Historic, Archive Document Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. I 1 / United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Fall 1981 Volume 42, No. 4 Fir© Management Notes Fire Management Notes An international quarterly periodical devoted ro forest fire management United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Fall 1981 Volume 42, No. 4 Contents 3 The Fire Management Electronic Age Fred McBride 6 Selecting Fire Prevention Program Objectives: One Aspect of Effective Program Planning and Evaluation G. Richard Wetherill 8 Determining the Role of Fire in Young Upland Plardwood Stands Jimmy C. Huntley 9 Cooperative Effort Improves Fire Shelter Arthur H. Jukkala Fire Management Notes is published by the Forest Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. Washington. D C. The Secretary of Agriculture has determined that the publication of this periodical is necessary in the transac¬ tion of the public business required by law of this Department. Use of funds for printing this periodical has been ap¬ proved by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget through September 30, 1984 Subscriptions may be obtained from the Superintendent of Documents, U S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D C. 20402. The subscrip¬ tion rate is $7.50 per year domestic or $9.40 per year foreign. Single copy cost is $2.00 domestic and $2.50 foreign NOTE — The use of trade, firm, or cor¬ poration names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement of any product or service by the U S. Department of Agriculture. 11 FIRESCOPE Robert L. Irwin 13 Recent Fire Publications Send suggestions and articles to Chief. Forest Service (Attn: Fire Management Notes). P O Box 2417, U S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20013 John R Block, Secretary U S Department of Agriculture 14 A Cost-Saving Concept for an Old Problem in Florida Jim Whitson 15 Mobilized Fire Simulator in Wyoming Michael H. Gagen R Max Peterson, Chief Forest Service L A Amicarella, Director Cooperative Fire Protection Francis R Russ, General Manager Cover: A graphics computer terminal used by the fire dispatcher at USD!, Bu¬ reau of Land Management’s Vale District office, Vale, Oreg. 2 Fire Management Notes The Fire Management Electronic Age Fred McBride Chief, Branch of Fire Management, USD/ Bureau of Land Management, Washington, D C. The graphics computer terminal at the fire dispatcher’s side begins to hum ( see cover). A map is print¬ ed and a lightning storm is pin¬ pointed in the NW quadrant. Five hundred cloud-to-ground lightning events have been received in the past 45 minutes. Each strike is evi¬ dent by a small cross which accu¬ rately locates it on the map. The dispatcher homes the light cursor on the graphics display terminal to identify the primary interest area, hits a key, and the terminal begins humming once more. First a new enlarged map appears with roads and towns and lightning strike lo¬ cations identified; next the associ¬ ated fire weather appears listing the temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, and fuel moisture from the nearest remote automated weather station (fig. I). The weather information provided is the hourly weather for the last 24 hours. Finally with one more touch of the terminal keys, the fire be¬ havior predictions appear. Now, in a matter of minutes the dispatcher knows the probability of a specific lightning event causing a fire, how the fire will behave if it does start, and what the acreage will be at the end of the first hour if a fire starts. This summer, the USDI Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will test an electronic system for fire suppression in Vale, Oreg., that will make the above scenario a reality. Using existing lightning de- Figure 1. — A remote automatic weather sta¬ tion at the Boise Interagency Fire Center, Boise, Idaho. tection equipment (fig. 2), remote automated weather equipment, and existing computer fire behavior models, the new system will pro¬ vide local fire managers with the information necessary to make ac¬ curate judgments on how to re¬ spond to a potential fire threat. Lightning-caused fires have al¬ ways been a factor in the natural process that modifies the vegetative cover. During the pre-European period, in what is now the United States, fires took their natural Figure 2. — Lightning direction-finder equip¬ ment in dispatcher’s office. course and altered the plant com¬ munities on hundreds of thousands of acres annually. Europeans set¬ tling the country before 1900 al¬ lowed wild fires to run their natu¬ ral courses and also used fire as a tool to clear the land and as a weapon of war. However, a series of devastating fires in the late 1800’s and the early 1900’s killed many people and destroyed proper¬ ty on millions of acres. From 1910 until 1970 everyone in the fire community worked on better and more sophisticated methods of suppressing fires. Since the early 1970’s, however, there has been a Fall 1981 3 resurgence of scientists who say that fire is an essential part of the ecological sequence and espouse its use to properly manage the natural system. Fire began to be applied by human beings on a limited basis through the use of controlled burns. These burns were tightly controlled, ignited under the most favorable conditions, and were usually very small in size. It was evident these fires would never provide the large vegetative changes that were once part of the natural scene. Fire people, with limited knowledge, were unwilling to allow fires to become