Land Management Decision Model: Planning
the Future of Fire-Dependent Ecosystems1
O. L. Daniels and R. W. Mutch2
LAND MANAGER INVOLVEMENT IN FIRE MANAGEMENT
Those responsible for managing vegetation and
people's use and occupancy of complex fire-related
ecosystems face specific and special challenges.
The vegetation is dynamic and can be physically
manipulated to produce different outputs. Economic values are high. Social and political
factors are often entrenched and unrelated to
ecologic realities. A multitude of physical and
biological science specialties contribute knowledge on which decisions are based. Considering
all these factors, the best of modern management
techniques are needed. Because fire management-the blending of traditional fire control activities with fire ecology principles and land management planning requirements--has an important role
to play in attaining this goal, we need to thoroughly understand the manager's involvement.
There are few current examples available to aid
in this process. The Lolo National Forest planning effort is one such model.
DeBruin (1976) asserted that "fire management
is change: it is a change in concept, a change
in policy, and a change in action:" His concluding thought to the conferees was that "the goal
of this entire effort is to manage change, to
enjoy change, because we believe from the changes
we are making will come a better land."
What are some of the present-day problems in
implementing the changing direction? Philpot
(1976) cited these reasons why only a small
percentage of existing knowledge is being effectively applied by land managers:
1.
Lack of personal commitment or acceptance
of fire's role in land management.
2.
Lack of expertise and technical knowledge.
Abstract: Integrating diverse biological, physical, social, and economic factors in determining
land allocation decisions and scheduling future
resource activities is the challenge facing land
managers today. Criteria were established to
resolve key issues and concerns in the selection
of an action program on the Lolo National Forest.
The early integration of fire information into
this planning process is a significant change in
direction for the Forest Service. The end result
is the actual scheduling of fire suppression,
fuel management, and prescribed fire programs to
achieve resource management objectives.
3. The fire ecology knowledge is not in
usable form.
4. Lack of administrative understanding and
strong leadership.
5. Absence of fire ecology considerations in
the basic land management planning process.
The crux of the problem rests largely in the
lack of personal commitment. Philpot advocated
an expanded role for fire management professionals, coupled with training in fire ecology for
all land managers.
Kilgore (1976) also included commitment among
five broad goals necessary to effective longrange fire management programs:
1.
Better understanding of fire as a process.
2.
Better understanding of fire as a tool.
3. Greater commitment by managers to use on
the land the best of what we already know.
4.
A well-trained cadre of prescribed-burners.
5. Greater public understanding of and involvement in developing and approving our management
practices.
A wealth of technical information on Mediterranean ecosystems has been presented at the Palo
Alto (1977) and San Diego symposia. Unfortunately,
however, a substantial gulf often exists between
knowledge and the practical application of that
knowledge to solve land management problems. We
have reviewed some of the reasons that contribute
to this application timelag. The remainder of
this paper will outline several steps that we
have found useful in applying the latest fire
ecology information to the management of firedependent ecosystems in western Montana.
1
Presented at the Symposium on Dynamics and
Management of Mediterranean-type Ecosystems, June
22-26, 1981, San Diego, California.
2
Forest Supervisor and Fire Staff Officer,
respectively, Lolo National Forest, Forest Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Missoula, Mont.
528
THE RIGHT INFORMATION AT THE RIGHT RESOLUTION
Land management planning efforts often fail to
prescribe comprehensive fire management actions
(presuppression, suppression, and prescribed
fire) that support resource objectives. Examples
of the resulting problems include the loss of
range forage and wildlife habitat due to the
encroachment of other species, suppression damage
from heavy equipment, suppression costs exceeding
values protected, loss of plant and animal diversity, unnatural fuel accumulations, fire rehabilitation programs that disregard the natural regeneration capacity of native species and society's
failure to recognize the true severity of the
urban/wildland fire situation.
One remedy to these problems is to assist land
managers in better integrating fire considerations into land management planning and resource
management decisions through "front-end analysis."
This remedy hypothesizes that a skill and knowledge
deficiency is the primary reason why resource
management decisions are not appropriately supported by a spectrum of fire management actions. Some
might debate that environmental and motivational
deficiencies are also contributing causes. But
there is evidence to suggest that the training
hypothesis is worth testing.
What ecosystem-related knowledge is necessary to
permit managers to more closely simulate the
"model" condition? The manager needs to know
something about the area's natural history, the
impacts of human activities, ecosystem changes over
time that influence land management decisions (fire
effects), and today's fire situation (fuel
and fire behavior interpretations).
Fire management actions will support resource
management objectives when land managers have such
knowledge of fire relationships and the skill to
use this knowledge during the planning process.
