A computational method for optimising fuel treatment locations

Modelling and experiments have suggested that spatial fuel treatment patterns can influence the movement of large fires. On simple theoretical landscapes consisting of two fuel types (treated and untreated), optimal patterns can be analytically derived that disrupt fire growth efficiently (i.e. with less area treated than random patterns). Although conceptually simple, the application of these theories to actual landscapes is made difficult by heterogeneity (fuels, weather, and topography). Here a computational method is described for heterogeneous landscapes that identifies efficient fuel treatment units and patterns for a selected fire weather scenario. The method requires input of two sets of spatial input data: (1) the current fuel conditions; and (2) the potential fuel conditions after a treatment is conducted (if treatment is permitted in a particular location). The contrast in fire spread rate between the two landscapes under the weather scenario conditions indicates where treatments are effective at delaying the growth of fires. Fire growth from the upwind edge of the landscape is then computed using a minimum travel time algorithm. This identifies major fire travel routes (areas needing treatment) and their intersections with the areas where treatments occurred and reduced the spread rate (opportunity for treatment). These zones of treatment 'need and opportunity' are iteratively delineated by contiguous patches of raster cells up to a user-supplied constraint on percentage of land area to be treated. This algorithm is demonstrated for simple and for complex landscapes.

[1]  Jan W. Van Wagtendonk,et al.  Use of a Deterministic Fire Growth Model to Test Fuel Treatments , 1996 .

[2]  Craig Loehle,et al.  Applying landscape principles to fire hazard reduction , 2004 .

[3]  D. Loftsgaarden,et al.  Evaluation of fire danger rating indexes using logistic regression and percentile analysis , 2003 .

[4]  Philip N. Omi,et al.  The use of shaded fuelbreaks in landscape fire management. , 2000 .

[5]  Philip N. Omi,et al.  Effect of thinning and prescribed burning on crown fire severity in ponderosa pine forests , 2002 .

[6]  Harold R. Weaver.  Fire As An Ecological and Silvicultural Factor in the Ponderosa-Pine Region of the Pacific Slope , 1943 .

[7]  M. Finney.  Design of Regular Landscape Fuel Treatment Patterns for Modifying Fire Growth and Behavior , 2001, Forest Science.

[8]  Sierra Nevada Ecosystem,et al.  Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project final report to Congress , 1997 .

[9]  Philip N. Omi,et al.  Random location of fuel treatments in wildland community interfaces: a percolation approach , 2004 .

[10]  Mark A. Finney,et al.  Calculation of fire spread rates across random landscapes , 2003 .

[11]  Carl N. Skinner,et al.  Basic principles of forest fuel reduction treatments , 2005 .

[12]  C. Barton,et al.  Ecological Restoration , 2005 .

[13]  C. Skinner,et al.  An Assessment of Factors Associated with Damage to Tree Crowns from the 1987 Wildfires in Northern California , 1995, Forest Science.

[14]  J. W. van Wagtendonk,et al.  Large fires in wilderness areas , 1995 .

[15]  D. X. Viegas,et al.  Use of graph theory and a genetic algorithm for finding optimal fuel treatment locations. , 2002 .

[16]  Lucy A. Salazar,et al.  Spatial Relationship of a Wildfire, Fuelbreaks, and Recently Burned Areas1 , 1987 .

[17]  W. Romme,et al.  The Interaction of Fire, Fuels, and Climate across Rocky Mountain Forests , 2004 .

[18]  Russell T. Graham,et al.  The effects of thinning and similar stand treatments on fire behavior in Western forests. , 1999 .

[19]  Russell T. Graham,et al.  Hayman Fire Case Study , 2003 .

[20]  J. Boone Kauffman,et al.  Use of prescribed fire to reduce wildfire potential , 1989 .

[21]  D. Peterson,et al.  Fuel treatments alter the effects of wildfire in a mixed-evergreen forest, Oregon, USA , 2005 .

[22]  Fuel Management: A Prerequisite Not an Alternative to Fire Control , 2006 .

[23]  Paulo M. Fernandes,et al.  A review of prescribed burning effectiveness in fire hazard reduction , 2003 .

[24]  A. Dunn.  The effects of prescribed burning on fire hazard in the chaparral: toward a new conceptual synthesis , 1989 .

[25]  Sarah McCaffrey,et al.  Science basis for changing forest structure to modify wildfire behavior and severity , 2004 .

[26]  E. A. Catchpole,et al.  Intensity of fire at its perimeter. , 1982 .

[27]  R. F. Wagle,et al.  A Controlled Burn Reduces the Impact of a Subsequent Wildfire in a Ponderosa Pine Vegetation Type , 1979 .

[28]  K. Hirsch,et al.  Fire-smart forest management: A pragmatic approach to sustainable forest management in fire-dominated ecosystems , 2001 .

[29]  David J. Parsons,et al.  Fire research and management in the Sierra Nevada national parks , 1996 .

[30]  James P. Menakis,et al.  Chapter 3. Indexing Colorado Watersheds to Risk of Wildfire , 2000 .

[31]  C. Allen,et al.  ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION OF SOUTHWESTERN PONDEROSA PINE ECOSYSTEMS: A BROAD PERSPECTIVE , 2002 .

[32]  Charles W. McHugh,et al.  Stand- and landscape-level effects of prescribed burning on two Arizona wildfires , 2005 .

[33]  IN THE WHITE MOUNTAINS OF ARIZONA , 1967 .

[34]  P. Fernandes,et al.  Fire behaviour and severity in a maritime pine stand under differing fuel conditions , 2004 .

[35]  M. Finney.  Fire growth using minimum travel time methods , 2002 .

[36]  D. Cram,et al.  Wildland Fire Effects in Silviculturally Treated vs. Untreated Stands of New Mexico and Arizona , 2006 .

[37]  H. Anderson.  Aids to Determining Fuel Models for Estimating Fire Behavior , 1982 .

[38]  T. Swetnam,et al.  Evaluating a century of fire patterns in two Rocky Mountain wilderness areas using digital fire atlases 1 , 2001 .