large. Meanwhile, more and more grass¬ lands were being converted to pin- yon-juniper stands as these hardy conifers invaded the open areas. Sagebrush thrived on areas that once had been tall grasses. Park¬ like stands of timber became clogged with fallen trees and thick stands of undesirable tree species. In 1974, as part of an effort to improve fire suppression capabil¬ ity, BLM launched a campaign to detect more of the lightning fires. The objective was to detect the fires before they became conflagra¬ tions. This effort was directed to¬ ward the control of fires while they were still small. By 1978, BLM had a basic lightning detection system in place. This system covered the entire western United States and Alaska (fig. 3). Lightning data were being sent to every BLM of¬ fice in a near real-time operation. Other agencies were being provided with the information on a request basis. The amount and accuracy of the information the lightning system provided was astounding. The de¬ mand for the information was overwhelming. Air traffic con¬ trollers wanted the information to reroute large jet airliners around severe lightning storms; electric companies wanted the information to identify areas of probable storm Figure 3. — Locations of lightning detection equipment in the western United States. damage. The military wanted the information so they could prepare for power failures. The Severe Storm Laboratory of the National Weather Service also wanted the information to forecast severe storms and confirm severe storm conditions. Meanwhile, the fire suppression organization was re¬ ceiving more information than it could efficiently handle. The num¬ ber of interested users far exceeded the distribution capability. The number of lightning events far ex¬ ceeded the capability of the organi¬ zation to react. Something needed to be done if the system was going to be a viable fire tool. Early in 1979, the Fire Manage¬ ment Branch of BLM in the Wash¬ ington Office, working with the Scientific Systems Development Di¬ vision of the Denver Service Center and the Communications Division of the Boise Interagency Fire Cen¬ ter (BIFC), began an analysis of what would be required to make the lightning system the valuable tool that was indicated. It was de¬ cided that the system would: • Require automatic graphic dis¬ tribution to 52 BLM locations and a minimum capability to distribute information to 1,000 additional users. • Provide a method to analyze the fire-starting probability of a lightning event. •Integrate the fire weather in¬ formation. •Provide associated weather in the vicinity of the lightning ac¬ tivity. To meet these design criteria, the people at BIFC decided the system would use a small dedicated com¬ puter to integrate the weather in¬ formation and the lightning infor¬ mation and to calculate the proba¬ bilities of fire ignition and fire spread capabilities. The system would also require graphics com¬ puter terminals at each field office, and 350 remote automatic fire weather stations throughout the western United States. By February 1981, the design had been refined to the point that we could proceed with the test of the integrated system in Vale, Oreg. The new system was named the Initial Attack Management System (IAMS). It provides: • Lightning strike location. • Storm movement patterns. •Associated weather informa¬ tion. •Calculated fire survival proba¬ bility. •Calculated fire behavior. With this information the fire manager has the tools to do the job. A natural-fire-starting event can be anticipated and accurate de¬ cisions can be made on the action required. •By determining if the ignition probability is significant in the interest area the fire manager decides whether or not to preposition suppression forces in the lightning area. •The fire manager determines the best route to the fire prone area. •The decision of suppression forces required is dictated by the calculated fire survival and modeled fire behavior. •By periodically monitoring the fire weather and associated fire behavior, the fire manager can determine whether a specific 4 Fire Management Notes fire may be allowed to follow the more natural ecological process and thus begin to re¬ verse the adverse impacts asso¬ ciated with the 60-year-old pol¬ icy ot immediate suppression. These advancements in electronic monitoring equipment will enhance our fire supression capabilities and increase our ability to manage nat¬ urally occurring fires. Fires with a potential for disaster will be sup¬ pressed in a timely manner, which will result in savings of suppression costs of many millions of dollars. Fires that provide a natural mod¬ ification of vegetation that comple¬ ments resource management objec¬ tives can be allowed to proceed. Also, researchers, resource man¬ agers, climatologists, and meteor¬ ologists will be provided with a new tool to better perform their work. Thus we welcome the elec¬ tronic age to fire management. ■ The Herman Nozzle — Another Approach to Foam Generation William (Hank) Herman, Forest Inspector, Gallitzin Forest District, Penn., recently developed a nozzle to generate low pressure foam for controlling wildfires. The increased interest in low' pressure foam in wildfire control is a result of the development and use of soap skim (tall oil) as a foaming wetting agent. The Texas Forest Service has successfully developed and tested equipment that delivers fire¬ fighting foam using soap skim and other foaming agents. Their system has been widely reported in various publications, and units are already in