![](media/image1.wmf){width="0.625in" height="0.75in"}

## 

# 

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="6.375694444444444in"
height="5.870138888888889in"}

CONTENTS

[CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION - 5 -](#chapter-1---introduction)

[1 Introduction - 5 -](#introduction)

[1.1 Background - 5 -](#background)

[1.2 Purpose and Need for this Plan - 7
-](#purpose-and-need-for-this-plan)

[1.3 Compliance - 7 -](#compliance)

[1.4 Legal Authorities for this Plan - 8
-](#legal-authorities-for-this-plan)

[CHAPTER 2 -- RELATIONSHIP TO LAND MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND FIRE POLICY -
9
-](#chapter-2-relationship-to-land-management-planning-and-fire-policy)

[2.1 NPS Management Policies - 9 -](#nps-management-policies)

[2.2 Enabling Legislation and Purpose - 9
-](#enabling-legislation-and-purpose)

[2.3 General and Resource Management Plan Goals and Objectives - 10
-](#general-and-resource-management-plan-goals-and-objectives)

[2.4 How this Plan Will Meet Objectives of the GMP and RMP - 11
-](#how-this-plan-will-meet-objectives-of-the-gmp-and-rmp)

[CHAPTER 3 --WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES - 13
-](#__RefHeading___Toc90087466)

[3.1 General Management Considerations - 13
-](#general-management-considerations)

[3.2 Wildland Fire Management Goals - 14
-](#wildland-fire-management-goals)

[3.3 Wildland Fire Management Options - 19
-](#wildland-fire-management-options)

[3.4 Description of Fire Management Units - 20
-](#description-of-fire-management-units)

[CHAPTER 4 -- WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM COMPONENTS - 38
-](#chapter-4-wildland-fire-management-program-components)

[4.1 Wildland Fire Management Program Components - 38
-](#wildland-fire-management-program-components)

[4.2 General Implementation Procedures - 38
-](#general-implementation-procedures)

[4.3 Preparedness Activities - 39 -](#preparedness-activities)

[4.4 Wildland Fire Suppression - 41 -](#wildland-fire-suppression)

[4.5 Wildland Fire Use - 48 -](#wildland-fire-use)

[4.5.1 Tactical Options Managing Wildland Fire Use - 50
-](#tactical-options-managing-wildland-fire-use)

[4.6 Prescribed Fire - 55 -](#prescribed-fire)

[4.7 Non-Fire Fuel Treatment Applications (Manual and Mechanical) - 58
-](#non-fire-fuel-treatment-applications-manual-and-mechanical)

[CHAPTER 5 -- ORGANIZATIONAL AND BUDGETARY PARAMETERS - 62
-](#chapter-5-organizational-and-budgetary-parameters)

[5.1 Description of Organization - 62 -](#description-of-organization)

[5.2 FirePro Funding Redo this section - 64 -](#firepro-funding)

[5.3 Relationship of Fire Management Organization to NPS Unit - 65
-](#relationship-of-fire-management-organization-to-nps-unit)

[5.4 Interagency Coordination - 66 -](#interagency-coordination)

[5.5 List of Key Interagency Contacts by Function - 66
-](#list-of-key-interagency-contacts-by-function)

[5.6 List of Fire Related Agreements - 67
-](#list-of-fire-related-agreements)

[CHAPTER 6 -- MONITORING AND EVALUATION - 68
-](#chapter-6-monitoring-and-evaluation)

[6.1 Introduction - 68 -](#introduction-1)

[6.2 Purpose and Need - 68 -](#purpose-and-need)

[6.3 Wildland Fire Monitoring Framework - 68
-](#wildland-fire-monitoring-framework)

[6.3.1 Use of Monitoring Levels 1 and 2 - 69
-](#use-of-monitoring-levels-1-and-2)

[6.3.2 Use of Monitoring Levels 3 and 4 - 69
-](#use-of-monitoring-levels-3-and-4)

[6.4 Monitoring Design - 72 -](#monitoring-design)

[6.4.1 Wildland Fire Monitoring - 72 -](#wildland-fire-monitoring)

[6.4.2 Prescribed Fire Monitoring - 74 -](#prescribed-fire-monitoring)

[6.4.3 Non-Fire Treatment Monitoring - 76
-](#non-fire-treatment-monitoring)

[CHAPTER 7 -- FIRE RESEARCH - 79 -](#chapter-7-fire-research)

[7.1 Introduction - 79 -](#introduction-2)

[7.2 Summary of Existing Fire Research - 79
-](#summary-of-existing-fire-research)

[7.2.2 Lassen Volcanic National Park Fire Ecology Publications - 82
-](#lassen-volcanic-national-park-fire-ecology-publications)

[7.3 Current Fire Research Needs - 84 -](#current-fire-research-needs)

[CHAPTER 8 -- PUBLIC SAFETY - 85 -](#chapter-8-public-safety)

[8.1 Description of Public Safety Issues and Concerns - 85
-](#description-of-public-safety-issues-and-concerns)

[8.2 Mitigating Actions - 86 -](#mitigating-actions)

[CHAPTER 9 -- PUBLIC INFORMATION AND EDUCATION - 87
-](#chapter-9-public-information-and-education)

[9.1 Description of Public Safety Information Capabilities and Needs -
87 -](#description-of-public-safety-information-capabilities-and-needs)

[CHAPTER 10 -- PROTECTION OF SENSITIVE RESOURCES - 91
-](#chapter-10-protection-of-sensitive-resources)

[10.1 Summary of Cultural Resources Requiring Sensitive Treatment or
Special Protection - 91
-](#summary-of-cultural-resources-requiring-sensitive-treatment-or-special-protection)

[10.2 Summary of natural resources requiring sensitive treatment or
special protection - 93
-](#summary-of-natural-resources-requiring-sensitive-treatment-or-special-protection)

[CHAPTER 11 -- FIRE CRITIQUES AND ANNUAL PLAN REVIEW - 99
-](#chapter-11-fire-critiques-and-annual-plan-review)

[Program Certification - 99 -](#program-certification)

[Periodic Review - 99 -](#periodic-review)

[CHAPTER 12 -- CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION - 100
-](#chapter-12-consultation-and-coordination)

####### 

####### **Appendices**

####### Appendix A References Cited

Appendix B Definitions

Appendix C Species Lists

Appendix D Environmental Assessment

Appendix E Other Unit Specific Supplemental Information

Appendix F Wildland and Prescribed Fire Monitoring Plan

Appendix G Pre-Attack Plan

Appendix H Long-Term Prescribed Fire and Hazard Fuel Reduction Plan

Appendix I Public Information, Education and Prevention Plan

Appendix J Rental Equipment Agreements

Appendix K Contracts for Suppression and Prescribed Fire Resources

Appendix L Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation Plan

Appendix M Yearly Readiness Check List

Appendix N Preparedness Staffing Plan

Appendix O Minimum Impact Suppression Tactics Reference Guide

Appendix P Delegation of Authority

Appendix Q Organizational Chart

####### 

####### **List of Figures**

####### Figure 1-1 Lassen Volcanic National Park and Vicinity.

Figure 3-1 Proposed Long-Term Treatment Areas

Figure 3-2 Generalized Vegetation for Lassen Volcanic National Park

Figure 3-3 Fire Management Unit 1 -- Boundary

Figure 3-4 Fire Management Unit 2 -- Wildland Fire Use

Figure 4-1 Lassen Volcanic National Park Water Resources

Figure 7-1 Historical Fire Regimes

####### **List of Tables** 

Table 3-1 Summary of Lassen Volcanic National Park Fire Management Units
Descriptions

Table 3-2 Forest tree species of Lassen Volcanic National Park

Table 3-3 Resource Target Conditions by Vegetation Types

Table 3-4 Historical Fire Regime Characteristics and Classes used by the
Interagency FRCC

Guidebook

Table 5-1 Fire Management Funding Structure

Table 5-2 Key Fire Management Contacts

Table 6-1 NPS Fire Monitoring Handbook -- Minimum Recommended Standards.

Table 6-2 Resource Target Conditions by Forest Type (Restoration and
Maintenance phases).

Table 6-3 Suggested Monitoring levels by Fire Management Option

Table 7-1 Historical Fire Regime characteristics and the Fire Regime
Classes used by the

Interagency FRCC Guidebook

Table 7-2 List of Fire-Related Resource Management Concerns at Lassen
Volcanic National Park

Table 9-1 Target Audiences and Communication Methods

Table 12.1 Values at Risk with Lassen Volcanic National Park

##### **CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION**

####### 

####### 

### 1 Introduction

This document defines a program of wildland fire management for Lassen
Volcanic National Park. It describes objectives and tasks covering a 10
year timeframe for utilizing the benefits of fire to achieve desired
natural and cultural resource conditions while at the same time,
protecting park resources and adjacent lands and values at risk from the
negative impacts of fire. Elements have been identified to ensure that
firefighter and public safety are not compromised.

### 1.1 Background

Lassen Volcanic National Park was established by an Act of Congress on
August 9, 1916 (39 Stat. 442) "for recreation purposes by the public and
for the preservation from injury or spoliation of all timber, mineral
deposits and natural curiosities or wonders within said park and their
retention in their natural condition and...provide against the wanton
destruction of the fish and game found within said park and against
their capture or destruction..." Incorporated into the park were Cinder
Cone and Lassen Peak National Monuments, which were established by
Presidential Proclamation (No. 753 and 754) on May 6, 1907, as part of
the Lassen Peak Forest Reserve.

The park encompasses 106,170 acres of mountainous terrain at the
southern end of the volcanic Cascade Mountain Range in northeastern
California (See Figure 1-1). Preserved within the park is the site of
the most recent volcanic eruption within the continental United States,
prior to the Mount St. Helens eruption in May 1980. Lassen Peak is one
of the largest plug dome volcanoes in the world. The park is unique in
that it also preserves, in a relatively small geographic area, examples
of the three other types of volcanoes recognized by geologists: shield
volcanoes, composite volcanoes and cinder cones. Also within the park is
the most extensive, intact network of geothermal resources west of
Yellowstone National Park, including outstanding examples of boiling
springs, mud-pots, and fumaroles. The park preserves cinder cones, lava
flows, and other volcanic evidence, as well as areas of undisturbed
forests, lakes, and streams. Three biogeographic regions come together
in the park: the southern Cascade Mountain Range, the northern Sierra
Nevada Mountains, and the Basin and Range Province.

Approximately 400,000 people visit the park each year. The park provides
opportunities for visitors to learn about volcanism and other park
phenomena and enjoy various recreational pursuits such as sightseeing,
backpacking, camping, picnicking, and hiking. Seventy-four percent of
the park is congressionally designated wilderness.

### ![](media/image3.jpeg){width="6.748611111111111in" height="8.733333333333333in"} 

### 

### 1.2 Purpose and Need for this Plan

Wildland fire has long been recognized as one of the most significant
natural processes operating within and shaping the northern Sierra
Nevada and southern Cascade Mountain ecosystems (SNEP 1996, Agee 1993,
Agee et. al. 1978, Kilgore 1973). Virtually all vegetation communities
show evidence of fire dependence or tolerance (Taylor 1990, 1993, Taylor
and Skinner 1998, Taylor and Halperin 1991, Kauffman and Martin 1989,
Kilgore and Taylor 1979). Many forest types in the park have been shaped
by frequent fire return intervals (ranging from 5-16 years) as evidenced
by park research (Taylor 2000). At the same time wildland fire has the
potential to threaten human lives and property. Consequently there is a
need to manage wildland fire so that threats to humans and property are
reduced, while at the same time restoring and/or maintaining its
function as a natural process.

NPS policy directs that every park having vegetation capable of burning
must have a Fire Management Plan, and that the Fire Management Plan must
be accompanied by an Environmental Assessment (EA) to document the
environmental consequences of proposed actions *(NPS Director's Order
18)*. The park's first fire management plan was written in 1982.
Additional fire management activities were assessed and documented in an
EA and plan in 1993. The 1993 Fire Management Plan was again updated in
1998 to comply with national policy changes.

This plan will implement wildland fire management policies and help
achieve resource management and fire management goals as defined in: 1)
NPS Management Polices (2001); 2) Lassen Volcanic National Park General
Management Plan (GMP 2003); 3) Lassen Volcanic National Park Resource
Management Plan (1999); 4) Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and
Program Review (2001); 5) The National Fire Plan and 6) A 10-Year
Comprehensive Strategy (*A collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland
Risks to Communities and the Environment).*

### 1.3 Compliance

This plan has been prepared in compliance with:

-   The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 United
    States Code (USC) 4321 et seq.), which requires an environmental
    analysis for major Federal Actions having the potential to impact
    the quality of the human environment;

-   Council of Environmental Quality Regulations at 40 Code of Federal
    Regulations (CFR) 1500-1508, which implement the requirements of
    NEPA;

-   The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (16 USC 470 et seq.),
    which requires protection of historic properties significant to the
    Nation\'s heritage;

-   The Wilderness Act (16 USC 1131 et seq.), which requires the
    preservation of wilderness character and wilderness resources in an
    unimpaired condition for the park's 78,982 acres of Congressionally
    designated wilderness; and for the approximately 25,000 acres which
    have been proposed for future designation (2003 GMP);

-   The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (19 U.S.C. 1536 (c), 50 CFR
    402), which requires that the effects of any agency action that may
    affect endangered, threatened, or proposed species must be evaluated
    in consultation with either the United States Fish & Wildlife
    Service (USFWS) or National Marine & Fisheries Study (NMFS), as
    appropriate;

-   Clean Water Act of 1972, as amended (CWA) (33 USC 1251-1387), which
    requires the protection of the chemical, physical, and biological
    integrity of the Nation's waters;

-   Executive Order 11990, \"Protection of Wetlands\", which requires
    federal agencies to avoid, where possible, impacts on wetlands; and

-   NPS Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and
    Decision Making; Director's Order #12 and Handbook.

This plan was developed over the course of 4 years with internal and
external interdisciplinary input, and reviewed by appropriate subject
matter experts in collaboration with adjacent communities, interest
groups, state and federal agencies.

### 1.4 Legal Authorities for this Plan

The management of NPS programs is guided by the Constitution, public
laws, treaties, proclamations, Executive Orders, regulations, and
directives of the Secretary of the Interior and the Assistant Secretary
for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.

NPS policy guidelines, planning documents, and actions plans, such as
this Fire Management Plan, must be consistent with these higher
authorities, and with appropriate delegations of authority. Authority to
implement this plan is found in 16 USC 1 through 4 (National Park
Service Organic Act), and delegations of authority found in Part 245 of
the Department of the Interior Manual.

##### 

##### **CHAPTER 2 -- RELATIONSHIP TO LAND MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND FIRE POLICY**

### 2.1 NPS Management Policies

NPS *Management Policies* (DOI 2001) is the basic Service-wide policy
document of the National Park Service. It is the highest of three levels
of guidance documents in the NPS Directives System. The Directives
System is designed to provide NPS management and staff with information
on NPS policy and required and/or recommended actions, as well as any
other information that will help them manage parks and programs
effectively.

