Fire Management Notes

44 Pages·2004·2.01 MB·English

United States Fire
Departmentof
Agriculture
Forest service
Management
Notes
Volume52, NO.2
1991
I
'I
> '
,
"
..~,-,
",--'
<•
-,
-~
_.
,
Fire United States
Departmentof
Agriculture
Management
Forest Service
Notes
An internationalquarterly periodical Volume 52, NO.2
devoted to forest fire management 1991
Contents 19 SummerConference: Forest FireLookout
Association
3 Aviation in Fire Management: Its Beginning in 1919
27 Technical Fire Management Training
and Today
Reid M. Kenady and Laurie Perrett
Fred A. Fuchs
29 Health Hazards of Smoke
7 Mark 1IIAerial Ignition: AField Perspective
Dick Mangan
John Fort
37 Field Use of Improved Airtankers and Retardant
10 Workforce Diversity Projects: Creativity in
Tanks
Recruitment
Dave Nelson
Elizabeth Kalish and Brenden Tu
38 ATribute to Smokejumpers: Dedication of the
13 CDF's Helicopter Program: What's Happening
National Wildland Firefighters Memorial
ArthurH. Trask
Tracey Nimlos and Timothy Eldridge
15 Fire BehaviorTraining-a Look at Some Upcoming
43 Rebuilding FEPP Engines: A Nebraska Innovation
Changes
Improves Quality
Donald W. Carlton
Eric J. Rasmussen
22 A Fire Protection Analysis for the Beaver Creek
Watershed: A Technical Fire Management Final Special Feature
Project
Thomas A. Wordell 20 Retired Firefighting Aircraft Go on Display
FredA.Fuchs
30 Improving Airtanker Delivery Performance
Charles W. George and Fred A. Fuchs Fire ManagementNotes ispublished bythe ForestServiceof the United Slates
DepartmentofAgriculture,Washington, DC.TheSecretaryofAgriculture hasdetermined
thatthepublicationofthisperiodicalisnecessaryinthetransactionofthepublicbusiness
requiredbylawofthisDepartment.
40 The Heavy-Lift Helicopter and Fire Retardant Drops
atthe Stormy FireComplex SubscriptionsmaybeobtainedfromtheSuperintendentofDocuments,U.S.Government
Printingonce,Washington,DC20402.
Lynn R. Biddison
SendsuggestionsandarticlestoChief,ForestService(Alln: FireManagementNotes),
P.O.Box96090,U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture,Washington, DC20090--6090.
EdwardR.Madigan,Secretary FrancisR.Russ
Short Features U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture GeneralManager
F.DaleRobertson,Chief DorisN.Celarier >.
ForestService Editor
5 Seven Sharp Sherpas-"New" Planes Soaring in
l.A.Amicarella,Director
Popularity FireandAviationManagement
John Hecht
U.s.DepartmentofAgricultureprograms,services,andemploymentareopentoallonthe
basisofmerit,withoutregardtorace,color,sex,religion,nationalorigin,age,ordisability.
6 Keeping Track of FEPP: Internal Control Any person who believes he or she has been discriminated against in any U.S.
Department01Agriculture-relatedactivity should immediatelycontacttheSecretaryof
Francis R. Russ Agriculture,Washington,DC20250.
Disclaimer:The useoftrade, firm, orcorporationnames inthis publicationisforthe
informationand convenienceofthereader. Such usedoes notconstituteanofficial
endorsement ofanyproductorservicebytheU.S.DepartmentofAgriculture. Individual
FrontCo~;Tanker27,thefirstP-3Atobemodiliedasanairtanker,startedservice authorsareresponsiblelorthetechnicalaccuracy01themateriel presented inFire
in1990. ManegemerltNotes.
2 Fire Management Notes
Aviation in Fire Management:
Its Beginning in 1919 and Today
Fred A. Fuchs
Assistant director, USDA Forest Service, Fire and Aviation Management, Washington, DC
This year the USDA Forest Serv Sixteen years after the first air ment and the military services and
ice is celebrating the lOOth plane flight at Kitty Hawk in 1903, the support of the General Services
anniversary of the beginning of the the Forest Service began using air Administration (GSA) and its Per
National Forest System. Twenty craft in support of wildfire sonal Property Management Division
eight years after the first forest suppression. Branch headed by StaffDirector Stan
reserve, the Yellowstone Park Tim Duda. All military excess property is
ber Land Reserve, was set aside in transferred to Federal agencies
1891 and 16 years after the airplane through the GSA.
first flew in 1903 at Kitty Hawk. Seven C-23A's (Sherpas), twin Another exciting accomplishment
NC, the Forest Service began using turboprop aircraft used to support the in aircraft improvement is the
aircraft in support of wildfire sup forces at North Atlantic Treaty Orga "remanufacture" of the last two For
pression. This fledgling effort used nization's bases, were acquired as est Service DC-3's in operation. As
the U.S. Army Ninth Corps. com U.S. Air Force excess property in the DC-3's-the backbone of the
manded by Major Henry A. "Hap" 1990. The use of the Sherpas, pri smokejumper program for years
Arnold, to fly World War I Curtiss marily in the smokejumper program, aged and their piston engines became
IN-40's and de Havilland DH-4B's will increase fire suppression effec less reliable, most were replaced with
on daily detection patrols. In 1919, tiveness and reduce costs: Operating de Havilland Twin Otters. The Twin
during the first year of air patrol, the the Sherpas. which carry a large Otters, which were unable to carry a
dozen of these aircraft used in Cal payload, is less expensive than using 20-person fire crew or as many
ifornia from Mt. Lassen to the contract operators' airplanes. That smokejumpers as a DC-3, did not
Mexican border discovered 550 fires. the fireflghting community now uses completely meet the needs of the
The patrol team reported their fire the Sherpas. C-130A's, and P-3A's smokejumper program. After an
information to fire control officers by is based in good part on the streogth extensive IO-year search for a DC-3
parachute or carrier pigeon in the of communication between Forest replacement aircraft. it was decided
field. From this promising beginning, Service Fire and Aviation Manage- that modernization ofthe DC-3 was
aviation has grown to occupy a major
fire suppression role.
What's New in Aircraft in the
1990's
Several new and exciting equip
ment developments in aviation for
fire management are taking place
right now. The older, piston-engined
airplanes, now difficult to maintain
because parts are in short supply, are
being replaced with turbine-powered
airplanes. In the 1990 fire season,
the Forest Service extensively used
four Lockheed C-130A's, two Lock
heed P-3A's. and the S-2F with a
Marsh turbine conversion-the''third
generation" of turbine-powered air
tankers in firefighting service. Closeup viewofde Havilland DH-4 onfire detection patrol (1919).
1991 Volume 52, Number 2 3
the best option. The two remanufac
tured aircraft with modem turboprop
engines, aircraft systems, and rebuilt
structures are operating this year in
McCall, 10, and Missoula, MT.
The 1919 Aviation Goals and
Evaluation Criteria Still Apply
As we entered the 1990's-the
eighth decade of aviation in support
of fire management activities-it is
interesting to note that no matter how
much technology has advanced, the
basic policy questions in aviation for
fire management that were asked in
1919 are still asked. Aviation uses
found safe, efficient, and effective in
1919 continue; however, uses that
failed in anyone of these areas have
been abandoned. For example, the Pilotand copilot indeHavilland DH-4 prepared/orfire detectionfttghs(1920),
1919 air fire patrol's work was
judged to be effective (550 fires elusive-it is a challenge that we
reported), efficient (compared favora cannot and do not give up on. On
bly with alternate methods in dollar August 30, 1991, Dr. Richard
and time costs), and safe enough, Jensen, Director of the Aviation Psy
although several accidents and chology Laboratory of Ohio State
fatalities took place. University, began an independent
Of the safety, efficiency, and study on Forest Service internal flight
effectiveness goals, safety is by far operations. Dr, Jensen's findings will
the most frustrating and difficult to set forth alternative methods and
achieve. The standards are not only techniques to enhance aviation safety
difficult to define, but also the per performance.
formance in meeting those standards.
As the use of aviation has increased, The New Equipment-Does It
safety has become an increasingly Help?
DeHavilland DH-4 onfire detectionpatrol
important concern. Through the last
nearMI. Hood (about 1921).
30 years, tremendous efforts have The new aviation tools such as
resulted in considerable reduction in tion use, safety performance is high; large helicopters and the turbine air
accidents, injuries, and fatalities. The in others, more effort is needed. tankers used in balance with many
questions of 1919 that fire managers Nearly 80 percent of fire support avi other firefighting tools improve fire
still ask about safety are: What is an ation accidents are caused by human fighting effectiveness and efficiency.
acceptable safety level? Can we error. Why do people make mistakes Their greater power reserve and flex
achieve an acceptable safety level at that cause accidents? Fire managers ibility also improve safety-but
a reasonable cost and, if so, how do search for the answer, but the search safety and containing its cost remain
we do it? Insome areas of fire avia- isoften frustrating and the answer our greatest challenge. -
4 Fire Management Notes
Seven Sharp Sherpas enhances the firefight because jumpers "The planes have about 4,500
"New" Planes Soaring in can betterorient themselves to the hours each," said Ed Blakeslee, For
conditions below." est Service aviation maintenance
Popularity
Four planes have been deployed specialist at BIFC. "That's equivalent
into the field this fire season. The togetting a mid~1980's car with
"New" airplanes added to the Forest Service has positioned its three 20,000 miles (32,186 km) on it."
smokejumperfleet in 1991 promise to planes at Redding, CA; Redmond, New, the Sherpas cost about $3
move more smokejumpers more effi OR; and Missoula, MT. BLM has sta million each. The estimated price of
ciently. The planes, known as tioned its plane at the AlaskaFire conversion to smokejurnper use from
"Sherpas," were transferred from the Service (near Fairbanks). The remain the freighter configuration is about
U.S. Air Force under the Federal ing three will beready by next year: $110,000 per plane. The conversions
Government's excess property two for BLM and one for the Forest are being handled by Western Air
program. Service. craft, in Boise, under a contract
Each twin-engine C-23ASherpa Eighteen C-23A's were produced administered by the Forest Service.
will carry 10to 12 smokejumpers and for the U.S. Air Force between To prepare for smokejumping duty,
their equipment. Fully loaded, the air 1982-84. They were used by the 10th windows, cabin insulation, and inte
craft's cruising range is around 450 Military Airlift Squadron stationed at rior cabin linings were installed. There
miles (724 Ian) at about 207 miles per Zweibrucken Air Force Base, located were some slight radio modifications,
hour (333 km/h). When used as a in what was then known as West Ger and installation of smokejumper
paracargo platform, itcan carry about many. The freighters serviced 22U.5. relatedequipment. The bodies were
5,000 pounds (2,268 kg) with 3 hours Air Force bases in northern Europe. repainted to thecolors of each agency.
of fuel.
"The planes are very well suited
for the smokejumperand paraeargo
missions," said Nels Jensen, USDA
Forest Service national aviation opera
tions officer at Boise Interagency Fire
Center (BIFC) and now a Sherpa
qualified pilot. "The performance is
better than anticipated, with a good
payload. It will save us a significant
numberof dollars in the future."
"Speed, visibility, and interior
room" are the advantages of the
Sherpa said Bureau of Land Manage
ment (BLM) BIFC smokejumper Ken
Franz, a 17-yearveteran with almost
400 jumps.
"Anything that delivers smoke
jumpersmore quickly will help stop
fires before they get big," he said.
"The Sherpa's interior space makes it
possible to be comfortable even with a
full fire load of cargo. The visibility
(of the terrain) through the windows
i, IThisarticlewaspreviouslypublishedinThe A BureauofLandManagement smoke
Flame, 8(I) 1and4, BoiseInteragencyFire jumper takes offfrom aC-23A Sherpa LandManagement demonstration May 1,
:Center, Boise, 10, during thejointForest Service-Bureau of 1991, nearBoise, IV.
i
1991 Volume 52, Number 2 5
The Sherpas have a rear ramp, sim (285 kmlh); cruising speed for Keeping Track of FEPP:
ilar to a C-130. However, the exit of smokejumpers--115 miles Internal Control
smokejumpers willexit through the per hour (185 kmIh); maximum
port door, as will the paracargo. (The rareof climb at sea Jevel-J,]80
State Foresters using loaned USDA I
door is removable and stored inside feet per minute (360 mlmin);
Forest Service Federal Excess
II the plane.) The rear ramp is used only service ceiling (maximum altitude Personal Property (FEPP) for fire I
for loading cargo, but unlike the aircraft can operate at, one
protection must have adequate internal
C-130, does notopen inthe air. engine out-12,9oo feet (3,932 controls to safeguard the equipment. I
I At the beginning of the season, 17 m).