The result of this "front-end" analysis will be the
development of presuppression, suppression, and
fire use criteria and actions that actively further
management direction. A recent fire ecology reference document (Davis and others 1980) provided
necessary information that managers needed to
specify appropriate direction for resource decisions; and the format of this reference document
should be of interest to others.
The habitat type groups used in this reference
are helpful descriptors that can be used to connect
fire/ecosystem relationships to the planning process
and to implement fire management prescriptions.
The habitat type groups are recognizable parts of
ecosystems that are ecologically distinct in terms
of topographic features, soils, vegetation, fuels,
and fire behavior potential. The groups can be
classified and mapped; thus, they can serve as a
ready index for many kinds of information.
Not only does the ecosystem stratification
account for the important intra-unit attributes,
but also portrays interactions among units. The
patterning of habitat type groups in space (each
with inherent biological, physical, and climatic
features) guides a logical process in formulating
management decisions.
PLANNING PROCESS ON THE LOLO NATIONAL FOREST: THE
DECISION MODEL
The planning process used to allocate land to
different resource purposes and schedule resource
management activities on the Lolo National Forest
complied with requirements of the National Forest
Management Act of 1976. The Forest Plan (1980)
established integrated land management direction
and time frames for implementation; direction for
implementing, monitoring, and evaluating projects,
activities, programs, and budgets; and criteria for
amending and revising the plan.
One novel aspect of this new planning process is
that 52 public issues and management concerns
identified on the Lolo National Forest provided the
focus for all subsequent planning. (Former land
management planning methods relied on almost encyclopedic amounts of inventory data and information,
whether it was needed or not.) A public issue is a
resource management subject or question of widespread public interest identified through public
participation. A management concern is a problem
requiring resolution or a condition constraining
management practices as identified by the interdisciplinary team. Public issues and management
concerns were resolved through one or more of the
following processes: quantitative analysis using a
mathematical model; forest policies; forest management standards and guidelines; and prescriptions
establishing specific management practices for
management areas.
This issue-driven and systematic planning process
insures that fire-related information is integrated
with other data at the very onset of planning.
These steps are being followed on the Lolo National
Forest to integrate fire considerations into the
Forest-wide management plan:
1. Identify the issues and management concerns.
The fire management issues and management concern:
on the Lolo National Forest revolved around basic
questions about how much fire can be used to achieve
resource objectives within air quality standards,
how compatible fire use and suppression programs
are with the role of fire in various ecosystems,
and how cost effective the fire suppression program
is upon implementation.
2. Develop planning criteria (e.g., for data
base, analysis of management situation, alternative
formulation, estimating effects of alternatives,
evaluation and selection of alternatives).
3. Develop, Process, and interpret fire data
base. Assess implications of historical fire
cycles; evaluate fire behavior potential recognizing several levels of resolution (experience and
judgment, National Fire Danger Rating models,
nomographs, photo series, on-the-ground fuel
inventories); determine fire management implications and opportunities.
529
4. Integrate fire information into the land
stratification framework (e.g., ecological land
units, habitat types, major ecosystems, etc.). An
example of this step is presented in a paper
titled "Fire Ecology of the Lolo National Forest
Habitat Types" by Davis, Clayton, and Fischer
(1980). This integration is used in the analysis
of the management situation.
5. Formulate land management alternatives and
develop fire management direction.
6. Evaluate fire and economic effects of alternatives.
7. Select a management alternative and its fire
management direction. The guidance is in the form
of broad direction for various resource activities
including wildlife, timber, esthetics, and wilderness.
8. Prepare operational fire management plans.
This is really the bottom line to the whole planning process: action programs on the ground that
support land management objectives.
9. Feedback. Monitor and continually refine the
process.
10. Amendment and revision.
The "front-end" integration of fire information
into the planning process is a significant change
in direction for the Forest Service. On the Lolo
National Forest we are making a positive effort to
manage the change, to enjoy the change, and to
assure more thoughtful management decisions because
of the change. We certainly don't have all the
answers on how to most effectively implement change.
But we do have the commitment, the climate, and the
interdisciplinary concept to learn as we go.
In addition to manager commitment, technical
ecosystem data, and a systematic planning process,
two additional components are essential in implementing changes in resource management programs.
Those two components involve building a receptive
organization and developing public understanding.
DEVELOPING AN ORGANIZATION
Once a resource manager is committed to the
total fire management job, a responsive organization must be built. The organization needs to
provide the expertise and manpower to do the suppression, land management planning, inventory, and
fire management activities; and supply the necessary information concerning the ecosystems involved. It is important to organize in a manner that
will keep presuppression and suppression costs
within bounds so that funds are available to implement the rest of the program.
Some of the organizational steps leading to
successful accomplishment include:
530
• Assembling the right team with the right
frame of mind. Acquire the proper mix of generalists and specialists with a firm grasp of ecosystem dynamics. Hire missing skills if necessary.
