fire danger operating 2015 2016 - wfas...fire danger operating plan 2015 – 2016 us f orest s...

NORTHERN ROCKIES

SOUTHWEST ZONE

FIRE DANGER OPERATING PLAN

2015 – 2016 US FOREST SERVICE LOLO NATIONAL FOREST

CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES

MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MISSOULA UNIT AND NORTHWEST UNIT

Plan Prepared:

November 2014

Anne Rys-Sikora, Fire Planner, Lolo National Forest

Teresa Sage, Initial Attack Dispatcher, Missoula Dispatch Center

Input and Reviewed by:

Laura Ward, Forest Fire Management, Lolo N.F.

Ron Swaney Fire Management Officer, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes

Jack Currie, Ronan Fire Dispatch Center Manager, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes

Matt Hall, Fire Management Officer Montana Dept. of natural Resources, Missoula Unit

Cory Calnan Fire Supervisor MT Department of Natural Resources, Clearwater Unit

Chad Pickering, Deputy Forest Fire Management Officer Lolo, N.F.

Tim Bradley, Missoula Interagency Dispatch Center Manager, Lolo N.F.

Kate Maffei, Plains Interagency Dispatch Center Manager, Lolo NF

ii

I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................. 1

II. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................................................................... 2

Fire Danger Technical Group ..................................................................................................................................... 2

Fire Weather Station Owner ..................................................................................................................................... 2

Dispatch/Communications/Command Center .......................................................................................................... 3

Fire Weather Program Coordinators ......................................................................................................................... 3

Forest Fire Management Officer and Program Officer ............................................................................................. 3

III. FIRE DANGER RATING INVENTORY ........................................................................................................................... 3

The Administrative Unit ............................................................................................................................................ 3

Fire Problem Identification........................................................................................................................................ 3

Weather Stations ...................................................................................................................................................... 5

Vegetation ................................................................................................................................................................. 7

Bio-Physical Setting ............................................................................................................................................... 7

EXISTING VEGETATION ............................................................................................................................................. 8

Maximum Temperature ...................................................................................................................................... 11

Minimum Temperature ....................................................................................................................................... 13

Dew Point ............................................................................................................................................................ 15

Climate Class ....................................................................................................................................................... 17

Topography ............................................................................................................................................................. 17

IV. CLIMATOLOGICIAL BREAKPOINTS AND FIRE BUSINESS ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 19

Fire Weather data ................................................................................................................................................... 19

Fire Occurrence data ............................................................................................................................................... 20

Parameters Used for each Fire Danger Rating Area ................................................................................................ 23

Correlation with Fire Occurrence ............................................................................................................................ 23

Analysis Variables .................................................................................................................................................... 24

Indices ................................................................................................................................................................. 24

Fuel Models ......................................................................................................................................................... 24

Lolo DNRC East FDRA Analysis Summary – ERC(G) and BI(G).............................................................................. 25

Lolo DNRC West Analysis summary – ERC(G) and BI(G) ...................................................................................... 27

CSKT East FDRA Analysis Summary – ERC(G) and BI(G) ...................................................................................... 29

CSKT West FDRA Analysis Summary – ERC(G) and BI(C) ..................................................................................... 31

Climatological Breakpoints .......................................................................................................................................... 34

Adjective Fire Danger Rating ....................................................................................................................................... 40

V. FIRE DANGER BASED DECISIONS ................................................................................................................................. 42

iii

Prevention Plan ........................................................................................................................................................... 42

Daily Staffing Levels ..................................................................................................................................................... 42

MT DNRC staffing levels are defined in the Southwestern Fire Mobilization Guide please contact Southwestern Land Office Fire Program Manager. ........................................................................................................................ 42

Lolo NF Personnel Staffing ...................................................................................................................................... 42

Aircraft – Detection ................................................................................................................................................. 45

Dispatching Plan .......................................................................................................................................................... 45

Severity .................................................................................................................................................................... 51

Preparedness Plan ....................................................................................................................................................... 53

Public Information: Restrictions & Closures ................................................................................................................ 54

VI. Operational Procedures ............................................................................................................................................. 54

Station Catalog Maintenance ...................................................................................................................................... 54

Daily Schedule ......................................................................................................................................................... 54

Quality Control Station Data ............................................................................................................................... 54

Enter Observations .............................................................................................................................................. 54

Weather Station Monitoring and Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 54

VII. PROGRAM NEEDS .................................................................................................................................................. 55

Weather Stations Sites ................................................................................................................................................ 55

Computer Equipment Needs ....................................................................................................................................... 55

Training ....................................................................................................................................................................... 55

Pocket Cards Seasonal Fire Danger Tracking ............................................................................................................... 55

VIII. Appendices ............................................................................................................................................................... 57

iv

I. INTRODUCTION The Fire Danger Operating Plan is the cornerstone for fire preparedness decisions made throughout the year. Preparedness is the result of activities that are planned and implemented prior to wildland fire ignitions. Preparedness is a continuous process that includes developing and maintaining unit level firefighting infrastructure, predicting fire activity, hiring, and training, equipping, and deploying firefighters, evaluating performance and improving overall operations. The preparedness process includes routine pre-season actions as well as incremental in-season actions conducted in response to increasing fire danger.

The Lolo Fire Danger Operating Plan (FDOP) is a fire danger applications guide for fire managers at a local level. A FDOP documents the establishment and management of the local unit fire weather station network and describes how fire danger ratings are applied to local unit fire management decisions.

The FDOP also informs other plans by establishing Forest specific preparedness levels based on climatic break points and fire business thresholds. Agencies within the Southwest Zone utilize these thresholds to inform various activities in the following plans:

• Prevention and Education Plan • Daily Staffing Levels Plan • Dispatch Mobilization Guide • Preparedness Plan • Southwest Zone Restriction and Closure Plan

Other supporting documents available:

• LNF Operations Guidebook • LNF Wildfire Guide and Branch Guidelines

Policy requirements for the establishment of FDOP are in the “Interagency Standards for Fire and Aviation Operations” (Redbook), Chapter 10, Preparedness and the Forest Service Manual 5124.

The Northern Rockies Southwest Zone FDOP will be reviewed annually.

1

II. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

FIRE DANGER TECHNICAL GROUP

Each Agency and Dispatch Center within the Zone will be responsible for providing an NFDRS technical specialist to participate in the maintenance, review, and update of this plan. The following are specific Agency who will constitute the Fire Danger Technical Group:

For Supervisors Office: Anne Rys-Sikora

For Missoula Ranger District: Greg Jacobsen

For Ninemile Ranger District: Mike Noel

For Plains Ranger District: Jon Airhart

For Seeley Lake Ranger District: Karl Nickoyczyk

For Superior Ranger District: Derek Elmstrom

For Missoula Interagency Center: Kristine Salmonson

For Plains Dispatch Center: Kate Maffei

For Ronan Dispatch Center: Jack Currie

Members of the Fire Danger Technical Group will monitor NFDRS to ensure validity, coordinate/communicate any problems identified, review plan implementation, coordinate plan revisions, present the plan, and be available for NFDRS technical consultation. Some specific elements to monitor and coordinate are ensuring observations are selected appropriately (time, state of the weather (SOW), wet flag) consistent station management in WIMS (herb state, catalog), station maintenance (instrument errors, transmit times) and station citing (eliminate redundant/inappropriate, propose new sites where appropriate).

FIRE WEATHER STATION OWNER

Five of the Remote Automated Weather Stations used in this Plan are owned and maintained by the Lolo N.F. Over site of these stations will be managed by:

Forest Intelligence Officer: Kristine Salmonson.

Two of the Remote Automated Weather Stations used in this Plan are owned and maintained by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. Over site of these stations will be managed by:

Ronan Dispatch Center Manager: Jack Currie

The Intelligence Officer is the contact for all issues regarding station management in WIMS and station maintenance. The Forest Intelligence Officer will assure that identified problems with a weather station are either corrected or assure that someone else corrects the problem.

The Montana DNRC does not have responsibility for any RAWS used in the analysis, therefore they do not have a representative listed.

2

DISPATCH/COMMUNICATIONS/COMMAND CENTER

The Intelligence Officers at both the Missoula Interagency Dispatch Center and Ronan Dispatch Center are responsible for entering observations daily and updating the Fire Danger Workbook for the entire Zone at 1300 daily. Missoula Dispatch Center will coordinate with Plains Dispatch Center to communicate daily the fire danger outputs by reading the indices the forest’s fire danger rating areas over the radio. During Fire Season, each day the previous evenings indices will be broadcast with the morning weather forecast and the actual indices will be broadcast with the afternoon weather forecast. Indices will be posted on the Missoula Interagency Dispatch Center web page by 1600 daily.

http://gacc.nifc.gov/nrcc/dc/mtmdc/

FIRE WEATHER PROGRAM COORDINATORS

Tribal, Forest and District Fire Management Officers and Assistant FMOs, and MT DNRC Unit Managers along with the help of their Fire Danger Technical Group representative are a Team that makes up the Fire Weather Program Coordinators. Their job is to assure that their personnel understand NFDRS outputs and how they are to be used. Fire Management Officers are responsible for implementing this plan, and ensuring decisions are made consistent with the intent of the plan. Fire Management Officers will also provide support for their Fire Danger Technical Group representative to assist the Intelligence Officer for any local needs that may occur.

