FSH 5109.19 - FIRE MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS AND PLANNING HANDBOOK 11/82 WO 34 - ANALYSIS OF MANAGEMENT SITUATION. The analysis of the management situations involves (1) an interdisciplinary assessment of current management practices, resource production capabilities, and special considerations on a National Forest; (2) an identification of management opportunities to improve upon current production of goods, services, and uses; and (3) screening of the identified range of alternative prescriptions and management levels to focus subsequent indepth analysis on a manageable number of well defined Forest plan alternatives. Fire management considerations that are integral to these tasks are developed generally in fire management analysis level I based on historic costs and effects. Where more specific estimates of potential fire program costs are needed, they are developed in fire management analysis level II. The basis for fire program decision, including analyses done to support them, should be clearly documented in the planning records. As a minimum, where fire program cost will be significant to the analysis, estimates (per acre) will need to be developed for the benchmark levels and plan alternatives required for land management planning (FSM 1920). Costs should be developed consistent with RPA requirements. Where there is no significant difference in the fire protection program appropriate for two or more of these, a single cost estimate may be used. 34.1 - Fire Management Situation. Fire management considerations for the analysis of capability and suitability are discussed in sections 34.11 and .12. 34.11 - Natural Role of Fire. The natural role of fire in local ecosystems and the perceived changes induced by man should be evaluated. These will require identification of the natural, premanagement fire regimes, and the changes in those regimes which past management practices may have caused. Expected changes in capability to produce under current and projected fire regimes should be identified where an area could be affected by intensive management practices that alter the fire regime and affect fire hazard. 34.12 - Recent Fire Activity. Fire history information should be examined to assess trends in fire occurrence, fire size, intensity, spatial distribution, and observed effects. The likely effects of historical and current resource management activities on fire occurrence, size, and impact should also be addressed. This portion of the analysis involves summarizing recent past fire activity (number of fires and acreage burned). To facilitate summarization of recent fire activity information, use FIREPLAN programs FPL-RETRIEVE through FPL-FREQ which produce summary tables of historical numbers of fires and acres burned by standard fire size classes and intensity levels for user specified areas and statistical cause categories. The summaries are produced for data from the fire occurrence period selected, and may include a tabular display by two periods and the decade as a whole where 10 years are used. 34.2 - Fire Management Practices. This section of the analysis includes evaluation of past fire management activities and their costs and effectiveness, as well as identification of possible conflicts with resource management objectives. The role of fire management in the protection of structures and improvements should also be identified. Fire program costs (FFP and FFF) should be tabulated for an appropriate number of years to adequately reflect the current level of the fire management organization, activities and outputs. The annual average will be the input to the no-charge alternative, and may be used to estimate future costs for other alternatives where fire program requirements will not significantly change. 34.3 - Proposed Management Prescriptions. Responsiveness to projections of public demand for goods, services, and uses, as well as public issues and management concerns, is a basic requirement of the Forest plan. Additional opportunities for improving resource productivity may also be addressed. Fire management consideration may be critical to the analysis of identified opportunities. Both positive and negative fire effects on capabilities to produce goods, services, and uses, must be explicitly addressed in proposed management prescriptions. Some of the noteworthy fire management considerations affecting the management of specific resources are discussed in sections 34.31 - .36. 34.31 - Fish and Wildlife. Fire has many potential implications related to wildlife habitat, and hence to wildlife program outputs. Generally, the longer term positive effects of fire on game habitat outweight immediate negative impacts. Maximizing fire protection within certain ecosystems can limit the kinds and amounts of outputs from wildlife management and decrease certain management opportunities. 34.32 - Range. The condition, long-term trend, and successional stage of rangelands is often related to fire occurrence and behavior. Expected range trends can also be related to fire management practices and the frequency and distribution of fires. Wildlife and livestock competition can be affected by fire use and fire management policies, and prescribed fire programs can affect the grazing and rotation system being employed or vice versa. 34.33 - Recreation. Fire occurrence can limit the amounts and kinds of areas available for certain types of recreation experiences. Visual resources can be enhanced, maintained, or degraded depending on fire management activities and their effects. Investments can also be affected. 34.34 - Timber. The role of fire in determining site productivity, preferred silvicultural treatments, stand stocking, species composition, and sustained yield should be analyzed. Additionally, the impact of various timber management activities on fire occurrence, fire behavior, and suppression effectiveness should be addressed. Fire considerations may also enter into the identification of timber-producing and non-timber-producing lands. 