Register      Login
International Journal of Wildland Fire International Journal of Wildland Fire Society
Journal of the International Association of Wildland Fire
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Assessing the exposure of the built environment to potential ignition sources generated from vegetative fuel

J. L. Beverly A B , P. Bothwell A , J. C. R. Conner A and E. P. K. Herd A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, 5320-122 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6H 3S5, Canada.

B Corresponding author. Email: jbeverly@nrcan.gc.ca

International Journal of Wildland Fire 19(3) 299-313 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF09071
Submitted: 8 July 2009  Accepted: 13 January 2010   Published: 13 May 2010

Abstract

We assessed the exposure of the built environment to potential ignition sources generated from vegetative fuel for four communities in the province of Alberta, Canada. Ignition processes generated by burning vegetation that were included in the analysis were radiant heat, short-range spotting, and longer-range spotting. Results were used to map the boundaries of the wildland–urban interface and to delineate zones within each community that identify the degree to which these areas represent potential wildfire entry-points into the wildland–urban interface. The assessment method can be used to set priorities for mitigation activities; compare conditions within and between communities and over time; and identify priority areas for time- and resource-intensive site assessments that are often completed for individual structures located in the wildland–urban interface. We compared results among the four case-study communities and demonstrated an application of the approach for evaluating community fuel treatment plans. Factors that influenced the exposure of the built environment to potential ignition sources differed among the communities, which suggested the need for community-specific mitigation strategies. Spatial patterns of areas with elevated ignition exposure reflected not only the amount of ignition-producing vegetation around the built environment, but also the size and arrangement of fuel patches in relation to the unique morphology of the community and the occurrence of occluded interface zones.

Additional keywords: community, defensible space, fire behaviour, fire management, FireSmart, FireWise, wildland–urban interface.


Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Forest Resource Improvement Association of Alberta (FRIAA) and was completed in partnership with Alberta Sustainable Resource Development and Millar Western Forest Products Inc. Valuable information and expertise regarding the analysis of Swan Hills fuel treatments were provided by K. MacDonald (Alberta Sustainable Resource Development). We thank M. E. Alexander (Canadian Forest Service) and K. Quintilio (Alberta Sustainable Resource Development) for their helpful comments on the manuscript.


References


Agee JK , Skinner CN (2005) Basic principles of forest fuel reduction treatments. Forest Ecology and Management  211, 83–96.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (2001) Chisholm Fire (LWF-063): final documentation report. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Forest Protection Division. (Edmonton, AB) Available at www.srd.gov.ab.ca/forests/chisholm/pdfs/Section2.pdf [Verified 11 January 2007]

Albini FA (1979) Spot fire distance from burning trees: a predictive model. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report INT-56. (Ogden, UT)

Albini FA (1981) Spot fire distances from isolated sources: extension of a predictive model. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Research Note INT-309. (Ogden, UT)

Albini FA (1983) Potential spotting distance from wind-driven surface fires. USDA Forest Service, Research Paper INT-309.

Alexander ME , Thomas DA (2003) Wildland fire behaviour case studies and analyses: other examples, methods, reporting standards, and some practical advice. Fire Management Today  63(4), 4–12.
Alexander ME, Tymstra C, Frederick KW (2004) Incorporating breaching and spotting considerations into PROMETHEUS – The Canadian wildland fire growth model. Chisholm/Dogrib Fire Research Initiative, Quicknote 6. (Foothills Model Forest: Hinton, AB) Available at www.fmf.ab.ca/CDFR/CDFR_Qn6.pdf [Verified 11 January 2007]

Beverly JL, Herd EPK , Conner JCR (2009) Modeling fire susceptibility in west central Alberta, Canada. Forest Ecology and Management  258, 1465–1478.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Butler CP (1974) The urban/wildland fire interface. In ‘Proceedings of western states section/Combustion Institute papers’, 6–7 May 1974, Spokane, WA. Vol. 74, no. 15, pp. 1–17. (Washington State University: Pullman, WA)

Carmel Y, Paz S, Johashan F , Shoshany M (2009) Assessing fire risk using Monte Carlo simulations of fire spread. Forest Ecology and Management  257, 370–377.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Cohen JD (1995) Structure Ignition Assessment Model (SIAM). USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, General Technical Report PSW-GTR-158. (Albany, CA)

Cohen JD (2000) Preventing disaster: home ignitability in the wildland–urban interface. Journal of Forestry  102, 15–21.
Davis JB (1988) The wildland–urban interface: what it is, where it is, and its fire management problems. In ‘Proceedings of the Symposium and Workshop: Protecting People and Homes from Wildfire in the Interior West’, 6–8 October 1987, Missoula, MT. (Eds WC Fischer, SF Arno) USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, General Technical Report INT-251. (Ogden, UT)