use. Information on the “Texas Snow Job” was viewed with great interest by Forest Inspector Her¬ man. Using 5 gal. of raw soap skim supplied by Michael L. Ax- som, Assistant State Fire Coordi¬ nator for the State of Indiana, Herman went to work. The result of his efforts is the Herman nozzle (fig- D- The Venturi principle is an inte¬ gral part of the Herman nozzle. A constriction of flow in the nozzle, then an expansion of liquid flow, and an injection of air (using at¬ mospheric pressure) generates the foam by mixing air with the water soap skim solution. All of the items needed to manufacture the Herman nozzle can be purchased off the shelf from plumbing supply or agricultural supply stores (fig. 2). The cost of materials in Central Pennsylvania stores is under ten dollars per nozzle. The foam generated by the Her¬ man nozzle is a little wetter than foam generated by the onboard foam generating systems. Penetra¬ tion of the wetting solution is very good, and it is very similar to ex¬ isting systems. Herman uses the nozzle he developed with a stand¬ ard slip-on tank and pump unit. The unit is a 150-gal fiberglass tank and the pump is a Wanner model A10F8 pump. The hose is standard 3A in rubber booster fire hose. As review, when using soap skim, the soap must first be di¬ luted by one half with water. Her¬ man suggests using warm water when mixing soap skim which is viscous and difficult to mix. After the soap skim is mixed, it should be used as a 1 or 2 percent solu¬ tion in a standard slip-on tank. For a 150-gal tank 1 .5 to 2 gal of the diluted soap skim is mixed in 150 gal of water, yielding the de¬ sired foaming agent. Herman is currently testing the idea of using foam along the edge of bulldozed and dug hand line safety strips, and using this as an anchor point for burning railroad safety strips. Herman is also test¬ ing a foam nozzle which can be used with a back pack tank. The possibilities for using foam in wild¬ fire control are many, from initial attack to mop-up. Materials needed to fabricate a Herman nozzle are: Quantity Item Description 1 3A in plastic syphon pickup (suction type water drainer) 1 3A in garden hose to 3/4 inch pipe thread adapter — P. V.C. 2 Ron Vik washer strainers, 3A in garden hose, 20 x 20 mesh (used in Parco Back Pack Tanks) 1 3A in pipe thread male to 3A in P.V.C. sleeve 1 3A in hose thread to 3A in pipe thread double female brass adapter 1 10 in piece of 3A in P.V.C. For more information, contact: William (Hank) Herman, Forest Inspector, Hollidaysburg Veterans Home, c/o D.E.R. — Bureau of Forestry, Hollidaysburg, PA 16648, (814)696-0129. Robert Davey, Staff Forester West, Division of Forest Fire Protection, Harrisburg, Pa.B Figure 1. — The Herman nozzle. Figure 2. — A disassembled Herman nozzle. Fall 1981 5 Selecting Fire Prevention Program Objectives: One Aspect of Effective Program Planning and Evaluation G. Richard Wetherill Sociologist, Southern Forest Experiment Station, USDA Forest Service, Starkvi/le, Miss. One problem plaguing fire pre¬ vention personnel is that a prevent¬ ed fire is no fire at all; it is a “non-event” and is difficult to measure. Fire prevention personnel need a system of measurable objec¬ tives that will adequately reflect their progress in reducing wildfires. For this discussion, “goals” and “objectives” are not words that should be used interchangeably; technically, goal is the much broader concept. Goals are gener¬ al, long-range, and difficult to measure, whereas objectives are more specific statements of what is intended, in terms that make meas¬ urement more feasible. A diagram of a process for es¬ tablishing objectives is shown in figure 1. Programs begin with a stated recognition of needs. Indi¬ vidual, organizational, and com¬ munity needs are placed in parallel channels. For example, needs to be considered in planning a program might be: clearing forest under¬ growth, managing agency resources more effectively, and maintaining or enhancing scenic beauty. These needs are then filtered to screen for institutional purposes, feasibil¬ ity, and interests of the clientele. Ultimately, by this process the goals that emerge offer specific di¬ rection for establishing measurable objectives. Therefore, program goals are met through the attain¬ ment of several program objec¬ tives. If progress toward a pro- individual Organizational Community Needs Needs Needs Figure 1.— A diagram of a process for establishing program objectives. gram goal such as “prevent forest fires” cannot be measured, then the best option lies within the realm of measuring specific objec¬ tives used to attain the overall goal. Objectives are specifically achievable efforts. To adequately document progress toward the ob¬ jectives, specific desired behavioral outcomes must be stated. For in¬ stance, consider an actual public information program for children ages 6 through 15. The goal of the program is to tell young people how the Forest Service functions, to explain the costs and hazards of wildfires, and to describe the im¬ pact of fires on community, schools, and the environment. Seven objectives can be stated for the single overall goal of providing information: 1 . Encourage young people to be more careful with fire, especially during fire season. 2. Make them aware of the cost of wildfires and how it affects the public. 3. Explain the Forest Service position on prescribed burning. 4. Explain how the Forest Service operates — budget, organization, etc. 5. Explain fire dispatching, suppression, equipment, crews, etc. 6. Encourage the reporting of fires or smokes. 