Here are some actions the State
l pilots were certified for the aircraft. • Take-offdistance. ISA-3,420 I
Forester can take to keep better track
Each has a minimum of12 hours on feet (1,092 m); ISA plus 15
the Sherpa and logged an average of degrees-4,250 feet (1,295 m). of•FESPePp:arationof Duties. The many I'
'Il 7,000 hours total flying time. Of this • Landing distance. 3,650 feet duties connected with FEPP must be !
group, 11 will fly for the Forest Serv- (1,113 m).
separated in such awaythat no one
, iceand 6 for the BLM. • Range. (With maximum fuel l
person has enough FEPP
1. Compared with theequivalent con- reserves for 45-minute hold and
I responsibilities toobscure actions I
tract smokejumper aircraft, the 50-mile (81 km) diven;ion)-225
from management oversight. I
introduction of the Sherpa will bring miles (362 km) with 7,000 pound
Segmentingduties protects the
an estimatedsavings of $160,000 (3,175 kg) payload; 770 miles If
program.
annually per plane. with 5,000 pound (2,268 kg);
• State Reviews and Audits. The
fuel consumption (averagc)--130 I II
State Forester is encouraged to I
Technical Facts gallons per hour (492 Uh).
conduct State reviews and audits and
• External dimensions. Span-74
I !toparticipate with the USDA Forest
For abetteridea aboutthe feet, 8 inches (23 m); length-58 Service in Forest Service reviews.
capabilitiesof the C-23A Sherpa, here feet (18 m); rearloading door I • Property Identification. All If
are some of the basic technical facts height, 6 feet, 6 inches (2 m), I FEPP on loan should beidentified as
about the aircraft: and width, 6 feet, 6 inches I I Federal property with USDA Forest
• Manufacturer. The C-23A (2 m). , I Service furnished tags or labels or I'
Sherpa, manufactured by Shorts • Internal dimensions. Cabin II iI with a State identification system
Brothers PLC of Belfast, North maximum length, 29 feet, 10 approved by the USDA Forest
ern Ireland, is afreighter version inches (9.1 m); maximum width, Service.
of the Shorts SD3-30 aircraft It 6 feet, 6 inches (2 m); maximum • Training. Managers and users of
is named after a Himalayan peo height, 6 feet, 6 inches (2 m); FEPP must beadequately trained.
plc ''renowned for their volume (all-cargo), 1,260cubic
• Enforcement. When FEPP on
durability, industry, and loyalty feet (29 m'); baggage compart loan is lost, damaged, or stolen, the
while working in severe environ ment (nose), 45 cubic feet (1.3 State Forester must find out whether
mental conditions." rn'). State employees have been negligent
• Engines. The engine, manufac • Weights and loadings. Weight in the carrying out of their duties. If
tured by Pratt & Whitney, is empty (includes crew of two)- negligence is determined, the State
powered by twin-propellers and 15,370 pounds (6,972 kg); fuel employee should be subject to the
is capable of developing 1,167 (jet)-4,480pounds (128 kg)
State'sadministrative regulations. -
horsepower at 1,675 revolutions (670 gal or 2,536 L); maximum
per minute. payload-7,000 pounds (3,175
• Performance. Allowable usable kg).• Francis R. Russ, property
weight-22,400 pounds (10,161 management specialist, USDA Forest
kg); elevation-lO,ooofeet Service, Fire and Aviation
(3,048 rn); maximum cruising John Hecht, public affairs writer, Management, Washington, DC, and
speed-2lS miles per hour Bureau ofLandManagement, Boise chairman oftheFEPP Study Group
(351 kmlh); minimum cruising Interagency Fire Center, Boise, ID
speed-177 miles per hour
6 Fire Management Notes
Mark III Aerial Ignition: A Field Perspective
John Fort
Zone fire management officer andforester, u.s. Fish and Wildlife
Service, St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, St. Marks, FL
In the last 10years the use of Ifagency goals are to be met, then inject glycol into a ping-pong ball
aerial ignition in prescribed burning aerial ignition may be viewed as a containing potassium pennanganate.
has grown dramatically nationwide. cost ofdoing business. After the ball is injected with glycol,
It is now used extensively in the the machine kicks the ball out of the
lower Coastal Plain of the South helicopter. Thirty to forty-five sec
eastern United States. New land onds later the ball ignites in an
managers, however, have had little exothermic reaction.
