha (20,725 acres); and the Tower Complex, Truxton Canyon Agency, BIA, 4,229 ha (10,450 acres).

The military airtankers (MAFFS) that were assigned to Phoenix, Arizona on 1 July flew 420 missions (538.9 flight hours) and dropped 4.8 million l of retardant. 220,000 l were dropped on the Black Ridge Fire in Colorado with the remainder of the retardant dropped on fires in Arizona.

On 12 July, a helicopter en route to a new fire crashed on the Gila National Forest. This crash resulted in fatalities to the pilot and two Gila National Forest employees. Two other employees escaped with minor injuries. On 15 July, the Hallelujeh Fire, Carson District BLM, was reported. This fire spread rapidly and threatened several rural sub-divisions. A Type I Incident Management Team and more than 800 people were mobilized for this fire before it was controlled on 17 July.

Finally, on 17 July, the monsoons arrived in the Southwest. While fire conditions moderated in the Southwest and Rocky Mountain Areas, sub-tropical moisture triggered a series of dry lightning storms beginning on 21 July and ending on 11 September. The Northwest, California, Northern Rockies, and Great Basin Geographic Areas were all heavily impacted. During this period 102 major fires occurred in the West. Within each Geographic Area these fires were widespread, further complicating the logistical support and suppression efforts. Type I Incident Management Teams were mobilized for 35 fires during this period.

On 28 July, NICC raised the National Fire Preparedness Level to IV and on 29 July to Level V. By 1 August, a major fire campaign had begun. All available agency and private sector resources were committed. Demand for resources continued. Multi-Agency Coordinating Groups at the Geographic Area and National levels were busy prioritizing incidents, allocating and re-allocating scarce national resources. Fire activity continued at a relentless pace during August. Weary firefighters were rested and re-deployed. Unprecedented demands on the logistical support system occurred, as fire activity continued at record levels for three months. At the peak of activity in August, more than 25,000 firefighters, 900 engines, 155 helicopters, 54 airtankers, 31 mobile kitchens, and 42 shower units were assigned to fires.

Several fires received national attention. Many towns and communities were threatened including Leavenworth and Chelan, Washington; McCall and Idaho City, Idaho; and Libby and Jardine, Montana. Military assistance was first requested on 18 July for one Battalion (approximately 600 people) of firefighters. By 25 August, seven battalions of firefighters, eight military Chinook helicopters, and 10 military Black Hawk helicopters had been mobilized for fires in the Northwest, Northern Rockies, and Great Basin Areas. NICC requested an eighth battalion 1 September, but cancelled the request on 4 September after many areas in the Northwest and Northern Rockies began receiving precipitation.

Four military airtankers (MAFFS) were activated again on 25 July for Boise, Idaho. On 26 July, four MAFFS were mobilized for Spokane, Washington, and then re-assigned to Helena, Montana on 3 September. The Boise MAFFS delivered 11 million l and the Spokane/Helena MAFFS, 5 million l respectively.

On 29 July, a P2V airtanker (04) crashed on the Butler Fire near Missoula, Montana, resulting in fatalities to the pilot and co-pilot. On 13 August, a C-130 airtanker (82) was dispatched on an initial attack mission in Southern California and crashed before arriving at the fire, resulting in fatalities to the three-person flight crew.

On 25 August, a bulldozer operator was killed as he was overrun by fire on the Hull Mountain Fire in Southwestern Oregon on Oregon Department of Forestry lands. Canada also provided assistance. One hundred Mark III Pumps, five DC-6 airtankers, and five “bird dog” aircraft were used on fires during August.

Finally, between 10 and 13 September, light rain showers occurred over much of the Northwest, Northern Rockies, Northern California, and the central mountains of Idaho, which provided some relief from the long, hot summer. The military Black Hawk helicopters were released on 12 September and the last battalion of military firefighters returned to their home base on 14 September. The eight MAFFS airtankers also returned to their home bases on 14 September.

On 13 September, the National Fire Preparedness Level was lowered to IV and to III on 16 September. A Type I Incident Management Team was mobilized on 13 September to assist with flood relief efforts in the villages of Hughes, Allakaket, and Alatna, Alaska.

An emergency firefighter employed by the Great Basin Fire Cache located in Boise, Idaho, died from injuries sustained in a vehicle accident on 16 September. The employee was delivering equipment and supplies to the Payette National Forest at the time of the accident.

Just as fire conditions were beginning to moderate, another series of dry lightning storms occurred in Northern California and Oregon. Large fires occurred on the Klamath, Shasta-Trinity, and Lassen National Forests in California and on the Malheur and Wallowa-Whitman National Forest in Oregon. Hot, dry weather during the last two weeks of September caused many of the contained fires in Idaho and Montana to become active again. During the last week of September, the NICC mobilized about 90 crews for fires in the Great Basin, Northern Rockies, Northwest, and North Zone Geographic Areas.

Lightning storms on 28 September started over 400 fires in Northern California and Southern Oregon. There was some precipitation with these storms and all fires were controlled at less than 4 ha in size.

October-November

In early October, a significant weather change occurred. Cool, unsettled weather with some precipitation moderated fire conditions throughout the West. By 15 October, demobilization of the large fires was nearly complete. By late October, wetting rains had occurred over much of the Western United States. The fire risk continued to increase in November until the third week when new fires occurred in Kentucky, Tennessee, and Georgia. These fires resulted in the mobilization of a Type I and Type II Incident Management Team, Type II helicopters, an airtanker, and miscellaneous overhead and crews from across the country. On November 20, a fatality occurred on the Cedar Mountain fire on the Chattahoochee NF during a fire shelter deployment. After Thanksgiving, more typically-seasonal weather conditions resumed and the fire season wound down.

