Fire Origins
Remember. Learn. Share.

On Protection of Towns from Fire — Benjamin Franklin, 1735

On Making Official History Honest — Kent Robert Greenfield, 1954

LCES—a Key to Safety in the Wildland Fire Environment — Paul Gleason, 1991

Attitude Check — Bill Fish, 1995

TriData Phase IV, “Developing a Cooperative Approach to Wildfire Protection” — Charles Perrow, 1998

Lessons From Thirtymile: Transition Fires And Fire Orders — Jerry Williams, 2001

Loop Fire Disaster Brief — November, 1966

1967 Task Force Report

• Preface
• Introduction
• Downhill Line Operations and “Chimneys”
• Communications
• Improve Scouting at All Critical Points
• Organization
• Protective Shelters
• Fire Protective Clothing
• Pre-Attack Planning and Construction
• Fuelbreak System
• Fire Behavior and Fire Research
• Appendix

2005 Fire Prevention and Safety grant application

• Synopsis and Budget
• Risk Assessment
• Evaluation
• Implementation Plan
• Justification

REPORT OF
THE FIRE SAFETY REVIEW TEAM

MARCH 1967

A PLAN TO FURTHER REDUCE
THE CHANCES OF MEN BEING BURNED WHILE FIGHTING FIRES

FUELBREAK SYSTEM

Progress has been made in developing the fuelbreak system since 1957.  Test plots have been established and standards have been developed.  Special funds have been made available for fuel treatment on priority areas.

Fuelbreak systems, involving the clearing of vegetative fuels in strategic places, offer some potential to improve the ability to confront and stop large or small fires.  The fuelbreaks usually will not work unless suppression forces are used to man them in advance of a fire.

Fuelbreaks greatly enhance the safety of the firefighters and provide for greater access to the wildland areas, facilitate faster first attack on fires and reduce the intensity of fire originating in the modified areas.

The cost of fuelbreaks differs widely in different areas because the widths vary greatly with topography and cover type.  An estimated average cost per acre is $50.

Fuelbreaks would be a supplement to our present organization so priorities would need to be established as to where the available monies would be used.

A balanced program of pre-attack coupled with a fuelbreak system would be of great benefit to fire suppression activities.

Recommendations:

Make a cost-benefit analysis of fuel modification in critical fire areas to determine feasibility of expanding the fuel break program.

WASHINGTON OFFICE COMMENTS:

The recommendation is approved in principle.  Before going ahead with it, a thorough evaluation of pertinent studies already available will be made.  After that, the objectives of the analysis can be more clearly specified.

The Duckwall project and fuel modification work done in various regions has shown fuel modification to be a sound measure for breaking up continuous bodies of dangerous fuels, thereby improving the chances of preventing large, damaging fires.  We know the work is effective.  What we don’t know is how much or what kind of it should be done to achieve optimum benefits.  The analysis should, therefore, be aimed at solving this problem.

While the analysis is being made, fuel modification work should continue in areas where its need is clearly indicated by pre-attack planning.

ACTION GUIDES:

<<< continue reading—1967 Task Force Report, Fire Behavior and Fire Research >>>