Fuel treatments such as prescribed fire and mechanical treatments are tools used widely by land managers to meet objectives such as reduction of fire area burned, reduction of fire behavior variables such as flame length and rate of spread, and reduction of fire severity. Fuel treatments have ballooned in scope and expense and, in the face of a warming climate and increasing fire severity, agencies in the state of Utah are allocating significant resources to this area. The state of Utah, the BLM in Utah, and the Forest Service in Utah have all committed large amounts of funding to fuel treatments over the past several years and moving forward. Fuel treatments can be effective in meeting objectives, but the research evidence for this comes mostly from case studies in low-elevation, pine-dominated systems. We need a better understanding of which fuel treatments are most effective, in which vegetation types they are most effective, and for how long they are effective so that managers have good information as they prioritize projects and make decisions.

The objective of the proposed work is to use broad-scale spatial analysis, existing monitoring data, and fire behavior modeling to assess the effectiveness of fuel treatments in meeting land management objectives in Utah. Specific tasks include 1) use existing datasets from the Utah Forestry Fire and State Lands, the Utah BLM, and the USFS in Utah to summarize fuel treatment interactions with fire perimeters and fire starts, to assess treatment exposure to wildfire. 2) Use existing monitoring data to compare treatment objectives with values measured in monitoring plots. 3) Use existing datasets to model fire behavior in the presence and absence of treatments. Results will be disseminated to managers and the public in the form of a written report, oral presentations, and summarized on a website.

Although wildfire is a integral component of natural ecosystems, it can have harmful effects on human communities through damage to property, watersheds, and air quality. It is also expensive; fire prevention is far more cost-effective than fire suppression, especially for large, high-severity fires. Fuel reduction treatments can help reduce the threat of high-severity fire, and also result in other ecological benefits. For example, fuel reduction treatments that reduce the threat of wildfire and subsequent cheatgrass invasion may be the only tool that can maintain important wildlife habitat, since cheatgrass is almost impossible to eradicate after it dominates a landscape and the grass-fire cycle is established. Other values, such as healthy watersheds and intact soil, are also easier and cheaper to protect than to rebuild. This project is designed to evaluate the effectiveness of fuel treatments and make recommendations about whether they are optimal in reducing the threats and risks to values in Utah.

Several Fire Management objectives in the State of Utah Resource Management Plan, which align with the Utah Catastrophic Wildfire Reduction Strategy (CatFire), overlap with this project. Goals of CatFire include resilient landscapes, fire adapted communities, and strong and effective local wildfire response. Fuels treatments can help with all of these goals, and a detailed understanding of fuels treatments that are maximally effective can help with efficient, cost-effective actions that meet CatFire goals. Other objectives of CatFire that overlap include "Make sure literature is updated as necessary to incorporate current research information", "Identify gaps in research and pursue funding to address research needs", and "Maintain collaborative efforts with interagency partners to deliver and update information". Finally, Utah's goal to "Expand planning opportunities" for Wildland Fire Fuel Management overlaps with this project as well. The US Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management uses the Utah Land Use Plan Amendment for Fire and Fuels Management. Although several resource protection measures are relevant, the one that most directly relates to this project is "Establish fuel treatment projects at strategic locations to minimize size of wildfires and to limit further loss of sagebrush". One goal of this project directly addresses this measure by evaluating whether fuel treatment projects are indeed being placed at locations that minimize the size of wildfires. The USDA Forest Service Region 4 encompasses all of Utah, as well as parts of other states. Each National Forest in Utah has a Forest Plan, and each of them include language on fuels treatments. For example, the Forest Plan for the Uinta portion of the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest states that "the reduction of fuels in the wildland urban interface protects homes, forest infrastructure, and sensitive watersheds from catastrophic wildfire... Fuels treatments consist of prescribed fire, wildland fire use, mechanical treatments, biological treatments, and other approved fuels treatment techniques. These treatments play an active role in the management of forested and non-forested vegetation health, rangeland health, wildlife habitat, watershed, and social concerns across the Forest. All fuels treatment methods are utilized to improve vegetation structure and age class diversity." The Dixie National Forest Plan Goal # 48 is to "Establish and maintain fuel mosaics which result in an acceptable hazard and spread potential of wildfire, allow an appropriate wildfire suppression, and coordination to other resource programs and objectives." This project will address these Forest Plan and others in the state of Utah by evaluating whether fuels treatments are meeting stated objectives as well as acting effectively to reduce wildfire risk.

Fuels reduction treatments are designed to reduce the threat of catastrophic wildfire, which can result in damage to homes and infrastructure, watersheds, wildlife habitat, and other critical infrastructure. This project is focused on fuel reduction treatments across the state of Utah, and outcomes will be shared with the goal of refining how and where fuel treatments are implemented, to better protect values at risk. Previous research has shown, in dry pine-dominated forests, that fuel treatments (especially thin + burn treatments) reduce fire severity, crown and bole scorch, and tree mortality compared to untreated forests. However, the findings are less consistent for other types of treatments, such as mastication. Most fuel treatment research has focused on dry pine forests, and most research has consisted of case studies. This limits the general inferences that can be made about the effectiveness of treatments.There has been far less work examining fuel treatment effectiveness in rangeland or high-elevation forests, and also far less work examining large datasets to analyze patterns in fuel treatments and wildfires at a regional scale. "Exposure" to fire is a metric used to try to determine whether fuel treatment projects are being targeted to the appropriate regions. This is important for cost-effective use of limited resources. Of the thousands of treated acres, many of those do not experience fire within the window of treatment effectiveness (up to ~15 years). The cost of treatment per unit area ($5-2000/acre) is an order of magnitude less than the cost of suppression and rehabilitation, especially in severe wildfires ($27/acre up to >$20,000/acre). Therefore, the judicious placement of treatments is key to optimizing the total funds spent on the combination of mitigation and suppression on western landscapes.

Fuel treatments have the potential to indirectly improve water quality and/or increase water quality, by reducing the risk of large high-severity wildfires. High-severity wildfire results in decreased infiltration, leading to increased run-off and erosion. Understanding which fuel treatments work best, in what ecosystems they are most effective, and how long they are effective can improve planning efforts everywhere, but particularly in important or vulnerable watersheds.

Not applicable. This project takes advantage of previously collected data and requires no additional field work.

In the first approach, we will use existing datasets from the Utah Forestry Fire and State Lands, the Utah BLM, and the USFS in Utah to summarize fuel treatment interactions with fire perimeters and fire starts, to assess treatment exposure to wildfire. The first question we will answer is: how are fire risk metrics and fuel treatments related? We will create a grid over the state of Utah; within each grid cell, fire risk metrics will be correlated with fuel treatment characteristics to assess whether fuel treatments are located in highest-risk regions within Utah. Fire risk metrics will come from the Utah Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal (UWRAP) as well as data we can derive from datasets such as area burned, fire severity, and fire starts. The second question we will address using these data is: what is the probability that a treatment is "tested" by fire in Utah, and what is the likelihood that a fire will encounter a treatment? To answer these questions, we will use ArcGIS software and account for timing of both fires and treatments (e.g., a treatment is not "tested" by a fire that burned prior to the treatment). The third question the graduate student will answer using fuel treatment and fire spatial data is: how do fire starts, final fire sizes, fire severity, and suppression costs compare when fires start in treated vs. untreated areas? In answering this question, we will also be able to evaluate whether treatments vary by age or treatment type, or by underlying vegetation type, in their effect on wildfire metrics. In the second approach, we will use existing monitoring data to compare treatment objectives with values measured in monitoring plots. Questions may include: for how many years are objectives met? Do treated areas differ significantly from untreated areas? The details of this analysis will depend on the variables monitored by each agency and how long plots are monitored, as well as where monitoring plots are located. This dataset is least certain in terms of the outcomes we can produce. However, it is worth exploring. Taking advantage of available data will allow us to extract all useful information from the work that has been done and provide feedback about relative effectiveness of different types of treatments in meeting objectives as well as longevity of treatments. We will also be able to provide feedback about the utility of the monitoring data being collected and whether there are key additional variables that could be measured to increase the value of monitoring programs. In the third approach, we will use existing datasets to model fire behavior in the presence and absence of treatments. Actual fire starts that occurred in treated areas will be modeled using fuel models representing treated and untreated fuels. We will compare the outcomes in terms of flame length, rate of spread, and other fire behavior characteristics that are important for suppression to answer: Do fuel treatments result in measurable differences in fire behavior and potential ecological effects? Scaled up to scales of space and time larger than individual wildfires, what is the overall effect of fuel treatments on area burned and fire severity in Utah? This work could be used as a first step toward developing a tool that would allow managers to model treatment impacts to fire and help prioritize and plan management actions.