Dickson BG, Prather JW, Xu Y, Hampton HM, Aumack EN , Sisk TD (2006) Mapping the probability of large fire occurrence in northern Arizona, USA. Landscape Ecology  21, 747–761.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Downing DJ, Pettapiece WW (2006) Natural regions and subregions of Alberta. Government of Alberta, Natural Regions Committee, Publication no. T/852. (Edmonton, AB)

Farris C, Pezeshki C, Neuenschwander LF (2000) A comparison of fire probability maps derived from GIS modelling and direct simulation techniques. In ‘Proceedings of the Joint Fire Science Conference and Workshop: Crossing the Millennium: Integrating Spatial Technologies and Ecological Principles for a New Age in Fire Management’, 15–17 June 1999, Boise, ID. (Tech. Eds LF Neuenschwander, KC Ryan) (University of Idaho: Moscow, ID)

Forestry Canada Fire Danger Group (1992) Development and structure of the Canadian Forest Fire Behavior Prediction System. Forestry Canada, Information Report ST-X-3. (Ottawa, ON)

Hirsch KG (1989) Analysis of the fire behavior associated with three 1988 spring wildfires in central Canada. In ‘Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on Fire and Forest Meteorology’, 17–21 April 1989, Ottawa, ON. (Eds DC MacIver, H Auld, R Whitewood) pp. 416–424. (Forestry Canada and Environment Canada: Ottawa, ON)

Kiil AD, Miyagawa RS, Quintilio D (1977) Calibration and performance of the Canadian Fire Weather Index in Alberta. Environment Canada, Northern Forest Research Centre, Information Report NOR-X-173. (Edmonton, AB)

Krawchuk MA, Cumming SG, Flannigan MD , Wein RW (2006) Biotic and abiotic regulation of lightning fire initiation in the mixedwood boreal forest. Ecology  87, 458–468.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed | Laughlin J, Page C (Eds) (1987) Wildfire strikes home! The report of the National Wildland/Urban Fire Protection Conference. National Fire Protection Association, NFPA SPP-86. (Quincy, MA)

Manzello SL, Cleary TG, Shields JR , Yang JC (2006a) On the ignition of fuel beds by firebrands. Fire and Materials  30, 77–87.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Neel MC, Ene E (2002) ‘FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Categorical Maps.’ (University of Massachusetts: Amherst, MA) Available at www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html [Verified 16 February 2010]

Partners in Protection (1999) ‘FireSmart: protecting your community from wildfire.’ (Partners in Protection: Edmonton, AB)

Partners in Protection (2003) ‘FireSmart: protecting your community from wildfire.’ 2nd edn. (Partners in Protection: Edmonton, AB)

Porterie B, Zekri N, Clerc J-P , Loraud J-C (2005) Influence des brandons sur la propagation d’un feu de forêt. Comptes Rendus Physique  6, 1153–1160.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | Simard AJ, Haines DA, Blank RW, Frost JS (1983) The Mack Lake fire. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, General Technical Report NC-83. (Saint Paul, MN)

Snellen D, Borgers A , Timmermans H (2002) Urban form, road network type, and mode choice for frequently conducted activities: a multi-level analysis using quasi-experimental design data. Environment & Planning A  34, 1207–1220.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Stocks BJ, Flannigan MD (1987) Analysis of the behaviour and associated weather for a 1986 north-western Ontario wildfire: Red Lake #7. In ‘Proceedings of the Ninth Conference on Fire and Forest Meteorology’, 21–24 April 1987, San Diego, CA. pp. 94–100. (American Meteorological Society: Boston, MA)

Talberth J, Berrens RP, McKee M , Jones M (2006) Averting and insurance decisions in the wildland–urban interface: implications of survey and experimental data for wildfire risk reduction policy. Contemporary Economic Policy  24, 203–223.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Tymstra C, Wang D, Rogeau M-P (2005) Alberta wildfire regime analysis. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Forest Protection Division. Wildfire Science and Technology Report PFFC-01–05. (Edmonton, AB)

USDA and Department of the Interior (2001) Urban wildland interface communities within the vicinity of federal lands that are at high risk from wildfire. Federal Register  66, 751–754.


Wilson AAG , Ferguson IS (1986) Predicting the probability of house survival during bushfires. Journal of Environmental Management  23, 259–270.


Winter G , Fried JS (2000) Homeowner perspectives on fire hazard, responsibility, and management strategies at the wildland–urban interface. Society & Natural Resources  13, 33–49.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |