Help -
Help for Webmasters
« back to results for ""
Below is a cache of http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/management/USDA_Report.pdf. It's a snapshot of the page taken as our search engine crawled the Web.
The web site itself may have changed. You can check the current page or check for previous versions at the Internet Archive. Yahoo! is not affiliated with the authors of this page or responsible for its content. An Agency Strategy for Fire Management USDA FOREST SERVICE An Agency Strategy for Fire Management A Report from the National Management Review Team January 12, 2000 NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW Executive Summary Over the past ten years, several significant programmatic reports highlight persistent and recurrent problems in fire man-
agement. Major cultural and demographic changes in the workforce, and significant programmatic changes in the agency,
have resulted in increased costs and a significant reduction in agency workforce participation on large fires. Without mak-
ing a significant organizational change, the overall ability to manage large fires will be compromised. This report is a comprehensive and strategic examination of past reviews, policies, and direction for the fire management
program. The National Management Review Team consisted of representatives from Forest Service line officers, the National Fire
Protection Association, the National Association of State Foresters, the National Park Service, the Brookings Institution,
and Forest Service Fire and Aviation Management staff. A full range of alternatives (pathways) were developed, including
designating a federal fire service, an outsourced fire services, and a "national" large incident management organization. The primary finding of this review is that the current level of dedicated and available staffing for large incident manage-
ment is diminishing. Therefore, the following recommendations were developed to address this and other issues concerning
large incident management: 1. Develop and implement a national Large Incident Management Organization, dedicated and professional, to more effectively manage large fire operations and natural disasters. The recommendation is predicated on building a strong,
local initial and extended attack fire program, and implementing an aggressive ecosystem restoration program. This
represents a significant departure from todays operation and will require a major commitment of people and
resources. 2. Clearly articulate to the field that an independent Federal Fire Service will NOT be pursued or entertained. The linkage to the agencys land management mission is simply too important to divorce aspects of fire management and
fire use from the agency. 3. An Implementation Team should be established, comprised of a representative cross section of interagency partners and interests. Oversight to implementation would be provided by the Deputy Regional Foresters for State and Private
Forestry, USDA Forest Service. 4. Establish a continuous monitoring process with annual reports on progress. 5. Assign an appropriate group to resolve issues raised by the State Foresters concerning the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Policy and Program Review (December, 1995). The recommended pathway is conceptual in nature. There are many actions necessary to successfully implement this path-
way. Without a fundamental change in the way large fires are managed, we can expect to experience the problems of today
well into the future, including a perceived lack of Forest Service capability to manage both wildfire and prescribed fire. NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW INTRODUCTION ..........................................................1 Where Are We Today ..........................................................1
Where Are We Going ..........................................................3 ISSUES, IMPORTANCE AND URGENCY ..........4 The Specific Issues ..............................................................4
Integration of Fire Management into
Ecosystem Management ....................................................5
Line/Staff Relationships ......................................................5
Large Fire Support ..............................................................5
Role of Other Agencies........................................................5
Most Desirable Future ........................................................6
Systemic Nature ..................................................................6
Current Situation Test ..........................................................7 LEARNING FROM OTHERS ..................................8 The British Columbia Forest Service ..................................8
The Department of Defense ................................................9
State Compacts ....................................................................9
In Search of Strategy ..........................................................9 PATHWAYS TO THE FUTURE ..............................10 PATHWAY I - Transfer of Fire Function ..........................10
Reasons for Considering This Pathway ............................10
Competitive Supply Option ..............................................11
Fire Service Option............................................................11
PATHWAY II - Full Agency Participation........................12
Reasons for Considering This Pathway ............................12
Two Years (or More) Option ..............................................12
Pools When Needed Option ..............................................13
PATHWAY III - Redefinition ............................................13
Reasons for Considering This Pathway ............................13
Large Incident Management Option ................................13
Evaluations ........................................................................14 RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CHIEF ..........15 The Recommended Pathway..............................................15
Implementation Recommendation ....................................15
Continuous Monitoring Recommendation ........................15
Other Recommendations....................................................16
Conclusion ........................................................................16 APPENDICES ..............................................................17 Chief's Letter......................................................................17
Charter ..............................................................................18
Reference List ....................................................................19
Team Members ..................................................................20
Details of the Recommended Option ................................21
Intent ..................................................................................21
Safety ................................................................................21
Initial Attack ......................................................................21
Large Fire Support ............................................................22
Fire In Ecosystem Management ........................................22
Prescribed Fires and Wildland Fire Use Projects ..............22
Incentives ..........................................................................22
Interagency Cooperation....................................................22
Aviation Management ........................................................23
Oversight............................................................................23
Accountability....................................................................23
Unresolved Issues ..............................................................23
Questions and Concerns on the Recommended Option ....24 TABLE OF CONTENTS AN AGENCY STRATEGY FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT 1 NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW INTRODUCTION The Chief of the Forest Service commissioned a review
team to look into several unresolved and lingering prob-
lems related to the fire management program. The Forest
Service fire and fuels program is not well integrated with
the land management program of the agency. In some
instances line and staff officer relationships regarding fire
management are ineffective. The Forest Service's ability to
provide adequate support to large fires is diminishing.
Many cooperators and partners think the Forest Service is
ineffective and inefficient in fire management. These four
problems are chronic. They have been identified over and
over in many reviews in this decade. These four problems
need immediate resolution. It is time for change. W HERE A RE W E T ODAY During most of its history the Forest Service pursued a
policy of suppressing all fires. Essentially, this is a policy
that tried to eliminate fire from the ecosystem. In 1979 the
agency recognized the need for a more comprehensive pol-
icy to accommodate fire's role in ecosystem dynamics. The Forest Service adopted a policy that allowed fire to occur
under prescribed conditions which would benefit the
ecosystem. This change emphasized fuels treatment as a
necessary measure to prevent catastrophic wildfires
through ecosystem management. In 1991 the Forest Service expended $7,800,000 on a fuel
treatment program designed to reduce hazardous fuels and
the cost of large fire suppression. This constituted less than
2.5% of the entire fire program expenditures. During this
time the agency employed 50,238 people (Figure 1) who
were required to make themselves available to fight fire.
But many agency employees did not support emergency
fire efforts occurring away from their assigned locations.
By 1998 the agency expended approximately $50,000,000
on the fuels program (8.5% of the total). The workforce
had diminished to 39,782 by 1998, a 21% reduction. Fuels
expenditures are forecasted to rise above $100,000,000 in
the year 2001 while the Forest Service workforce continues
to decline in numbers. The workforce is also changing dramatically because it is
aging. The proportion of the Forest Service workforce age
45 and older was 37.9% in 1986 compared to 57.2% in
1999 and the average age increased from 42.4 years to 45.8
years over the same period (National Academy of Public
Administration, 1999). 1974 1998 60,000 Workforce FOREST SERVICE EMPLO YEES CALENDAR YEAR 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 FIGURE 1 Federal Workforce Trend With the exception of Yellowstone in 1988, the 1994 fire
season burned more acres than any other recent fire season
(Figure 2). Thirty-four firefighters died in that fire season.
Firefighting resources were in short supply and costs were
high. The severity of 1994 brought the problem of hazardous
fuel conditions to the forefront. This season was a catalyst
for the federal agencies to review their programs and make
necessary changes in policy. Land management decisions
can create ecosystems prone to adverse fire effects. Other
areas of policy review were aimed at reducing the cost and
risk of large fire suppression, improving line officer
accountability in wildland fire management and strength-
ening the support and role of outside agencies in federal
fire management, while assisting state and local govern-
ment wildland fire protection. The Forest Service review of the 1994 fire season (USDA
Forest Service, 1995) resulted in the development of the
Course to the Future, which laid out the work necessary
to make an effective fire management program in the face
of increasing complexities. The "Course to the Future" has underlain the changes that
the Forest Service has made since 1994 in the fuels pro-
gram (Figure 3). The recognition that fuels management is
necessary for success in reducing large fire costs and improving ecosystem health is well rooted in the organiza-
tion as well as being recognized by the General Accounting
Office (GAO, 1999). Key recommendations from the "Course to the Future"
remain unresolved. These include: By the year 2005, establish a multi-funded, interdiscipli-
nary account for restoration and maintenance of fire
dependent ecosystems. Develop a workforce capable of achieving, restoring, and
protecting these ecosystems at this scale. Establish prescribed fire objectives and assess fire conse-
quences into the land management planning process. Renegotiate state and local cooperative fire agreements
with partners at the wildland/urban interface to clarify pro-
tection responsibilities. Move toward preparing 75% of the workforce to be
trained, qualified, and available to support fire emergencies
by the year 2000. Intensify training of line officers to better redeem fire
management responsibilities. These six recommendations can be categorized into four
issues that inhibit the successful execution of the fire man-
agement program. The Forest Service identifies (USDA
Forest Service, 1995) these as: 2 USDA FOREST SERVICE - AN AGENCY STRATEGY FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW 1980 3,500 Wildfires - Forest Service ACRES BR UNED (1000s) YELLOWSTONE 3,000 2,500 2,000 0 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 500 1,500 FIGURE 2 USDA FOREST SERVICE - AN AGENCY STRATEGY FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT 3 NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW Integration - Integration of the fire and fuels program into