34.35 - Water, Soil, and Air. The analysis should consider the sensitivity of water, soil, and air resources to various levels of fire occurrence and fire behavior. For water, consider quality, peak volumes, offsite damage, and storage degradation. Fisheries habitat considerations are also interrelated. For soil, the role of fire in nutrient cycling might be considered, along with the relationship between fire frequency, soil loss, and site degradation. Air quality considerations, such as the tradeoffs between wildfire probability, prescribed fire use, and airshed characteristics, should be included. 34.36 - Wilderness. A primary area of concern for wilderness management involves the effects of fire occurrence, fire size, and fire behavior on the dynamics of local ecosystems. Maintenance of the natural ecosystem is an objective of wilderness management, and fire often plays an important role in many systems. A related concern is the impact of past fire exclusion on future fire behavior, and the possible need to use prescribed fire to restore system or areas to more natural conditions. 34.4 - Preliminary Screening of Management Prescriptions. In order to assess the feasibility of alternative production possibilities for various goods, services, and uses and to focus on subsequent indepth analysis on a few select alternatives, a wide range of comprehensive management prescriptions are to be examined by the interdisciplinary team. In addition to the general resource management fire management relationships identified earlier, there are four specific opportunities for the fire management involvement in the interdisciplinary formulation and screening of comprehensive prescriptions using FORPLAN. They involve (1) input of fire program costs, (2) incorporation of prescribed fire and associated air quality considerations, (3) examination of fuel treatment (fire hazard reduction) opportunities, and (4) integration of expected wildfire effects, under various management prescriptions, into the determination of resource production and cost coefficients to be used in the Forest analysis. 34.41 - Fire Program Costs. For each prescription, the efficient fire program level which meets management direction should be estimated and expressed on a per acre basis. For allocation and scheduling purposes of FORPLAN, the costs provided should be Forest-level expected FFP and FFF costs; that is, exclusive of Regional and national fire program budgeted costs. For budget determination, only the Forest FFP dollars would be used. The accuracy of these costs, and related analysis appropriate to derive them, will be a direct function of the: 1. Size and complexity of the fire-management job and budget. 2. Sensitivity of the fire program and outputs and costs to differences in proposed prescriptions and forest plan alternatives. 3. Sensitivity of total management program costs to differences in fire program costs. In many cases, historic forest costs (level I analysis) will be satisfactory as the basis for estimating those in the future for some or all resource management alternatives. Where proposed management direction for resource practices or targets under candidate prescriptions will result in a significant departure from historic fire program levels or activities, a more analytical deviation of probable costs (and consequences) may be needed from a level II analysis. In carrying out such a detailed analysis, it should be noted that at this stage of the planning process, given the sensitivity of the overall planning model, it is neither necessary nor appropriate to attempt to determine precise program costs or most efficient program mix for all potential prescriptions. In many cases, a few (or even one) runs through the level II process using even rather low resolution data are sufficient to establish a baseline from which program costs for a number of alternatives can be estimated with reasonable accuracy. 34.42 - Prescribed Fire. Where prescribed fire is to be incorporated in prospective management prescriptions for a Forest management area either for fire hazard reduction or for the establishment, maintenance, or enhancement of resource values, a number of fire-related information elements are required. These include (1) burning costs estimates; (2) fire behavior; (3) fire effects and resource value changes; (4) associated changes in fire hazard; and (5) logistic, legal, and environmental constraints on prescribed fire operations. 1. Estimates of the costs of prescribed burning are formulated on a per-acre basis and are handled in FORPLAN just as any other treatment costs for the benefiting function would be handled. 2. Expected changes in fire hazard resulting from the proposed burning treatment, together with the other treatments comprising an overall management prescription for the analysis area, must be identified and incorporated in the appraisal of resource production capability for FORPLAN. 3. Operational constraints include the availability of funds, manpower, and equipment; legal requirements; and environmental consideration, such as soil stability and water and air qualify should be formulated explicitly in the form required by FORPLAN. 34.43 - Fuel Treatment. Vegetation and fuel treatment practices may be written into some of the prescriptions to be examined in Forest analysis where issues, concerns, or opportunities have been identified in one or more of the following: 1. Reducing natural fuel buildup. 2. Establishing a vegetative mosaic to break up large uniform blocks of hazardous natural or prior activity fuels. 3. Maintaining or changing seral or climax vegetation stages. 4. Establishing fuelbreaks in accordance with planned preattack needs. 5. Maintaining or improving the level of resource outputs. Treatment costs, direct resource impacts, effectiveness in reducing fire hazard and operation constraints are identified and developed for use in FORPLAN through interdisciplinary involvement. The economic efficiency of proposed fuel treatment programs must be quantified (sec. 42.3). Costs must be attributed to the benefiting functional program. 