Summary 

In terms of length and scope, the 1994 fire season has been the most demanding on record. Major fire activity involving all the Western Geographic Areas occurred from the end of May through October. Demand for resources of all types often exceeded the supply. Listed below is some data about resources mobilized through the National Interagency Coordination Center and comparisons with previous years (Tab.1). Number of wildland fires and area burned in the U.S.A. by agency for the 1994 fire season are given in Table 2. Number of wildland fires and area burned in the U.S.A. by geographic areas for 1994 are given in Table 3. For comparison with previous years the number of wildland fires and area burned in the U.S.A. for all agencies for the decade 1985-1994 are given in Table 5.

Without question, this season ranks as one of the worst in terms of loss of life among those involved in suppression efforts. From initial and extended attack firefighters, to retardant flight crews, to support personnel, it crossed agency and private sector lines and their sacrifices were high.

     

Tab.1. Resources mobilized through the National InteragencyCoordination Center in 1994 and comparisons to previous years

Resource Mobilized

1994

1993

1988

5-year Average

Type I Incident Management Team

69

9

60

24

Overhead

10,379

814

7,740

3,200

Crews

1,636

275

1,336

654

Type I Helicopters

142

26

31

42

 

 

Tab.2. Number of wildland fires and area burned in the U.S.A. byagency for the 1994 fire season

Agency Number of Fires Area Burned (ha) Bureau of Indian Affairs 3,870 107,432 Bureau of Land Management 3,479 309,671 U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service 132 68,204 National Park Service 998 34,536 States 51,604 521,633 U.S.Forest Service 14,396 598,761 Totals 74,479 1,640,237

 

 

Tab.3. Number of wildland fires and area burned in the U.S.A. bygeographic areas, for all agencies for 1994

Geographic Area Number of Fires Area Burned (ha) Alaska 606 103,533 Northwest Area 5,878 235,051 California North Zone 1,566 64,858 California South Zone 8,841 100,990 Northern Rockies Area 4,875 122,476 Eastern Great Basin Area 3,175 375,310 Western Great Basin Area 909 82,422 Southwest Area 6,974 227,772 Rocky Mountain Area 3,203 43,451 Eastern Area 11,020 59,171 Southern Area 27,442 225,204 USA Total 74,479 1,640,238

 

 

Tab.4. Number of wildland fires and area burned in the U.S.A. forall agencies for the decade 1985-1994

Year

Number of Fires

Area Burned (ha)

1994

74,479

1,640,238

1993

58,810

727,457

1992

87,394

837,688

1991

75,754

1,195,297

1990

66,481

1,870,344

1989

48,949

739,502

1988

72,750

2,027,232

1987

71,300

990,407

1986

85,907

1,100,430

1985

82,591

1,172,055

1985-1994 Average

72,442

1,230,065

 

 

From: Woody Williams
National Mobilization Officer
Address:
USDA, Forest Service
National Interagency Fire Center
3905 Vista Avenue
USA – Boise, Idaho 83705

 

 

NATIONAL INTERAGENCY FIRE CENTER (NIFC)

NIFC is the nation’s logistical and technical support center for wildfire suppression. Through planning and interagency management, the five major federal land and resource management agencies, along with the National Weather Service, work together to provide cost-effective response to wildfire and other national emergencies. At NIFC are the Nationals Interagency Coordination Center, the National Incident Radio Support Cache, Fire and Aviation Training, Great Basin Smokejumpers and Equipment and Supply Cache, Technical Support, Equipment Development, Infrared Mapping, Initial Attack Management System, and Fire and Aviation Contracting.

NATIONAL INTERAGENCY COORDINATION CENTER (NICC)

An interagency operation at NIFC that provides logistical support and intelligence reporting to all wildland management agencies. As local and regional resources are exhausted during fire emergencies and other disasters, geographic coordination centres throughout the U.S. order additional resources through NICC. Based on the “closest forces” concept, the closest qualified resources, regardless of agency affiliation, will be sent. NICC dispatches crews, overhead personnel, aircraft, equipment and supplies across the U.S. and Canada and to other foreign countries based upon requests.

Top
Country Notes

 

/by

USA: American Fire Officials Expand International Activities (IFFN No. 18 – January 1998)

 

American Fire Officials ExpandInternational Activities

(IFFN No. 18 – January 1998, p. 89)

Wildland fire is a natural disaster affecting most nations of the world, and there is an increasing willingness to exchange information and work toward procedures that will benefit all wildland fire organizations. On a global basis, such cooperation can provide great mutual benefit for the agencies involved from both an operational and scientific basis.

The United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM), a key public land agency of the US Department of the Interior, has become more active with international cooperation over the past several years. BLM manages over 265-million acres of public land in the western United States, and is responsible for wildland fire response on more than 355-million acres of Department of Interior lands. The major base for BLM is at the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) in Boise, Idaho.

During the late summer of 1997, BLM officials from the national office of Fire and Aviation at NIFC visited Germany, Russia and Norway to seek opportunities for research and cooperation. The trip provided a foundation for the BLM Fire and Aviation program to take advantage of opportunities where they best suit their long-range goals to learn from other nations and to share wildland fire expertise and enhance professionalism.