FOREST FIRE MANAGEMENT OFFICER AND PROGRAM OFFICER Agency Fire Managers and their Staff Line Supervisors will use this Fire Danger Operating Plan and NFDRS outputs as a tool to coordinate and to make informed fire related decisions. The fire manager and Line Supervisors in support to their agency administrators are ultimately responsible for ensuring this plan is maintained, utilized, and communicated.

III. FIRE DANGER RATING INVENTORY

THE ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT

This plan encompasses an area of 5 million, 32 thousand acres (5,032,179) in west central Montana including land owned by the US Forest Service (USFS), Montana Department of Natural Resource Conservation (MT DNRC), Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), local Government and private and commercially owned lands. Wildland fire management responsibilities are shared among these entities through the Montana Cooperative Fire Management and Stafford Act Response Agreement (locally known as the six-party agreement).

FIRE PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

A 15 year period has been selected for this operating plan analysis, 1999 thru 2013. The data included all fires across the interagency landscape. The data has been checked using GIS to ensure no duplication of fire data exists between agencies. Across the entire Study Area there was an average of 360 fires per year, and an average 33,530 acres burned per year largely skewed by acres burned in 2000, 2003 and 2007. The fire activity in this Study Area is

3

http://gacc.nifc.gov/nrcc/dc/mtmdc/

seasonal with fires occurring in the summer months and few to no fires occurring in the winter months. July and August tend to have the most fires with approximately just less than 40% each, and the remaining months with less than 10%. Approximately 70% of the fires are less than ¼ acre in size. Lightning is the ignition source for approximately 50% of the fires, which leaves 50% of the fires to be human caused. Within the 15 year time frame that the analysis occurred there are 1721 days when wildfire ignition actually took place. Most of those days saw only one of two ignitions.

4

WEATHER STATIONS

There are 7 (seven) permanent Remote Automated Weather Stations (RAWS) Managed by the agency participating in this analysis. Fire Managers across the Study Area agreed to use these seven RAWS stations in this analysis because of the longevity of their data and the diverse biophysical settings the RAWS are located. RAWS are located in the lowest elevations possible which dry out the soonest alerting fire managers of the threat and represent the areas where human populations are located.

The Topology map shows the location of the all 7 RAWS locations. Below is a table describing RAWS parameters edited from individual Station catalog

Name Elevation Station Type

NFDRS fuel model

Climate class

Slope class Aspect

Greenup date

Freeze date

Avg. precip

Initial 1000h

PLAINS 241206 2510 4 G 2 4 4 8 - June 31-Dec 17.9 20

Hot Springs 241211 2880 4 G 2 1 0 15 - May 31-Dec 13.0 20

Ronan 241403 3060 4 G 3 3 0 15 - May 31-Dec 20.0 20

ST. REGIS 241302 2680 4 G 2 4 4 13 - May 31-Dec 19.2 20

NINEMILE 241507 3300 4 G 2 3 5 8 - June 31-Dec 18.81 25

SEELEY LAKE 241508 4235 4 G 3 3 6 8 - June 31-Dec 21.5 25

Blue Mountain (MISSOULA) 241513 3367 4 G 2 3 0 8 - June 31-Dec 13.36 20

5

Topology Map Showing RAWS Locations

6

VEGETATION

BIO-PHYSICAL SETTING The Bio Physical Setting Map illustrates the major river corridor and topography influences on vegetation within the study area. The western portions of the Lolo NF and MT DNRC lands has Ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir/Western larch at lower elevations near the river corridors and quickly transitions through mixed conifer with shrub understory and Western larch on wetter aspects into higher elevation Lodgepole pine.

The eastern portions of the Lolo NF and MT DNRC lands with the exception of the northern area, transition zones are less evident. Most of the area is dominated by mixed conifer with areas of grassland to the far east. The northern portion to the FDRA has higher elevation mountainous terrain which lends itself more readily to Lodgepole pine transitioning to Whitebark pine and wetter, higher elevation vegetation growth.

The eastern portions of the CSKT lands transition quickly from lower elevation grass/shrub through mixed conifer into higher elevation Lodgpole pine and Whitebark pine.

The western portions of the CSKT land is a wide valley with several water features. The bio-physical setting in a majority of the area is dominated by grass/shrub vegetation with areas of Ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir in the higher terrain.

7

EXISTING VEGETATION Existing vegetation is heavily influenced by topography and human use. The transition between vegetative types is generally more pronounced. Large areas normally inhabited by native grasses, shrubs and timber have been developed into agricultural land.

WESTERN CLARKFORK AND FLATHEAD RIVER DRAINAGES

Lower elevations of the western portions of the Lolo NF and MT DNRC lands consist of grass with small amounts of fine, dead fuel with shrubs (fuel model GR2) mainly on the south aspects. In valley and drainage bottoms, on south and west aspects, this grass fuel model transitions to warm dry ponderosa pine and Douglas fir habitat types which contain a moderate fuel loading of pine needle litter typified by fuel model TL8. A fuel model TU1 consisting of grass, shrub, and litter is also prevalent in these habitat types. Ninebark, serviceberry, rough and Idaho fescues, and bluebunch wheatgrass habitat types are present. Occasional grassy parks surrounded by timber types are present on southerly aspects all along the Lower Clark Fork River of Superior, Plains and Thompson Falls.

The grass fuel model transitions into Ponderosa Pine habitat types along the entire Clark Fork corridor with a moderate load of pine litter (fuel model TL8) at the lower elevations and in the drainage bottoms. This fuel model lies

8

up most side drainages to the Clark Fork River. These stands are on most of the private lands and lower elevations on National Forest. These stands are also characterized as fire regime condition class 3.

The higher elevations along the Flathead River and Clark Fork River divide and the Idaho/Montana border can vary depending on aspect, but are typically characterized as mixed conifer stands with intermixed high load conifer litter, light slash, and or a dead fuel component, represented by TL5. Cool lodgepole pine and lower subalpine pine/Engelmann spruce are habitat types consistent for these locations. Fuel model TU5 with a heavy forest litter, shrub component, and understory conifer development is also prevalent. Intermittently dispersed throughout these fuel types are low loadings of grasses, shrubs, and litter typified by fuel model TU1. Fires in this fuel model would be more of a stand replacement event under very high to extreme conditions. There is some low load grass and/or shrub with litter fuel (fuel model TU1) throughout. This fuel model usually is in the transition zone between fuel model TL8 and fuel model TU5.

EASTERN CLARKFORK RIVER DRAINAGE

Lower elevations of the eastern Clarkfork River Drainage consist of grass fuel types with small amounts of fine, dead fuel with shrubs representative of fuel model GR2. In valley and drainage bottoms, on south and west aspects, this grass fuel model transitions to warm dry ponderosa pine and Douglas fir habitat types which contain a moderate fuel loading of pine needle litter typified by fuel model TL8. A fuel model TU1 consisting of grass, shrub, and litter is also prevalent in these habitat types. Ninebark, serviceberry, rough and Idaho fescues, and bluebunch wheatgrass habitat types are present. Occasional grassy parks surrounded by timber types are present on southerly aspects along the Frenchtown Face and throughout the Rock Creek Corridor. Much of these valley bottom locations are encompassed within Wildland Urban Interface. The Missoula Valley, Lolo Creek, Ninemile Creek, Petty Creek, Fish Creek, Rock Creek, Clark Fork River Drainage and the Highway 200 valley corridor all contain this vegetative structure.

Lower to mid-elevation transitions into a cool, dry, and moist Interior Douglas fir habitat type. Much of the vegetation structure at these elevations consists of mixed conifer stands with heavier fuel loadings in forest litter, shrubbery and understory conifer growth. TU5 fuel models often best represent these locations. Western larch habitat type is more prevalent in the higher reaches of the mid- elevation vegetation ranges. Inclusions of western red cedar, grand fir and lodgepole pine are also present. These locations are typically within human developed areas.

Vegetation in the higher elevations and lower elevation north aspects is depicted by mixed conifer stands with intermixed high load conifer litter, light slash, and or a dead fuel component, represented by TL5. Cool lodgepole pine and lower subalpine pine/Engelmann spruce are habitat types consistent for these locations. Fuel model TU5 with a heavy forest litter, shrub component, and understory conifer development is also prevalent. Intermittently dispersed throughout these fuel types are low loadings of grasses, shrubs, and litter typified by fuel model TU1. These sites are generally limited access locations. High elevations in the Great Burn Proposed Wilderness, Rattlesnake Wilderness, Scapegoat Wilderness, and portions of the Rock Creek drainage contain whitebark pine and lodgepole pine habitat types. Increased fuel loadings and tree mortality may be seen at these higher elevations due to mountain pine beetle attacks over the last decade. Vegetation in these higher elevations is pre-disposed to stand replacement fire due to the high fuel load accumulations and understory vegetation.