7. Explain how the public can help the Forest Service stop incendiary fires. These “process objectives” can be easily measured in terms of wheth¬ er they were presented in the pro¬ gram. Most program objectives should be “product-oriented.” In other words, they should identify specific behavioral or attitudinal changes the program is designed to accom¬ plish. Specific objectives might be worded as in the following: 6 Fire Management Notes At the end of the program, par¬ ticipants will know how to: 1. Properly build and extin¬ guish a campfire. 2. Report a fire. 3. Define litter. 4. Define vandalism. 5. Identify the reasons why some fires are good and some are bad. 6. Differentiate between in¬ cendiary and prescribed fires. 7. Prevent carelessness with fire (e.g., playing with matches, throwing away lighted cigarettes, etc.). While progress toward product- oriented objectives is somewhat harder to measure than progress toward process-oriented ones, the product-oriented objectives often yield tangible proof of program ef¬ fectiveness. Simple tests can be constructed to measure progress. The discrepancy between planned outcomes (objectives) and actual outcomes can then be examined to see which parts of the program are succeeding and which are falling short. Good objectives are not hard to select. It is necessary, however, to state them specifically enough to allow evaluation. Information about programs, progress toward goals, and program directions are important factors to consider in planning, developing, and conduct¬ ing prevention programs. Specify¬ ing objectives of fire prevention programs in measurable terms will contribute to meeting them. Literature Cited Knowles, M. S. The modern practice of adult education: androgogy versus peda¬ gogy. New York: Association Press; 1970. 147p. ■ Need Help With Fuels Appraisal? “The Activity Fuel Appraisal Process: Instructions and Ex¬ amples’’ (General Technical Re¬ port, RM-83) is a recent publica¬ tion by Stanley N. Hirsch, David L. Radloff, Walter C. Schopfer, Marvin L. Wolfe, and Richard F. Yancik. How many times have you, as a Forest Manager, been faced with the tricky decisions regarding how to best handle slash and other resi¬ dues? To remove these activity fuels (fuels created by man’s activi¬ ties, such as logging, road build¬ ing, etc.), your choices range from prescribed burning to crushing or hauling from the site. Uncertainties generally compli¬ cate these decisions. A wildfire may never occur in the given area; or if one does, the ignition source and location, the specific weather at the time, the resulting fire be¬ havior, and the final size at which the fire is controlled, are all uncer¬ tain. This publication presents a pro¬ cedure that considers important uncertainties in evaluating alterna¬ tive fuel treatments, and gives a hazard index for each treatment expressed as probable acres burned. The resulting decision tree utilizes fire and weather records and fuel and fire behavior models. The manager supplies estimates for (1) fire occurrence rate, (2) fireline intensity, (3) fire spotting behavior, and (4) fire size. Track¬ ing these data through the proce¬ dure, the manager arrives at poten¬ tial acres burned for each treat¬ ment (including a “do nothing’’ option) and is equipped to choose the treatment that best fits the management plan. Resource manager, ad¬ ministrators, and landowners re¬ sponsible for managing forested lands will find this paper valuable in selecting the best treatments for activity fuels to decrease fire haz¬ ard and meet resource goals. This publication is available from Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Publi¬ cations Distribution, Drawer A, 240 West Prospect Street, Fort Collins, CO 80526. ■ Fall 1981 7 Determining the Role of Fire in Young Upland Hardwood Stands Jimmy C. Huntley Wildlife Biologist, Silviculture Laboratory, Southern Forest Experiment Station, USDA Forest Service, Sewanee, Tenn. Various harvesting methods have often failed to adequately regener¬ ate oak forests on good hardwood sites, so a study was established on the Southern Cumberland Plateau to determine if fire had played a major role in the establishment of existing oak stands. More specifi¬ cally, the objective of the study was to determine if the fire affect¬ ed species composition and domi¬ nance in young hardwood stands that developed after clearcutting. Three stands — 4-, 5-, and 6 years old — were prescribed burned. Pre¬ burn and postburn data were col¬ lected to determine species density, frequency, composition, and domi¬ nance. "rhe successional changes of one unburned 5-year-old stand were also monitored. Data 2 to 4 years later showed that an oak component is present in the burned and unburned stands, but that oak does not dom¬ inate as in the original stands. Yel¬ low-poplar is substantially more abundant in the new stands. The single prescribed burns had large initial effects on stand density and structure but long-term effects appear minimal. After burning, changes in species com¬ position occurred but they were small and oaks were not appreci¬ ably favored (fig. 1). Small Figure 1. — The relative density of woody stems, greater than 1.4m in height, before and after burning of 5-year-old hardwood stand. changes in species composition of a young stand may be amplified as the stand matures and some species now dominant become relegated to the understory or midstory. Pres¬ ently, many species appear in suffi¬ cient density to dominate the ulti¬ mate stands. The fires increased wildlife food availability