Preston fox prescribed fire review
Preston Fox
ESCAPED PRESCRIBED FIREREVIEW
November 20, 2009
Okanogan - Wenatchee National Forest
Entiat Ranger District
Entiat, Washington
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
BACKGROUND
PROCESS
FINDINGS
Element 1: Seasonal Severity, Weather, and On-Site Conditions Leading Up to the Wildfire Declaration
Element 2: The Actions Taken Leading Up to the Wildfire Declaration, to Determine Consistency with the Prescribed Fire Burn Plan
Element 3: The Prescribed Fire Burn Plan and Consistency with Policy
Element 4: Prescribed Fire Prescription and Consistency with On-Site Measured Prescription Parameters
Element 5: Approving Line Officer’s Qualifications, Experience, and Involvement
Element 6: Qualifications and Experience of Other Key Personnel
Element 7: Key Causal Factors
CONCLUSIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS / OBSERVATIONS / LESSONS LEARNED
1
Preston fox prescribed fire review
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On Friday, October4, 2009, a U.S. Forest Service prescribed fire nearEntiat, Washington, escaped, resulting in 1071 acres of fire outside the unit. This included a portion of the EntiatExperimental Forest.
The Preston FoxPrescribed Fire was planned to treat 10 acres of natural fuels on National Forest Lands. Itsescape and the resulting wildfire caused 1071 acres of Federal land to burn. The initial phases of the wildfire were managed by the local resources then transferred to the local Type 3 Incident Management Team (Incident Commander Cannon).
The Okanogan - Wenatchee National Forest Deputy Forest Supervisor convened a team of three people to conduct a review into the key causal factors for this escaped prescribed fire. The Review Team interviewed personnel associated with the implementation of the burn, and reviewed and examined written documentation of events and actions leading up to and immediately following the escape.
The Review Team found that the test fire phase of the prescribed fire was unsuccessful. The principal causal factors of the escape stemmed from an underestimation of potential fire behavior, rate of spread, size of test fire, and potential for escape fire. Due to the size of the test fire, personnel onsite could not readily control it, when fire behavior indicated it was outside prescription parameters.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
The Okanogan - Wenatchee National Forest Deputy Forest Supervisor convened a team of three people to conduct a review into the key causal factors for this escaped prescribed fire. The Review Team interviewed personnel associated with the implementation of the burn, and reviewed and examined written documentation of events and actions leading up to and immediately following the escape. The principal objectives of the review were to:
- Determine if the Prescribed Fire Plan was adequate for the project and complied with policy and guidance related to prescribefire planning and implementation.
- Determine if the prescription, actions, and procedures set forth in the Prescribed Fire Plan were followed.
- Describe and document factual information pertaining to the review.
- Determine if overall policy, guidance, and procedures relating to prescribed fire operations are adequate.
- Determine the level of awareness and the understanding of the personnel involved, in regard to procedures and guidance.
BACKGROUND
The EntiatRanger District is one of sevenRanger Districts on the Okanogan-WenatcheeNational Forest in Washington.
On Thursday, October 4, 2009, a U.S. Forest Service prescribed fire near Entiat, Washington, was declared an escape, resulting in 1071 acres of Federal land being burned. The project had been initially ignited on October 1, 2009, at 1328, when a test fire was ignited. Prior to ignition, the burn boss and ignition specialist reviewed the current and predicted weather, and took samples of fine fuel moistures. After further reviewing the parameters of the prescribed fire burn plan they decided to commence with the test fire ignition.
The test fire consisted ot a strip along one edge of the burn unit. At approximately 1345, the first strip was completed, and a small spot fire was reported in the ditch on the upper side of road 5504. Ignition was halted briefly, until the small spot was contained. Single tree torching and flare ups in brush concentrations within the burn unit were observed prior to the first spot fire. As soon as the spot was contained, and the first strip was secured, a second strip was started.
By 1400, the second strip was completed, and another spot fire was reported above the 5504 road. This spot fire grew rapidly, and at a rate unexpected, in an understory dominated by decadent snowbrush ceanothus and pine grass. Even with contingency resources on site, the spot fire spread quickly, and exceeded the capabilities of the resources on hand to contain. Between 1400 and 1415 ignition continued, a third strip across the top was already started when the burn boss ordered all ignition to stop. By 1530, the spot fire was estimated to be between 50 to 100 acres in size, and within the identified contingency area.
The escape was initially managed by local resources, then transferred and managed as a Type 3 Incident(as recommended by a complexity analysis) and was established as the Preston FoxFire, Incident WA-OWF-1078. Incident Objectives were:
1) SAFETY-Provide for firefighter and public safety at all times.
2) Contain fire east of the ridge between McCrea and Burns Creek
3) Contain fire west of the East Fork of Brennegan Creek.
4) Contain fire above the 5504 road.
5) Contain fire south of Devil’s Backbone Trail.
Background on the Preston Fox Prescribed Fire:
Fuel loadings throughout the burn area are light to moderate with scattered pockets of heavier loadings mostly within the draws and on the north slopes.Fuel models found within the burn area are identified in the table below.
Fuels within and adjacent to the burn area.
Burn Unit / DominantFuel Model / Secondary
Fuel Models / Fuel
Loading
Tons/Ac. / Adjacent
Fuel Models
South facing slopes / 6 / 2 ,5 and 9 / 5-16 / 2, 8, and 9
North facing sloes / 8 / 9 / 15-26 / 2 and 6
West facing slopes / 2 / 1 and 9 / 3-7 / 5 and 9
Long Term Objectives:
The purpose of this project was to begin to create a landscape that is more resistant to wildfire and that sustains ecosystem processes, patterns and composition that are sustainable in order to meet management objectives. Specific goals of the prescribed burn are:
- Reduce the risk of stand replacement fires.
- Control stands density with fire and/or thinning to favor more open, fire resistant and healthy stands.
- Reduce the potential spread of wildfire between Forest Service land and private land.
- Establish a fire treatment regime that closely mirrors suspected natural fire frequencies.
Preston Fox BurnSite Description:
The majority of the landscape within the Preston Fox burn area is dominated by a homogeneous, dense stands of immature sapling and pole-sized ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir (photo 1). In the higher elevations lodgepole pine and white bark pine are the dominant species (photo 2). Isolated areas of western white pine, grand fir, and quaking aspen exist in the study area. The under story is dominated by early seral species, primarily snowbrush ceanothus and pine grass. Much of this shrub under story is decadent, containing large amounts of dead stems and leaves. Small areas of mature timber exist in isolated areas. Forest plant associations in the Douglas fir series in the warm, dry shrub/herb and cool, dry grass plant association groups characterize these stands.
(Photo 1) – Ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir.
Photo 2 – Lodge pole pine at higher elevation with small component of dead and down material.
PROCESS
The Review Team spent October5, 2009, in the field looking at the unit, interviewing key personnel, researching, examining decision-making processes, and reviewing materials relevant to the Beehive Prescribed Fire.
The review process included review or analysis of:
- The Prescribed Fire Burn Plan.
- Weather and on-site conditions leading up to the escape.
- The qualifications of personnel involved.
- The actions leading up to the escaped fire, for consistency with the Prescribed Fire Burn Plan, including causal agents contributing to the escaped fire.
- Interviews with participants of the prescribed fire.
Review Team
Laura Mayer / Team Leader / R6 Fuels Analysis / State Office Regional OfficeLeanne Mruzik / Team Member / Fuels Management Specialist / State Office Regional Office
Anthony Starkovich / Team Member / South Zone Fire Mgt Officer / Mt. Baker-SnoqualmieNF
Forest Participants
Clint Kyhl / Deputy Forest Supervisor / Supervisors OfficeTom Graham / District Ranger / Wenatchee River RD
Bobbie Scopa / Forest Fire Staff / Supervisors Office
RichyHarrod / Forest Fire Ecologist / Supervisors Office
Kyle Cannon / Division Chief / Entiat RD
Aaron Rowe / Prescribed Fire Burn Boss / Entiat RD
Roberto Garibay / Ignition Boss / Entiat RD
FINDINGS
- The emphasis of the Review Team’s findings is based on the following seven assigned elements: (Interagency Prescribed Fire Planning and Implementation Procedures Guide, July 2008, page 29).An analysis of seasonal severity, weather events, and on-site conditions leading up to the wildfire declaration.
- An analysis of the actions taken leading up to the wildfire declaration for consistency with the Prescribed Fire Plan.
- An analysis of the Prescribed Fire Plan for consistency with policy.
- An analysis of the prescribed fire prescription and associated environmental parameters.
- A review of the approving line officer’s qualifications, experience, and involvement.
- A review of the qualifications and experience of key personnel involved.
- A summary of causal agents contributing to the wildfire declaration.
In preparing this report, the Team focused on findings that were considered significant contributing factors to the escape of the prescribed fire.
The information under each element of the review is organized leading with a finding, followed by supporting discussion and background information. Recommendations are summarized in a separate section that follows the element reviews.
Element 1: Seasonal Severity, Weather, and On-Site Conditions Leading Up to the Wildfire Declaration
The area of the Preston-Fox incident lies within Fire Weather Zone 677, in the Spokane Fire Weather Forecast area. The historical observations taken by the Dry Creek Remote Automated Weather Station (RAWS352620) best represent seasonal fire weather indices for the area of the Preston-Fox incident. The fire season had been about average with the indices staying well below the 90 percentile. A few drying trends in early and late August pushed all indices to above the 90th percentile. Rain events occurred in mid August then again during Labor Day weekend driving all indices well below the annual historical averages. On October 1, the day of ignition, fire weather indices where in the 30th to 40th percentile range, see table below.
