HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA1898ltlztsku
lnterztgency
fire Mztnztgement
Plztn
liamana/fnlnchumlna Planning Area ~.
0 100 ,, ••
8CALa
march 19B!
I recommend the Bureau of Land Management and State of Alaska fire suppression
organizations implement the Alas~ Interagency Fire Management Plan: .Tanana/
Minchumina Plan Area. I concur with the fire management option(s) to be:: applied
on the lands administered by my organization. I have reviewed. 'the· Plan' and ·
recognize. the fire management options to be applied by the other cooperating
organizations on lands adjacent to those administered by my organization.
State Director
Bureau of Land Management
Theodore Smith
State Forester
Department of Natural Resources
Date ~:2...t:z..I!.Z--L.&~,<?-...!.-/-L-98~2--
Date
John Cook --}"{)-'\_..-Ronald 0. Skoog
Commissioner Regional Director
National Park Service Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Area Director
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Date ----------------------------------
President
Doyon Limited
Date ._5-cP-? ~
----~~--~~--------------------
Regional Director
Fish and Wildlife Servi-ce
--------------------------------·Date
William C. ~-lilliams
President
un:r:/4·tngham
Superint ent
Denali National Park/Preserve
Tanana Chi s Conf ence, Inc.
Date ) r 2
•
•
•
::"
..
I
•
•
THE ALASKA INTERAGENCY FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN
TANANA/MINCHUMINA PLANNING AREA
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT COVER SHEET
-FINAL-
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS
John Cook
Regional Director
National Park Service
540 W. 5th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska
(271-4551)
Curtis McVee
State Director
Bureau of Land ·Management
701 C Street, Box 13
Anchorage, Alaska
(271-5076)
SUMMARY
Keith Schreiner
Regional Director
Fish and Wildlife Service
1011 E. Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska
(276-3800)
Jacob Lestenkof
Area Director
Bureau of Indian Affairs
P.O. Box 3-8000
Juneau, Alaska 99802
(586-7171)
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Indian
Affairs and Bureau of Land Management propose to implement the Tanana/Minchu-
mina Interagency Fire Management Plan. The fire plan applies to approximately
31,000,000 acres of·Federal, State, Native Corporation and other private lands
in central interior ~laska. The plan contains four fire management alterna-
tives or options that range from immediate and aggressive suppression to no
initial attack. Implementation of the plan, which is the preferred alterna-
tive, allows for the use of cost effective strategies to reduce fire suppres-
sion expenditures, and to assure responsiveness to land manager/owner ob-
jectives .
DECISION RECORD
Adopt preferred alternative(s) as shown on Appendix E and implement special
considerations (Table 9). This decision is in conformance with existing
land-use plans where applicable. No significant negative impacts will occur;
therefore, an environmental statement is not required .
•
•
•
I.
II.
-·
-·
•
•
ALASKA. I~ERAGENCY FIRE MANAGEM~NT PLAN
TANANA/MINCHUMiNA PLANNING AREA
AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Table of Contents
List of Tables •
List of Figures.~
INTRODUCTION ,
A. AUTHORITY AND PLANNING TEAM COMPOSITION.
B. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES •..
c.
D.
GENERAL GUIDELINES •••••
RELATIONSHIP TO LAND USE PLANNING •••
E. CURRENT FIRE MANAGEMENT POLICY. , • , •
F. PUBLIC MEETINGS •..••.••••••••••.•••..•..
G. ROLE OF FIRE IN THE ALASKAN ENVIRONMENT.
H. REV! SION ................................ .
PLANNING AREA
A. GENERAL ...•
B.
c.
D.
1.
2.
3.
Location and Size ..
Land Ownership ..•..
Population and Facilities.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT.
1.
2.
3.
Climate .•..
Topography.
Soils/Watershed •..••••
VEGETATION .•...•.••••...•••••••••
1.
2.
3.
Major Plant Communities •••••
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
Black Spruce Woodland ..
Open/Closed Black Spruce Forest ..
Open/Closed White Spruce Forest.
Open/Closed Deciduous Forest .•
Tall Shrubland •••••.•••.•
Low Elevation Shrubland ••
Shrub Bogs and Bogs .•
Grasslands .•••.••
Tussock Tundra ••.
Other Tundra Communities.
Fire Effects on Vegetation ..•••
Postfire Vegetation Recovery .•••
White Spruce .. , •..•••..
Black Spruce •••••••••••
Tussock Tundra ••••.•.•.
Other Non-forested Sites ••
a._
b.
c.
d.
WILDLIFE ........ .
1. Fire Effects on Habitat •••
2. Wildlife Response to Fire .
a.
b.
c.
d.
e .
Moose •..••
Caribou ...
Dall Sheep ..
Bison .................... .
Black and Grizzly Bears .••
0
..... . ... ii
1
1
.2
3
3
4
5
5
• • . • • • • • • • • • . 7
. ... ·-
7
7
9
9
9
.10
.10
.11
• •. 11
..11
.12
.12
.12
.12
..13
.. 13
..13
.13
.13
.14
.15
..15
.. 16
.17
• .18
.. .18
.18
.20
. ....... 20
..21
.21
.21
.22
III.
IV.
v.
VI.
VII.
·VIII.
E.
F.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
Table of Contents, Continued
Upland Game Birds and Small Game Mammals.
Aquatic Furbearers and Waterfowl.~.
Terrestrial Furbearers ..•••••••••
Small Mammals and Birds ••••••••••••••••••.••
Rap tors .... ,. ........... .
Fish-..................... .
THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES .•
1. Animals~
2. Plants ................ . . · ..
HUMAN VALUES AND AGriVITIES.
Wilderness ............ . . ........... .
..... 22
• •• 23
• •• 23
. •.• 24
•• 25 . .... • .• 25
. ....... 26
. ....... 26
. .••.••• 26
· ••..•... 26
•.••. 26 1.
2.
3.
4.
50
6.
7.
8.
Cultura~/Historic R~sources.
Visual Resources ••••••••
....... ..27
..28
.28
.32
.32
.33
......... ~ ....... .
Air Quali."ty ............... .
Recreation ••••
Economy ••••...
Forestry~ ••.•..
. ........................ .
Subsistence and Lifestyle.
FIRE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
A. HISTORICAL FIRE ROLE AND OCCURRENCE ••
FUELS AND FIRE BEHAVIOR ••••• , ••••.••••••.••
SUMMARY OF FIRE OCCURRENCE BY SUBUNIT.
B.
c.
D. SUPPRESSION OOSTS •••••••••••••
E. SUPPRESSION RESOURCES.
FIRE MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES
. ......... .
A. ·INTRODUCTION ••••••..••.••••••••••
·B. INTENT OF MANAGEMENT OPTIONS •••••
C • . GENERAL DESCRIPTION ••••.••
0 0 • 0 33
.37
.42
..43
..44
..44
.47
.~7
.· ~ ...... 48
GENERAL OPERATIONAL POLICY
A. PRESUPPRESSION ••...••.. ~ . .. , ................ ~ .................. 51
.B. GENERAL OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES •••••••••••••••••••••••••• .... ~ .. 52
C. PO STFIRE AGriVITIES •...•........... • ................... . . ...... s 3
OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES FOR INDIVIDUAL FIRE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
A. CR1ITICAL PROTECTION SITES (AREAS) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• .55
..57
.59
.65
B. ·FULL PROTEcTION SITES (AREAS) ••
C. MODIFIED AGriON SITES (AREAS).
D. LIMITED AGriON SITES (AREAS).
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. PURPOSE AND NEED ••••.• . ................... ·~·
B. ALTERNATIVES AND PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ( s ) ••••.
AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ••.•.•••••••..••• · •••••••• : ••••
.71
.71
....... 71 c.
D~ ENVIRONMENTAL OONSEQUENCES •••. . .............................. ~ . 71
E. PARTICIPANTS ••••••
SELEcrED REFERENCES •....••• ................................... • 72
.99
APPENDICES
·A. PUBLIC ·IS SUES -AND · OOMMENTS •••• ~ ••••• ~ ••••••••••••••••••••••• • ••• .101
FOR McGRATH , ALASKA •••••••• ~· .1 0 7
FROM FAIRBANKS, ALASKA ••••••• 109
B.
c.
·D.
CLIMATIC DATA FROM EXTENDED REOORDS
CLIMATIC DATA FROM EXTENDED REOORDS
LAND STATUS . (in map pocket)
!
'~
i •
I
I
•
•
Table of Contents, Continued
• E. MANAGEMENT (WATERSHED) UNITS AND FIRE MANAGEMENT . OPTIONS
(in map pocket) .
F. MODIFIED INITIAL ATTACK ANALYSIS •••••••••••••••••••••••• ~ ••••••••• 113
G. ESCAPED FIRE ANALYSIS ........•.........•...•................•..... 119
H. PREVENTION OBJECTIVES ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 127
I. MONITORING PROCEDURES ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 129 • J. GLOSSARY •.•.. ., ......................•...•.......•............•....• 145
•
•
•
•
•
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Occurrence of heavy smoke conditions in interior Alaska .••••.......... 31
Total number of fires and acres.burned by fire size class .••.......•..• 38
(1957 to 1981)
Total number of fires and acres burned by cause ... · •.....•..•••••......• 40
(1957 to 1981)
Fire occurrence by month (1957 to 1981) ................................ 41
Fire causes by month (195 7 to 1981) .....•.••.••....••..•.•.••..•....... 41
Suppression costs using 196 7 as the base year ...•.........••....... · .... 45
General effects of fire and fire suppression .....••...•...•.........•.. 74
General effects of alternatives ...............•..........•.............• 77
Effects of preferred alternatives •.•.......•.•.....•................... 79
i
•••
I
•
' •
•
:.
·-1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
1.
2 •
3.
4.
5 •
6.
. 7.
8.
9.
10 •
LIST OF FIGURES
Planning area boundaries ............................................... 8
Range of emission factors from forest burning •...•••.••.••..........••. 30
Annual number of Class G fires~ 1957-1981-Tanana/Minchumina ..•...••• 39
planning area
Annual acreage burned by Class G fires-1957-1981 -Tanana/ ..••••.•••. 39
Minchumina planning area
Operational decision chart for Critical. Protection Sites (Areas) •••.•.• 56
Operational decision chart for Full Protection Sites (Areas) •••........ 58
Operational decision chart for Modified Action Sites (Areas) •.••.•.•..• 61
Operational decision chart for Limited Action Sites (Areas) .•••.•....•• 67
Operational decision chart for monitoring procedures .....••.•.•••.•••. l30
Fuel type map ..... !) ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 133
ii
•
•
•
•
I :.
i
' '
'•
•
I
•
L INTRODUGriON
ALASKA INTERAGENCY FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN
TANANA/MINCHUMINA AREA
AND ·'
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
A. AUTHORITY .AND PLANNING TEAM COMPOSITION
This plan is being prepared with the approval and support of the Alaska Land
Use Council (ALUC). The ALUC was fo~ed in 1980 by a provision of the.Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) .
The ALUC designated a Fire Management Project Group .to organize and. coordinate
interagency fire management. The group is composed of 'representatives from
Doyon, Limited (for Alaska Federation of Natives); Alaska Department of Fish
and.Game; Alaska Department of Natural Resources; National Park Service; U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service; Bureau of Land Management; Bureau of Indian Af-
fairs; U.S. Forest Service Region 10; and U.S.F.S. Institute of Northern
Forestry.
The Tanana/Minchumina Fire Planning Team' is . a working group under the. Fire
Management Project Group. It is composed of representativ~s from:
Tanana Chiefs Conference, Inc.·
Doyon, Limited
State of Alaska
Department of Natural Resources
Department of Fish and Game
U.S. Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
National Park Service
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Bureau .of Land Management
. U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service, Institute of Northern Forestry
B. GOALS AND OBJEGriVES
The purpose of this plan .is to provide an opportunity for land managers within
the planning area to accomplish their .land use objectives through cooperative
·fire management. We re«;:ognize . that the management optiori.s developed in this
plan should be ecologically sound, operationally feasible, and flexible enough
to change as new objectives, fnformation, and tec~nology become available.
The objectives of this plan are to ensure:
1. The coordination and consolidation of . fire pr'evention activi-
ties, including education, regulation, enforcement, and burning restrictions~
2. Aggressive and continued suppression action on fires which
threaten human life, identified private property, and physical developments.
3. A regular review to facilitate modification by individual
parties or between parties with shared boundaries and/or concerns.
4. Maintenance of total control by affected land managers/owners
in selecting the fire management options in the lands that they administer.
5. Identification, promotion, and (where possible) prioritization
of needed research related to fire management and fire 1 s role within the
planning unit.
6. Selection of fire management options to help realize current
resource management objectives in a manner which maximizes the effectiveness
of each dollar spent.
7. That the treatment of options other than total and immediate
suppression is as comprehensive in planning, design, and operational guide-
lines as the treatment if total and immediate suppression is planned.
C. GENERAL GUIDELINES
The plan was prepared within these general guidelines:
1. · The boreal forest is a fire-dependent ecosystem, which has evolved
in association ~th fire, and will lose its character, vigor, and faunal and
floral diversity if fire is totally excluded.
2. The plan will be formulated under existing land ownership and land
use plans. This recognizes that land ownership will change continually for
several years, and that land use plans are in various stages of completion.
Yearly reviews, modifications, and updates of the plan will be made accord-
ingly. (See Section H.)
3. This plan will be implemented during the 1982 fire season.
4. The plan will replace the current policy of total suppression with a
comprehensive fire management program for the planning area.
5. This plan will establish fire management options which each land
manager can apply according to his own land use objectives and constraints.
Each land manager is expected to incorporate changes in land use objective'?
into the plan each year. Selection of a fire management option does not
preclude the development of prescribed burning programs by any land
manager/ owner.
6. The functions of allocation of forces, detection, and prevention
will be considered and addressed as needed to accomplish objectives of the
plan.
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
•
•
•
•
7. Cost effective strategies will be explored to reduce fire suppres,-
sion costs, promote resource management, and assure responsiveness to all land
managers' objectives.
D. RELATIONSHIP TO LAND USE PLANNING
This plan is not a land use plan. Rather, it is a guide to coordinate use of
fire suppression forces among a wide variety of land managers and to promote a
comprehensive fire management program. It does not develop land use objec-
tives; it implements these objectives relative to fire management.
Unfortunately, land use. planning has only been completed within very small
portions of the planning area. Thus, specific objectives have not been devel-
oped for most of the planning area. Nevertheless, land managers are guided by
basic policies and objectives which can be stated without land use planning
(e.g., protection of human life). These policies and objectives provide a
solid foundation for this planning effort. As more specific objectives are
developed by various land managers, they will be incorporated ·into this plan .
The status of land use planning for individual agencies is reviewed below.
Native Corporation -Planning is in preliminary stages of collecting informa-
tion. No specific planning is underway although the need is recognized to
promote effective use of resources .
State of Alaska -The State has completed land use allocations in most of the
area. General land use planning for the eastern part of the area has begun,
and is scheduled for completion in mid-1982.
National Park Service -Comprehensive land use planning has begun for Denali
National Park and Preserve .
Fish and Wildlife Service -The Nowi tna Refuge was added to the Fish and
Wildlife Refuge system by P.L. 96487. No specific land use planning has been
dorie.
Bureau of Land Management ~ The Utility Corridor Land Use Plan, covering a 6
to 24 mile wide strip along the Trans-Alaska Pipeline was approved on
September 29, 1979. The Anchorage District completed a plan for the south-
western part of the area in 1981. The balance of BLM land is not covered by a
land use plan.
E. CURRENT FIRE MANAGEMENT POLICY
All participating agencies subscribe to a policy of immediate and aggressive
initial attack, followed by aggressive, sustained attack until the fire is
suppressed. This policy can only be modified when mandated by safety con-
siderations or lack of men/equipment, or when an approved fire management plan
is in effect. The Tanana/Minchumina Fire Management Plan constitutes such a
plan.
3
\
The USDI, Bureau of Land Management and the State of Alaska currently provide
all fire suppression forces in the planning area, The State protects the
northeastern corner of the area, including State, Federal, and private lands.
The BLM protects the remainder of the planning area, including State, Federal,
and private lands.
While the State and BLM still provide all suppression forces, the policies and
objectives under which fire is managed are changing radically. The National
Environnental Protection Act, Federal Land Policy and Management Act, En-
dangered Species Act, and other laws have stimulated the change in policy from
fire suppression to fire management. In addition, lands have been transferred
from the BLM to the State of Alaska, the U. S. National Park Service, and the
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, according to the provisions of the Alaska
Statehood Act (1958), and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act
(1980). The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (1971) gave about 44 million
acres to village and regional Native corporations. Each village corporation
was allowed to select from three to seven townships, while regional corpora-
tions selected varying amounts of land, according to the Native population in
the region. The Act specifies that the Federal government has fire suppres-
sion responsibility on Native lands, even though these lands are in private
ownership.
The fire suppression organizations are moving from a time when they had a
reJ.atively simple mandate (suppress all fires), into an era when they must
respond as service organizations to the complex demands and objectives of many
new and old . land managers. This is the essence of the Tanana/Minchumina
Plan--to provide a formal and organized transition from simple fire suppres-
sion to complex fire management.
F. PUBLIC MEETINGS
In May 1981, public meetings were held in all towns and villages located
within or near the fire planning area. The objectives were to make the public
aware of the plan, and to answer any questions regarding the plan content,
procedures, or potential impacts.
Members of the fire planning team were divided into two groups, one to visit
the northern part of the area and one to visit the south. Team members rep-
resented three to five Federal, State, or private agencies, and always in-
cluded a representative from BLM Fire Management and the Alaska Department of
Fish and Game. Meetings were held in Fairbanks, Ruby, Tanana, Rampart, Minto,
Manley, Nenana/Anderson, Healy, McGrath, Minchumina, Telida, Nikolai, Takotna,
and Medfra.
Before each meeting, team members sent announcements and/or made phone calls
to the community indicating dates when the meeting would be held. !t each
meeting, an overview of the proposed fire management options established by
the plan was given, and the opinions of local residents sought. All comments
regarding the fire plan were recorded, and questions answered. Residents were
encouraged to send any additional suggestions or comments to the Fairbanks or
Anchorage BLM District offices.
4
•
•
•
•
•
• I
•
I
•
•
•
•
•
• I
Appendix A contains a summary of the questions which the public asked, and the
planning team's response •
G. ROLE OF FIRE IN THE ALASKAN ENVIRONMENT
Fire has been a natural force in the Alaskan interior for thousands of years.
It is a key enviromental factor in these cold-dominated ecosystems. Without
fire, organic matter accumulates, the permafrost table rises, and ecosystem
productivity declines. Vegetation communities become much less diverse, and
their value as wildlife habitat decreases. Even some of the plant and animal
·species normally associated with later successional stages will find the
environment unsuitable.
Fire rejuvenates these ecosystems. It removes some of the insulating organic
matter and results iii a warming of the soil. Nutrients are added both by ash
from the fire, and by increased decomposition rates. Vegetative regrowth
quickly occurs, and the cycle begins again.
An occasional fire may be critical: for maintaining the viability of northern
ecosystems, yet fire can also be a threat to human life, property, and valued
resources. The realization that fire plays an essential ecological role, but
also has a destructive potential in relation to human life and values can make
the fire management decision process very difficult.
H. REVISION
This plan will be reviewed for revision yearly by a committee. of land man-
agers/owners. This meeting should take place prior to April 1 to allow fire
suppression organizations to implement any changes. It will be the respon-
sibility of the Bureau of Land Management Alaska Fire Service to manage the
review process.
A land manager/owner may change the management option on any part of his land
at any time between September 30 and April 1. Alterations or changes will be
processed in the same manner as modifications in Cooperative Agreements. It
will be the responsibilitY of the land manager/owner to notify adjacent land
·manager(s)/ owner(s) of any change in the management option.
Information on land status changes, critical sites, and special concerns (such
as historic and cultural sites) may be used to update the plan at any time
during the year. This will be handled at the local .operational level •
5
,-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I I. PLANNING AREA
A. GENERAL
1. Location and Size
The Tanana/Minchumina Planning Area encompasses approximately 31,000,000 acres
(48,000 square miles), about 1,500 square miles smaller than the State of New
York. It is located in central interior Alaska (Figure 1) and is bounded on
the,east by the George Parks Highway, on the south by the crest of the Alaska
Range, on th~ west by the Big River, Innoko River, and Placerville Road, and
on the north by the northern crest of the.Melozitna River watershed, the Ray
Mountains, and the Dalton Highway (Alaska Pipeline haul road) •
The planning area is centrally bipected by the Kuskokwim River and the Yukon
River, the two largest rivers in Alaska. Most of the inhabitants live along
these rivers and the Tanana River which flows into the Yukon at the village of
Tanana.
2. Land Ownership
Major shifts in land ownership are occurring and will continue for several
years as a result of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), Alaska
Statehood Act, and Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. The area
includes 10 recognized Native villages and two Native groups awaiting appro-
vaL (Current land status is shown in Appendix D in map pocket 1.) Corporate
Native lands include patented, interim-conveyed, and selected designations for
both village .and regional corporations as well as cemetery and historical site
selections. Most of the acreage is in the selected cat~gory with continual
changes to interim-conveyed as the ANCSA conveyance process continues.
BLM is the interim manager for nonconveyed Native selections, except for the
Ruby selection inside the Nowi tna Wildlife Refuge for which the Fish and
Wilglife Service is the interim manager. This means that the respective
agencies, acting for the Secretary of the Interior, have the final decision
authority for fire protection on the Native lands.
State land is in a category similar to Native lands: that is, patent~d, tenta-
tively approved, or selected. Patented and tentatively approved lands are
concentrated in the Fairbanks locale northwesterly to Livengood, along the
Parks Highway, in the Kokrines Hills, and in the Poorman area. Elsewhere, the
State lands are chiefly in the selected category. BLM is the interim manager
for State selected lands.
Lands in Denali Na tiona! Park and Preserve are under the jurisdiction of the
National Park Service. The Nowitna Wildlife Refuge, created in March 1980, is
administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service. This agency is also the in-
.terim manager for Native selections lying within the Refuge boundaries.
1.
Base map obtained from Arctic Enviromnental Information and Data Center,
707 A Street, Anchorage, Alaska •
7
figure 1
Tancina-Minchumina Fire Management
Planning Unit
8
30,742,000 ac .
. (48,000 sq. mi.)
Stevens
• Village
I
e!
!
\
I
al
l
I
' I .,
' I
j
•:
i .!
I
i
i
t
i
.~
•
•
i :e
•
•
•
•
The BLM manages the remaining Federal lands outside the Park and Refuge,
except for small military parcels at Clear and Takotna, and several small air
navigation sites administered by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
More than 300 Native allotments and about 75 other settlement claims are found
ac'ross the area. Additionally, there are parcels of privately pa te~ted land.
The claimants for Native allotments, Trade and Manufacture (T&M) sites, head-
quarters sites, and patented mining claims have possessory interests which
place the claims in the same category as private land.
3. Population and Facilities
Most of the people in the planning unit live in the Fairbanks area, with a
local population of about 36,000. The rest of region is sparsely populated.
Twelve villages, located mainly along rivers and highways, have a total popu-
lation of about 2400. A few people live outside of villages on mining claims
or near areas which meet their subsistence needs.
The road net within and adjacent to the planning area is very limited. The
George Parks Highway extends from near Anchorage to Fairbanks, forming the
eastern· boundary of the pl~:mning area from Cantwell to Fairbanks. The-Elliot
Highway forms part of the northeast planning unit boundary, frqm Fairbanks
north to Livengood, and then extends southwest into the planning area to
Manley Hot Springs. The Dalton Highway extends from Livengood northwest to
the Ray Mountains, along the remainder of the northeastern boundary of the
planning unit .
·Most major facilities are· located near population centers or along the road
network. A variety of remote communication sites are scattered throughout the
area, but they are generally located on rocky unburnable ridge tops where they
~r~ not threatened by wildfires •
B. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
1. Climate
The climate is continental, characterized by long cold winters and short warm
summers. Winter temperatures of -60 °F or lower are not uncommon and can be
expected for extended periods of time. Summertime temperatures are relatively
mild, but have reached as high as 90°F. Freezing conditions have occurred in
.every month of .the year within the planning unit. Because sunlight approaches
22 hours/day in the northern portion in mid-June and slightly less in the
southern portion, there is no pronounced variation in burning conditions
between day and night during the peak of the fire season.
Annual precipitation is approximately 12 inches for the northern portions and
19 inches in the central and southern portions with 40 to 50 percent of this
in the form of snow. Light, general rain occurs frequently during the summer
months, although significant amounts are provided by thunderstorms. Thunder-
storms are most frequent in the months of June and July (specific information
can be found in Appendixes B and C). Spring flooding occurs commonly along
nearly all major rivers. Floods also can occur following periods of excep-
tionally heavy rainfall in midsummer.
9
u.
Prevailing winds are southwesterly and tend to be closely associated with
frontal passages. Severe winds often occur near the mouths of the valleys and
steep gorges along the north face of the Alaska Range. These winds influence
adjacent areas for up to 20 miles. Terrain also plays an important role in
determining wind flow patterns in the ,sheltered Interior.
The basic question relative to predicting the seasonal fire weather picture
was addressed to some degree in the climatological study performed for the
Bureau of Land Management by the University of Alaska (Searby, 1975). The
results of assessing whether or not a weather pattern would remain through a
fire season, or if there would be predictable changes as a season progressed,
showed wide variations of temperature and precipitation between years and
during an individual season. This indicates that any predictions of seasonal
or long-range burning conditions would be accompanied by a high degree of
risk.
2. Topography
The planning unit is composed of four physiographic regions:
a. Interior Alaska Lowlands This area includes broad
valleys and plains between the Alaska Range and Kuskokwim Mountains, and south
of the Yukon River between Ruby and Tanana. Most of these lowlands are nearly
level and are interlaced with streams, sloughs, shallow lakes, and marshes.
Also "included are glacial outwash plains and piedmont slopes, originating in
the Alaska Range.
b. Interior Alaska Highlands -The Kokrines Hills, north of
the Yukon River, and the Ray mountains, north of the Tanana River, consist
mostly of rounded hills and ridges but include some mountains higher than
4,000 feet. Parts of the area adjacent to major river valleys are as low as
300 feet.
c. Alaska Range -This long narrow mountain chain forms the
southern boundary of the fire plan area. Steep talus and scree slopes, razor-
back ridges and deep valleys predominate, with many peaks higher than 10,000
feet. Huge glaciers are the source of many of the major rivers and streams
which eventually become part of the Tanana, Kuskokwim and Yukon Rivers.