by increasing the amount of woody and herbaceous vegetation near the forest floor. The greatest detrimental impacts of burning were loss of 4 to 6 years’ growth and possible lowering of timber quality. When hardwood stands are burned at very young ages and complete topkill occurs, the loss of growth and stem quality will be minimal. ■ 8 Fire Management Notes Cooperative Effort Improves Fire Shelter Arthur H. Jukkala Equipment Specialist, Equipment Development Cen¬ ter, USDA Forest Service, Missoula, Mont. For years the fire shelter has been the basic protection for fire¬ fighters caught in entrapment situ¬ ations. Recently, the shelter was redesigned to increase its protective capabilities and service life. The improvements are the result of work at the Missoula Equipment Development Center (MEDC) and an employee suggestion by Mark Linane, hot shot crew foreman on the Los Padres National Forest, Calif. Linane suggested that the shel¬ ters be carried at the side like a canteen instead of around the waist (fig. 1), making them more accessible and speeding deploy¬ ment. He found this method of carrying also increased shelter serv¬ ice life. Concurrently, with Linane’s sug¬ gestion, MEDC was being funded to determine if advances in tech¬ nology had made possible material or design improvements. Work at MEDC verified that the existing materials were the best available. One design change was made. A 6-inch skirt was added along the sides of the shelter. The skirt will help a firefighter inside the shelter keep it on the ground. The Ship Island entrapment inci¬ dent on the Salmon National For¬ est in Idaho in 1979 in which one firefighter died indicated the need for this holddown feature. MEDC also studied different methods of folding and carrying the shelter to reduce the flexing and abrading that cut service life. A better way to fold the shelter was found. The result was a more compact shelter, so a new carrying case was needed. With the help of Linane’s ex¬ perience, MEDC designed a new case. It has five advantages over the old one: •It requires less material. • It clips on to any belt and can be carried vertically or horizontally (fig. 2). •It allows more rapid shelter deployment. •The new carrier allows better folding which reduces wear and tear and increases shel¬ ter service life. Figure 1 . — The improved shelter is more compact. Fall 1981 9 •The carrier will attach to fireline gear carrier being de¬ veloped at MEDC. The improved shelter is a good example of how field and equip¬ ment development people can work together to improve firefighting equipment. ■ Figure 2. — Clips on the new carrier allow the shelter to he carried vertically or horizontally. Thirteen Prescribed Fire Situations That Shout Watch Out! 1 . You are burning with a plan that has not been approved by the appropriate line of¬ ficer. 2. You are not a qualified burn¬ ing boss but have been told to go ahead and burn. 3. The objective of the burn is not clear. 4. There are areas of special concern within the burn that cannot be burned. 5. Private land or structures ad¬ join the burn. 6. You are uncomfortable with the prescription. 7. You have not requested spot weather forecasts. 8. You decide a test fire is un¬ necessary. 9. You decide all your people are old hands and no briefing is necessary. 10. Escape probability is small so you don 7 bother with escape planning. 1 1 . You, or the firing boss, are beginning to lose control of your torch people. 12. Mop-up and patrol instruc¬ tions are not specific or understood by the mop-up boss. 13. You haven’t lost one in a long time and are starting to feel smug. John Maupin, Fire Staff Of¬ ficer, Ochoco National Forest, USDA Forest Service, Prineville, Oreg. ■ 10 Fire Management Notes FIRESCOPE Robert L. Irwin FIRESCOPE Program Manager, Forest Fire Labora¬ tory, USD A Forest Service, Riverside, Calif. Wildfires are a part of every southern California summer. The drying heat and winds, combined with the activities of millions of people, make it virtually impossi¬ ble to prevent them. These fires must be hit hard and fast — stopped before they burn into populated areas and threaten lives and property. City, county, State, and Federal agencies spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year for firefighters and equipment, but it became clear a little over a decade ago that the availabilityof large numbers of firefighters and their advanced firefighting machines was not enough. In 13 days of September and Oc¬ tober 1970, fires in southern Cali¬ fornia burned over half a million acres, destroyed 772 homes and other structures, and took the lives of 16 people. In 1971, Congress authorized the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service to design a system to help the California fire services improve their coordination and ef¬ fectiveness in multijurisdictional fires and other major emergencies. The result was FIRESCOPE (Firefighting Resources of South¬ ern California Organized for Po¬ tential Emergencies), a cooperative development program involving Federal, State, and local fire serv¬ ices. After a decade of design, de¬ velopment, and implementation, the program is proving that the southern California multiagency firefighting complex is greater than the sum of its parts. FIRESCOPE’s development started in 1972 with a 5-year design effort, actively supported by the California Department of Forestry and the Office of Emergency Serv¬ ices, the Los Angeles City and County Fire Departments, the Ven¬ tura and Santa Barbara County Fire Departments, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. In 1977, the partner agencies began the difficult process of de¬ veloping and implementing the design recommendations under real world conditions. The design was built around four fundamental principles: 1 ) Commonality and uniformity among cooper¬ ating agencies improves performance. 