34.44 - Estimating Wildfire Effects. The likely resource changes, both positive and negative, due to expected wildfire activity should be taken into account in the development through the interdisciplinary process of production capability estimates for each of the prescriptions to be examined. The probability of wildfires at various intensity levels, together with associated effects on resources, may have a strong influence on the quantity of goods, services, and uses that will ultimately be derived. In estimating the likely wildfire impacts on resource production, information concerning both fire effects and anticipated fire activity will be needed. 1. Fire Effects. The expected change in resource outputs per burned acre by fire size class and intensity level should be developed individually for each resource for which outputs are planned and identified for each analysis area in the Forest plan alternative. Reflect only the difference between outputs that would be realized (and utilized) without a fire and those that can be derived or salvaged after a fire. Account for both beneficial and detrimental fire effects (both increases and decreases in resource outputs over time). 2. Fire Activity. The expected burned acreage in the analysis area (by fire size class and intensity level) is established for each alternative examined. These estimates are developed through consideration of past fire activity, the likely fire occurrence rate and anticipated fuel conditions associated with a given alternative or prescription, and expected fire suppression capability. If more detail is required, or historical data is insufficient for estimating future effects of alternatives being addressed in FORPLAN, the level II analysis should be carried out to provide data of the needed resolution. The overall expected change in production of a given resource is then obtained by multiplying the per acre production changes developed in items 1, by the corresponding expected burned acreage values and then summing over all fire size classes and intensity levels. The coefficients in the resource production functions used in FORPLAN are then adjusted to reflect these expected changes. 35 - FORMULATION OF FOREST PLAN ALTERNATIVES. The fire manager may need to evaluate several fire management program options in order to assist the interdisciplinary team in the preparation of technically and economically feasible forest plan alternatives. Fire management analysis level II would be used to estimate costs and fire effects of the different options. When management alternatives have been selected from FORPLAN management prescriptions, the interdisciplinary team must determine whether each alternative is reasonable, feasible, and capable of achievement from the standpoint of fire management. As the first test of feasibility, the fire management specialist will compare the fire requirements, identified by the interdisciplinary team, with the current situation; that is, fire regime, fire history, 10-year occurrence, of fire level I analysis. In addition, the fire specialist will display the legal, policy, and political considerations which may not have constrained individual prescriptions in FORPLAN, but when aggregated into a management alternative, have management implications. For example, smoke from any allowable small prescription fires may be intolerable in the aggregate. 35.1 - Reasonable Range of Alternatives. The range of options evaluated might vary from a description of the current fire management situation (level I) to a comprehensive analysis of each land management alternative with one or more fire management options (level II). The number of options considered will vary with the fire management complexity (workload) on each Forest. It is anticipated that the least complex Forests, from a fire-management standpoint, will require only a description of the current situation, while the most complex Forests may require more detailed evaluation of several mixes and program levels within each Forest plan alternative. However, be alert to take advantage of situations where the results of evaluation of a program option can be applied to several land management alternatives. Fire program options should represent significant differences in activity mixes, and/or kinds/amounts of forces (for example, aviation-oriented versus ground-oriented initial action; major prevention effort with reduced IA versus major emphasis on IA). The effects of small changes, such as adding or deleting only 2 or 3 units, usually cannot be reliably evaluated in this stage of the analysis due to the nature of the simulation model. 35.2 - Fire Management Standards and Guidelines. As each prescription or Forest plan alternative, which includes resource outputs and values, is formulated, the objectives and outputs must be translated into fire management direction consisting of appropriate standards and guidelines for use in development of fire management program options. Management direction will be provided by the interdisciplinary team for each separate fire management analysis zone (FMAZ) or management areas on the Forest; several such geographic units may have similar direction. Fire management direction may also be similar for some FMAZ for several Forest plan alternatives. Management direction must specify the resource practices, objectives, and production goals for the FMAZ and may include tentative targets for fire intensity, smoke management, or other special protection considerations where essential to meet specific resource management constraints. Fire management direction may include general fire planning guides for a management area in the form of long term annual average numbers of fires or annual average burned acreages by fire size and intensity which, from a resource standpoint, would not adversely affect attainment of resource targets. Maximum size objectives for individual fires, such as the previous 10-acre objective, may be established as planning evaluation criteria only for those areas where fire management direction clearly and specifically defines and supports such a requirement as essential to meet a resource management objective. This restriction is necessary, because the use of fire size constraints as inputs to the fire program evaluation precludes the use of economic criteria as a factor. 