Introduction - Wildland Fuel Fundamentals and Applications - page 11

fuel information by component and property (Rothermel 1972 ; McArthur 1966 ).
Fire managers now had a quantitative description of a fuelbed that had a direct ap-
plication—the simulation of fire behavior and effects. While there have been many
modifications to fuel descriptions since 1960, wildland fuelbeds have mostly been
described using a suite of components and properties that were specifically engi-
neered for fire behavior computations.
The main problem with this engineering approach is that it is often incompat-
ible with describing the dynamic ecology of wildland fuelbeds. Woody fuels, for
example, may be defined by particle diameter classes with ranges that are so broad
that the variability of biomass estimates within a diameter class may overwhelm
differences across fuelbeds. Rates of decomposition and deposition of woody fuel
particles may also vary greatly over the diameters of particles within one class. And
because fire behavior-engineered components often tend to have high variabilities
in the properties that are used to define them, it may be more difficult to quantify
and evaluate important fire management concerns, such as fuel treatment longevity
and effectiveness. Additionally, it may be more difficult to get accurate estimates of
other fire-related management issues, such as smoke emissions, tree mortality, and
fuel consumption, when high variability is a result of inappropriate fuel descrip-
tions. Because wildland fuel science now has a much broader application than just
fire behavior, such as fire effects, wildlife habitat assessment, carbon inventory, and
tree regeneration potential, it may be time to take a more ecological approach to
studying fuels.
References
Abell CA (1937) Rate of spread and resistance to control data for Region 7 fuel types and their
application to determine strength and speed of attack needed. Preliminary Report. U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Asheville, 7 pp
Agee JK (1993) Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest forests. Island Press, Washington
Arno SF, Parsons DJ, Keane RE (2000) Mixed-severity fire regimes in the northern Rocky Moun-
tains: consequences of fire exclusion and options for the future. In: Wilderness science in a
time of change conference, volume 5: Wilderness ecosystems, threat, and management, Mis-
soula, Montana, May 23-27, 1999. Fort Collins, CO. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Forest Service
Rocky Mountain Research Station, Proceedings RMRS-P-15-Vol 5, pp 225-232
Banks WG, Frayer HC (1966) Rate of forest fire spread and resistance to control in the fuel types
of the eastern region. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC. Fire
Control Notes 27(2)10-13
Barrows JS (1951) Fire behavior in northern Rocky Mountain forests. Northern Rocky Mountain
Forest & Range Experiment Station Paper 29, 274 pp
Bebi P, Kulakowski D, Veblen TT (2003) Interactions between fire and spruce beetles in a
subalpine Rocky Mountain forest landscape. Ecology 84(2):362-371. doi:10.1890/0012-
9658(2003)084[0362:ibfasb]2.0.co;2
Brown AA, Davis K (1973) Forest fire control and use, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
Busing RT, White RD, Harmon ME, White PS (2009) Hurricane disturbance in a temper-
ate deciduous forest: patch dynamics, tree mortality, and coarse woody detritus. Plant Ecol
201(1):351-363. doi:10.1007/s11258-008-9520-0