The American delegation spent time during the trip in Germany for briefings on international activities, and were given a tour of the Black Forest to look at the management and fire practices used there. As a result, some initial studies will be conducted in the US by students working on graduate studies in German universities.

The delegation travelled on to Russia and spent several days in Moscow working with Avialesookhrana (Aerial Forest Fire Protection Service) officials, then visited remote locations in central Siberia to observe Russian fire fighting equipment and procedures. They participated in meetings with a number of government and academic officials to learn about natural resource management and wildland fire issues in Russia.

As a result of the trip, an initial program of personnel exchanges was discussed, with potential for BLM smokejumpers to work in Russia during 1998, and Russian smokejumpers working in Idaho and Alaska in the US. BLM plans to use this process to gain additional technical information about Russian equipment and procedures to compare and contrast them with American systems.

Following the Russian visit, the members travelled to Oslo, Norway where the Norwegian Directorate for Fire and Explosion Prevention (DBE) provided the BLM group with a review of wildland fire issues in that nation, and hosted several meetings to exchange information about wildland fire. The series of meetings opened the possibility of future cooperation between Norway and the BLM in exchanges and possible studies.

BLM national officials are pleased with the positive results of this trip, and plan to use the results to help establish a long-term program of international cooperation and exchange.

 

 

From: David Vickery
Chief, External Affairs
Address:
BLM Fire & Aviation
National Interagency Fire Center
3833 S. Development Blvd.
USA – Boise, Idaho 83705

Top
Country Notes

 

/by

USA: A Brief Overview of the Southern United States Fire Situation January – July 1998 (IFFN No. 19 – September 1998)

 

A Brief Overview of the Southern United States Fire Situation
January – July 1998

(IFFN No. 19 – September 1998,p. 40-42)

Unusually wet conditions associated with El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) this past winter had a significant negative impact on prescribed burning operations. In spite of the high rainfall, natural resource managers in Florida still succeeded in treating more than 500,000 acres during the first three months of 1998. (In a typical year about 2,000,000 acres are treated, about 75-80% during this time period.) Many of these burns were, however, more patchy and consumed less fuel than usual because of high dead-fuel moistures. Average ambient temperatures were also higher than normal which resulted in a significantly earlier spring green-up and increased growth of the herbaceous groundcover and woody understorey. Many of these planned dormant-season burns were thus actually conducted during the transition period or early growing-season. This in turn, pushed planned growing-season burns back further into the spring.

Weather patterns switched rather abruptly in late March and by the end of May the deep south was experiencing abnormally high maximum daily temperatures and extended drought. A commonly used measure of relative dryness, the Keetch-Byram Drought Index (also called the Cumulative Severity Index) which ranges from 0 (saturated) to 800 (bone-dry), was already over 600 in some areas. The vast majority of growing-season prescribed burns on the southern coastal plain are conducted between late April and early June. However, many fire managers defer scheduled prescription burns when the KBDI surpasses about 450. The result was a substantial reduction in the number of acres treated during May and June. My guess is that by the end of the year, only about 1 million acres (ca. 400,000 ha) will have been treated, half of the number treated during an average year.

During a typical year, wildfire activity on the southern coastal plain begins to increase in February, and peaks in March as green-up occurs and the winter weather, which is characterized by rain every 5 to 7 days associated with the passage of cold fronts, gives way to our hot steamy summers dominated by afternoon thunderstorms. In Georgia, about 25% of the total number of wildfires occur in March. This year the wet winter resulted in fewer wildfires and dramatically less acreage burned over during this time period in Georgia (Tab.1). The same held true for Florida.

 

Tab.1. Georgia wildfire statistics

 Month

Number of Fires 1998

Area burned (ha) in 1998

Number of fires 5-year average (1993-97)

Area burned (ha) 5-year average (1993-97)

January

234

207

513

667

February

498

587

1,108

1,895

March

909

1,692

1,576

3,047

April

426

550

1,124

1,498

May

492

557

677

779

June

1,264

8,784

434

646

 

The Central Pacific Ocean was about 4.5° C above average in March when it began to cool. The drop in average sea temperature continued, reaching an unprecedented rate in June before levelling off in July slightly below the norm. As the ENSO effects on synoptic weather patterns weakened, a large area of high pressure formed over the southern US blocking the normal flow of moisture-laden air from the Gulf of Mexico over the southeastern US. Instead hot dry winds from the northwest were the norm. Subsidence, the process that brings dry air aloft down to the surface was also taking place. This resulted in very few convective showers, high temperatures, unseasonably low relative humidities and a concomitant increase in the KBDI with many locations approaching 800. This weather pattern translated into a predictable increase in wildfire activity throughout June and early July. This area of high pressure then shifted west in July resulting in the return of afternoon showers over Florida, but hot, dry, windy weather over Texas and Oklahoma. Texas is experiencing the driest spell in 104 years with temperatures exceeding 100° F (38° C) for the 29th consecutive day on 4 August 1998.

