Studying interregional wildland fire engine assignments for large fire suppression

Abstract

One crucial component of large fire response in the United States (US) is the sharing of wildland firefighting resources between regions: resources from regions experiencing low fire activity supplement resources in regions experiencing high fire activity. An important step towards improving the efficiency of resource sharing and related policies is to develop a better understanding of current assignment patterns. In this paper we examine the set of interregional wildland fire engine assignments for incidents in California and the Southwest Geographic Coordination Areas, utilising data from the Resource Ordering and Status System. We study a set of multinomial logistic models to examine seasonal and regional patterns affecting the probabilities of interregional resource assignments. This provides a quantitative and objective way to identify the factors strongly influencing interregional assignments. We found that the fire activity in the regions significantly affects response probabilities, as does the season and the national preparedness level. Because our models indicate significant unexplained variation, even when accounting for fire activity, seasonality and resource scarcity, we hypothesise that the existing system could benefit from future research.

Fire Suppression Resource Scarcity: Current Metrics and Future Performance Indicators

“…Further, resource movement and prepositioning is an important consideration for efficiency questions. A growing body of research has helped build a foundation of knowledge in this area (e.g., [17,18,[50][51][52]); however, there is still much to be learned for the wide variety of resource types and agencies at play in the national response arena. Finally, imposing restrictions on resource use in an interagency realm is fraught with challenges, particularly given different agency priorities with respect to fire management policy, values at risk, and relative appetite for beneficial fire opportunities.…”

Evidence of effectiveness in the Cohesive Strategy: measuring and improving wildfire response

“…A suppression problem definition suggests that operational activities under the command organisational structure of ICS are the dominant focus in wildfire response. Further, alternatives to address suppression as a problem have focused on modelling, monitoring, decision tools and influences associated with the operational aspects of fire management (Thompson 2014;Hand et al 2015;O'Connor et al 2016;Thompson et al 2016a;Belval et al 2017;Hand et al 2107;Jolly and Freeborn 2017;Katuwal et al 2017;Wei et al 2017). Suppression has also been recognised as part of a broader operational toolbox, which includes managed wildland fire and prescribed fire.…”

“…Suppression has also been recognised as part of a broader operational toolbox, which includes managed wildland fire and prescribed fire. Each of these strategic approaches are recognised to have relative advantages and disadvantages in given settings (Steelman and McCaffrey 2011;Katuwal et al 2016;Belval et al 2017;Hand et al 2017;Ingalsbee 2017;Katuwal et al 2017;Stonesifer et al 2017;Wei et al 2017), including cost implications (Donovan and Brown 2005;Canton-Thompson et al 2008). The point is that there is an organisational and expertise-based path dependence based on how the problem is defined.…”

Examining dispatching practices for Interagency Hotshot Crews to reduce seasonal travel distance and manage fatigue

“…Other studies have shown ROSS to be a valuable source of information for examining dispatching and assignments for fire responders and equipment (e.g. Calkin et al 2014;Belval et al 2017;Lyon et al 2017). We only examined filled requests for IHCs; this model is not meant to be used to prioritise which requests should be filled, but rather to fill those already determined to be a priority.…”