Enhancing Fire Science Exchange: The Northern Rockies
Fire Science Network
Author(s):
Vita Wright, USFS RMRS / NPS FAM
Crystal Kolden, University of Idaho
Todd Kipfer, MSU Big Sky Institute of the Environment
Kristine Lee, Fire, Fuel, and Smoke Science Program, Rocky Mountain Research Station
Adrian Leighton, Salish Kootenai College Department of
Natural Resources
Jim Riddering, UM National Center for Landscape Fire Analysis
Leana Schelvan, National Center for Landscape Fire Analysis
Abstract:
The Northern Rocky Mountain region is one of the most fire-prone
regions in the United States. With a history of large fires that have
shaped national policy, including the fires of 1910 and 2000 in Idaho
and Montana and the Yellowstone fires of 1988, this region is projected
to have many large severe fires in the future. Communication about
fire science needs and science products is critical to effective,
science-informed management. Despite the concentration of fire
scientists and fire research in this region, land managers struggle
to sort through available scientific information; find the right tools,
models, and applications to make management decisions; and
access expertise relevant to management questions. The Northern
Rockies Fire Science Network is being developed to assist managers
in the Northern Rockies by offering a single place where managers
can access the latest knowledge and tools supporting fire and
fuels management in this region. The Fire Science Network will
also help identify regional research priorities, build and strengthen
relationships among managers, scientists, and other science
delivery partnerships in the region, and work to overcome barriers
associated with the different cultures of science and management.
This presentation describes the background, vision, and goal behind
the Network and illustrates examples of the types of activities and
services the network can provide. It also describes the Fire Science
Network’s first priority: the conduct of a regional needs assessment
to gather feedback on which activities to prioritize.
Presenter Bio: A fire social science analyst, Vita Wright works
in a shared position between the USFS Human Factors & Risk
Management RD&A and the NPS Branch of Wildland Fire. She is also
pursuing her PhD at the University of Montana, where she is studying
individual and organizational influences to the use of fire science.
Previously, Vita developed and led the interagency Aldo Leopold
Wilderness Research Institute’s Research Application Program,
which focused on wilderness science application. She currently
focuses on organizational culture and organizational learning in
support of fire decision making, safety, and the integration of science
with management.
Learning from Escaped Prescribed Fire Reviews
Author(s):
Anne Black, Human Factors and Risk Management RD&A, USDA
Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station
Dave Thomas, Renoveling
Jim Saveland, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research
Station
Abstract:
Over the past decade, the wildland fire community has developed
a number of innovative methods for conducting a review following
escape of a prescribed fire. The stated purpose been to identify
methods that not only meet policy requirements, but to reduce future
56
escapes. Implicit is the assumption that a review leads to learning.
Yet, as organizational learning expert David Garvin notes, a lesson
is not learned just because the reasons and context for an error has
been explored; true learning only occurs when behaviors change on
the ground.
In this Joint Fire Science Program funded study, we seek to
understand whether and how the escaped prescribed fire reviews
processes currently designed and implemented by U.S. federal
fire agencies promote organizational learning. We are particularly
interested in what facilitates individual and organizational learning
and how learning may be effectively transferred. Since the challenge
is less on the theoretical side (a tremendous amount of theoretical
information exists about organizational learning and understanding
error) and more on the cognitive and behavioral side (how do we
individually recognize and internalize new insights and adjust
behavior, and what does an organization need to do to facilitate
learning, particularly by third-parties?) we are using structured
dialogue sessions with review participants as our primary method of
inquiry. The two day workshops are guided by three questions: What
aspects of the escaped prescribed fire review processes as currently
designed and implemented promote organizational learning? How
effectively do current reviews transfer the knowledge gained from
reviews to other field units? What is needed to strengthen the
learning and the knowledge transfer aspects of reviews? Ultimately,
results will be summarized into ‘best or most effective practices for
future review team members and participants. For this presentation,
we will review preliminary findings from three of the four scheduled
workshops.
Presenter Bio: Dr. Black, a Social Science Analyst with the Human
Factors and Risk Management RD&A, is interested in understanding
and facilitating sustainability in human-ecological systems. She has
been studying fire management through various lenses that reflect
on organizational performance (high reliability, human factors,
safety, resiliency and organizational learning) in the wildland fire
community since 2002.
Accidents, Accident Guides, Stories and The Truth
Author(s):
Dr. Ted Putnam, Mindful Solutions
Abstract:
Here at the 11th Wildland Fire Safety Summit we are students of
fire safety, which is our basic theme for gathering to exchange
our collective and separate visions. The secondary theme is
how stories and narratives aid in this process. And this invites
the question can stories also hinder improving wildland fire
safety? Part of our quest for safety involves exploring accidents,
near misses and mishaps to promote individual, cultural and
organizational learning...Lessons Learned.
How do accidents, accident investigations, truth and stories
intermix? Should accident investigations focus on telling the Truth? If
so, at what cost? Should truth be compromised to further individual,
cultural or corporate images? Should accident investigators possess
any core skills? If so, who determines those skills and provides
the training and oversight that is associated with regulating such
a process? Should stories embody a reasonable semblance of the
truth, i.e. true stories? An alternate definition of a story is “ a lie.” Is
this a warning for us as investigators and storytellers?
My analysis will start with the “First Fire” Investigation, Story and
Movie...all involving events unfolding in 1949 at Mann Gulch. In
57