, d. Kuskokwim Highlands -These uplands, in the west central
'part of the planning unit, include hills and low mountains. The primary
portion consists of a series of rounded ridges 1 ,500 to 2,000 feet in eleva-
tion, separated by deep narrow valleys. A few peaks stand above the general
level of the hills.
3. Soils-Watershed
A description of soils in the planning area can be found in the Exploratory
Soil Survey of Alaska (Rieger et al, 1979). In general, the soils on raised
areas along moraines and hills, or along. major drainages, are well-drained,
sandy or gravelly loams. These are the warmest, most productive, and fre-
quently the driest sites. Severe fire can damage soils on these sites if the
organic mat is thin. However, these sites usually support deciduous plant or
white spruce/moss communities, which are relatively fire-resistant.
10
•
•
•
I_
•
•
I:
I
:
ei
I
-I I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
-·
:~
•
In lowlands, extensive areas are underlain by cold wet soils, usually with a
thick organic mat and often with permafrost. Fire effects on these sites can
vary widely with the severity of fire and the nature of the permafrost.
Permafrost is a condition in which ground temperature remains below freezing
for two or more years. Above the permanently frozen soil is an "a~tive l~yer"
which thaws and freezes each year. Thawing is retarded by the insulating
effect of a thick organic •. t1ayer. The active layer found in the Tanana/Minchu-
mina area ranges from 10 to greater than 60 inches in depth.
Fine-grained permafrost soils may contain up to 50 percent water. They are
ex~remely unstable and easily eroded when the insulating cover of vegetation
is removed because water released by the melting ice can cause runoff even on
very gentle slopes. Sandy soils can have a fairly high ice content but resist
erosion because of their large particle size. Coarse-grained gravelly soils
tend to be very stable because they are generally well-drained.
Many of the soils and substrates in the planning unit are composed of fine-
grained materials. North-facing slopes, south-facing toe slopes, valley
bottoms, and areas shaded by heavy tree-cover are completely underlain by
ice-rich permafrost. Complete removal of the shading or insulating vegetation
rna t __ results in rapid melting of the ice-rich, fine-grained soils ·and sub-
strates. Rain may greatly accelerate melting. If the vegetation mat is
removed to the edge of a water body, silt and organic material may wash into
the water. Significant erosion rarely occurs after wildfires in interior
Alaska because fires rarely consume the entire organic mat, although slumping
and landslides occasionally occur on steep slopes after severe fires.
While wildfires have little effect on watershed values, major erosion fre-
qt~:ently results from the use of mechanized fire equipment on ice-rich, fine-
grained, permafrost soils. Complete removal of all of the vegetation and
organic material during fireline construction causes much deeper permafrost
ll)el ttng than occurs in adjacent burned areas. Runoff channels and deep
gull~ys f-requently form, and stream siltation can result.
C. VEGETATION
1. Major Plant Communities
T.he flora of the Tanana/Minchumina planning area is typical of interior
Alaska. The immense area includes nearly all plant communities found in the
Interior, ranging from conifer and hardwood forests to alpine tundra. The
predominant forest cover types include black spruce, white spruce, har4wood,
and .mixed deciduous-conifer.
a. Black Spruce Woodland -Black spruce forests with a canopy
closure of less than 25 percent, but greater than 10 percent, typically occur
on poorly-drained permafrost sites. The understory is dominated by sphagnum
moss on wetter sites and feathermoss/lichens on drier sites. Ericaceous
.-.
11
2 shrubs , dwarf arctic birch, and cottongrass are also important. The trees
are oft.en very a·tunted due to the harshness of the site. These black spruce
communities often have a thick organic mat, which surface wets and dries out
quickly in response to changes in relative humidity. This,· along with the
continuity of fuel over larger areas, allows this vegetation type to burn
readily when ignited during dry periods· of time, usually with a crown fire.
The site will be ready to burn again in 30-40 years, once a moss/lichen layer
has developed in the new black spruce stand.
b. Open/Closed Black Spruce Forest'~'-Black spruce stands with
canopy cover greater than 25 percent occur throughout the planning area.
Paper birch and tamarack are occasional components. These stands are usually
located on slightly drier sites than are woodland black spruce communities,
and the trees are often taller. The understory is usually dominated by fea-
thermosses, although lichens may form a nearly continuous mat in some stands.
Ericaceous shrubs, dwarf arctic birch, and low willows make up most of the
shrub layer. Open/closed black spruce forests burn with a frequency similar
to that of black spruce woodlands.
c. Open/Closed White Spruce Forest White spruce forests
with canopy closure greater than 25 percent form large, productive stands on
warm well-drained sites, especially along major rivers.. White spruce also
commonly forms "stringers" along smaller streams and around lakes. Paper
birch and balsam poplar often comprise a significant. part of the tree canopy
in these stands.
In open stands, a wide variety of shrubs and herbs dominate the understory,
along with feathermoss. Alder, tall willow, prickly rose, buffaloberry,
bunch berry, twinflower, and ericaceous shrubs are common. Fire occurs much
less frequently in these forests than in the black spruce types. When they
occur they tend to have lower intensities, although, occasionally, fires kill
white spruce, particularly in older stands.
d. Open/Closed Deciduous Forest Pure stands of birch,
aspen, or mixtures of the two species are common on upland sites in the In-
terior. Aspen are most common on warm, well-drained sites, and grade into
birch on colder, wetter sites. Aspen is an intermediate stage leading to
white spruce, while paper birch sites may later be dominated by white or black
spruce. A well developed understory of alder, willow, highbush cranberry and
low shrubs is usually present, as well as herbaceous vegetation, mosses and
lichens. Fires are infrequent in deciduous forests and generally are low
intensity when they do occur. However, these·fires often kill the thin-barked
overstory, after which a new hardwood stand will quickly reestablish.
e. Tall Shrubland -Tall willow, alder, and shrub birch form
dense stands between treeline and alpine communities, and in some riparian
zones. The understory varies considerably, consisting of dense grasses and
herbs, or mosses and lichens. Fires tend to burn very slowly and with very
low intensity on the rare occasions when they occur in this vegetation type.
2 Ericaceous shrubs include blueberry, cranberry, Labrador tea, and other
shrubs belonging to the taxonomic family Ericaceae.
12
•
•
•
•
' ei
! e:
I
.I I
I
\
\e I :
I
l
!
I
I
I ~
I
!
I
'
1
•
f. ·Low Elevation Shrublands -Tall willows form extensive
·e:b!nmuni-ties ·in law areas, particularly near the foothills of -~lle Ai~:s'~a ,:R~ng~.
On·moist sites the understory consists of a dens.e feathermoss/ericaceo~s· shi4b.
mat,. while ·on dry sites there may be nearly continuous cover of ~ich.E!ns~ The
meager fuels and typically moist conditio.ns seldom support fires. of ariy not;...
able size. ' ·
·.·;·
4
· g. Shrub Bogs and Bogs -Vast shrub bog cOmmunities, dom:f.na-
·ted· by ericaceous shrubs, are found over much of the area. Stunted black
·spruce and·. :dwarf-arctic birch ·are often scattered throughout. Shrub _ bog~
. '6ccur ort wet cold sites, generally underlain' by permafrost, and ha're a thic)t
orga·nic -inat. 'This community grades almost imperceptibly into black ·spruce
woodland and low shrublands. On very wet· sites, all shrubs disapp~ar and ~-· ·
' · bog ·characterized by sphagnum dominates. These areas are often left unburned
·.:'when· large fires burn ·surrounding, drier areas.
h. Gr'asslands -Grassy meadows are scattered throughout the
area on old lacustrine and glacial deposits. They are genera~ly dominated_ by·
bluejoint . grass and provide. vital habitat for several· _wildl_i~e_ sp~cie.s.
i. Tussock Tundra -Tussock tundra, dominated by co'ttongrass,
is found on· gentle slopes underlain by permafrost in mountain ·valleys in the
·northwest part of the planning unit. Other· important species include eric~
ceous shrubs, mosses, and lichens, and frequently other sedges, shrub hirch,
·and cloudberry. Fires in tussock tundra can burn with high intensity at any
·time ·of the summer because ·of the large amount· of dead material. Fires ca!l
burn very deeply fnto the organic mat after a long dry period, but more char-
acterist.ically consume only the surface organic layer. · · · · · ·· · ·:-··
j. Other Tundra Communities -Other .tundra communities ·are
also found within the planning area, but do no1; readily burn. Shrub tundra,
dominated by dwarf birch, blueberry, Labrador tea, and dwarf willqw, . is faitly
common at higher elevations, abovE! the shrub bog communities with their
stunted black spruce. Fires which· burn into these communities from lower
elevations frequently go out because of th.e' moist conditions anl sparse fuel~
Fires which do burn have very slow rates o.f. spread· and "low intensity',.' · ·· ·
The following .communities are probably found. within the planning unit at
higher elevations, although their extent is unknown. ·Herbaceous tundra,·
meadow .communities dominated by grasses and other herbaceous plants, ·ate .fOU!J.cl
on adequately drained, protected sites. Fires would be infrequent and o( iqw
intensity, · }?ecause of low fuel loading, ·and summer-green cc:>Itdit'ions.
Sedge,..grass tundra is usually too wet to burn, and also has . a very low quan-
tity of fuels.
Mat"''and-cushion tundra .. communities are laci:tted where harsh-envfr.onrnerttal
conditions limit the development of vegetative cover:. Discontinous low grow-
ing mats of vegetatio~, primarily of Dryas species and prostrate willow are
found,-along with ericaceous shrubs, other forbs, sedges, aiid sometimes
lichens. Fire occurrence is. very low because fuels are sparse and discon-
tinous, and any fire would be quite .small .
. j
13
2. Fire Effects on Vegetation
Fire may. -be the chief factor maintaining vegetative productivity in cold
Alaskan soils, in which the lack of nutrients is a major factor limiting plant
growth. Most nutrients are tied up in the vegetative overstory and in the.
thick moss and organic layers, and are unavailable to plants. The insulating
effect of the organic mat limits summer warming of soil, and keeps the level
of permafrost close to the surface.
Burning organic material changes nutrients from complex forms unavailable for
plant growth, to more simple and readily available forms in ash. The soil
becomes warmer because the overstory and moss layer have been removed, the
organic layer is thinned, and the darkened soil surface -absorbs more of the
sun's heat.· The active layer becomes much deeper, increasing the volume of
soil from which plants can extract nutrients. The soil nutrient regime is
greatly. improved by the increased activity of decomposing and nitrogen fixing
organisms. The degree to which these changes occur is closely> related to the
.·amount of organic matter removed by the fire, a factor which can vary con-
siderably. for different fires and for different areas of a single fire.
The amount of organic layer consumption is the result of an interaction be-
. ·tween·· the organic layer moisture content and the amount of heat released by
.. b~rning fuel. The depth of burning, fire severity, is much greater if the
organic layer has been dried by a long period of sunny weather' than if the
fire occurs after only a few drying days. The type and amount of initial
reyegetation of .the burned area will be closely related to the severity of the
fir·e.
The three major means of plant regeneration after burning are: resprouting
from the stumps of plants killed by fire, resprouting from lateral roots and
rhizomes (buried stems), and plant development from buried or wind carried
seeds. The depth of organic material remaining as a· mat on the mineral soil
· will determine which of these means of revegetation will be the most impor-
tant. ·
In Alaskan· forests . with deep organic layers, most of the below-ground plant
parts are found in the organic mat, rather than in the soil. Roots and rhi-
zomes ·of plants such as blueberry, mountain cranberry, and twin-flower are
· located in the upper portions of the organic layer, while rhizomes of other
,_.-species, such as rose, raspberry, and fireweed tend to be more deeply buried.
Many of the roots of willow and some of the lateral roots of aspen also· grow
in the organic mat. Because these plant parts are th~ source of new sprouts
after fire kills above-ground stems, the depth of burn has a great effect on
the amount of postfire sprouting, and the species likely to dominate the
postfire community. If fire just scorches or burns the surface of the org~riic
mat, killing, for the most part, just the above-ground stems, rapid and often
prolific sprouting occurs from roots and rhizomes of those species found in
the surface organic layers. _ If fire heat penetrates into the organic mat,
killing plant parts to some depth but not consuming all organic matter,
sprouts may originate from more deeply buried plant parts, and the sprouts may
take longer to grow to the surface. Species with more deeply buried rhizomes
and roots will be favored over those species which root primarily in the upper
organic layer.
14
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
:•
C~plete consumption of the-organic laye-r removes many or ·all of 'these 'poten-
ti<il; s:p:i·outing sites, truly killing most p·lantf;l on the site. A fire which
burns away most or all of the organic layer will greatly lfnii t the ·amount-of
vegetative repr~duction which can occur after 'fire, but ·will-favor development'
of --n.e~ plants from seeds by creat:i.ng good seedbed conditions. ·: ·· :
Most plants o£ interior Alaskan forests require. bare or nearly bare mineral
soil as a prerequisite 'for successful seed establishment. When a seed falls
on a blackened, but deep organic layer, :i..t will germinate when there i·s plenty
o:f ·.,-moisture, such as after snowmelt or spring rains.· -However, the seedling
will frequently die i-n a warm summer, because ·it is rooted ·in-the organic-
· layer which dries out. Because mineral soil retains moisture much longer 'than
organic material, a· seed landing on a mineral soil seedbed is much more likely
to develop into a mature 'plant. Also, because postfire sprouting'' is ·limited
on deeply burned sites, the amount of competition from other plants will be
greatly reduced for several -years. --
A mosaic of fuel, o~ganic layer and soil moisture conditions on.a site can
lead to-a variable pat tern of burn severity~ and thus favors the development
of a vegetation ·mo_saic after the fire. Sprouts, seedlings, and v:egetation
which . survived the fire may all be found.·-Successful re-establishment of
seedlings, however, depends on more than the presence of a· suitable seedbed .•
Other -factors are also critical, such as the type and age of prefire -vegeta;...
tion, the time of year when the fire burned,. the distance to the nearest' seed-
source, the amount of. seed consumed by rodents and birds, and the periodicity
of seed crops. Whf.te spruce, for example, iS physiologically ·capable :Of
producing -good corie crops every two. or three years' but the lack of .. favorable
w~ather ·for cone formation can greatly increase the interval. A-·ten year
p¢riod between large cone crops ·is not unusal.
3. Postfire Vegetative Recovery
1) Newly burned stage --lasts for a ·few weeks to. a -year~
Th~ forest: floor is covered with a layer of charred organic material>and-·ash.
Suckers of rose, highbush cranberry, ·willow and aspen appear. firs.t; then
seedlings of fireweed, aspen, paper birch, and rarely, white· spruce. Red
!asp berry, and other herbaceous species will b.e present in lesser amounts:.-
2) Herb-seedling stage -o:..s years· postfire)~.-. This
sJage is dominated by shrubs, aspen, and herbaceous plants, particularly'
firewee_d, and Ceratadon and Polytrichum mosses and the liverwort Marchant-la,
.wh~ich colonize bare mineral soil. Vegetative cover increases; li-tter.·accumu-
lates and a thin or~anic layer begins to form.
I 15
t·
I
4) Dense hardwood stage (26-45 years postfire).
Hardwoods form a dense canopy and shade out the shrub understory. As the
stage progresses, hardwoods begin to. thin, and an understory of. small spruce
develops. Cladonia lichens are more abundant in this than any other stage,
although they are not a significant part of the ground cover. Organic layer
depth does not increase.
5) Mature hardwood stage (46-150 years postfire).
These stands .are characterized by well developed aspen and/or paper birch, or
mixtures of hardwoods and white spruce. Because paper birch trees tend to
outlive the aspen by 30 to 50 years, older stands usually contain paper birch.
or birch/spruce mixtures. Highbush cranberry, prickly rose, twin-flower, and
horsetails dominate the understory; leaf litter covers the. forest floor;
willows, mosses and lichens are not important. The organic layer depth aver~
ages 11 em.
6) Spruce stage -(150 to 300+ years postfire). Mature
white spruce dominates, with a few remaining hardwoods in younger stands.
Prickly rose and highbush cranl?erry are the major understory species, but ~y
. be replaced by green alder in older stands. Twin-flower and horsetails are
common. · Feathermosses cover the forest floor, over a 12 em organic layer •
.. It has been suggested that without fire, some old upland white spruce sites
··would eventually be replaced by black spruce and bog, or a treeless moss/
lichen association, although others believe that white spruce stands are the
:final vegetation stage. Substantial evidence indicates that older white
spruce stands on floodplains are rep'laced by black spruce as perma~rost d~vel
op s under accumulating moss and lichen layers.
b. Black Spruce-Postfire revegetation of black spruce/fea-
thermoss sites follows a sequence similar to that for white spruce sites, but
the duration and dominant species of later stages differs. Permafrost is
close to the surface on most black spruce sites. Fire's consumption of some
of the organic layer, and the blackened surface will result in a warming of
the soil profile. Depth of t~ active layer will increase and soil and vege-
tative productivity will markedly improve. The following sequence. of postfire
vegetative changes have been detailed. by Foote (1980).
1)
few days of the· fire,
joint, Labrador tea,
materials cover most of
Newly burned stage -(0-1 year after fire). Within_a
sprouts of willow, prickly rose, bog blueberry, blue-
cloudberry, ·and Polytrichum moss appear. Charred
the forest floor throughout this stage.
2) Moss-herb stage -(1 to 5 years postfire). Other
species also become important, including black spruce, aspen, paper birch,
addi tiona! species of willows, resin birch, mountain cranberry, Ceratodon moss
and · Marchantia, as well as bluejoint, cloudberry and horsetail. The activ:e
thaw zone increases greatly during this stage.
3) Tall shrub-sapling stage -(5 to 30 years postfire).
Tall shrubs and/or saplings dominate the overs tory, especially willow and
aspen. Black spruce and hardwood seedlings are abundant. Ceratodon moss,
fireweed, bluejoint, blueberry, Labrador tea and mountain cranberry dominate
the low growing vegetation. The active layer reaches its maximum depth,
averaging 82 em.
16
.-.
•
.,
;
•!
•
•
I
i r
' I
•
1
i
b
•
•
•
i .
I
I • I
f
' • I
i
I • !
i
I •
·.•
4) Dense tree ·stage -(30 to 55 years postfire}. An
ove.rstory of numerous young birch and/or aspen trees is present, with exten,..
slve patches of ·low shrubs, feathennosses and Cladonia and Cladiria lichens •
Covet o{ herbaceous plants and willow has greatly decreased, while resin
birch, prickly rose anc.l green alder are still commOn. The trees begin to
self-thirt during this period. These stands· are highly flammable .and fre-
quently burn.
5) Mixed hardwood-spruce stage -(56 to 90 years post-
fire); A mixed overs tory of black spruce, aspen, and/or paper birch domi-
nates. Hardwoods are mature and ·begin to stagnate and die out. Prickly rose,
mountain cranberry' blueberry' bluejoint, bunchberry and feathermosses. are. the
major understory species. The permafrost table begins to advance, averaging
57 em below the surface. Many stands bur~ during this successional s·tage.
6) Spruce stage -(91 to 200+ years postfire). This
final. stage has an overstory of black spruce and perhaps a few relict aspen·
and paper birch. A mid-vegetation layer of green alder, smaller black spruce
arid· sometimes prickly rose. overtops the forest floor layer of feathermosses,
Sphagmnn moss, mountain cranberry, blueberry, and a few herbs. A few Clad ina
and Cetraria lichens are present. With increasing stand age., sphagnum mounds
increase in size, the moss layer thickens, the depth to pennafrost decreases,
and vegetative growth stagnates, because of cold soils and unavaila~ility of
nutrients.
Without .fire, wet b0 ggy conditions and a fafrly open stand of stunted black
spruce will develop on cold.er and. wetter sites. On mesic black spruce sites,
stands II¥1Y increase in density, nia:lnt.aining themselves by layering and rooting
.of lower branches, or may decrease in dens! ty, ·with many dead and dyit;lg trees
and little reproduction. Fire is the only way to restore upland black spru~e
sites to a productive state.
c. Tussock Tundra -. Fires· in . tussock· tundra remove varying
amounts of cottongrass, shrubs. rooted in the cottongrass tussocks, tussock
mounds, and adjacent mosses, lichens and organic matter. Vegetative recovery
after most fires will begin within a few weeks, with sprouting of cottongrass,
other sedges, shrub birch,. ericaceous shrubs, and cloudberry. Because flower-:
ing and seed production of cottongrass increase manyfold, seedling estab-'
lishment occurs on :favorable seedbeds. Lightly burned lichens may regenerate
frem unburned basal parts. After 7 or 8 years, little direct evidence of fire
may be visible~
Revegetation on severely burned sites will proceed more slowly. Many co1:ton:-
grass tussocks will be partially or completely consumed , by fire, .and less
sprouting will occur. Some· shallow rooted shrub species, such as mountain
cranberry and crowberry, may be temporarily eliminated from the site. Cotton-
grass reestablishment from seed will be a major means of revegetation~
Lichens will initially establish from wind blown lichen fragments which land
on moist microsites, ·but it is not known how many years will be required
before lichens regain thetr prefire abundance.
The tussock· growth fonn is a vei:y important adaptation to these cold sites.
Higher than the general ground level, tussocks ·receive more· sunlight, thaw
17
more quickly in the spring, reach maximum summer temperatures sooner, average
6-8° C warmer than soils beneath the surface, and have more favorable nutriertt
regimes because of the warmer temperatures. The tussock growth form ensures
much higher productivity for tussock sedges and associated plants (Chapin, Van
Cleve, and. Chapin, 1979).
Productivity will decline as sphagnum and other mosses fill in the spaces
around the tussocks. Tussocks will no longer receive additional sunlight, so
their internal temperature will be as cold as soil temperatures, and growth of
most vegetation will stagnate. Some tussocks may eventually be completely
buried by sphagnum. Because tundra fires cannot be dated with present
methods, it is not known how long this process takes. The effect of sphagnum
moss accumulation on tussock tundra lichen production is not known, but it may
be detrimental, as it is on black·spruce sites.
d. Other Non-forested Sites -Postfire revegetation in
· shrublands and bogs is primarily by resprouting of shrubs, grasses, sedges,
and low growing herbaceous plants. Because these vegetation types are fairly
·wet, fires rarely' burn severely enough to burn· all root's and rhizomes. After
. the rare event that a fire burns deeply into the organic layers, seed repro-
duction will assume greater importance, and recovery of the prefire vegetation
·will initially be slower.
·Fires in grassy meadows can be intense, but are usually beneficial, even in
the short term. Sprou~ing occurs within a few days. Removal of accumulated
litter and darkening of the soil surface promotes earlier snowmelt and green-
up, and therefore a longer growing season. Seed production is much greater,
ana grass production will increase for· several years, only declining as litter
accumulates to prefire levels. Fire wfll also benefit meadows by removing or
killing back encroaching trees and shrubs.
Postfire revegetation of sedge-grass, and mat-and-cushion tundra has not rreen
studied in Alaska. It is likely that plant recovery will be by sprouting if
perennating· plant parts are not destroyed. If sprouting sites are killed,
recolonization of the small burned areas will probably be from seed, or from
roots and rhizomes which spread into the burned al;'ea from adjacent living
plants.
D.· WILDLIFE
1. Fire Effects on Habitat
Fire is a natural occurrence within Alaskan ecosystems. Generally, the ef-
fects of fire on habitat are much more significant than the effects on
existing animals. .Habitat changes determine the suitability of the environ-
ment for future generations 'of animals. Fires may have a short-term negative
impact on existing animals by displacing or sometimes killing them or by
disrupting critical reproductive activities.. However, these animal popula-
tions recover quickly if suitable habitat is provided. Generally, fire . im-
proves the habitat for a wide vari(;!ty of species. The adverse effects that
the immediate generation of wildlife may experience are· usually greatly offse.t
by the benefits accrued to future generations.
18
.:
I
I
el
i
•'~
i .:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
~· I
•
•••
•
Most of the. planning area is covered wi.th a mosaic .of .forest -and bog habitat
types that have been collectively termed the northern boreal forest. Flre ·is
the primary agent of change in the. bore~l forest and is. responsible· for ma:J,.n-
ta:ining habitat heterogeneity. Wildlife have evolved in the presence of fire
and have adapted to its presence. Indeed, the continued well-being of most
species of wildlife depends on periodic disturbance of the habitat by fire.
Even those species ·normally associated with mature stages of vegetat':;f.on are
able to accommodate and benefit from some level of disturbance . by ... fire_ •
The: grasses· and herbaceous plants that quickly reestablish on burned areas
provide an ideal environment for many species of.small.mammals and birds. A
rapid fricrease in microtine population usu;ally occurs following a fire. This
abundance of small prey animals in turn makes. the recently burned area . an
important foraging area for predatory animals .and birds. However, the size of
the fire and the subsequent proximity to cover, and denning or nesting.sites
affects the degree of use by these larger animals.
Fire severity and frequency greatly influence the length of time that this
grass and herbaceous plant stage will' persist: Severe burning., delays the
reestablishment of shrubs, a benefit to grazing animals and seeci.,.e~~i~. J?Jrds-~
Frequent reburrting of a site further retards generation of shru'!:>.~ -~~4 se~d
lings arid' prolongs the grassland environment.
For some species of wildlife,· such as bison, this perpetuation of a grassland
environment is beneficial. Where bison are p~esent, a management program that
entails periodic burning to preclude invasion by .shrubs and t;rees <;E!-n supp_le·-·
ment the· rangeland that is naturally available · along ·the br~ided river.
courses.
Browsers such· as moose, ptarmigan and hares can benefit from the fire as soon
as ·shrubs a:nd tree seedlings begin to reestablish. If a fire leaves most of
the shrub· root and rhizome ·systems intact, sprouting· will occur very soon
after burning. In the· case of early season fires, some forage may be ay~il
ab•le by the end of· the growing season and limited use by> browsing. a~imals 1118Y
occur. Forage quality is much improved, with higher digestability, protein,
and mineral content for some years after 'fire. As tall shrubs and tree ~ap-·
lings begin to dominate, the site becomes increasingly able to provide spelter
and forage for a greater variety of wildlife. Although the rate of regrowth·
varies among burned areas and is dependent 'on many factors discus'sed earlier,
this productive stage can persist for as long as 30 years after fire.