land management decision making is, in many places,
nonexistent. This integration is paramount. Land manage-
ment decisions should not create, or further promote, a
paradox where fire as an ecosystem agent contradicts the
intended land management goal, yet they frequently do. Relationships - Many fire program staff, and the line offi-
cers that are responsible, do not enjoy firm, stable, produc-
tive relationships. These relationships vary as a function of
the individuals involved, rather than being founded on
important principles and mutual respect. Support - Large fire costs continue to escalate. The cost of
fighting fire is incredibly expensive. The mechanisms for
funding emergency fire suppression do not foster cost
reduction in the current environment. Social demands tend
to exacerbate the problem by requiring more and more
resources be employed in essentially futile efforts at effec-
tiveness. The agency cannot muster much of its own work-
force to support large fire emergencies. This requires sup-
ply from outside sources, which are frequently more
expensive to obtain and transport. Role of Others - The Forest Service's external cooperators,
particularly the state wildland fire protection organizations
do not agree with many of the approaches to fire manage- ment the agency uses. In addition, the expense of the feder-
al fire fighting effort is prohibitive to the cooperators,
causing less use and hard feelings. Many states are reluc-
tant to help a cooperator who appears to be unable to help
themselves (Forest Service). W HERE A RE W E G OING The charge of this National Fire Program review was to
take a fresh look at the common problems that have
plagued effective fire management over the years and see
what agency actions are necessary to make it better. Fire management is more complex as social, political, eco-
nomic, and environmental pressures increase. Fire manage-
ment considerations have to become part of land manage-
ment decision making. To accomplish this task, line and
staff must work effectively together, the agency must be
able to support emergencies when they arise, and work
effectively with cooperators, who are becoming more and
more critical to success. The agency is at a crossroads: it
can remain as is, or do something fundamentally different
to meet these challenges. This report proposes the latter. 0 1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985 Fuel Treatment Program ACRES TREATED 250,000 500,000 750,000 1,000,000 1,250,000 1,500,000 FIGURE 3 4 USDA FOREST SERVICE - AN AGENCY STRATEGY FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW ISSUES, IMPORTANCE AND URGENCY Several programmatic self examinations have been
conducted in fire management since 1994, including
nationally: Strategic Fire and Aviation Management Goals
and Actions in Support of Ecosystem Management,
March, 1994. Strategic Assessment of Fire Management,
January, 1995. Course to the Future - Positioning Fire and
Aviation Management, May, 1995. Final Report of the Interagency Management
Review Team, South Canyon Fire, June, 1995. Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and
Program Review, December 1995. The standard approach of conducting a review, finding
problem areas, developing recommendations, and imple-
menting action plans does not seem to solve repetitive and
recurrent issues. The approach to solving these continuing,
repetitive issues has always been the same and the results
are also always the same. This led the Forest Service to try
a different approach to addressing these chronic issues. T HE S PECIFIC I SSUES Four common issues raised repeatedly in program reviews
seem to transcend fire management such that they require
an agency solution, rather than a simple program fix.
These common issues, in order of importance to success,
are: 1. Integration of fire management in land management 2. Line/Staff relationships for an effectively managed program 3. Large fire support and corresponding large fire costs 4. Role of other agencies Cultural considerations permeate all issues and define the
environment in which programs must operate. The design
of the existing fire organization is not compatible with
today's workforce culture. Managers have little ability to
modify the culture but can modify the organization. The
underlying systemic problems and issues identified for fire
management also significantly affect other Forest Service
programs. Culture issues must be recognized and dealt
with on an agency basis. The refinement of the issues follows: I NTEGRATION OF F IRE M ANAGEMENT INTO E COSYSTEM M ANAGEMENT Lack of integrated planning results in competing and con-
flicting direction and objectives. Many times land manage-
ment decisions are compromised by creating conditions
which cannot be sustained in fire dependent ecosystems.
