The National Park Service Wildland Fire
Management Program1
Stephen J. Botti2
Abstract
The USDI National Park Service (NPS) manages a wide variety of land areas throughout the
nation. These lands contain many priceless resources such as historic properties, rare species,
critical habitats, and special concern biological communities. They also provide a large
infrastructure for visitor services. The NPS has long recognized that wildland fire can be a threat
to some of these resources and a benefit to others. For this reason, NPS fire management has
emphasized a balance between aggressive suppression and fire use. The NPS utilizes the FIREPRO
programmatic analysis to determine appropriate staffing, program support, and funding for each
park area. Because the NPS manages so many non-market and non-use resources, FIREPRO does
not utilize a cost-plus-net-value-change philosophy to identify a least cost program. Instead, it
attempts to define a program that effectively accomplishes resource management objectives while
protecting life, property, and other resources for which parks were established. Future
enhancements to FIREPRO will focus on using geographic information systems to evaluate the
cost-effectiveness of alternative fire management strategies spatially across landscapes and through
time. This will require a more precise definition of resource management goals and objectives and
improved methods for monitoring ecosystem changes.
The USDI National Park Service (NPS) contains 377 units in 48 states, the District
of Columbia, and many overseas territories (fig. 1). Within these units, the NPS
manages 34 million hectares of land, including 21 million hectares in the state of
Alaska. This is the most varied land base of any land management agency in the
United States, ranging from the White House, to Gettysburg National Military
Park, to famous natural areas such as Yellowstone and the Grand Canyon, to
urban recreational areas such as the Santa Monica Mountains.
Some rather unique wildland fire management problems are associated with
this geographic variety. Many of the nation's scenic, historic, and ecological
treasures are found within National Parks. NPS lands contain more than 29,000
historic buildings, 47,000 known archeological sites, and 30,000 non-historic
buildings valued at more than $6.5 billion. In addition, NPS lands encompass 6
Figure 1
National Park Service, land
management profile, 377
units.
An abbreviated version of this
paper
was
presented
at
the
Symposium on Fire Economics,
Policy, and Planning: Bottom
Lines, April 5-9, 1999, San
Diego, California.
1
Program
Planning
Manager,
National Park Service, 3833
S. Development Ave, Boise,
ID 83705.
2
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-173. 1999.
7
Session 1
Figure 2
National Park Service, critical
resources to be protected from
wildland fire.
Management Wildlife Program-Botti
National Park System
Critical Resources to be Protected from Wildland Fire
million hectares of critical habitat for a wide variety of endangered, threatened,
rare, and sensitive species, and more than 1 million hectares of special concern
biological communities (figs. 1, 2). Special concern biological communities include
the hardwood hammocks in the Everglades, ohia forests in Hawaii, and giant
sequoia groves in Sequoia National Park. These are areas containing rare
associations of plants and animals that may be sensitive to a variety of
environmental impacts. Protection of these areas may be identified in legislation and
policy as one of the primary purposes of a park.
Because critical habitat and special concern biological communities are
considered priceless, the NPS cannot allow them to be destroyed by wildland
fire. Conversely, many of the NPS sensitive species and biological communities
are dependent upon recurring fire for their perpetuation. Because of the dual
nature of this relationship to wildland fire, the NPS has emphasized both
aggressive suppression of unwanted wildland fires and restoration of natural fire
regimes through wildland fire use and prescribed fire. Recent changes in
Federal wildland fire policy have solidified this perspective and required no
major strategic changes in NPS fire management plans.
Distribution of Wildland and Prescribed Fires in
the NPS
In the past 10 years, the NPS has suppressed an average of 791 fires per year,
managed an average of 73 wildland fires per year for resource benefits, and set
Figure 3
National Park Service, wildland/
prescribed fire occurrence,
1989-1998.
8
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-173. 1999.
Management Wildlife Program - Botti
an average of 210 prescribed fires each year (fig. 3). Since the Yellowstone fires of
1988, fire occurrence records show a slow but steady increase in numbers of
prescribed fires and wildland fires managed for resource benefits and a slight
downward trend in numbers of wildland fires suppressed. During the same time
period, the area burned by suppressed wildland fires also has shown a
downward trend, while the prescribed burned area has remained about the
same, and the area burned in wildland fires managed for resource benefits has
slowly increased (fig. 4).
During 4 of the past 7 years, the area prescribed burned actually exceeded
the area of suppressed wildland fires. Even in 1994, one of the most severe
wildfire years on record, the total fire area managed for resource benefits
(prescribed and wildland) was about equal to the area of suppressed fires. This
demonstrates the increasing emphasis by the NPS on using fire as a resource
management tool to restore and maintain natural ecosystems.