The *Management Policies* section on fire management recognizes that:

> "Naturally ignited fire is a process that is part of many of the
> natural systems that are being sustained in parks. Human-ignited fires
> often cause the unnatural destruction of park natural resources.
> Wildland fire may contribute to or hinder the achievement of park
> management objectives. Therefore, park fire management programs will
> be designed to meet park resource management objectives while ensuring
> that firefighter and public safety are not compromised."

*Management Policies* also directs that:

> "All fires burning in natural or landscaped vegetation in parks will
> be classified as either wildland fires or prescribed fires. All
> wildland fires will be effectively managed through application of the
> appropriate strategic and tactical management options. These options
> will be selected after comprehensive consideration of the resource
> values to be protected, firefighter and public safety, and costs.
> Prescribed fires are those fires ignited by park managers to achieve
> resource management and fuel treatment objectives. Prescribed fire
> activities will include monitoring programs that record fire behavior,
> smoke behavior, fire decisions, and fire effects to provide
> information on whether specific objectives are met. All parks will use
> a systematic decision-making process to determine the most appropriate
> management strategies for all unplanned ignitions, and for any
> prescribed fires that are no longer meeting resource management
> objectives."

The program of action outlined in this plan is in accordance with
direction provided in the current version of *Management Policies*.

### 2.2 Enabling Legislation and Purpose

The mission of Lassen Volcanic National Park is \""for recreation
purposes by the public and for the preservation from injury or
spoliation of all timber, mineral deposits and natural curiosities or
wonders within said park and their retention in their natural condition
and...provide against the wanton destruction of the fish and game found
within said park and against their capture or destruction....\" The Act
of Congress which established Lassen Volcanic National Park (39 Stat.
442) August 9, 1916, recognized the significance of the area's cultural
and natural resources by stating that the Park is: "\...dedicated and
set apart forever as a public (park) or pleasure ground for the benefit
of the people\...and\...for the preservation of the natural objects
within said park\...." This act, like the 1916 Organic Act, did not
specify any one feature or ecosystem of Lassen Volcanic National Park as
being the most important. Rather, it recognized that all these resources
are of value. Therefore, the purpose of Lassen Volcanic National Park is
to preserve all aspects of its history and ecological environment,
including natural processes, i.e. fire, and to provide for visitor use,
unimpaired for future generations.

The program of action outlined in this plan is in accordance with the
mission and the establishment purposes of Lassen Volcanic National Park.

### 2.3 General and Resource Management Plan Goals and Objectives 

Lassen Volcanic National Park's General Management Plan (GMP) was
completed in June of 2003. Desired Future Conditions identified in the
GMP will guide subsequent updates of this fire management plan. Goals
identified in the existing plan (DOI 1975) are:

## Conservation of natural resources

To conserve the park's natural resources free from the adverse
influences of man while allowing those types of use and development that
do not significantly impair park resources.

## Research programs

To secure adequate information, through research or other means, to
facilitate protection of park resources and management of visitor
activities in ways that minimize impacts on the park's environment.

## Interpretation

> To foster an understanding and appreciation of the sequence of
> geological forces that created Lassen Volcanic National Park and how
> these forces affect the environment and ecological communities and
> provide information assistance appropriate for the safe and enjoyable
> use of the park resources without impairment of those resources.

## Environmental awareness

To promote environmental awareness by encouraging the utilization of the
park resources by schools and other groups for environmental study areas
and cooperate with them in both off-site and on-site program assistance.

## Cultural resources

> To identify, inventory, evaluate, preserve, monitor, and interpret the
> park's cultural resources in a manner consistent with the requirements
> of historic preservation law and National Park Service policies.

The Park's Resource Management Plan (RMP) identifies several resource
management objectives that can be linked directly to the use and
management of fire (DOI 1999):

-   Restore and maintain the natural terrestrial, aquatic, and
    atmospheric ecosystem conditions and processes to the degree that is
    physically possible and politically practical so they may operate
    unimpaired from human influences.

-   Maintain or restore indigenous flora, fauna, and natural communities
    to the extent possible, to achieve species diversity and community
    structure equivalent to pre-Columbian times or post-Columbian
    conditions which would have been created by natural events and
    processes.

-   Protect rare species by measures aimed at preserving habitat and
    preventing extirpation but which minimize adverse influences on
    other indigenous species.

-   Work cooperatively with other agencies to minimize, mitigate or
    prevent resource damaging human influences resulting from activities
    inside and outside of the park boundary.

-   Protect, to the degree practical, and when it is not detrimental to
    park resources, the visiting public from known resource hazards by
    reducing hazards and/or to advise the public of potential risks.

-   In areas designated as "cultural zones", identify and preserve or
    restore elements of the landscape (historic landscape plantings,
    walkways and historic structures) to give an accurate representation
    of the historic period.

### 2.4 How this Plan Will Meet Objectives of the GMP and RMP

This fire management plan is a detailed program of action to implement
fire management policies and resource management objectives outlined in
higher authority policies and plans (i.e. *Management Policies*, GMP,
RMP). It has been developed to:

-   Identify and protect values at risk through appropriate management
    responses to fire events;

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Take special precautions to preserve and perpetuate sensitive, rare,
    threatened, or endangered plant/animal species;

-   Expand the prescribed burning program to all ecosystems where fire
    exclusion has created unnatural fuel loadings;

-   Quantify fire behavior and efforts through monitoring and
    evaluations of all fires in order to refine prescriptions to achieve
    objectives;

-   Research the role of fire in the park's fire-adapted ecosystems.
    This effort will include monitoring of ecological effects of
    wildland fire use and prescribed fires, as well as acquisition of
    information on fuel accumulations, forest insects and diseases,
    vegetation dynamics and other topics important to fire management
    and planning;

-   Implement a public information program that includes prevention,
    education, and interpretation, and ensures that socioeconomic
    considerations are included with ecological concerns when informing
    the visitor;

-   Comply with air pollution control regulations and smoke management
    concerns as required by the Clean Air Act and in cooperation with
    all county smoke agencies;

-   Maintain an active fire prevention program to reduce the incidence
    of human-caused wild fires;

-   Prevent fire spread onto adjacent public and private lands by
    containing all fires within the park boundary; however, wildland
    fire use may be permitted to spread outside or inside of the park
    from adjacent, compatible fire management areas within the
    jurisdiction of involved agencies as allowed by Interagency
    Agreements.

This plan will help meet objectives of the GMP and RMP through an
adaptive management framework that includes planning, research,
interdisciplinary objective setting, execution, effects monitoring,
evaluation, and recommendations for change.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc90087466 .anchor}

##### **CHAPTER 3 --WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES**

National Park Service wildland fire management activities are essential
to the protection of human life, personal property and irreplaceable
natural and cultural resources. Additionally, the use of fire as a
management tool has become essential to successful completion of the NPS
mission. The complex nature of implementing fire management activities
requires highly qualified personnel and a structured planning process.
The following section identifies the available wildland fire management
strategies that may be utilized during the life of this planning
document. Included here are discussions of general fire management
considerations, specific fire management objectives, strategies, and an
approach for each of the park's Fire Management Units (FMU).

### 3.1 General Management Considerations

As part of the NPS wildland fire management program, Lassen Volcanic
National Park embraces the goals established in the 10-Year
Comprehensive Strategy (USDA and DOI 2001) which identifies the need
to: 1) improve fire prevention and suppression; 2) reduce hazardous
fuels; 3) restore fire adapted ecosystems; and 4) promote community
assistance.

The Park will administer its wildland fire program in a manner that
will:

-   Achieve maximum overall benefits and minimize damages of wildland
    fire use within the framework of land use objectives and resource
    management plans, while giving primary consideration to firefighter
    and public safety.

-   Educate employees and the public about the scope and effect of
    wildland fire

> management, including fuels treatments, resource protection,
> prevention, hazard/risk assessment, mitigation and rehabilitation, and
> fire's role in ecosystem management.

-   Stabilize and prevent further degradation of natural and cultural
    resources lost and/or damaged by impacts of wildland fires and/or
    fire management activities.

-   Maintain the highest standards of professional and technical
    expertise in planning and safely implementing an effective wildland
    fire management program.

-   Integrate fire management with all other aspects of park management.

-   Manage wildland fire incidents in accordance with accepted
    interagency standards, using appropriate management strategies and
    tactics and maximize efficiencies realized through interagency
    coordination and cooperation.

-   Scientifically manage wildland fire using best available technology
    as an essential

> ecological process to restore, preserve, or maintain ecosystems and
> use resource
>
> information gained through inventory and monitoring to evaluate and
> improve the program.

-   Protect life and property and accomplish resource management
    objectives, including restoration of the natural role of fire in
    fire-dependent ecosystems.

-   Effectively integrate the preservation of wilderness including the
    application of

> \"minimum requirement\" management techniques into all activities
> impacting this
>
> resource.

All fires occurring in the park will be classified as either wildland or
prescribed fires. Selected strategies will consider firefighter and
public safety as the first priority then resource values to be
protected. This plan will make available a full range of strategic and
tactical options, as described in Section 3.3.

A systematic decision making process will be used to determine the most
appropriate management option for all unplanned ignitions, and for any
prescribed fires that are no longer meeting resource management
objectives. The full range of suppression strategies will be considered,
but any methods used to suppress wildland fires should minimize impacts
of the suppression action and the fire, commensurate with effective
control and resource values to be protected.

### 3.2 Wildland Fire Management Goals

The purpose, goals and objectives of the park's fire management program
are derived from agency mandates, policy statements, environmental laws
and park planning documents. The Fire Management Plan (FMP) must respond
to direction provided in Federal and NPS policy statements such as the
2001 Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management
Policy (USDI and USDA 2001). Fire management action must also comply
with laws such as the National Park Service Organic Act, Endangered
Species Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Wilderness Act, National
Historic Preservation Act and Archeological Resources Protection Act,
and other laws related to the National Park Service. The park's General
Management Plan (NPS 2003), Natural and Cultural Resource Management
Plan (NPS 1999), and previous fire management plans also provide
specific direction regarding park-specific resources and stewardship
goals.

Within the framework of larger agency policy and environmental law, the
park's staff has identified the following goals for the fire management
program. Each goal is further refined through associated objectives,
which aid managers in measuring the success of fire management actions.
An adaptive approach will allow the park fire program to refine
prescriptions and fire applications to assure desired outcomes are
achieved.

[Fire Management Goals]{.underline}

**1. Ensure that firefighter and public safety is the first priority in
every fire management activity.**

[Desired Outcome:]{.underline} Park visitors and staff are protected
from the safety risks of fire management activities. Firefighters are
able to manage fire and fuels with acceptably low levels of risk.

[Five Year Objective:]{.underline} Visitors, staff, and firefighters
sustain no injuries resulting from fire management activities.

Strategies:

-   All personnel involved in fire management operations will receive a
    safety briefing describing known hazards and mitigating actions,
    current fire season conditions, and current and predicted fire
    weather and behavior.

-   Individuals fully qualified using current National Wildfire
    Coordination Group standards will carry out fire management
    operations.

-   Job Hazard Analyses (JHA) will be developed and implemented for
    every fire management activity. The JHA\'s will be reviewed by
    personnel prior to implementing fire management actions.

-   All or portions of the park will be closed to the public when fire
    activity poses a threat to human safety (at the discretion of the
    Superintendent).

-   Park neighbors, visitors, and local residents will be notified of
    all planned and emergency fire management activities that have the
    potential to impact them.

-   Daily safety briefings will be completed for park fire staff. After
    action reviews, safety updates and near miss information will be
    shared and interpreted.

**2. Restore and maintain desired fire regimes to the maximum extent
practicable so park ecosystems exhibit a high degree of health and
function.**

[Desired Outcome:]{.underline} Fire and fuels management activities
create and maintain a mosaic of native plant and animal communities that
are sustainable and reflect desired ecological conditions.

[Five Year Objective:]{.underline} Treat 15% of the parks burnable
landscape, under prescription, over next five years.

Strategies:

-   Restore fire to the Park's undeveloped landscapes by implementing
    fire regimes compatible with contemporary conditions and ecological
    goals.

-   Promote species diversity and restore the stability and resilience
    of the park\'s natural communities through targeted fire
    applications.

-   Use treatments to restore composition and structure of highly
    altered natural communities, focusing on units with the highest FRID
    (Fire Return Interval Departure) values.

-   Reduce the introduction, abundance, and spread of non-native plant
    species, through targeted fire applications or post-fire treatments.

-   Actively monitor and evaluate fire management activities, adapting
    prescriptions and program scale when appropriate.

-   Collaborate with partner agencies, and universities in pursuing a
    refined understanding of fire in the Park ecosystems.

-   Employ adaptive management strategies, reviewing monitoring
    information annually. Research and monitoring data will be evaluated
    to refine fire applications and assure targets are being met.

**3. Protect Cultural Resources (including prehistoric sites,
ethnographic resources, cultural landscapes, and historic structures)
from adverse influences of wildland fires, fire suppression, prescribed
fires, and manual/mechanical treatments.**

[Desired Outcome:]{.underline} Fire and fuels management action will
result in a landscape supporting fire regimes of manageable severity and
behavior.

[Five Year Objective:]{.underline} Sustain no loss of known historic
structure or ethnographic resources over the next five years.

Strategies:

-   Focus a portion of fuels management activities in areas surrounding
    historic structures.

-   Complete inventories and update site records for pre-historic sites
    and ethnographic resources.

-   Complete cultural landscape inventory and develop treatment
    recommendations.

-   Complete structure assessment and develop mitigations.

-   Develop fire management projects designed to create fire safe
    landscapes surrounding important sites.

-   Develop a resource advisor guide for the park and assure resource
    advisors are assigned to all incidents

**4. Protect Sensitive Park Resources from adverse influences of
wildland fires, fire suppression, prescribed fires, and manual/
mechanical treatments.**

[Desired Outcome:]{.underline} A sustainable park landscape supporting
plant and animal communities reflective of pre-settlement conditions.

[Five Year Objective:]{.underline} Sustain no net loss of important
natural resource values over the next five years.

Strategies:

-   Assure review of all fire planning documents by Natural Resource
    staff and Network Fire Ecologist.

-   Complete surveys and update inventories for sensitive species.

-   Complete habitat assessments for spotted owls and cascade frogs,
    developing wildfire mitigation strategies.

-   Develop a resource advisor guide for the park and assure resource
    advisors are assigned to all incidents

**5. Reduce hazardous accumulations of fuels near structures, roadways,
wildland-urban interface areas, and cultural resources such as historic
structures.**

[Desired Outcome:]{.underline} The fuel conditions in strategic areas
adjacent to urban interface boundaries, developed areas, and
cultural/historic sites are maintained at a level such that the
values-at-risk are adequately protected from wildland fire.

[Five Year Objective:]{.underline} Reduce hazard fuels in developed
areas, urban interface boundaries, and cultural/historic zones to a
level where at 90^th^ percentile weather conditions, average flame
lengths would be 4 feet or less.

Strategies:

-   Use manual and mechanical treatments to reduce hazard fuels in areas
    directly adjacent to park facilities.

-   Use prescribed fire and manual/mechanical hazard fuel reduction in
    strategic locations to reduce the threat of wildland fire spreading
    outside the park boundaries.

-   Apply manual/mechanical hazard fuel reduction adjacent to targeted
    significant cultural and historic sites to enhance protection from
    fire damage.