Recognize that a new concept is often implemented
because of an individual's commitment, not the
organization's commitment. When an individual
transfers, the new concept often transfers with
him; strive to replace key people with like people.
• Develop a productive climate for change. Set
the example of receptivity to change. Encourage an
interdisciplinary approach on problems. Insist
that fire personnel interact with other specialists
early in the planning process. Provide for challenging training. Establish priorities and reasonable schedules to assure a high-quality, professional effort.
• Seek opportunities to implement change on
the ground . . . and demonstrate a capability
to apply current state-of-the-art procedures.
• Match fire management strategies to land
management objectives.
• Take calculated risks. Risk taking is a part
of the job if we are doing right things. Don't
shut a program down when the going gets tough. Be
alert to invalid attacks and take immediate action
to counter them with facts. Expect a professional
and thorough planning job and critical review -and support subordinates in a risk situation. Be
prepared to establish and defend a shift in funding
emphasis.
• Establish effective inform and involve programs. Reach public and Government agency groups.
• Kilgore cautions to avoid any bandwagon
approach to the use of fire: "while there is some
element of risk in reasonable fire management, we
will lose both credibility with, and support of,
knowledgeable fire control experts as well as
support of the public if we do not use the best
possible professional skills and judgment in our
use of fire in the forest."
• Maintain an aggressive fire suppression
capability. We will be able to proceed only as
fast as our ability to contain fire when and where
we want it.
INFORM AND INVOLVE EFFORT
Concurrent with planning and organizing for a
comprehensive fire management program, it is
necessary to develop a satisfactory public and
political environment for change. All people need
to understand and accept the role of fire in
ecosystems. This requires a factual and objective
portrayal of fire history regimes and the effects
of fire on plant and animal communities. Armed
with the pertinent facts, the various publics then
need to have ample opportunities to comment on
different fire management strategies to achieve
land management objectives.
Public support should be nurtured early in
program development so that later "surprises" are
minimized. Even the best conceived efforts are
doomed to negative confrontations every time the
public is surprised with unexpected fire results.
But if the public well understands the role fire
plays in maintaining the viability of many ecosystems, they will be in a much better position to
accept such tradeoffs as reduced air quality
resulting from prescribed fire.
The presence of fire cycles has been well
documented for western Montana in recent years.
These cyclic fires played a variety of roles that
included (1) seedbed preparation, (2) recycling
of nutrients, (3) setting back plant succession,
(4) providing conditions favorable for wildlife,
(5) providing a mosaic of age classes and vegetation types, (6) reduction of numbers of trees
susceptible to attack by insects and disease, and
(7) reduction of fire hazard.
These facets of the inform and involve job are
key to effective program accomplishment:
Several categories of fire management actions
have been established on the Lolo National Forest
in response to property values, economics, and
resource objectives. The first is the wildland/
homes fire management situation where life and
property values are so high that we want to achieve
immediate control of fires. Many more people are
building homes in wildland areas where fires are
common. An interagency fire prevention and suppression program is being developed that will
enable people to live more compatibly within
wildland ecosystems that periodically burn. In the
modified dispatch fire management situation,
initial attack dispatch procedures were modified to
improve the cost effectiveness of suppression
actions during low fire danger periods.
• Full commitment of facts and knowledge to the
important issues.
• The internal audiences (our own people) are
as important as the external audiences. Don't
forget to build understanding with the maintenance
person in the motor pool and the receptionist on
the front desk . . . they make numerous daily
contacts, too.
• We need to involve the public in the decisionmaking process, as well as informing them. But
let's involve an informed public.
• The inform and involve effort is everyone's
job. It cannot simply be delegated to Public
Information Officers.
• Appreciate the importance of sincere one-onone communications with many people.
• Go beyond a "key people" list of contacts.
Get into the schools and service groups; reach the
person-in-the-street.
• Be imaginative and innovative in approaches.
Make good use of audio-visual aids. Avoid the
stereotyped "public meeting" atmosphere.
• Remember that the name of the game is communication: a two-way exchange of information and
ideas. Be a good listener.
• Recognize critical audiences and approach
them with an honest desire to build understanding.
• Identify air quality concerns as a crucial
resource management issue and approach it in a
professional and competent manner. We have smokeless tobacco but not smokeless fires. Prepare the
public to appreciate some smoke as an inevitable
byproduct of prescribed fire programs.
Unplanned fires started by humans and lightning
are permitted to burn under approved prescriptions
to fulfill wildlife and wilderness objectives.
These fire management areas pose little threat of
fires burning outside the boundaries and causing
resource and property damage. Over 310,000 acres on
the Lolo National Forest have been allocated to
observation fire management areas in the current
program. These fires are monitored daily to insure
they remain in prescription.