Humans cause the vast majority of the 45 to 50,000 wildfires in the 13 southern states each year, with about 40% of the total due to arson. Less than 10% are attributed to lightning although many more are caused by this source but are not included in the database because they are not reported, or go out without human intervention. Lightning generally causes more fires than humans during the summer with most of the acreage burned between late April and early June. Between 500,000 and 600,000 acres (ca. 200,000 to 240,000 ha) are subjected to wildfires in a typical year although about 1 million acres (ca. 400,000 ha) burned over during each of the extremely bad years of 1989 and 1996. As of August first, 28,000 wildfires had already burned over 1,100,000 acres (445,000 ha) including 580,000 (235,000 ha) in Florida and 318,000 (130,000 ha) in Texas. The fall wildfire season is still months away. Not a single southern wildfire burned more than 5,000 acres (2,000 ha) last year. The first of numerous fires to do so this year was discovered 25 May 1998 in a swamp on the Apalachicola National Forest in Florida and reached 7,000 acres (2,800 ha) on 12 June. The largest fire on private lands in Georgia in 40 years burned 16,000 acres (6,500 ha) in June, while a fire on the nearby Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge reached 7,000 (2,800 ha) acres on 15 July and was finally controlled after more than 4 inches of rain in a 4-day period.

Although major fire activity in the southern US has so far been pretty much confined to Florida and west Texas, brief periods of high activity also occurred in the mountains of western North Carolina and Kentucky, along the Gulf Coast of Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, in Georgia and in Oklahoma. Most of this region is now receiving shower activity but the KBDI is still above 600 in many places. During the first 3 days of August, 200 more fires were reported that burned 19,100 acres (7,700 ha). Toward the end of July, measured live fuel moistures in Texas were 45% in Juniperus, 50% in grass, and 80% in the leaves and small branches of Quercus. Its no wonder drought-related tree mortality has been reported across the region. Precipitation is 6-25% of average and fine dead fuel moistures are still in the 2-4% range in many areas as of 3 August. Complete consumption of down woody fuels during passage of the flame front was a common occurrence. Firebrands were igniting the grass fuels a mile or more ahead of the main fires. The situation was even worse in Florida because of the large area of urban/wildland interface that was impacted.

Every county in Florida has been subjected to major fire activity since the beginning of June, but the news media have focused on those counties from the centre of the peninsula east to the coast, and north to the Georgia line because of the extensive urban/wildland interface. Evacuation of homes began on 16 June and was a daily occurrence until 11 July. Numerous communities were evacuated in several counties and for the first time to my knowledge, virtually a whole county (approximately 45,000 people) was evacuated and put under a dusk to dawn curfew. Well over 100,000 people were evacuated during this time period in Florida, some more than once as fires were controlled and flared back up, or new ones started. The good news is that less than 100 homes and businesses were destroyed and only about 250 were damaged. Miraculously I am aware of only one firefighter fatality, an Alabama Forestry Commission employee died of a heart attack while constructing fireline in his home state. Three “civilians” in Florida were also claimed by heart attacks attributed to the fires. Resource damage (primarily timber) will likely approach US$100,000,000. Suppression costs are still incomplete, but will be astronomically high. The pulp and paper industry pretty much abandoned the use of prescribed fire over the past decade in favour of herbicides which predisposed their plantations to higher levels of damage because of the increased dead fuel loads that exacerbated fire behaviour.

To help put these fires in perspective, consider the following: 158 aircraft were committed to the Florida fires, 1½ times the number on the Yellowstone fires; virtually every heavy helicopter available was in Florida – the other 3 were fighting fires in Alaska; over 5,200 fire fighters were in Florida; 80 to 100 new fires were occurring each day at the peak; live fuel moistures were in the 70 to 80% range and 10-hour dead fuel moistures were hovering between 3 and 4%; the military airlifted fire engines from California and the Pacific Northwest to Florida (a distance of about 4,000 km); the airports at Ormond Beach and Daytona were closed for several days; wells were dug and a 1-mile hose lay was constructed to get water where it was needed; ground fires were consuming 4-5 feet (1.2-1.5 m) of organic soil; 1, 10, and 100 hour fuels were being completely consumed; a number of fires were plume-dominated; three major fires burned to the Atlantic Ocean; 2-yr roughs were supporting 20 ft (6 m) flame lengths; in some areas the needle cast was heavy enough to obscure the “black” and supported 2-3 ft (60-90 cm) flame lengths during reburns; in some instances the crowns of heat-killed brush were burning and carrying fire into the overstory crowns, and; fires made runs with humidities in the mid sixties.

Fire danger was about the same throughout the southern coastal plain so why did Florida get hammered so much worse than surrounding states? The answer is lightning; Florida has one of the highest concentrations of lightning strikes in the world exceeding 120 strikes per acre per year in some areas. Most of the activity occurred ahead of the daily sea breeze front as it moved inland. The fires were concentrated in peninsular Florida and on at least one occasion, the east and west sea breeze fronts collided over the centre of the state with the increased convective activity causing a large number of lightning fires. Very little rainfall accompanied this lightning. Georgia also had a high number of lightning fires but their initial attack was more successful.

The two suppression organizations are both well organized with state-of-the-art equipment and highly trained personnel so that is not the answer. Both states advocate and facilitate the use of prescribed fire and indeed, many instances were recalled where fires were held only because they happened to run into recent prescribed burns. Downdrafts from thunderstorms, which are more numerous in Florida, result in strong erratic winds that can produce sudden changes in the direction of fire spread. Access to lightning-caused fires can be more of a problem in Florida because growing conditions are better which results in heavier fuels. The difference in initial attack success can be attributed in large part to the extensive urban/wildland interface in Florida meant that initial attack forces often had to protect structures while a fire continued to gain momentum. The large number of daily fire starts in Florida also was a contributing factor, tractor-plow units would put a plow line around one fire and then race off to the next without having time to mop-up.

Can another disaster like this one happen again in the future? The answer is not only that it can happen, but that it almost assuredly will happen. For whatever reason, the loss of life and property was much less than expected but there is no reason to expect it will be so low the next time. I’m sure the extensive review and studies that will be conducted over the next few months will address steps that can be taken to decrease the destruction in future wildfire disasters. Pulp and paper companies will undoubtedly reassess their decision to abandon the practice of underburning to control woody competition and for hazard reduction. The only known practical method of reducing wildfire damage is the frequent use of prescribed fire. Yet prescribed underburns will in all likelihood become increasingly difficult to conduct in the future as the urban/wildland interface continues to expand. It remains to be seen whether fire managers will be able to garner and sustain the needed public support to assure the increased use of prescribed fire necessary for ecosystem health and to minimize the threat of catastrophic fire.

Information supplied by numerous state and federal agency personnel in Florida and Georgia provided the data base for this report.

 

 

From: Dale Wade
Research Forester
Address:
USFS Southern Research Station
320 Green Street
USA – Athens, Georgia 30602-2044

Top
IFFN No. 19
Country Notes

 

/by

USA: 1990 Fire Activity (IFFN No. 4 – December 1990)

 

1990 Fire Activity

(IFFN No. 4 – December 1990, p. 12-13)

The potential for the 1990 fire season was apparent early in the year. Extreme drought prevailed over much of the West. Southern California recorded the driest winter in 133 years on top of its fifth year of drought. The mountains of the Southwest were devoid of winter snow pack. The debris on the ground resulting from Hurricane Hugo made a million acres in the Carolina’s a matter of real concern. Late rainstorms caused a large amount fine fuels to flourish in the Great Basin.

Even with this potential, the season was slow to start. An abnormally wet climate developed over the eastern part of the country, and aside from a few fires in Southern Florida, there was a quiet season in the Southeast. In late June a rash of fires broke out in Texas, Western New Mexico, and Arizona as record heat brought on numerous dry lightning storms. On the afternoon of 26 June a fire fighting crew from Arizona Prison System was overrun on the Dude Fire, Tonto National Forest, and six fatalities occurred. One day later, two firefighters lost their lives in another fire entrapment situation on the California Fire near Riverside, California.

A lot of new fires occurred during this period, the most notable being the Paint fire near Santa Barbara, California which burned 280 homes in one three hour run. The Bedford Fire near Corona, California also burned homes. Over 120 new fires were occurring each day and although most of the firefighting organizations were strapped, they made excellent efforts in initial attack which were generally successful.

On 2 July, Alaska had a significant lightning storm resulting in 40 new fires. Firefighting resources began to flow northward. Though the fires in the Southwest were beginning to receive some rain, they still had a lot of fire and needed the Nation’s firefighting assets. Strapped for resources, our partners in Canada were tapped for assistance, and they responded with two air tankers.

Twenty-two new fires started in Alaska including on that threatened Tok Junction and closed the ALCAN Highway. A Yukon high pressure system became established, and Alaska was in trouble by 10 July when over 100 large fires spread from west of Galena into Canada. At the same time, a 1,200 ha fire on the Okefenokee Refuge in Georgia required a Type I team and lightning fires were beginning in the Pacific Northwest. The weather in the West was extremely hot and dry with an average of 26,000 lightning strikes per day, but tough, effective initial attack continued to hold any fires from growing very large.

On 8 August the Awbrey Hills Fires on the outskirts of Bend, Oregon, destroyed 28 homes. It became necessary to move some resources from Alaska southward as there were about 350 fires occurring each day from widespread, dry lightning storms in California, Oregon, Nevada, Utah, and Idaho. Fires erupting in Yosemite Park and the adjacent Stanislaus National Forest required closure of the Park.

At this point, four battalions of military troops were ordered; two into Oregon and two into California. Troops came from Fort Lewis, Washington, and Fort Carson, Colorado. By mid month the weather patterns began to change, bringing much cooler temperatures and showers into the Pacific Northwest. Demobilization began by 15 August. On 27 August, rains finally came to Alaska, and the crews began to gain control over the large fires they had been fighting. Nearly 1.2 million ha burned in Alaska this year in a very bad season.

By late August the weather over the West again became very hot and dry. Another killer fire in the Wasatch State Park, southwest of Salt Lake City, killed two firefighters and destroyed 18 homes. The Paint Fire in San Diego County burned 28 homes and threatened 175 more. Record high temperatures over most of the country kept initial attack crews busy and another fire in the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge required considerable effort to hold it under 1,200 ha.

1990 was as terrifying and devastating as we thought it would be. Extreme fire behavior cost 14 firefighters their lives, and many injuries were sustained. There were four serious aircraft incidents but fortunately, no deaths. By 30 September 1990, a total of 60,875 fires had burned 4,575,117 acres (ca.1,85 million ha).

 

 

From: Denny Truesdale
Address:
Defense and Emergency Operations Specialist
Fire and Aviation Management,
USDA Forest Service
P.O. Box 96060
Washington, D.C. 20090-6090
U.S.A.

Top
Country Notes

 

/by

USA: Influences on Prescribed Burning Activity in the United States National Forest System (IFFN No. 19 – September 1998)

 

Influences on Prescribed Burning Activity
in the United States National Forest System

(IFFN No. 19 – September 1998,p. 43-46)

Introduction

Recent analyses of fire policy have called for increased prescribed burning to prevent future wildfire damage and enhance fire-dependent ecosystems and commercial forests (Mutch 1994, USDA Forest Service 1994, USDI 1995, Bell et al. 1995). The USDA Forest Service has set a goal of burning 1.2 million hectares per year by the year 2010 (Bell et al. 1995). Wise allocation of prescribed fire resources will require a solid baseline assessment of current activity and an understanding of the barriers to implementation of burning programs. Despite its ecological benefits, prescribed burning is being increasingly scrutinized and regulated as a source of air pollution (Sandberg 1978), traffic hazards (Mobley 1990), and escaped wildfire (Mobley 1985, Hoover 1989, Craig 1990, Cleaves and Haines 1997).