NPS Fire Management Economics
The distribution of wildland and prescribed fires throughout NPS units is quite
different from the pattern on most other Federal lands and has great impact on
the organizational and economic structure of the fire management program. In
the past 10 years, 75 percent of the area burned by suppressed wildland fires
occurred in only 11 NPS units (3 percent):
Park
Everglades National Park, Florida
Denali National Park and Preserve, Alaska
Yosemite National Park, California
Yukon-Charlie Rivers National Preserve, Alaska
Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve, Alaska
Big Cypress National Preserve, Florida
Saguaro National Park, Arizona
Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming
Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico
Glacier National Park, Montana
Santa Monica Mountains National
Recreation Area, California
Area Burned (ha)
64,670
58,840
29,070
28,070
25,290
14,850
7,290
7,040
5,450
5,160
4,480
Figure 4
National Park Service, wildland/
prescribed fire area burned,
1989-1998.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-173. 1999.
9
Management Wildlife Program-Botti
The situation with fire use is even more dramatic. In the past 10 years, 87
percent of the area burned in wildland fires managed for resource benefits
occurred in only seven park units:
Park
Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, California
Glacier National Park, Montana
Everglades National Park, Florida
Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona
Yosemite National Park, California
Dinosaur National Monument, Colorado
Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming
Area Burned (ha)
6,350
5,240
4,380
3,450
3,080
1,740
1,520
Eighty percent of the area prescribed burned in the past 10 years also was in
7 parks:
Park
Big Cypress National Preserve, Florida
Everglades National Park, Florida
Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, California
Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona
Yosemite National Park, California
Wind Cave National Park, South Dakota
Badlands National Park, South Dakota
Area Burned (ha)
158,310
17,940
7,800
7,170
5,700
4,880
4,470
The goals and objectives for protecting people, property, and historic
resources, and enhancing natural resources in these few parks have a tremendous
impact on fire management economics in the NPS. Fire management
expenditures can be grouped into three program areas: readiness and program
management, wildland fire response, and fuels management and prescribed fire
(fig. 5). Readiness and program management involves planned and programmed
expenditures for program leadership and for staffing and equipment required
for responding to normal year unplanned ignitions. Wildland fire response
expenditures occur on individual incidents and cannot be planned in advance.
These involve the full range of appropriate management responses on unplanned
ignitions, from aggressive suppression to monitoring, and also include
Figure 5
National Park Service, wildland
fire management expenditures
(adjusted to 1999 dollars), 19891999.
10
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-173. 1999.
Management Wildlife Program-Botti
emergency rehabilitation actions. Fuels management and prescribed fire
expenditures are for planned projects, but actual obligations tend to be
unpredictable because they are dependent on prescription criteria, smoke
impacts, and other constraints. Readiness and program management budgets,
which are fixed by Congress, have slowly increased during the past 10 years.
During the same period, wildland fire response expenditures have fluctuated
depending on the severity of the fire season and the threats presented by wildland
fires. Fuels management and prescribed fire expenditures have shown a slow
increase, accelerating in recent years because of the increasing emphasis on
reducing hazardous fuels and restoring the natural ecosystem role of fire.
Expenditures for wildland fire response and for fuels and prescribed fire
management are theoretically unlimited; however, amounts in excess of annual
budgets require national emergency declarations, supplemental appropriations,
or emergency transfers from other budgeted programs.
The costs of wildland fire response and prescribed fire are dramatically
different. It is useful to discuss these differences in terms of the relative cost per
hectare of each type of operation (fig. 6). There are few incentives to control costs
on wildland fire incidents, because of the perceived emergency nature of the
response and the threats to life, resources, and property. For this reason, those
costs have averaged $813 per hectare over the past 10 years, eight times the
average cost of prescribed fires. In 1998, appropriate management response on
wildland fires cost 10 times as much per hectare as hazardous fuels reduction
and prescribed burning to restore the natural ecosystem role of fire. Wildland
fire costs per hectare have fluctuated depending on the size of fires, the threats
they present, and resources available at the time. Prescribed fire costs per hectare
have shown a slow and steady increase as larger and more risky areas are burned
and more resources are invested in the program. Managers control the costs of
prescribed fires by establishing ranges of acceptable costs for projects with
similar characteristics. For example, the costs of projects within a certain size
range, in a particular fuel type, are evaluated against similar historic projects to
determine if they are acceptable. Projects that exceed a statistical range of costs
are not approved or require special justification.
NPS Fire Program Analysis - FIREPRO
Similar to other Department of the Interior bureaus and the USDA Forest Service,
the NPS must demonstrate that its fire expenditures are both effective and
efficient. Accountability requires the NPS to defend the relationships between
investments in readiness, program management, prescribed fire, and appropriate
management response on wildland fires. The NPS uses a system-wide analysis of
Figure 6
National Park Service, cost per
hectare (adjusted to 1999 dollars),
wildland fire/prescribed fire,
1989-1998.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-173. 1999.
11
Management Wildlife Program-Botti
program workload and complexity called FIREPRO to determine appropriate
staffing and funding targets. This analysis identifies the staffing and program
support required to achieve a 95 percent success rate on initial wildfire
suppression response and provides adequate program planning and oversight.