The greatest variety of wildlife will be found. during the tall ~ll.rub.,.sapling.
stage. Many species, which up to that point have frequented• tp.e burned area--
only to hunt or forage~ begin to find that it prQvides shelter and d~nning or·
nesting sites as well. This abundance. ariel diversity of wildlife, ;l.n turn,.
makes these burned areas extremely import~nt to p'eople, whether it be to hunt
and· ·trap or to view and photograph.
On most sites the young trees outgrow the shrubs and begin to domi-~ate the
canopy after 25-30 years. At this .. ·point the shrub component; thins out and
changes, as more shade-tolerant species replace. the willows. Sub~equently,
use ·by browsing animals such. as moose_, hares, .arid ptarmigan declines. On
mesic sites· which are 'developing into black spruce forest, licheps become
important during this period and increase in abundance for 50 to 60 years •
19
As the forest canopy develops and the understory species disappear, a burned
site becomes progressively more unproductive. Relatively few animal species
can find the requirements necessary for their survival in the mature spruce
forest that will eventually develop in the absence of further fire.
Because lichen cover increases in these more mature stages of black spruce
stands, these areas are very valuable for lichen foraging animals such as
caribou at this stage of development. However, in older stands, lichens are
slowly replaced by feather and sphagnum mosses. On valley bottoms where a
muskeg-bog situation exists, lichen cover also develops but, contrary to the
upland sites, lichens may persist as succession advances.
Generally speaking, large, severe fires are not nearly as beneficial to wild-
life as are more moderate fires. Lighter fires quickly benefit browsing
animals and their predators by opening the canopy, recycling nutrients, and
stimulating sprouting of shrubs. In addition, the mature trees which are
killed but not consumed by the fire, provide nesting sites for hole nesters
such as woodpeckers, flickers, kestrels, and chickadees, as well as some cover
for other animals. A severe fire that burns off the aboveground biomass and
kills root systems, removes all cover and slows the regeneration of the im-
portant browse species, which must now develop from seeds.
Some sites, however, have progressed so far toward a spruce forest community
that very little shrub understory exists from which revegetation of the site
may occur. Furthermore, many sites are so cold and poorly drained that black
spruce have a competitive edge over the less tolerant shrub species. In these
situations, a light. fire simply results in more spruce. Severe fire, or
frequently recurring fires are necessary to kill the seeds in the spruce cones
and prepare a suitable seedbed for other species. Then the value of the site
to most species of wildlife is enhanced.
2. -Wildlife Response to Fire
a. Moose -Moose were formerly much more abundant within
virtually all portions of this planning area. Quality of moose browse in much
of the area appears to be deteriorating and until fire or other disturbances
are permitted to occur, overall carrying capacity for moose will not signifi-
cantly increase. Fire suppression activites have interrupted the natural fire
regime in much of the area to the overall detriment of moose and other species
dependent on early forest seral stages.
Moose populations usually increase following fire due to increased production
of high quality browse in the burned area. However, if the moose population
has declined for reasons other than poor habitat, moose may be slow to utilize
new habitat created by burning, and numbers may not increase dramatically.
Under these circumstances the remaining moose have little trouble obtaini~g
sufficient browse without utilizing the new burn. Use of a burned area will
depend largely on whether it is situated in an area traditionally used'· by
moose or through which they migrate. Dispersal _to new areas will be slow.
If, however, a fire occurs in an area where the moose population is near
carrying capacity of the range, then competition for food and social pressures
between individuals will result in more rapid exploitation of new habitat
created by a fire. The use of burned areas by moose is also related to the
20
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
:•
,.
•
•
:•
•
•
•
amount of available cover. Fires. of moderate size or large fires that :contain
' numerous unourned inclusions create more edge effect than extenflive ~s.evere
·fires, resulting in better moose habitat.
b. Carib'ou . -It appears. that· caribou may not be adversely.
affected by fire to the degree once believed. The· short-term effects -of ftre
on caribou winter range are mostly negative. These include destruction. of
forage lichens, reduced availability of other preferred species in early
postfire' succession, and temporary alterations in caribou movements. Howeve;r,-
forage qual! ty of vascular plants will be improve!i l?Y fire.
Long-tenn effects are generally beneficial. . Light fires may rejuvenate s.tands
of lichens with declining production. Fire helps maintain diversity in veg-
et~tion type, replacing old forest stands where lichens have been replaced by
mosses, thereby initiating the successional cycle which leads to the, reestab-
lishment of lichens. Fire creates a mosaic of fuel types and fire conditions
that naturally precludes a series of large, extensive fires that may be devas-
tating. to caribou habitat. Caribou· are nomadic and each herd has historica~ly
utilized a range much larger than necessary to meet its short-term fo.od !leeds •
Thus, gradual rotation of the forest sys.tem by fire· can be accommOdated and,
as pointed out, may be essential to prevent large severe fires which burn huge
portions of a herd's range .. and result in an immediate lowering of ra'Qge carry-
ing capac! ty .
The long-term effects of fire on caribou range may be negative in some cases,
however. Fires that recur frequently over a relatively short period of time
may result fn forests being replaced by ·grasslan.ds or shrub-dominated commu-
nities; ·although this is not likely to occur over large areas. Als6, large
severe fires can create monotypes which would lead to irregularity in produc-
tivity and abundance of forage .lichens.
Whi-le hi~itoric-reasons for the decline in caribou distribution and abundance
are not well known, loss of winter range to fire is not a probable cause.
Although much of the caribou range occurs in a11 area of high fire_ frequency,.
there is no indication that natural wildfire has occurred· more frequently in .
recent years than in the historic past. In fact, it is likely that less
acreage has burned annually. in recent times because. of improved .. fire .. suppres:-
sion capabilities.
c. Dall Sheep -Winter range, lambing areas, and. mineral
·licks are crt tical elements of Dall sheep habitat. Because the vegetative
cover found on sheep range does not carry fire wel.l-in most cases, fire. nor-
·ma:lly does not play a significant role. ,in sheep population dynamic.s. Under
some circmnstances, fire may enhance sheep range by depressing treeline in
~a~e~s· where the boreal forest has encroached on alpine habitat.
---d. Bison -Wildfires are extremely beneficial to bison. The
.. present: .habitat is .maintained ·primarily by river erosion and flooding; how:..
ever, fire has the potential for greatly expanding suitable bison ·habita:t away
from the floodplain. The grasses and forbs that are the mainstay of their
diet quickly reestablish after a fire. Burning serves to· stimulate new growth
and remove the mat of old material, causing earlier green-up. In addition, an
21
extensive severe fire may result in a long lasting grass stage, by killing
sprouting trees and shrubs, and tree seeds. Repeated fires can have the same
result by killing tree and shrub vegetation before it is mature enough to
produce seeds. The August 1977 fire in the Farewell area created new grassy
areas which were utilized by bison during the summer, fall, and winter.
e. Black and Grizzly Bears -Black and grizzly bears are both
benefited by fire, responding in much the same way as do their prey species.
Both are omnivorous, and fires increase the availability of both plant and
animal foods. Blueberries, cranberries, and soapberries increase following
fire, particularily in upland areas. Moose calves are important in the.diets
of both the black and grizzly bears in the springtime. Early stages of plant
succession tend to increase moose production, therefore, more calves are
available as prey. Small mammals are more readily available and play an
important ·role in bear diets during the snow-free months. The grizzly, in
particular, should benefit from increased large rodent populations following
fire, although this is speculative and not yet proven. Because black bears
make extensive use of lowland marshy areas during spring, fires ocurring in
such areas should be considered beneficial for this species.
f. Upland Game Birds and Small Game Mammals Upland game
birds and small mammals are also herbivores and as such, generally benefit
from the increased forage and diversity created by fires in the boreal forest.
Sharp-tailed grouse prefer the open, shrubby areas created by fire over the
dense forest. In the absence of fire sharp-tailed grouse frequent the open
muskeg bogs; however, openings created by fire apparently are preferred and
are not nearly as limited. Sharp-tailed grouse extensively utilize young
burns both for foraging and for essential reproductive activtties such as
"lekking" (display activity on communal dancing grounds).
Ruffed grouse numbers may be initially depressed by the occurrence of a fire;
however, they begin using the burned areas extensively as foraging sites when
the sapling stage develops. Most researchers believe that the overall effects
of fire upon ruffed grouse are beneficial and that fire may indeed be essen-
tial for the maintenance of healthy populations of ruffed grouse in the boreal
forest.
Fires in ptarmigan summer habitat are a rare occurrence, since breeding occurs
in the alpine areas at higher elevations. However, fires near treeline could
increase ptarmigan nesting habitat by removing spruce trees that are encroach-
ing on alpine tundra sites. Because most ptarmigan migrate to lowland areas
for the winter months where their primary winter foods are young willow and
birch, fires in the boreal forest can improve habitat for ptarmigan.
Spruce grouse appear not to be benefited by fires because of their preference
for mature coniferous forest habitat. Changes in habitat that affect avail-
ability and suitability of nesting areas, brood rearing area,s, feeding places
or roosting sites would greatly impact spruce grouse.
Snowshoe hares normally prefer older stands of black spruce and thick alder
tangles during lows in their 10-year cycles. During population highs, how-
ever, hares will use even severely burned areas. Hares normally use open
22
•
•
i
I
e:
I
•
•
•
•
•
••
••
•
•
•
areas during summer months when their diet consists largely of herbaceous
plants and leaves from low shrubs which are more abundant and nutri tio.us on
recently burned sites. Small fires or large fires with numerous unburned
. inclusions of black spruce or other heavy cover should provide optimal habitat
for hares.
g. Aquatic Forbearers and Waterfowl -When fires ~occur in
riparian (streamside) areas and marshes, they can be beneficial to ·muskrat,
beaver, goose, duck, and swan populations. Without fire, ponds will usually
be filled in by marsh vegetation.. Organic matter accumulation will then favor
the establishment of shrubs and trees. Fire· rids marshes of dead grass,
sedges, and shrubs and thereby tends to open up dense marsh vegetation to a
degree that s:uits feeding waterfowl. Burning also stimulates the growth of
new ·shoots whi.ch are of_ greater forage quality. Fire can have a short term
negative impact when it occurs during nesting or molting periods.
Fire also is an important factor itt the maintenance of· marsh systems. In dry
s:!,lmmers, p~_at marshes can burn down to the point where new bodies of water are
created. Burning also alters the insulative effect of old marsh vegetation
and_ allows solar heat to penetrate and alter the marsh subsurface where perma-
frost or ice· lenses are prevalent. Subsequent melt-outs can result in new
po·nds and altered vegetative cover.
h. Terrestrial Forbearers -The furb~arers other than beaver
and muskrat are carnivorous and tend to respond to fire in a manner similar· to
that of their primary prey populations. Some predators such as lynx are verY'
specific, concentrating their efforts toward securing snowshoe hares. Others
such as -the red fox are-less specific and are able to thrive on a variety-of
prey species such as rodents, hares, birds,·· and even fruits and berries at
certain times of the year.
Because of their extremely large home ranges, wolves-should not be harmed by
fires of small or moderate size and will derive benefits from such fires ·as
habitat conditions develop that favor prey species. Extremely large fires in
caribou winter range, however; may cause changes in caribou migration routes
and choice of wintering ar~as. In that case, wolves would also be forced· to
cease using the area, or switch to alternate prey species.
Fire probably benefits· wolverine in most cases because ample food sources are
apparently their key habitat requirement.
Red· foxes . have been characterized as animals of open grasslands and low
shrubs, subsisting primarily upon rodents and hares. Therefore, d~pending
upon the numerical response of red-backed and meadow vole populations· on a.
sHe, the first 10 to 20 years following fire should benefit red foxes.
tynx appear to prefer the same habitat types as snowshoe hares, their primary
prey; therefore, fires which benefit· hares by increasing browse production i.n
association with adequate cover will also benefit lynx. Numerous small fires
with numerous unburned inclusions should create optimal conditions for hares.
and lynx .
·j
23
There is a common assumption that all fires are detrimental to pine marten
populations, and intense fires do remove large trees which provide denning
habitat. However, at the same time the food base for marten may be expanded.
The food preferences are broad and marten are not dependent upon a parti.cular
prey species. Mice and voles constitute the main source of food, along with
birds, squirrels, and berries. The frequently voiced assumption that martens
depend heavily upon red squirrels probably is not valid in Alaska.
Large fires that result in extensive replacement of mature spruce with aspen
and birch are decidedly detrimental to marten. Marten usually abandon these
burned~over sites. However, the mosaic created by small fires or fires with
unburned inclusions of spruce probably benefit marten populations more than
they harm them. Cover and denning sites are retained in the unburned por-
tions, while nearby foraging areas (openings created by fire) are improved.
Both the least and short-tailed weasel benefit from the increased prey abun-
dance that usually follows burning.
Coyote populations are benefited by fires that result in many openings within
the boreal forest or which result in replacement of forest with grassland.
i. Small Mammals and Birds -Fires either benefit most small
mammals or cause only temporary declines in their populations. Because vege-
tative recovery enormously increases available biomass on burned areas, popu-
lation declines are more than. compensated for in a short time.
Red-backed voles, a species known to inhabit mature black spruce forests, will
quickly exploit newly burned areas adjacent to mature stands of black spruce.
Meadow voles often will begin using the same burned area in about the third
year. Peak rodent densities in one study occurred when environmental condi-
tions could be tolerated by both red-backed and meadow voles 7 to 16 years
following fire. The implications of these observations are that predators
largely dependent upon rodents will derive maximal overall benefits from a
fire during that period of rodent super-abundance.
Although most small mammal species thrive best in very early seral stages of
vegetation, a few, like the red squirrel and flying squirrel, are adapted to
old-age coniferous forests. These squirrels are dependent on white spruce for
food and cover, and would be adversely affected by fire.
The habitat requirements for passerine birds varies greatly. Some like the
pine grosbeak are specialized seed eaters that prefer spruce forest. However,
most species frequent younger seral stages of vegetation and are most abundant
in areas of greatest plant diversity. All burned areas will not be the same
age nor size in an area with a history of fire, nor will conditions in like-
age burns be the same because of differences in prefire vegetation, and fire
severity. This presents a diverse vegetative mosaic that will support a wide
spectrum of bird life. Extensive stands of black spruce present a rather
narrow set of enviromnental conditions which restricts the number of bird
species which can inhabit such areas.
Studies of songbirds in relation to fire in the north are scarce; however, one
study (Klein, 1963) graphically demonstrated the changes that can occur fol-
lowing fire in the boreal forest. After burning of a white spruce forest in
24
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
•
Alaska in 1948, only 19 birds of 7 species were seen during 20 hours of obser-
vation. By 1957, 9 years later, nearly 200 blrds of 19 species were seen, but
by 1961, 13 years later, only 16 species were observed. Woodpeckers were well
represented because of insects in the fire-killed spruce.
j. Rap tors Hawks, owls, eagles, and falcons generally
benefit from fire. Small raptors that feed on mice and voles benefit most
rapidly, since the herbaceous vegetation that is preferred by these small
rodents returns to a burned site quickly after a fire. Raptors that special-
ize in preying on hares, grouse and ptarmigan benefit the most when shrubs and
sapling trees invade the burned site. Small fires or large fires with many
unburned inclusions would generally be best because of the vegetative mosaic
that would result. The sharp-shinned hawk is probably the only raptor in
Alaska that might be adversely impacted by fire. These h~wks forage in the
scrubby, open black spruce muskegs and prefer spruce trees for nesting sites •
Other raptors are not nearly so restrictive in their foraging and nesting
requirements. Golden eagles, great gray owls, great horned owls, boreal
owls, goshawks, and hawk owls will nest in conifers, but neither require them
nor necessarily prefer them. Kestrels, hawk owls, and boreal owls . nest in
tree cavities created by nesting woodpeckers. Burning produces standing dead
trees that are readily utilized by woodpeckers, flickers, and other hole
nesting species. Other raptors such as short-eared owls and harriers forage
and nest in grassy meadow situations which are usually .created and maintained
by fire.
k. Fish -Fire effects which can directly impact fish popu-
lations are increased siltation and increased water temperature. Indirectly,
any alteration of the nutrient flow which adversely affects aquatic organisms
will also in turn affect fish populations.
Very little surface erosion normally occurs on burned sites in interior Alaska
(except where heavy equipment is tised to suppress the fire); thus, stream
siltation is usually negligible. The few studies which have been conducted
on fire effects on stream temperature indicate no postfire increases in the
temperature of streams within a burned area. Thus, fish species which are
adapted to the cold water in Interior streams are not likely to be affected.
Burning also does not seem to adversely impact the aquatic fauna in the
Interior.
Fire has the potential for initiating other changes in a riverine system. A
stream that coursed unimpeded through white spruce before a burn, may become
dotted with beaver colonies 10 to 20 years after a fire •. Beaver ponds provide
excellent rearing waters for salmon fry and can also benefit grayling and
pike. On the other hand, beaver dams may restrict fish migrations and could
temporarily result in the absence of grayling from the upper reaches of some
streams. Probably in most cases the presence of beaver ponds is beneficial. to
the fish resource of the area and should be viewed as a positive attribute of
fire .
25
E. THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
1. Animals
The only listed endangered animal species that has known distribution and
occurrence in the planning area is the peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus
anatum). Since known nesting sites generally occur in areas where actual
burning of vegetation is unlikely (i.e., cliff faces, and rock outcrops), the
potential for burning of nest sites or mortality to the bird or its young is
fairly remote.
Fire has long-term beneficial effects for peregrines because it provides
successional vegetational changes and diverse habitat for prey species. Fire
improves waterfowl production in wetland habit. Diverse habitats and in-
creased vegetation productivity provide numerous niches for small bird popu-
lations which may provide for an improved prey species base for peregrines as
well as other raptor species.
The effects of fire suppression and related activities are considered to have
more adverse impact on sensitive, threatened, and endangered species than the
actual fire. Human activities, such as the construction of fire breaks, crew
camps, use of vehicles, retardant drops, and low flying aircraft, which occur
near peregrine falcon eyries, would contribute to disturbance of nesting birds
and increase the likelihood for nest abandonment or mortality to young.
2. Plants
Four taxa proposed for threatened or endangered status (Murray, 1980), have
been located within the planning unit. Three of these taxa-Smelowskia
borealis var. villosa, Smelowskia pyriformis, and Taraxacum carneocoloratum--
are found on high, dry alpine ridgetops. The low fire potential in these
areas minimizes the risk of destruction by fire, and the inaccessibility of
the_moQntain summits precludes their consideration as staging areas for fire
equipment or personnel. The fourth taxon, Oxytropis kokrinensis, is found in
the Ray Mountains at.the northern boundary of the management area. The fell-
fields of the low, rounded hills on which this species occurs provide more
suitable fire fighting staging areas and their utilization could entail dis-
turbance to the oxytrope. While the general distribution of the species in
the Ray Mountains is not yet known, it is believed to be sufficiently exten-
sive to withstand some disturbance to local populations. For this reason,
Oxytropis kokrinensis does not warrant specific protection at this time, but
the likelihood of its presence should be noted.
F. HUMAN VALUES AND ACTIVITIES
1 . Wilderness
Denali National Park contains the only designated wilderness within the plan-
ning area. As a natural ecosystem process, fire will increase the suitability
of any area for wilderness designation by Congress. The opportunity for
primitive recreation and solitude could even be enhanced. Conversely, the use
of bulldozed firelines could effectively remove an area from wilderness con-
sideration, making any such activity extremely undesirable.
26
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2. Cultural/Historic Resources
Cultural resources are the prehistoric and historic evidence of human activ~
ities. · In addition to physical remnants, cultural resources can be found in
oral accounts and customs passed down through the generations, and in life.;..
styles and lifeways that continue to be lived. Because fire suppression is
only a very recent activity of humans in Alaska, most cultural values, espe-
cially lifeways, have evolved in fire-dependent environments. Some aspects of
the cultural heritage in the planning area have been significantly influenced
by fire, since fire has played a major role in the vegetation and wildlife
resources that contribute substantially to those lifestyles, 'customs,. and
cultural styles.
The planning area contains a variety of known cultural resources, including
archeological sites thousands of years old, native cemeteries, former com-
munity sites, and travel routes associated with native heritage. Evidence of
more recent human settlers includes cabins, roadhouse sites, mines, trails,
and tools and equipment associated with European explorers and settlers ..
Although some surveys have been done and others are ongoing, only a relatively
small por.tion of the planning area has had extensive investigation for cul-
tural resources. Until surveys can be completed, all cabins and other remains
must be considered culturally valuable. The only National Register s;ites
currently listed are all cabins and roadhouses associated with the Iditarod
Trail,. which is the first National Historic Trail in the United States .
In assessing the impacts of fire and fire suppression activities on· cultural
resources, it is advisable to draw a distinction between surface and sul,l-
surface resources. Surface resources are primarily historic in nature and
tend to be constructed of flammable materials, because natural processes of
deterioration have not operated long enough to level structures. Subsurface
resources are primarily prehistoric and ·archeological, and tend .to consist
largely of nonflammable material because natural processes of deterioration
have eliminated most organic matter. Furthermore, subsurface resources tend
to be much less visible than surface resources, because structures have been
leveled and the material covered by vegetation.
a. Effects of Fire -Information concerning the effects of
fire and fire suppression activities on cultural resources is scanty. Some
information has been gathered concerning fire effects in the lower 48. stat_es,
but any attempt to generalize from this data to radically different conditions
in Alaska would not be justifiable. Nevertheless, logic and reason would seem
to indicate that surface historic structures are subject to severe effects
from fire itself. Organic materials used in construction are likely to be
completely destroyed or substantially damaged as a result of burning.
Subsurface resources are much less likely to be significantly aff·ected by
fire. In a very severe fire, which burns down to mineral soil, organic.
material such as bone, ivory, and wood that is present in the soil matrix will
be ~estroyed. Intense heat from such a fire is also likely to fracture and
otherwise damage non-organic material such as ceramics and chipped stone.
Because of well-developed vegetation mats and generally moist soils, fire in
this region does not usually burn extensive areas to mineral soil. In this
27
case, severe impacts to subsurface cultural resources are very unlikely. Much
of interior Alaska is known to have burned in the past. Evidence of such
burning has been observed on several archeological sites that have been exca-
vated, apparently with no evidence of severe impacts from the fires.
b. Effects of Fire Suppression -The possibility of damage
to surface cultural resources from fire supp,ression activities is relatively
slight. This is particularly true of standing historic structures .which can
be easily observed, even by untrained individuals~ Consequently, it is likely
that most suppression activ.i ties such as fireline and camp <construction can be
located so as to prevent impacts to surface cultural resources. Surface sites
such as lithic scatters will be disturbed by fireline construction and similar
ground~disturbing activities.
Subsurface cultural resources are likely to be damaged by suppression activ-
ities, particularly firelines. Such resources are difficult to observe,
particularly in regions such as the Tanana/Minchumina, where well-developed
vegetation mats obscure them, making it likely that such sites will not even
be discovered until after they hav~ been disturbed.
3. Visual Resources
The effect of. fire on the visual resource is primarily beneficial but can be
adverse in areas of high visual sensitivity. In general, areas of high visual
sensitivity correspond to ·major travel corridors and population centers.
Major access corridors which may . be visually sensitive include the Yukon,
Kuskokwim, and Tanana Rivers, roads, major aviation routes, and the Iditarod
Trail.
Wildfire is an integral part of the ecological process that maintains or
enhances natural visual diversity. In the short-term, a small fire (up to
50,000 acres), blackens an area creating sharp visual .contrast and possib.ly
visual interest. Extremely large, severe fires (over 50,000 acres) with few
unburned or less severely burned inclusions, create large expanses of bla~k
ened landscape which are monotonous and result in reduced visual' interest.
Extensively burned areas will have a negative visual impact on some users
(viewers), although others will view the scene positively, or make no value
judgment. Even large burned areas may create a pleasing visual effect once
vegetation regrowth has begun.
Fire suppression can cause highly adverse damage to visual resources. Short-
term impacts are generally acceptable unless viewed from key observation
positions such as highways, high use areas, or scenic overlooks. Long-term
impacts are unacceptable and are usually a result of bulldozed firelines.
Bulldozers disturb the organic mat and expose Dl-ineral soil, creating distinct
unnatural lines across the landscape, and sharp color contrast that may take
decades to disappear.
4. Air Quality
The inevitable fate of vegetation is decomposition and eventual incorporation
into soil. During a very short period of time while a fire is burning, pro-
cesses of oxidation and chemical transformation occur which are similar to
those that slowly occur in decomposition, with the concurrent production of
28
••
•
•
••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
!e
1
l
:.
some materials that go into the atmosphere and are eventually returned to the
ve'getation system. There is a great chemical similarity between the products
of· combustion of forest fuels and the products of decai. A summary of emis-
sfons (Figure 2) from forest burning indicates relatively-· large amounts o,f
ca'rbon dioxide, water, particulates, and carbon monoxide. Lesser amounts of
hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxides, and essentially no sulfur oxides are produced ·
fr:om forest fires (Martin, 1976).
Th.ere are substances, termed and regarded as "pollutants," which emanate from
forest burning' and enter the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide (C02.) and water (H 2 o)
emissions are not considered pollutants. Carbon monoxide \CO) is toxic and
lethal concentrations of ro have been found in the active part of some fires.
High CO concentrations at the fire site decrease rapidly in an;y direction to
ambient conditions. The burning of' forest fuels contributes only 1/600 of the
total CO emitted from other natural sources.· Unsaturated hydrocarbons-(HC) of
low molecular weight are related to Los Angeles-type photochemical smog.
Hydrocarbons known to. be photochemically reactive are present in wood smoke
but, with the exception of ethylene, in very small amounts. Hydrocarbons are
extremely widespread in the plant world in volatile oils, waxes, and resin$.
The most prevalent HC in the atmosphere is methane (marsh gas) -which origi-
nates primarily from the decay of organic material. The relative importance
of HC emitted from forest fi_res, as far as photochemical smog is concerned,
appears to be vecy small. Nitric oxide (NO) is also regarded as an importartt
pollutant because of its involvement in photochemical smog processes which may
produce damagi-ng compounds such as ozone (O_i) and peroxyacylnitrates. NO -is.
not a combustion product, but forms when arr is heated higher than 2800° F.
