A System Dynamics Model Examining Alternative Wildfire Response Policies

In this paper, we develop a systems dynamics model of a coupled human and natural fire-prone system to evaluate changes in wildfire response policy. A primary motivation is exploring the implications of expanding the pace and scale of using wildfires as a forest restoration tool. We implement a model of a forested system composed of multiple successional classes, each with different structural characteristics and propensities for burning at high severity. We then simulate a range of alternative wildfire response policies, which are defined as the combination of a target burn rate (or inversely, the mean fire return interval) and a predefined transition period to reach the target return interval. We quantify time paths of forest successional stage distributions, burn severity, and ecological departure, and use departure thresholds to calculate how long it would take various policies to restore forest conditions. Furthermore, we explore policy resistance where excessive rates of high burn severity in the policy transition period lead to a reversion to fire exclusion policies. Establishing higher burn rate targets shifted vegetation structural and successional classes towards reference conditions and suggests that it may be possible to expand the application of wildfires as a restoration tool. The results also suggest that managers may be best served by adopting strategies that define aggressive burn rate targets but by implementing policy changes slowly over time.

[1]  Scott L. Stephens,et al.  Changing spatial patterns of stand-replacing fire in California conifer forests , 2017 .

[2]  M. Rollins.  LANDFIRE: a nationally consistent vegetation, wildland fire, and fuel assessment , 2009 .

[3]  Adrián Regos,et al.  Using Unplanned Fires to Help Suppressing Future Large Fires in Mediterranean Forests , 2014, PloS one.

[4]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  An empirical machine learning method for predicting potential fire control locations for pre-fire planning and operational fire management , 2017 .

[5]  Marie-Josée Fortin,et al.  State‐and‐transition simulation models: a framework for forecasting landscape change , 2016 .

[6]  Thomas G. Dietterich,et al.  Allowing a wildfire to burn: estimating the effect on future fire suppression costs , 2013 .

[7]  S. Stephens,et al.  Managed Wildfire Effects on Forest Resilience and Water in the Sierra Nevada , 2017, Ecosystems.

[8]  Carol Miller,et al.  Wildland fire as a self-regulating mechanism: the role of previous burns and weather in limiting fire progression. , 2015, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[9]  David L. Martell,et al.  A Review of Recent Forest and Wildland Fire Management Decision Support Systems Research , 2015, Current Forestry Reports.

[10]  Scott L. Stephens,et al.  Using Fire to Increase the Scale, Benefits, and Future Maintenance of Fuels Treatments , 2012 .

[11]  Alan A. Ager,et al.  Research, part of a Special Feature on Exploring Feedbacks in Coupled Human and Natural Systems (CHANS) Examining fire-prone forest landscapes as coupled human and natural systems , 2014 .

[12]  D. Peterson,et al.  Climate and wildfire area burned in western U.S. ecoprovinces, 1916-2003. , 2009, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[13]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Assessing the expected effects of wildfire on vegetation condition on the Bridger-Teton National Forest, Wyoming, USA , 2014 .

[14]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Spatial and temporal assessment of responder exposure to snag hazards in post-fire environments , 2019, Forest Ecology and Management.

[15]  S. Stephens,et al.  Vegetation change during 40 years of repeated managed wildfires in the Sierra Nevada, California. , 2017 .

[16]  Alan A. Ager,et al.  A social-ecological network approach for understanding wildfire risk governance , 2019, Global Environmental Change.

[17]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Rethinking the Wildland Fire Management System , 2018, Journal of Forestry.

[18]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Negative consequences of positive feedbacks in US wildfire management , 2015, Forest Ecosystems.

[19]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Quantifying the influence of previously burned areas on suppression effectiveness and avoided exposure: A case study of the Las Conchas Fire , 2016 .

[20]  Kevin Barnett,et al.  Beyond Fuel Treatment Effectiveness: Characterizing Interactions between Fire and Treatments in the US , 2016 .

[21]  João Claro,et al.  Forest fire management to avoid unintended consequences: a case study of Portugal using system dynamics. , 2013, Journal of environmental management.

[22]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Getting Ahead of the Wildfire Problem: Quantifying and Mapping Management Challenges and Opportunities , 2016 .

[23]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Examining alternative fuel management strategies and the relative contribution of National Forest System land to wildfire risk to adjacent homes – A pilot assessment on the Sierra National Forest, California, USA , 2016 .

