Comparing potential fuel treatment trade-off models

Abstract

Understanding the trade~offs between short-term and long-term consequences\r\nof fire impacts on ecosystems is needed before a comprehensive fuels\r\nmanagement program can be implemented nationally. We are evaluating 3\r\npotential trade-off models at 8 locations in major U.S. fuel types, We present results of the initial testing of the 3 selected models/modelling approaches and a 4th model on the Bitterroot National Forest (BNF) in western Montana. The selected models/modelling approaches were 1) the Fire Emissions Trade-off Model (FETM), 2) sequential use of the SIMPPLLE and MAGIS models, 3) the Vegetation Dynamics Development Tool (VDDT), and 4) the LANDscape\r\nSUccession Model (LANDSUM). We simulated 3 fuel treatments over 50\r\nyears: 1) no action, 2) prescribed burning in ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir types at 2 different rates, and 3) timber harvesting that returns the stand to a reproduction stage. Simulation results for all models suggested that the acreage of Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine types would not be appreciably altered by the fuel treatments. Most models suggested the harvest treatment would reduce area burned by wildfire and smoke emissions; some models suggested the prescribed fire treatment would reduce wildfire acreage. All models suggested that the harvest treatment would reduce acreage of pole-size trees; some models suggested the fire treatment would increase acreage of sapling-size trees.

Citation

Weise, David R.; Kimberlin, Richard; Arbaugh, Mike; Chew, Jim; \r\nJones, Greg; Merzenich, Jim; Wiitala, Marc; Keane, Robert; Schaaf, Mark; Van Wagtendonk, Jan. 2003. Comparing potential fuel treatment trade-off models. In: Arthaud, Greg J.; Barrett, Tara M., eds. 2003. Systems Analysis in Forest Resources: Proceedings of the 8^th Symposium; Snowmass Village, CO. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers: p. 15-25