“FUELSOLVE”
Optimizing Fuel Solutions
and
Ecological Values in Landscapes
PNW Station, Wenatchee Forestry Sciences Lab,
Okanogan & Wenatchee National Forests
&
College of Forest Resources, University of Washington
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Goals & Objectives
n
Stabilize fuel & fire conditions:
n
n
n
Treat maximum acres for excessive fuels,
Reduce potential for catastrophic wildfire
effects,
Maintain or enhance ecological values
n
n
Spotted owl locations,
Late-successional forest inside and outside
Late-Successional Reserves (under NWFP).
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
What FUELSOLVE does?
n
Tries to optimize both
n
n
n
n
Amount & pattern of fuel treatments,
and
Persistence of ecological features from wildfire, such
as late-successional forest.
Uses current condition in short-term simulation
period, i.e., does not model forest growth.
Basically, helps design & evaluate fire-safe
landscapes based on fuel, fire, & ecological
criteria.
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Decision Support System for Fuels Planning
(1) Is the landscape
“broke”, or meeting
societal expectations?
No
STOP
Simulate
landscape
change w/
time & fire
NOCLAMMS
DSS
Yes
(2) How best to
pattern fuel
treatments
with LSR network?
= decision milestones
(3) How will those
alternative patterns
look in X years?
Spatial
optimization
to design
alternatives
= planning tools to be developed
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Optimal Planning Process
Management Action
Optimizer
(3) Select specific
combination of
treatments
(7) Use this result to
“evolve” towards a
better combination
of treatments.
(6) Has combination
of stand treatments
done better than
previous
combinations?
(4) Apply fire
model multiple
times
(5) Calculate
assessment criteria
for this combination
of treatments
(1) Define a wide
range of possible
stands treatments
(2) Select forest
features to preserve
& define
assessment criteria
STOP when criteria
have been achieved
or no improvement
can be obtained.
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Scale of application
n
Landscapes of <50,000 acres
n
Designed for watershed-scale analysis
n
Ranger District project-level application
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Data Requirements
moderate?
n
n
n
n
n
Ignition data. Map of zones low to high probability of
ignition used to “start” wildfires, and worst-case fire
weather data.
Stands to protect, i.e. not treat.
FARSITE fire model data: elevation, aspect, slope, fuel
model, stand height, ht to live canopy, canopy bulk
density , etc.
Treatment details: stand structure modification & spatial
patterns (random, adjacent to protected stands, etc.).
Evaluation criteria: wildfire size, intensity, effects, LSF
amount & connectivity. (Later, other ecosystem values)
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Analyst requirements
low to medium
n
Requires mid-level analyst or GIS
specialist to run model for local situations.
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Model outputs
n
n
Maps of options & wildfire and ecological
evaluations.
Text data on evaluation criteria for
treatment combinations.
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Linkages to other models
n
n
n
FARSITE, abbreviated version.
FlamMap alternative to FARSITE
FCCS fuel characterization & fire indices
n
n
n
n
Crowning
Fire spread rate
Fire effects
Others to be explored.
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Partners
n
n
n
College of Forest Resources, University of
Washington. Jim Agee, David Ford, Doctoral
Research Associates
Okanogan & Wenatchee National Forests. Bill
Gaines, Richy Harrod
PNW Research Station, Eastside Forest Health
Restoration Team, Wenatchee. John Lehmkuhl,
Paul Hessburg, Dave Peterson, Ross Kiester,
Peter Singleton
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Current status
n
n
May/June 2004: Begin 1-yr funded effort for prototype
development.
Oct. 2004: Progress report.
n
n
n
n
n
Model building,
Early simulations for pilot landscape on Leavenworth Ranger
District, Oka-Wen NF,
Design complexity options for prototype.
Feb. 2005: Working model of treatments & effects on
response variables.
June 2005: Final of prototype & implementation options.
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Training
n
n
Pending completion of prototype in June
2005.
Application workshops anticipated for
Version 1, during summer of 2005.
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.
Example application
n
n
In development now, so no example available.
Model goal is to allow fuel planners, fire staff, wildlife
biologists, other ’ologists, regulators, & public to:
n
n
Plan & evaluate the area & spatial pattern of landscape-level fuel
treatment alternatives, potential wildfire futures, & ecological
effects on a key protected resource (e.g. spotted owl habitat or
locations).
Identify preferred alternative to maximize fuel treatments &
protect resources based on “best available science”.
Disclaimer: The views in this report (presentation) are these of the author(s) do no necessarily represent the views of the Forest Service.