The use of prescribed fire is expanding to meet
resource objectives: reducing the fire hazard
after logging, exposing mineral soil for seedbeds,
regulating insects and diseases, changing the
composition of species in plant communities,
improving the yield and quality of forage, improving wildlife habitat, maintaining aesthetic quality
and appearance of campgrounds and historical areas,
and perpetuating natural ecosystems in wilderness.
Increasing public concerns over air quality require
the development of smoke management strategies that
minimize unwanted effects by shifting some burning
programs to spring and summer months to avoid fall
air stagnation problems, using more logging residues for other purposes such as firewood so that a
smaller quantity of material requires burning, and
improving our forecasting capability to insure
adequate smoke dispersal.
CURRENT FIRE MANAGY ENT PROGRAM
SUMMARY
Historically, fire has been a frequent visitor
to ecosystems on the 2,000,000 acres of the Lolo
National Forest. Data compiled for the period 1955
to 1974 indicate an average of 180 fires per
year. About two-thirds of these fires are lightning-caused and one-third are man-caused.
Several important facets of any fire management
program must be understood by everyone. First,
there are risks involved --primarily the risk of
fire escaping. Also, fire management programs will
cost money -- money for the inventories, planning,
and fire monitoring activities.
531
Smoke in the atmosphere will be another inevitable
by-product.
Faced with the risk factor, costs, smoke, and
possible public controversy, the question might be
asked, "Why do it at all?" Because the benefits
are substantial. Integrating fire considerations
into the land management planning process should be
cost effective in the long run, improve ecosystem
productivity, help prevent conflagrations, and
provide tangible results to society.
A fire management program that is fully integrated into the total land management program of a
National Forest has definable elements. Because
this integration effort is a change from the past,
there are few guidelines to follow. The people on
the Lolo National Forest have developed the elements of their program as follows:
1. Develop and maintain commitment of the top
management team to basic concepts.
2. Maintain aggressive fire suppression
capability.
3. Develop an organization to provide expertise and manpower to carry out the program.
4. Develop and use processes of planning that
integrate fire considerations into ongoing activities.
5.
Daniels, Orville L. Fire management takes commitment. Proceedings of the Tall Timbers fire
ecology conference and Intermountain Fire Research Council; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula,
Mont.: Tallahassee, Fla.; Tall Timbers Research Sta.; 1976; 163-165.
Davis, Kathleen M., Bruce D. Clayton, and William
C. Fisher. Fire ecology of Lolo National
Forest habitat types. Ogden, Utah: Intermountain Forest and Range Exp. Sta., Forest
Serv., U.S. Dept. Agric.: 1980; Gen. Tech.
Rep. INT-79. 77 p.
DeBruin, Henry W. From fire control to fire management, a major policy change in the Forest
Service. Proceedings of the Tall Timbers fire
ecology conference and Intermountain Fire
Research Council; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula,
Mont.: Tallahassee, Fla.; Tall Timbers Research Sta.; 1976: 11-17.
Forest Serv., U.S. Dept. Agric. Proceedings of
the symposium on the environmental consequences
of fire and fuel management in Mediterranean
ecosystems; 1977 August 1-5; Palo Alto, Calif.:
Washington, D.C.; Forest Serv., U.S. Dept.
Agric.; Gen. Tech. Rep. W0-3. 498 p.
Forest Serv., U.S. Dept. Agric. The proposed Lolo
National Forest plan. Missoula, Mont.: 144 p.
Develop fire knowledge base to the unit.
6. Develop and maintain public and political
acceptance of these programs.
7. Implement the program by getting fire into
the ecosystems in a way that meets objectives.
The key factor in the entire program is the
land manager and management team -- their commitment and drive. They need to understand the concepts, have a vision of where they are going, and
have the courage to take the risks involved.
Daniels (1976), expanded upon the idea of
commitment in some detail:
"A manager should be willing to commit his
personal time to the program, otherwise it will not
succeed. Fire management brings together all the
elements of complex land management: public
emotions, professional emotions, economics, environmental impacts, a high risk of heavy capital
expenditure. All these things mean that the manager should be deeply involved in the decision
making. He is the one who must balance the complexities and reach a meaningful decision. Considering the newness of the concepts, I believe it
is a nondelegable responsibility."
The reward in better land management and professional satisfaction makes the effort well worthwhile.
532
Literature Cited
Kilgore, Bruce M. From fire control to fire management: an ecological basis for policies.
Transactions of the 41st North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conf.; Wildlife
Management Institute; Washington, D.C.: 477493.
Philpot, Charles W. 1976. Are land managers
applying our current knowledge of fire ecology?
Proceedings of the Tall Timbers fire ecology
conference and Intermountain Fire Research
Council; 1974 October 8-10; Missoula, Mont.:
Tallahassee, Fla.: Tall Timbers Research Sta.;
1976: 430-433.