Functionalism is promoted when an integrated approach is
not used in land management decisions. When profession-
als are not available to participate in land management
decision making, resultant decisions suffer. Functions that
are adequately represented will overshadow the missing
function, leading to land management decisions of lesser
quality. The same problems arise operationally when land
management projects are implemented. Functional budgets and programs promote competition
among staff areas, single benefit resource projects, and
narrowly focused personnel. This prevents integration, effi-
cient funding and staffing of projects, and inhibits broad
based understanding of fire's role in ecosystem manage-
ment The Forest Service directives system is not well aligned.
Fire management direction is found in many places and is
not complementary in many cases. This exacerbates func-
tionalism. Functionalism results in conflicting and competing agendas
for limited agency resources. In some cases, conflicting
direction, such as in the management of threatened and
endangered species, places fire managers at risk of failure. USDA FOREST SERVICE - AN AGENCY STRATEGY FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT 5 NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW Participation in another resource area's activities, such as
wildlife personnel helping on fire projects, does not appear
to enhance one's career, or professional standing among
their peers. L INE /S TAFF R ELATIONSHIPS Relationships between line officers and staff managers are
strained because of different backgrounds and experiences,
differing perspectives about priorities, unclear communica-
tions, uncertain direction, and different roles. Many line
officers do not actively participate in fire management
activities. Some do not actively participate in leadership
and management of their own fire programs. When line
officers do become involved they are frequently criticized
for it by fire managers. Some line officers do not perceive
active fire participation as career enhancing. Many fire
managers do not actively seek line officer support, involve-
ment, or line officer experience. Consequently, there is a disconnect in communications and
support for each other. Functional allegiance (both line and staff) creates a chasm.
As less time is spent working on common problems, the
chasm widens. This environment leads to an appearance of
a "club" with initiation rights and membership examina-
tions. These "clubs" are perceived to exist by both line and
staff for both line and staff. It appears that there are disconnects among Forest Service
mission and culture, agency priorities and workforce.
Forest Service leadership does not clearly communicate its
expectations. This leads to mixed, often ignored messages. Incident Commanders assume a powerful role in large fire
decision making. They select the people for their teams
which can amplify the appearance of a "club.
The web site itself may have changed. You can check the current page or check for previous versions at the Internet Archive. Yahoo! is not affiliated with the authors of this page or responsible for its content. An Agency Strategy for Fire Management USDA FOREST SERVICE An Agency Strategy for Fire Management A Report from the National Management Review Team January 12, 2000 NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW Executive Summary Over the past ten years, several significant programmatic reports highlight persistent and recurrent problems in fire man-
agement. Major cultural and demographic changes in the workforce, and significant programmatic changes in the agency,
have resulted in increased costs and a significant reduction in agency workforce participation on large fires. Without mak-
ing a significant organizational change, the overall ability to manage large fires will be compromised. This report is a comprehensive and strategic examination of past reviews, policies, and direction for the fire management
program. The National Management Review Team consisted of representatives from Forest Service line officers, the National Fire
Protection Association, the National Association of State Foresters, the National Park Service, the Brookings Institution,
and Forest Service Fire and Aviation Management staff. A full range of alternatives (pathways) were developed, including
designating a federal fire service, an outsourced fire services, and a "national" large incident management organization. The primary finding of this review is that the current level of dedicated and available staffing for large incident manage-
ment is diminishing. Therefore, the following recommendations were developed to address this and other issues concerning
large incident management: 1. Develop and implement a national Large Incident Management Organization, dedicated and professional, to more effectively manage large fire operations and natural disasters. The recommendation is predicated on building a strong,
local initial and extended attack fire program, and implementing an aggressive ecosystem restoration program. This
represents a significant departure from todays operation and will require a major commitment of people and
resources. 2. Clearly articulate to the field that an independent Federal Fire Service will NOT be pursued or entertained. The linkage to the agencys land management mission is simply too important to divorce aspects of fire management and
fire use from the agency. 3. An Implementation Team should be established, comprised of a representative cross section of interagency partners and interests. Oversight to implementation would be provided by the Deputy Regional Foresters for State and Private
Forestry, USDA Forest Service. 4. Establish a continuous monitoring process with annual reports on progress. 5. Assign an appropriate group to resolve issues raised by the State Foresters concerning the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Policy and Program Review (December, 1995). The recommended pathway is conceptual in nature. There are many actions necessary to successfully implement this path-
way. Without a fundamental change in the way large fires are managed, we can expect to experience the problems of today
