David E. Calkin

How risk management can prevent future wildfire disasters in the wildland-urban interface

Significance Recent wildfire events throughout the world have highlighted the consequences of residential development in the wildland-urban interface (WUI) including hundreds to thousands of homes burned during a single wildfire to, more tragically, firefighter and homeowner fatalities. Despite substantial investments in modifying wildland fuels near populated areas, losses appear to be increasing. In this article, we examine the conditions under which WUI wildfire disasters occur and introduce a wildfire risk assessment framework. By using this framework, we examine how prefire mitigation activities failed to prevent significant structure loss during the Fourmile Canyon fire outside Boulder, CO. In light of these results, we suggest the need to reevaluate and restructure wildfire mitigation programs aimed at reducing residential losses from wildfire. Recent fire seasons in the western United States are some of the most damaging and costly on record. Wildfires in the wildland-urban interface on the Colorado Front Range, resulting in thousands of homes burned and civilian fatalities, although devastating, are not without historical reference. These fires are consistent with the characteristics of large, damaging, interface fires that threaten communities across much of the western United States. Wildfires are inevitable, but the destruction of homes, ecosystems, and lives is not. We propose the principles of risk analysis to provide land management agencies, first responders, and affected communities who face the inevitability of wildfires the ability to reduce the potential for loss. Overcoming perceptions of wildland-urban interface fire disasters as a wildfire control problem rather than a home ignition problem, determined by home ignition conditions, will reduce home loss.

Developing the US Wildland Fire Decision Support System

A new decision support tool, the Wildland Fire Decision Support System (WFDSS) has been developed to support risk-informed decision-making for individual fires in the United States. WFDSS accesses national weather data and forecasts, fire behavior prediction, economic assessment, smoke management assessment, and landscape databases to efficiently formulate and apply information to the decision making process. Risk-informed decision-making is becoming increasingly important as a means of improving fire management and offers substantial opportunities to benefit natural and community resource protection, management response effectiveness, firefighter resource use and exposure, and, possibly, suppression costs. This paper reviews the development, structure, and function of WFDSS, and how it contributes to increased flexibility and agility in decision making, leading to improved fire management program effectiveness.

Negative consequences of positive feedbacks in US wildfire management

Over the last two decades wildfire activity, damage, and management cost within the US have increased substantially. These increases have been associated with a number of factors including climate change and fuel accumulation due to a century of active fire suppression. The increased fire activity has occurred during a time of significant ex-urban development of the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) along with increased demand on water resources originating on forested landscapes. These increased demands have put substantial pressure on federal agencies charged with wildfire management to continue and expand the century old policy of aggressive wildfire suppression. However, aggressive wildfire suppression is one of the major factors that drive the increased extent, intensity, and damage associated with the small number of large wildfires that are unable to be suppressed. In this paper we discuss the positive feedback loops that lead to demands for increasing suppression response while simultaneously increasing wildfire risk in the future. Despite a wealth of scientific research that demonstrates the limitations of the current management paradigm pressure to maintain the existing system are well entrenched and driven by the existing social systems that have evolved under our current management practice. Interestingly, US federal wildland fire policy provides considerable discretion for managers to pursue a range of management objectives; however, societal expectations and existing management incentive structures result in policy implementation that is straining the resilience of fire adapted ecosystems and the communities that reside in and adjacent to them.

Accommodating non-market values in evaluation of wildfire management in the United States: Challenges and opportunities

Forests in the United States generate many non-market benefits for society that can be enhanced and diminished by wildfire and wildfire management. The Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy (1995, updated 2001), and subsequent Guidance to the Implementation of that policy provided in 2009, require fire management priorities be set on the basis of values to be protected (including natural and cultural resources), costs of protection, and natural resource management objectives (including beneficial fire effects). Implementation of this policy is challenging because those charged with executing the policy have limited information about the value that society places on non-market goods and services at risk. This paper reviews the challenges of accommodating non-market values affected by wildfire in social cost-benefitanalysisandproposesaneconomicresearchagendumtosupportmoreefficientmanagementofwildfireinthe United States.

Wildfire risk and hazard: procedures for the first approximation

This report was designed to meet three broad goals: (1) evaluate wildfire hazard on Federal lands; (2) develop information useful in prioritizing where fuels treatments and mitigation measures might be proposed to address significant fire hazard and risk; and (3) develop risk-based performance measures to document the effectiveness of fire management programs. The research effort described in this report is designed to develop, from a strategic view, a first approximation of how fire likelihood and fire intensity influence risk to social, economic, and ecological values at the national scale. The approach uses a quantitative risk framework that approximates expected losses and benefits to highly valued resources from wildfire. Specifically, burn probabilities and intensities are estimated with a fire simulation model and are coupled with spatially explicit data on human and ecological values and fire-effects response functions to estimate the percent loss or benefit. This report describes the main components of the risk framework, including the burn probability models, highly valued resource data, and development of response functions, and illustrates the application to the State of Oregon. The State of Oregon was selected for prototype due to the wide range of variability in ecoregions represented in the state. All of the highly valued resource themes were represented in the mix of developed and natural resources present in the state. National risk and hazard approximation results for the Continental United States are available at the following location: www.fs.fed.us/wwetac/wflc/.