MISSION VALLEY

Lower elevations of the Mission Valley are composed of large areas of wetlands and agricultural land. These areas are typically bordered by large areas of grass with small amounts of fine, dead fuel with shrubs (fuel model GR2) mainly on the valley floor and south aspects. In valley and drainage bottoms and on south and west aspects of

9

mountainous terrain, this grass fuel model transitions to warm dry ponderosa pine and Douglas fir habitat types which contain a moderate fuel loading of pine needle litter typified by fuel model TL8. A fuel model TU1 consisting of grass, shrub, and litter is also prevalent in these habitat types.

The mid to high elevations within and bordering the Mission Valley to the west and south can vary depending on aspect, but are typically characterized as mixed conifer stands with intermixed high load conifer litter, light slash, and or a dead fuel component, represented by TL5. Cool lodgepole pine and lower subalpine pine/Engelmann spruce are habitat types consistent for these locations. Fuel model TU5 with a heavy forest litter, shrub component, and understory conifer development is also prevalent. Intermittently dispersed throughout these fuel types are low loadings of grasses, shrubs, and litter typified by fuel model TU1. Fires in this fuel model would be more of a stand replacement event under very high to extreme conditions. There is some low load grass and/or shrub with litter fuel (fuel model TU1) throughout. This fuel model usually is in the transition zone between fuel model TL8 and fuel model TU5.

Mid to high elevations on the east slope of the Mission Mountains is depicted by mixed conifer stands with intermixed high load conifer litter, light slash, and or a dead fuel component, represented by TL5. Cool lodgepole pine and lower subalpine pine/Engelmann spruce are habitat types consistent for these locations. Fuel model TU5 with a heavy forest litter, shrub component, and understory conifer development is also prevalent. Intermittently dispersed throughout these fuel types are low loadings of grasses, shrubs, and litter typified by fuel model TU1. These sites are generally limited access locations. High elevations in the Mission Mountains Wilderness and the South Fork Jocko Tribal Primitive Area contain whitebark pine and lodgepole pine habitat types. Increased fuel loadings and tree mortality may be seen at these higher elevations due to mountain pine beetle attacks over the last decade. Vegetation in these higher elevations is pre-disposed to stand replacement fire due to the high fuel load accumulations and understory vegetation.

10

MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE

11

MINIMUM TEMPERATURE

13

DEW POINT

15

CLIMATE CLASS Climate class relates to how the NFDRS model greens up and cures live vegetation. Six of the seven RAWS Stations used in this analysis are located in Climate Class 2; Plains, St Regis, Ninemile, Blue Mountain, Hotsprings and Ronan, while one is located in climate class 3; Seeley. It is important to note that live fuel moistures across the landscape are much more variable than indicated by NFDRS climate class. The climate class affects the rate of drying of live fuels with a climate class 2 drying more slowly than a climate class 3.

Climate Class 2

Sub-humid (rainfall deficient in summer) ponderosa pine woodlands of the West; the mountain valleys (or parks) of the Northern and Central Rockies. A climate class 2 causes green up of live fuels in the NFDRS model to move from winter cured to peak greenness in 2 weeks and slows the curing rate of live fuels to reflect seasonality.

Climate Class 3

Sub-humid (rainfall adequate in all seasons) affecting those higher elevations in the West that support dense forests. In a climate class 3 peak greenness is reached in 3 weeks.

TOPOGRAPHY With the highest elevations generally to the East, the entire region is rugged mix of mountainous forests and valley bottoms. Slope over the area ranges widely from rolling level to sheer rocky cliffs.

The Mission Valley is a clear topological feature within the study area. The valley is damper to the east along the toe slope of the Mission Mountains. The Western portion of the Mission Valley is more arid, and the entire valley is generally rolling and level with a constant elevation. The Missoula Valley to the south of the Mission Valley is generally rolling and level as well.

The map used in the Fire Danger Rating Areas section on the following page illustrates the topology well.

Fire Danger Rating Areas

A Fire Danger Rating Area is defined as: “A geographic area relatively homogenous in climate, vegetation and topography, tens of thousands of acres in size, within which the fire danger can be assumed to be uniform. Its size and shape is primarily based on influences of fire danger, not political boundaries. It is the basic on-the-ground unit for which unique fire management decisions are made based on fire danger ratings. Weather is represented by one or more NFDRS weather stations.” (NWCG Fire Danger Working Team. 2002. Gaining an Understanding of the National Fire Danger Rating System. NWCG, PMS 932, Boise, Idaho. 72 pp.)

A comprehensive analysis of the study area has been conducted using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) programs and data. All of the data sources utilized were developed consistently across the entire area, not unique by ownership. The primary data utilized includes:

17

Lolo F.F. Historic Fire Occurrence

Lolo N.F. Historic Weather data

15m eSAT Imagery

LANDFIRE Biophysical Setting, Existing Vegetation,

Climate data produced by PRISIM Climate Group and distributed by The PRISIM Climate Group, Oregon State University, http://prism.oregonstate.edu {Portions of this document include intellectual property of The PRISIM Climate Group and are used herein by permission. Copyright © 2011. All Rights Reserved.} Climate data included for the period 1999 - 2013: Maximum and Minimum Temperature, precipitation and Dew Point averaged by month for the months of June, July, August and September.

Four Fire Danger Rating Areas’ were delineated based on identifying areas of uniform fire danger. The contribution of vegetation, weather, and topography was weighed as to which would have the greatest effect on wildland fire in making the delineation.

1. Lolo MT DNRC East (LDE) 2. Lolo MT DNTC West (LDW 3. CSKT East (CE) 4. CSKT West (CW)

18

IV. CLIMATOLOGICIAL BREAKPOINTS AND FIRE BUSINESS ANALYSIS

FIRE WEATHER DATA

Fire weather data was collected for the fifteen year period from 1999 – 2013 for each of the three agencies who provide wildland fire protection within the study area. The Forest Service and The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes data was downloaded from the National Fire and Aviation Management Web Application Site (FAM_WEB). The Montana State data was downloaded from MT.gov web site under Fire & Aviation Management.

A quality control process was developed and utilized on 7 RAWS, producing the most consistent, least erroneous historic weather data available. Analysis was run on each station’s data in both Fire Family Plus and Excel to look for spikes or erroneous data.

Two of the FDRA will have one RAWS each. The CSKT East FRDA will use the Ronan RAWS and the CSKT West will use the Hot Springs RAWS. This is in part due to the practical reality that these RAWS are the only ones that have been collecting data in each area for the entire analysis period.

Two special interest groups were created in Fire Family Plus. RAWS can be grouped and their data compiled to run together in a single analysis. These groups are called Special Interest Groups (SIGs). One will be used with the Lolo DNRC West FDRA and the other with the Lolo DNRC East FDRA. Comparative analysis was done on each SIG using Excel pivot tables to determine if the RWAS were aligned for use in a SIG. Results of the line charts indicate they are able to be used together in a SIG. Each RAWS in each SIG were equally weighted.

19

FIRE OCCURRENCE DATA

Fire data for this analysis was downloaded from the National Fire and Aviation Management Web Application Site (FAM_WEB). Data for the fifteen year period from 1999 – 2013 was collected for each of the three agencies who provide wildland fire protection. Ocular inspection was done using GIS as well as cross referencing respective data attribute tables to determine no duplicate fire records existed and that all Latitude Longitude values for each fire record is correct. Fire Records were separated by Fire Danger Rating Area and imported into Fire Family Plus for Fire Associations to be assigned.

A summary of historical fire data for all agency fires within each FDRA was created using Fire Family Plus. These summary reports indicate that nearly all fires within the study area occur during the months of May and October. Therefore the parameters analysis will include May and October as the fire season through the annual filter setting. This decision was made so that indices created will represent the time of year when the greatest probability of danger will occur.

20

Lolo DNRC East FDRA 1999 - 2013

• 94% Fire Days occur between May – October

• 54% Lightning • 46% Human • 95% Less than 10 acres

Lolo DNRC West FDRA 1999 - 2013



21

CSKT East FDRA 1999 - 2013



CSKT West FDRA 1999 - 2013



22

PARAMETERS USED FOR EACH FIRE DANGER RATING AREA

The parameters for each FDRA correlation analysis are listed in the table below. Except where specified in the following discussion, all RAWS station parameters were previously determined by local fire managers based on historical observations. All other parameters were selected as follows.

LOLO DNRC EAST AND WEST FDRAs Slope and climate classes for each RAWS within the appropriate SIG were set to the same value to eliminate conflicts in Fire Family Plus when running the various analyses. The slope class represents the overall steepness found within each FDRA and directly affects the spread component. The climate class 2 causes the green up of live fuels to reach peak greenness within two weeks of the green up date, and slows the curing rate of live fuels to reflect seasonality. CSKT East and West FDRAs The slope class represents the overall steepness found within each FDRA and directly affects the spread component. Hotsprings RAWS was set to slope class 1 to reflect the flatter terrain typical of the CSKT West FDRA. Ronan RAWS was set to slope class 3 to represent the steep terrain found within the CSKT East FDRA. Climate class 2 causes the green up of live fuels to reach peak greenness within two weeks of the green up date, and slows the curing rate of live fuels to reflect seasonality. LARGE FIRE SIZE and MULTIPLE FIRE DAY The large fire acres and number of fire days to make a multiple fire day were determined for each FDRA area by running several iterations of the Probability Analysis within Fire Family Plus using several analysis variables. Through this process, the optimum values for large fire size and what constitutes a multiple fire day were determined by comparing Chi2 and RL2 to achieve the best correlation between indices and fire occurrence before moving further in the analysis.