well into the future, including a perceived lack of Forest Service capability to manage both wildfire and prescribed fire. NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW INTRODUCTION ..........................................................1 Where Are We Today ..........................................................1
Where Are We Going ..........................................................3 ISSUES, IMPORTANCE AND URGENCY ..........4 The Specific Issues ..............................................................4
Integration of Fire Management into
Ecosystem Management ....................................................5
Line/Staff Relationships ......................................................5
Large Fire Support ..............................................................5
Role of Other Agencies........................................................5
Most Desirable Future ........................................................6
Systemic Nature ..................................................................6
Current Situation Test ..........................................................7 LEARNING FROM OTHERS ..................................8 The British Columbia Forest Service ..................................8
The Department of Defense ................................................9
State Compacts ....................................................................9
In Search of Strategy ..........................................................9 PATHWAYS TO THE FUTURE ..............................10 PATHWAY I - Transfer of Fire Function ..........................10
Reasons for Considering This Pathway ............................10
Competitive Supply Option ..............................................11
Fire Service Option............................................................11
PATHWAY II - Full Agency Participation........................12
Reasons for Considering This Pathway ............................12
Two Years (or More) Option ..............................................12
Pools When Needed Option ..............................................13
PATHWAY III - Redefinition ............................................13
Reasons for Considering This Pathway ............................13
Large Incident Management Option ................................13
Evaluations ........................................................................14 RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CHIEF ..........15 The Recommended Pathway..............................................15
Implementation Recommendation ....................................15
Continuous Monitoring Recommendation ........................15
Other Recommendations....................................................16
Conclusion ........................................................................16 APPENDICES ..............................................................17 Chief's Letter......................................................................17
Charter ..............................................................................18
Reference List ....................................................................19
Team Members ..................................................................20
Details of the Recommended Option ................................21
Intent ..................................................................................21
Safety ................................................................................21
Initial Attack ......................................................................21
Large Fire Support ............................................................22
Fire In Ecosystem Management ........................................22
Prescribed Fires and Wildland Fire Use Projects ..............22
Incentives ..........................................................................22
Interagency Cooperation....................................................22
Aviation Management ........................................................23
Oversight............................................................................23
Accountability....................................................................23
Unresolved Issues ..............................................................23
Questions and Concerns on the Recommended Option ....24 TABLE OF CONTENTS AN AGENCY STRATEGY FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT 1 NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW INTRODUCTION The Chief of the Forest Service commissioned a review
team to look into several unresolved and lingering prob-
lems related to the fire management program. The Forest
Service fire and fuels program is not well integrated with
the land management program of the agency. In some
instances line and staff officer relationships regarding fire
management are ineffective. The Forest Service's ability to
provide adequate support to large fires is diminishing.
Many cooperators and partners think the Forest Service is
ineffective and inefficient in fire management. These four
problems are chronic. They have been identified over and
over in many reviews in this decade. These four problems
need immediate resolution. It is time for change. W HERE A RE W E T ODAY During most of its history the Forest Service pursued a
policy of suppressing all fires. Essentially, this is a policy
that tried to eliminate fire from the ecosystem. In 1979 the
agency recognized the need for a more comprehensive pol-
icy to accommodate fire's role in ecosystem dynamics. The Forest Service adopted a policy that allowed fire to occur
under prescribed conditions which would benefit the
ecosystem. This change emphasized fuels treatment as a
necessary measure to prevent catastrophic wildfires
through ecosystem management. In 1991 the Forest Service expended $7,800,000 on a fuel
treatment program designed to reduce hazardous fuels and
the cost of large fire suppression. This constituted less than
2.5% of the entire fire program expenditures. During this
time the agency employed 50,238 people (Figure 1) who
were required to make themselves available to fight fire.
But many agency employees did not support emergency
fire efforts occurring away from their assigned locations.