On a global basis, natural production of NO, mostly by soil organisms, exceeds
man's. production by rs to. 1. Forest fires are an insignificant source of NO.'
There: is no_ evidence that the emissions from combusion of forest fuels are a
t~re_a·t to human health (USDA Forest Service, 1976).
The visible column of smoke from a forest fire contains a lot of water, very ·
small aerosols of organic matter, and some unburned carbon in finely divided
form. The water condenses on the particulates, forming a cloud of water drop-
lets. The total accumulation of particulates or aerosols from burning wood is
very small in comparison with that emanating normally from. forests. The
principal valid objection to the burning of forest fuels as regards 'particu-
late pollution is the temporary interference with vis~bility. Military,
commercial, recreational, and even fire detection and fire suppression air-:
craft activities can' all be adversely affected by smoke. However, data from
the Alaskan interior indicate that smoke conditions severe enough to impact
aircraft (visibility reductions to 6 miles or less) do not occur ·to the 'exte-p.t
generally assumed (refer to Table 1). Yearly occurrences. of heavy smoke range
from an average of about 6 days per year at Tanana to about 2 day$ per year at
McGrath. Even when heavy smoke is present, it is rarely (less than ·40%) so
severe as to exceed the Visual Flight Rule (VFR) weather minimums for-aircraft
within a control zone airspace and very rarely (less than 15%) exc~eds VFR
minimums for areas outside of control zone airspaces •. The historical occur-
rence, extent, and duration of heavy smoke in the interior of Alaska_ indicate
the problem is minimal.
29
PARTICULATES 3-50
BACKFIRE
EMISSION
FACTORS
(LBS/TON)
PHOTOCHEMICAL
PRODUCT~
co 20
. HC 10
2000-4000 C02
1000-2000 H2o
50-200 PARTICULATES
150 co HEAD FIRE
EMISSION
FACTORS
40 HC (LBS/TON)
OZONE
Figure 2. ' Range of emission factors from _forest burning. Because diffi-
culties in sampling and the complexity of the problem, estimated. levels of
emission factors may vary greatly from these data. (Figure is adapted from
that of P. W. Ryan, Southern Fares t Fire Labor a tory, USDA' Fares t Service,
Macon, Ga. Figures for emissions of carbon dioxide, water, and particulates
have been 'modified.)
30
••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• • • • • • • •
Table 1
0 . H S k (1) C d. . . I . Al k cccurrence of eavy mo e on 1t1ons 1n nter1or as a
STATION
NAME
NUMBER OF
YEARS OF
DATA
TOTAL
NUMBER OF
SMOKE DAYS(2 )
YEARLY AV.
NUMBER OF
SMOKE DAYS(2 )
TOTAL NUMBER OF DAYS VISIBILITY WAS LIMITED
BY HEAVY SMOKE BY DISTANCE CLASS (MILES)
0-1/8 3/16-3/8 1/2-3/4 1-2~ 3-6
Fairbanks 24 116 4.8 0 2 14 28 72
Farewell 13 30 2.3 0 1 4 10
Galena 18 67 3.7 1-7 5 26
Indian Mountain 20 69 3.5 1 2 8 12
Lake Minchumina 22 46 2.1 0 1 4 9
McGrath 20 38 1.9 0 1 5 14
Nenana 24 101 4.2 0 2 7 19
Tanana 15 85 5.7 0 1 9 20
TOTAL NUMBER OF SMOKE-DAYS 552 2 17 56 138
(1)
(2)
% OF TOTAL NUMBER OF
SMOKE-DAYS BY DISTANCE
CLASS
Heavy Smoke -Visibility reductions to 6 miles or less.
.4 3.1 10.1 25 .o
Smoke-Day. -Any day in which smoke, haze, or smoke and haze was reported at any one of eight
tri-hourly observations for the given station.
VFR weather minimums for airports within a control zone airspace are a 1,000-foot ceiling and
3-mile visibility.
VFR weather minimums for aircraft operations outside of the control zone airspace are "clear
of clouds" and "1-mile visibility."
(Table is a modification from Barney, R. J., and E. R. Berglund. 1974. Wildfire Smoke
Conditions: Interior Alaska, USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap. PNW-178, 18 p., illus. Pacific
NW For. and Range Exp. Stn., Portland, Oregon) •
..
15
28
46
32
18
73
55
339
61.4
•
5. Recreation
Types of recreation in the area include hunting, fishing, recreational trap-
ping, camping, hiking, boating, cross-country skiing, scenic travel such as
driving, flying, riding the railroad and buses, snowmobiling and ORV driving,
dog sledding, berry picking, gold panning, photography, mountain climbing,
nature study, and wildlife viewing.
As with other human activities, most recreation is centered around major
access routes and population centers. The most intense use is concentrated
along roads, particularly the road to Kantishna which passes through Denali
National Park. Rivers, lakes, and airstrips concentrate use to a much lesser
extent. Very few recreation activities occur away from major access points,
with the exception of hunting.
Fire promotes vegetation and wildlife diversity which can enhance recreation
opportunities in the long term. · The negative effects of fire on recreation
generally are short-term and are directly related to fire effects on specific
resources used in recreation. Effects on visual and cultural resources,
wildlife, and vegetation will have immediate and direct effects on use of
these resources for camping, sightseeing, hunting, and other activities;
Recreation users are generally more mobile than subsistence users. Thus, if
recreation is precluded by fire in one area, they generally can find an alter-
nate area in which a similar recreational activity can be pursued. However,
smoke thick enough to limit aircraft flights could cause the cancellation of
remote area hunting trips.
One of the most prominent recreational resources in the planning area is the
Iditarod Trail, which receives national attention each year as it is traveled
by mushers in the longest dog sled race in the world. Approximately 140 miles
of the trail lie within the southwest part of the planning area. While small
fi.i:·es are unlikely to affect trail users, large fires, such as the 1977 Bear
Creek Fire near Farewell, have resulted in very difficult travel because of
exposure to wind, drifting snow, fallen trees, and loss of key landmarks,
particularly the opening through tree crowns used to follow the trail.
6. Economy
Fire and fire suppression activities have important effects on the economy of
interior Alaska. The Bureau of Land Management presently hires about 300
seasonal employees, who are· fed and housed locally, while the State of Alaska
currently hires about 20. Equipment, aircraft, and support services are
procured. Aircraft hire can be an important source of income for local air
charter companies.
A busy fire season can have an extremely significant impact on village econ-
omies, because many Native fire fighting crews are employed, providing a major
source of cash income. Fire can affect subsistence hunting and trapping
activities by altering wildlife habitat, with increases or decreases in asso-
ciated species. Specific effects can be inferred from Section II. D., Wild-
life, and II. F.8, Subsistence and Lifestyle.
32
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
7. Forestry
Despite the vast quanti ties of timber within the planning area, low volumes
per acre and inaccessibility have limited timber harvesting to the road system
and areas adjacent to villages. The timber is harvested, processed, and used
locally for house logs, saw timber, and fuel wood. Most lands which support
local forestry operations have been selected by village or regional Native
Corporations, although a large area of potentially commercial timber exists on
State land within the boundaries of the Nenana agricultural project.
Commercial timber occurs on warm, well-drained soils along river margins and
on south, southeast, and southwest-facing slopes. White spruce is the most
valuable species for saw timber, and birch is the most valuable species for
fuel wood. Balsam poplar and aspen are also utilized .
Although the various hardwood species have different potential lifespans, they
are all managed on a 70-year rotation under natural conditions. After the age
of 70 or 80 years, hardwood species are very susceptible to fungal decay, 'a
primary cause of mortality. White spruce stands are managed on a 130-year
rotation. Although capable of surviving for over 300 years, few stands reach
this age, because overstocked or old white spruce stands tend to develop heavy
fuel loadings which make them susceptible to stand destroying fires.
Fire protection increases the probability that commercial forests will reach
their full rotation ages. However, some commercial size stands are so small
in area and inaccessible that fire protection is not justified .
Effects of Fire -All commercial forest species in interior Alas~a germinate
and grow best on mineral soil in open sunlight. Because seedling success is
quite low on organic seedbeds or under shaded conditions, fire provides opti-
mum conditions for both hardwood and spruce seedlings .
Aspen and birch are very susceptible to damage from fire because of their thin
bark. White spruce and balsam poplar have thicker bark and may survive light
surface fires. Most fires will result in prolific sprouting from roots and
stem bases of aspen and birch, while balsam poplar sprouts to a lesser degree.
All species are generally killed by., severe fires which destroy their shallow
root systems. However, these fires create the seedbed which permits the
reestablishment of hardwood stands from seed, and the replacement of old white
spruce stands in a state of· decay.
8. Subsistence and Lifestyle
The residents of the Tanana/Minchumina fire planning area have lifestyles
oriented to the outdoors. Fishing, hunting, and gathering activities provide
for much of the food needs of rural residents. However, the degree of depend-
ency upon the natural resources of the area varies considerably, ranging from
those who lead a truly subsistence lifestyle to those who supplement their
incomes by hunting, trapping, and fishing .
Salmon and whitefish are caught in large numbers in nets and fish wheels and
dried for use during the winter. Dried fish are used for human food and dog
food and are bartered for other essentials. Local residents also fish commer-
33
cially. Income from the sale of fish contributes greatly to the cash economy
of rural villages. Fishing, whether it be commercial or for subsistence use,
is a way of life for many residents of the area. Families frequently travel
to summer fish camps that have been in use for several generations.
Moose hunting provides for most of the meat needs of the rural residents,
since moose occupy virtually all portions of the planning area. Because moose
tend to spend much of their lives along the river systems' moose are fre-
quently found in areas wHere people are or where access is good. In addition,
these moose populations are utilized by many nonlocal Alaskans who hunt there
for recreation and to supplement their food supplies.
Historically, people living in this planning area have also relied on caribou
to meet many of their domestic needs. People from Tanana and Rampart used to
hunt caribou in the Kokrines Hills and Ray Mountains; residents of McGrath and
Takotna fo.rmerly harvested caribou from the Nixon Fork during winter when
overland access was possible; and residents of Minchumina hunted Alaska Range
caribou that wintered nearby. Now because of greatly reduced caribou numbers
and resultant hunting restrictions or closures, most of these people no longer
harvest caribou. Only in Nikolai, and to a lesser extent Telida, are local
residents still able to hunt caribou. Most of the caribou in the Alaska Range
are accessible only to hunters using aircraft. Consequently, most of the
70-100 caribou harvested from this area annually are taken by non-local resi-
dents (mostly from Anchorage) or non-residents hunting with a guide.
Black bear hunting provides food, recreation, and economic value during a time
of year when most hunting seasons are closed. Most black bears are hunted in
spring and early summer when they are available by boat access on the low-
lands. During the fall, bears frequent the good berry producing hillsides and
are often taken incidental to other hunting activities. Interior black bears
are generally smaller than bears from either coastal or more southern areas;
however, there is some guiding interest in portions of the planning area.
Grizzly bears are rarely eaten and most of the harvest is by sport hunters.
However, some animals are killed as nuisances or in defense of life and prop-
erty. The guiding industry brings considerable money into the state's ecomony
by selling guide services in this portion of the Alaska Range. Much of this
d~es not benefit the local residents of the area directly; however, nonresi-
dent hunting fees contribute substantially toward the management of other
species which local residents do utilize extensively.
Bis~n are not readily available to most residents of the planning area since
the herd occupies a rather remote area accessible only by air. McGrath resi-
dents, who have access to aircraft transportation and are relatively close to
the herd, have shown considerable interest in hunting bison. Other hunters
come primarily from Fairbanks and· Anchorage. Bison are equally valued for
their meat and as trophy.
Most Dall sheep found within the planning area occupy areas that are rela-
tively inaccessible to local residents. Consequently most are taken by sport
hunters and less than 25 percent of the sheep harvest is for local domestic
use.
34
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Migrating waterfowl are an important food supplement for residents of interior
Alaska. Most waterfowl hunting in this portion of Alaska is for local domes-
tic needs. Only Minto Flats supports sizeable and important recreational
hunting of waterfowl and this is largely due to its proximity to a major urban
center (Fairbanks). However, waterfowl reared in these areas also provide
recreational hunting opportunities for many people throughout the United
States and Canada since these are migratory species •
Grouse, ptarmigan, and hares are also extremely important locally as a supple-
ment to other food sources. Usually these species are readily available and
easily caught in snares or shot. Most are used to augment food needs; how-
ever, sport hunting has become increasingly prevalent in some areas near
Fairbanks. Hares a·re also used as dog food and as bait for traps. Although
the hides are fragile they are sometimes used for mittens and blankets, and
occasionally the pelts are sold commercially to make felt.
Trapping is a major source of income for many families residing in the plan-
ning area. When running trap lines, trappers often use some of the numerous
cabins scattered throughout the remote portions of the planning area.
Marten, fox, wolverine, lynx, beaver, and muskrat are the furbearers of great-
est importance to local residents. Trapping effort depends on both abundance
of the furbearers and the prices being received for the various pelts. Many
are retained for local domestic uses such as mittens, hats, and garment trim.
Carcasses of lynx, beaver, and muskrat are frequently used for human or dog
food. All are usable as trap bait .
Marten are the economic mainstay of most trappers in the area. Because of the
importance of marten in the local economy, factors that influence marten
abundance must be carefully evaluated.
The wolf is a highly valued furbearer. However, wolves are more difficult to
trap, require expensive and hard to obtain traps, and occur at lower dens-
ities than do other furbearers. Consequently, the harvest remains relatively
low .
35
•
•
III. FIRE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
A. HISTORICAL FIRE ROLE AND OCCURRENCE
Fire. has played a significant· role in the interior Of Alaska. An average
annual burn of 1 ~5 to 2.5 million acres prior to 1940 has been estimated.
With the organization of fire suppr.ession actiVities, starting with the forma-
tion. of the Alaska Fire ·t:::ontrol Services in 1939, these numbers have been
reduced to about 900,000 acres per year (10 year average 1969-1978), but large
fires still occur frequently despite increases in suppression efforts.
Essentially, fire suppression has been successful in c:ontrolling those fires
of low and moderate· intensity and severity, fires with distinctly different
ecological ·effects th/:m the large, high intensity fires which have occurred.
Fire suppression may· therefore have had greater ecological impact than that
indicated by the decrease in average annual' burned acreage. ' ..
Within the Tanana/Minchumina Planning Area,· fire activity has followed much
the same. pattern. During the 25-year period (1957-1981 )'for which statistics
are available, approxill!ately 9 percent of the 31,000,000 acres in the planning
area burned. Duri'ng this period there were 1,716 fires which burned a total
of 2,831,554 acres for an annual average of 69 fires and 113,262 acres burned
(Table 2). These averages are not truly representative of the fire activ:i'ty,
however, as only 4 percent·(64) of the'fires burned 94 percent (2,,688,784.} of
the .. total burned acreage. There were large fires (greater than 5,000 acre~)
in ·1957, 1958, 1959,1968, 1969, 19'71 thru 1977, and 1981 (Figure J & 4)~· Th~
m,ost active years were: 1957, (390,8-77 acres); 1968 (400,870 acres);_. :1969
(683,953 acres); 1977 (389,760 acres);· and 1981 (313,800). In contras.t .to
these big fire years,. there. were· several seasons (1961, 1965) with very little.
a:c't·lvi ty, less than 200 acres burned. The largest individual fires in the
planning; area were Big Denver· 1/9447 at 314,683 acres in 1969, and Bear Creek
/t7721 at 345,000 acres in 1977.
Of the 1, 716 total fites within the planning area, 820 (47.8%) were man-caused
and 896· (52.2%) were· caused' by·lightning (Table 3). In looking at the plan-
ning ar.ea as whole, however, .. these figures do not accurately· represent the
area at 'large because almost half ·of the man-caused fires occurred in the
Goldstream unit which includes. the city of Fairbanks and the surrounding rural
. areas. The majority of the m;:m~ca:t~sed fires in this unit were due to debris
burning.(36%) and recreation (23%), strongly biasing the total figures for the
planning unit. ·
There is a definite pattern to the seasonal fire occurrence. The greatest
number of fires started in the months of May, .·June, :and July, with 249, 587
and .. 563 respectively (Table 4). Lightning caused 11 percent of the fires in
May, 62 percent in June, and 72 percent in July (Table 5). By September,
ligrtning occurrence dropped off and the majority (92%) of the fires were
man-caused. The earliest reported fire was on Mar.ch 29' ·and :. the latest on
October 26. Both were mari-caused .·
37
Table 2
Total Number of Fires and Acres Burned by Fire Size Class
(1957-1981)
Number of Fires*
Size
Class* A B c D E F G Total
Year:
57-59 31 56 37 15 11 16 17 183
60-64 28 47 26 2 1 1 0 105
65-69 97 124 54 17 11 15 29 347 ~
70-74 214 191 64 19 7 2 8 515
75-79 233 161 46 5 5 12 5 457
80-81 26 57 18 2" 1 0 5 109
TOTAL 629 636 245 60 36 46 64 1 '716 :::
w
00 Acres Burned
57-59 0 172 1,396 2,858 6,400 43,500 516,137 570,463
60-64 0 163 883 235 410 1,800 0 3,491
65-69 1 398 1 '995 2, 785 5,349 32,101 1,l91,063 1,233,692
70-74 0 486 1,982 2,845 3,450 25 ,5 70 216,024 250,357
75-79 4 388 1,085 790 2,700 2,400 451 '760 459' 127
80-81 0 142 394 320 0 0 313,800 314,424
TOTAL 5 1,749 7 '735 9~833 18,309 105,371 2,688,784 _2,831 ,554
* Does not include false alarms.
** A= 0-0.25 acres, B = 0.26-9 acres, C = 10-99 acres, D = 100-299 acres,
E = 300-999-acres, F = 1000-4999 acres, G = 5000+ acres
• •
• Figure 3:
• 15
14
13
~ 12 t:J.
~ 11 H ~ 10
~ 9 • 0
~ ·8
t:J 7 p::) s 6 z 5
4
I 3
.2
1
0
• Figure 4:
700
675
650
625
600
575
550
525
500
475
450
425
400
"""' 375
(Jl 350 "0 r::
ct1 325
(Jl 300 ::l
0 275 ..c:
~
'-' 250
Q 225 t:J z 200 ~
:;:J 175 p::)
~ 150
t:J 125 ~ u 100 < 75
50
25
00
:•
Annual Number of Class G + Fires (5,000 Acres): 195 7-1981
Tanana/Minchumina Planning Area
I I ••• I
57 58. 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79
+ Annual Acreage-Class G Fires (5,000 ): .1957-1981
r--
r--
00 ..
0
:j\
M
0 0
..;t 0
.-I ..;t .. ..
LJ') .-I
I'• r--
II
Tanana/Minchumina Planning Area
-· ('I'")
0 LJ')
r--C'\
00 .. .. ('I'")
0 00
0 ~
..;t '-'
..
('I'")
r--0 0 0
0 0 0
\0 0 0 .. .. ..
I iii
0
~ r--..
C\
00
<"')
''!•'·
80 81
6
0 c:o ..
<"')
'""I
<"')
57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81
39
Table 3
Total Number of Fires and Acres Burned by Cause
(1957 to 1981)
Number of Fires Acres Burned
Man:... Man-
Year Lightning Caused Total Lightning Caused Total
.j::o-57-59 113 70 183 552,619 17,844 570,463 0
60-64 53 52 105 2,623 868 3,491
65-69 .156 191 347 901,403 332,289 1,233,692
70-74 290 225 515 249,196 1,161 250 '357
75-79 198 259 457 427,887 31,240 459,127
80-81 86 23 109 314,205 219 314,424
TOTAL 896 820 1 '716 2,447,933 383,621 2,831,554
•
• • • • • • • •
--• • • • • • • •
Table 4
Fire Occurrence by Month (1957-1981)
March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct.
57-59 0 1 22 98 37 10 15 0
60-64 1 0 21 30 51 3 0 0
65-69 0 6 49 103 131 30 9 9
70-74 0 3 68 206 158 62 18 0
75-79 0 17 63 85 174 73 43 2
80-81 0 1 26 65 13 3 1 0
TOTALS 1 28 249 587 563 181 96 11
~ ......
Table 5
Fire Causes by Month (195 7-1981)
March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. TOTAL
Man 1 27 222 221 158 92 88 11 820
Light-0 1 27 366 405 89 8 0 896
ning
B. FUELS AND FIRE BEHAVIOR
The vegetation occurring in the Tanana/Minchumina Planning Area has been pre-
viously described in section II.C.l., Major Plant Communities. A 1:250,000
scale fuels overlay has been made through manual interpretation: of LANDSAT
imagery.
The fuels in the Tanana/Minchumina Planning Area are similar to those through-
out the rest of the interior of Alaska and contribute to similar fire behavior
and problems. The majority of the fire-prone areas are typified by complexes
of fine fuels, both living and dead, which react rapidly to changes in rela-
tive humidity. They are capable of rapid drying, even after substantial
rainfall. Fuel beds are often continuous, with few breaks. Deep organic mats
allow fires to be carried beneath the surface, increasirig the probability of
hold over fires and the difficulty of mop-up.
Black spruce and white spruce are often associated with these. fuel complexes
and contribute to additional fire behavior considerations. Spruce trees
(especially black spruce) qften have branches growing near the ground a~d
retain a large number of dead branches. These dead fuels f·orm a vertical
ladder that easily carries a surface fire into the crowns. The problems
associated with crown fires are increased when the spruce grow in dense stands
with closed canopies, forming a continuous fuel bed above the ground. In
·addition to crowning, spotting ahead of the main fire is a problem in spruce
stands. The embers are lofted as crowns burn, and are carried by the wind to
points ahead of the main fire.
Fuels under deciduous stands and tall shrubland communities do not create the
same problems, because they are not as dense, usually do not burn as readily,
and crown fires are rare. Fires may occur in this fuel type after snowmelt
but before greenup in spring, then again after leaf drop in the fall. How-
ever, the potential for suppression problems does exist after periods of
extensive drying.
A third important and extensive fuel type in the planning area is tussock
tundra. From a fuels and fire viewpoint, the tussock tundra is essentially a
grassland. Virtually all of the burnable material is small diameter and
loosely packed dead grass. The fuel wets and dries very rapidly, burns
quickly, and because there is typically a substantial amount of fuel, the
fires can be remarkably intense when burning under dry, windy conditions.
This situation presents a set of suppression problems unique to the fuel type.
Line building may be questionable and is certainly time consuming because of
the commonly deep layers of organic material. For the same reasons, mopup is
slow and tedious. Because the dead grass fronds are retained on the tussocks,
this fuel type is ready to burn aey time the area is snow free, and even
beyond that under the right circumstances.
Elevations above 3,000 feet form effective barriers to fire spread because
they generally do not support enough vegetation to carry fire. Extensive high
elevation areas in the Ray Mountains, Kokrines Hills and Alaska Range are
unvegetated and form natural firebreaks.
42·
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
't·
·C. S~Y OF FIRE OCCURRENCE BY MANAGEMENT UNIT
The Tanana/Minchumina Planning Area ha~ been divided Into 17 management uriits
which correspond to entire watersheds or segments of very lar'ge watersheds.
Unit bqundaries are natural barriers to the· spread of fire. Management uriits
are mapped, in.Appendix :tP· (in attached map 'pocket). Thirty-six smaller units
had originally been used for a cietaHed analysis of fire occurrence, fire· be-
havior,· fuels, and other related information.-This analysis is available from
·the BIM fire suppression organiZation.
Summaries of fire .. information have been made for the 17 management units.
Some of the patterns of fi:re 'oc·c~rrenck will be summarized, including units
with high levels of lightning activity, units with high risk of man-caused
fires; and units with similar weather patterns .
The first grouping of units lies just to. th_e north of, and includes portions
~f., the Alaska Range. This includes the Big River, Tonzona River, and most of
the Upper Kantishna units. Topography typically rang~s from lowlands to the
west and north, grading up into the mountains of the Alaska Range to -the
south. The Alaska Range creates a rain shadow which _diminiShes farther east
and north away from t'b:e msmntains. Historically-, this . general area does not·
receive as much lightn;i.ng activity: as the areas to the north. The potential
for large fires does exist, however, due to the drying effects of the rain
shadow and because -of strong persistent winds which. funnel down t\le· steep
mountain ranges. The Bear Creek Fire; /17721,-in 1977, which burned 345,000
acres in the Big River Unit, is a typical example of the type of fires which
can occur in these units when drought is combined with high winds. The Toklat
Unit also includes mountains of the Alaska Range, but its northern section
receives more 1 ightning than the areas· to the southwest·. F:i,re behavior can
also be extreme in this unit. Fire occurrence. in the Alaska Range is .quite
low_, and fires are small because of steep terrain and sparse fuels •
Man-caused fires account for apout 81% of all fires in the Goldstream Unit,
which includes Fairbanks and i-ts rural residential areas. About 60% of the
f~res in the Minto Unit to the west, and the section of the Toklat Unit 'north
of Denali Park, are man-caused... Most of the fires start near settlements or
along roads. Lqrge numbers. of fires associated With land clearing and mining
have occurred around Takotna and Takotna Mountain in the southwest part,of the
planning area (Nixon Fork Unit).
The greatest lightning activity occurs in the center of the planning area,.
including the following management units: Cosha, northeast part of the Lower
Nowi tna, most of the Birches Unit, and-northern. part of the Upper Kantishna
Unit. Most of -the thunderstorm ac:tivity south of the Yukon River is caused by
frontal lifting associated with the movement of 'massive sto:rm systems across
the Interior. These :systems. are· commonly widespread and create considerable
·lightning, _but a:re us1;1ally accompanied by measurable· precipitation that de-·
creases' fire ·activity. These four units seem to be more· fire prone than
surrounding areas, possibly becaus,e weaker storms moving inland from the west
3 Base map 'obtained-from Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center,
707 A Street, Anchorage, Alaska
43
drop their precipitation before reaching them. Therefore, the fuels in these
areas are likely to be drier and more likely to sustain a lightning fire. The
potential exists for large project fires, since there have been 18 Class G
f:f.res-.(greater than 5,000 acres) since 1957.
The units . north of the Yukon· River, Melozi tna, Tozi tna, Ray River, and Ram-
part, also experience high levels of lightning ·activity. The lightning is
-.associated with small, localized· thunderstorms rather than wide ranging, large
storm systems which affect the units to the south and west. Almost all fires
are caused by lightning, particularly in the'Melozitna and Tozitna drainages,
and initial attack is fairly successful. Large fires have occurred in the
past, . inclu,dipg a 251,500 acre fire; near Tanana in 1969, and a 314,700 acre
. fire around Manley Hot Springs that same year.