2) Rapid, accurate, and com¬ plete information is essen¬ tial in an effective man¬ agement system during a crisis. 3) Individual incident control procedures that are de¬ signed to complement and support regional coordina¬ tion systems will improve overall crisis management. 4) Modern technologies can be integrated to improve fire service effectiveness. These principles were translated into three major components and a group of supporting technologies. The Incident Command System (ICS) provides a common emer¬ gency management organization structure for the agencies that must work together in a crisis. This in¬ cludes common terminology, uni¬ form procedures, and improved communications techniques. ICS can be expanded efficiently from a first-response, single-agency inci¬ dent to a major, multiagency re¬ sponse situation. In 1980, ICS was used by more than 120 agencies over a 16-day period on 28 critical fires involving both urban and wildland areas. The Multi-Agency Coordination System (MACS) integrates the col¬ lection, processing, and dissemina¬ tion of information to improve co¬ ordination at the top management levels of agencies involved in the management of a crisis. The sys¬ tem provides a comprehensive pic¬ ture of the seven-county area, with particular emphasis on the avail¬ ability of emergency response forces and determining priorities among several incidents that may be competing for scarce firefight¬ ing resources (fig. I) MACS is designed to overcome three specific problem areas often found in other management co¬ ordination systems. First, it is inte¬ grated with ICS so that all infor¬ mation flowing to or from incident sites are in the same format and reporting procedures are the same, Fall 1981 11 Figure 1. — City, county. State, and Federal fire emergency organizations work together to determine priorities and effectively use limited firefighting resources. regardless of agency or jurisdic¬ tion. Second, it includes all of the fire services in southern California. There are more than 250 depart¬ ments and agencies from Federal, State, county, and local govern¬ ments in the seven-county area of southern California. Larger agen¬ cies are most directly involved, but even fire districts and volunteer de¬ partments are included through the State’s Master Mutual Aid System. Third, MACS operates contin¬ uously to provide 24-hour support for any incident that may become more than a single agency can han¬ dle. The Fire Information Manage¬ ment System (FIMS) uses a high- capacity mini-computer, several computer programs, and a compre¬ hensive data base. The system is linked to 28 agencies, providing al¬ most immediate status reports on all fire service resources, condi¬ tions of existing incidents, fire be¬ havior predictions for wildland fires, and management communi¬ cations not covered by standard re¬ ports. Portable computer terminals are available at incident command posts to speed two-way transfer of orders and reports. Records of incident actions are stored in the computer and can be retrieved by participating agencies for annual and other periodic summaries and for cost accounting. Other existing technology, all linked to the computer, expands the amount of information avail¬ able and improves the integration of all system components. It in¬ cludes infrared sensing and air-to- ground telemetry, automated weather stations, and several types of communications hardware. In addition, a single, comprehensive mapping process is used. The FIRESCOPE effort has been a voluntary one. No legal or fiscal mandates exist to require membership or association. Within this voluntary framework, agencies have pursued a development and implementation effort that is huge in scope, complex in nature, and unique in its accomplishments. Several factors have contributed to the success of the program, among them sound design and a strong commitment by partici¬ pating agencies. However, one ele¬ ment has combined the design and agency support into a realistic sys¬ tem. That element is the multi¬ agency Decision Process. The Decision Process is based on the theory that organizations that work together continuously are, in effect, forming another organiza¬ tion that will function more effec¬ tively if certain accepted manage¬ ment concepts are followed. With¬ in the new organization’s structure, each element of the FIRESCOPE program is tested, discussed, and accepted or rejected. Since no agency is forced to adopt any element, those that are implemented have passed some hard tests of practicality and feasi¬ bility. Also, the process moves ele¬ ments completely through the de¬ velopment cycle, from conception to application, involving the end users at each step. This is a unique departure from the usual forms of technology transfer and tends to build a deeper sense of commit¬ ment to the system. A major disadvantage of the process is that it tends to be slow and frustrating. Almost every ele¬ ment is new and untried, so agree¬ ment to any procedure requires participants to alter old policies. The program has changed the ways agencies relate to one another, and it has changed the ways people work. Changes are traumatic in any organizational environment, and FIRESCOPE agencies have