-   Monitor the effects of prescribed fire and manual/mechanical fuel
    reduction treatments so that their effectiveness as well as any
    resource impacts are identified and incorporated into future
    planning.

**6. Maintain preparedness for fire response.**

[Desired Outcome:]{.underline} Lassen Volcanic National Park staff
effectively manages fire activities using the best available science.
Professional conduct and performance occurs at all levels. Procedures
and policies are adhered to during all operations.

[Five Year Objective:]{.underline} Develop the capacity to maintain an
extended attack wildland fire organization and a complex prescribed burn
organization composed of park personnel serving in at least 50% of the
critical overhead positions.

Strategies:

-   Maintain an active training and trainee assignment program.

-   Develop the knowledge, skills, and abilities of park employees in
    areas of fire management that benefit both the park and the
    individual.

-   Support incident team participation and participation on fire
    incidents and projects.

-   Create an environment where employees are able to develop to their
    fullest potential.

-   Master the latest fire technology in order to predict and track fire
    danger and fire potential.

**7. Maximize the efficiency of the fire management program by
coordinating with other park divisions and neighboring agencies.**

[Desired Outcome:]{.underline} Lassen Volcanic National Park contributes
significantly to the local, state, and national firefighting effort.
Fire management activities are effectively managed jointly across
administrative boundaries for common goals of safety and resource
protection.

[Five Year Objective:]{.underline} Maintain the number of shifts worked
by park staff in suppression, prescribed fire, and wildland fire use to
a five year average of 900 shifts per year. Complete joint WFU
agreement/plan with USFS.

Strategies:

-   Coordinate preparedness and fuels management activities with the
    following entities: California Department of Forestry and Fire
    Protection (Tehama-Glenn and Shasta Unit), United States Forest
    Service (Lassen National Forest) and the Bureau of Land Management
    (NOD).

-   Support the Susanville Interagency Emergency Command Center.

-   Status available resources with the ECC and send resources to
    incidents on the local, state, and national level.

-   Annually review interagency agreements and modify as needed.

-   Coordinate fuels activities through local fuels committees and
    interagency partnerships.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Cooperatively manage wildland fires and prescribed fires across unit
    boundaries with USFS and CDF.

-   Support National Park Networks with resources, overhead, and
    planning.

**8. Evaluate the costs and benefits of alternative fire management
strategies to ensure that financial costs are commensurate with
protection or enhancement of resource and wilderness values.**

[Desired Outcome:]{.underline} Lassen Volcanic National Park achieves
cost containment strategies commensurate with national standards for all
fire management incidents.

[Five Year Objective:]{.underline} Maintain balanced budgets and target
treatment costs at less then \$200 per acre over the next five years.

Strategies:

-   Follow cost containment guidelines for all fire management
    activities.

-   Utilize NPS network resources when possible

-   Complete planning and project implementation at significant spatial
    scales.

-   Use firefighting resources in a manner compensatory with values at
    risk.

**9. Integrate fire management with all other aspects of park management
and operations.**

[Desired Outcome:]{.underline} All park divisions support fire
management actions.

[Five Year Objective:]{.underline} Park fire management activities
receive collective input, review and support from all Divisions over the
next five years.

Strategies:

-   Schedule annual fire program review to provide other park divisions
    with updates on planned activities.

-   Request review of fire effects data from resource management.

-   Coordinate fire program outreach with park interpretation staff.

-   Request dedicated staff time from cultural resource staff to assist
    with project compliance and review.

-   Keep all park employees informed of current and up and coming fire
    management activities.

### 3.3 Wildland Fire Management Options

[Wildland Fire Suppression]{.underline}

The suppression of selected wildland fire events is an integral part of
land management and a significant part of all National Park Service
programs. The decision to suppress fires is informed by the values at
risk, incident specific conditions and the availability of firefighting
resources. All firefighting will be implemented in a matter providing
the highest protection for life and property while minimizing the
impacts of suppression actions commensurate with the values at risk.

The magnitude of wildfire response varies tremendously between incidents
and should be matched to the current and predicted fire behavior.
Tactics include the construction of fireline with crews or mechanical
equipment, the delivery of water with aircraft or engines, and the use
of firing operations. All tactics and strategies are aimed at the safe
and efficient control of fire spread.

Depending on the size and complexity of the fire event an appropriate
organization of overhead and firefighting resources will be deployed.
Some combination of tactical options will be selected by fire managers,
depending on the anticipated consequences and management objectives for
the area threatened. A set of strategies will be analyzed as part of the
Wildland Fire Situation Analysis (WFSA) process for incidents involving
extended attack. The wildland fire suppression option will be considered
necessary for all human-caused wildland fires originating in the park;
for all ignitions occurring in the Developed FMU; and for ignitions that
threaten valued resources.

[Wildland Fire Use]{.underline}

Wildland fire use (WFU) is the management of naturally ignited wildland
fires to accomplish specific pre-stated *\[defined\]* resource
management objectives in identified geographic areas (NPS, et al.,
1998). Each non-human caused fire is assessed relative to very specific
parameters of topography, weather, fuel types, projected fire spread and
resource risk. Selected fires are monitored closely and suppression
actions implemented when effects are no longer deemed beneficial or fire
spread exceeds the maximum manageable area (MMA). The decision to manage
fire for resource benefits is dependent on desirable weather conditions,
public and firefighter safety, as well as the availability of resources.

[Prescribed Fire]{.underline}

Prescribed fire is the use of management ignited fire to achieve
specific goals and objectives. Projects may be targeted at reducing the
threat of catastrophic fire, achieving desired vegetation patterns, or
creating specific landscape conditions. In all cases, prescribed fire
should be implemented based on clearly articulated objectives and
supported through careful monitoring.

Prescribed fire applications occur at varying spatial scales based on
operational constraints and ecological needs. Prescribed fire plans,
outlining specific conditions under which projects can be implemented,
are required for all ignitions. Standards for plan development and
review are outlined in chapter 10 of RM 18.

Prescribed fire is an option for all the identified FMUs in the park.
Still the highest priority burn units tend to occur in low-elevation
forests where the historic fire regime included short return intervals
and the dominant vegetation appears well adapted to low-intensity fire.
Fire frequencies within this portion of the landscape may have departed
from historical frequencies by one or more return intervals,
representing the Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC ) values of 2 and 3.
Appropriately targeted prescribed fire will aid in moving these stands
toward desired conditions.

[Non-Fire Applications]{.underline}

A significant portion of the risk associated with the management of fire
is related to the amount and arrangement of organic fuels. In some
cases, significant risk can be mitigated by reducing or changing the
amount and arrangement of fuels on the landscape. Non-fire applications
can be broadly characterized in two groups: Mechanical and Manual
treatments. In all cases, the focus of the treatments is to alter the
arrangement of fuels and reduce the likelihood that fire will transition
from surface fire spread to crown fire.

**Mechanical treatments** include the use of larger mechanized equipment
such as front end loaders, tub grinders, and other large equipment in
order to move and process larger material. Mechanical treatments are
only considered for developed areas of the park that are experiencing
forest health decline. In some of the developed areas, stands of old
growth mixed conifer are experiencing insect and disease damage which is
killing many large trees. For forest health and the safety of visitors,
larger trees as well as dense pole size thickets need to be removed from
these developed areas.

Material resulting from mechanical treatments will usually be removed
from the site. In some instances, material may be piled and burned on
site.

**Manual treatment** is the use of hand tools or hand operated power
tools. Manual treatments are used to cut, clear or prune herbaceous and
woody species to effectively reduce hazardous accumulations of wildland
fuels and to create defensible space near structures as well as along
prescribed fire boundaries. In the park, manual treatment could be
used 1) to remove excess woody debris from the ground; 2) to remove
"ladder" fuels, such as low limbs and brush (which could carry fire from
the forest floor into the crowns of trees); and 3) to thin dense stands
of trees, near developed areas, to reduce the horizontal continuity of
fuels.

Material resulting from manual treatments will be cast back on site,
placed into piles and burned on site or depending on size, quantity and
location, may be chipped and removed from the site.

### 3.4 Description of Fire Management Units

The park landscape has been partitioned into two Fire Management Units
(FMU) based on location relative to jurisdictional boundaries,
management designations and desired outcomes. As the name implies, the
Boundary FMU follows the north, west and south boundaries of the park.
The Wildland Fire Use FMU is made up of the interior portion of the park
and is closely aligned with designated wilderness. The long term
treatment strategies for each of the FMU's are described in Table 3-1.
The two units are very similar in terms of vegetation patterns, fuel
loading and topography. The distinction between the two units lies in
the degree to which various treatment strategies can be effectively
utilized. Prescribed fire treatments are the focus along the park
boundary in an effort to create a zone in which fire spread can be more
easily managed. Based on a Fire Return Interval Departure (FRID)
analysis, this also appears to be the area of the park with the highest
need for fire applications. Successful implementation of fuels
treatments within the Boundary FMU will also allow the park staff to
take advantage of the frequent natural ignitions occurring within the
Wildland Fire Use FMU. All available treatment types are proposed in
each FMU, with the exception of mechanical treatments which are not
possible in designated wilderness. This landscape management approach
should result in improved ecological conditions and increased program
efficiency.

Table 3-1-Fire Management Unit Descriptions

+----------+------+-------+--------+------+--------+--------+-------+
| Fire     | T    |       | Prop   | L    |        |        |       |
|          | otal |       | ortion | ong- |        |        |       |
| Ma       | A    |       | of FMU | term |        |        |       |
| nagement | cres |       | to be  | T    |        |        |       |
| Unit     | in   |       | T      | reat |        |        |       |
|          | FMU  |       | reated | ment |        |        |       |
| (FMU)    |      |       | over   | Sche |        |        |       |
|          |      |       | 10     | dule |        |        |       |
|          |      |       | Years  | Sum  |        |        |       |
|          |      |       |        | mary |        |        |       |
+----------+------+-------+--------+------+--------+--------+-------+
|          |      | No    |        | Wild | Pres   | Manual | Mech. |
|          |      | n-Bur |        | land | cribed | Trea   |       |
|          |      | nable |        |      | Fire   | tments | Treat |
|          |      | Acres |        | Fire |        |        | ments |
|          |      |       |        | Use  |        |        |       |
+----------+------+-------+--------+------+--------+--------+-------+
| Boundary | 32   | 284   | 62%    | 1    | 18,000 | 800    | 150   |
|          | ,023 |       |        | ,000 |        |        |       |
+----------+------+-------+--------+------+--------+--------+-------+
| Wildland | 74   | 8068  | 46%    | 20   | 14,000 | 200    | 0     |
|          | ,349 |       |        | ,000 |        |        |       |
| Fire Use |      |       |        |      |        |        |       |
+----------+------+-------+--------+------+--------+--------+-------+
| Total    | 106  | 8352  | 51%    | 21   | 32,000 | 1000   | 150   |
|          | ,372 |       |        | ,000 |        |        |       |
+----------+------+-------+--------+------+--------+--------+-------+
| Pr       |      |       |        | [    | 30%    | \<2%   | \<1%  |
| oportion |      |       |        | ]{.m |        |        |       |
| of Park  |      |       |        | ark} |        |        |       |
| Area     |      |       |        |      |        |        |       |
| Treated  |      |       |        | 20%  |        |        |       |
| by Each  |      |       |        |      |        |        |       |
| Fire     |      |       |        |      |        |        |       |
| Ma       |      |       |        |      |        |        |       |
| nagement |      |       |        |      |        |        |       |
| Strategy |      |       |        |      |        |        |       |
+----------+------+-------+--------+------+--------+--------+-------+

^1^ Yearly amounts may vary according to weather and other
planning/implementation considerations.

![](media/image4.jpeg){width="6.489583333333333in"
height="8.758333333333333in"}

[Features Common to all Fire Management Units]{.underline}

[Fire Season]{.underline}

The typical fire season for the park occurs between July 10 and October
15 of each year, based on an historical fire weather analysis with data
collected from the Manzanita Lake and Chester Remote Area Weather
Station (RAWS) and individual fire incident reports dating back to 1961.
The highest incidence of lightening occurs during this time period,
along with the highest mean daytime temperatures and lowest mean daytime
relative humidities. Before and after these dates, fuel moistures and
persistent snow-pack reduce the burning indices to near zero.

[Fuel Characteristics]{.underline}

Within the timber litter fuel complex, most of the park's fuel types
would fall under Fire Behavior Prediction System (FBPS) fuel model 8
(1978 National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS) fuel model H)
consisting of closed canopy stands of short-needle conifer; and FBPS
fuel model 10 (1978 NFDRS fuel model G) which is short-needle conifer
stands with heavy accumulations of dead/down material. Many of these
stands are dominated by Lodgepole pine (*Pinus contorta*) and with in
stands of this nature the surface fuels often burn more readily then
typical fuel model 10 examples. There is a smaller component of FBPS
fuel model 9 (1978 NFDRS fuel model U) where there are stands dominated
by Jeffery pine (*Pinus jefferyi)*. The remainder of the landscape is
captured in FBPS fuel models 2 (1978 NFDRS fuel model C) for the open
pine stands with grass understory and FBPS fuel model 5 (1978 NFDRS fuel
model F) for areas of low shrub cover dominated by pinemat Manzanita
(*Arctostaphylos nevadensis)* or more developed montane chaparral
including Manzanita (*Arctostaphylos patula)*, snowbrush ceanothus
*(Ceanothus* velutinus), and bush chinquapin *(Castanopsis
sempervirens).* Significant areas in the park have a low occurrence of
surface fuels. Past disturbance and edaphic conditions can result in
open stands of large diameter trees with little ability to sustain
surface fire spread.

[Management Considerations]{.underline}

Lassen Volcanic National Park is a park managed for wilderness values.
All fire management activities within the designated wilderness area
will employ the lowest impact approach based upon a Minimum Requirement
and Minimum Tool Determination. All fire management activities within
the Wilderness Area will follow established Minimum Impact Suppression
Tactics (MIST) guidelines.

Access to most back country areas of the park are limited to existing
paved roads within the front country and some improved gravel roads on
the adjoining National Forests. Approximately 160 miles of recreational
trails and former fire patrol roads occur in the wilderness and
backcountry, forming a network from which fires can be accessed and
controlled.

Water sources are very limited in the park and are generally associated
with a few large lakes. A list of prohibited water sources is currently
being worked on and will be included in the revised aviation plan.
Current restrictions are limited to double dipping. Aviation resources
should not dip out of more then one water source during the same
mission. All potential water sources must be approved by the Resource
Advisor.

For some portions of the park, smoke impacts to local communities could
be a concern. Smoke management plans will be developed for all
prescribed fires and conditions monitored closely. Undesirable smoke
impacts could warrant conversion of wildland fire uses fires to
suppression fires or prescribed fires to be extinguished.

[Specific Fire Management Objectives (i.e. resource target
conditions)]{.underline}

Lassen Volcanic National Park covers approximately 311 miles of the
southernmost peaks of the Cascade Mountain range. Elevation in the park
varies from 5302' at Warner Valley to 10,456' on Lassen Peak. Most of
the park below 7874' is forested, with the distribution of conifer
species being strongly correlated with elevation (Parker 1991). Red fir
*(Abies magnifica)* and lodgepole pine *(Pinus contorta var. murrayana)*
dominate upper elevations (6890' to 7874'), whereas white fir (*A.
concolor)* and Jeffrey pine (*P. jeffreyi)* are most abundant on lower
slopes (\<6890'). Distribution of these tree species vary considerably
within individual forest types. Lodgepole pine can occur in nearly pure
stands on the lower 1/3 of slopes. Stands dominated by mature White fir
are also represented and are likely the result of specific disturbance
histories. Limited stands of mountain hemlock *(Tsuga mertensiana)*
occur along the treeline \>7874'. Table 3-2 summarizes the distribution
of common tree species by the forest types found in the park.

Other minor vegetation communities occur in the park. Montane chaparral,
in scatter stands, can be found at lower elevations and drier aspects.
Dispersed within forest communities, low stands of pinemat manzanita
connect individual stands of red fir and lodgepole pine. Seasonally wet
meadows are also common in valley bottoms, along streams and lake
margins (White et al 1995). See Figure 3.2 for a generalized vegetation
map of the park.

Table 3-2 Forest tree species of Lassen Volcanic National Park.

+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| Tree Species      | Forest  |         |            |      |         |
|                   | Types   |         |            |      |         |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
|                   | Jeffrey | White   | Lodgepole  | Red  | M       |
|                   |         |         | Pine       |      | ountain |
|                   | Pine    | Fir     |            | Fir  | Hemlock |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| *Pinus ponderosa* | \#      |         |            |      |         |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| *Calocedrus       | \#      |         |            |      |         |
| decurrens*        |         |         |            |      |         |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| *Pinus            | \#      | \#      |            |      |         |
| lambertiana*      |         |         |            |      |         |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| *Pinus Jeffreyi*  | M       | \#      |            |      |         |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| *Abies concolor*  | \#      | M       | \#         | \#   |         |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| *Pinus contorta*  |         |         | M          | \#   |         |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| *Abies magnifica* |         | \#      | \#         | M    | \#      |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| *Pinus monticola* |         | \#      |            | \#   | \#      |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| *Tsuga            |         |         | \#         | \#   | M       |
| mertensiana*      |         |         |            |      |         |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+
| *Pinus            |         |         |            |      | \#      |
| albicaulis*       |         |         |            |      |         |
+-------------------+---------+---------+------------+------+---------+

"M" = Major species present, "#" = Minor species present

![](media/image5.jpeg){width="6.75in" height="8.729166666666666in"}

The following table summarizes target conditions in terms of fuel
reductions and forest structure for each of the dominant vegetation
types. It is important to note that targets will change as management of
these areas moves from restoration to maintenance conditions. For
additional information, see the FMP chapter on Monitoring and Evaluation
(Chapter 6) or Appendix F that describes the wildland and prescribed
fire monitoring program in detail.

Table 3-3. Resource Target Conditions by Vegetation Types

+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+------------+
| **FMU   | **Fuel     | **Stand Density  | **Fuel       | *          |
| Ident   | R          | by diameter      | Load**       | *Gap/Patch |
| ifier** | eduction** | class and        |              | Size       |
|         |            | species          | **Di         | Dist       |
|         | **Goal**   | composition**    | stribution** | ribution** |
|         |            |                  |              |            |
|         | **\[r      | **\[restoration  | **(% of      | **(% of    |
|         | estoration | phase\]**        | landscape)** | la         |
|         | phase\]**  |                  |              | ndscape)** |
|         |            |                  | **\          |            |
|         |            |                  | [maintenance | **\[m      |
|         |            |                  | phase\]**    | aintenance |
|         |            |                  |              | phase\]**  |
+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+------------+
| Jeffery | 60-90%     | 20-50 TPA \> 12" | 20-40% 5-30  | 75-95%:    |
| Pine    | total fuel | dbh              | tons/acre    | .25-2.5 ac |
|         | reduction  |                  |              |            |
|         |            | \< 400 TPA 2-6"  | 20-50% 30-60 | 5-25%:     |
|         |            | dbh              | tons/acre    | 2.5-25 ac  |
|         |            |                  |              |            |
|         |            | (5-50%           | 5-20% \>60   | \<1%:      |
|         |            | pine,0-70%       | tons/acre    | 25-247 ac  |
|         |            | shrub,           |              |            |
|         |            |                  |              |            |
|         |            | 0-25%            |              |            |
|         |            | grass/sedge)     |              |            |
+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+------------+
| White   | 60-90%     | 30-80 TPA \> 12" | 1-25% 5-30   | 70-95%:    |
| Fir     | total fuel | dbh              | tons/acre    | .25-10 ac  |
|         | reduction  |                  |              |            |
|         |            | \< 600 TPA 2-6"  | 30-70% 30-60 | 5-30%:     |
|         |            | dbh              | tons/acre    | 12-25 ac   |
|         |            |                  |              |            |
|         |            | (30-70% fir      | 5-20% \>60   | \< 1%:     |
|         |            | 0-20% pine       | tons/acre    | 25-247 ac  |
|         |            |                  |              |            |
|         |            | 0-20% other)     |              |            |
+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+------------+
| Lo      | 0-35%      | Unknown density  | Not yet      | 80-99%:    |
| dgepole | total fuel |                  | developed    | 2.5-10 ac  |
| Pine    | reduction  | (40-90%          |              |            |
|         |            | pine,0-50%       |              | 1-20%:     |
|         |            | hemlock, 0-10%   |              | 12-741 ac  |
|         |            | fir)             |              |            |
|         |            |                  |              | \<1%: \>   |
|         |            |                  |              | 741 ac     |
+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+------------+
| Red Fir | 35-55%     | Unknown density  | Not yet      | 80-99%:    |
|         | total fuel |                  | developed    | .25-247 ac |
|         | reduction  | (15-60% fir,     |              |            |
|         |            | 0-30% pine 0-10% |              | 1-20%:     |
|         |            | hemlock)         |              | 247-4942   |
|         |            |                  |              | ac         |
|         |            |                  |              |            |
|         |            |                  |              | \<1%: \>   |
|         |            |                  |              | 4942 ac    |
+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+------------+
| Red     | 35-55%     | Unknown density  | Not yet      | 80-99%:    |
| Fir/    | total fuel |                  | developed    | .25-247 ac |
| Western | reduction  | (15-60% fir,     |              |            |
| White   |            | 0-30% pine 0-10% |              | 1-20%:     |
| Pine    |            | hemlock)         |              | 247-4942   |
|         |            |                  |              | ac         |
|         |            |                  |              |            |
|         |            |                  |              | \<1%: \>   |
|         |            |                  |              | 4942 ac    |
+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+------------+
| M       | 0% total   | Unknown density  | Not yet      | 80-99%:    |
| ountain | fuel       |                  | developed    | .25-247 ha |
| Hemlock | reduction  | (15-60% hemlock, |              |            |
|         |            | 0-40% fir        |              | 1-20%:     |
|         |            |                  |              | 247-4942   |
|         |            | 0-10% pine)      |              | ac         |
|         |            |                  |              |            |
|         |            |                  |              | \<1%: \>   |
|         |            |                  |              | 4942 ac    |
+---------+------------+------------------+--------------+------------+

Information used to develop the target conditions included research data
where available, historic photos and written records, and expert
opinion. These target conditions are an attempt to describe an
ecologically desirable landscape as well as providing metrics for
defining management success. They reflect our best ecological intuition,
but were clearly developed in the context of imperfect knowledge. With
the aid of monitoring data and new research, targets will be
periodically reviewed and revised when necessary. The fire management
program will be reviewed annually and treatments assessed to determine
if the landscape is progressing toward these desired future conditions.

[Native Vegetation]{.underline}

*Wet and Dry Meadows (900 ac)*

Herbaceous communities are scattered throughout the park and range from
densely vegetated, wet meadows of monocotyledonous species including
sedges *(Carex spp.),* and perennial grasses (*Agrostis thuberiana,
Deschampsia caespitosa,* and *Muhlenbergia filformis)* (Taylor 1990b);
to steep slopes or larger gaps within forested areas composed of mostly
broad-leaved dicotyledonous species such as satin lupine *(Lupinus
obtusilobus),* mule ears *(Wyethia mollis),* *Artemisia douglasiana,*
and *Alnus tenuifolia (*Pinder et al. 1997).

These communities do burn, infrequently, but are generally resistant to
fire spread. During fire season, many of these vegetation types sustain
high fuel moisture and may act as effective fire breaks. In the case of
broad-leaved herbaceous communities, fuel loads are low and exist in a
discontinuous arrangement. There appears to be little need for
management ignited fires in these community types.

*Montane Chaparral (2,000 ac)*

Pinder et al. (1997) found that most chaparral species in the park occur
below 7544' on relatively xeric sites (e.g. warmer aspects and steeper
slopes). These scattered shrub fields tend to be small in size and are
generally dominated by manzanita (*Arctostaphylos patula)*, snowbrush
ceanothus *(Ceanothus velutinus*), and bush chinquapin *(Castanopsis
sempervirens).*

Fire is an important disturbance in the montane chaparral communities
with return intervals ranging from 10-75 years. Mean Fire Return
Intervals (FRIs) tend towards the higher end of this range. Fire events
tend to burn with high severity and generally require an alignment of
strong winds and low Relative Humidity's (RH). Chaparral shrub species
tend to have well developed fire adaptations. Greenleaf manzanita for
example, is both a facultative sprouter and seeder. Many members of the
ceanothus genus are obligate seeders requiring several fire specific
cues to illicit germination. Facultative sprouting is also common among
shrub species from this community (Keeley and Keeley 1993).

Although fire plays an important role in regeneration of chaparral,
these communities can also persist for long periods in the absence of
fire events (Keeley and Fotheringham 2001). The distribution of montane
chaparral within the park, as well as its limited spatial extent,
reduces the need for extensive prescribed fire treatments. Some
chaparral communities are included within larger burn blocks within the
Boundary FMU and will be treated with prescribed fire.

*Jeffrey Pine and White Fir (23,000 ac)*

Jeffrey pine and white fir forest types are found below 6233' with
varied composition, although either species may be strongly dominant on
individual sites. Other minor cohorts include ponderosa and sugar pines
*(Pinus ponderosa and P. lambertiana)*, with occasional occurrences of
incense cedar *(Calocedrus decurrens),* red fir and western white pine
*(Pinus monticola).* The soils associated with these forest types have
significantly higher pH values and greater exchangeable basic cation
content (potassium, calcium, and magnesium) than other forests types in
the park (Parker 1991).

The mixed-conifer forests within the park have experienced significant
ecological change with alterations in fire regimes since the early
1900s. Fire exclusion has initiated a significant increase in shade
tolerant white fir. This increase density of understory trees has made
high-severity fire events more likely. Pre-settlement fire regimes, in
this vegetation type, were characterized by frequent, low severity
events of limited spatial extent. The historical mean fire return
interval is 16-30 years (range 9-38 yrs) (Taylor 2000). Alterations in
forest structure now increase the chance of fires transitioning from
surface spread to crown fire. The resulting high severity fires may have
significant impacts on recovery and initiate type conversion to some
other plant assemblages.

Fire is linked with other disturbance factors in pine-dominated forests,
most notably post-fire insect attack. Scorched trees are more likely to
be successfully attacked by western pine beetle *(Dendroctonus
brevicomis)*, mountain pine beetle *(D. ponderosae)*, red turpentine
beetle *(D. valens)*, or pine engraver beetles *(Ips spp.)*. Reduction
in tree vigor during drought is also associated with insect attack. Fire
may be helpful in the control of dwarf mistletoe infestation by pruning
dead branches and consuming low hanging brooms.

The mixed conifer forests of the park are a high priority for prescribed
fire and manual fuels treatments. Fire applications here are focused on
returning stands to target structural conditions and improving
composition of dominant tree species. Much of this forest type occurs in
the Boundary FMU and is currently captured in prescribed fire units.
Treatments here will be evaluated and adapted to assure stand conditions
are improving and negative impacts (i.e. mortality of mature trees) do
not exceed acceptable levels.

*Lodgepole Pine (14,000 ac)*

Lodgepole pine stands occur between 6234' and 7546' and are most common
on flat, valley bottom sites or lower slopes, often in margins of
meadows and lakes. In this forest type, lodgepole pine is strongly
dominant, with red and white fir and mountain hemlock occurring as a
minor associate. Climax stands of lodgepole pine do appear to exist
within the park boundary, though many stands may be seral in nature. In
these stands, given long enough fire free intervals, lodgepole may be
replaced by red fir and mountain hemlock (Agee 1993).

Lodgepole pine forests, in the park, are characterized by a
mixed-severity fire regime. A combination of low, moderate and high
severity fires occur in space and time. Most stands, in the park, show
an origin from more widespread stand replacement-type fires. In Oregon,
Stuart (1984) documented a fire free interval of 60 years and located
one stand that had been fire free for 350 years. Shorter fire return
intervals have been documented in the park, with a range of 28-54 years
(Taylor 2000). FRI may be strongly correlated with site factors and
stands bordering higher productivity forests may experience more
frequent fires.

Most Lodgepole pine stands appear to have multiple age classes (Stuart
et al 1989) generated from fire events or mountain pine beetle attacks.
Many stands appear to follow a disturbance pattern of insects, fire and
fungal pathogens. Strong winds are likely associated with the rare stand
replacement fire in the Lodgepole pine type. Mature Lodgepole pines seem
quite resistant to fire damage.

Within the park, Lodgepole pine occurs in a matrix of other forest
types, primarily red fir and red fir/western white pine stands.
Prescribed fire is planned for many of these areas to reduce fuel loads
and the density of small diameter white fir. Burning in pure Lodgepole
pine is often difficult due to the lack of fine, surface fuels. Much of
the fire spread in these stands occurs through log to log burning and
occurs over long periods of time. Still, these stands are excellent
candidates for WFU, with slow, mixed intensity fire behavior

*Red Fir (49,000 ac)*

Red fir is the most widespread forest type in the park and is a common
upper montane forest type throughout the Sierra Nevada and southern
Cascade ranges. In the park, red fir forests are found between
6522-7874' on upland flats and sloping terrain surrounding sedge meadows
and Lodgepole pine forests. In this forest type, red fir is dominant in
terms of basal area and/or stem density. Trees often grow to large
diameters and occur in relatively high densities given the size of the
individuals. It is most often found in association with western white
pine and lesser amounts of Lodgepole and Jeffrey pines, white fir and
mountain hemlock.

Red fir forests have a moderate severity fire regime, with fire
frequencies and intensities intermediate to those of other Pacific
Northwest forests (Agee 1983). Mature red fir appears relatively fire
tolerant. Determining fire return intervals for these forest types is
difficult. Many scars are grown over and true fir tends to rot easily.
Many fires burn with low intensities leaving little scaring. Still, a
range of fire frequencies of 4-127 years (mean 41 yrs) appears in the
literature. Within Lassen Volcanic National Park, typical large fire
sizes in red fir forests have been about 400 acres. Small patches of
low, moderate, and high-severity fire typically occur, with
high-severity fire often covering less than one-third of the landscape.
Old-growth stands of red fir are least likely to burn with high
severity. Although there has probably been some increase in older
patches, it is unclear from the literature if red fir stands in the park
have been affected substantially by fire exclusion over the past 80-100
years (Taylor and Halpern 1991, Taylor 2000). Recent WFU fires have
exhibited a complex mosaic of severity with low intensity fire
dominating most of the burn area.

Wind is another important disturbance factor in red fir forest (Taylor
and Halpern 1991). Due to the small scale of wind throw, there appears
to be little interaction between these events and fire. Kilgore (1971)
did note increased intensities in stands with down, heavy fuels.

Stand development patterns in red fir forests are complex. Red fir is
both fire-tolerant and shade-tolerant. These stands seem to be
persistent with or without disturbance. Several stand development
patterns are common. If a stand replacement fire occurs, scattered
mature red fir trees usually survive to provide a seed source for slow,
recolonization by red fir and other species. These stands tend to have
high levels of tree diversity. In moderate-severity patches, many mature
red firs remain and seedlings do well in the resulting partially shaded
conditions. These post fire stands tend to be more diversely structured
with multiple age classes represented. In low-severity patches,
understory trees are killed but little growing space is opened for
regeneration. Red fir reproduces slowly in small gaps where sun flecks
occur.

Most red fir forests do not appear to be experiencing major alterations
in structure and composition due to fire management policy. Although
some stands may be approaching twice the average fire return interval,
these same stands show fire-free intervals longer then those resulting
from fire exclusion. Due to the minor alterations in fire regimes, these
stands are excellent candidates for WFU. The variable severity of fire
regimes in red fir suggest most fires will behave within controllable
levels. High-severity runs will likely remain small, due to the patchy
mosaic of fuels in this landscape. Given the stochastic nature of this
forest type, no central tendency of stand age, structure or composition
would remain stable. Supporting as much fire use as is safely possible
should be the goal for this vegetation type.

*Mountain Hemlock (7,000 ac)*

Mountain hemlock stands occur from 7874 to 8530' elevation, generally on
middle to upper slopes of Lassen Peak and nearby mountains (Taylor
1990). Mountain hemlock occurs with red fir and western white pine at
lower elevations and with white bark pine *(Pinus albicaulis)* at
treeline. Mountain hemlock is usually found on nutrient-poor sites with
coarser textured soils than red fir dominated sites (Taylor 1990).

Mountain hemlock is a thin-barked species susceptible to fire damage.
Most fire events, regardless of intensity, result in stand replacement.
At lower elevations, the presence of red fir and western white pine may
denote a more mixed-severity fire regime. Almost a century of fire
exclusion has had little impact on fire behavior in mountain hemlock
forests. However, near treeline, mountain hemlock forests have increased
in density since the mid 1800's due to climate change (Taylor 1995).

Little active fire management is needed in these forest types and no
focus prescribed fire or fuels treatment is planned. WFU is certainly a
possibility, though most fires occurring at this elevation remain small
and possess little potential for large fire growth.

[Non-Native Vegetation]{.underline}

According to surveys completed in 2002, Lassen Volcanic National Park
has been invaded by at least 49 species of non-native vascular plants.
These non-native populations are found throughout the park on
approximately 10,000 acres (9% of land base) and are associated with
areas that have experienced some form of site disturbance whether
natural (e.g. soil erosion, intense fire) or human-caused (e.g.
facility, trail and road construction) (Koenig 2004). The most
wide-spread species include common plantain *(Plantago major)*,
dandelion *(Taraxacum officinale)*, and Kentucky bluegrass *(Poa
pratensis ssp. pratensis).*

The park has focused eradication efforts over the last 2-3 years on 10
species that show promise for control. These target species include:
wooly mullein *(Verbascum thapsus)*, bull thistle *(Cirsium vulgare)*,
Klamathweed *(Hypericum perforatum)*, bulbous bluegrass *(Poa bulbosa),*
smooth brome *(Bromus inermis),* and Jerusalum oak *(Chenopodium
botrys).*

It is not clear what the effect of fire management action, in the park
will be on the above listed non-native species. Monitoring data will be
used to detect change in species abundance and cover within treatment
areas. Undesirable effects will trigger review of prescriptions and the
possibility of additional research or testing.

[Rare & Sensitive Plants]{.underline}

Fire plays a role in the management and conservation of many rare and
sensitive plant species. Fire helps maintain open habitat, encourages
sexual and vegetative reproduction, and affects competing of associated
plant species. Although fire may injure or kill individual plants,
long-term effects on species may be beneficial.

There are no federal or state listed threatened and endangered plants
species in Lassen Volcanic National Park. The park is home to 24 special
status species being tracked by park botanists and the California Native
Plant Society (Koenig 2004). These species are often associated with
aquatic or alpine habitats and are unlikely to experience fire events.

[Classifying Natural Fire Regimes]{.underline}

Effective management of fire in a specific ecosystem is aided by the
characterization of reoccurring fire events. It is this repeat pattern
of fire, as opposed to single fire events, that generates landscape
characteristics and target conditions. Capturing the natural range of
variability, not the central tendency of fire regimes, is the goal of
effective landscape fire management. Fire regimes are most usefully
described by components and/or post fire effects. Fire type, frequency,
intensity, severity, timing (seasonality), size and pattern, and
predictability are key components commonly used to describe the pattern
of fire in given ecosystems. A qualitative measure of fire impacts on
biotic elements of ecosystems is also commonly used to describe fire
regimes. The following classification scheme from Brown and Smith (2000)
may be helpful in planning fire management action within the park:

-   Understory fire regime - Fires of this type apply to forests and
    woodlands. These fires are generally non-lethal to the dominant
    vegetation and do not significantly alter the structure of the
    dominant vegetation. It has been estimated that at least 80 percent
    of the aboveground vegetation survives fires of this regime.

-   Mixed severity fire regime - Fires of this type apply to forests and
    woodlands. These fires cause selective mortality in dominant
    vegetation and include both understory burning and dependent crown
    fire behavior.

-   Stand-replacement fire regime - Fires of this type apply to forests,
    woodlands, shrublands, and grasslands. These fires kill aboveground
    parts of the dominant vegetation, which significantly changes stand
    structure and possibly composition. It has been estimated that at
    least 80 percent of the dominant vegetation is either consumed or is
    killed during these fire events.

-   Non-fire regime -- These regimes have little or no occurrence of
    natural fire.

-   Ecosystems can also be placed into categories related to the
    presence or absence of fire and its influence:

-   Fire independent ecosystems -- Those ecosystems are virtually free
    from fire. Species possess no adaptations to fire; when fire occurs,
    the effects are long-lasting and recovery is slow.

-   Fire dependent ecosystems -- Fire is common and fuel conditions are
    conducive to fire spread. Plant species are adapted to fire and
    require it for survival and continuance. Post-fire recovery is
    immediate and fire exclusion can result in significant changes. An
    example of fire dependent vegetation in the park is montane
    chaparral types.

-   Fire-initiated ecosystems -- Fire is infrequent and catastrophic. It
    both terminates and initiates long-lived species. These ecosystems
    are common in temperate and boreal regions, and include some pioneer
    species that are shade intolerant. These pioneer species are
    commonly replaced during fire free intervals. Initial re-vegetation
    is rapid but post-fire recovery occurs over long periods of time.
    Examples of fire-initiated systems at the park include the Lodgepole
    pine and mountain hemlock forest types.

-   Fire-maintained ecosystems -- Fire is frequent (1 to 25 years),
    usually as surface fires. Intensity is light and crown fires are
    uncommon. Fire decreases fuel buildup and controls plant succession,
    often keeping out invading species. Fire favors faster growing trees
    with a high tolerance for fire and post-fire environments. The
    exclusion of fire from these types leads to fuel buildup and
    vegetative change, with fire intolerant species becoming more
    abundant. Fire exclusion may also significantly change the nature of
    future fire events. Examples of fire-maintained systems at the park
    include Jeffrey pine and white fir forest types.

    The historical fire regime characteristics for the major vegetation
    types found within the park are summarized in Table 3-4.
    Descriptions from the Interagency Fire Regime Condition
    Classification (FRCC) system are included as a cross-reference. More
    information on the Interagency FRCC system can be found at \<
    [http://www.frcc.gov]{.underline} \>.

![](media/image6.jpeg){width="6.75in" height="8.729166666666666in"}

Table 3-4. Historical fire regime characteristics and the Fire Regime
Classes used by the Interagency FRCC Guidebook.

+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| *           | *       | **Fire Regime**   | *       | **Fire       |
| *Vegetation | *Mean** |                   | *Fire** | Frequency    |
| Type**      |         | **                |         | &**          |
|             | **Fire  | Characteristics** | **R     |              |
| **(park     | Return  |                   | egime** | **Severity   |
| acres)**    | Int     |                   |         | Class**      |
|             | erval** |                   | **      |              |
|             |         |                   | Class** |              |
|             | **(r    |                   |         |              |
|             | ange)** |                   |         |              |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
|             | *(conso |                   | *(from  |              |
|             | lidated |                   | Hann &  |              |
|             | from    |                   | Bunnell |              |
|             | fire    |                   | 2001)*  |              |
|             | ecology |                   |         |              |
|             | litera  |                   |         |              |
|             | ture*¹) |                   |         |              |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Sedge       | Unknown | Infrequent Fire   | ?       | Unknown      |
| Meadows     |         |                   |         |              |
|             |         |                   |         |              |
| (886 ac)    |         |                   |         |              |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Montane     | (10-50) | Fields maintained | II      | 0-35 years   |
| Chaparral   |         | or cycled by      |         |              |
|             |         | frequent fire;    |         | frequent to  |
| (2,000 ac)  |         | shrubs typically  |         | less         |
|             |         | re-sprout and     |         | frequent     |
|             |         | dominate within 5 |         |              |
|             |         | years             |         | stand        |
|             |         |                   |         | replacement  |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Jeffrey     | 16      | Frequent surface  | I       | 0-35 years   |
| Pine        | years   | fires             |         |              |
|             |         |                   |         | frequent     |
| (23,000 ac) | (9-32)  | Low/Moderate      |         |              |
|             |         | severity          |         | low severity |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| White Fir   | 30      | Frequent surface  | I       | 0-35 years   |
|             | years   | fires             |         |              |
| (9,238 ac)  |         |                   |         | frequent     |
|             | (15-38) | Low/Moderate      |         |              |
|             |         | severity          |         | low severity |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Lodgepole   | 47      | Mix of            | IV      | 35-100 years |
| Pine        | years   | crown/surface     |         |              |
|             |         | fires             |         | less         |
| (14,000 ac) | (28-54) |                   |         | frequent     |
|             |         | Mixed severity    |         |              |
|             |         |                   |         | stand        |
|             |         |                   |         | replacement  |
|             |         |                   |         | or mixed     |
|             |         |                   |         | severity     |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Red Fir     | 41      | Mix of            | III     | 35-100 years |
|             | years   | crown/surface     |         |              |
| (49,000 ac) |         | fires             |         | less         |
|             | (4-127) |                   |         | frequent     |
|             |         | Mixed severity    |         |              |
|             |         |                   |         | mixed        |
|             |         |                   |         | severity     |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Red Fir/    | 70      | Mix of            | III     | 35-100 years |
|             | years   | crown/surface     |         |              |
| Western     |         | fires             |         | less         |
| White Pine  | (       |                   |         | frequent     |
|             | 26-109) | Mixed severity    |         |              |
| (33,158 ac) |         |                   |         | mixed        |
|             |         |                   |         | severity     |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Mountain    | 115     | Mix of            | V       | \>100 years  |
| Hemlock     | years   | crown/surface     |         |              |
|             |         | fires             |         | infrequent   |
| (7,000 ac)  |         |                   |         |              |
|             |         | High severity     |         | stand        |
|             |         |                   |         | replacement  |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+

¹ (Bekker & Taylor 2001, Taylor 1993, Taylor 1999, Taylor 2000, Taylor &
Solem 2001)

**[Fire Management Unit-1 BOUNDARY: *(32,023 acres)*]{.underline}**

The Boundary FMU consists of discontinuous areas and discrete patches
found along the park's north, south, and west boundaries. This FMU
includes the Lassen Park Road corridor that bisects the west-central
portion of the park.

This FMU is configured, in part, because the administrative boundary of
Lassen Volcanic National Park does not coincide with natural barriers to
fire. Fires originating in the park could cross administrative
boundaries if left unchecked and fires occurring in neighboring
jurisdiction could spread into the park. Wildland Fire Use is
particularly complex in this FMU, as the adjacent Forests may not
consider these fires desirable. Still, opportunities do exist to allow
prescribed fires and some wildland fires to cross boundaries.

All fires within this FMU will be evaluated for the appropriate
management response. Restoring target conditions and reducing fuel loads
are the primary management goals for this FMU. The risk of undesirable
fire impacts or the chance of a fire leaving the park is sufficient to
make suppression the default strategy. Wildland Fire Use will only be
considered in this FMU when:

-   The fire has obvious barriers to spread

-   Fire movement is into the WFU unit and not towards developed areas
    or out of park.

-   When the fire happens late enough in the season where analysis shows
    limited fire movement, or when environmental factors (weather,
    fuels, and topography) suggest no problematic fire behavior.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   There is coordination with the neighboring Lassen National Forest.

    All management strategies are allowed in this FMU including:
    wildland fire suppression, prescribed fire, limited wildland fire
    use and mechanical treatments. However, prescribed fire and manual/
    mechanical treatments will be the primary strategies used for hazard
    fuels reduction and restoration in this FMU.

[Physical and Biotic Characteristics]{.underline}

The boundary of this FMU follows the jurisdictional boundary of the park
and contains all the major vegetation types listed above. This FMU is
shown in grey on the accompanying FMU map (See Figure 3.4) and comprises
32,023 acres or 30% of the park's total landbase. The northern portion
of the Boundary FMU contains more of the parks pure Jeffery pine and
mixed conifer stands. This FMU also contains some of the more extensive
stands of montane chaparral.

[Wildland Fire Management Situation Summary]{.underline}

Prescribed Fire and Non-Fire Applications such as manual thinning are
the most appropriate management options for this FMU, although limited
fire use is also a possibility. Fire regimes in this FMU have been
significantly altered from their historical range. The risk of losing
key ecosystem components, due to inappropriate fire events or transition
to certain seral states, is high. Fire frequencies have departed from
historic patterns, resulting in possible changes to one or more of the
following: fire type, fire size, intensity, severity, and landscape
patterns. Some stands in this FMU need aggressive amounts of restoration
(manual treatments) prior to the reintroduction of fire.

![](media/image7.jpeg){width="6.75in" height="8.729166666666666in"}

**Fire Management Unit-2 WILDLAND FIRE USE *(74,349 acres)***

The Wildland Fire Use FMU is located in the center of the park, interior
to the Boundary FMU. Most of this FMU is designated wilderness. The edge
of this FMU does align with the eastern boundary of the park and the
adjacent Caribou Wilderness in Lassen National Forest.

[Physical and Biotic Characteristics]{.underline}

The boundaries of the Wildland Fire Use FMU closely aligned with
designated wilderness within the park and also on the neighboring Lassen
National Forest. This FMU is shown in stripes on the accompanying FMU
map (See Figure 3.4) and comprises 74,349 acres or 70% of the park's
total landbase. This FMU contains much of the red fir dominated forest
types as well as significant Lodgepole pine stands. The Wildland Fire
Use FMU also captures the majority of the non-burnable portions of the
park. Most fire regimes components in this FMU are within a historical
range and the risk of losing key ecosystem components are low.

[Wildland Fire Management Situation Summary]{.underline}

Wildland fire use is the dominant strategy, although significant
prescribed fire acres are also planned. Wildland fire use would be
implemented when a naturally ignited fire occurs under favorable
environmental and spatial conditions, generating desirable effects for
the life of the fire. If a wildland fire use fire does not continue to
meet resource objectives, the appropriate suppression response would be
employed.

All naturally occurring fires will be evaluated for their potential to
accomplish resource objectives through the Wildland Fire Implementation
Plan (WFIP) process. Up to 27% of the acres in this FMU would be treated
using managed wildland fire (up to 20,000 acres) over the next 10-year
treatment period. This proportion of managed wildland fire takes into
account an objective of managing at least one wildland fire per season
based on historical mean fire sizes of 1100 acres (range 100-3800 acres)
as reported by Taylor (2000). Up to 14,000 acres would be treated with
prescribed fire to meet resource management objectives. The primary
purpose of prescribed fire in this FMU is to create defensible wildland
fire use boundaries.

Prescribed fire and Non-Fire Applications, such as manual thinning, may
be desirable options for protecting specific resource values by reducing
fuel buildup and modifying forest structure to reduce fire intensities
if ignitions do occur.

##### **CHAPTER 4 -- WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM COMPONENTS**

### 4.1 Wildland Fire Management Program Components

[General Management Considerations]{.underline}

Lassen Volcanic National Park will manage wildland fire commensurate
with the fire management goals and objectives outlined in Chapter 3. In
order to accomplish these goals and objectives, park management will
utilize five primary tools:

1.  Preparedness Actions (these actions are usually described within the
    "suppression" section. Preparedness is felt to be a stand alone tool
    in the park as these actions prepare the fire organization for ALL
    of the following tools.)

2.  Suppression

3.  Wildland Fire Use (WFU)

4.  Prescribed Fire

5.  Non-fire Applications (Manual/Mechanical)

These tools give fire managers a variety of options when choosing the
*appropriate management response* for different situations. While all of
the tools are allowed in both Fire Management Units, certain tools may
be more ecologically or socially acceptable based upon that unit's
values, hazards, and risks given the time of year.

This chapter will begin by describing management's response to wildland
fire and how Suppression and Wildland Fire Use (management tools 1 and
2) are implemented. This chapter will then describe the planned
management tools of Prescribed Fire, Mechanical and Manual Treatments
(management tools 3, 4 and 5).

### 4.2 General Implementation Procedures

All wildland fires will be assessed individually by preparing the
appropriate level of a *Wildland Fire Implementation Plan* (WFIP). From
this plan, the *appropriate management response* will be chosen. The
procedures that will be followed are outlined in Chapter 4 of the
*Wildland and Prescribed Fire Management Policy Implementation
Procedures Reference Guide.* Assessment includes data gathering and
situation analysis (i.e. internal and external values which are enhanced
or require protection, management objectives, safety, climatology and
weather, fuel conditions, and fire behavior). The *appropriate
management response* ranges from monitoring with minimal on-the-ground
disturbance to intense suppression actions on all perimeters of the
fire. The response may vary from fire to fire and even between different
sections of the perimeter of a single fire.

When an unplanned fire occurs, the following is the process managers
will follow:

-   **Locate the fire**

-   **Size-up and determine cause.** If the fire is human caused, it is
    automatically a suppression fire.

-   **Complete a WFIP Stage I analysis** to determine the *appropriate
    management response* within two hours of on-the-ground size up. This
    analysis is described in detail in Chapter 4 of the *Wildland and
    Prescribed Fire Management Policy Implementation Procedures
    Reference Guide.* Any trained fire staff, qualified as a single
    resource boss or higher can complete the Stage 1 analysis. However,
    the Fire Management Officer, Assistant Fire Management Officer, or
    other Fire Use Manager will review for accuracy and present it to
    the Superintendent for the fire use go/no-go decision.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The *Fire Situation* is the first part of the Stage 1 analysis to be
    completed. This includes size-up information, fuels conditions,
    weather and fire behavior (current and predicted), and availability
    of resources.

-   The second part of the Stage 1 analysis is the *Decision Criteria
    Checklist.* This checklist aids the Superintendent in making the
    initial decision to manage a fire as WFU or if it should be
    suppressed.

Through the Stage 1 Analysis, a decision will be made to manage the fire
for resource benefits, or to suppress the fire. A single wildland fire
cannot be managed using both strategies.

All wildland fires will be managed according to federal policies.
Federal actions will be consistent with direction provided in RM 18, DO
60 and *Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations.*

### 4.3 Preparedness Activities

## [Definition]{.underline}

***Preparedness*** includes all preplanned actions that lead to
effective prevention of unwanted fires and the appropriate response to
all fire ignitions.

## [Training]{.underline}

The park will offer the required annual safety training for all wildland
firefighters who maintain a red card. At minimum, annual training will
consist of an 8-hour firefighter safety refresher that must include
training on fire shelter care and use. Basic firefighter training
(inclusive of S-130/190) will be provided for all employees new to
wildland fire. Qualifications for all positions will conform to minimum
standards established in the *Wildland and Prescribed Fire
Qualifications System* publication PMS-310-1. More stringent
qualifications may be imposed by the department, agency, or park as
needed.

Training needs are identified through individual development plans
between each supervisor and employee. Training offered within the park
will vary from year to year depending on the needs.

## [Fitness]{.underline}

All staff involved in firefighting will pass an annual Work Capacity
Test (WCT) and receive a physical exam as prescribed in national
guidance. Seasonals entering on duty must pass the NWCG approved WCT
within two weeks unless unusual conditions exist. The annual fitness
test has potential for firefighter injury; therefore test execution will
follow all required procedures and safeguards.

Fire staff, who are identified as primary firefighters, will participate
in an ongoing fitness program and will be provided one hour per day for
physical training as directed in RM 18.

## [Fire Prevention]{.underline}

Fire prevention is an important aspect of the parks' preparedness
activities. The park will conduct an active fire prevention program
including public messages, inspections, fire use restrictions, and
hazard abatement reduction around structures. This program will be fully
detailed in Appendix I, the *Public Information, Education and
Prevention Plan*. Currently the prevention plan is under development.

Additional prevention activities for the park will consist of prevention
signing, prevention messages, and prevention patrols, particularly
during periods of very high to extreme fire danger. A comprehensive
public information and education program is detailed in chapter 9.

## [Fire Readiness]{.underline}

Fire readiness is the year-round organized inventory and assessment of
equipment and personnel. The park has developed a summary list of all
preparedness activities by month. This comprehensive calendar of
preparedness activities is located in the Yearly Readiness Checklist
(Appendix M). As part of the readiness program all operations modules
and support personnel will be assessed annually through a readiness
review and inspection program. Also, mandatory pre- and post-season
operations preparedness and review meetings are held each spring and
fall

## [Weather]{.underline}

The park utilizes three weather stations for information and National
Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS) indices calculations. All three of
these stations are on Forest Service land and are managed by Lassen
National Forest. The park has had an intermittent station that has moved
locations several times due to damage from heavy snowfall. The park will
re-establish this station on top of Mt Harkness beginning summer of
2005.

The three stations used are:

-   Manzanita Lake Station #040609

-   Bogard Station \# 040703

-   Chester Station #040904

## [Fire Danger Determination]{.underline}

The park Fire Management Officer (FMO), Assistant Fire Management
Officer (AFMO), or Fire Business Manager (FBM) will track NFDRS fire
danger indices and plot them against historical averages. The Energy
Release Component (ERC), determined using Model G from the Manzanita
Lake station, will be used as the main fire danger indicator for the
park.

The parks daily staffing levels are driven by the Manzanita Lake
station. A complete description of the process used to ascertain the
park-wide fire danger and the staffing logic can be found in the
*Preparedness Staffing Plan* (Appendix N).

Seasonal (May through October) FireFamily+ runs for Manzanita Lake are
posted in the fire management office as an aid to seasonal comparison of
fire danger with past years. Pocket cards are also carried by park fire
fighters for the same reason.

### 

## [Preparedness Staffing Plan]{.underline}

After daily fire weather is processed and existing forecasted fire
danger conditions are determined, the park will implement preparedness
staffing as appropriate. The parks' *Preparedness Staffing Plan* insures
that adequate fire staff is on duty for periods of high fire danger. The
plan, found in Appendix N, sets guidelines to increase or decrease daily
hours worked, numbers of people on duty, etc. The plan also provides
task examples which need to be accomplished as fire danger rises.

In general, the plan calls for the following staffing:

-   Staffing Levels 1, 2, and 3: normal tours of duty and number of fire
    personnel.

-   Staffing Level 4 and 5: the fire management officer (FMO) or acting
    may authorize extended hours and increased staffing for fire crews.
    The Fire Business Manager will activate a preparedness account to
    cover the costs.

-   The Superintendent, FMO or Acting has the ability to raise the
    staffing level by one for unusual events, such as holiday weekends,
    that will increase the potential for wildland fire.

## [Pre-Attack Plan]{.underline}

A pre-attack plan is a comprehensive compilation of essential fire
management information. The pre-attack plan includes pre fire WFSA
information, draft delegation of authority, interagency agreements, and
structural protection needs. It also includes a map of critical fire
information such as potential ICP's, helispots, water sources, roads and
trails etc. The pre-attack plan is found in appendix G.

### 4.4 Wildland Fire Suppression

## [Decision from the Stage 1 WFIP]{.underline}

***Wildland fire suppression*** is the management of unplanned wildland
fires, including human and lightning ignited, to minimize threats to
people, property and resources from such fires. Suppressed wildland
fires will receive *appropriate management responses* that give
consideration to fire values, hazards, and risks. The entire fire, or
only a portion of it, may have its spread checked and extinguished
dependent upon affected ecological, cultural, or social values, and
hazards. It remains a park fire management goal to address the
protection of values and hazards pro-actively, thereby allowing for fire
use in place of wildland fire suppression whenever possible. For
example, if unnatural fuel loads exist which limit the ability to
implement fire use projects, it may be necessary to use conservative
fuels management techniques initially to restore an area to a natural
range of conditions. Once this is done, more park areas will be able to
support fire use rather than require wildland fire suppression. Once a
fire is placed into suppression status, it cannot be switched to
wildland fire use.

All fire management activities in the park will rely on tactics which
cause a minimum amount of resource damage while maintaining minimal risk
to the safety of the public, firefighters, and other personnel. Tactical
tools that are used will be chosen based on a minimum requirement /
minimum tool (MR/MT) analysis. Superintendent approval is required for
off-road use of vehicles, bulldozers, and some mechanized equipment. The
Minimum Impact Suppression Techniques (MIST) Guide can be found in
(Appendix O).

When determining suppression tactics, collateral damage to park
resources as a result of the proposed suppression action is considered.
Least cost or minimum acres burned are not the sole determining factors
in choosing tactics. Considering public and firefighter safety first,
tactics selected are those which create the least collateral damage to
park resources.

## [Range of Potential Fire Behavior]{.underline}

Fire behavior in the park varies from smoldering to running crown fires.
Potential fire behavior follows seasonality with low fire behavior
expected from spring/early summer, moderate in mid-summer, and the
potential exists for very active fire behavior late summer/fall.

Fire behavior under higher fuel moistures, less wind influence and
relatively flat terrain could exhibit a smoldering stage, whereas the
same fuels under drier, windier conditions will create a flaming fire.
The same fuels under drier environmental conditions could lead to
isolated torching and possibly some crown fire runs under conditions
with very low relative humidities and with an alignment of slope and
wind. All of the timbered landscape has the potential to exhibit extreme
fire behavior: high rates of spread and independent crown fires. All of
these conditions should be predictable and are within the normal range
of variability.

## [Initial Attack]{.underline}

If potential complexity, climatology and projected fire behavior,
natural and cultural resource effects, and relative risk indicators are
unacceptable to the agency administrator, the fire will be suppressed.
If suppression is warranted, the Stage I analysis will serve as
documentation of that decision.

The suppression response may vary from dispatching 2 firefighters or
numerous crews and aircraft to begin aggressive initial attack. All
suppression tactics will be based on current and predicted fire behavior
given the hazards and associated threats to values. Minimum Impact
Suppression Techniques (MIST) will be incorporated into all suppression
operations.

The intensity of initial attack response is based on values at risk.
Fires in, or near, developed areas where there is a high likelihood of
danger to the public or property, will receive a high level response
based on expected fire behavior. During normal conditions, Susanville
Interagency Dispatch Center (SIFC) uses a "Run Card" system to dispatch
resources based on the closest forces concept. The park is divided into
5 dispatch areas, labeled "P1-P5", and each area has a corresponding run
card. The run card has pre-planned resources to be dispatched at each
dispatch rating of "low, medium, and high". These preplanned dispatches
range from one Duty Officer and a recon aircraft for the wildland fire
use unit under a low dispatch, to an air attack, one duty officer, one
helicopter, three wildland engines and a structure department at high
dispatch.

During lightning events, SIFC will activate the lightning plan,
described in the pre-attack plan (Appendix G). During the lightning
plan, the park will activate its own fire dispatch. SIFC remains able to
dispatch large events and process resource orders, but initial dispatch
to park fires will transition to the fire management Duty Officer.

## [Confinement as an Initial Attack Strategy]{.underline}

The confinement strategy may be implemented as long as it is not used to
meet resource objectives. Confinement may be selected if it is the best
strategy option for:

-   Firefighter safety

-   Maximizes availability of critical suppression resources during
    periods of very high or extreme fire danger

-   Minimizes suppression costs

Confinement may be a strategic selection through the Wildland Fire
Situation Analysis process when the fire is expected to exceed initial
attack capability or planned management capability. When confinement is
selected as the initial action, a Wildland Fire Implementation Plan will
be prepared in stages.

## [Response Times and Staffing Needs]{.underline}

When the park wide Staffing Level is 3 or higher, fire operations
modules will have a 5-minute response time for assignments. Crews will
be equipped so that they can leave directly from a project site,
prepared for an unsupported 24-hour assignment, without having to return
to the station. If the predicted Lightning Activity Level (LAL) is III
or higher, modules may have extended daily hours at the discretion of
the Fire Management Officer. A sixth day of work may be authorized at
the discretion of the park Fire Management Officer. The hours of the
modules may be extended, and a seventh day of work may be authorized by
the park Fire Management Officer if the predicted LAL is IV or higher.

## [Restrictions for Fire Management Activities]{.underline}

The following restrictions apply to all lands within the park:

-   Aircraft operating above the park will maintain an altitude of 1500
    ft above ground level (AGL). Emergency and Special Use flights are
    approved for flights under 1500 AGL upon approval of the Aviation
    Manager and/or Superintendent, or other qualified park staff.

-   Helicopter use and landing at unimproved sites is allowed for
    emergencies or other activities approved by the Aviation Manager.
    New helispot construction is not allowed unless there is an imminent
    threat to life.

-   The decision to use aerial retardant will be made by the Duty
    Officer or an Incident Commander under a Delegation of Authority.
    Retardant use must be limited to times when the risk to life or
    property is greater than potential resource damage from the
    retardant. Retardant must be kept away from lakes and streams if at
    all possible.

-   Motorized equipment is not allowed in the unimproved and wilderness
    areas of the park without approval of the Superintendent. Chainsaw
    use is allowed as the minimum safe, effective tool for fire
    management activities within the park. Use of chainsaws is limited
    to essential use.

-   Handline construction will meet MIST standards. Where possible,
    control line locations will use existing trails and natural
    barriers. Cold trailing of the fires edge is preferred to handline
    construction.

-   Minimize disturbance to riparian areas by fire management activities
    and personnel.

-   Significant water use from lakes less than 20 acres requires
    resource advisor approval.

-   During helicopter bucket operations, only one lake may be used by
    the same bucket unless the bucket is sufficiently cleaned to prevent
    cross contamination from lake to lake (see water resource map figure
    4.1).

-   If a cultural resource is found, work will immediately be stopped so
    as not to disturb the site. If time allows, a resource advisor will
    be notified and will evaluate the site. The resource advisor will
    re-route any line construction or mitigate negative impacts to the
    site.

-   A resource advisor will be notified of all new fire starts in the
    park, and will be utilized during fire activities. Initial
    rehabilitation plans must be completed and significant progress must
    be made before incident management teams and resources are released.

![](media/image8.jpeg){width="6.75in" height="8.729166666666666in"}

[Extended Attack]{.underline}

The Fire Management Officer or Acting will regularly validate that the
fire is managed appropriately and will assess the need to complete a
*Wildland Fire Situation Analysis* (WFSA). Examples of situations that
may indicate the need for WFSA completion include: 1) not meeting
control objectives by the end of the second burning period, 2)
incrementally increasing number of resources to achieve containment
objectives, and 3) unexpected fire behavior. Completed WFSAs will allow
for the full range of strategic and tactical actions from full
suppression on all perimeters to confinement within natural barriers.

The fire will initially be managed by an Incident Commander Type 5 or 4,
(ICT5, ICT4) during initial attack. As the fire meets the above
criteria, the command of the fire will transition to an Incident
Commander Type 3 (ICT3). If the fire exceeds the capabilities of local
resources, or if the management complexity of the fire exceeds the
capabilities of these local resources, the park will manage the incident
through a delegation to a Type 2 or Type 1, Incident Management Team

When an Incident Management Team is assigned, the team will be briefed
by the Superintendent (Agency Administrator's Briefing) and current IC
or the FMO. The team will be given a written delegation of authority and
will have an Agency Administrator's Representative assigned as a staff
member to the incoming IC. The delegation of authority will provide the
IC with the Agency Administrator's priorities, specific restraints, and
other guidelines necessary to implement the Delegation of Authority (see
Appendix P for a delegation of authority example).

## [Selecting a New Wildland Fire Strategy]{.underline}

There are several reasons for selecting a new wildland fire strategy:

-   The fire is exceeding stage II or III of a WFIP

-   When the appropriate management response has not been successful.

-   Implementation of a prescribed fire is unsuccessful

-   Initial WFSA strategy is unsuccessful

A new wildland fire strategy will be developed by implementing a new
Wildland Fire Situation Analysis.

During wildland fire use, there may be isolated cases where formal
implementation of the WFSA process is not prudent or logical because a
wildland fire exceeded an established MMA. Management options in this
situation include:

-   Constrain the fire spread with available holding crews within two
    burning periods.

-   In the case of long-range spotting, treat an isolated spot generated
    by this natural process as a separate fire. Determine appropriate
    management action for this new ignition separately from the original
    wildland fire, based on criteria specific to this fire.

These provisions are outlined in the *Wildland and Prescribed Fire
Management Policy Implementation Procedures Guide*, page 50, chapter 4.

## 

## [Minimum Impact Suppression Tactics]{.underline}

The goal of MIST is to minimize fire suppression impacts on the land
while ensuring the actions taken are safe, timely and effective.
Strategies for suppression activities and tactical operations will be
planned to have the least long-term impact to the resource. All fire
management activities within the park should adhere to MIST where
possible.

## [Rehabilitation Guidelines]{.underline}

On May 5, 2003 the Department of the Interior issued an interim policy
for wildland fire Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation (ESR) in a
memorandum titled *"Wildland Fire Emergency Stabilization and
Rehabilitation Policy and Procedures".* This interim policy is to remain
in effect until a new 620 Departmental Manual (DM) Chapter 3 is issued.
The interim policy also provides direction for rewriting the DM, funding
of wildland ESR projects, and provides changes to the funding and
documentation of projects in FY 2004. An example ESR may be found in
Appendix L.

Every effort will be made to prevent excessive human-caused impacts
during a suppression effort through careful planning and supervision,
individual education and commitment, and the use of minimum impact
suppression techniques.

When rehabilitation is necessary, efforts will be initiated by the
Incident Commander while the fire is being managed and through mop-up.
If performed after the incident, the Chief of Resources Management in
conjunction with the fire management branch will designate an employee
to organize and direct rehabilitation efforts. However, it is not the
intent of ESR to stop all erosion or eradicate all non-native species
that may appear following a fire. The ESR program should focus only on
mitigating significant damage (RM18 1999).

ESR plans must be submitted to the regional office within five (5)
calendar days following control of a wildfire (RM18 1999).

If re-vegetation or seeding is required, only native plant species will
be utilized and the Park's Fire Ecologist or Plant Ecologist will be
consulted. Rehabilitation planning for each fire will be the
responsibility of the Incident Commander in consultation with the
resource advisor. Rehabilitation of fire management damage should be
performed prior to complete demobilization.

ESR is a long-term commitment to protect resources, which occurs outside
of the suppression organization.

## [Fire Management Record Keeping]{.underline}

Permanent Park Records

The following will be held as permanent historic resource records:

-   Fire reports (DI-1202, supplementary reports, ICS forms).

-   Fire weather records.

-   Historic records of the park, including photos or maps showing
    vegetative cover, etc.

-   Monthly reports or other records which document fire occurrence or
    behavior.

-   GIS or hand drawn maps or records pertinent to fire management.

## [Fire Report Records]{.underline}

Each fire within the park or any fire threatening to enter the park will
be reported immediately to the Superintendent, or designated alternate.
An ICS-209 (incident status summary) report will be accomplished twice
daily for extended fire situations. A DI-1202 (individual fire report)
will be completed for all fires that occur inside the park. The fire
reporting process is a critical element within the FirePro analysis and
must accurately reflect the fire load of the park.

The Fire Business Manager along with the IC will maintain a complete
accountability of fire costs for each fire. All human-caused wildland
fires within the park will be investigated. Any investigations involving
potential claims against the government, trespass fires, or other
illegal activities on federal lands will be immediately turned over to
the Law Enforcement Branch of Resource and Visitor Protection Division.

Completion of the Individual Fire Reports is the responsibility of the
ranking National Park Service employee on scene of the wildland fire.
These reports will be submitted to the Fire Management Officer within 48
hours after the fire is declared out. Within 10 days individual fire
reports will be entered into SACS.

### 4.5 Wildland Fire Use

## [Decision from the Stage 1 WFIP]{.underline}

***Wildland fire use*** (also referred to as *fire use*) is the
management of unplanned wildland fires, such as lightning-ignited, to
accomplish specific resource management objectives. Lightning-caused,
wildland fires will receive appropriate management responses that give
consideration to values, hazards, and risks. Fire use projects are the
preferred means for achieving resource management objectives in the
wildland fire use FMU where restoration and ecological values dominate
considerations.

Wildland fire use projects will be allowed to burn within current and
predicted weather/climatological parameters and associated fire behavior
that ensure:

1.  Fire stays within a delineated area defined in the *Wildland Fire
    Implementation Plan* (WFIP)

2.  Vegetation changes are within an accepted ecological range of values
    for the affected ecosystem

3.  No identifiable threat will occur to significant historic or
    cultural resources

4.  No identifiable threat to life or private property

5.  Cooperation with state or federal air quality guidelines for
    particulate matter.

6.  Concurrence of NPS regional staff during national preparedness level
    4 and NPS national staff concurrence at preparedness level 5.

Procedures to ensure the results listed above:

1.  Monitor weather and associated fire danger along with climatological
    comparisons to historical averages and past, known fire years.

2.  Work closely with the appropriate Air Quality Manager for the given
    county where the fire is located. Install a portable air quality
    monitoring stations at smoke sensitive sites affected by fire use
    projects.

3.  Complete adequate fire behavior spread predictions for all
    ignitions. A long-term fire behavior analyst will be used for all
    Stage III analyses.

4.  Consult with park archeologists or fire archeologists.

5.  Assign sufficient wildland firefighting resources to manage the fire
    use project. This includes operational and logistical resources for
    implementation as well as managers and decision-makers.

6.  Consult with Resource Advisor and Chief of Natural Resource
    Management.

All fire management activities in the park will rely on tactics that
minimize resource damage while maintaining the safety of the public,
firefighters, and other personnel. Tactical tools that are used will be
chosen based on a minimum requirement / minimum tool (MR/MT) analysis.

## [Unplanned Fire: What do we do?]{.underline}

All wildland fires will be assessed through the appropriate level of
WFIP analysis and the *appropriate management response* will be chosen.
The procedures that will be followed are outlined in Chapter 4 of the
*Wildland and Prescribed Fire Management Policy Implementation
Procedures Reference Guide.* . Assessment includes data gathering and
situation analysis (i.e. internal and external values which are enhanced
or require protection, management objectives, safety, climatology and
weather, fuel conditions, and fire behavior). The *appropriate
management response* ranges from monitoring with minimal on-the-ground
disturbance to intense suppression actions on some perimeters of the
fire. The response will vary from fire to fire and even along the
perimeter of a fire.

Decision criteria and risk factors to consider in the Stage I analysis
are outlined in Chapter 4 of the *Wildland and Prescribed Fire
Management Policy Implementation Procedures Reference Guide.* Parameters
requiring in-depth analysis for the park often include: coordination
with the Lassen National Forest, off-site impact of air quality,
seasonal fire danger/drought and its relation to fire spread (including
chances of fire spreading off-park into jurisdictions lacking fire use
capability), availability of resources, on-site impacts to cultural and
natural resources, and threats to human life. If it is determined that
the fire can be managed within the above constraints, then the ignition
may be appropriate to manage as a fire use project.

-   **Seek concurrence** from the Air District to manage the fire as a
    fire use project on the day the ignition is confirmed if it is a
    "no-burn" day.

-   **Choose the *appropriate management response*** based on the
    previous Stage I analysis. In this example, the decision is made to
    manage the fire for resource benefit because the agency
    administrator found the potential for complexity, climatology,
    projected fire behavior, natural and cultural resource effects, and
    relative risk indicators to be acceptable.

-   **Implement the *appropriate management response*** -- For fire use
    projects this may vary from periodic aerial reconnaissance to
    on-scene fire monitors. If the management complexity of the fire
    exceeds the capabilities of local resources, the parks will manage
    the incident through delegation to a Fire Use Incident Management
    Team (see Appendix P for a delegation of authority example).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Notify the public about the chosen management response.** Use
    contact lists and communication methods from the parks *Public
    Information, Education, and Prevention Plan.*

-   **Continue to reassess the fire situation** -- During a fire use
    project the parks must perform periodic fire assessments. The
    superintendent must continually validate that the fire is managed
    appropriately and will assess if there is a need for a more detailed
    Stage II or III WFIP analysis, or convert the fire to a wildland
    fire suppression action. The frequency of the periodic fire
    assessment will be indicated on the signature page of the 'Periodic
    First Assessment' form attached to the WFIP. Signature frequency can
    range from daily (high complexity, high-risk fires) to weekly (low
    complexity, low risk fires). If the periodic assessment indicates
    that the fire can no longer be successfully managed for resource
    benefit, a Wildland Fire Situation Analysis (WFSA) will be prepared
    to analyze and document changes in fire management strategy. The
    WFSA format is also contained in the *Wildland and Prescribed Fire
    Management Policy Implementation Procedures Reference Guide.*

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Manage the fire until declared out** according to monitoring
    intensity and frequency guidelines indicated in the WFIP. At the
    minimum, periodic ground or aerial reconnaissance will be used to
    reassess conditions and fire status. More in-depth monitoring may be
    necessary to ensure proper incident management if complexity or risk
    increases. The park will monitor for wind speed, wind direction,
    smoke plume rise and dispersal, temperature, humidity, fuel
    moisture, fire size, and fire behavior (rate of spread, direction of
    spread, intensity).

### 4.5.1 Tactical Options Managing Wildland Fire Use

## [Wildland Fire Use]{.underline} 

Wildland fire use (WFU) is the management of naturally ignited wildland
fires to accomplish specific pre-stated *\[defined\]* resource
management objectives in predefined geographic areas (NPS, et al.,
1998). One of the basic premises of managing fire is that every wildland
fire will receive an "Appropriate Management Response." Because every
fire in the wildland is different, decisions need to be made that are
appropriate for the management of each individual fire.

The Wildland Fire Implementation Plan (WFIP) is the planning and
decision document required for all wildland fires. This planning
document has three stages of implementation:

**Stage 1:** This is the initial fire assessment for all fires. This
includes the decision criteria checklist which determines whether the
fire will be managed as fire use or suppressed.

**Stage 2:** For fires continuing as WFU, this stage is for the short
term implementation actions which include; short term fire behavior
predictions and risk assessment, short term implementation actions,
complexity analysis, and a stage 3 needs assessment.

**Stage 3:** Long term implementation actions. It is anticipated that
less than 20% of all of the fires will require a stage 3 analysis which
includes a Maximum Manageable Area (MMA) definition, fire behavior
predictions, long-term risk assessment, and long term implementation
actions. While each WFU will have its own stage 1 and 2 analysis, stage
3 can include one fire or can be combined into a complex of multiple
fires. In the case of multiple fires, each fire will have its own
analysis completed concerning the probability of the fire reaching an
area of concern. Each fire within an MMA will also have its own
Management Action Points (MAP'S) for implementing various tactical
approaches.

Because of unique situations, such as the relative small size of the
park combined with unnaturally high fuel loading, Lassen Volcanic
National Park has taken the basic definition of WFU and developed five
general tactics for implementing various fire scenarios. These scenarios
were developed to enhance success in managing fires within the
boundaries of the park. In the WFIP, different tactical approaches can
be implemented individually or by combining several, depending on the
needs of the given fire. They are meant as a guide to approved tactics
within the park

Each tactical approach also takes into account the four factors involved
in a Wildland Fire Risk Assessment:

-   Implementation Risk-availability of resources, seasonal severity,
    fire objectives

-   Ecological Risk-fire regime, fire effects, condition class

-   Critical Concerns-internal/external involvement,
    social/political/economic impacts, fire duration

-   Safety-tactical complexity, threats to life and property, fire
    behavior

The following are the scenarios:

1.  Monitoring of Free Roaming WFU.

> *Scenario:* The fire is burning in a location where control concerns
> are minimal and easily mitigated, and fire behavior will produce
> desired fire effects.
>
> *Tactic:* The fire is allowed to burn freely with little or no
> on-the-ground disturbance. Fire may be monitored on site and/or from
> the air. The fire is allowed to burn unimpeded for its duration.
>
> Considerations for this tactic:

-   Resources commensurate with complexity are readily available.