The Lower Nowitna, Upper Nowitna, North Fork Kuskokwim, and northern·Innoko
units, which lie along the western boundary o{ the planning area, are affected
. by wide ranging sto.rm systems accompanied by lightning, similar to the area. to
the east. The storms generally ·drop mo.re rain in this area because they have
. not lost much moisture while moving inland from the west. These· units may
also be subject to occasional dry lightning storms which cause numerous fires.
The Kuskokwim Mountains run through this area, and appear to influence the
local weather. . Most of the North Fork Kuskokwim ·unit lies to the ·east of
these mountains and experiences eratic weather conditions without recognizable
patte~ns.
D. SUPPRESSION COSTS
Suppression costs have been extremely variable, ranging from $10,341 in 1965
to $5,172·,028 in 1977. Costs. have· been adjusted to the value of the U.S.
dollar in' 1967 for cOmparison purposes (see Table 6). A large ·percentage of
the costs for 1977 can be attributed to the Bear Creek fire, 117721, which
burned from August 6, to September 20, covered 345,000 acres and cost
$2,408,033 to suppress.
This is similar to the general statewide pattern·. It has been determined that
9 percent of the fires (those class E and larger) contributed to 70-80 percent
of .the total. suppression costs resulting in an average suppression cost per.
fire of $32,000. These hi'gh suppression costs are due to multiple -concurrent
fires, large, inaccessible land areas, and .dependence upon expe'nsive air
attack and transportation of supplies.
E .. SUPPRESSION-RESOURCES
At present, the fire protection within the Tanana/Minchumina area· is provided
by the BLM and the State of Alaska. The BLM maintains initial attack forces,
primarily helitack, at Galena, Tanana, Lake 'Minchumina, McGrath, and Fair-
banks. Smokejumpers are stationed at _Fairbanks, Galena,. and McGrath with
,temporary standby at other bases within the area when necessary. Retardant
bases are located at McGrath, Galena, and Fairbanks, and a secondary base is
set up at Tanana. · Temporary bases can be moved into areas with adequate
airstrips when needed. Retardant aircraft with water scooping .capability can
be operated ·out of many of the larger lakes.
4'¥
•
•
•
•
..
•
•
•
• • • • • • • • •
Table 6 * Suppression Costs Using 1967 as the Base Year
Adjusted, Adjusted Acres
Year No. Fires Cost Cost Factors Cost Burned
1957 70 429,049 84.3 508,955 401,499
1958 51 392,173 86.6 452,855 85,822
1959 66 250' 188 87.3 286,584 80' 198
1960 31 29,390 88.7 33,134 128
1961 20 25' 170 89.6 28,091 141
1962 21 128,844 90.6 142,211 2,164
1963 31 129,127 91.7 140,814 1,036
1964 31 61,796 92.9 65,518 348
1965 25 10,541 94.5 11,154-79
1966 64 323,490 97.2 332,808 62,169
1967 37 320,478 100.0 320,478 3,535
1968 114 3,453,703 104.2 3,314,494 419,071
.r:-1969 110 2, 717 '982 109.8 2,475,393 748,838
L1l 1970 69 209,767 116.3 180,367 486
1971 60 1,858,848 121.3 1,5 32,438 121,059
1972 212 1,297,314 125.3 l,035,366 88,592
1973 73 145,508 133.1 109,322-365
1974 238 1,321,470 147.7 894,698 39,855
1975 87 530,009 161.2 328,789 30 '795
1976 115 989 ,Ol3 170.5 580,066 33,022.
1977 144 5 '172 ,028 181.5 2,849,602 393,832
1978 88 621,180 195.4 317,902 630
1979 53 699,23.7 217.4 321,636 835
1980 22 750,558 ;246.8 304,116 624
*Includes false alarms
)
The State of Alaska has suppression forces centered in Fairbanks, with sup-
pression responsibility for the Fairbanks area and the Parks Highway bordering
the eastern edge of the planning unit.
46
: .•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
..
•
•
•
IV. FIRE MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES
A. INTRODUGriON
The Tanana/Minchumina Fire Management Plan establishes four management op-
tions: Critical Protection, Full Protection, Modified Action, and Limited
Action. Fire suppression alternatives range from immediate and aggressive
suppression to no attack. As presented, the alternatives set forth general
standards for selection of the appropriate option by the land manager/owner.
Further, they provide basic guidance and parameters within which the fire
suppression organization and land manager/owner make initial strategies and
tactical decisions. Fire management options selected for the lands in the
Tanana/Minchumina planning area are shown in Appendix E (in attached map
pocket).
It will be incumbent upon the land manager/owner to select· a fire management
option based upon an evaluation of local conditions in order to provide guid-
ance to the fire suppression organization. In turn, the fire suppression
organization is expected to respond to the land manager/owner to the best of
its capability. Because of rapidly changing land status,· the State of Alaska
and Native corporations chose fire management options on lands which they have
selected but have not yet been conveyed to them, even tho~gh management rests
with a Department of the Interior agency.
These options are presented under the basic philosophy that they are not "set
in concrete" when applied to a specific. land area in thi:s plan. Rather, the
application of the options must be flexible and subject to revision as condi-
tions change, such as formulation of specific land use objectives and. avail-
ability of new data. This places a burden on managers to maintain continued
evaluation of all factors, at least annually, to accompli~h plan and individ-
ual land manager/owner management options. The land manager/owner(s) can
change their selection of a fire management option between September 30 and
April 1 of any year, but not during the fire season. (Refer to Section I. H.,
Revision, p. 5.)
B . INTENT OF MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
Critical Protection Management Option -This option was specifically created
to differentiate the protection of human life and inhabited property from
natural resource protection. The designation of a site (area) with this
option is left to the discretion of the land manager/owner responsible for
fire protection for the site. Unquestioned priority over all other fires is
automatically given to sites (areas) identified in this option.
Full Protection Management Option Areas assigned this designation will
receive fire protection equivalent to what has been supplied in the past.
That is, all fires in these areas will receive aggressive initial attack and
aggressive suppression efforts until the fire is declared out. This option
was designed for the protection of cultural and historical sites, high re-
source value areas, and those types of things which require wild land fire
protection but do not involve the protection of human life and habitation .
47
Limited Action Management Option-This category recognizes those area wher~ a
natural fire program is desirable or the values at risk do not warrant the
expenditure of suppression funds. Suppression actions need only be to the
extent necessary to keep a fire within the management unit or to protect
critical sites within the area.
Modified Action Management Option -This option provides a level of protection
between "Full" and "Limited". The intent is to provide manager/owners with an
alternative for those lands that require a relatively high level of protection
during critical burning periods, but a lower level of protection when the
risks of large, damaging fires is diminished. Its intent is to reduce sup-
pression costs and increase resource benefits during the entire fire season
through its two distinct operational responses to fire.
During the critical portion of the fire season, all fires will receive aggres-
sive initial attack. If a fire escapes initial attack and requires more than
a modest commitment to contain it, an Escaped Fire Analysis (Appendix G) will
be conducted to determine level of suppression commensurate with the values at
risk. The intent is to allow acres burned to be balanced with suppression
costs. Lands placed in this category will usually be suited to indirect
attack.
On individually predetermined evaluation dates, each Modified Action unit will
automatically convert to no initial attack status unless an evaluation of
current conditions indicates that the preestablished date is too early.
Reevaluations will be conducted every 10 days until conditions (such as recent
local fire behavior and weather, State-wide fire load) safely allow for no
initial attack status in each Modified Action unit. The intent is to reduce
the commitment of suppression forces to these units when risks are low and to
achieve some resource management objectives through limited fire activity.
The initial evaluation date for each individual unit will be determined prior
to each fire season by the affected land manager/owners based on their assess-
ment of the values at risk and the historical risk of fire (seasonal activity)
in the unit. It is not the intent of this planning process to develop pres-
criptions (which integrate fuels, weather, and topographic variables) to
quantify the decisions to cease initial attack in Modified Action areas.
Local weather information is available from a very limited number of sites
within the planning area. The flammability of the black spruce fuel complex
fluctuates rapidly and no reliable method for predicting extended drying
conditions ex.ists for Alaska. A traditional "prescription" cannot delineate
the end of the critical portion of the fire season in the Alaskan interior.
c. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Critical Protection Sites (Areas)
Policy: This designation is for those areas where fire presents a real and
immediate threat to human safety and designated physical deve'lopments. Fires
burning in these areas (sites) will be immediately and aggressively sup-
pressed.
48
~ I
l
I • I
I
I • , I
l
I
! •' I
I
i
I er
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
..
•
•
Objectives:
1.
2.
3.
Protect human life and inhabited property.
Place highest priority on the allocation of suppression forces to
sites (areas) in this option.
Limit damage from fire to the minimum achievable.
Operational Considerations:
1. Areas designated by this option are restricted to sites and im-
mediate surrounding areas.
2.
3.
Managers are encouraged to exercise restraint in the designation of
physical developments, limiting the application of this option to
those sites which are currently or routinely occupied as a· resi-
dence, or of such high economic or cultural value that fire could
cause an irretrievable loss.
The land manager/owner may elect to designate suppression tools
which may not be used entirely or within s~lected locations. Any
such constraints are documented in this plan within VII., Environ-
mental Assessment.·
Full Protection Areas
Policy: Fires burning in this area will be controlled through immediate and
aggressive action.
Objectives:
1. Regardless of fire weather or behavior, control all fires at the
smallest acreage possible .
2. Minimize the disruption by fire on designated, planned, or ongoing
human activities in the area.
Operational Considerations:
1.
2.
Only fires in the critical protection area receive a higher priority
for suppression resources.
Constraints on the use of selected suppression tools are at the dis-
cretion of the land manager/owner as documented in VII., Environ-
mental Assessment.
Modified Action Areas
Poliey: Contain
directed by the
attack analysis.
all fires using aggressive initial attack unless otherwise
land manager/owner upon completion of a modified initial
(See Appendix F).
49
Manage fires to consider resource management objectives in a cost effective
manner.
Objectives:
1. Reduce suppression costs on escaped fires through minimum force
commitments and indirect suppression tactics.
2. Provide opportunities for fire to help achieve land management
objectives.
Operational Considerations:
1. When a fire escapes control,
suppression organization and
caped fire analysis format to
Appendix G) •
the fire will be evaluated by the fire
the land manager/owner, using the es-
determine further fire strategy. (See
2. After the predetermined evaluation date, initial attack action will
cease unless the land manager/owner instructs the fire suppression
organization to continue suppressing fires occurring on certain
lands within this designation.
3. Constraints on the use of selected suppression tools are at the dis-
cretion of the land manager/owner as documented in VII., Environ-
mental Assessment.
Limited Action Areas
Policy: Contain fires only to the extent required to prevent undesirable
escape from this area.
Objectives:
1. Reduce overall suppression costs.
2. Allow fire to burn unimpeded to the fullest extent possible.
3. Prevent fire activity in this area from violating fire management
policies and objectives in adjoining areas.
Operational Considerations:
1.
2.
' 3.
Careful monitoring of fire behavior and fire weather conditions is
essential within this area.
When escape of a fire from this area appears imminent, the fire
management organization and land manager/owner will jointly develop
a strategic.control plan. ·
Constraints on the use of selected suppression tools are at the
discretion of the land manager/owner as documented in VII., Environ-
mental Assessment.
50
!
I
! e:
I
•
•
I
I
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
..
•
•
V. GENERAL OPERATIONAL POLICY
The operational procedures are discussed in two parts. The first part,
V. General Operational Policy, addresses procedures that are applicable to
the entire planning area, encompassing all fire management options. The
following part, VI. Operational Procedures for Individual Fire Management
Options, provides a readily available reference for operations personnel.
Interagency cooperation is essential in all aspects of fire management and
suppression. Existing cooperative agreements address many of these concerns.
Any operational procedures which change current agreements between agencies
apply only to the Tanana/Minchumina Planning Area. Cooperative agreements, as
updated each year, will be the principal means of implementing operational
aspects of this plan.
A. PRESUPPRESSION
Specific areas of mutual cooperation include, but are not limited to:
1. Prevention -Divergent aims and goals will require special coor-
dination. Cooperative prevention programs will be developed to
minimize public confusion, duplication of efforts, and to provide a
program that can be mutually implemented. Prevention objectives are
offered as guidelines for the development and design of prevention
programs (Appendix H).
2. Training in fire suppression, fire management, and resource manage-
ment.
3 .
4.
Fire activity plan development -including prescribed burning pro-
grams.
Mutual interchange -of information and a preseason briefing des-
cribing the capabilities and goals of the land manager/owner and
suppression organization. Examples of this information exchange
include:
a.
b.
c.
Each affected land manager/owner will provide a roster of
contact personnel, listing location and phone numbers, to
insure ongoing coordination throughout the fire season.
The fire suppression organization will provide a personnel
roster depicting appropriate operational contact personnel .
The land manager/owner will identify for the fire suppression
organization:
1) Specific changes in constraints on the use of selected
suppression tools.
2) Changes in management options which are to be applied to
specific parcels of land.
5. An analysis should be made by the land manager/owner to determine if
there are areas or zones where prescribed burning or hazard re-
51
duction would allow the selection of a less stringent fire. management option.
The fire suppression organization may provide the expertise for these opera-
tions at the land manager/owner's request. The land manager/owner and the
fire suppression organization should coordinate the funding of these projects.
These projects may be of particular value in the management of areas sur-
rounding critical sites.
B. GENERAL OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES
Unless specifically changed by provisions of this plan, existing fire manage-
ment operational procedures will ·be followed. Interagency use and allocation
of suppression forces, support capability, and expertise is encouraged. The
concerns from the involved agency or agencies will be handled in the following
manner:
1.
2.
An agency Natural Resource Officer normally will be assigned to the
fire overhead team to work with the on-fire organization. In addi-
tion, each agency is encouraged to provide qualified personnel for
use on overhead teams.
Selection of overhead for specific fire assignments will be made by
the fire suppression organization. Agencies should nominate people
on their staff for fire positions prior to April 1, each year.
These nominations should include the agency, the individual's name,
their NIFQS rating (National Inter-agency Fire Qualification
System), and their availability. These people will be used whenever
possible on fires on their own agency's land.
,3. During the active fire season, each affected land manager will be
expected to:
a.
b.
c.
Provide a weekly roster of operational contact personnel who
will be available 24 hours a day.
Make available a representative for periods of multiple fire
activity and/or large fire occurrence. Representatives will be
expected to have the ability and authority to make decisions,
set priorities, and identify strategies.
Provide Natural Resource Officers to the extent possible for
fire assignment.
4. -If the fire suppression organization cannot contact the agency
representative within a reasonable amount of time, they will take
the appropriate action using the best information they have avail-
able. Such actions will continue until an agency representative can
be contacted.
5 • Responsible fire suppression organizations will provide logistical
support to the fullest extent possible to the land manager(s) or
their representatives assigned to the fire. This includes support
at fire base field stations to agency employees identified as neces-
sary for performance of this plan.
52
·I
I
!
I
~
i
i
I
i
i
I
I
I
•i I
I : ;
I
!
•! i
i
I
i
!
.II
I
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
.,
•
...
•
•
•
6.
7 •
8.
In the event that either the fire ·suppression organization or .a land
manager/owner feels that conditions warrant a burning restriction in
a particular area or zone, tqe a,ffected land manager/owner(s) and
the fire organization will make the determination. If it is decided
to place a burning restriction on an area or zone, the affected land
manager/owner(s) will be responsible for public notification and
enforcement.
Safety dictates that a~ flights conducted within the vicinity of an
active fire action by the land manager/owner or his representative
will be coordinated with the appropriate fire suppression dispatch
office.
Participating agencies are requested to notify the appropriate fire
suppression field office when ongoing field work may complement
suppression operations. Examples include:
a. Aircraft flights which may provide detection coverage.
b. Aircraft which may be. used in field support activities.
C. POST FIRE ACTIVITIES
Joint review and critique of suppression actions on individual fires and/or
the activity which occurred throughout a season is left to the discretion of
.the parties invol.ved. Either the suppression organization or a land
manager/owner may request a formal critique.
Overhead teams will be required to furnish information required by the
affected land manager/owner. Conversely, the land manager/ owner(s) will be
required to furnish necessary information fat the completion of daily and
final fire suppression reports,-
The responsibility for final report submission rests . with the suppression
organization, including the submission of a final copy . to the land
manager/owner .
53
•
•
•
•
•
VI. OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES FOR
INDIVIDUAL FIRE MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
A. CRITICAL PROTECTION SITES (AREAS)
Presuppression: Land managers/owners are required to identify the size of the
area around each critical site which will receive the highest level of pro-
tection.
Operations:
1. Detection -Critical sites (areas) will receive maximum detection
coverage.
2.
3.
priority for· the action is to be
Fires will receive immediate and
Attack Response -The highest
given critical sites (areas).
aggressive initial attack with
with the minimum damage possible
adequate forces to obtain control
to the critical site(s).
Notification Requirements -As soon as possible, the affected
land manager/owner will be notified of t~e fire situation. Informa-
tion within the initial status report will include: location, size,
fuel type, fire behavior, description of critical site involved, and
action taken.
4. Escaped Fires-will be handled as follows:
a. The critical site will receive priority protection. over adja-
b.
cent lands and resources.
Adjacent lands and resources will be jointly analyzed by
the land manager/owner and the fire suppression organization to
determine fire suppression strategy after the critical site has
been protected .
55
Figure 5
OPERATIONAL DECISION CHART
FOR·
CRITICAL PROTECTION SITES (AREAS)
Determine adeiuate response
Execute I. A. response
+ + T T
Fire out
land manager/owners(s)
of fire status ~
~~~~------~~~~0-.~H-.~T~e-am~ Ask land manager/owner(s)
needed if evaluation of resources
0. H. Team briefing -conducted
by land manager/owner(s), if
necessa
Continue suppression
action to protect
critical site
Suppress fire
of the option assigned to
the surroundi n
Land manager/owner's rep.:
.1. Evaluates resources
2. Establishes priori ties
3. Develo s lan
site has
rotected
Land manager/owner(s)
has evaluated
resources
56
is uired
Protect
critical site
Implement strategy plan
as developed by land ·
mana er/owners(s)
:~
I
I
•t
i
I
.\
I
I
•'
I
.;
' '
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
B. FULL PROTECTION AREAS
Presuppression: Suppression force preparedness and mobilization will be pro-
vided to the extent necessary to ensure that all fires receive full suppres-
sion, except as modified by the Alaska Interagency Fire Service coordination
group during abnormal fire years .
Operations:
1. Detection -Designated lands will receive the maximum detection
coverage available.
2. Attack Response -Fires will receive immediate and aggressive ini-
tial attack with sufficient forces to obtain control at the smallest
acre~ge possible.
3 ., Notification Requirements -On fires where initial attack is suc-
cessful or the fire is otherwise controlled within the first burning
period, special agency notification is not required. The fire
suppression organization will notify the agency of these fires
, through normal briefing sessions or by forwarding a copy of the
individual fire report to the land manager/ owner(s).
4. Escaped Fire-When a fire escapes initial attack and requires
continued suppression efforts, the affected land manager/owner will
be contacted. The land manager/owner and the fire organization will
ascertain if a joint evaluation is necessary ·to develop further fire
strategy ..
Escaped fires will be placed under the management control of an
appropriate level fire overhead team .
The need to place a land manager/owner's representative at the fire
suppression organization's h.eadquarters will be at either the dis-
cretion of the affected agency or at the request of the suppression
organization.
On-site resource impact assessments will be provided by a Natural
Resource Officer assigned to the overhead team organization. It is
expected that each agency furnish this capability to the best of its
ability .
57
Figure 6
OPERATIONAL DECISION CHART.
FOR
FULL PROTECTION AREAS
Detection of
Determine location and affected
land er/owner(s)
Identify special
o erational constraints
Determine
land mana constraints
Fire
· first burnin
No special land manager/owner(s)
notification necessa
Notify land manager/owners(s)
of fire status
Mobilize Ask land manager/owner(s)
if evaluation of resources
is re uired
0. H. Team briefing ~ conducted
by land manager/owner(s)~ if
necessary
I Yes
!
Land manager/owner's Fire organization
representative: .proceed With
1. Evaluates resources strategy plan and
2. Establishes priorities action
3. Develops strategy plan '
', ,. l Continue suppression action I ..,_
· until fire is out I
58
I • I
I
I
I •• I
I
I
•!
I
I
I
el
I
•I
I
I
I
I
•i !
I
I
I
.~
~ I.
I
I
I
I
al
I
••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
C. MODIFIED ACTION AREAS
Presuppression: Suppression force preparedne.ss and mobilization will be
provided to the extent necessary to ensure that all fires receive aggressive
initial attack, except as modified by the Alaska Interagency Fire Service
coordination group during abnormal fire years.
Operations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Detection -Designated lands will receive the same detection cover-
age as Full Protection Areas.
Attack Response -Once a fire is detected and plotted, and the
affected land manager.is identified, the operational decision charts
will be followed. The chart describes the appropriate procedures
and course of action for both the suppression organization and the
land manager/owner.
Aggressive initial attack will cease on the .predetermined evaluation
date unless: (1) a modified initial attack analysis has been com-
pleted (see Appendix F), and . (2) the land manager/owner(s) has
provided written instructions to continue normal initial attack
response within the management unit as a result· of the initial
attack analysis.
On non-initial attack fires, alternative action (contingency) plans
will be jointly developed by the land manager/owner and the fire
suppression organization. Implementation of an alternative action
plan will be a joint decision between the affected parties.
On escaped fires, a strategic action plan will be jointly agreed
upon by the. land manager/owner and the suppression organization .
Notification· Requirements -The land manager/owner(s) will be im-
mediately notified of those fires not receiving initial attack.
Daily communications will continue until the fire is declared out,
or, the land manager/owner wishes to change the notification re-
quirement .
On fires where .initial attack is successful or the fire is otherwise
contained within the first burning period, special agency notifica-
tion is not required. The fire suppression organization will notify
the agency of these fires through normal briefing sessions or by
forwarding a copy of the individual fire report to the ~and
manager/owner(s).
Monitoring -The fire suppression organization will maintain moni-
toring responsibilities on unmanned fires. Joint monitoring ar-
rangements will be made when situations warrant or the land
manager/owner(s) wishes to implement his own monitoring procedures .
59
Moni taring will be performed until the fire is manned or declared
out. This information will be used to update or revise alternative
action plans when necessary. (See Appendix I for specific moni-
toring procedures.)
a. Field station responsibilities include:
l)
2)
3)
obtaining a spot weather forecast each day.
obtaining a 3-5 day spot forecast each day. ~
providing a past 10-day weather summary, including
preciptation amounts, from the two fire weather station(s)
nearest to the fire.
b. Fire site observation responsibilities will include:
c.
1)
2)
3)
4)
making a map of the fire and adjacent area depicting the
following: fire size and location, topography, fuel
types(s), obvious areas of special concern, and natural
barrier locations.
observing fire behavior, including: estimated rate of
forward spread, direction of spread, estimated flame
lengths, description of fire (i.e., crowning, ground fire,
surface fire), and spotting (including distance).
describing smoke behavior, including plume height and
direction of movement.
observing general weather.
Projection of fire perimeter
Information obtained from the field station and the fire site
will be used to predict the fire perimeter at .the close of the
next 24-hour period. This information will be used by the land
manager and the fire suppression organization to determine if
the implementation of the contingency plan is necessary.
Information and analysis will be recorded as a chronological
history of the fire.
60
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
. ..
•
•
•
•
•
Yes
Written notification
Figure 7
OPERATIONAL DECISION CHART
FOR
MODIFIED . .ACTION AREAS
· Detection of
Determine location
· and affected land
mana er/owner(s)
has been received to ~~-----------:~~------------~~-dis.continue nonnal
initial attack
No attack
+
Notify land manager
of action taken
No forces available
Delay attack
status
monitoring
rocedures
! Monitoring procedures 1
initiated"
(See Chart D, p. 66),--~--.....-::-------,
Extended attack
situation
(See Chart B, p. 62)
Forces.become
available
·.~··
Analyze fire
situation
61
Chart A
Check res tric-·
tions on fir.e
suppression tools,
i.e., no cats, etc • . +
Analyze fire fighting
force availabilit
Execute
initial attack
res onse
Fire
out
Escaped fire
.situation
(See Chart C,. p. 63)
Fire organization
proceeds with
s'(:rategy plan
and-action
Extended attack
Notify land manager
of fire status
.Determine resource
evaluation require-
affected
Onsite
evaluation ~-----~~
reguested
!
Fire organization
proceeds with
interim strategy
plan and action
Chart B
Land manager's representa-
tive: ,
1. Evaluates -resources
2. Establishes .. priorities
3. Devel~s sti:at~ plan
~ Suppression action ~-~--------------~ '------------~~-~ continues until: --
Fire is
declared out
, It
Project fire
situation is
declared
(See Chart C, p; 63)
62
_ ... -Escaped fire analysis
determines level of risk is
low and ·land manager/owner
objectives can be satisfied
+
[ Initiate moni taring I
(See Chart D, p-64-)
I
.. )
I
E er I
-·
•
' I
•
Fire management
officer
I • I •
';!
Notify 'manager
of. fire ·status
Mobilize appropriate
level overhead team
includin NRO
Overhead team and land
Chart C
~' ~.' •. ,, ,; ' ••. ' -. ·;-·.· 1"'
: .. j
/
I . •
I · manager conduct agency '·-·-· .....
I • -·-·-·-·-briefing and determine
Fire out
~\
Escaped fire analysis
determines level or risk
and if land manager/owner
ob · ecti ves can be sat is fi ed
Initiate
monitorin
(Modified Action Area: Chart D, p. 64
See Chart G, p. 69) Limited Action Area :
63
Monitoring procedures
initiated
Prepare alternative
action lans
Implementation of an
alternative
Chart D
Continue monitoring!~ L_!Y~e~s~-----.. Return to:
analyze fire
situation ~
Revise alternative
action plan if
necessa
(See Chart A, p. 61)
64
I • !
!