not been immune to the pressures created by their own changes. Nonetheless, the program has moved forward at a steady pace, and the accomplishments are worthy of note. One of the best measurements of FIRESCOPE’s success is the po¬ tential applicability of many of its elements to other geographical areas and to disasters other than fire. In addition, certain elements are applicable to emergencies in¬ volving both rural and urban areas, mobilizing their forces to aid each other. ICS, for example, has proven to be widely applicable in California and with some revisions has be¬ come a national model to improve multiagency effectiveness. The sys- 12 Fire Management Notes tern has been applied successfully to both wildland and urban fires (including high-rise building tires), to floods, and to hazardous mate¬ rials accidents. Property and sup¬ pression cost savings of several million dollars have already been attributed to ICS in southern Cali¬ fornia. Another model worthy of na¬ tional examination is the Multi- Agency Coordination System. MACS is the first coordination system that actively involves all fire services in a major geographic area, integrating them at all four levels of government — Federal, State, county, and local. The third element with national potential is the mapping process adopted by FIRESCOPE involving high- and low-level aerial photog¬ raphy and computers. Other map¬ ping programs have been simpli¬ fied, and nearly $5 million in duplicated efforts has been elim¬ inated. The USD1 Geological Sur¬ vey is adopting several significant parts of the process. The USDA Forest Service has independently set up a program to promote technology transfer of the appropriate FIRESCOPE elements to other Federal and State organi¬ zations with wildland fire protec¬ tion responsibilities. The project is called FIRETIP (Fire Management Notes, Vol. 42, No. 3, Summer 1981) and is now staffed to pro¬ vide technical assistance in the ac¬ tual transfer of FlRESCOPE-re- lated technologies. In southern California and else¬ where in the country, more and more emergencies require these service organizations to work to¬ gether. Incidents ranging from the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in Pennsylvania to the MGM Grand Hotel fire in Las Vegas demonstrate the need for an effec¬ tive response system. FIRESCOPE has proved that multiagency coordination in emer¬ gencies is possible and successful. It has potential applications in emergencies of almost any type and potential benefits that are only beginning to be realized. ■ Recent Fire Publications Alexander, M. E.; Euler, D. L. Role of fire in the uncut boreal mixed wood forest. In: Boreal Mixed wood Sym¬ posium; 1980 September 16-18; Thunder Bay, ON. Sault Ste. Marie, ON: Cana¬ dian Forest Service, Great Lakes For. Res. Cent.; 1980: 42-64. Banks, S. W. The fireworks con¬ troversy: A weekend in flames. Western Fire Journal 33(10): 23-26; 1981. George, Charles W.; Johnson, Ce¬ cilia W. Evaluation of Mega- tard 2700: A proposed new fire retardant system. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-1 12. Ogden: UT. U.S. Department of Agri¬ culture, Forest Service, Inter¬ mountain Forest Range and Experiment Station; 1981. 22 P- George, Charles W. Fire retardants and aerial delivery sys¬ tems — performance and use. Aerial Applicator 19(8): 4-5; 1981. Hauck, Charles A. Some applica¬ tions of upper air data to fire management in the southern Appalachians. In: Second Conference on Mountain Me¬ teorology; 1981 November 9-12; Steamboat Springs, CO. Steamboat Springs, CO: American Meteorological So¬ ciety; 1981 : 40. Lovell, John. CDF and PG&E team up to combat powerline hazards. Western Fire Journal 33(10): 38-40; 1981. Moore, John D. Revised interest in short term fire retardants. Aerial Applicator 19(8): 6-7; 1981. Ramsey, G. S.; Higgins, D. G. Canadian Forest Fire Statis¬ tics: Part I, 1978; Part II, 1979. Information Report PI-X-9. Chalk River, ON: Petawawa National Forestry Institute; 1981 . 52 p. Stocks, B. J. Black spruce crown fuel weights in northern On¬ tario. Can. J . For. 10: 498-501; 1980. Taylor, Dale L.; Herndon, Alan. Impact of 22 years of fire on understory hardwood shrubs in slash pine communities within Everglades National Park. Report T-640. Home¬ stead, FL: U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service, Everglades National Park Service, Everglades Na¬ tional Park; 1981 . 26 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Four E’s of railroad fire prevention. In: Annual Report. Northeast Forest Fire Supervisors’ Meet¬ ing; 1980 June 23-26; Sara¬ toga Springs, NY. Broomall, PA: Northeastern Forest Ex¬ periment Station, U.S. De¬ partment of Agriculture, For¬ est Service; 1981. 107 p. Weaver, Robert W. Fire fighting from the air — an update. Aeri¬ al Applicator 19(8): 8-11; 1981. ■ Fall 1981 13 A Cost-Saving Concept for an Old Problem in Florida Jim Whitson Forester, Florida Division of Forestry, Tallahassee, Fla. Whitson is currently assigned to FI RETIP proj¬ ect, Boise Interagency Fire Center, USDA Forest Service, Boise, Idaho. The Florida Division of Forestry is searching for new answers to an age-old problem — the muck, or peat, fire. Over the years many suppression techniques have been used, all labor intensive. With to¬ day’s economy, however, such methods are prohibitively expen¬ sive. Peat deposits encompass an esti¬ mated 3,500 square miles of Flori¬ da’s land surface and total in ex¬ cess of 1.75 billion tons of mate¬ rial.1 The deposits are located prin¬ cipally in the central and southern portions of the State but can be found throughout. Of all the suppression methods tried, flooding a muck fire with water has been the best solution. 