36 - EVALUATION OF FIRE PROGRAM OPTIONS. Fire management analysis level II is used to estimate the effects of each proposed fire management program option. The process integrates fire prevention, detection, suppression, and fuel treatment activities and expresses both immediate and longterm effects in the same format used to display management direction for the fire management program. This permits comparison of the management direction to the anticipated effects of each proposed fire management program option. This comparison is also the basis for creation of different fire management responses to management direction at the most economically efficient level. Costs include annual operating and maintenance costs, expected suppression costs, one time investments in fuels treatment, and expected value changes. Both positive and negative effects are calculated to determine net value changes. Nondollar values for such items as public safety are considered subjectively. In making these determinations of resource value changes, consideration must be limited to those resources or values associated with planned outputs identified for each area by the interdisciplinary team. In all cases where fire is a significant factor in the management situation, a sufficient number of fire management mixes and expenditure levels must be evaluated to be certain the minimum cost plus net value change option is identified. The interdisciplinary team will evaluate dollar and nondollar resource value changes and recommend the best fire management program option for each Forest plan alternative tested. This information may be combined with social and political factors to decide which fire management program best meets the Forest's needs. 36.1 - Minimum Requirements. Forests which had no significant fire management issues, concerns, or opportunities identified will, as a minimum, confirm and document that there is little probability that fire and fire management programs under a Forest alternative(s) will have a significant adverse impact upon resource outputs and environmental values, or significantly influence decisions regarding resource management. 36.2 - Procedures. Forests not performing an analytical evaluation of the effects of fire management options will prepare a brief subjective analysis of probable fire related effects, and document these effects. Forests carrying out the quantitative evaluation process (level II fire analysis) will document for the planning process record the following outputs for the preferred (best meets fire management selection criteria) fire management option for each Forest plan alternative: 1. The mix of fire management activities that make up the preferred fire management option. 2. Fire management direction. 3. The program budget level, including expected annual FFF costs. 4. The expected net value change. 36.3 - Time Period To Be Evaluated. The cost and net value change data for the fire program options evaluated for the selected Forest plan alternative shall be based upon Forest conditions during the first decade of the planning period. Where significant changes in fuels, access, fire occurrence, or fire management direction will result during this time period, estimated conditions at the midpoint should be used or the level II analysis. The level III (plan implementation) shall be based upon current conditions. Where fuels treatment which would involve fire management funds is proposed, the potential efficiency of the overall program shall be evaluated using conditions as they will exist either (1) at the completion of the treatment or (2) after 50 years, whichever is earlier. The analysis consists of comparing the present value of the current (pretreatment) C+NVC with that of the posttreatment or 50 year C+NVC plus the average annual fire management fund cost of the fuel treatment work. The posttreatment C+NVC would be based upon the fire program and fire effects appropriate for the post-treatment conditions. FIREPLAN program FPL-FUELS is used to calculate the present values for the comparison of the alternative programs to determine which is more efficient. In some cases, it may be necessary for fire program cost and effects estimates to be developed for the evaluation of Forest plan alternatives based upon expected future Forest conditions under each of those alternatives. This would be appropriate when one or more alternatives will significantly affect future fire program costs differently than other alternatives, and the cost or effects will be a factor in alternative selection. Comparisons of future costs and net value changes will always be made on their present values. 37 - SELECTION OF FOREST PLAN ALTERNATIVE 37.1 - Minimum Requirements. Where fire management issues, concerns, or opportunities are of little or no significance on the Forest, documentation of the fire management program for the selected Forest plan alternative will be limited to a brief tabulation of program costs, organization, and important activities. 37.2 - Procedures. Use the level I and level II fire analysis outputs as appropriate to document the fire management program for the selected alternative(s) for the Forest plan. 37.3 - Forest Plan Record Content for Fire Management. The Forest planning record will include the following information that responds to the Forest land management plan decisions: 1. A reference to the disposition of the fire management issues and concerns and their relationship to the resulting management direction. 