.l
I
I
r
•
•
•
:e
D. LIMITED ACTION AREAS
Presuppression: The supp.ression organization will review all boundaries to
·assure that they are adequate as possible control points. Recommendations for
relocating or reinforcing boundaries will be made by the suppression organiza-
tion. Presuppression action plans will be developed where known reinforcement
.work will be required where a fire threatens to cross the boundary. Any
necessary alterations will be agreed upon between the suppression organizatio.n
and affected parties. ' .
Operations:
1. Detection -Designated lands will receive routine detection effort.
Additional flights will be provided when requested by individual
agencies.
2. Attack Response-Once a fire is detected, plotted, and the affected
land manager/owner is identified, the operations decision chart will
.be followed. Its use describes the appropriate procedures and
course of action ·for both the suppression organization and the land
manager/ owner.
Land managers/owners or the suppression organization may request, in
writing, that' all fires .within a designated: area ·receive initial
attack response. Those fires escaping init'ial attack .will be
handled as any other fire burning in a Limited Action area. Those
fires which currently exist will not receive special suppression
consideration.
3. Notification Requirements -The land manager/owner will be immedi-
ately not.ified of all fires detected. Daily communications will
continue until the fire(s) is declared out or the land manager/owner
.:wishes to change the notification requirement.
·4. Monitoring -The fire suppression organization will maintain the
monitoring responsibilities on fires while they are burning. Joint
monitoring arrangements will be conducted when situations warrant or
the land manager/owner wishes to implement his own monitoring pro-
cedures.
Moni taring . will be performed until the fire is manned or declared
out. This information will be used to update or revise alternative
action plans when necessary. (See Appendix I for specific moni-
toring procedures.)
a. Field station responsibilities include:
1) obtaining a spot weather forecast each day.
2) obtaining a 3-5 day spot weather forecast ·each day.
3) providing a past 10-day weather summary, including pre-
cipitation amounts from the two fire weath~:7r station(s)
nearest to the fire.
65
b. Fire site responsibilities will include:
1) making a map of the fire and adjacent area depicting the
following: fire size and location, topography, fuel
type(s), obvious areas of special concern, and natural
barrier locations. ·
2) observing fire behavior, including: estimated rate of
forward spread, direction of spread, estimated · flame
lengths, description of fire (i.e., crowning, ground fire,
surface fire), and spotting (including distance).
3) describing smoke behavior including plume height and
direction of movement.
4) observing general weather.
c. Projection of fire perimeter
!!).formation obtained from the field station and the fire site
will be used to predict the fire perimeter at the close of the
next 24-hour period. This information will be used by the land
manager and the fire suppression organization to determine if
the implementation of the contingency plan is necessary.
Information and analysis will be recorded as a chronological
history of the fire. ·
66
.\ ........
•
••
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Figure 8
OPERATIONAL DECISION CHART
FOR
LIMITED ACTION AREAS
Determine if written
request for I.A.' action
has been
T T
Fire out ~E-x~te-n-d7e-d~f~i~r-e'
situation
(See Chart F, p. 68)
·special
constraints
concerns
Fire management
organization and
affected land
manager determine
I Actions completed
I Notify
67
1
land manager· I
1
Chart E
Fire management
organization and
affected land
Suppression forces
mobilized to preven
undesirable
from area
~ire organization
proceeds with
strategy plan
and action
Fire is··
declared out
Extended atta~k
situation
Notify land manager
of fire status
Determine resource
evaluation require-
ments from-affected-
land mana er(s)
Onsite ....
evaluation ~---~-
requested
' lr
Fire organization
proceeds with
interim strategy
plan and action
Chart F
Land managers representa-
tive:
1. Evaluates resources
2. Establishes priorities
3. Develop_s strategy _ _plan
Suppression action _
continues until: 1 ~-~--------------~
L ~~ Escaped fire analysis
determines level of risk --
Escaped fire
situation is
.declared
(See Chart C, p. 63)
68
and if land manager/owner
objectives can be satisfied
+.
I Initiate monitor~~g l
(See Chart G, p. 69)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
l 'e
I
I
I ,.
:
Fire
continues
to burn
Revise alternative .__-...! action plan if
necessa
Monitoring procedures
initiated
alternative
lans
Implementation of an
alte.rnative action
Fire is
declared
out
69
Analyze fire
situation
l
Return to:
fire predicted to
remain within area
·(See Chart E, p. 67)
Chart G
•
•
•
••
i ·•
•
•
•
•
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. PURPOSE AND NEED
Refer to Section I, Introduction, subparts A, B, and C, and Section II,
Planning Area, subpart A, of this document.
The fire management planning area was divided into 17 management units (see
Appendix E). The unit boundaries were established by evaluating topography,
land status, fuels, and presence of barriers to fire spread. These management
units are the basic land unit used for the purpose of analyzing and applying
fire management alternatives to the planning area .
B. ALTERNATIVES AND PREFERRED ALTERNATIVES
1. Alternatives
The proposed action for this assessment is to implement the Tanana/Minchumina
Interagency Fire Management Plan. Within this proposal, four fire management
alternatives are available to the land manager/owner(s) for their respective
lands. These fire management alternatives are presented in detaii in Section
IV. of this document. Additionally, operational procedures for each fire
management alternative are discussed in Section VI of this document.
The No Action alternative consists of continuing implementation of. the current
fire management policy. Current fire management policy is summarized in
Section I, subpart E, of this document.
2. Preferred Alternative
The preferred alternative of the fire management plan is to implement the
combination of alternatives as illustrated by Appendix E.
C. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Refer to Section II, Planning Area, for a description of the environment that
would be affected by the proposed action.
D . ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
1. Effects of Fire and Suppression Activities
The general effects of fire and suppression are presented in Table 7 (pg. 76).
These general effects represent the anticipated effects in an average year.
The general effects of the alternatives on the environment, including the no
action alternative, are presented in Table 8 (pg. 79). These general effects
represent the anticipated effects of a particular alternative if it were
applied to the entire planning unit in an average year. Additionally, it
should be noted that the effects of the Modified Action alternative will vary
71
depending on whether a fire occurs before or after the modified intial attack
analysis has been conducted. If the fire occurs before the analysis, the
anticipated effects will be essentially the same as the Full Protection al-
ternative. However, if the analysis has been conducted, the anticipated
effects will range between those of the Full Protection and Limited Action
alternatives.
2. Effects of Preferred Alternative(s)
The anticipated effects of the preferred alternative(s) are presented in
.Table 9 (pg. 81). The information is .Presented for each management unit which
contains Federal lands, and represents the summary of an analysis based on the
following factors:
Land status
Critical sites
Fire considerations
Fire history
Number per size class, suppression action
Initial attack success
Fire behavior
Fuels
Natural barriers/topography
Public issues and concerns
Local
Regional
Resource considerations of land manager
Resource management objectives and land uses
Preliminary selection of alternative(s)
Effects of preliminary alternatives(s)
Development of mitigating measures
Special considerations
Adjacent land manager/owner coordination
Reevaluation of preliminary alternative(s)
Effects of final alternative(s)
Lands in the Goldstream, Innoko, and Nixon Fork units are State of Alaska,
Native corporation, or privately owned. The effects of the preferred alterna-
tive on these lands have not been recorded in this Environmental Assessment.
E. PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Tanana/Minchumina Interagency Fire Planning Team, and other
persons from their respective organizations, participated in the preparation
of this Envirornnental Assessment. ~embers of the team at the time· of· signing
included:
Norman "Frenchie" Malotte
BLM, Anchorage
Isaac Juneby
Tanana Chiefs Conference, Fairbanks
72
Kay Johnson
BLM, Anchorage
Phil Perkins
BLM, Anchorage
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
-·
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
•
Bob Wright
Doyon, LTD, Fairbanks
Kay Herman
Doyon, LTD, Fairbanks
Bruce Durtsche
BLM, Fairbanks
Melanie Miller
BLM, Fairbanks
Dale Haggstrom
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Fairbanks
Dorothy Simpson
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Fairbanks
Jim Lewandoski
Alaska Department of Natural Resources
Fairbanks
Bill Kirk
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Anchorage
Glen Anderson
Bureau of Indian Affiars
Anchorage
Doug Erskine
U.S. National Parks Service
Anchorage
John Dalle-Molle
U.S. National Park Service
Denali National Park
Dennis Ricker
Alaska Department of Natural
Resources, Anchorage
Rod Narum
U.S.F.S., Institute of
Northern Forestry, Fairbanks
Joe Ribar
BLM, Fairbanks
Kirk Rowdabaugh
BLM, Anchorage
Other individuals were members of the planning team earlier in the planning
.process. Their names and agencies at the time of their affiliation with the
planning team are:
Bill Hanson
BLM, Anchorage
Don Yingst
BLM, Anchorage
Roger Trimble
B~, Fairbanks
Bill Paleck
U.S. National Park Service
Anchorage
Mike Newell
Alaska Department of Natural Resources
Anchorage
73
Pa·t Kidder
BLM, Fairbanks
Dave Williams
Doyon, LTD, Fairbanks
Steve Clautice
Alaska Department of Natural
Resources, Fairbanks
Elgin Filkins
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Anchorage
Envi romne ntal
Component
Soils
Air
Water
Cultural
Surface
·Subsurface
Visual·
Table 7
General Effects of Fire and.Fire Suppression
Fire
* (H+) Increased temperature
and active layer thickness
enhances nutrient availa-
bility and turnover.
(L-) Slight potential for per-
mafrost degradation on steep
slopes through soil slumping
and subsidence.
(M-) Short term interference
with visibility due to smoke.
(L...::') Potential siltation due
to fire burning shoreline vege~
tation • ..
(H-) , Potential for complete
destruction of historic struc-
tures.
(L-) Extremely severe fire
may damage historic. and pre-
historic artifacts.\ ·
(M+) Long term effect by add-
ing vegetation diversity to a
scene.
(M-) Large fires may have .
short term effect by imposing
a blackened, disrupted, un-
pleasing scene.
Suppression
Activities
(M-) May cause severe
erosion where firelines
are bulldozed and ac-
cess roads are built.
(L-) Use of large burn-
out operations may in-
crease smoke~
(M-) Increased silt
load due to erosion of
bulldozed firelines.
(L-) Fire camps, heli-
ports? and other activ-
ities may damage both
surface and subsurface
resources by compaction,
disturbance, or removal
of artifacts.
(H-) Long term·residual
effect from fire breaks,
cat lines, etc., caused
by straight and harsh
contrast lines in the
landscape.
·:
* 0 = no impact; Lj= low impact; M = moderate impact; H = high impact
+ positive; -/= negative
i
I
74
•
·~
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Environmental
Component
Wildlife
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species
Plants
Animals
Wilderness
Table 7 (Continued)
Fire
(H+) Long term effect by in-
creasing habitat diversity anq
forage quality.
(H-) Short term effect by
loss of habitat with large
fires.
(M+) Snags are created and
are habitat for cavity nesting
birds.
(M+) Fire killed trees may fall
into streams to create cover
for some species.
(L+) Increased nutrient en-
richment of water from fire
ash.
(H+) Fire sets back stages
of plant succession. Over
long term, this benefits plants
which thrive in early stages of
succession.
(L-) Possible removal of local-
ized plants.
(H+) Fire enhances prey spe-
cies habitat.
(L-) Unlikely event of fire
causing nest abandonment or
death.
(H+) Fire is a natural com-
ponent of the ecosystem.
75
Suppression
Activities
(L+) Long term effect
by creating edge effects
and diversity along fire-
lines.
(M-) Short term dis-
ruption of animals dur-
ing suppression period.
(H-) Direct drops of
fire retardant into
streams can cause very
localized fish kill.
(M-) Siltation increases
due to construction and'
erosion of fire lines.
(H-) Localized plants may
be destroyed by construct-
ion of fire lines, comp-
action in camp areas, etc.
(H-) Fire retardant may
harm plants in localized
areas.
(M-) Short term disrup-
tion by human activities
may have long term ef-
fects if breeding failure
or mortality of young
occurrs .
(H-) Long term effect
by construction of fire
lines, access roads,
etc.
Environmental
Component
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
Table 7 (Continued)
Fire
(H+) Long term effect by in-
creasing diversity and vigor.
(L-) Short term effect by loss
of vegetation.
(L+) Long term effect on trap-
ping and hunting through im-
proved wildlife habitat.
(H-) Possible short term loss
of marketable forest resources.
(H-) Private property such
as cabins may be lost.
(H-) Possible disruption if
a home or community were eva-
cuated.
(M-) Short term elimination of
trapping and hunting in areas
of a large burn.
76
Suppression
Activities
(L-) Fire line construc-
tion causes loss of vege-
tation in localized areas.
(M+) Hiring of local
residents for suppression
activities enhances
economy.
(L-) Social disruption
due to influx of crews
in small communities.
(M+) Regional economy is
enhanced because of con-
tract services related
to fire management oper-
ations.
(H-) Current cost of
existing fire management
practices is extremely
high.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Environmental
Component
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Table 8
General Effects of Alternatives
Critical, Full Protection,
and No Action (Present Policy)
(H-) May cause severe erosion
where firelines are bulldozed
and access .. roads are built.
(0 to L-) Short term interfer-
ence with visibility due tb
smoke .
(H-) Increased siltation due
to fire breaks, line and road
construction.
(0) Historical sites and
surrounding areas will re-
ceive protection.
(1-) Fire suppression
activities may cause
compaction, disturbance, or
removal of artifacts.
(H-) Long term residual ef-
fect from suppression by
adding straight and harsh
contrast lines to landscape.
(H-) Minimal habitat diversity
poor forage quality and avail-
ability.
(M-) Siltation due to con-
struction and erosion of
firelines and breaks.
Limited
Action
(H+) Increased temp-
erature and active layer
thickness enhance nu-
trient availability and
turnover .
(1-) Minimal fireline
construction.
(M-) Short term inter-
ference with visibility
due to smoke.
(0 to 1-) Severe fires
may cause siltation on
short term.
(H-) Potential loss of
site may occur if not
pre-identified to imple-
ment protective measures.
(L-) Fire. suppression
activities may cause com-
paction, disturbance, or
artifact removal.
(L-) Suppression ef-
fect if no bulldozers.
(H+) Scene enhanced by
diversity.
(L-) Short term effect
by blackened scene .
(H+) Long term effect by
increasing habitat diver-
sity and forage quality.
(L-) Short term effect
of large fires by habi-
tat loss.
(L+) Habitat improved
by fallen trees.
(0) Minimal siltation
if no bulldozers.
* 0 no impact; L = low impact; M = moderate impact; H =high impact;
+ positive; - = negative
77
EnviroiDnental
Component
Threatened
and Endangered
Species
Wilderness
Vegetation
Socio Economic
Table 8 (Continued)
General Effects of Alternatives
Critical, Full Protection,
and No Action (Present Policy)
(H-) Minimal habitat diver-
sity, no early successional
stages.
(H-) Localized species may be
disrupted or destroyed by
suppression activities.
(H-) Long term effect by
cons.truction of firelines,
roads, breaks.
(H-) Negative effect on
diversity and vigor.
. (H-) No long term effect of
improved wildlife habitat.
(H-) Minimal loss commercial
timber.
(H-) Minimal loss private
property.
(H-) Minimal disruption by
evacuation.
(H+) High employment by sup-
pression organization.
(M-) Disruption by influx of
crews.
(H-) Extremely high cost to
suppression organization.
78
Limited
Action
(H+) Fire maximizes
habitat diversity and
enhances prey habitat.
(L-) Potential disrup-
tion by suppression in
localized area.
(H+) Fire is a natural
component.
(H+) Minimum effect
by suppression actions.
if no bulldozers.
(H+) Long term effect
by increasing diversity
and vigor.
(H+) Habitat improvement
in long term.
(M-) Potential lQss
commercial timber.
(M-) Potential loss
private property.
(M-) Potential evac--
uation.
(L-) Moderate employ-
ment level by suppres-
sion organization.
(M+) Moderate cost to
suppression organization.
(H+). Minimal cost to
suppression organization
if hazard reduction
programs are implemented.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Table 9
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Entire planning area
AGENCY: BIA
LAND STATUS: Native Allotments
.SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Heavy equipment
approved case-by-case only. Avoid
human water sources when using retardant .
Identify and protect historical sites with
presuppression plans; identify and protect
NAs with improvements and develop pre-
suppression plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Critical,
Full
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: NAs with
improvements (structures, fish
wheels, smoke racks, cabins, etc.)
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
0 to 1-1-
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 to 1-
0 0 to 1-
1-0
0 0
0 to 1-0 to 1-
0 to 1-0 to 1-
0 0
0 to 1-1-
1-M+ to H+
* 0
+
no impact; L = low impact; M = moderate impact; H
positive; -= negative
high impact;
79
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT:. Big River
AGENCY: BLM
LAND STATUS: BLM; State of Alaska;
Native corporations
SPECIAL OONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression
plans at historical sites and Iditarod
T.rail; install Remote Automated Weather
Stations (RAWS) to aid in prescription
development; clear trails after fire;
contour firelines; avoid retardant in
salmon streams; clear log jams as
needed; no suppression at T&E species
sites; limit heavy equipment.
ENVIRONMENTAL
OOMPONENT
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface·
Visual
Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
/
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
H+
H-~
0
0
0
'L-
0 to L-
0 to L-
0 to L-
0 to L-
L-
0 to L-
L±
80
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Modified,
Full
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: Native
allotments
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
H+ L-
0 M-
0 L-
0 L-
0 H-
H+ L-to M-
H+ L-
0 L-
H+ L-toM-
H+ L-to M-
H+ L-to M-
H+ L-
H+ L-
I
.!
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
!
I
•
•
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Birches PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Full
AGENCY: BLM
LAND STATUS: BLM; FWS; State
of Alaska; Native corporations
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression
plans at special sites; no suppression at
T&E sites; limit use of heavy equipment .
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visu~l
Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
L-
0
0
0
0 to L-:
0 to L-
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
0
0
0 to L-
81
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES:
None known
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
H+ 0 to L-
0 0 to L-
H+ 0 to L-
0 0
0 0 to L-
H+ 0 to L-
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0 to L-
H+ 0 to L-
0 0 to L-
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Birches
AGENCY: FWS
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Full
LAND STATUS: BLM; FWS; State of NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES:
Alaska; Native corporations Native allotments
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression
plans at special sites; no suppression at •
T&E sites,; limit use of heavy equipment.
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Soil·
Air
Water
Cultural:
· · Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife:
Terresfriat
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
1-to M-
0
0
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
0
0
0 to L-
82
FIRE
LONG-TERM
H+
0
H+
0
0
H+
H+
H+
H+
H+
H+
H+
0
FIRE
SUPPRESSION
0 to L-
0 to L-
0 to L-
0
0 to L-
0 to 1-··
0
0
0
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
0 to L-
•
•
•
•
:I
••
•
;;
:
'
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Lower Nowitna PREFERRED ALTERNATIYE(s): Limited
AGENCY: BLM
LAND STATUS: BLM; FWS; State'of
Alaska; Native corporations
SPECIAL CDNSIDERATIONS: No suppression
at T&E sites; no heavy equipment.
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Sqil
'· Air·
Water
.. Cultural:
Surf:ace
Subsurface
Visual
Wild'life:
.Terrestrial
Aquatic
Thr.eatened and
Endangered. Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
0 to L-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
H+
0
0
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES:
83
None known
FIRE
LONG..: TERM
H+
0
H+
0
0
·H+
H+
H+
H+
H+
H+
'H+
.. H+
FIRE
SUPPRESSION
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.
0
0
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Lower N'owi tna PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): All
AGENCY: FWS
LAND STATUS: BLM; FWS; State
of Alaska; Native corporations
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression
plans at critical sites and other sites;
no suppression at T&E sites.; limit use. of
heavy equipment; no straight firelines.
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife:
· Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
L-
0
0
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
0
0
0 to L-
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES:
Native allotments·
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM . SUPPRESSION
M+ L-
0 0 to L-
0 0 to L-
0 0
0 0 to L-
H+ 0 to L-
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0 to L-
H+ 0 to L-
0 0 to L-
84
•
•
•
l
·~
I
i
I
I
I II
1
I
I
i
l .:
I
!
i
! e!
' I .I
1 I
I
i
i
!
I
I
•' I
I
I
i
•
Table 9, co·ntinued . • Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Cosna PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Limited,
Modified, Full
AGENCY: . BLM
• LAND STATUS: BLM; State of Alaska; NATURE OF-CRITICAL SITES: Possible
Native corporations Native allotments
SPECIAL OONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression plans
for special and critical sites; no sup-
pression at T&E species sites; limit use
of heavy equipment.
ENVIRONMENTAL FIRE FIRE FIRE
COMPONENT SHORT-TERM LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
• Soil 0 H+ 0 to L-
Air L-0 0 to L-
Water· 0 H+. 0
I
Cultural:
• Surface 0 0 0
Subsurface 0 0 0
Visual 0 to L-H+ 0 to L-
Wildlife:
• Terrestrial 0 to L-H+ 0 to L-
Aquatic 0 H+ 0
Threatened and
Endangered Species: ,. Plants 0 to L-H+ 0
Animals 0 to L-H+ 0
Wilde rriess/Rec. 0 H+ 0 to L-
Vegetation 0 H+ 0 to L-
Socio-Economic 0 to L-H+ 0 to L-
•• 85
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Melozi~na PREFERR~D ALTERNATIVE(s): Limited,
AGENCY: BLM
LAND STATUS: BLM; State of Alaska;
Native corporations (near mouth·of
Melozitna)
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression
plans at historical sites; no suppression
at T&E species sites; no heavy equipment;
monitoring.
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife:
Terrestrial·
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species·:
· Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
So~io-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
L-
0
0
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
H+
0
0 to L-
86
Full
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: None
known
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
H+ 0 to L-
0 0 to·L-
() o·
0 0
0 0 to L-
H+ 0 -
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ . 0 to L-
H+ 0
. H+ 0 to L-
I • ·. I
I :
I
I
I •• I
I
i
I
•I i-
1
.I
I
I .:
~
i
I
i
·I I
I
•
••
•
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Minto Fiats
AGENCY: BLM
LAND STATUS: BLM; State of Alaska;
Native corporations
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression plans
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Full,
Modified
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: Private
property; Trans-Alaska Pipeline
System; pump station
at special and critical sites; no suppression e at T&E species sites; use of heavy equipment
on case-by-case basis.
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
e Soil
•
•
•
Air·
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
L-to M-
0
0
0
L-
0 to L-
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
0
0 to L-
0
87
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
M+ 0 to M-
0 0 to L-
M+ 0 to M-
0 0
0 0 to L-
L+ L-to M-
L+ L-to M-
0 to L+ 0
0 to L+ 0 to L-
0 to L+ 0 to L-
0 0 to 1.:..
0 to L+ L-
0 0 to L-
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: North Fork Kuskokwim
AGENCY: BLM
LAND STATUS: BLM; State of Alaska;
Native co_rporations
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression
plans; clear trails after fire; contour
firelines; clear log jams as needed; no
suppression at T&E species sites; limit
~se of heavy equipment.
ENVIRONMENTAL
!=!OMPONENT
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife:
. Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
. Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio,..Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
. H+
H-
0
0
0
L-
0 to L-
0 to L-
0 to L-
0 to 1-
L-
0 to L-
L±
88
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Modified
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: Possible
future settlement
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
H+ 0 to L-
0 L-
0 L-
0 L-
0 H-
H+ L-
H+ L~
0 L-
H+ L-to M..;.
H+ L-to M-
H+ H-
H+ 0
H+ L-
I ,. I
I
i
I .• ;
I .:
i
!
I
i
I
I
I e!
I
!
I
'
I
•\
I
i
I
!
I
.i
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
.i
I
'
i
•I
•
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
•
•
•
•
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Rampart
AGENCY: BLM
LAND STATUS: BLM; State of Alaska;
Native corporations
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression
plans at special and critical sites;
no suppression at T&E species sites;
use of heavy equipment on a case-by-
case.
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Soil
Ai;r
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
L-to M-.
0
0
0
1-
,. Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
• Endangered Species:
•
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
0
0
0
0
to L-
0
to L-
to L-
0
to 1-
0
89
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Modified,
Full
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: Trans-Alaska
Pipeline System; Native allotments;
pump station; Yukon crossing develop-
ments
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
M+ 0 to M-
0 0 to L-
M+ 0 to M-
0 0
0 0 to L-
L+ L-to M-
L+ L-toM.:.
0 to L+ 0
0 to L+ 0 to L-
0 to L+ 0 to L-
0
0 to L+ 0 to'L-
0 0 to L-
Table. 9, Continued
Effect· of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Ray River
AGENCY: BLM
LAND STATUS: BLM; State of
Alaska; Native Corporations
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression plans
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Modified
Full
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: Trans-Alaska
Pipeline System; development of Ray
River Hot Springs ·
at special and critical sites; no suppression
at T&E sites; -use of heavy equipment on case-
by-case basis.
ENVIRONMENTAL FIRE FIRE FIRE
COMPONENT SHORT-TERM LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
Soil 0 M+ L-
Air /1 L-:-to M-0 L-
Water 0 M+ 0 to L-
Cultu?:al:
Surface 0 0 0
Subsurface 0 0 0 to L-
-· Visual 0 to L-M+ 0 to L-
Wildlife:
Terrestrial 0 to L-M+ 0 to L-
Aquatic 0 M+ 0 to L-
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants 0 to L....; M+ ·o to L-
Animals 0 to L-M+ 0 to L-
Wilderness/Rec. 0 to L-M+ 0 to L-
Vegetation 0 to L-M+ L-
So-cio-Economic 0 to L-M+ 0 to L-
90
•
I,
I .I
I
I
tl
I
l
•I
•
!
!
I
I
I
I
.I
I
el
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
Table 9, Continued
.Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEME:trr UNIT: Toklat
AGENCY: NPS
LAND S~ATUS: NPS; State of.Alaska;
Native corporations
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: No heavy equipment;
site specific presuppression plans for
special sites; no suppression at T&E sites;
maximize natural processes •
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Soil
Air
Water.·
Cultural':
Surface
Subsurface ..
Visual
Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation .
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
L-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
H+·
0
0 to L-
91
. )
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Limited,
Full, Modified
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: Improve:..
ments, Native allotments; Denali
Park headquarters; Stampede area
I
FIRE. FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
H+ 0 to L-
'H+ 0
H+ 0
0 0
d 0 to L-
H+ 0 to L-
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ L-.to M-
H+ L-to M-
H+' M-
Table 9·,. Continued
Kffeet· o·f. P:t:efer.re& A1;;terna;tfve
MANAGEMENT: UN:IT'·::-TC>zi.tna-
AGENCY:· BLM
LAND. STATUS::~ BLM:;~ Sit•at:e. of .Alaska:;.