We will use existing monitoring data for part of the project, but no additional vegetation or wildlife monitoring will be done. Project updates will be uploaded yearly to the WRI project website.

Partners include personnel from Utah Forestry Fire and State Lands (Brian Cottam), the Utah BLM (Brad Washa), and the USDA Forest Service Region 4 (Linda Chappell). These partners have been involved in the planning of the project, and will contribute data and resources to the project moving forward.

Project results and recommendations will be communicated with state and federal land managers and landowners through research publications, extension publications, and oral presentations. Recommendations will include elements that can be incorporated into forest plans, wildlife management plans, and other resource management plans.

Fuel treatment projects can benefit domestic livestock by increasing forage, for example by reducing woody plant cover or by promoting new grass growth. In addition, fuel treatments reduce the risk of high-severity fires which can result in erosion, loss of forage, and exclusion of livestock for several years after fire. A better understanding of fuel treatment effectiveness across public lands in Utah can indirectly benefit livestock management by helping managers place treatments in time and space for maximum wildfire risk reduction.

01/01/2019

06/30/2022

2022

We calculated encounter rates between wildfires and fuel treatments statewide, analyzed burn severity in 48 treatments in forested vegetation that burned in wildfires, and summarized manager accounts of treatment effects when encountered by fire. We also measured ecological health metrics associated with Wyoming big sagebrush ecosystem resilience to fire and resistance to cheatgrass in juniper mastication treatment sites that were burned by wildfire.

Wildland fuel treatments are widely implemented on public lands in the western United States to modify wildfire behavior and mitigate negative fire effects. Treatments alter the combustible biomass on the landscape by reducing, restructuring, and disrupting heavy fuel loads and continuity. Federally managed land comprises a majority of the land area of Utah, where the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS) have implemented thousands of fuel treatments. Identifying current landscape-scale patterns and factors driving treatment effectiveness is fundamental for improving the spatial arrangement and rate of implementation for future treatments. The objective of this study was to conduct a statewide evaluation of fuel treatment effectiveness on BLM and USFS-managed lands in Utah using multiple scales and metrics of effectiveness: 1.) Encounter rates, 2.) Burn severity, 3.) Manager reports, and 4.) Ecological health. This study examined the current status of fuel treatment effectiveness on public lands in Utah and provided methods suitable for scaling to the geographic administrative levels that treatments are implemented, such as BLM districts and USFS forests.

Fuel treatments were found to be effective in their primary goals of altering fire behavior, based on the metrics of burn severity and manager reports. Juniper mastication treatments were ineffective at improving the measured ecological health metrics. Fuel treatments were seldom encountered by wildfire, a pervasive issue in fuels and wildfire management. Expanding the treated area network and increasing the use of unplanned fire to treat additional landscape would result in higher encounter rates between treatments and wildfires and thus, the circumstances in which treatments are effective. For more detailed information about this study see the attached thesis on the Images/Documents page.