This report summarizes the results of a survey conducted to quantify prescribed burning activity on Forest Service lands, and to identify resource objectives and barriers to increased burning. No comprehensive assessment of the area treated by prescribed burning has been made; and Forest Service administrative units only recently have begun to consolidate their estimates of prescribed burning needs. Such information, as well as a characterization of the physical, social, legal, economic, and managerial factors that shape the burning programs on National Forests will be necessary to effectively develop expanded burning programs.

Methods

Analyses of prescribed burning activity levels, as well as resource objectives and constraints, were based on responses to a questionnaire mailed to Forest Service fuels management officers (FMO’s) in December 1995. For the period 1985-1994, the FMO’s were asked to provide estimates for the following variables: (1) acres burned annually and number of burns for each of four burn types–slash reduction, management-ignited burns in natural fuels, prescribed natural fires, and brush, range and grassland burns (Slash reduction includes burns to reduce debris from logging, road construction or natural events. Management-ignited fire is understory burning in an established stand. Prescribed natural fires are those ignited by lightning or spontaneous combustion. Brush, range, and grassland burns do not include fires for cropland management.) ; (2) major intended resource benefits or purpose of burns; (3) historic trends in and expectations for burned acreage by type of burn; (4) barriers to expanding the use of prescribed fire; and (5) annual acreage of prescribed burning needed to achieve resource management goals. The FMO’s ranked resource objectives and constraints on a scale of 0 to 5 with 5 being most important.

We received completed surveys from 95 of the 114 FMO’s contacted; and those responding units accounted for about 85 percent of the total National Forest System acreage, excluding Alaska. National forest-level estimates were aggregated into regional and national totals.

Results

Activity Levels and Resource Objectives

The total prescribed fire area averaged 367,511 hectares per year. The Southern Region reported the highest annual average burned area at 175,686 hectares (Fig.1).

The total acreage treated was not evenly distributed by burn type. Management-ignited prescribed fires accounted for the most at 62.2 percent of the system total; followed by slash reduction (25.3 percent), brush and rangeland (8.3 percent), and prescribed natural fire (4.2 percent). Overall, the national forests conducted an average of 6,763 burns per year, of which 75 percent were for slash reduction and 20 percent were management-ignited burns in natural fuels. Accordingly, regions with significant slash burning acreage reported the most burns.

 

15476 Byte

Fig.1. Annual prescribed burning area (ha) by U.S. Forest Service Region

 

The most important resource objective or purpose for burning was wildfire hazard reduction, followed by ecosystem management (using prescribed burning to reestablish natural fire intervals), game habitat enhancement, site preparation for reforestation, nongame habitat enhancement, control of competing vegetation in timber stands, threatened and endangered species habitat enhancement; insect and disease management; and rangeland improvement. The average burn size was 54 hectares. This varied from 17 hectares in the Pacific Southwest Region to 185 hectares in the Southern Region. The largest burns were prescribed natural fires (251 hectares) and smallest were slash burns (18 hectares). Management-ignited burns were the second largest(166 hectares) followed by brush and range burns (124 hectares). This relationship of relative burn size was similar among most regions. Estimates of burning levels needed to achieve management goals totalled 0.82 million hectares per year, more than twice the average achieved during the survey period. Desired acreage, as a percent of the acreage attained, ranged from 145 percent in the Northern Region to 672 percent in the Intermountain Region.

Trends in Burning Activity

Because of reductions in timber harvesting between 1985-1994, the slash burn acreage had decreased in more forests (60 percent) than any other burn type. Conversely, increasing fuel treatment budgets and greater emphasis on the use of prescribed fire for silviculture, ecosystem, and wildlife purposes resulted in a 76 percent increase in the number of forests using management-ignited burning. Prescribed natural fire levels remained fairly constant servicewide (62 percent), except in the Southwestern Region where there was a large increase. Brush and rangeland burns either increased (43 percent) or remained stable (44 percent) Servicewide.

Over the next ten years (1995 to 2004), estimated trends for all burn types range from a 57 percent chance of increase to a 15 percent chance of decrease. There is a 28 percent chance it will remain about the same. The likelihood for increasing management-ignited burns, prescribed natural fires, and brush and rangeland burns are 79, 66, and 51 percent, respectively. Conversely, there is only a 31 percent chance that slash burning will increase.

Barriers to Burning

The FMO’s rated 14 factors on a 5-point “scale of importance,” representing the degree to which each factor imposed a barrier to expanding the use of prescribed fire. The environmental law factor, which includes laws to protect water quality, endangered species, archaeological sites, and other resource values — but does not include laws governing smoke management or protecting air quality — received the highest mean rating (3.82). Environmental laws also include planning and evaluation procedures to be followed when conducting land management activities on Federal lands. Lack of adequate funding was the second most important factor, with a mean of 3.66. Also highly rated were: personnel (shortages of qualified professionals and technicians); narrow window (the prescription window for conducting burns); planning costs; public opinion; liability (for smoke intrusion and escaped fires); and regulations (air quality and smoke management laws). Barriers that received low ratings in all regions included: the use of alternative management practices, uncertainty about burning as an effective fuels management practice (such as effects on soil composition or tree growth), and the availability of insurance.