1 Davis, John H. Jr., The Peat Deposits of Florida: Their Occurrence, Development and Uses. Florida Geological Survey Bulle¬ tin, Tallahassee, Fla. 1977. In many areas, though, there is no readily available water supply, and water must be transported by tanker trucks to the fire. A technique now under assess¬ ment by the Division of Forestry might eliminate the need to trans¬ port water. By using equipment similar to that used to remove wa¬ ter during construction (i.e., de¬ watering equipment), a source of water can be produced on site for both direct suppression and use in suppression equipment. -i Figure 1. — Well point field and header. This method uses a series of shallow well points penetrating the muck and connected to a header (Jig. 1). A constant vacuum is pulled and as the water enters the pump, air is separated to produce a constant prime (fig. 2). Dewatering equipment shows exciting promise for muck fire sup¬ pression in Florida, and could very well be applied in other areas where peat fires are a problem. ■ Figure 2. — Air-cooled diesel pump used with well point system. Note the air separa¬ tion chamber at rear. 14 Fire Management Notes Mobilized Fire Simulator in Wyoming Michael H. Gagen Assistant State Forester, Fire Management, Wyoming State Forestry Division, Cheyenne, Wyo. The Wyoming State Forestry Di¬ vision is training fire command of¬ ficers in structural and wildland fire suppression using a mobile fire simulator. Mike Gagen, Assistant State Forester, Fire Management, and Bernie Engleman, Rural Fire Training Officer, converted a Fed¬ eral excess property trailer to a traveling fire simulator (fig. I ) with projection and sound equip¬ ment (fig. 2). The back was squared off, doors installed, and the screen placed so that when the back doors are open the screen is immediately behind them. The sound system for the train¬ ees is on a table outside and be¬ hind the trailer. This eliminates the need to fit the simulator and screen to a different room at each training location. The trailer can be backed into any fire station or garage and be ready for operation in 10 minutes, cutting setup time from 2 to 3 hours. This has considerably re¬ duced the service time required for reliable operation of the simulator. Gagen reports that the total cost of outfitting the trailer with the simulator was less than $800 and it Figure 1. — Simulator trailer amt van. is the most valuable and popular training class in Wyoming. For more information, contact: Michael H. Gagen, Assistant State Forester, Wyoming State Forestry Division, 1 100 West 22nd Street, Cheyenne, WY 82002. ■ Figure 2. — Equipment inside fire simulator trailer. Fire Suppression Course for Rural Fire Companies A 4-day course in rural fire sup¬ pression has been developed through a cooperative effort of the National Association of State For¬ esters, the USDA Forest Service, the Pennsylvania Bureau of For¬ estry and the State’s fire school at Lewistown, Pa. The course, which deals with forest fire behavior and suppression and rural structural fires, will be presented as part of the Pennsylvania State Fire School’s 1982 curriculum. During the course, the students will be presented lessons on forest fire behavior, safety on the fire line, wildfire investigation, forest fire prevention, structural fire be¬ havior, and suppression of build¬ ing fires with rural equipment. For more information, contact E. F. MacNamara, Chief, Division of Forest Fire Protection, Bureau of Forestry, 109 Evangelical Press Building, 3rd & Reily Streets, Har¬ risburg, PA 17120. ■ * U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1982-360-914:201 Fall 1981 15 United States Department of Agriculture Postage and Fees Paid U S Department of Agriculture AGR-101 Washington, D C. 20250 OFFICIAL BUSINESS Penalty for Private Use, $300 1981 Smokey Bear Awards The Cooperative Forest Fire Prevention (CFFP) Executive Committee awarded Golden, Sil¬ ver, and Bronze Smokey Statuettes in 1981 to persons or organizations who made outstanding contribu¬ tions to the prevention of human- caused forest or range fires. Recipients of 1981 Golden Smokey Bear awards: • Canadian Forestry Association • City of Torrence, California, and the Torrence Rose Float Asso¬ ciation Recipients of 1981 Silver Smokey statuettes: • Marvin E. Newell, Multiregional Fire Prevention Spe¬ cialist, Forest Service • Middle Atlantic Interstate Forest Fire Protection Compact Recipients of 1981 Bronze Smokey statuettes: • Southwest Lincoln County Fire Prevention Cooperative, Mon¬ tana ® Dick Ray, Bureau of Land Management, Oregon Figure 1.—/?, Max Peterson, Chief of the USDA Forest Service, recently presented a Golden Smokey Bear Award to the Canadian Forestry Association ( CFA ). The CFA, a Federation of provincial Forestry Associations, received a Golden Smokey Bear Award for its outstanding nationwide contributions to forest fire prevention. The CFA is the first Canadian body in the history of the Smokey Bear Award to receive an award. From left to right are: Dal Flail, CFA Executive Director; R. Max Peterson; Dr. D. R. Redmond, CFA President; and Smokey Bear. • Arthur S. Bimrose, Editorial Cartoonist, The Oregonian, Port¬ land, Oregon • Paula Hanninen, South Dakota Division of Forestry • Calvin L. Frink, Forest Fire Warden, Surry, New Hampshire • Wenatchee World, Wenatchee, Washington • Texas State Radio Network, Texas ■ 16 Fire Management Notes