By 1998 the agency expended approximately $50,000,000
on the fuels program (8.5% of the total). The workforce
had diminished to 39,782 by 1998, a 21% reduction. Fuels
expenditures are forecasted to rise above $100,000,000 in
the year 2001 while the Forest Service workforce continues
to decline in numbers. The workforce is also changing dramatically because it is
aging. The proportion of the Forest Service workforce age
45 and older was 37.9% in 1986 compared to 57.2% in
1999 and the average age increased from 42.4 years to 45.8
years over the same period (National Academy of Public
Administration, 1999). 1974 1998 60,000 Workforce FOREST SERVICE EMPLO YEES CALENDAR YEAR 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 FIGURE 1 Federal Workforce Trend With the exception of Yellowstone in 1988, the 1994 fire
season burned more acres than any other recent fire season
(Figure 2). Thirty-four firefighters died in that fire season.
Firefighting resources were in short supply and costs were
high. The severity of 1994 brought the problem of hazardous
fuel conditions to the forefront. This season was a catalyst
for the federal agencies to review their programs and make
necessary changes in policy. Land management decisions
can create ecosystems prone to adverse fire effects. Other
areas of policy review were aimed at reducing the cost and
risk of large fire suppression, improving line officer
accountability in wildland fire management and strength-
ening the support and role of outside agencies in federal
fire management, while assisting state and local govern-
ment wildland fire protection. The Forest Service review of the 1994 fire season (USDA
Forest Service, 1995) resulted in the development of the
Course to the Future, which laid out the work necessary
to make an effective fire management program in the face
of increasing complexities. The "Course to the Future" has underlain the changes that
the Forest Service has made since 1994 in the fuels pro-
gram (Figure 3). The recognition that fuels management is
necessary for success in reducing large fire costs and improving ecosystem health is well rooted in the organiza-
tion as well as being recognized by the General Accounting
Office (GAO, 1999). Key recommendations from the "Course to the Future"
remain unresolved. These include: By the year 2005, establish a multi-funded, interdiscipli-
nary account for restoration and maintenance of fire
dependent ecosystems. Develop a workforce capable of achieving, restoring, and
protecting these ecosystems at this scale. Establish prescribed fire objectives and assess fire conse-
quences into the land management planning process. Renegotiate state and local cooperative fire agreements
with partners at the wildland/urban interface to clarify pro-
tection responsibilities. Move toward preparing 75% of the workforce to be
trained, qualified, and available to support fire emergencies
by the year 2000. Intensify training of line officers to better redeem fire
management responsibilities. These six recommendations can be categorized into four
issues that inhibit the successful execution of the fire man-
agement program. The Forest Service identifies (USDA
Forest Service, 1995) these as: 2 USDA FOREST SERVICE - AN AGENCY STRATEGY FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW 1980 3,500 Wildfires - Forest Service ACRES BR UNED (1000s) YELLOWSTONE 3,000 2,500 2,000 0 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 500 1,500 FIGURE 2 USDA FOREST SERVICE - AN AGENCY STRATEGY FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT 3 NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW Integration - Integration of the fire and fuels program into
land management decision making is, in many places,
nonexistent. This integration is paramount. Land manage-
ment decisions should not create, or further promote, a
paradox where fire as an ecosystem agent contradicts the
intended land management goal, yet they frequently do. Relationships - Many fire program staff, and the line offi-
cers that are responsible, do not enjoy firm, stable, produc-
tive relationships. These relationships vary as a function of
the individuals involved, rather than being founded on
important principles and mutual respect. Support - Large fire costs continue to escalate. The cost of
fighting fire is incredibly expensive. The mechanisms for
funding emergency fire suppression do not foster cost
reduction in the current environment. Social demands tend
to exacerbate the problem by requiring more and more
resources be employed in essentially futile efforts at effec-
tiveness. The agency cannot muster much of its own work-
force to support large fire emergencies. This requires sup-
ply from outside sources, which are frequently more
expensive to obtain and transport. Role of Others - The Forest Service's external cooperators,
particularly the state wildland fire protection organizations
do not agree with many of the approaches to fire manage- ment the agency uses. In addition, the expense of the feder-
al fire fighting effort is prohibitive to the cooperators,
causing less use and hard feelings. Many states are reluc-
tant to help a cooperator who appears to be unable to help
themselves (Forest Service). W HERE A RE W E G OING The charge of this National Fire Program review was to
take a fresh look at the common problems that have
plagued effective fire management over the years and see
what agency actions are necessary to make it better. Fire management is more complex as social, political, eco-
nomic, and environmental pressures increase. Fire manage-
ment considerations have to become part of land manage-
ment decision making. To accomplish this task, line and
staff must work effectively together, the agency must be
able to support emergencies when they arise, and work
effectively with cooperators, who are becoming more and
more critical to success. The agency is at a crossroads: it
can remain as is, or do something fundamentally different
to meet these challenges. This report proposes the latter. 0 1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985 Fuel Treatment Program ACRES TREATED 250,000 500,000 750,000 1,000,000 1,250,000 1,500,000 FIGURE 3 4 USDA FOREST SERVICE - AN AGENCY STRATEGY FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW ISSUES, IMPORTANCE AND URGENCY Several programmatic self examinations have been
conducted in fire management since 1994, including
nationally: Strategic Fire and Aviation Management Goals
and Actions in Support of Ecosystem Management,
March, 1994. Strategic Assessment of Fire Management,
January, 1995. Course to the Future - Positioning Fire and
Aviation Management, May, 1995. Final Report of the Interagency Management
Review Team, South Canyon Fire, June, 1995. Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and
Program Review, December 1995. The standard approach of conducting a review, finding
problem areas, developing recommendations, and imple-
menting action plans does not seem to solve repetitive and
recurrent issues. The approach to solving these continuing,
repetitive issues has always been the same and the results
are also always the same. This led the Forest Service to try
a different approach to addressing these chronic issues. T HE S PECIFIC I SSUES Four common issues raised repeatedly in program reviews
seem to transcend fire management such that they require
an agency solution, rather than a simple program fix.