[24]  Michael J. Jenkins,et al.  Wildfire’s resistance to control in mountain pine beetle-attacked lodgepole pine forests , 2013 .

[25]  A. Ager,et al.  Improving long-term fuel treatment effectiveness in the National Forest System through quantitative prioritization , 2019, Forest Ecology and Management.

[26]  Emily Jane Davis,et al.  Categorizing the Social Context of the Wildland Urban Interface: Adaptive Capacity for Wildfire and Community "Archetypes" , 2015 .

[27]  Sarah McCaffrey,et al.  Defining Extreme Wildfire Events: Difficulties, Challenges, and Impacts , 2018 .

[28]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Application of Wildfire Risk Assessment Results to Wildfire Response Planning in the Southern Sierra Nevada, California, USA , 2016 .

[29]  Branda Nowell,et al.  Evidence of effectiveness in the Cohesive Strategy: measuring and improving wildfire response , 2019, International Journal of Wildland Fire.

[30]  Lisa M. Holsinger,et al.  Evaluating ecological resilience across wildfire suppression levels under climate and fuel treatment scenarios using landscape simulation modelling , 2019, International Journal of Wildland Fire.

[31]  David E. Calkin,et al.  Engaging the fire before it starts: A case study from the 2017 Pinal Fire (Arizona) , 2019 .

[32]  T. Spies,et al.  Wildfires managed for restoration enhance ecological resilience , 2018 .

[33]  Scott L. Stephens,et al.  Variability in vegetation and surface fuels across mixed-conifer-dominated landscapes with over 40 years of natural fire , 2016 .

[34]  Yu Wei,et al.  Spatial optimization of operationally relevant large fire confine and point protection strategies: model development and test cases , 2018 .

[35]  Brandon M. Collins,et al.  Constraints on Mechanized Treatment Significantly Limit Mechanical Fuels Reduction Extent in the Sierra Nevada , 2015 .

[36]  Brian J. Harvey,et al.  Evidence for declining forest resilience to wildfires under climate change. , 2018, Ecology letters.

[37]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Prioritising fuels reduction for water supply protection , 2019, International Journal of Wildland Fire.

[38]  Timothy Ingalsbee.  Whither the paradigm shift? Large wildland fires and the wildfire paradox offer opportunities for a new paradigm of ecological fire management , 2017 .

[39]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  A Model-Based Framework to Evaluate Alternative Wildfire Suppression Strategies , 2018 .

[40]  A. S. Meador,et al.  The Economics of Ecological Restoration and Hazardous Fuel Reduction Treatments in the Ponderosa Pine Forest Ecosystem , 2015 .

[41]  James C. Robertson,et al.  The missing fire: quantifying human exclusion of wildfire in Pacific Northwest forests, USA , 2019, Ecosphere.

[42]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Designing Operationally Relevant Daily Large Fire Containment Strategies Using Risk Assessment Results , 2019, Forests.

[43]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  A framework for developing safe and effective large-fire response in a new fire management paradigm , 2017 .

[44]  Charles W. McHugh,et al.  Simulation of long-term landscape-level fuel treatment effects on large wildfires , 2006 .

[45]  J. Agee,et al.  Reform forest fire management , 2015, Science.

[46]  S. Dobrowski,et al.  What Drives Low-Severity Fire in the Southwestern USA? , 2018 .

[47]  Christopher D. O’Connor,et al.  Disturbance and productivity interactions mediate stability of forest composition and structure. , 2017, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[48]  Tonja S. Opperman,et al.  LANDFIRE - A national vegetation/fuels data base for use in fuels treatment, restoration, and suppression planning , 2013 .

[49]  Toddi A. Steelman,et al.  Wildfire risk as a socioecological pathology , 2016 .

[50]  E. Reinhardt,et al.  An Evaluation of the Forest Service Hazardous Fuels Treatment Program—Are We Treating Enough to Promote Resiliency or Reduce Hazard? , 2017 .

[51]  S. Acker,et al.  Expanding Our Understanding of Forest Structural Restoration Needs in the Pacific Northwest , 2018, Northwest Science.

[52]  John Handmer,et al.  A review of operations research methods applicable to wildfire management , 2012 .

[53]  Sarah J. Hart,et al.  Examining forest resilience to changing fire frequency in a fire‐prone region of boreal forest , 2019, Global change biology.

[54]  Matthew P. Thompson,et al.  Systems Thinking and Wildland Fire Management , 2017 .