2. A description of the fire management direction and the plan's expected response, by management area, to include: a. Tables showing the expected average annual performance for the selected fire management option for the first decade. (Expected average annual areas burned by fire size and intensity, and expected costs and net value changes. These become targets for the purpose of monitoring plan performance over time.) b. Associated prescribed fire plans and practices developed for the management areas. 3. Proposed level and mix of the fire management activities for the selected option for the first decade including cost. 4. Calculate the FMEI (MIH Z91) for the selected option, based on the option FFP (less proposed fuels investment), expected annual FFF, and expected annual net value change for the next planning period. 5. Monitoring and evaluation requirements. This includes periodic evaluations of the quality of performance such as done with program and activity reviews. It must also require annual comparison of outputs with planned pars and calculation of the annual FMEI. 6. Form FS-5100-2, Integrated Fire Control Organization and Financial Plan, and/or FS-1930-1, Multi-year RPA/PD&B System Plan, documenting the components of the program mix for the selected option. 7. Worksheets 1-17 (plus 18-21 for designated representative Forests) for each option evaluated. 38 - PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 38.1 - Minimum Requirements. The amount of the analysis needed to develop the fire management action plan to implement the planned fire management program will depend upon the complexity of the fire management workload on the planning unit and the level of detail which has been developed in the fuels, prevention, suppression and detection analysis processes. Where the level I analysis has provided sufficient detail to identify operational requirements for program element implementation and project planning, no further action beyond final documentation in operational plans and formats as directed by regional instructions will be required. Where level II analysis has been carried out, the program mix and level identified must form the basis for the implemented program. In complex fire situations further analysis may be necessary to establish more specifically the most effective precise composition, such as location and timing of program activities previously identified. 38.2 - Procedures. The development, evaluation and selection of fire management program elements which have taken place in level I and level II analyses provides specific fire management program direction and associated budget requirements for its implementation, to meet selected forest planning goals and objectives. This direction is then translated in more complex situations into the organization necessary to implement and carry out that program through the level III analysis. Accomplishment is through short-term tactical and operational project level guidance, (in conformity with the Forest plan) and definition of the personnel, equipment, facilities, location, timing and annual budgets for all activities. These will be documented, and as a minimum, entered into the program development and budget process through either Form FS-1930-1, Multi-year RPA/PD&B System Plan, or Forms FS-5100-2; Integrated Fire Control Organization and Financial Plan, and FS-1900-4, Project Work Plan, as specified by Regional direction. In the latter case, ADVENT and MIH codes will still be used to identify activities to ensure uniformity. Examples of additional analysis which may need to be carried out at level III are: 1. Conform the program to the actual budget. 2. Develop guidelines for seasonal manning periods for primary fire action resources through analysis of expected fire spread rates and intensity levels. 3. More precisely define the most effective configuration of the efficient initial action organization alternative (location, dispatch rules, precise suppression resource "mix", etc.). 4. Analyze outputs to develop specific daily personnel requirements for management area and the unit as a whole by fire intensity level. 39 - MONITORING AND EVALUATION. The Forest will monitor program performance, and annually briefly document the results. The evaluation will estimate how well the objectives of the plan are being met, and measure the deviation from the expected costs and outputs of the fire management analysis process. This measurement and evaluation must recognize that planned program performance (based on the analysis process) is in terms of expected average annual outputs' actual performance each year will vary from this due to weather and other natural, variable factors. Over time this variation should, if the plan is valid, average out to the planned performance. Data for this evaluation will be collected to the same level of detail and resolution as that used in the Forest planning process. Form FS-5100-29, Individual Fire Report, data will be maintained in accordance with FSH 5109.14. The evaluation will include at least the following: 1. Monitor the changes in fire activity (fire occurrence, and acres burned by size and intensity) and compare with the predictions derived in the plan for that area, where fuel conditions have been altered by management practices. 2. Show comparison of the prevention program projections for person-caused fires, with trends evidenced by the fire occurrence statistics. 3. Evaluate the adequacy of the fire management organization to meet the expected fire frequency and size distribution at the expected cost and net value change levels as projected for the selected option. These should be compared both on an annual and a cumulative basis for the planning period. 4. Determine the adequacy of the values change analysis by comparing the reported annual value change from the individual fire reports with the projected analysis.