CORRELATION WITH FIRE OCCURRENCE The four indices and 2 fuel models were evaluated to determine the most representative index and fuel model to use as the primary fire danger indicator on the Lolo National Forest. The analysis involved a combination of subjective and quantitative methods as described in “Evaluation of Fire Danger Rating indexes Using Logistic Regression and Percentile Analysis” 1 and “Intermediate National Fire Danger Rating System, S-491 Student Workbook (2003)”. These methods compared the relationship of a given index and fuel model to historical fire occurrence and climate data. A complete review of the methodology of this analysis is available in Section VIII of this Plan.

1 Andrews PL, Loftsgaarden DO, Bradshaw LS (2003). Evaluation of fire danger rating indexes using logistic regression and percentile analysis. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 2003, 12, 213-226.

SIG Station ID Name

241507 Ninemile 3 2 8-Jun 31-Dec241508 Seeley Lake 3 2 8-Jun 31-Dec241513 Blue Mtn 3 2 8-Jun 31-Dec241302 St. Regis 3 2 13-May 31-Dec241507 Ninemile 3 2 8-Jun 31-Dec241206 Plains 3 2 8-Jun 31-Dec

CSKT West 241211 Hotsprings 1 2 15-May 31-Dec 3 25 2CSKT East 241403 Ronan 3 2 15-May 31-Dec 3 25 2

25 5

Lolo DNRC East

Lolo DNRC West

Fire Danger Rating Area

Slope Class

3

3

Large fire size

Multiple fire day

25 5LDE

LDW

Climate class

Greenup date

Freeze date

Analysis period

23

ANALYSIS VARIABLES

INDICES The indices analyzed for each FDR were Energy Release Component (ERC), Burning Index (BI), 1000 hour fuel moisture (FM1000), and 100 hour fuel moisture (FM100). ERC or BI are commonly chosen as fire season indicators depending on climate, predictability, fuel type/condition, and fire occurrence association. FM1000 may be used as an indicator in areas dominated by a heavy fuel component. FM100 was included in the analysis to provide contrast to FM1000 results.

FUEL MODELS Fuel model C and G were selected for analysis with each of the indices because they best represent the fuels found within the zone. Fuel model C (open timber/grass) is primarily composed of fine dead fuels, which respond quickly to changes in weather and tend to have lower energy output than heavier fuels. Fuel Model G (Closed, short-needle conifer, heavy dead) contains a large load of heavy dead fuels. Because heavy fuels react very slowly to changes in weather, fuel model G reflects longer term weather trends.

PROBABILITY ANALYSIS Probability analysis is a quantitative measure of each variable’s relationship to historical fire activity data. The more an index ‘fits’ the historical record, the more confidence in the index as an indicator of fire danger.

Goodness of Fit: Chi2 Test and RL

2: The Chi2 test is a way to quantify how well a modeled index aligns with historical fire data points. The lower the Chi2 value, the more a model fits the data. In FF+, Chi2 test is to 8 degrees of freedom with the following confidence levels:

With the RL2 test, the closer RL

2 is to one, the better the logistic model fits the data.

SUM OF PERCENTILES An effective indicator of increased fire activity will have more fire activity occurring on days with higher index values. If an index has little to no relationship to fire activity, the distribution shift of variables would be similar to that for all observation days. For each index, the sum differences in the percentiles (All-Day vs. Fire Day, Multi-fire day, and Large Fire Day) were used to quantify the distribution shift. RANGE OF PREDICTOR VARIABLE AND PROBABILITIES Even if a predictor variable (index) performed well in other areas of analysis, a range below 50 was used to eliminate index values from further consideration. A wide range of predictor variable and probabilities is preferred because of greater flexibility in setting levels. A low range in either increases the likelihood of a majority of observations in one or two classes and does not allow much room for transition between index levels.

Excellent Not GoodLimiting Chi-square 13.36 15.51 20.09 >26.12

Good

Not Good ExcellentR(L)-squared < 0.7 0.71 0.89 >0.90

Good

24

FREQUENCY GRAPHS With frequency graphs, the frequency of fire activity is compared to the frequency of all observations (all days). If the distribution of fire activity is similar to the distribution of all days, there is no relationship between the index value and fire activity. CLIMATOLOGY GRAPHS Climatology graphs show the relationship of an index’s historical values to fire season, and are especially useful when compared to years with high fire activity.

LOLO DNRC EAST FDRA ANALYSIS SUMMARY – ERC(G) AND BI(G) ERC(G) and BI(G) both ranked high overall as correlating well with fire occurrence. However, ERC(G) stands out as a better overall fire danger indicator because it tracks well with fire season and has very few fire occurrences at low ERC(G) values. BI(G) would work well for setting daily dispatch response levels to capture daily variations in wind and fuel moistures.

LDE Probability Analysis Both indices have a high range of values for developing decision points. BI(G) correlates better with fire day looking at the Chi2 value, but both indices do well with large fire day and multiple fire day.

Sig / Station

Analysis Variable

Range of Predictor Variable [PVr] (higher = better)

Prob for low Index Value (lower=better)

Range of Prob [Pr] (higher = better)

Chi2

(Lower=better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Chi2

(Lower=better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Chi2

(Lower = better)

RL2

(higher=better)

Sum of Per-centiles (higher = better)

Rank Sum

Final Rank

25/5 firesLDE ERC G 77(2) 0.05(3.5) 0.78(2) 49.4(4) 0.91(3) 0.24(2) 2.9(1) 0.96(1) 0.27(2) 26.2(3) 0.79(3) 140(1) 27.5 1LDE ERC C 21(5) 0.18(5) 0.46(5) 63.8(5) 0.7(5) 0.14(6) 12.6(6) 0.80(5) 0.09(5.5) 18.9(2) 0.53(5) 102(4) 58.5 5LDE BI G 86(1) 0.05(3.5) 0.82(1) 18.9(2) 0.95(2) 0.33(1) 5.4(2) 0.89(3) 0.31(1) 28(4) 0.69(4) 134(3) 27.5 1LDE BI C 57(3) 0.22(6) 0.44(6) 80.9(6) 0.51(6) 0.16(4) 12.1(5) 0.72(6) 0.09(5.5) 29.9(6) 0.30(6) 82(5.5) 65 6LDE FM1000 20(6) 0.04(2) 0.70(4) 38.9(3) 0.9(4) 0.15(5) 6.7(3) 0.92(2) 0.24(3) 29.4(5) 0.80(2) 135(2) 41 4LDE FM100 23(4) 0.01(1) 0.77(3) 6.8(1) 0.99(1) 0.18(3) 9.9(4) 0.86(4) 0.21(4) 14.9(1) 0.86(1) 82(5.5) 32.5 3

Large fire day given fire day Multiple fire day given fire dayFire day

25

LDE Fire Day Separation from All Days Both ERC(G) and BI(G) display more fire activity occurring at higher index values than during all days, with ERC showing a larger separation between All Days and Fire Days.

LDE Fire Frequency Distribution Below, ERC-G and BI-G have a distribution shift towards higher index numbers versus all days; therefore both indexes are related to fire activity. However, BI-G has a large number of observations and some fire activity at a value of zero. Fire activity at an index’s minimum value indicates lower reliability as a fire danger indicator.

26

LDE Climatology ERC(G) climatology graph depicts a more pronounced fire season with a definite peak of index values in August. Also, ERC(G) shows more of a steady trend, both build-up and declining from peak fire season, compared to BI(G). The first peak of BI(G) in May displays the increase in fire danger typical observed in the spring before green-up occurs.

LOLO DNRC WEST ANALYSIS SUMMARY – ERC(G) AND BI(G) ERC(G) and BI(G) both ranked high overall as correlating well with fire occurrence. However, ERC(G) stands out as a better overall fire danger indicator because it tracks well with fire season and has very few fire occurrences at low ERC(G) values. BI(G) would work well for setting daily dispatch response levels to capture daily variations in wind and fuel moistures.

LDW Probability Analysis ERC(G) and BI(G) were the top two overall ranked indices. Both have excellent range of index values and good or better correlation based on chi2 on large and multiple fire days. BI(G) has the better chi2 fit on all fire days, but both indices show good logistical model fit if looking at RL

2 value.