58044 Byte

Fig.2. Prescribed burning operation in the Sierra Nevada, California.
Photo: J.G.Goldammer

 

Discussion and Conclusions

Prescribed burning is an important activity in the National Forest System. At about 364,225 hectares accomplished each year, it may be the most common planned disturbance, a distinction formerly held by timber harvesting. Changes are occurring quickly. For example, Forest Service fuel management budgets have increased substantially, from historic levels of about US$20 million, to US$60 million in 1997. The acreage of natural fuels burned each year has been increasing, for both management-ignited and prescribed natural fire. There is some uncertainty about the prescribed natural fire program; the use of prescribed natural fire is controversial and subject to conflicting political, physical, and managerial objectives.

The FMO’s who responded to our survey confirmed the need for an increased use of fire. Less than half of the desired level is being met, although recent increases in appropriated funds has narrowed the gap. Barriers consist chiefly of environmental restrictions, funding shortfalls, and a shortage of available personnel.

The perceived importance of the environmental barrier may be due to a combination of factors: ambiguity in the application of regulatory standards, actual restrictions on burning practices, and reaction to the prospect of increasing regulation. Potential legal actions by interest groups or concerned citizens may also contribute to the importance of this factor. Although appropriated funds have increased since 1995, the availability of personnel for prescribed burning may become critical, especially with increasing competition from the wildfire control burden. Burning helps managers achieve a variety of resource objectives. The Forest Service prescribed burning program is linked to the future of many of its other programs, e.g., wildlife, threatened and endangered species, range, and ecosystem management.

Many respondents identified the shift from slash reduction burns to natural fuels burns as indicative of a trend towards fewer and larger burns. Although such a trend could have positive implications for per-acre costs, it might also could present problems in successfully managing the wildland/urban interface, sensitive species habitat, and other protected areas. The Forest Service officials who responded to our survey were optimistic about achieving resource goals, despite implementation barriers and cost constraints. The shortage of trained personnel and uncertainties about long-term funding are concerns that must be addressed if progress towards these goals is to continue. The burning season’s narrow window of opportunity makes it doubly important that managers have a well-trained and available workforce.

References

Bell, E., D. Cleaves, H. Croft, S. Husari, E. Schuster, and D. Truesdale. 1995. Fire economics assessment report. Submitted to Fire and Aviation Management, USDA Forest Service.

Cleaves, D.A., and T.K. Haines. 1997. Regulation and liability risk: their influence on the practice and the price tag of prescribed burning. In: Proceedings of the Environmental Regulation and Prescribed Fire Conference, 15-17 March 1995. Tampa, Florida (D. Bryan, ed.), 165-183.

Craig, J.N. 1990. Regulation of prescribed fire. In: Natural and prescribed fire in Pacific Northwest forests (J.D.Walstad, S.R.Radosevich, and D.V.Sandberg, eds.) Oregon State University Press, Corvallis.

Hoover, K. 1989. Working with the rules and regulations governing slash burning in Washington State.In: The burning decision: regional perspectives on slash (D.P.Hanley, J.Kammenga, C.Oliver, eds.) University of Washington, College of Forest Resources, Seattle.

Mobley, H.E. 1985. Smoke management. In: Proceedings Prescribed Fire and Smoke Management in the South Conference, 12 Sept 1984. (D.D.Wade, ed.), 47-50. Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. Asheville, NC.

Mobley, H.E. 1990. Summary of smoke related accidents in the South from prescribed fires. American Pulpwood Association. Technical Release 90-R-11.

Mutch, R.W. 1994. Fighting fire with prescribed fire: a return to ecosystem health. J. Forestry 92 (11), 31-33.

Sandberg, D.V., J.M. Pierovich, D.G. Fox, and E.W. Ross. 1978. Effects of fire on air— a state-of-knowledge review. USDA Forest Service. General Technical Report WO-9.

USDA Forest Service. 1994. Western forest health initiative. Unpublished report. Washington, DC; USDA Forest Service.

USDI/USDA. 1995. Federal wildland fire management policy and program review, draft report. Washington, DC: Department of Interior.

 

 

From: Terry K. Haines and Jorge Martinez and David A. Cleaves
Address:
USDA Forest Service
Southern Research Station
Law and Economics Research Unit
USA – New Orleans, Louisiana
USDA Forest Service
Ecosystem Management
USA – Washington D.C. 20090

Top
IFFN No. 19
Country Notes

 

/by

USA: The 21st Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference in Florida: A Focus on Fire and Forest Ecology (IFFN No. 19 – September 1998)

 

The 21st Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference in Florida:
A Focus on Fire and Forest Ecology

(IFFN No. 19 – September 1998,p.47-48)

The 21st Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference was held in Tallahassee, Florida, U.S.A. on 14-16 April 1998. Titled: “Fire and Forest Ecology: Innovative Silviculture and Vegetation Management”, this conference brought together 240 researchers and managers who used fire to manipulate vegetation to achieve their organizations’ goals. Land managers from groups with very different objectives, whether industrial commodity production or preservation-oriented, often use fire for remarkably similar reasons. The conference goal was to provide a forum to discuss fire ecology, management and effects, both within and outside the context of silvicultural treatments.

