The Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System: An Overview

Stocks, B. J.; Lynham, T. J.; Lawson, B. D.; Alexander, Martin E.; Wagner, C. E. Van; McAlpine, Robert S.; Dubé, D. E.

doi:10.5558/tfc65450-6

Cited by 230 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fire danger rating is a means of quantifying the potential or ability of a fire to start, spread, and cause damage (Merrill and Alexander 1987). Formal Fire Danger Rating Systems (FDRS) have been in development in Canada, Australia, and the United States for about 75 years (Deeming et al 1977;Luke and McArthur 1978;Stocks et al 1989). The Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System (Stocks et al 1989) has two subsystems that are currently used operationally: the Canadian Forest Fire Weather Index (FWI) System (Van Wagner 1987) and the Canadian Forest Fire Behavior Prediction (FBP) System (Forestry Canada Fire Danger Group 1992).…”

Section: Fire Danger Ratingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of the Indonesian and Malaysian Fire Danger Rating Systems

Groot

Field

Brady

et al. 2006

Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest and land fires in Southeast Asia have many social, economic, and environmental impacts. Tropical peatland fires affect global carbon dynamics, and haze from peat fires has serious negative impacts on the regional economy and human health. To mitigate these fire-related problems, forest and land management agencies require an early warning system to assist them in implementing fire prevention and management plans before fire problems begin. Fire Danger Rating Systems (FDRS) were developed for Indonesia and Malaysia to provide early warning of the potential for serious fire and haze events. In particular, they identify time periods when fires can readily start and spread to become uncontrolled fires and time periods when smoke from smouldering fires will cause an unacceptably high level of haze. The FDRS were developed by adapting components of the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System, including the Canadian Forest Fire Weather Index (FWI) System and the Canadian Forest Fire Behavior Prediction (FBP) System, to local vegetation, climate, and fire regime conditions. A smoke potential indicator was developed using the Drought Code (DC) of the FWI System. Historical air quality analysis showed that the occurrence of severe haze events increased substantially when DC was above 400. An ignition potential indicator was developed using the Fine Fuel Moisture Code (FFMC) of the FWI System. Historical hot spot analysis, grass moisture, and grass ignition studies showed that fire occurrence and the ability for grass fires to start and spread dramatically increased when FFMC > 82. The Initial Spread Index (ISI) of the FWI System was used to develop a difficulty of control indicator for grassland fires, a fuel type that can exhibit high rates of spread and fire intensity. This ISI-based indicator was developed using the grass fuel model of the FBP System, along with a standard grass fuel load and curing level estimated from previous Indonesian studies. Very high fire intensity is expected in grasslands when ISI ≥ 6. To provide early warning, the FDRS identifies classes of increasing fire danger as the FFMC, DC, and ISI approach these key threshold values. The Indonesian FDRS is now operated nationally at the Indonesian Meteorological and Geophysical Agency. The Malaysian Meteorological Service operates the Malaysian FDRS and displays regional outputs for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. The FDRS are being used by forestry, agriculture, environment, and fire and rescue agencies to develop and implement fire prevention, detection, and suppression plans.

show abstract

Section: Fire Danger Ratingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of the Indonesian and Malaysian Fire Danger Rating Systems

Groot

Field

Brady

et al. 2006

Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When fuel types are used as input to fire behavior models they are converted to fuel models, which include the specific parameters necessary to run fire simulation programs. Such is the case of the 13 fuel models of the Northern Forest Fire Laboratory (NFFL) (Rothermel, 1972), the 20 fuel models of the National Fire Danger Rating System (NF-DRS) (Cohen and Deeming, 1985), or the 17 fuel types of the Canadian Fire Behavior Prediction System (FBP) (Stocks et al, 1989). Other fuel type classifications were created with a broader scope.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generation of a global fuel data set using the Fuel Characteristic Classification System

Pettinari

Chuvieco

2016

Biogeosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This study presents the methods for the generation of the first global fuel data set, containing all the parameters required to be input in the Fuel Characteristic Classification System (FCCS). The data set was developed from different spatial variables, both based on satellite Earth observation products and fuel databases, and is comprised by a global fuelbed map and a database that includes the parameters of each fuelbed that affect fire behavior and effects. A total of 274 fuelbeds were created and parameterized, and can be input into FCCS to obtain fire potentials, surface fire behavior and carbon biomass for each fuelbed.We present a first assessment of the fuel data set by comparing the carbon biomass obtained from our FCCS fuelbeds with the average biome values of four other regional or global biomass products. The results showed a good agreement both in terms of geographical distribution and biomass loads when compared to other biomass data, with the best results found for tropical and boreal forests (Spearman's coefficient of 0.79 and 0.77).This global fuel data set may be used for a varied range of applications, including fire danger assessment, fire behavior estimations, fuel consumption calculations and emissions inventories.

show abstract

“…Various interpretive media, from posters (e.g. Alexander 1995; Cole and Alexander 1995;Stocks and Hartley 1995) and look-up tables (Canadian Forestry Service 1984;Taylor et al 1997) to computer displays (Lee et al 2002), are useful in providing fire danger information depending on the background, literacy, numeracy, and culture of fire management staff. The CFFDRS supports decision making by providing real-time fire danger information that is useful at multiple operational levels.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Science, technology, and human factors in fire danger rating: the Canadian experience.

Taylor

Alexander

2006

Int. J. Wildland Fire

181

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The present paper reviews the development of the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System (CFFDRS) and its implementation in Canada and elsewhere, and suggests how this experience can be applied in developing fire danger rating systems in other forest or wildland environments. Experience with the CFFDRS suggests that four key scientific, technological, and human elements need to be developed and integrated in a national forest fire danger rating system. First among these is a sustained program of scientific research to develop a system based on relationships between fire weather, fuels, and topography, and fire occurrence, behavior, and impact appropriate to the fire environment. Development of a reliable technical infrastructure to gather, process, and archive fire weather data and to disseminate fire weather forecasts, fire danger information, and fire behavior predictions within operational agencies is also important. Technology transfer and training in the use of fire danger information in fire operations are necessary, as are cooperation and communication between fire management agencies to share resources and set common standards for information, resources, and training. These elements must be appropriate to the needs and capabilities of fire managers, and must evolve as fire management objectives change. Fire danger systems are a form of media; system developers should be careful not to overemphasize scientific and technological elements at the expense of human and institutional factors. Effective fire danger systems are readily assimilated by and influence the organizational culture, which in turn influences the development of new technologies. Most importantly, common vision and a sense of common cause among fire scientists and fire managers are needed for successful implementation of a fire danger rating system.

show abstract

The Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System: An Overview

Cited by 230 publications

References 8 publications

Development of the Indonesian and Malaysian Fire Danger Rating Systems

Development of the Indonesian and Malaysian Fire Danger Rating Systems

Generation of a global fuel data set using the Fuel Characteristic Classification System

Science, technology, and human factors in fire danger rating: the Canadian experience.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About