Sig / Station

Analysis Variable




Chi2

(Lower=better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Chi2

(Lower=better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Chi2

(Lower = better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Rank Sum

Final Rank

25/5 firesLDW ERC G 77(2) 0.03(2.5) 0.71(2) 46.1(6) 0.9(4) 0.22(2.5) 4.6(1) 0.83(1) 0.21(2) 13.8(6) 0.53(2) 136(2) 33 1LDW ERC C 22(4.5) 0.09(5) 0.51(6) 26.2(3) 0.88(5) 0.22(2.5) 5(2) 0.78(2) 0.06(6) 8.1(4) 0.1(6) 103(6) 52 6LDW BI G 99(1) 0.03(2.5) 0.77(1) 18.3(2) 0.94(2) 0.32(1) 9.3(6) 0.59(6) 0.2(3) 6.5(1) 0.51(3.5) 122(4) 33 1LDW BI C 62(3) 0.11(6) 0.52(5) 31.2(4) 0.80(6) 0.20(4.5) 8.7(5) 0.62(5) 0.09(5) 7.6(2) 0.21(5) 142(1) 51.5 5LDW FM1000 18(4.5) 0.01(1) 0.64(4) 36.8(5) 0.91(3) 0.17(6) 5.7(3) 0.71(4) 0.25(1) 8.2(5) 0.71(1) 128(3) 40.5 3LDW FM100 22(6) 0.03(2.5) 0.65(3) 11.5(1) 0.97(1) 0.2(4.5) 6.5(4) 0.72(3) 0.16(4) 7.7(3) 0.51(3.5) 108(5) 40.5 3

Fire day Large fire day given fire day Multiple fire day given fire day

27

LDW Fire Day Separation from All Days Both indices indicate more fire activity occurring at higher index levels, but ERC(G) has greater spread and less variability. The first peak of BI(G) in May displays the increase in fire danger typical observed in the spring before green-up occurs.

LDW Fire Frequency Distribution Below, ERC-G and BI-G have a distribution shift towards higher index numbers versus all days; therefore both indexes are related to fire activity. However, BI-G has a large number of observations and some fire activity at a value of zero. Fire activity at an index’s minimum value indicates lower reliability as a fire danger indicator.

LDW Climatology ERC(G) climatology graph depicts a more pronounced fire season with a definite peak of index values in August. Both indices show a steady trend, both build-up and declining from peak fire season, although ERC(G) is a little smoother than BI(G).

28

CSKT EAST FDRA ANALYSIS SUMMARY – ERC(G) AND BI(G) ERC(G) and BI(G) both ranked high overall as correlating well with fire occurrence. ERC(G) displays a slightly better distribution shift from all-weather days to fire activity days, has fewer observations at low values, and displays a smoother trend line on the climatology graph. BI(G) would work well for setting daily dispatch response levels to capture daily variations in wind and fuel moistures.

CSKT East Probability Analysis FM1000, ERC(G) and BI(G) ranked the highest overall. TheFM100 range of variables is very small limiting the room for transition between index levels when making management decisions. FM100 was not considered further as a potential fire danger rating indicator. Looking at the chi2 values, both ERC(G) and BI(G) are a good fit to fire day and have excellent fit to Large Fire Day and Multiple Fire Day.

Sig / Station

Analysis Variable




Chi2

(Lower=better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Chi2

(Lower=better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Chi2

(Lower = better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Rank Sum

Final Rank

25/2RONAN ERC G 73(2) 0.08(3.5) 0.59(2) 11.6(2) 0.87(2) 0.23(1) 7.1(5) 0.53(5) 0.3(3) 7.5(5) 0.43(5) 114(1) 36.5 3RONAN ERC C 21(6) 0.15(5) 0.4(5) 14.8(3) 0.74(3) 0.21(2.5) 4.3(2) 0.62(2) 0.22(5) 2.7(2) 0.6(2) 98(5) 42.5 4RONAN BI G 74(1) 0.08(3.5) 0.56(3) 20.6(4) 0.73(4) 0.2(4) 3.3(1) 0.63(1) 0.29(4) 4.7(3) 0.46(3.5) 109(2.5) 34.5 1RONAN BI C 45(3) 0.18(6) 0.38(6) 20.7(5) 0.56(6) 0.17(5) 4.5(3) 0.54(4) 0.18(6) 10.3(6) 0.14(6) 100(4) 60 6RONAN FM1000 27(5) 0.02(2) 0.54(4) 26.6(6) 0.7(5) 0.21(2.5) 4.8(4) 0.59(3) 0.35(2) 6.4(4) 0.46(3.5) 109(2.5) 43.5 5RONAN FM100 28(4) 0.01(1) 0.6(1) 10.9(1) 0.88(1) 0.1(6) 10.9(6) 0.22(6) 0.37(1) 2.5(1) 0.72(1) 90(6) 35 2


29

CSKT East Fire Day Separation from All Days Both indices have more fire activity occurring at higher index levels, but ERC(G) has a greater margin between all days and fire activity.

CSKT East Fire Frequency Distribution Both indices show a slight distribution shift to higher values on fire days and a good distribution shift on Large and Multiple Fire days. Both ERC(G) or BI(G) have very few fires at low index values which corresponds with expected lower chance of fire day on a low index value day.

30

CSKT East Climatology ERC(G) has a more distinct fire season peak and trend line than BI(G). BI(G) is much more variable for each period through the fire season.

CSKT WEST FDRA ANALYSIS SUMMARY – ERC(G) AND BI(C) Both ERC(G) and BI(G) correlate well with fire activity and have an excellent range of values to set decision points. Fire activity increases with index values for both indices, with ERC(G) displaying a slightly better distribution shift. ERC(G) climatology graph displays a smoother trend line and a more pronounced fire season peak in August. However, BI(G) clearly shows higher index values in the spring pre-green up and an August fire season peak. BI(G) may be a better fire danger indicator in the CSKT West FDRA due to the high loading of fine fuels and their reactivity to wind.

CSKT West Probability Analysis ERC(G), BI(G) and FM100 ranked the highest in the probability analysis. FM100 correlates well with all the fire day types, but has a very limited range of values from which to set decision points. FM100 was not considered further in this analysis. BI(G) fits very well (excellent chi2 and RL

2) and ERC(G) moderately well (RL2 higher than

70%) with fire data on all fire days. Both indices correlate well considering chi2 on Large and Multiple Fire days.

Sig / Station

Analysis Variable




Chi2

(Lower=better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Chi2

(Lower=better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Chi2

(Lower = better)

RL2

(higher=better)


Rank Sum

Final Rank

25/2 firesHSPRNGS ERC G 84(2) 0.05(3.5) 0.75(2) 29.3(5) 0.81(5) 0.29(1) 9.4(5) 0.56(4) 0.48(2) 10.7(3) 0.58(2) 116(2) 36.5 3HSPRNGS ERC C 25(4) 0.07(5) 0.66(5) 12(4) 0.88(4) 0.27(4) 12.9(6) 0.47(5) 0.37(3) 17.4(6) 0.29(6) 99(5) 57 6HSPRNGS BI G 91(1) 0.05(3.5) 0.77(1) 5.9(2) 0.94(2) 0.28(2.5) 5.3(3) 0.6(3) 0.36(4.5) 8.8(1) 0.45(3) 90(6) 32.5 1HSPRNGS BI C 54(3) 0.1(6) 0.63(6) 6.4(3) 0.92(3) 0.28(2.5) 9.2(4) 0.46(6) 0.33(6) 10.8(4) 0.32(5) 102(4) 52.5 5HSPRNGS FM1000 16(6) 0.04(2) 0.67(4) 31.1(6) 0.78(6) 0.26(5) 3.0(1) 0.81(1) 0.51(1) 11.5(5) 0.62(1) 126(1) 39 4HSPRNGS FM100 21(5) 0.01(1) 0.72(3) 5.2(1) 0.96(1) 0.24(6) 3.4(2) 0.75(2) 0.36(4.5) 9.6(2) 0.44(4) 104(3) 34.5 2


31

CSKT West Fire Day Separation from All Days Both ERC(G) and BI(C) show more fire activity at higher index levels, but ERC(G) displays a little more separation between all observation days and fire days.

CSKT West Fire Frequency Distribution ERC(G) has a slightly more pronounced distribution shift toward high index values for fire days, multi-fire days and large fire days. Both indices show very few observations or fire activity at low index values.

CSKT West Climatology ERC(G) displays a fire season peak in August and a very smooth trend line. Although the BI(G) trend line is not as smooth, it shows both a peak in August, but also a peak in the spring prior to greenup. This may be useful in describing fire danger on windy spring days, when primary spread is in the grassy lowlands.

32

FDRA INDEX OVERVIEW An overview of the analysis results are as follows. These fuel model / indices pairs will be used to determine the climatological breakpoints

Fire Danger Rating Area SIG / RAWS

Index / Fuel Model

Climatological Breakpoints Used For:

Lolo DNRC East LDE ERC(G)

- Adjective Fire Danger Rating - Staffing Levels - Preparedness Levels - Pocket Cards - Severity Requests*

BI(G) - Dispatch Response Levels

Lolo DNRC West LDW ERC(G)


BI(G) - Dispatch Response Levels

CSKT East Ronan ERC(G)


ERC(G) - Dispatch Response Levels

CSKT West Hotsprings ERC(G),


ERC(G) - Dispatch Response Levels

* Severity Requests are partially based on the 90th and 97th percentiles derived from year-round climate data. All other levels are determined from correlating fire occurrence data with climate data based on a fire season of May through October (2014 Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation2 and 2013 Wildland Fire and Aviation Program Management and Operations Guide3).