Allowing a wildfire to burn: estimating the effect on future fire suppression costs

Where a legacy of aggressive wildland fire suppression has left forests in need of fuel reduction, allowing wildland fire to burn may provide fuel treatment benefits, thereby reducing suppression costs from subsequent fires. The least-cost-plus-net-value-change model of wildland fire economics includes benefits of wildfire in a framework for evaluating suppression options. In this study, we estimated one component of that benefit - the expected present value of the reduction in suppression costs for subsequent fires arising from the fuel treatment effect of a current fire. To that end, weemployedMonteCarlomethodstogenerateasetofscenariosforsubsequentfireignitionandweatherevents,whichare referred to as sample paths, for a study area in central Oregon. We simulated fire on the landscape over a 100-year time horizon using existing models of fire behaviour, vegetation and fuels development, and suppression effectiveness, and we estimatedsuppressioncostsusinganexistingsuppressioncostmodel.Ourestimatessuggestthatthepotentialcostsavings may be substantial. Further research is needed to estimate the full least-cost-plus-net-value-change model. This line of research will extend the set of tools available for developing wildfire management plans for forested landscapes. Additional keywords: bio-economic modelling, forest economics, forest fire policy, wildland fire management.

A comparative risk assessment framework for wildland fire management: the 2010 cohesive strategy science report

The FLAME Act of 2009 requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service and the U.S. Department of Interior to submit to Congress a Cohesive Wildfire Management Strategy. In this report, we explore the general science available for a risk-based approach to fire and fuels management and suggest analyses that may be applied at multiple scales to inform decisionmaking and tradeoff analysis. We discuss scientific strengths and limitations of wildfire risk assessment frameworks, including the benefit of broad scalability as demonstrated by four recent case studies. We further highlight the role of comparative risk assessment, which extends the analysis to include the decision space available to managers and stakeholders to allow them to explore the tradeoffs between alternative courses of action. We identify scientific limitations of the analytical protocol and discuss questions of how to better address climate change, smoke modeling issues, and socioeconomic vulnerability, and how to better quantify treatment effectiveness. Key challenges are: achieving a balance between retaining analytical flexibility at regional and sub-regional planning scales while simultaneously retaining data and methodological consistency at the national scale, and identifying and aligning regional and national priorities to inform multi-objective strategy development. As implementation proceeds, the analytical protocol will no doubt be modified, but the contents of this report comprise a rigorous and transparent framework for comparative risk assessment built from the best available science.

Wildfire exposure and fuel management on western US national forests

Substantial investments in fuel management activities on national forests in the western US are part of a national strategy to reduce human and ecological losses from catastrophic wildfire and create fire resilient landscapes. Prioritizing these investments within and among national forests remains a challenge, partly because a comprehensive assessment that establishes the current wildfire risk and exposure does not exist, making it difficult to identify national priorities and target specific areas for fuel management. To gain a broader understanding of wildfire exposure in the national forest system, we analyzed an array of simulated and empirical data on wildfire activity and fuel treatment investments on the 82 western US national forests. We first summarized recent fire data to examine variation among the Forests in ignition frequency and burned area in relation to investments in fuel reduction treatments. We then used simulation modeling to analyze fine-scale spatial variation in burn probability and intensity. We also estimated the probability of a mega-fire event on each of the Forests, and the transmission of fires ignited on national forests to the surrounding urban interface. The analysis showed a good correspondence between recent area burned and predictions from the simulation models. The modeling also illustrated the magnitude of the variation in both burn probability and intensity among and within Forests. Simulated burn probabilities in most instances were lower than historical, reflecting fire exclusion on many national forests. Simulated wildfire transmission from national forests to the urban interface was highly variable among the Forests. We discuss how the results of the study can be used to prioritize investments in hazardous fuel reduction within a comprehensive multi-scale risk management framework.

Development and application of a geospatial wildfire exposure and risk calculation tool

Applying wildfire risk assessment models can inform investments in loss mitigation and landscape restoration, and can be used to monitor spatiotemporal trends in risk. Assessing wildfire risk entails the integration of fire modeling outputs, maps of highly valued resources and assets (HVRAs), characterization of fire effects, and articulation of relative importance across HVRAs. Quantifying and geo-processing wildfire risk can be a complex and time-intensive task, often requiring expertise in geospatial analysis. Researchers and land managers alike would benefit from a standardized and streamlined ability to estimate wildfire risk. In this paper we present the development and application of a geospatial wildfire risk calculation tool, FireNVC. We describe the major components of the tool and how they align with a geospatial wildfire risk assessment framework, detail a recent application of the tool to inform federal wildfire management and planning, and offer suggestions for future improvements and uses of the tool. We review the development of FireNVC, a geospatial wildfire risk calculation tool.FireNVC is a flexible platform to assess risk to multiple resources and assets.FireNVC enables a streamlined process for quantifying risks at landscape scales.We apply the tool to help prioritize risk mitigation planning on federal land.Sensitivity analysis suggests results are robust for prioritization.

Wildfire Risk Transmission in the Colorado Front Range, USA

Wildfires are a global phenomenon that in some circumstances can result in human casualties, economic loss, and ecosystem service degradation. In this article we spatially identify wildfire risk transmission pathways and locate the areas of highest exposure of human populations to wildland fires under severe, but not uncommon, weather events. We quantify varying levels of exposure in terms of population potentially affected and tie the exposure back to the spatial source of the risk for the Front Range of Colorado, USA. We use probabilistic fire simulation modeling to address where fire ignitions are most likely to cause the highest impact to human communities, and to explore the role that various landowners play in that transmission of risk. Our results indicated that, given an ignition and the right fire weather conditions, large areas along the Front Range in Colorado could be exposed to wildfires with high potential to impact human populations, and that overall private ignitions have the potential to impact more people than federal ignitions. These results can be used to identify high-priority areas for wildfire risk mitigation using various mitigation tools.