Native c:o;:qm:r:a.t±o;ns:·
SPECIAL CXlNSIDE:R:A:TIONS::;: Monito:r.:tng;:: p:re,-·
suppress·i.o.n:· p:ht'IIS! for. sp:eciaL a.ndi:
criticaL si.tes;;c· no: suppr.-essi:on·. a:t.
T&E sites:;;: I:iimi.t use of:. heav;y.· equip.ment: •.
ENVIRONMEN:.r:AK
' . '
-COMPONE:NE'
Soil·
Air
W:ater·.
Cultural:_
Sur:face·
. Suhstirface·
Visual:
Wildlife.:;
Yerresttial!
Aquatic:
Threa t.eried. and·
Endangered Species:·
Plants:
AnimalS
Wi ide·rness:/Rec.
Vegetat-ion
S.ocio-Ec.ononrlc
FIRE~
SHORT~':r'ERM.
0.
(}.
o:
0 to L-
0 to E,.;..
H+'
0 toL,..
0: to L:-·
92
PREFERRED,: ALTERNAT:IVE{s:)::.-Euil-,.
Linrlt:ec:L
NATURE: OF' CRLTICAL, Sc!TES:.
Homes>:Ltes: on. Thzitna· River ,
FIRE:·
LONG~ TERM:
H+
'H+
H+
H+
H+
H+
H+
H.+
H+
FIRK.
SUPP.lH:B:S:ION·
0 to~ L.--
o:
0'
o·
0
n-
Oi toe L:-·
o: to L-
L-
:~
'
J
I
I
!
•I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
-·
I
I
•
i• I
•
Table 9, Continued
Effect· of Preferr-ed Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Tonzona
AGENCY: NPS
LAND STATUS: NPS; State of Alaska;
Native corporations
-SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: No heavy equipment;
no suppression at T&E sites; identify
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): ·Limited,
Modified
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: None
known
natural barriers; maximize natural processes .
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT-
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
L-
0
0
0'
0
0
0
0
0
H+
0
0 to L-
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
H+ L-
H+ L-
H+ 0
0 0
0 L-
H+ L-
H+ L-
H+ 0 to L-
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ M-
H+ M-
H+ M-
93
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Upper Nowitna
AGENCY: BLM
LAND STATUS: BLM; FWS; State of
Alaska; Nativ~ corporations
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression
plans at historical sites; no suppression
at T&E sites; limited use of heavy
equipment; monitoring.
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
L-
0
0
0
0 to 1-
0 to L-
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
0
0
0 to L-
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Limited,
Full, Modified
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: Native
allotments along Titna River
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
M+ L-
0 0 to L-
0 0
0 0
0 0 to L-
H+ 0 to 1-
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ L-
H+ 0 to 1-
H+ 0 to L-
94
I ~
i
'
.,
I
.,
I
.,
I
I
i
\
!
•I I"
I
i
I
I
.I
i
I
I ,
I .:
!
I
·I
.I
I
I
•
•
•
•
Table q, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Upper Nowitna
AGENCY: . FWS
LAND STATUS: BLM; FWS-Nowitna Wild
River and Refuge, State of Alaska
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression
plans at possible NAs and historical
sites; no suppression at T&E sites .
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threate.ned and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
0
0 to L-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 to L-
0 to L-
H+
0
0 to L-
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Limited
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: Possible
Native allotments
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
H+ 0
0 0
H+ 0
0 0
0 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
95
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Upper Kantishna
AGENCY: BLM
LAND STATUS: NPS; BLM; State of Alaska;
Native corporations
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Presuppression
plans; limited use of heavy equipment;
contour firelines; clear trails after
fire; clear log jams as needed; no sup-
pression at T&E sites.
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
Endangered Species:
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
FIRE
SHORT-TERM
H+
H-
0
0
0
L-
0 to L-
0 to L-
0 to L-
0 to L-
L-
0 to L-
L±
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Modified
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: None known;
possible settlement area in future
FIRE FIRE
LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION
H+ 0 to L-
0 L-
0 0 to L-
0 L-
0 H-
H+ L-
H+ L-
0 L-
H+ L-to M-
H+ L-toM-
H+ H-
H+ 0
H+ L-
96
i
I
a!
I
I
•
•
••
Table 9, Continued
Effect of Preferred Alternative
MANAGEMENT UNIT: Upper Kantishna
AGENCY: NPS
LAND STATUS: NPS; BLM; State of Alaska;
Native corporations
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: No heavy equipment
except at previously disturbed areas at
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE(s): Limited,
Full, Modified
NATURE OF CRITICAL SITES: Wonder
Lake area and other improvements;
Native allotments
• Kantishna; no suppression at T&E sites;
maximize natural processes; identify natural
barriers.
FIRE FIRE FIRE ENVIRONMENTAL
COMPONENT SHORT-TERM LONG-TERM SUPPRESSION •
•
Soil
Air
Water
Cultural:
Surface
Subsurface
Visual
e Wildlife:
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Threatened and
• Endangered Species:
•
•
Plants
Animals
Wilderness/Rec.
Vegetation
Socio-Economic
0
L-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
H+
0
0 to L-
H+ 0 to L-
H+ 0
H+ 0
0 0
0 0 to L-
H+ 0 to L-
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H+ 0
H~ L to M-
H+ L to M'-
H+ M-
97
•
. I
•
VIII. SELECTED REFERENCES
Barney, R.J. 1971. Selected 1966-69 Interior Alaska wildfire statistics with
long-term comparisons. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest ·and
Range Experiment Station, Portland, Oregon. Res. Note PNW-154, 13 p.
Barney, Richard J., and Erwin R. Berglund. 1974. Wildfire smoke conditions:
interior Alaska. USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap. PNW-178, Pacific Northwest
Forest and Range Experiment Station, Portland, Oregon, 18 p., ill us.
Chapin, F. Stuart III, Keith Van Cleve, and Melissa C. Chapin. 1979. Soil
temperature and nutrient cycling in the tussock growth form of Erio-
phorum vaginatum. Journal of Ecology 67: 169-189 .
Eyre, F.H. (ed.) 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada.
Society of American Foresters, Washington, D.C. 148 p.
Foote, Joan. 1980. Developmental stages of
presentation, BLM Fire Effects Seminar.
Alaska, 25 p.
forest succession. Text of
May 19-20, 1980; · Anchorage,
Hanson, W.A. 1980. Preliminary results of the Bear Creek Fire Effects
studies. Open-File Report, USDI Bureau of Land Management, Anchorage
District Office, Anchorage, Alaska. 90 p.
Kelleyhouse, David G. 1980. Fire/wildlife relations in Alaska. Unpublished
manuscript. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Fairbanks, Alaska. 19
p.
Klein, D.R. 1963. Effect of fire on Alaska wildlife. Alaska Coop. Wild Res.
Unit, University of Alaska, Quart. Rep. 14 (3): 13-29.
1980. Wildfire, lichens, and caribou.
Workshop, "Wildlife and Wildfire," Nov. 27-28, 1979.
Terri tory. Yukon Wildlife Branch, p. 37-65.
In Proceedings of
Whitehorse, Yukon
Martin, R. E. 1976. Prescribed burning
Northwest. Conference proceedings:
west. Feb. 17-19, 1976. Washington
ton. pp. 134-156.
for site preparation in the Inland
Tree planting in the Inland North-
State University, Pullman, Washing-
Murray, David F. 1980. Threatened and endangered plants of Alaska. USDA
Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management, 59 p •
Rieger, Samuel, Dale B. Schoephorster, and Clarence E. Furbush. 1979. Ex-
ploratory soil survey of Alaska. USDA, Soil Conservation Service.
213 p.
Searby, Harold W. 1975. Climatologic analysis -Alaska. Final report for
BL."i Contract No. 52500-CTS-1065. Arctic Environmental Information and
Data Center, University of Alaska, Anchorage. 56 p.
99
USDA Forest Service.
Selway-Bitterroot
Clearwater, Lolo,
USD~-FS-DES (ADM).
1976. Environmental Statement, Fire management in the
Wilderness. A proposed policy change. Bitterroot,
and Nez Perce National ,Forests, Northern Region.
R1-76-12. 229 p.
Viereck, L.A. 1973. Wildfire in the taiga of Alaska. J. Quaternary Research
3 (3): 465-495.
, and C.T. Dyrness, (eds). 1979. Ecological effects of the ----=,..,...-:----: Wickersham Dome Fire near Fairbanks, Alaska. USDA Forest Service.
Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment S~ation, Por-tland, Oregon.
Gen. Tech. Report PNW-90;. 71 p.
, J. Foote, C.T. Dyrness, K. Van Cleve, D. Kane, and R. Siefert.
-----=-=~-. 1979. Preliminary results of experimental fires in the black spruce type
of Interior Alaska. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and
Range Experiment Station, Portland, Oregon. Research Note PNW-332.
28 p.
, and L.A •. Schandelmeier. 1980. Effects of fire in· Alaska and ------adjacent Canada--a literature review. USDI B·ureau of Land Management,
Alaska State Office, Anchorage, Alaska. BLMAlaska Tech. Report 6. 124
p.
Watson, C.E., C.I. Branton, and J.E. Newman. 1971. Climatic characteristics
of selected Alaskan locations. Univ. of Alaska. Institute of Agri-
cultural Sciences. Tech. Bull. No. 2. 56 p.
100
•
•
•
APPENDIX A
PUBLIC ISSUES AND COMMENTS
1. Will there be a reduction in the fire suppression organization if some
areas do not receive full suppression?
2.
No. The designation of some areas as "no suppression" (Limited Action)
areas will probably ~ot cause a reduction in suppression forces. Cur-
rently the fire organizations are hard pressed during "bust" situations
to handle the entire fire load. The designation of "no suppression"
areas will make it easier to prioritize the assignment of limited fire
suppression forces. Some suppression actions may still be done on fires
in Limited Action areas to keep a fire within the boundaries of the area
or to protect identified resources within the area.
What is the Tanana/Minchumina Fire Management Plan going to do to Emer-
gency Fire Fighting (EFF) crew hiring for fires within the planning area?
Implementation of the plan will probably have little or no effect on the
numbers of crews hired. While one of the primary objectives of the plan
is to reduce the costs of fire suppression in the planning area, the area
encompassed by the plan is not large enough to significantly influence
the state-wide fire suppression organization's manning levels.
3. Can suppression forces, especially local villagers, be put to work in
slack seasons on prescribed burns?
Yes. Native crews, as well as seasonal fire fighters, may be used on
prescribed burns; however, funding for prescribed fire is very limited at
this time.
4. How far from a village can a fire be before it is judged as potentially
dangerous?
Each situation is different and there is no one answer. Weather and fuel
conditions, and numerous other factors must be considered. Villages, .of
course, have the highest protection standards and receive priority over
other lands.
5. Will BLM fight fire on Native land?
6.
Yes. By law (ANCSA) the Federal land management agency within which area
the Native land is located is responsible for the protection of those
Native lands. The BLM protects most Federal lands in the planning area
and will continue to suppress fires on Native lands.
How will priorities be set for available fire fighting forces when two or
more different land manager/owners want protection but not enough forces
are available?
The Tanana/Minchumina Fire Management Plan helps establish priorities for
the fire organization. Critical areas will receive the highest pro-
101
tection available. Full Protection, Mod·ified Action, and Limited Action
Areas have progressively lower priorities.
If a conflict between land manager/owner(s) exists during an on-going
fire operation it can be presented to the Interagency Fire Coordination
Group of the Alaska Land Use Council.
7. The situation presently exists where the State of Alaska pays for fire
protection and the Native Lands receiv~ free fire protection as granted
by ANCSA. Will this influence the decision on how suppression forces are
allocc:tted?
No. This will not have an effect. Fire fighting forces will be allo-
cated to State and Native lands based on the priorities established in
the plan. Native lands will receive· full suppression at all times.
8. Who makes the decisions on what will occur on village lands?
Doyon Limited (Regional Native Corporation) and the Tanana Chiefs Con-
ference represented the individual villages during the development of, the
fire management plan and selected the management option for all affected
Native lands. During the suppression of fires, the Fire Boss implements
the strategic decisions that have been made jointly by the Zone Fire
Management Officer and the involved land manager/owners.
9. Will private landowners be billed for suppression costs on their lands?
The State of Alaska (Division of Natural Resources) is responsib~e for
the protection of private property. In many areas, the State, under
agreement, pays BLM to provide fire protection. Regardless of the sup-
pression agency, normally there are no costs to the landowner for pro-
tection and/or suppression of fire on private property. However, if the
landowner is negligent in some manner or is in violation of State fire
regulations, a claim may be filed against the landowner to recover sup-
pression costs.
10. How can villages get assistance to reduce the fire hazard near the vil-
lages?
Each village council needs to contact the Tanana Chiefs. They in turn
can either contract the service or work with Federal or State agencies
for technical assistance. With proper safeguards and coordination with
the affected land management agencies, prescribed burning may be used to
accomplish this need. Tools and supplies for hazard reduction projects
would have to be purchased by the villages.
11. Will the villages be liable if a prescribed fire on village land goes on
to another manager/owner's land?
Villages, like other private landowners, could be liable for negligence
if a prescribed fire escaped their lands. Each case would have to be
tried separately in the courts and judged independently.
102
•
•
•
12. Will cabins be ·located on maps whereby their location may become too well
.known and be susceptible to vandalism and burglary?
No. Locations of cabins must be known by the land managers involved to
make sure the sites are given adequate fire protection. However, this
information will not be circulated to the general public:
13. Does the Plan address the problem of smoke pollution within the airsheds
of concerned communities?
14.
Yes. If smoke from the planning .area becomes a problem (shutting down
air traffic) the Plan provides for the immediate suppression of all new
fire starts. The general issue of smoke in Alaska is currently being
addressed by the Fire Management Project Group (Alaska Land Use Council)
and the State Department of Environmental Conservation.
Will traplines be protected?
Traplines and their associated improvements will not be automatically
protected. The decision to protect them remains the responsibility of
the land manager/owner, after evaluating potential impacts on the area's
economy, individual life styles, resource objectives, and fire protection
priori ties. During our travels through the villages, a number of resi-
dents expressed a desire to see more fires in areas where their traplines
now exist ··because the habitat production is decreasing and .trapping
success is declining.
15. The Lands Bill mandates protection of subsistence opportunity.
16.
(a) What does this mean as far as fire is concerned?
Fire fs a natural part of the Alaskan ecological system. In the
short-term, fire may sometimes reduce the local subsistence · oppor-
tunities. On the long-term, fire can improve the subsistence oppor-
tunities· in areas where habitat quality and quantity has deteriora-
ted.
(b) In the fire plan, are you protecting these areas from fire or pro-
viding for fire to help sustain and enhance habitat and wildlife?
Providing fire to help sustain and enhance habitat and wildlife is
one factor in deciding how to manage fire within the planning area.
This benefit is weighed against many other factors to determine what
level of protection is provided for a given area.
If fire will benefit the moose populations,_ will a comparable increase in
sport hunting result, thus makfng it more difficult for local-subsistence
hunters?
An increase in moose population due to improved browse quality could
result in increased sport hunting. The Alasl<;a Department of Fish and
Game would be aware of any population changes, and as in other areas of
the State, would regulate use of wildlife resources.
103 .
17. Will siltation foul spawning streams after a fire?
Siltation of rivers and streams is not common after fire in interior
Alaska. Soil erosion and stream siltation can result from improper
fireline construction and/or location during fire suppression activities.
However, the fire organizations are aware of potential problems and take
approprtate tactical and reclamation actions to reduce the ·threat.
18. How long will it be for burned-over areas to be productive again?
Depending on habitat type and fire severity, there can be a great deal of
variation in post-fire vegetation recovery. No single answer could
properly address the issue. Fire effects, specifically site productiv-
ity, are discussed ·in the fire management plan in sections II and VII.
19. Wouldn't it be better to start fires when we can control them rather than
let wildfires occur any time if we want to use fire as a resource manage-
ment tool?
The vegetative mosaic that currently exists in Alaska has resulted in
large part from recurrent fires over a long time. Prescribed burning can
be a suitable means of managing specific resources in specific locations.
The development and implementation of a prescribed burn plan is a complex
process and must be repeated for each specific site and objective.
Allowing some natural fires to burn by implementing the fire management
plan may result in some resource benefits that a prescribed fire could be
designed to accomplish. However, a primary objective of the Tanana/Min-
chumina Fire Management Plan is to reduce the commitment of the fire
suppression forces in selected areas when and where the risk of property
loss and resource damage is low. Designation of some lands as Limited
Action areas will also help to restore the natural fire regime under
which the ecosystems developed.
20. Does the plan allow for land managers to do prescribed burning?
The plan neither directs nor precludes individual land manager/owner's
prescribed burning programs.
21. What is Denali National Park and Preserve's position on fire?
Denali National Park and Preserve is a cooperating member of the
Tanana/Minchumina fire ~management planning team. The plan designates
most of Denali as a Limited Action area where natural fires are allowed
to burn except that fires are not allowed to escape. into neighboring
areas with more restrictive suppression standards. As in other Federal
lands. in Alaska, prescribed burning can also be used for resource man-
agement in the area.
22. What is Doyon's position regarding fire?
Doyon has made it clear from the very beginning that they want no less
than full fire suppression on all of their lands. Doyon feels that
104
•
•
•
until such time as a comprehensive review of. the resources located on
corporation lands is accomplished, the corporation is unable to designate
any srelected or conveyed lands as not having valuable resources and is
resolved to require that all Native', lands receive the maximum available
fire suppression to insure the protection of any and all valuable re-·
sources located thereon.
23. Has fire history been established in preparation of the plan?
Chapter III, Fire Management Information, outlines all available fire
occurrence information (1957-1981) for the planning a+ea.
24. Why not wait and see how the plan works in other areas first before
implementing it completely, or wait for results of the 40-Mile Plan?
The 40-Mile Fire Management Plan has been . evaluated and information
gained from it has helped to steer the development of the Tanana/Minchu-
mina Fire Management Plan. However, the two planning areas have their
own unique characteristics and the two plans have their own set of ob-
jectives. Further evaluation of th~ 40-Mile Plan will continue~ but is
not necessary to proceed with the implementation of the Tanana/Minchumina
Plan. In fact, standards developed in the Tanana/Minchumina planning
process may soon be used to upda·te the 40-Mile Plan •. ·
25. Can the Tanana/Minchumina Fire Management Plan be changed?
Yes. A· review and update of the Plan· is required every year. (See
Section I. H., Revision (p. 5.)).,
105
•
1-'
0
'-.!
• • • •
CLIMATIC DATA FROM EXTENDED RECORDS FOR McGRATH,
(62° 58' N.,
JAN FEB . MAR APR
TEMPERATURE
Degrees F
Daily Maximum 0.8 11.5 22.1 39~8
Daily Minimum -18.7 -11.3 -5.6 15.3
Record High 54 55 51 67
Record·Low -64 -64 -51 -28
Days
Maximum !:32°F* 30 25 24 8
Maximum ~ 70 °F * 0 0 0 0
Deg. Days 65°F 2294 1817 1758 1122
Deg. Days 35°F ·1354 1017 840 307
PRECIPITATION
Inches
Rainfall 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.17
Snowfall 17.1 13.6 12.3 4.5
Total 1.26 1.14 0.93 0.47
Days -Rainfall is:
~.10 inches 3 3 3 2
2:.50 inches ** ** )"'* **
* Heating degree days.
** Average is > 0 < 0. 5 days
The symbol > means "equal to or greater than"
< means "equal to or less than"
155° 3 7 I W •, 334 ft. MSL)
MAY JUN JUL AUG
54.8 67.5 68.6 63.0
33.3 45.4 48 .. 7 45.2
80 89 88 83
-2 30 33 28
0 0 0
1 10 13 5
648 258 208 338
23 0 0 0
0.88 1.66 2.43 3. 79
0.6 T 0.0 T
0.88 1. 66 2.43 3. 79
2 4 6 8
** 1 1 2
• • •
ALASKA
SEP OCT NOV DEC ANN
52.2 34.2 13.4 1.6 35.8
35.5 19.4 -2.9 -15.6 15.7
76 61 47 44 89
6 -22 -49 -67 -64
15 27 30 159
0 0 0 29
633 1184 1791 2232 14283
11 311 897 1419 6179
2.51 0. 72 0.08 0.0 12.24
0.9 7.6 13.6 14.9 85.1
2.61 1.32 1.08 1.01 18.58
7 3 .3 2 46
2 ** -·** ** 6
•
f-'
0
~
• •
CLIMATIC DATA FROM EXTENDED RECORDS FOR FAIRBANKS (UES), ALASKA
(64°51'N.,
JAN FEB MAR APR
TEMPERATURE
Degrees F
Daily Maximum 1.7 12.0 24.8 42.7
Daily Minimum ...:.16.0 -8.7 1.2 17.0
Record High 42 49 56 71
Record Low -65 -59 -56 -32
Days
Maximum .:S 32 °F* 30 ,25 21 5
Maximum 2:70°F* 0 0 0
Deg. Days 65°F 2241 1795 1624 1029
Deg. Days 35°F 1401 1093 713 204
PRECIPITATION
Inches
Rainfall 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.09
Snowfall 10.9 7.0 6.6 2.0
Total 0.83 0.51 0.42 0.24
Days -Rainfall is:
~.10 inches 3 2 1 1
2:.50 inches ,0 0 ** 0
* Heating degree days.
** Average is >0 <0.5 days
The symbol > means "equal to or greater than"
< means "equal to or less than"
14r 52' w., 481 ft. MSL)
MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT
60.2 71.7 72.7 67.3 55.4 36.1
33.6 44.1 46.8 43.0 33.6 18.6
88 95 99 90 85 67
0 26 29 19 7 -28
0 0 0 11
5 18 21 12 1 0
561 237 174 322 615 1163
10 0 0 0 12 280
o. 78 1.48 2.10 2.43 1.32 0.39
0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 7.0
0.80 1.48 2.10 2.44 1.36 0.93
2 4 5 6 4 3
** 1 1_ 1 1 **
•
NOV DEC ANN
13.8 2.3 38.4
-2.3 -14.1 16.2
59 58 99
-54 -62 -65
20 27 139
0 0 57
1764 2198 13723
964 1401 6078
0.04 0.0 8.64
7.7 8.5 50.6
0.63 0.57 12.31
1 2 34
** ** 4
APPENDIX F ·
MODIFIED INITIAL ATTACK ANALYSIS.
FIRE ·ANALYSIS
. ' .
Date
----------~------Management 'Unit ---------------
Land Status -----~--------------~--------~------------~------------
Adjacent Land Status and .. Fire Management Option(s) ------------------
Weather (past, including present day):
5-Day Cumulative Precipitation _________ ~--------------------~
General-Past 10 Days (or longer) -----------------------------------
Weather (predicted 5-day outlook) -------------------------------------------
Weather (extended range outlook)
-----------------~--------------------
Fuels in Area --------------------------~--------~~--------------------
Topography --~--------------------------------------~-------------------
Natural .Barriers ------------------------------------------
Fire History to Date ---------------------.,.------------------
Anticipated Fire Behavior --------------:-------:------------------------.,.-------.,.-
Completed By:
Fire Representative
113
(
•
•
•
Appendix F, Continued
Management Unit
Land Status
MODIFIED INITIAL ATTACK ANALYSIS
RESOURCE ·ANALYSIS
Date ------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjacent Land Status and Fire Management Opti.on(s) -----------------------------
Anticipated Fire Impacts
Soil
------------------------------------------~------------------------------
Water -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vegetation--------------------------------------------------------------------
Wildlife
------------------------------------------------------------------~--
Air
------------------------------~-------------------------------------------
Recreation
--------------------------------------------------------------~----
Cultural/Historic -------------------------------------------------------------
(Continued on Back of Sheet)
115
Appendix F, Continued
Visual
Social
MODIFIED INITIAL ATTACK ANALYSIS
RESOURCE ANALYSIS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Political ------------------------------------------------------------------
Life/Property ---------------------------------------------------------------
Other ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Completed·By:
Land Manager/Owner Representative
116
' I •
·-!
I
I
I
I
I • I
I
I
l
i
I
I
~
i
I
• I
I
I • !
I
I
I •
I
J
•
•
••
...
•
Appendix F, Continued
MODIFIED INITIAL ATTACK ANALYSIS
DECISION RECORD
Management Unit--------------------------------------------
Continue Initial Attack
Discontinue Initial Attack
Fire Suppression Summary Statement
------------------------------------------~---
Land Manager/Owner Summary Statement
Signature ~--~-------------------------Fire Representative
Date
------------------------------~
----------------------------~---------------
Signature
~~~~----~~--~----------~---Land Manager/Owner Representative
Date ----------------------------------------
117
•
•
•
..
•
APPENDIX G
ESCAPED FIRE ANALYSIS
FIRE ANALYSIS
Management Unit------------
Fire Number -------------------
Fire Name ------------------
Fire Management Option ;__ ______ _
Fire Coordinates -------------
Date ---------~~--~----------
Land Status ------------------------_...;..:_...;.;....:.;,_;_;;__..::._~-'---'-'---...:;_--
. . .
Adjacent. Land· Status and Fire Management Option(s) ·----------------
Weather (past, including present-day):
5-Day Cumulative Precipitation---~---------------~~-~~~~~~-
General-Past 10 Days (or longer)_·--~--------------~;__;__;__;__ __ ~~--------
. . -
Fine --Fuel Moisture Today ------------------------------
Weather (predicted 5-day outlook) -------~------------------------------------
Fuels in Area -------------------------------~----
Topography --------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural Barriers --------------------------------------
Fire Behavior -Past 5 Days ------------------------------------
Fire Behavior -Present Day -----------------------------------
Fire Behavior -Anticipated ------------------------------
(Continued on Back of Sheet)
119
Appendix G, Continued
Fire Size
ESCAPED FIRE ANALYSIS
FIRE ANALYSIS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Control Action to Date (specific details, such as percent containment)
Completed By:
Fire Representative
120
•
•
•
•
•
•
Appendix G, Continued
ESCAPED. FIRE ANALYSIS
RESOURCE ANALYSIS
Management Unit
Fire Number
------------------------Fire Management Option-------------
Fire Coor:dinates. -----------------------------------------------
Fire Name Date
----~---------------------------------------------------~----
Land Status ------------------------------------~----~----~----~~-----------
Adjacent Land Status and Fire Management Option(s.)