2 U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S Department of Agriculture. 2014. Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations, pgs. 10-3 - 10-4. Produced by the Federal Fire and Aviation Task Group, National Interagency Fire Center, Boise, ID. 3 U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs. 2013. Wildland Fire and Aviation Program Management and Operations Guide, pgs. 4-18 – 4-19, 4-33.

33

CLIMATOLOGICAL BREAKPOINTS The following Tables illustrate the decision breakpoints for each of the FDRAs. The correlating tables below outline the Index Range and percentage values.

FDRA: Lolo MT DNRC East (LDE)

34

FDRA: Lolo MT DNRC East (LDE) – BI(G) Response Levels

35

FDRA: Lolo MT DNRC West (LDW)

36

FDRA: Lolo MT DNRC West (LDW) – BI(G) Response Levels

37

FDRA:CSKT East Ronan (CE) – ERC(G)

38

FDRA: CSKT West – Hot Springs (CW) Indic: Burning Index ERC(G) –

39

ADJECTIVE FIRE DANGER RATING Information about each Fire Danger Rating Area and the SIG that represents the index for that area are presented in the table below. The five color categories described below; low, Moderate, High Very High & Extreme directly correlate to the Preparedness Levels 1 through 5.

FDRA NAME Lolo DNRC East SIG FDRA

Lolo DNRC West SIG FDRA

STATION Missoula 241513

Seeley Lake 241508

Ninemile 241507

Ninemile 241507

St Regis 241302

Plains 241206 MODEL

INDEX ERC ERC

Index Range

% Days

% Fire Days %LFD %MFD Index

Range % Days % Fire Days %LFD %MFD

Green PL I 0-26 25 8 2 1 0-24 21 4 0 0 Blue PL II 27-39 29 21 6 4 25-39 32 18 5 3 Yellow PL III 40-53 16 37 17 40 40-54 28 42 24 40 Orange PL IV 54-63 13 23 39 37 55-63 12 22 39 38 Red PL V 64-+ 7 11 37 18 64-+ 8 14 32 19

• LFD = Large Fire Day Fires >25 acres MFD = Multiple Fire Day >5 fires per day

FDRA NAME Lolo DNRC East SIG FDRA

Lolo DNRC West SIG FDRA

STATION Missoula 241513

Seeley Lake 241508

Ninemile 241507

Ninemile 241507

St Regis 241302

Plains 241206 MODEL

INDEX BI BI

Index Range

% Days



Green PL I 0-29 21 7 4 2 0-29 22 6 0 0 Blue PL II 30-49 48 46 13 37 30-49 48 44 24 31 Yellow PL III 50+ 31 47 83 61 50+ 30 50 76 69


FDRA NAME CSKT East

CSKT West

STATION Ronan 241403

Hot Springs 241211 MODEL

INDEX ERC ERC

Index Range

% Days



Green PL I 0-19 22 4 0 0 0-24 5 0 0 0 Blue PL II 20-32 25 19 7 18 25-49 37 16 0 5 Yellow PL III 33-51 36 48 29 47 50-68 36 48 42 45 Orange PL IV 52-60 12 19 36 23 69-79 15 24 27 32 Red PL V 61-+ 5 10 29 12 80-+ 7 13 31 18


40

The following table describes the Adjective fire danger rating definitions. The two columns on the left are copied out of “Gaining an Understanding of the National Fire Danger Rating System” 2002, and are considered the national standard. On the Lolo Planning Levels and Adjective Ratings are based off the same ERC value which is not the case on other units across the Nation.

Fire Danger Rating and Color Code

Description

Low (L) (Green)

Fuels do not ignite readily from small firebrands although a more intense heat source, such as lightning, may start fires in duff or punky wood. Fires in open cured grasslands may burn freely a few hours after rain, but woods fires spread slowly by creeping or smoldering, and burn in irregular fingers. There is little danger of spotting.

Moderate (M) (Blue)

Fires can start from most accidental causes, but with the exception of lightning fires in some areas, the number of starts is generally low. Fires in open cured grasslands will burn briskly and spread rapidly on windy days. Timber fires spread slowly to moderately fast. The average fire is of moderate intensity, although heavy concentrations of fuel, especially draped fuel, may burn hot.

High (H) (Yellow)

All fine dead fuels ignite readily and fires start easily from most causes. Unattended brush and campfires are likely to escape. Fires spread rapidly and short distance spotting is common. High intensity burning may develop on slopes or in concentrations of fine fuels. Fires may become serious and their control difficult unless they are attacked successfully while small.

Very High (VH) (Orange)

Fires start easily from all causes and, immediately after ignition, spread rapidly, and increase quickly in intensity. Spot fires are a constant danger. Fires burning in light fuels may quickly develop high intensity characteristics such as long distance spotting and fire whirlwinds when they burn into heavier fuels.

Extreme (E) (Red)

Fires start quickly, spread furiously, and burn intensely. All fires are potentially serious. Development into high intensity burning will usually be faster and occur from smaller fires than in the very high fire danger class. Direct attack is rarely possible and may be dangerous except immediately after ignition. Fires that develop headway in heavy slash or in conifer stands may be unmanageable while the extreme burning condition lasts. Under these conditions the only effective and safe control action is on the flanks until the weather changes or the fuel supply lessens.

41

V. FIRE DANGER BASED DECISIONS

PREVENTION PLAN The CSKT Prevention Plan is available upon request; please contact Jack Currie, Ronan Fire Dispatch Center Manager, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes

MT DNRC Prevention is available upon request; please contact Southwestern Land Officer Fire Program Manager.

The Lolo National Prevention Plan is located on the fsweb at: http://fsweb.lolo.r1.fs.fed.us/fire/prevention2/prevention.shtml and is otherwise available upon request.

DAILY STAFFING LEVELS The Staffing Levels for CSKT are upon request; please contact Jack Currie, Ronan Fire Dispatch Center Manager, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes

MT DNRC staffing levels are defined in the Southwestern Fire Mobilization Guide please contact Southwestern Land Office Fire Program Manager.

LOLO NF PERSONNEL STAFFING Staffing levels for personnel and initial attack resources needed will vary throughout the year by Fire Danger Rating Area. When fire danger rating is Low, typically during pre/post and early season no or limited initial attack capability is required. Consequently the Staffing tables below reflect requirements for Planning Level three through five. Staffing for Low and Moderate Resources needed by staffing level should increase with increasing fire danger.

Preparedness Level PL III High PL IV Very High PL V Extreme

Three day Average

40-53

54-63

64-+ East FDRA ERC

West FDRA ERC 40-54 55-63 64-+

Forest Supervisor or Acting

5-day coverage 0800-1630

5-day coverage 0800-1630 on-call 24 hours

5-day coverage 0800 – 1630 on-call 24 hours

District Ranger or Acting

5-day coverage 0800-1630


5-day coverage 0800 – 1630 on-call 24 hours

Forest Fire Duty Officer 5-day coverage thru PP 12 0800-1630 7-day coverage begins pp 13 0930-1800



42

Forest Aviation Officer 5-day coverage thru PP 12 0800-1630 5-day coverage begins pp 13 0930-1800



District Fire Duty Officer

5-day coverage thru PP 12 0800-1630 7-day coverage begins pp 13 0930-1800



Preparedness Level PL III High PL IV Very High PL V Extreme

Three day Average

40-53

54-63

64-+ East FDRA ERC

West FDRA ERC 40-54 55-63 64-+

MIDC and PDC

5-day coverage thru PP 12 0800-1630 7-day coverage begins pp 13 0800-1800 on-call 24 hours



Fire Prevention Technicians

4 FPTs 5-day coverage 0800-1630

4 FPTs 5-day coverage 0930-1800

4 FPTs + Severity 5-day coverage 0930-1900

Wildland Engines

5 Wildland Engines 5-day coverage thru PP 12 0800-1630 7-day coverage begins PP 13 0930-1800

10 Wildland Engines 7-day coverage 0930-1800

10 Wildland Engines 7-day coverage 0930-1900

IA Modules

5 IA Modules 5-day coverage thru PP 12 0800-1630 7-day coverage begins PP 13 0930-1800

5 IA Modules 7-day coverage 0930-1800

5 IA Modules 7-day coverage 0930-1900

Total District IA Firefighters Available

30 IA FFTRs 45 IA FFTRs 45 + 15 on Severity

Helicopter + Helitack Module

N718MD & module 7-day coverage begins July 1 0930-1800

N718MD & module Module 7-day coverage begins July 1 0930-1800

N718MD & module Module 7-day coverage begins July 1 0930-1900

43

Lookouts

6 Staffed Lookouts 5-day coverage 0930-1800



Air Patrol

Following Lightning

Following Lightning

Following Lightning

44

AIRCRAFT – DETECTION The Forest has a light fixed wing aircraft available on an 80-day IDIQ contract. Additional light fixed wing aircraft are available on CWN contracts. The aircraft are used primarily for wildland fire detection and monitoring purposes. The use of the aircraft is based on the LNF Single Incident Preplanned Dispatch Guide, Forest Staffing and Drawdown Levels and the following general guidelines:

Preparedness Level III

• Following lightning, detection flights will automatically be scheduled for those areas that received lightning • Scheduled for two days following lightning • District Duty Officer or DFMO will have the responsibility to cancel or continue flights after the two

scheduled days

Preparedness Levels IV & V

• Daily detection flights will automatically be scheduled • Flights will continue daily across the whole forest or until a DDO or DFMO deems them no longer necessary

on their district • Order a second aircraft for coverage as needed

MIDC is responsible for ordering and dispatching aircraft, assigning Aerial Observers and determining flight routes. Every effort will be made to place an Aerial Observer trainee on each flight. Trainees will meet the standards outlined in the Lolo National Forest Aviation Plan. Districts will be responsible to assist with providing Aerial Observers.

