Forest Fire Detection in the

1

• Forest Fire Detection in the
• Wildland-Urban Interface
• James Barnier
• Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
• Division of Forestry
• FERIC Wildfire Detection Workshop
• March 25 27, 2003

2
(No Transcript)
3
(No Transcript)
4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
Several Detection Options

• Public reporting
• Fixed lookouts
• Ground patrols

• Air patrols
• Lightning detectors
• Satellite imagery

8
911 Availability
9
Choice of a Detection Method

• Risk
• Hazard
• Value

10
Research Objective

• Evaluate the performance and cost-effectiveness
  of public and organized wildfire detection
  methods in the wildland-urban interface

11
The Study Area
12
Forest covertypes
13
Socio-economic importance

• 90 thousand direct jobs
• 3.3 billion in wages
• 5.4 billion in value added
• 2 million hectares of parks and conservation
  areas
• Over 8 million visitors annually

14
Settlement patterns

• 1.5 million residents
• 16 persons per square kilometre
• 45.8 billion in property values

15
Wisconsins detection system

• 95 fixed lookouts
• Public reporting
• Air patrols
• Ground patrols

16
Wildfire causes
17
(No Transcript)
18
Suppression techniques

• Ground attack
• Type VII-X engines and/or Type IV engines with
  Type IV tractor plows

19
(No Transcript)
20
Analytical Methods

• Cost-benefit analyses
• Tukeys multiple comparison tests of performance
  measures

21
Costs benefits of lookout detection
22
A benefit function

• Lookout benefits assessed relative to public
  detection

23
Data

• Two separate but linked datasets
• 4,690 individual fire reports (1987-1995)
• 711 addendum reports from (1992-1995)

24
A suppression cost model

• Model estimated for three covertype/ fuel model
  combinations
• Data included only those observations when
  lookouts were staffed

25
Results Economic EffectivenessStatewide

• Protected 238 ha from wildfire damage
• Reduced suppression costs by 12 k
• Prevented 591 k in property damage
• Each 1 cost gt 6 savings

26
A closer look
27
Per fire

• Protected 1.6 ha from wildfire
• Saved 86 in suppression costs
• Prevented 4,100 in property damage

28
Administrative region

• Area saved and suppression costs saved were not
  statistically different
• Property damage prevented and number of wildfires
  detected differed significantly

29
A closer look
30
Individual lookouts

• Lookout performance was highly variable
• Lookouts that detected more fires saved area and
  generated more benefits

31
A closer look
32
Results Detection PerformanceWildfire
sightings
33
Detection lag
A
A
34
Final size
B
AB
A
35
Suppression cost
B
AB
A
36
Conclusions

• Fixed lookouts were cost-effective
• Majority of benefits attributable to property
  damage prevention
• Performance highly variable

37
Conclusions (Continued)

• Small number of lookouts generated majority of
  benefits
• Public and lookouts see different wildfires
• Opportunities exist to enhance wildfire detection