Anticipated Fire Impacts
Soil
Water
Vegetation-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wildlife -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recreation ---------------------------------------------------------------
Cultural/Historic ----------------------------------------------------------------
(Continued on Back of Sheet)
121
Appendix G, Continued
Visual
Social
ESCAPED FIRE ANALYSIS
RESOURCE ANALYSIS
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Political ----------------------------------------------------------------
Life/Property ------------------------------------------------------------
Other
----~--------------------------------------------------------------
Completed By:
Land Manager/Owner Representative
122
I •
•• I I
I
~ I
r
I
•
•
•·
.1
•
Appendix G, Continued
ESCAPED FIRE ANALYSIS
ALTERNATIVE ACTION PLAN
Management Unit------------
Fire Number
Fire Management Option -------
Fire Coordinates -----------------------------------
Date--~------------~-------Fire Name ------------------------
Land Status ---~~------~---------------------------------
Adjacent Land Status and Fire Management Option(s) -----------------
Alternative 1
Action Description ____________________________________ ___
Suppression Capability Needed ----------------------------------
Size at +24 hrs. -------Size at +72 hrs. -------Size at +5 days -----
Est. Control Date ____ _ Est. Control Size ------Est. Control Cost -------
Alternative 2
Action Description _________________________________ ~---
Suppression Capability Needed
Size at +24 hrs.
I
Est. Control Date
Alternative 3
----
Size at +72 hts.
Est. Control Size ------
Size at +5 days
Est. Control Cost ------
Action Description _________________________________ ___
Suppression Capability Needed ------------------------------------
Size at +24 hrs.
Est. Control Date ----
Size at +72 hrs.
Est. Control Size ------
·Completed By:
Size at +5 days -------
Est. Control Cost _. -------
~--~--------~---------Fire Representative
NOTE: Do not destroy. Add additional alternative action plans as they are
required. This will provide an on-going record of the fire situation.
123
•
-·-
•
·-
•
•
Appendix G, Continued
Fire Number
Fire Name
ESCAPED FIRE ANALYSIS
DECISION RECORD
-----------------------· Management Unit
--------------~----------
Date --------------------------------~-----------------------
Alternative Action Plan Recommended 1 2 3 (circle one)
Suppression Method Impact on Resources -------------------------------------------
Special Operational Considerations
------------------~---------------------------
Summary Statement (be particular in describing why the particular action plan.was
recommended ) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Signature ~~~~----~----~----------~----Land Manager/Owner Representative
Signature ~--~----------~------------------Fire Representative
125
•
•
•
•
APPENDIX H
PREVENTION OBJECTIVES
A. EDUCATION
B.
c.
D.
Heighten public awareness and concern to attempt prevention of all fires
near human habitations and physical developments .
HAZARD REDUCTION
Heighten awareness of the resident public to prescribed burning programs,
including legal constraints and fire suppression limitations and techni-
cal assistance. Examples include:
1. Involvement in early spring burning near dwellings and physical
improvements.
2. Firebreaks near dwellings and other physical improvements .
FIRE SAFETY
Heighten awareness and concerns of resident public to fire safety design
considerations in and near dwellings and physical improvements. Examples
include:
1. Wood stove· placement and design.
2. Burning barrel placement and design.
3. Spark arresters on motorized equipment.
INVESTIGATION AND ENFORCEMENT
The suppression organizations will provide preliminary fire investiga-
tions on all man-caused fires. Enforcement of applicable State and
Federal rules, regulations, and statutes will be done by the land
manager/owner(s) .
127
•
•
•
APPENDIX I
TANANA/MINCHUMINA FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN
MONITORING PROCEDURES
The Tanana/Minchumina Fire Management Plan establishes four fire management
options which a land _manager/owner can use to help achieve resource ob-
jectives, while effectively maximizing each dollar spent on fire suppression.
The four options are: Critical Protection, Full Protection, Modified Action,
and Limited Action. The Critical and Full Protection options specify that all
fires receive immediate and aggre~sive suppression action. Fires in Modified
Action areas receive aggressive initial attack_until the critical portion of
the fire season has ended. Fires in Limited Action areas are not suppressed
unless they threaten escape to an area in a higher protection level.
The plan specifies that fires will be monitored in Limited Action areas, and
in Modified Action areas after the decision to stop initial attack has been
made. Monitoring is conducted to provide information to management which will
be used to estimate fire behavior. Information may also be used to assess
fire effects on resources, and provides a chronological history of the fire
and suppression decisions.
G
Each dispatch office will have a~ atlas of inch-to-a~mile maps covering their
area, which show mana~units, fire management option __ J:~~-!1-~a~i~-~. land
~tatu~, and special resource concerns. Another complete set of inch-to-a-mile
maps, and specific forms, will be available for monitoring use.
The following monitoring procedures will be used. When the situation requires
surveillance of a fire start or management unit, surveillance personnel obtain
the field surveillance forms and inch-to-a-mile map quads for the area:· of
interest. At the fire site, fire behavior is estimated, and fuels and major
resource concerns, such as cabins, are mapped. Dispatch personnel obtain spot
weather forecasts, and compile previous weather data from the two weather
stations nearest to the fire site. Fire behavior predictions are made by a
qualified individual, using the fuels map and spot forecast.· This prediction,
and the supporting information, is given to the Fire Management Officer, who,
in consultation with . the land manager/owner, decides what further action
should be taken. Control may be_ taken to prevent the fire from leaving the
Modified or Limited areas, or to reduce resource impact. If no suppression
action is to occur, monitoring will continue at an interval determined by the
FMO. This same procedure is used for every subsequent monitori-~g action; The
procedure is outlined in Figure 9.. .
129 '
Figure 9
OPERATION DECISION CHART
MONITORING PROCEDURE
Spot forecast and pre-
vious weather summary
obtained b dis atch
·r--;F;-;i-r-e-;-b-eh,....av-i-:-o-r--:f::-o-r_e_c_a_s~t-m-a-:d-e--, I
"''ng '"rvoillanoo and .,__.______]
weather information
Field surveillance and
and fire behavior
Develop strategic action plan
with land er/owner
S"ppro.,ioo l taken I
contained within area
Continue monitoring
130
Continue monitoring
r
I
i"
I
I
I
I • I
l
'I
•
\
I .,
'I 'I I,
I
I
L
~r
. I
The,forms provided on the following pages are to be used:
Field Surveillance, Report -summarizes fire site weather, terrain, ob-
served fire and smoke behavior, and special concerns.
Weather and Fire Behavior Report -used in the dispatch office to itemize
spot forecast and previous weather; and to summarize forecasted fire
behavior.
Moni taring Decision Record -documents decisions related to the moni-
toring process and proposed contingency and strategic cont~ol plans.
While no form is provided. a specific format is used for fuel type mapping.
The specific procedure follows:
Fuels are to be mapped on an inch-to-a-mile topographic map. Letter and
numerical modifiers are· selected for each fuel type using the list on the
following page. For example:
I.A.2
B.3/4
IV.A.2
B.2/4
C.2
Black Spruce, moderately dense with an understory of
low shrubs (greater than 3 feet tall) and lichens/
moss.
Hardwoods, moderately dense, with an understory of
low shrubs and spruce trees; hardwood canopy in full
leaf (should change map notation· when canopy condi-
tion changes) •
Use of the format just described will permit the selection of the proper fire
behavior fuel model. An accurate map of fuels in the vicinity of the fire
must be made on the first surveillance flight, even if it requires extra
flight time. This map should be used on each monitoring flight, and improved
if necessary. An example of a fuel type map is shown in Figure 10.
131
I.
II.
III.
IV.
v.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
FUEL MAPPING CATEGORIES
BLACK SPRUCE
A. Tree Density*: 1. Scattered 2. Moderately Dense
3. Dense
B. Understory Vege-1. Tussocks 2. Shrubs 0-3 ft.
tat ion: 3. Shrubs greater than 3 ft.
4. Lichens/Moss
WHITE SPRUCE
A. Tree Density*: 1. Scattered 2. Moderately Dense
3. Dense
B. Understory Vege-1. Shrubs 0-3 ft. 2. Shrubs greater than 3 ft.
tat ion: 3. Lichens/Moss 4. Other (describe)
SPRUCE/HARDWOOD MIX (Note on Map % Spruce and % Hardwood)
A. Tree Density*: 1. Scattered 2. Moderately Dense
3. Dense
B. Understory Vege-1. Shrubs 0-3 ft. 2. Shrubs gtr. than 3 ft.
tation: 3. Lichens/Moss 4. Grass
5. Other (describe)
HARDWOODS
A. Tree Density*: 1. Scattered 2. Moderately Dense
3. Dense
B. Understory Vege-1. Shrubs 0-3 ft. 2. Shrubs gtr. than 3 ft.
tation: 3. Lichens/Moss 4. Spruce
5. Grass 6. Other (describe)
c. Canopy Condition: 1. Before Green-Up 2. Full-Leaf
3. Leaf-Fall
SHRUBS A. (0-3 ft.) B. (Gtr. than 3 ft.)
TUSSOCK/SHRUB MIX (Note on Map % Tundra and % Brush)
A. Shrub Height:
B. Tussock Height:
TUSSOCK TUNDRA
Tussock Height:
ALPINE TUNDRA
BARE ROCK
GRASS
Grass Height:
OTHER
Describe:
1. (0-3 ft.)
1. (0-1 ft.)
A. (0-1 ft.)
A. Continuous
Vegetation
A. (0-3 ft.)
2. (Gtr. than 3 ft.)
2. (Gtr. than 1 ft.)
B. (Gtr. than 1 ft.)
B. Discontinuous
Vegetation
B. (Gtr. than 3ft.)
* Tree Density: Scattered -trees gtr. than 15 ft. apart
Moderately dense -trees 5-15 ft. apart
Dense -trees less than 5 ft. apart
132
' ~
I
I
I
J.
I
~
I
I
_I
" l
I
,,
.?"?
'-~"'~ UNITED STATES
""·~ DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
•
•
1~)-.. ·nrr GEOLOGICAL SURVEY '-"'" v;?"' ' 4~
I _, ·.-
68]3000m. N ;--'· l -
<( ; .
f-'
,;of-x:· 0 •
r~O \
•<( -j
0:: l
0::: w
f-
)] '
j ,./
'. I --:-_(-,§ __ --.
' c.
U)
i! -I
"' ~·
--J
l 21 N
I 20 N
,J
I
. 32
'
!• ·-
Fig. 10
Fuel Type Map
133
•
•
•
Date--:--------
Observation Time ------------
Observer
--------~----------
Fire Number
------~~--------
TANANA/MINCHUMINA FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Field Surveillance Report.
GENERAL (information provided by Dispatch)
Date Fire Started ---------Longitude ____ _ Latitude ------
Management Unit --------Township ___ _ Range ____ Section ___ _
Fire Management Option------------
Land Status
Geographic Location --------
-------------------------------------------
FIRE SITE WEATHER
General Weather Conditions --------------------------------
Wind Direction ------------Estimated 20-Foot Windspeed --------
Check Appropriate Category(ies):
Clear (less than 1/10 of sky cloud covered)
Scattered clouds (1/10 to 5/10 cloud covered)
Broken Clouds (6/10 to 9/10 cloud covered)
Overcast· (more than 9/10 of sky cloud covered)
Foggy
Drizzling (precipitation of numerous fine
droplets; in some areas referred to as
"misting")
Raining
Snowing or Sleeting
Showering (showers in sight or occurring
at station) ·
Thunderstorm i"n progress (lightning or
thunder heard)
Estimated distance to thunderstorm
TERRAIN
General Area
Flat Flat
At Fire Site
River Valley Bottom
Rolling Hills
Mountainous
Lower 1/3 of slope
Upper 1/3 of slope
Ridgetop
Other (describe) Other (describe)
135
OBSERVED FIRE BEHAVIOR
Estimated Rate of Spread
------~--------
Estimated Flame Length ---------
Estimated Width of Direction of Forward Speed
Flaming Front ________ ~---------
Type of Fire· (check appropria.te category):
Ground (smoldering)
Spotting: Yes No
Surface Crown
Single trees torching out
6 or more trees torching out
Running crown fire
Distance ahead of fire front ---------------
Comments ----~----------------------------------------------------------------
SMOKE
Column Height -----------Direction of Movement ---------------
Color: Black White ---------------
Comments --------------~--------------------------------------------~-------
SPECIAL CONCERNS (note here and on map any people, cabins, development, etc.,
in vicinity of area)
136
•
•
•
•
•
•
Date
Time
Reporter
Fire Number
TANANA -MINCHUMINA FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Weather and Fire, Behavior Report ,
Long.
Twp. ----Rge.
x Lat.
____ Sec.
Date Fire Started
Management Unit
Fire Mgt. Option
Land Mgr./Owner(s)
Geographic Location
Adjoining Land Mgr./Owner(s) and Fire Mgt. Option of Each
WEATHER SUMMARY (NOTE: Obtain a spot weather forecast each day. The complete spot
forecast can be attached to this report.)
Spot Weather Forecast for Today's Burning Period
1400 Temp Max RH Precip. Amount
1400 RH Time Precip. Duration
Max Temp Min RH
Time Time
Min Temp , Wind Dir.
Time Max Wind Speed
Time
Thunderstorm activity predicted (describe type)
Spot Weather Forecast for Tomorrow's Burning Period
1400 Temp Max RH Precip. Amount
1400 RH Time Precip. Duration
Max Temp Min RH
Time Time
Min Temp Wind Dir.
Time Max Wind Speed
Time
Thunderstorm activity predicted (describe type)
3 - 5 Day Spot Weather Forecast
137
SEASONAL TREND
Past 10-day weather observation from two fire weather stations nearest fire
Station name
State of
~ Weather
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
l
Dry Bulb
Temp.
Fuel Stick
Moisture
Max.
Temp.
Today's weather observation:
Station name
State of Dry Bulb Fuel Stick Max.
~ Weather Temp. Moisture Temp.
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
Today' s weather ·observation:
Additional Comments
138
Min.
Temp.
Min.
Temp.
Max.
R.H.
Min.
R.H.
Max. Min.
R.H. R.H.
Precip. Precip.
Dur. ~
Precip. Precip.
Dur. Amt.
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
a. Projection point
b. Day or night (D/N)
DAY TIME CALCULATIONS
c. Dry bulb tempe;rature, °F
d. Relative humidity, %
e. Reference fuel moisture;·%
(from Tabl_e A)
f. Month
g. Exposed or shaded (E/S) '
h. Time
FINE DEAD FUEL MOISTURE CALGU~TIONS
D/N D/N D/N
E/S E/5 E/5
i. Elevation change B/L/A B/L/A B/L/A
B = 1000'-2000' below ~ite
L = ~1000' of site location
A= 1000'-2000' above site·
j. Aspect
k. Slope
D/N D/N D/N
E/S 'E/S . E/S
B/L/A B/L/A B/L/A
1. Fuel moisture correction, %
(from Table B, C, or D)
m. _ Fine dead fuel moisture, %
(line e-. line 1)
(to .line 9, other side)
DDEJDDD
I I·DDI. IDD
NIGHT TIME CALCULATIONS
n. Dry bulb temperature, °F
o. Rela:ti ve h~idi ty, 9.;
p. Reference fuel moisture, %
· (from Table E)· . ·IL-.;.._ ----!1·1 L.--.-:. · ___;_.~-I L--1 -----~1 L--1 ___.I-~.--1 _____.I L...;...._l _..
Use.Table F only .if a strong inversion
exists and a correction must be made
for elevation or aspect change.
q. Aspect o·f projection point
r. Aspect of site location
s. Time
t. Elevation change B/L/A
B = 1000'-2000 1 below site.
L = ~1000 1 of site location
A = 1'000 1 -2000 1 above site ·
.B/L/A B/L/A
Correction for projection ·· --.. l-,__ __ ...J, L----J' l----l point location(from Table F) . . . . .
. -. '
u. ,.
v.
w.
x.
Correction for site location I I I
(L) (from Table·Fr '------' ·-L-----'· L.----' I
Fuel moisture correction, 9• · · L ___ _.-I I · l ___ -J
(line u -line v) ·_ . . _ I
Fine dead fuel moisture, %
(line p + line w)
(to line 9, other side)
l I I.__J_.. I
139
,'---
B./L/A B/L/A B/L/A
I I
I I·
I I·
) I
(January .. l980)
'
FIRE BEHAVIOR ~ORKSHEET
Name of fire'-:-------------Fire Behavior Officer_·-------------~:heC!t __ . ···f
Date'-----------!ime'------Proj. Period Date. ________ Project titae trom ___ to_
1 Projection point
2 Fuel I!IDdel
3 Fuel model proportion,%·
-4 2Q-foot w1Ddspaed, t11ph
5 Wind reduction. factor
6 Shade (0•0-10%;1•10-50%
2•50-90%;3•90-100%)
7 Dry bulb temperature, oF
8 Relative humidity, %
9 Fine dead fuel 1110ist ure, %
or , HTL FM, %
· .. 10 ·10 ·H TL FM; ·l··
:: ·ll J.OQ H ~ .. ~ •. %
12 Live fui!l IIIDiscu:re, ~
13 Mid flame t·tindsp@ed , mph
Over-
lay
.!!!!.!!.
SHADE
DB
RH
1 II
10 H
100 H
LIVE
M·t~S
----
reg.
.!!2.:...,_
60
61
62
28
63
30
33
7'' ----
\<. ·-i4 Windward· slo'!)e·; % (W)
-or-PCT S RO
'15 Maxi.:llum slope on flank, % (F) ---W/J! W/F W/F W/F. w/F W/F ·
16· Projection·time, hr PT 81
·~:.P -.~P sca.Ie_. i!lllll:i MS 82
-or-
18 .Map conversion factor
19 Effective windspeed, mph
***************************************************************************************************************
Keystroke
20 Ra1:c o£ spl:-ead, ch/br A ROS ----88
21 Heat per unit area, BTu/f~2 R/S R/A 90
22 Fireline intensity, BTU/ftis B !NT SJ
23 Flame length, ft .vs FL 54
24 Spread c!.istan.:e, chains r. SD ---· 42 ----
25 Map distance, inches R/S MD 4J
, ..... ,. 2n· ?<!.rimeter; ·cha.ir•'l D PER 40
--27 ··Area, ·acres · RiS ABEA ----89
28 I~ition component E tc ----44
-2~ Reaction.intensity, BTU/ft 2/min R/S IR 5..!
October 1979
140
~
I • !
I
~ I
i
i
I
i
i
~
' •
i ..
I
I
~ I
i
J
~
I
i
I
I·
FIRE BEHAVIOR FORECAST
Date
Time
Forecaster
Fire Number
1. Describe the predicted fire behavior (attach a map showing the projected
fire perimeter at 10 AM tommorow, and at the end of tommorow's burning
period).
2. Given the 3-5 day weather outlook, is escape from the designated area
a likely occurrence?
141
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Date -----------------
Observation Time ---------------FMO __________________________ _
Fire Number ------------------
TANANA/MINCHUMINA FI~ MANAGEMENT PLAN
Monitoring Decision Record
Is a fligh~ with the land/manager owner required in order to make a suppression
decision?
Is so, when?
If no suppression action will be taken, identify the next action in the
monitoring sequence:
What is the contingency plan or strategic control plan should the fire threaten
an undesirable escape from the area? ------------------------------------------
Additional comments:
143
I
•
•
•
•
-·
•
•
-·
-.•
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
ANCSA: Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act -the act authorizing land convey-
ance to Alaska Natives, passed in 1971; P.L. 92-203 •
ANILCA: Alaska National Int·erest Lands Conservation Act -the bil~ which
established na.tional parks, monuments, and wildlife refuges, and other
national conservation units in Alaska, passed in 1980; P.L. 96-487.
Contingency Plan: Predetermined alternative tactical course of action and its
consequences. The plan provides for smooth transition of the control effort
when new direction is required.
Control of a Fire: The· completion of control lines around a fire, any spot
fires, and interior islands to be left unburned; burning out any unhurried area
adjacent to the fire side of the control lines; and cooling down all hot spots
that constitute immediate threats to the control lines until these can reason-
ably be expected to hold under foreseeable conditions.
Cooperative Agreement: A written document which identifies who, what, when·,
where, why, and how certain actions will be done by each ind-ividual or agency
involved. This is signed by the designated land manager(s) .
Cultural Resources: Prehistoric and historic remnants and phys_ical and oral
evidence "of human activities.
Deficiency Lands: Lands designated for selection by village and regional
corporations when there is insufficient land for selection in their core
townships or regions.
Designated Physical Development: Physical structures, improvements or specif-
ic sites that the land manager/owner selects and lists as needing the highest
priority fire protection .
Direct Attack: Fireline is built at the edge of the fire, or· the _edge and
interior of the fire are worked on directly.
Escaped Fire:
forces .
An unwanted fire which ·is not contained by the suppression.
Fire Behavior: The manner in which fuel ignites, flame develops, and the fire
spreads and exhibits other phenomena.
Firebreak: A natu'ral or constructed barrier utilized to stop or check fires
that may occur, or to provide a control line from which to work.
Fire Effects: Any changes in resources which resu.l t from the interaction
between a fire and the enviro·nment.
Fire Management: Application of fire, both natural or prescribed, to achieve
land management object-ives within sound ecological, envirollffiental, and -econo-
mic objectives and constraints.
145
•
Fire Management Options: A range of alternatives which defines the kind and
extent of fire activity acceptable or desirable on a given land area.
Headquarter Site: A parcel of land not to exceed five acres which must be
used in conjunction with a business. Applicant does not have to occupy for
any definite period of time.
Indirect Attack: A method of suppression in which the control line is located
along natural firebreaks, favorable breaks in topography, or at considerable
distance from the fire.
Initial Attack: Actions constituting the first suppression work on a fire.
Interim Conveyed Lands: Lands approved for conveyance to the Native corpora-
tions and a document of Interim Conveyanc-e issued. This document is used for
conveyance until survey has been accomplished and a patent issued. Lands are
administered and managed by Natives.
Land Manager/Owner: The responsible Line Officer for the Federal agencies or
designated individual in Federal, State, and private organizations who is
authorized to make decisions concerning the management of specified land
areas.
Management Fire: Fire which contributes to 'the attainment of management
objectives of an area. This includes any fire not suppressed because it meets
established criteria.
Management Units: Geographic subdivisions within the planning area which are
surrounded by barriers to fire spread and within which fire management options
are implemented.
Monitoring: The process of observing and evaluating fire behavior, weather,
and affected resources for the purpose of making fire management decisions.
Native Allotments: Each
Tlingit, Aleut, Eskimo, is
for which they must show
appealed or with conflict,
Alaska Native of 1/8 Native blood, Athabascan,
entitled to 160 acres in not more than four parcels
occupancy and use. Allotments on record, if not
were administratively approved by ANILCA.
Native Selected Lands: Lands withdrawn for Native selection and selected by
Native village or regional corporations.
Over Selected Lands: Lands selected by the Native corp·orat1ons and State in
excess of their entitlements.
Patented Lands: Lands for which Native corporations or the State of Alaska
have received the final document of ownership -subject to reservations by the
U.S. Government.
Patented Mining Claims: A mining claim that has had a validity check and been
approved for a patent and a patent document issued. This patent conveys
surface rights as well as subsurface -subject to valid existing rights.
146
•
·-
•
••
•
•
~
I
•
-·
Prescribed Fires: An administratively approved fire (nat~ral or man-ignited)
burning under approved and coordinated plans in wildland_ fuels, confined to a
specific area with the intent of :achiE!ving ce'rtain planned and desirable-land "
or resource _objectives.'
Private Pat'ented Lands·: 'La,nds .that" have been conveyed to private individuals .
or o'rganizatio!JS. --These lands are owned in "Fee Simple." They have a pate~t
which assures ownership. ·
Project Fire: A fire which requires a Class I or Class II Fire Overhead Team
as determined by 'either the suppression organization or tqe land manager/
owner.
Regional Corporation: An Alaska Native Regional· Corporation, established
under the laws of the State of Alaska· in accordance with the provisions of
ANCSA. The State of Alaska has been divided into twelve Native Regional
Corporations with a thirteenth formed for Alaska Natives which live out of
Alaska. Regional Corporations receive all subsurface rights of lands acquired
by Village CorporationE! within their region. They also receive the surface
and subsurface rights of lands conveyed to the region.
Resource Objective: A desirable management decision of a course of action
which provides targets for program accomplishment.
State Selected: Land selected by the State for futurt;! possible conveyance.
Strategic Action Plan: A plan which identifies and takes into consideration
all information about a fire, how the various resources are affected, and
specific agency and/or management concerllil, and deve,lopfil a recommended course
of action for control of the fire.
Strategy: The broad scale planning and direction for an escaped fire situ-
ation. Strategic plans integrate considerations' of land management objectives
and direction, resource locations and values,·fire size, suppression capabili-
ties,. the effects of the fire and suppression activities, and costs.
·Suppression: The work ·of extinguishing or confining a fire beginning With its
discovery.
Sustained Attack:
achieved.
Continuing suppression action on a fire until control ·is
Tactic: The selection of suppression methods and the coordination of all
forces committed to a fire .to accommodate a designated strategy.
T & M Site: A parcel of land up to
and manufacturing site regulations.
land is.conveyed.
80 acres in size conveyed under the trade
Applicant must have a going business when
Tentatively Approved: Lands Tentatively 'Approved for conveyance to the State
of Alaska. When land has been TA'd, BLM relinquishes management.
Unpatented Mining Claim: A parcel of land upori wh:i,ch a mining claim has_ been
filed but no document of fee simple ownership has b_een issued. Applicant has
only rights to subsurface estate and limited rights to the surface estate.
147
Village Corporation: A,n Alaska Native Village Corporation, organized under
the laws of the State of Alaska as a business for profit or nonprofit corpora-
tion to hold, invest, manage 'and/or distribute lands, property, funds, and
other rights and assets for and on behalf of a Native Village in accordance
with the terms of ANCSA. Village Corporations receive ownership of the sur-
face estate on the land conveyed to them. The Village Corporation entitlement
varies from three (3) to seven (7) townships, depending on their population as
of 1970.
Wildfire:
plan.
Any wildland fire· not prescribed for the area by an authorized
148