DISPATCHING PLAN The CSKT Dispatching Plan is available upon request; please contact Jack Currie, Ronan Fire Dispatch Center Manager, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. The CSKT Duty Officer will make wildfire resource response decisions based on current staffing and preparedness levels. These decisions will take into consideration fire location, expected values at risk, time of day, other reported fires, resource availability and current and expected weather. Changes in fire behavior and fires resistance to control related to the fire seasons progression will also feed the decisions made by the Duty Officer. Daily briefings between the Duty Officer and Duty Dispatcher will occur to ensure wildfire response integrity for fires occurring on or adjacent to the Flathead Indian Reservation.

Lolo NF Dispatching Levels based on the fire danger rating system will be used by Missoula Interagency Dispatch Center (MIDC) and Plains Dispatch Center (PDC). The Dispatch levels are intended to capture daily variations in weather (such as high winds and/or low relative humidity) which may affect the spread and growth rate of a fire start. Anticipated potential for fire growth in turn affects that day’s initial attack response. Breakpoints were established through analysis with fire occurrence data with special attention to large fire occurrence. As the dispatch level changes, production capabilities of suppression resources change.

Each dispatch office within the zone will maintain runcard information within their respective Initial Attack Standard Operating Plans. The runcards will specify resource(s) to be dispatched based on protecting Agency’s needs and

45

response levels. The protection Agency’s Duty Officer and on site Incident Commander may order adjustments to runcard resources based on local intelligence and knowledge.

Daily, the Dispatch center will determine the dispatch level based on forecasted and actual Index values for the appropriate FDRA. The level will be set in the WildCAD program and read over the radio with the fire weather forecast.

Preplanned Incident Dispatching Analysis Lolo

A coordinated Dispatch Level based on the fire danger system will be utilized across the study area at both Missoula Dispatch Center and Plains Dispatch Center. Both Dispatch Centers use a five level system described by colors, delineated by fire danger rating area, and tracked by dispatch centers. The described dispatch colors indicate likely differences in fire business. As dispatch levels change, production capabilities of suppression resources change. For Planning Level I & II (colors Green & Blue) no pre-planned dispatch guidance. Fire occurrences at these two levels often happen on the shoulder seasons and are taken on a case-by-case basis. Dispatching is a result of the professional judgment of the Duty Officer and Incident Commander on site who will recommend the necessary resources.

The following table describes how fire business is used to indicate thresholds for minimum staffing decisions at the District level across the two FDRAs. Detailed information about the Forest’s FMUs can be found in the Fire Management Plan. The intent is to identify minimum drawdown levels across the Forest by District based on fire danger and values at risk. ERC’s are used to guide these minimum staffing or drawdown levels.

Index BI(G) % Days% Lrg Fire BI(G) %Days

% Lrg Fire BI(G) %days

% Lrg Fire BI(C) %Days

% Lrg Fire

Low 0 21% 4% 0 22% 0% 0 31% 0% 0 23% 0%Moderate 30 48% 13% 30 48% 24% 30 36% 21% 18 44% 35%High 50 31% 83% 50 30% 76% 44 33% 79% 32 33% 65%

Lolo MT DNRC East Lolo MT DNRC West CSKT East CSKT West

46

FUM 1 Wildland Urban Interface – Is primarily the low elevation lands where most of the population lives and where their travel corridors are.

FMU2 Assessable / Roaded – Is the mid level elevation lands that have a usable road system.

FMU3 Unroaded – Primarily High Elevation lands that do not have any roads. Some are wilderness, some are proposed wilderness other areas simply do not have any roads constructed.

The Fire Management Units account for elevation breaks of low, medium and high elevation within each Fire Danger Rating Area.

47

Air Support Dispatch Resources

Based on weather conditions and ongoing fire activity and availability, resource allocation of Aircraft resources is at the discretion of the Duty office and Incident Commander.

MDC & PDC Pre- and Post-Fire Season, Pre-June and Post-September, Single Incident Preplanned Dispatch Guide

PREPAREDNESS LEVELS

FMU 1 WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE SUPPRESSION RESPONSE

FMU 2 DEVELOPED SUPPRESSION RESPONSE

FMU 3 WILDERNESS ROADLESS AREAS MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

Preparedness Level I ERC East FDRA 0-26 West FDRA 0-24

1 WL Eng or 1 IA Module 1 ICT-4 or 5 CWN Helicopter


1 IA Module or SMJs 1 ICT-5 CWN Helicopter

Preparedness Level II ERC East FDRA 27-39 West FDRA 26-39



1 IA Module or SMJs 1 ICT-5 CWN Helicopter

Preparedness Level III ERC East FDRA 40-53 West FDRA 40-54

1 WL Eng 1 IA Module available 1 ICT-4 Helitack available Based upon point of origin, notify DNRC or appropriate RFD.

1 WL Eng or 1 IA Module 1 ICT-4 or 5 Helitack available

1 IA Module, Helitack, or SMJs 1 ICT-5

48

MDC & PDC Fire Season, May 1st to September 30th, Single Incident Dispatch Guide

PREPAREDNESS LEVELS




Preparedness Level III ERC East FDRA 40-53 West FDRA 40-54

1 WL Eng or 1 IA Module available 1 ICT-4 Helitack available Based upon point of origin, notify DNRC or appropriate RFD.

1 WL Eng or 1 IA Module 1 ICT-5 Helitack available

1 IA Module, Helitack available or SMJs, 1 ICT-5

Preparedness Level IV ERC East FDRA 54-63 West FDRA 55-63

1 WL Eng 1 WL Eng available 1 IA Module available 1 ICT-3/4 Helitack available Retardant available Based upon point of origin, notify DNRC or appropriate RFD.

1 WL Eng 1 WL Eng available 1 IA Module available 1 ICT-4 Helitack available Retardant available

1 IA Module, Helitack available or SMJs 1 IA Module, Helitack or SMJs available 1 ICT-5

Preparedness Level V ERC East FDRA 64+ West FDRA 64+

1 WL Eng 1 IA Module 1 WL Eng available 1 ICT-3/4 Helitack available Retardant available ATGS available Based upon point of origin, notify DNRC or appropriate RFD.

1 WL Eng 1 IA Module 1 WL Eng available 1 ICT-4 Helitack available Retardant available ATGS available

2 IA Module, Helitack available or SMJs SMJs available 1 ICT-5

49

MDC & PDC Fire Season, May 1st to September 30th, Single Incident Dispatch Guide

PREPAREDNESS LEVELS




Preparedness Level III BI East FDRA 40-53 West FDRA 40-54

1 WL Eng or 1 IA Module available 1 ICT-4 Helitack available Based upon point of origin, notify DNRC or appropriate RFD.

1 WL Eng or 1 IA Module 1 ICT-5 Helitack available

1 IA Module, Helitack available or SMJs, 1 ICT-5

Preparedness Level IV BI East FDRA 54-63 West FDRA 55-63

1 WL Eng 1 WL Eng available 1 IA Module available 1 ICT-3/4 Helitack available Retardant available Based upon point of origin, notify DNRC or appropriate RFD.

1 WL Eng 1 WL Eng available 1 IA Module available 1 ICT-4 Helitack available Retardant available

1 IA Module, Helitack available or SMJs 1 IA Module, Helitack or SMJs available 1 ICT-5

Preparedness Level V BI East FDRA 64+ West FDRA 64+

1 WL Eng 1 IA Module 1 WL Eng available 1 ICT-3/4 Helitack available Retardant available ATGS available Based upon point of origin, notify DNRC or appropriate RFD.

1 WL Eng 1 IA Module 1 WL Eng available 1 ICT-4 Helitack available Retardant available ATGS available

2 IA Module, Helitack available or SMJs SMJs available 1 ICT-5

50

SEVERITY Fire Severity funding is the authorized use of suppression operations funds for extraordinary preparedness activities required due to:

• Preparedness plans indicate the need for additional preparedness/suppression resources; • Anticipated fire activity will exceed the capabilities of local resources; • Fire season either starts earlier or lasts longer than planned in the fire management plan • An abnormal increase in fire potential or danger not planned for in existing preparedness plans.

Federal severity requests are partially based on the 90th and 97th percentiles derived from year-round climate data and are not related to historical fire occurrence. These climatological breakpoints are used for budgetary decisions by federal agencies.

MT DNRC will enter into discussion upon reaching Preparedness Level 3.