Fire Weather Observations from WIMS for Dry Creek RAWS using NFDRS Fuel Model C for September 28 –October 2, 2009.
Sept / Fuel Moisture 10, 100, 1000 / Ignition Component / Spread Component / Energy Release Component / Burning Index / Haines Index29 / 6, 6,10 / 21 / 11 / 14 / 31 / 2
30 / 7, 8, 10 / 20 / 13 / 13 / 32 / 3
01 / 9, 9, 11 / 11 / 9 / 10 / 24 / 2
02 / 8,10,10 / 21 / 16 / 12 / 34 / 2
The fuels models identified under Element 4 – Burn Area Description are fuels model 6, 5, 2, and 9, with adjacent fuels models of 6, 5, 9, 2, and 8. The dominant fuel model identified for south facing slope units is fuel model 6, and secondary models are 5, 2, and 9. In addition, vegetation description describes an understory dominated by early seral species, primarily snowbrush ceanothus and pine grass. Shrub understory is decadent, containing large amounts of dead stems and leaves.
National information for live fuels moisture found within the Wildland Fire Assessment System ( under the AVHRR NDVI Greenness database Relative Greeness (RG) Maps are available that portray how green the vegetation is compared to how green it has been historically. The RG is just one indicator that could be used to indicate live fuel moisture or relative greenness. The RG map for October 1, 2009 indicated the relative greenness of live fuels well below the normal historical range for the Preston Fire. Weather and fine dead fuels moisture observations taken October 1, 2009, prior to ignition, were well within the Weather and Fuel Guidance Parameters for Moderate-Dry prescription level. Live fuel moisture samples not taken prior to ignition, and an assumption was made that the live fuels moisture content was within the prescription levels parameters of “cured to 100 %”, identified in Element 7 – Fire Behavior Prescription. It should be noted that live fuels moisture sampling was not required in the burn plan, and that part of the contingency line, and the burn unit boundaries were identified within shrub fields and/or drainages with a heavy shrub component, and these were expected to hold or slow fire spread. Local knowledge of how live fuels would contribute to fire behavior and spread appear to be limited, and not considered a factor prior to ignition.
Element 2: The Actions Taken Leading Up to the Wildfire Declaration, to Determine Consistency with the Prescribed Fire Burn Plan
On October 1, 2009, at 1328 ignition of the test fire started. Prior to ignition, the burn boss and ignition specialist reviewed the current and predicted weather, and took samples of fine fuel moistures. After further reviewing the parameters of the prescribed fire burn plan they decided to commence with the test fire ignition. All weather and fine fuel moistures that were measured were recorded, and these were within the weather and fuel guidance parameters identified in the burn plan. Live fuel moisture was not considered a factor as far as contributing to fire spread. Although live fuel moisture parameters are identified in the burn plan,no live fuel moisture samples were taken.
The burn boss and ignition specialist decided to light one strip across the entire top of the unit below road 5504, and to use this strip as the area of the test fire. Dot ignition technique was used, to help keep intensity down. The ignition specialist observed that the spacing between the each ignition point was readily spreading together and requested lighters to spread out the ignition points (dots).
At approximately 1345, the first strip was completed, and a small spot fire was reported in the ditch on the upper side of road 5504. Ignition was halted shortly, until the small spot was contained. Single tree torching and flare ups in brush concentrations were observed prior to the first spot fire. As soon as the spot was contained, and the first strip was secured, a second strip was started.
By 1400, the second strip was completed, and another spot fire was reported above the 5504 road. This spot fire grew rapidly, and at a rate unexpected, in an understory dominated by decant snowbrush ceanothus and pine grass. Even with contingency resources on site, the spot fire spread quickly, and exceeded the capabilities of the resources on hand to contain. Between 1400 and 1415 ignition continued, a third strip across the top was already started when the burn boss order all ignition to stop. By 1530, the spot fire was estimated to be between 50 to 100 acres in size, and within the identified contingency area. On October 4, when it became apparent that the fire would exceed the contingency area and burn into the experimental forest, the unit declared an escape fire.
When asked during the review process how the burn boss and ignition specialist had planned to contain the test fire if the results did not meet burn objectives, the ignition specialist indicated that they planned on letting the test fire burn through the entire 10 acre unit, and hold the burn within the unit boundaries, and below road 5504.
Element 14 – Test Fire Provisions in the Planned Location states:
- The test fire will take place at the top of the unit each burn day, preferably in an area that is representative of the unit’s fuels loading, terrain, and local weather influences.
- The test fire will be closely monitored and documented to assure all prescription parameters can be met before continuing with ignition of the unit.
The test fire previsions were not followed. With the exception of a test fire taking place at the top of the unit, the first, second, and start of the ignition third strip were ignited without taking into full consideration the fire spread, prescription parameters, and ensuring burn objectives were being met.
Element 3: The Prescribed Fire Burn Plan and Consistency with Policy