A Return On Investment Approach for Evaluating Great Basin Fuel Break Priorities
Linear fuel breaks are a primary type of fuel treatment used to reduce the likelihood and damages from wildland fire to values at risk in rangelands in the western US. However, based on past research and a recent case study, there is likely a large amount of variation in burn probability reduction among fuel breaks due to prevailing winds, fuel conditions, and proximity to other fuel breaks. We are developing a return on investment (ROI) approach to evaluate approximately 6500 individual fuel breaks in the Great Basin. We are developing methods to prioritize fuel breaks based on a cost-effectiveness measure to maximize the benefits of fuel breaks to sagebrush and sagebrush dependent species. Results from the study can be used to provide information for cost-effective fuel break network installations for efficiently reducing wildfire hazards to wildland urban interface communities, important public sagebrush lands and natural resource uses, and sagebrush dependent wildlife species.
This research is addressing the goal of modeling the benefit of individual fuel breaks to compare scenarios of fuel break networks. Using fire simulation modeling, modified LANDFIRE inputs, and existing and proposed fuel breaks, we are implementing a geospatial ROI prioritization scheme to help determine fuel break priority or importance, and to help evaluate tradeoffs between reducing landscape burn probability and increasing disturbance with added fuel breaks and their maintenance. This project is expanding upon preliminary work, with the objective to implement a fuel break prioritization across the Great Basin study area, for the existing and proposed fuel break networks (~6500 fuel break segments). To simulate fire two scenarios are modeled: the first uses problem fire conditions (97th percentile fire conditions) and a second less extreme (but more likely) fire weather scenario. We are comparing burn probability differences between fuel break/no fuel break scenarios to generate the marginal benefit of each fuel break segment. Next, prioritization occurs via maximizing the sum of a cost-effectiveness measure of fuel break benefits following methods from Kreitler et al. (2019). In the prioritization, updating the burn probability reduction occurs after a selection, to ensure subsequent fuel breaks are quantified correctly given previous actions and are not redundant. We will compare expected impacts to values at risk in additional sagebrush dependent species, to assess multiple input criteria and explore geographic and administrative boundaries as bounding regions for fuel break prioritization and comparison. Our intended application of this co-produced method is to quantitatively assess proposed fuel breaks, develop methods for the spatial prioritization of fuel breaks, and assist managers with their applied and scientific needs to address wildland fire risk.
Linear fuel breaks are a primary type of fuel treatment used to reduce the likelihood and damages from wildland fire to values at risk in rangelands in the western US. However, based on past research and a recent case study, there is likely a large amount of variation in burn probability reduction among fuel breaks due to prevailing winds, fuel conditions, and proximity to other fuel breaks. We are developing a return on investment (ROI) approach to evaluate approximately 6500 individual fuel breaks in the Great Basin. We are developing methods to prioritize fuel breaks based on a cost-effectiveness measure to maximize the benefits of fuel breaks to sagebrush and sagebrush dependent species. Results from the study can be used to provide information for cost-effective fuel break network installations for efficiently reducing wildfire hazards to wildland urban interface communities, important public sagebrush lands and natural resource uses, and sagebrush dependent wildlife species.
This research is addressing the goal of modeling the benefit of individual fuel breaks to compare scenarios of fuel break networks. Using fire simulation modeling, modified LANDFIRE inputs, and existing and proposed fuel breaks, we are implementing a geospatial ROI prioritization scheme to help determine fuel break priority or importance, and to help evaluate tradeoffs between reducing landscape burn probability and increasing disturbance with added fuel breaks and their maintenance. This project is expanding upon preliminary work, with the objective to implement a fuel break prioritization across the Great Basin study area, for the existing and proposed fuel break networks (~6500 fuel break segments). To simulate fire two scenarios are modeled: the first uses problem fire conditions (97th percentile fire conditions) and a second less extreme (but more likely) fire weather scenario. We are comparing burn probability differences between fuel break/no fuel break scenarios to generate the marginal benefit of each fuel break segment. Next, prioritization occurs via maximizing the sum of a cost-effectiveness measure of fuel break benefits following methods from Kreitler et al. (2019). In the prioritization, updating the burn probability reduction occurs after a selection, to ensure subsequent fuel breaks are quantified correctly given previous actions and are not redundant. We will compare expected impacts to values at risk in additional sagebrush dependent species, to assess multiple input criteria and explore geographic and administrative boundaries as bounding regions for fuel break prioritization and comparison. Our intended application of this co-produced method is to quantitatively assess proposed fuel breaks, develop methods for the spatial prioritization of fuel breaks, and assist managers with their applied and scientific needs to address wildland fire risk.