All other levels are fire business thresholds used to set specific fire program levels (Adjective Fire Danger Rating, Staffing Levels, Dispatch Response Levels, etc.) and are statistically related to occurrence of fires over the fire season (May –October) (2014 Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation4 and 2013 Wildland Fire and Aviation Program Management and Operations Guide5)

The climatological percentiles used for budgetary decisions by Federal Agencies are:

• Lolo National Forest: ERC(G) 90th and 97th percentile based on year round data from 1999 - 2013. • Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes: ERC(G), 90th and 97th percentile

o CE based on year round data from 2005 – 2013. Year round data prior to 2005 for Ronan RAWS was not available.

o CW based on year round data from 2001 -2013. Year round data prior to 2001 for Hot Springs RAWS was not available.

LDE LDW CE CW

percentile ERC(G) ERC(G) ERC(G) ERC(G) 90th 54 54 52 69 97th 64 65 62 80

When severity resource dollars are available and used in firefighting efforts staffing of personnel and resources follows these recommendations:

CSKT Severity needs are determined on a seasonal basis, for more information contact Jack Currie, Ronan Fire Dispatch Center Manager, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes

DNRC Severity information can be referenced through the Southwestern Land Office Fire Mobilization Guide. Contact Southwestern Land Office Fire Program Manager.

4 U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S Department of Agriculture. 2014. Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations, pgs. 10-3 - 10-4. Produced by the Federal Fire and Aviation Task Group, National Interagency Fire Center, Boise, ID. 5 U.S Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs. 2013. Wildland Fire and Aviation Program Management and Operations Guide, pgs. 4-18 – 4-19, 4-33.

51

Lolo National Forest Severity Resources:

Preparedness Level PL III High PL IV Very High PL V Extreme Three day Average

40-53 54-63

64-+ East FDRA ERC

West FDRA ERC 40-54 55-63 64-+ CWN Helicopter(s) IA, EA and multiple

starts IA, EA and multiple starts

Preposition as needed

SEAT IA, EA and multiple starts

IA, EA and multiple starts

Preposition at Plains

Air Attack Platform + ATGS



Preposition at Plains

Wildland Engine Modules IA Modules

Boost Districts as needed to meet Draw Down Level

Boost Districts as needed to meet Draw Down Level

Preposition on Districts based upon Severity

Dozers, Lowboys, Excavators, Tenders

Confirm availability and location

Preposition on Districts based upon Severity

52

PREPAREDNESS PLAN The CSKT Preparedness Plan is available upon request; please contact Jack Currie, Ronan Fire Dispatch Center Manager, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes

The Lolo N.F. has pre defined Management Action Points (MAPs) based on Planning Level. These MAPs are broad in scale and apply to the entire Forest. They are relative to the amount of fire activity the Forest is experiencing and when an escalation or alternative of management actions is warranted. MAPs anchored to a specific geographic location are defined at the tactical level and are discussed in the Lolo Wildfire Guide.

Preparedness Level Management Action Points

PL III East FDRA ERC 40-53 West FDRA ERC 40-54

• Transition from 5-day coverage to 7-day coverage: Transition to 7-day coverage will be determined after PP 13, maintain Minimum Draw down Levels and work with Dispatch Centers to identify resources available for Off-Forest assignments to support other Geographic Area resource request.

• Following Lightning: DO’s order aerial detection from the Aircraft Desk by 9am through Aircraft desk.

• Single Unplanned Ignition: Execute the appropriate FMZ response based upon the Single Incident Preplanned Dispatch Guide.

• Multiple Ignitions: Forest and District FDOs, and the Dispatch Centers will consult to set incident priorities. After consultation, shift, preposition, and order appropriate resources to meet the next day’s Preparedness Level.

• Contingency Resources: Dispatch Centers identify as needed to support prescribed fire burning across the Forest.

• Transition from PL III to PL IV: Forest will order a Prevention and Education Specialist to manage and coordinate restrictions and closures with our cooperators.

PL IV East FDRA ERC 55-63 West FDRA ERC 55-63 and PL V East FDRA ERC 64+ West FDRA ERC 64+

Preparedness Levels IV & V • Daily detection flights will automatically be scheduled • Flights will continue daily across the whole forest or until a DDO or DFMO

deems them no longer necessary on their district • Order a second aircraft for coverage as needed • Single Unplanned Ignition: Execute the appropriate FMZ response based

upon the Single Incident Preplanned Dispatch Guide. • Multiple Ignitions: Forest and District FDOs, and the Dispatch Centers will

consult to set incident priorities. After consultation, shift, preposition, and order appropriate resources to meet the next day’s Preparedness Level.

• Transition from PL IV to PL V: Forest and District FDOs, and the Dispatch Centers will consult order and preposition severity resources to best meet the Forest needs.

53

PUBLIC INFORMATION: RESTRICTIONS & CLOSURES The Southwest Zone has a Restrictions and Closures Plan that is written in cooperation with all Interagency Partners included in this Fire Danger Operating Plan.

The Restrictions and Closures Plan is located on the fsweb http://fsweb.lolo.r1.fs.fed.us/fire/prevention2/prevention.shtml and is otherwise available upon request.

VI. OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES

STATION CATALOG MAINTENANCE The Confederated Salish and Kootenai RAWS station maintenance is carried out through contract with Forest Technology Systems (FTS).

The five RAWS stations owned and managed by the Lolo N.F. have over sight by the MDC Intelligence Officer. The MDC Intelligence Officer will ensure the Station Catalogs are current and accurate. Physical Maintenance of the RAWS will be managed through the Fire Danger Technical Group.

DAILY SCHEDULE

QUALITY CONTROL STATION DATA The Intelligence Officer at the Missoula Dispatch Center will access WIMS daily for weather observations.. Weather readings for the previous 24 hours will be checked by looking at hourly readings (DRAWS fastpath in WIMS) for abnormal or inappropriate readings, possibly indicating instrument errors. Observations will be emailed out to the Forest Fire Managers.

ENTER OBSERVATIONS All observations will be for the hourly weather record closest to 13:00 hours. For stations with transmit times more than :30 minutes after the hour, that will be a 12 hour reading in WIMS, all rest will be a 13 hour reading in WIMS. State of the Weather will be selected based on conditions at 14:00 hours (daylight savings time) for the majority of the Fire Danger Rating Area the station represents, not necessarily just the station. The Wet Flag will be set to “Y” when appropriate, as described in the latest WIMS Technote or Help Desk guidance. Tasks associated with selecting an observation should be accomplished by 15:00 hours each day, so that the observations will be available to the Missoula National Weather Service, so they can enter trend forecasts, therefore allowing forecasted indices to be available for the next day.

DIDX and DOBS will be downloaded from WIMS daily after forecasted indices become available. This information will be emailed along with the Weather Observations. Fire managers will work with their Prevention & Education Specialists to make sure the Adjective rating boards located throughout the forest are current and updated.

WEATHER STATION MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE An individual from each Ranger District and the Confederated and Salish and Kootenai Tribes has been identified as members of the Fire danger Technical Group. A MT DNRC individual has not been identified because they do not

54

http://fsweb.lolo.r1.fs.fed.us/fire/prevention2/prevention.shtml

manage any of the Remote Automated Weather Stations used in this analysis. The members of the Fire Danger Technical Group are responsible for coordinating with the Intelligence Officer for maintenance and replacement of RAWS equipment and parts. Appropriate training and team support will be provided to and by members of this technical working group.

VII. PROGRAM NEEDS

WEATHER STATIONS SITES The Lolo NF RAWS citing, maintenance, and data management is to be evaluated annually by the Fire Danger Technical Group to ensure the stations are meeting the intent and needs of fire danger rating and weather forecasting.

The Confederated Salish and Kootenai RAWS station maintenance is carried out through contract with Forest Technology Systems (FTS).

COMPUTER EQUIPMENT NEEDS No computer needs have been identified at this time, however if some do arise they will be provided for.

TRAINING The Lolo NF development of future Fire Danger Technical Specialists will be part of the Training Program forest-wide. It takes a number of years to become proficient as a technical specialist, developing technical specialists requires forethought so that they are available with the need.

Individuals needing training to maintain the RAWS stations will be provided that training. The Intelligence Officer will be provided the training necessary to be proficient in the Weather Information Management System (WIMS) and Fire Family Plus.

The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes have sent three employees to the weather stations maintenance Training in 2014. This knowledge supports the contract carried out through FTS

Experienced Managers are needed to interpret NFDRS data appropriately and to make the best decisions. Managers at all levels and staff departments within the Fire Organization need some understanding of NFDRS. S-491 is recommended for all area managers. One employee from each dispatch center should have attended s-591 Advanced National Fire Danger Rating Systems.

POCKET CARDS SEASONAL FIRE DANGER TRACKING The Lolo NFand MT DNRC combines efforts to generate Fire Danger Pocket Card for Fire Fighter Safety. They are a two sided page including a chart each Fire Danger Rating Area. The pocket card is posted on the Lolo Fire Management web page.

The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes will generate Fire Danger Pocket Card for Fire Fighter Safety for both of their fire Danger Rating Areas.

55

VIII. APPENDICES All Fire Family Plus Analysis Outputs used in this document are available by request.

57

fire danger operating 2015 2016 - wfas...fire danger operating plan 2015 – 2016 us f orest s...

Documents