These common issues, in order of importance to success,
are: 1. Integration of fire management in land management 2. Line/Staff relationships for an effectively managed program 3. Large fire support and corresponding large fire costs 4. Role of other agencies Cultural considerations permeate all issues and define the
environment in which programs must operate. The design
of the existing fire organization is not compatible with
today's workforce culture. Managers have little ability to
modify the culture but can modify the organization. The
underlying systemic problems and issues identified for fire
management also significantly affect other Forest Service
programs. Culture issues must be recognized and dealt
with on an agency basis. The refinement of the issues follows: I NTEGRATION OF F IRE M ANAGEMENT INTO E COSYSTEM M ANAGEMENT Lack of integrated planning results in competing and con-
flicting direction and objectives. Many times land manage-
ment decisions are compromised by creating conditions
which cannot be sustained in fire dependent ecosystems.
Functionalism is promoted when an integrated approach is
not used in land management decisions. When profession-
als are not available to participate in land management
decision making, resultant decisions suffer. Functions that
are adequately represented will overshadow the missing
function, leading to land management decisions of lesser
quality. The same problems arise operationally when land
management projects are implemented. Functional budgets and programs promote competition
among staff areas, single benefit resource projects, and
narrowly focused personnel. This prevents integration, effi-
cient funding and staffing of projects, and inhibits broad
based understanding of fire's role in ecosystem manage-
ment The Forest Service directives system is not well aligned.
Fire management direction is found in many places and is
not complementary in many cases. This exacerbates func-
tionalism. Functionalism results in conflicting and competing agendas
for limited agency resources. In some cases, conflicting
direction, such as in the management of threatened and
endangered species, places fire managers at risk of failure. USDA FOREST SERVICE - AN AGENCY STRATEGY FOR FIRE MANAGEMENT 5 NATIONAL FIRE MANAGEMENT REVIEW Participation in another resource area's activities, such as
wildlife personnel helping on fire projects, does not appear
to enhance one's career, or professional standing among
their peers. L INE /S TAFF R ELATIONSHIPS Relationships between line officers and staff managers are
strained because of different backgrounds and experiences,
differing perspectives about priorities, unclear communica-
tions, uncertain direction, and different roles. Many line
officers do not actively participate in fire management
activities. Some do not actively participate in leadership
and management of their own fire programs. When line
officers do become involved they are frequently criticized
for it by fire managers. Some line officers do not perceive
active fire participation as career enhancing. Many fire
managers do not actively seek line officer support, involve-
ment, or line officer experience. Consequently, there is a disconnect in communications and
support for each other. Functional allegiance (both line and staff) creates a chasm.
As less time is spent working on common problems, the
chasm widens. This environment leads to an appearance of
a "club" with initiation rights and membership examina-
tions. These "clubs" are perceived to exist by both line and
staff for both line and staff. It appears that there are disconnects among Forest Service
mission and culture, agency priorities and workforce.
Forest Service leadership does not clearly communicate its
expectations. This leads to mixed, often ignored messages. Incident Commanders assume a powerful role in large fire
decision making. They select the people for their teams
which can amplify the appearance of a "club.