3,500 acres (1,416 hal of helitorch
exposure to the use of aerial ignition,
burning and 90,000 acres (36,424 hal
and others are in need ofmore
of "ping-pong" (Premo Mark III Effective Use of Aerial Ignition
detailed information to better plan
aerial ignition device) burning on
and make budget decisions.
Federal land, all of it prescribed fir How can aerial ignition work
ing in the Coastal Plain. Ping-pong effectively in fuelsmanagement?
Fire History on the Lower Coastal
ignition has become the method of Answering that question requires tak
Plain
choice for most applications in the ing a step back and asking some
lower Coastal Plain. Helitorch is specific questions:
The lower Coastal Plain of the
used to some extent, most often on • When would aerial ignition be
Southeastern United States stretches
site preparation bums and understory more desirable than hand ignition?
roughly from Texas to Florida along
bums on wetter sites. • What must be considered inplan
the Gulf ofMexico and up the Atlan
Thc Mark III device, mounted ning for the ignition? .
tic Coast to Virginia. Historically,
inside the helicopter, is a 61-pound • How much does it cost?
this predominantly fire ecosystem
(26.8 kg) aluminum and stainless The following observations, which
burned in response tolightning
steel frame with motor, pumps, respond to these questions, are based
strikes and Native American fire sets.
chutes, and liquid tanks used to on my field experience and a general
Uplands, composed ofspecies of
southern yellow pine, burned fre
quently (2- to IO-yearintervals),
while the wetter sites (swamps and
stream areas) of bottomland hard
wood trees and midstory brush
normally burned in response to pro
longed drought (50- to lOO-year
intervals).
In this century, prescribed fire has
been extensively introduced in the
area. The primary method of ignition
has been by hand, and types of fire
included backing, head (both spot
and strip), and flanking. The onset of
aerial ignition has added a new
dimension to prescribed fire and
given the land manager another tool.
Firsthand Experience
My field positions over the last
A l-mile section ofMark IIIspotssettoback intopineflatwoods onSt. MarksNational Wildlife
10 years have allowed me to oversee Refuge andhead through marshgrass.
1991 Volume 52, Number 2 7
understanding of issues affecting pre Advantages of Aerial burning. Planning Is Critical, Hours of
scribed burning. They are not the Aerial ignition can allow goals to be planning should precede the brief
result of a controlled scientific study. met within additional constraints. period of implementation (ignition).
To Hand Burn or Ignite by Air. Aerial ignition allows the burnout of This means establishing the basics:
An oversimplification of when to use specified areas in a much shorter The weather and fuel parameters,
aerial ignition is almost whenever timeframe (hours instead of days) smoke criteria, and fireline sites.
(and wherever) one would handbum. than handbuming. Fewer people can Variables unique t~ aerial ignition
The manager is simply substituting cover more acres if the method of must be covered. Some of these vari
one method of ignition for another. ignition is aerial. Short-lived ables are aviation safety concerns,
Tltegoals of the land manager can be "weather windows" can be used to location ofthe closest helicopter and
met by either hand or aerial ignition. full advantage. Smoke management fuel source, adequate landing sites,
Hand ignition is an accepted and criteria can be met by compressing a effective communication, source of a
expedient method of ignition. Aerial set volume of smoke into a large col Premo Mark 111 machine and ping
ignition requires more preparation, umn and allowing for rapid dispersal. pong balls, coordination with local
but the end results are often superior Smoke concerns become more com aviation authorities, and use of
because the quantity of work can be pelling as the duration of the bum trained people. With proper planning,
dramatically increased and the quality increases. Aerial ignition minimizes ignition by air can be straightforward
ofwork can be better ensured. Here the duration of the bum. and as expedient as hand ignition.
arc four examples of superior results: Although useful, aerial ignition is The actual firing mimics hand
• Better coverage of an area not a panacea for all bums. Gener ignition methods.
• Tighter control of the ignition ally, if an area is going to be a
process concern with hand ignition, it wiIJbe The Costs
• More effective smoke management a concern with aerial ignition. When
• Burning goals achieved in a higher these areas are encountered, aerial Two of the most common planning
quality manner firing might allow the manager to concerns are whether dollars will be
Constraints on Burning. Land resolve the situation effectively and available and if satisfactory produc
managers have a set of prescribed meet assigned goals. For example, tion can be realized. Table I may
bum goals to achieve-acres burned, aerial ignition may allow the man help answer these questions. The
tons of fuel reduced, certain under ager to take better advantage of table reports field data collected from
story species targeted-and a finite marginal weather conditions or better 84 aerial ignitions at 5 reporting sta
amount of resources---dollars, time, treatment of marginal fuels by gener tions for 5 years. The ignitions were
favorable weather-to accomplish ating more or less heat. Ifan area by the Premo Mark 111 device and
these goals. Recent political and can be easily handbumed, itcan also were on 91,377 acres (36,980 hal of
social changes have combined to be easily lit by air, allowing the Federal lands in the lower Coastal
limit these resources, constraining lighting of several easy areas in a Plain. The bums occurred during the
when bums may occur. Dollars are much shorter period of time and thus months of October through March
fewer to fund the same (or greater) reducing cost per acre. and reflect various Federal land man
goals. Personnel ceilings have limited agement goals, although the
the number of people on the ground Aerial Ignition Planning dominant one is fuel reduction. A
to do the burning. State smoke variety of weather and fuel condi
management and air quality require How aerial ignition is used will tions is represented. The predominant
ments limit the days when burning determine whether results are satis fire behavior model is No. 7 South
is allowed-further constraining the factory and whether goals are ern Rough (Anderson 1982)and
"weather window"-through successfully met. Success can be National Fire-Danger Rating System
restrictive and necessary smoke insured by thorough planning and Model D (Deeming 1975). Various
management criteria. proper implementation. types of helicopter contracts and
8 Fire Management Notes
Table l-SummaryofMarkIII ignitioncosts
Fiscal Numberof Flight Flight Numberof Costof Miscellaneous Total
year ignitions Unit Acres hours cost ballsused balls cost cost
1991 8 St. Marks National Wildlife 8,915 25.8 $11,480 23,250 $ 3,138 $ 644 $ 15,262
Refuge, FL
1990 17 Wakulla Ranger District, FL 20,663 40.4 13,699 45,300 6,116 1,346 21,161
1989 5 Wakulla Ranger District, FL 7,400 19.5 5,710 35,500 4,792 504 11,006
1988 9 Wakulla Ranger District, FL 9,880 22.4 4,735 30,250 4,082 1,024 9,841
1987 13 Biloxi Rangel District, MS 6,670 11.4 1,833 20,250 2,735 1,934 6,502
1987 21 Wakulla Ranger District, FL 22,485 74.9 19,900 133,000 17,955 2,775 40,630
1987 3 Conecuh Ranger District, AL 6,326 14.5 2,334 23,600 3,186 1,901 7,421
1987 8 Apalachicola Ranger District, 9,038 13.2 2,124 23,000 3,103 1,240 6,467
FL
Total 84 91,377 222.1 $61,815 334,150 $45,107 $11,368 $118,290
hourly flight rates were used, and Per acre costs for air ignition vary ment objectives to be attained in a
three types of helicopters were widely and are tied directly to man quality, cost-effective manner.•
flown. Other costs such as planning, agement goals and methods used to
overhead, agency salaries, and carry out the bum. For example, a Literature Cited
agency equipment are not included. reduction in the number ofballs
The acres column refers to those dropped or a modification of the fir Anderson, Hal E. 1982. Aids todetermining
acres actually burned. The flight cost ing pattern can lower the cost, or a fuelmodelsfor estimated firebehavior.
Gen. Tech. Rep. 1NT-122. Ogden,UT:
is based on the hourly leasing rate of decision to use aerial firing on small
U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Forest
the aircraft. The flight hours are areas for smoke management reasons
Service, Intermountain Forestand Range
those helicopter hours (from the can raise the cost. Costs must be Experiment Station. 22p.
ship's hour meter) needed to ferry viewed on a program level, and Deeming, John, E.; Burgan, RobertE.;
ignition devices to the burn site, aerial ignition viewed as a tool to Cohen, JackD. 1977.The National Fire
Danger Rating Systern--l978. Gen. Tech.
observe the area, and light the bum. accomplish the entire bum program.
Rep. INT-39. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department
The flight cost is based on the hourly The overall saving in time-and
ofAgriculture, ForestService, Intennoun
rate of the aircraft. The cost of the therefore money-may outweigh the tainForestandRangeExperiment Station.
ping-pong balls (aerial ignition additional cost of ignition. If agency 63p.
devices) is held constant at 13.5 goals are to be met, then aerial igni
cents each. Some items included in tion may also be viewed as a cost of
miscellaneous costs are for daily heli doing business. Goals of Prescribed Fire on
copter availability, fuel truck, and In the Federal sector aerial ignition the Coastal Plain
costs required by contract. is well established and increasing as
A few observations drawn from more managers understand the proce • Site preparation for regeneration
these ignitions follow: dure and are exposed to the benefits. • Cattle range improvement
• The average total aerial ignition Most questions and issues connected • Understory fuel reduction
cost per acre was $1.29. to aerial ignition can be resolved if a • Control ofcertain midstory plants
• The average number ofping-pong thorough job of planning is done • Stimulation of understory species
balls dropped per acre is 3.6, at a before executing the bum. Properly for wildlife
cost of49 cents per acre or 38 per applied, aerial ignition can comple • Restoration of ecosystems
cent ofthe total per acre cost. ment hand ignition and open an • Visual enhancement
• The average number ofacres lit opportunity for future land manage- • Maintenance of marshes and
per flight hour was 411. wetlands
1991 Volume 52, Number 2 9
Workforce Diversity Projects: Co~O
Creativity in Recruitment
University
Elizabeth Kalish and Brenden Tu
Graduate students inCooperative Education Program; USDAForest Service;
Rocky Mountain Region; Air, Aviation, and Fire Management; Lakewood, CO
The Rocky Mountain Region, or Elizabeth Kalish In January 1991, I started work on
Region 2, of the USDA Forest Serv my master's degree at CSU in forest
ice has a cooperative education I started working in fire manage fire sciences with my funding also
program that has as one of its goals ment in 1986 while taking time off coming from the cooperative educa
to increase workforce diversity in fire from college to assess my career tion program. Through ajoint effort
management by investing in the goals. After spending 2'12 years at the between the USDI National Park
education ofprofessional fire man University of Arizona studying his Service and the USDA Forest Serv
agers. We are two of the students tory and working with the athletic ice, I was able to work at the
currently involved in the program department, both as an athlete and a Dinosaur National Monument, col
and would like to tell you about the trainer, I took ajob with Mesa Verde lecting data for my master's thesis. I
program: Its advantages to the National Park helitack crew. I spent am developing a standardized live
agency and to US. two extended seasons at the park fuel moisture sampling method for
working in helitack and fire dispatch. sagebrush, a method for use in pre
Brenden Tu At the beginning of 1988, I scribed fire planning. The method is
returned to school, now at CSU, in designed to be cost-effective and
I graduated from the University of
the natural resources management easy for managers to use in the field.
California, Davis (UC Davis) in
program. I spent the following
.resource science with a forestry
summer working on a resource man What the Program Has Meant
emphasis. My first experience with
agement crew at Rocky Mountain to Us
wildland fire was as a member ofthe
National Park. During the fall of
Davis handcrew organized by the
1988, I decided to pursue fire man The opportunities this program has
Mendocino National Forest. I worked
agement as a career and accepted a offered us have been outstanding. In
for the Davis handcrew for three sea
position as a cooperative education the summer of 1990, we collected
sons, 1986-88. While in school, I
forester in the Rocky Mountain data for a prescribed natural fire plan
was also involved with the City of
Region Cooperative Education Pro on the South Platte Ranger District of
Davis Volunteer Fire Department.
gram. I spent the first two summers the Pike National Forest. This is one
After graduating from UC Davis,
working in the prescribed fire pro ofthe first plans of this kind in the
I decided to further pursue my
gram on the Pike National Forest. I Rocky Mountain Region. During the
interest in fire behavior and fire
completed my bachelor's degree in schoolyear, we worked with the
management.
December of 1990. region's National Fire Management
In August 1990, I started my mas
ter's degree program at Colorado
State University (CSU), funded by
the Rocky Mountain Region Cooper
ative Education Program. During the
summer of 1991, I was detailed to
the Redfeather Ranger District of the
Arapaho and Roosevelt National For
ests to collectdata for my master's
thesis. I am looking at the economics
ofrural fire protection-particularly
Federal grants to volunteer fire
departments. The evaluation of the
rural fire protection programs could
aid in the distribution of Federal
funds to States and volunteer fire
ElizabethKalish andBrenden Tu withChiefF. DaleRobertson ontheirtriptotheUSDAForest
departments. Service WashingtonOffice.
10 Fire Management Notes