The keynote speaker, Dr. Johann-Georg Goldammer, Fire Ecology and Biomass Research Group, Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, set the stage for the conference by speaking to “Silviculture and Vegetation Management By Fire: Global Transitions.” His worldview of fire accurately framed the issues of fire’s role in natural ecosystem development and the importance of fire as a management tool for progressive natural resource professionals. In the Fire and Forest Ecology session of the conference, moderator Jim Vose, of the Coweeta Lab, U. S. Forest Service, brought us up to date the ecosystem perspectives of using prescribed fire to achieve the manager’s objectives. The conference was then treated to a primer on the physiological effects of fire, the long-term effects of prescribed biennial fires on longleaf pine growth, the impact tree harvesting followed by a site preparation burn had upon plant succession and restoration of desired plant communities in the Southern Appalachians (U.S.A.) and a new project where fire behaviour and movement were controlled across artificial corridors of various widths. The second segment of this session had talks on long-term (30 years!) impacts of fire in Montana, old-growth oaks in a fire-dominated system in Florida, the history of disturbance, including fire, in central Alaska, and fuel loads vs. overstory conditions in New Mexico.

Mike Weber, of Forestry Canada, Edmonton, Alberta, introduced the Fire and Soils session by relating how fire impacted ecosystem structure and function in the boreal forests. This talk was followed by others on comparing fire to chemical and mechanical site preparation and the impacts of fire on hardwood forest soils.

In the session titled: “Fire and Ecological Restoration”, Wally Covington, of Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona, U.S.A. framed the issue of prescribed fire as a specific ecological restoration tool. The speakers who followed documented the use of fire as an ecological restoration tool on federal lands, and dealt with specific management problems, such as snag management or regions, such as Florida sand-scrub or Ohio oak savannas. The “Fire and Herbicides” session was moderated by Shep Zedaker, professor of silviculture at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A. Shep examined the issues, both biological and legal (an increasingly onerous impediment to prescribed burning in the U.S.A.), and the management and research implications. The subsequent papers detailed the use of fire and herbicides to achieve management goals, whether to restore a native wiregrass to fire-excluded sites in the southeastern U.S.A. or to reduce an exotic grass on an island off California, U.S.A., air-quality implications of prescribed fire and the resultant use of herbicides, or enhance game management by periodic herbicides and annual burns.

The “Fire and Wildlife” session, moderated by Dick Williams, CSIRO, Darwin, Australia, started with Dick’s talk on fire regimes and biodiversity management in northern Australia landscapes. The following talks dealt with fire’s impacts on cavity nesters in Florida and Arizona, U.S.A., and ground dwelling birds and mammals in South Carolina and Arizona, U.S.A. Unlike many scientific conferences, this one explicitly included talks by management professionals outlining their experiences with fire used to achieve their organization’s goals. Terry Hingtgen, of the Florida (U.S.A.) Park Service spoke of his efforts to improve wildlife habitat in southern Florida by using fire. Steve Miller, of the St. John’s River Water Management District, talked about his organization’s efforts to improve the forestland with a fell-and-burn technique. Dave Gerhardt, Westvaco Corporation, South Carolina (U.S.A.) spoke of the constraints and implications that a large industrial landowner faces when using fire as a management tool.

Fire and Policy Issues was introduced by Frank Cole, of the Joseph W. Jones Ecological Research Center, Newton, Georgia, U.S.A. with his outline of policy issues facing prescribed burning. The conference attendees then learned of the extent of the use of prescribed fire in the southeastern U.S.A. and the costs of burning by federal U.S. agencies.

For the banquet speech, Bob Izlar of the University of Georgia, U.S.A. spoke of fire and the impacts on the small landowner in Georgia. He addressed the urbanization of forested land near Atlanta, the capital of Georgia, and the many current and pending regulations which could deleteriously impact the use of prescribed fire as a management tool. The final session, Fire and Silviculture, was also the longest, reflecting the purpose of the conference and the amount of work done in the field. While most of the talks focused on the southeastern U.S.A., there were some interesting talks about research in the Pacific Northwest and the Great Lakes regions of the U.S.A. The moderator, Dave Van Lear, Clemson University, U.S.A., spoke of the latest advances in fire as a silvicultural tool. The audience then heard of specific research on shelterwood-burn techniques in the mountains and foothills of the southern Appalachians, the use of fire in canopy gaps and the impact on deer browse in West Virginia (U.S.A.), the restoration of an endangered forest canopy species, Pinus pungens, using fire, restoring fire to pine systems in the north-central U.S.A. and using fire to maintain old-growth structure in forests in eastern Oregon, U.S.A.

The focus of the conference was on using fire as an active management tool. The subsequent wildfire season in Florida shows what can happen when the use of fire as this tool is restricted, by liability, urbanization or ignorance. As the 1998 fire season in Florida showed, it is not a matter of “if” the forests will burn, but “when.”

Federal and state statutes and policy limit the weather conditions under which prescribed burns can be conducted in heavily urbanized regions such as Florida, to minimize the impacts of smoke on visibility and human health. There is a potential danger that a restriction of the burning window would reduce prescribed burning in critical areas. This would create fuel loads, especially in the commercial plantations, that will inevitably result in large conflagrations, with the resulting impact on the economics of suppression, damage to residential and commercial buildings and, perhaps, the loss of life.

 

 

From: W. Keith Moser
Ecological Forestry Scientist,
Address:
Tall Timbers Research,Inc.
Route 1, Box 678
USA – Tallahassee, Florida 32312-9712

Fax:    ++1-904-668-7781
Phone: ++1-904-893-4153 x 247
e-mail: 4ester@compuserve.com

Top
IFFN No. 19
Country Notes

 

/by