FIREPRO analyzes fire occurrence and weather records for a normal year and
historic initial response success to determine the proper mix of fire engines and
crews. Monitoring and management requirements for wildland fires managed
for resource benefits are calculated from historic records of the numbers and
duration of such fires. In addition to the cost-acceptability assessment, prescribed
fire projects are prioritized through a national ranking system on the basis of
values to be protected. To determine if prescribed fires are achieving long-term
resource management objectives, FIREPRO determines the staffing required to
implement a fire effects monitoring system. This system monitors changes in
fuels and vegetation indefinitely into the future.
Project rankings, cost profiles, and initial response success alone are
insufficient to measure whether expenditures are efficient and effective. Any
discussion of fire economics in the NPS must be guided by a firm understanding
of its land management objectives. The purpose of wildland fire management in
the NPS is neither to produce a good safety record for firefighters, maintain a
modernized fleet of fire engines and aircraft, nor achieve the least cost program.
The purpose is to protect lives, property, and resources from damage and to use
wildland fire to achieve a wide range of resource management benefits. In
particular, a primary purpose is to restore and maintain fire dependent
ecosystems and reduce the threats of unwanted wildland fire through reduction
of hazardous fuel accumulations. It is the accomplishment of these goals and
objectives that should be the focus of economic analyses and program
performance assessments.
Agencies that produce market value commodities from their lands have
incorporated such values into an analysis of fire program cost plus net value
change in resources (C+NVC) to determine the least cost program. The NPS has
been faced with a more difficult situation because of its emphasis on protecting
non-market and non-use resources. Determining NVC for the potential loss of
the General Sherman Tree or the Battleship Rock pictographs left by the ancestral
Pueblo Indians enters the realm of individual philosophical and spiritual values.
Nevertheless, such resources are not of infinite value, and their protection cannot
be based on the total lack of cost controls. Likewise, the benefits of restoring and
protecting a mixed conifer ecosystem by reestablishing the natural role of
frequent low intensity surface fires is difficult to quantify. Even quantifying the
economic benefits of reducing hazardous fuels has proved difficult. Although
the relationship between changes in fuels and changes in fire behavior can be
predicted, the unpredictability of ignitions and the conditions under which they
will occur introduce a large degree of uncertainty into the relationship between
fuels management costs and suppression costs. Further complicating this analysis
is the fact that almost all prescribed fires in the NPS are designed to produce
ecosystem management benefits in addition to reducing hazardous fuels that
might threaten lives and property.
For this reason, the NPS believes that the proper way for it to determine
appropriate fire management budgets and control wildland fire expenditures is to
focus on the effectiveness of various budget levels and response strategies in
achieving long-term land management goals and objectives. For instance, in the
hypothetical analysis depicted in (fig. 7), management strategy "C" is as effective as
"A" but costs less, whereas strategy "B" costs the same as "A" but is more effective.
Management strategies that lie along the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) frontier
provide the most cost-effective alternatives for given budget levels. The dashed line
depicts a possible future evolution of the cost-effectiveness frontier for a given set of
12
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-173. 1999.
Management Wildlife Program - Botti
Figure 7
Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA).
strategies (fig. 7). Reducing hazardous fuels and restoring natural fire regimes and
vegetation structures will, in time, tend to flatten the CEA frontier curve so that
strategies such as C and B become more effective and less costly (fig. 7). Some fuel
types require repeated treatments to achieve fuel reduction and ecosystem
restoration targets. Each subsequent fire becomes simpler and less costly, and the
overall effectiveness of the strategy in reducing the risks of catastrophic wildfire
increases through time. FIREPRO is the first step in developing this process. Future
enhancements will focus on quantifying precise resource management goals and
objectives and developing methods to measure how well these are achieved. This
will involve evaluating vegetation and fuel changes through time at the ecosystem
level, which is currently beyond the capability of the fire effects monitoring program
in FIREPRO.
Summary
The National Parks discussed earlier will be the primary focus of such efforts
because that is where fire management has the greatest impact and where most of
the money is spent. Technologies for spatial analysis of fuels, vegetation, fire history,
fire regimes, and values across a landscape will soon allow the NPS to model
the effectiveness of alternative fire management budgets and strategies. Constraints
on the use of fire, such as smoke and visitor use impacts, can be assessed and used
to modify resource management goals and objectives. By analyzing changes in
fuels and ecosystems in both space and time, managers will be able to identify the
most cost-effective program for the long term. Rather than focusing
exclusively on immediate trade-offs between the costs of emergency response
capability and economic values protected, the NPS strategy is to view investments
in prescribed fire and wildland fire use as capital investments that will return
benefits in the future. These benefits will include reductions in suppression
readiness costs and the exorbitant cost of fighting catastrophic wildfires.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-173. 1999.
13