-   Projected fire growth is in a naturally defensible area.

-   Seasonal severity contributes to desired fire effects.

-   Critical concerns are able to be mitigated.

-   Minimal on the ground tactics increase safety

2.  Herding the Fire.

> *Scenario:* Fire is burning towards an identified control line on a
> section of the fire while it remains free burning on other sections.
> (A control line may be a road, trail, natural feature, stream, or
> constructed handline that management has pre-identified.)
>
> *Tactic:* The fire may be allowed to burn up to but not cross this
> line, and may be allowed to burn freely on other parts of the fire. On
> the ground actions may include the use of chainsaws and hand tools for
> removing fuels while constructing handline, and improving existing
> roads and trails. Portable pumps and fire engines may also be used to
> supply water. Helicopters may be used to support holding actions with
> water drops as well as air tankers on rare occasions; however the use
> of retardant will need prior approval from the wilderness coordinator.
> Handheld firing devices such as drip torches, fire quick flares and
> fusees may be used to burn out along a control line and aerial firing
> may be used to burn out where handheld devices are impractical.
>
> Considerations for this tactic:

-   Resources commensurate with complexity are readily available.

-   Seasonal severity contributes to desired fire effects.

-   Ability to mitigate safety concerns through standard firefighting
    guidelines

-   Projected fire growth and predicted fire behavior allow for tactical
    advantage in prepping and implementing herding tactic.

-   Ability to mitigate critical concerns.

3.  Management Controlled Growth.

> *Scenario:* The fire is burning in an area that would provide resource
> benefits from the fire. The determining factor in using this tactic is
> when fire behavior predictions and fire growth simulations create
> concerns over the ability to maintain control of the fire for its
> duration. Many locations in the park that would create this scenario
> are some of the highest priority areas for getting fire back into the
> ecosystem.
>
> Another determining factor for this scenario is when predicted smoke
> impacts may be unacceptable due to the timing of large acre burning
> periods.
>
> *Tactic:* Management would identify one or more Target Burn Areas
> (TBA) within the MMA. Each TBA would have defensible boundaries,
> either constructed or existing, could be any size, and act as the
> fires progression. The development of TBA's would mimic as much as
> practical, fire growth simulations such as in FARSITE (FARSITE is a
> fire growth simulation software commonly used for planning purposes on
> wildland fires). The TBA's perimeter or entire area may be burned
> under more manageable conditions such as after rain, or periods of
> high relative humidities. After one TBA is burned and the fire spread
> is checked, the next TBA may be burned at the next opportunity. This
> could be done immediately or later in the season, all depending on
> favorable burning conditions.
>
> For mitigating smoke impacts, management could either delay fire
> spread by checking, or advancing fire spread during times of good
> smoke dispersion. Checking or advancing fire spread may not always be
> possible due to firefighter safety and potential control problems.
>
> Considerations for this tactic:

-   Resources commensurate with complexity are readily available.

-   Seasonal severity/predicted seasonal severity may produce unwanted
    fire behavior.

-   Resource benefit objectives can be met while meeting objectives of
    fire control.

-   Undesirable fire effects may be mitigated by management controlled
    ignition.

-   Many critical concerns can be mitigated through controlled ignition.

-   Ability to mitigate safety concerns is increased through proactive,
    not reactive management.

-   Threats to property or park boundary mitigated in pre planning.

4.  Management Controlled Intensity.

> *Scenario:* The fire is burning in an area that would provide resource
> benefits from the fire. The determining factor in this scenario is
> undesirable fire effects may occur due to hot burning conditions or
> the unnatural buildup of fuels. The main objective of this tactical
> strategy is mitigating the undesirable fire effects in areas that have
> missed several fire return intervals, or other areas that are in need
> of fire treatments at a lower intensity level. The goal would be that
> the next WFU in these areas would be more of a free roaming fire and
> require less aggressive management.
>
> *Tactic:* After fire growth predictions have been completed and an MMA
> has been determined, areas that may be at high risk for undesirable
> fire effects will be identified. This can be stands of similar forest
> types within the MMA, or can even be identified as an entire Target
> Burn Area.
>
> One unique aspect of this scenario is that it can be employed as a
> part of a free roaming fire, one that is being herded, and can be used
> within management controlled growth or used only as a stand alone
> tactic. The identified areas may be ignited by management when fire
> conditions are favorable for desired fire effects, such as following a
> rain shower, times of high humidities, or taking advantage of early
> season burning conditions.
>
> Considerations for this tactic:

-   Resources commensurate with complexity are readily available.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Seasonal severity/predicted seasonal severity may produce
    undesirable fire effects.

-   Resource benefit objectives can be met while meeting objectives of
    fire control.

-   Undesirable fire effects can be mitigated by management controlled
    ignition.

-   Many critical concerns can be mitigated through controlled ignition.

-   Ability to mitigate safety concerns is increased through proactive,
    not reactive management.

-   Threats to property and the park boundary are mitigated in pre
    planning.

5.  Delaying Fire Spread

> *Scenario:* Temporary extenuating circumstances (air quality concerns,
> cumulative impacts, visitor safety, national fire situation,
> seasonality, availability of fire management resources etc.) occur at
> the time of a natural ignition that would preclude immediate growth of
> a WFU fire. This scenario could also include if a portion or the
> entire perimeter of an established WFU is checked for the above
> reasons. The objective of this scenario is to take advantage of the
> potential resource benefits WFU provides, but at an appropriate time.
> Timing for allowing a WFU to burn will then be commensurate with
> favorable or improved extenuating circumstances (as listed above).
>
> *Tactic:* Fire spread on a new WFU fire would be checked at the
> closest natural barriers or by constructed "check" line. When the
> temporary extenuating conditions that warranted the checking of the
> fire spread have abated or have been mitigated, the fire will then be
> allowed to spread from where it was checked. Management would then
> have the option of re-lighting the checked edge of the fire, or
> advancing the fire spread to mimic predictions of what the fire might
> have burned had it not been checked. The WFIP process would be
> followed and a fire specific plan would be created. The analysis
> portion of this plan would model predicted growth to guide management
> on where to advance the fire.
>
> Considerations for this tactic:

-   Time is extended to obtain critical resources.

-   Fire is delayed so that seasonal severity produces desirable fire
    effects.

-   Resource benefit objectives can be retained by not suppressing a
    desired WFU.

-   Desired fire effects can be obtained by managed timing of fire.

-   Many critical concerns can be mitigated through pre-planning.

-   Ability to mitigate safety concerns are increased through proactive,
    not reactive management.

-   Threats to property and the park boundary are mitigated in pre
    planning.

## [Post-fire: What do we do?]{.underline}

-   **Rehabilitation** will follow Minimum Impact Suppression Tactic
    Guidelines if on-the-ground actions are taken to check fire spread.
    In the event a fire covers large areas, has unnaturally severe
    effects on natural or cultural resources, or causes major impacts to
    the parks developed resources (i.e. trail system) a separate *Burned
    Area Emergency Rehabilitation Plan* will be developed by the
    Resource Management and Fire Management Offices, and approved by the
    Superintendent.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Assemble monitoring data** as part of the final fire package.

-   **Review incident** when deemed appropriate by fire management
    staff, superintendent, or fire management committee.

## [Staffing Needs and Responsibilities]{.underline}

Stage 2 and 3 analyses will be completed by the FMO, AFMO or a qualified
Fire Use Manger. Additional park staff serving as subject matter experts
will be involved in planning as conditions, issues, and fire location
dictate. Examples include Senior Management Team, archeologist, wildlife
biologist, roads and trails supervisor, buildings and utilities manager,
and fire information and education specialist. Fire complexity and risk
will determine staffing needs.

The park will allow fire use at all staffing levels (1-5). All qualified
personnel identified in the individual WFIP will be available to
complete their identified tasks. The park fuels and monitoring crew will
have primary responsibility for staffing fire use fires. When the park
wide Staffing Level is 3 or higher, all park fire crews will have a
5-minute response. The fuels and monitoring crew will be equipped so
that they can leave directly from a project site without having to
return to the station. If the predicted Lightning Activity Level (LAL)
is 3 or higher, or if LALs of 3 or more have occurred within the last
five days, fire crews may have extended daily hours. A sixth day of work
may be authorized at the discretion of the park fire management officer.
The park fire management officer may authorize a seventh day of work for
the monitoring crew if the predicted LAL is 4 or higher.

All fire use projects will be managed by the appropriate level of a
qualified fire use manager, either type 1 or 2 (FUM1 or FUM2). Depending
upon tactical implementation needs, additional staff may be assigned to
the incident.

## [Documentation and Cost Tracking]{.underline}

The fire package will contain copies of all documents. The package will
include: all planning documents (WFIPs, WFSAs, and amendments for
either), delegations of authority, monitoring data and summary reports,
revalidation and certification documents, fire time reports, maps,
photos, and DOI-1202). All expenditures (personnel, aircraft, supplies,
and equipment) will be tracked and reported according to the standards
established in the Department of the Interior Individual Fire Occurrence
Form (DOI-1202). All fire use projects will have an appropriate fire
management accounting code.

It will be the responsibility of the Fire Management Officer, or his/her
incident commander on the fire to ensure fire report completion. The
report is a valuable tool as it provides a historical record of the fire
regime for the park. The DI-1202 is the basic document used by the
National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) to document a fire occurrence.

## [Special Considerations]{.underline}

The RAWS station at Manzanita Lake will be utilized for tracking ERC
values for fire use because of the long history of quality weather data
collected at this site. This data can be used in programmatic and
individual fire analyses of climatological data (i.e. FireFamily+) for
fire use projects. Additional RAWS units at Bogard, and Chester have
long history records and available for aiding decision making. A
portable RAWS will be installed at Mt Harkness starting the summer of
2005.

### 4.6 Prescribed Fire

***Prescribed fires*** are ignited by management to achieve resource
objectives, most often a combination of ecosystem restoration or
maintenance objectives and reduction of high hazard fuel loadings. These
objectives are not mutually exclusive and usually all prescribed fire
operations contain a mix of them. In certain areas of the park where
lightning-caused fires continue to be suppressed, prescribed fire may be
used to replace these suppressed natural ignitions.

Prescribed fires must be described in a prescribed fire burn plan. The
plan will contain a prescription defining goals, objectives, and
treatment methods employed to achieve the objectives.

Prescribed fire may also be used in concert with manual treatment. High
hazard fuel conditions can be reduced while meeting structural
objectives in areas immediately adjacent to infrastructure values or in
boundary areas through a mix of manual treatment and prescribed fire.
Manual treatment may be used as the primary method of reaching
structural goals while prescribed fire actually removes the hazardous
fuels.

Examples:

-   There is a hazardous accumulation of fuels adjacent to
    infrastructure values that can be mitigated with the use of
    prescribed fire. The main objective of the burn operation would be
    reducing high hazard fuels with ecosystem restoration as a secondary
    consideration.

-   There is an area that requires restoration of the ecological fire
    process. There are no infrastructure values or boundary issues. The
    main objective of the burn would be restoration of ecological
    processes. The secondary objective would be reducing high hazard
    fuels.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   There is an area that has been prescribed burned for ecosystem
    restoration. For a variety of reasons, several constraints have
    precluded fire use for ecosystem maintenance. The area has missed 1
    or 2 fire return intervals and is showing signs of high hazard fuels
    build-up, species composition shift, and increased stand density.
    The main objective of the burn would be for ecosystem maintenance
    purposes.

## [Planned Treatment - Prescribed Fire: What do we do?]{.underline}

-   **Annually update GIS data** according to fuels management
    accomplishments from the previous year.

-   **Annually identify areas** that need prescribed fire and/or manual
    treatments by evaluating values, hazards, and risks. The park
    geographic information system (GIS) is the primary data storage and
    analysis system employed to achieve this goal. Where appropriate,
    treatment across agency boundaries is encouraged and facilitated.

-   **Select treatment priorities** based upon the analysis of the
    values, hazards, and risks. Consider managerial capabilities to
    accomplish treatments given practical limitations in planning,
    operations, finance, and logistical support.

-   **Write the annual fuels treatment plan** that describes the program
    for the up-coming field season including descriptions of individual
    segment preparation and execution needs. Insert this annual plan
    into the revised *Long Term Fuels Treatment Plan,* (Appendix H).
    This document is completed each spring following consultation with
    resources management and fire staff.

-   **Complete resource surveys** as needed. This will include both
    cultural resource surveys and sensitive species surveys.

-   **Assign burn bosses to individual treatment segments.** Each burn
    boss scouts the area so that the segment burn plan can be written
    and crews can begin prep work.

-   **Complete burn plans** early enough before the burn so that the
    park fire management staff, chief ranger, chief of resources
    management and superintendent have adequate time to address any
    remaining issues associated with the planned prescribed fire.

-   **Submit the burn plan to the Air District for review.** The Air
    District has up to 30 days to review the burn plan. They are
    required to inform the park of concurrence or to request changes at
    the end of the 30-day period. []{.mark}

-   **Request Pre-Ignition Forecasting.** No more than seven days prior
    to the earliest ignition date, a request will be submitted to the
    Air District to begin long-range smoke dispersal forecasting for the
    proposed ignition. The District will provide 96, 72, 48-hour
    outlooks, and 24-hour forecasts on days leading up to the proposed
    ignition date. The District retains final go/no-go authority until
    the time of ignition.

-   **Notify the public about the annual project list**. At the
    beginning of fire season, notify local communities, media,
    businesses, agency partners, and employees about upcoming projects
    for the year.

## [Project Implementation: What do we do?]{.underline}

-   **Notify the public about the upcoming ignition.** Use contact lists
    and communication methods from chapter 9. In addition to regular
    information about project logistics, location, and objectives, use
    appropriate smoke information and recommendations.

-   **Monitor weather and fuels** against prescriptive criteria.
    Prescribed burns are ignited when weather conditions are favorable
    for dispersing smoke away from smoke sensitive areas (SSA's), or
    during conditions that dilute smoke so that impacts to SSA's do not
    exceed health standards. This will be accomplished by utilizing the
    most current and comprehensive weather forecasting information
    available for predicting smoke transport direction and concentration
    down wind. Fuel moisture is also a high priority prescription
    element that will be monitored pre-burn. Fuel moisture prescriptions
    are designed to provide the optimum balance between the need to
    moderate fire behavior, minimize undesired fire effects on other
    resource values, and minimize smoke production (drier fuels burn
    cleaner and produce less pollutants). Fuel moisture information will
    be obtained and analyzed pre-burn for all significant categories of
    fuels (litter/duff, 1-, 10-, and 1000-hour fuels) to ensure
    conformity with the prescription.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Assess effects of other park fire management workload** on
    successful outcome for the burn. Consider the cumulative air quality
    effects of the upcoming project and any fire use projects (unplanned
    but managed ignitions) that may already be burning in the park. If
    effects cannot be mitigated, postpone the planned burn. Consider
    long term burn-out periods for early season burns and if management
    can maintain constant watch on such burns until they pose no threat
    of escape. This scenario of early season burns also needs to factor
    in additional funds to watch the burn through the summer.

-   **Obtain superintendent go/no go decision** on ignition.

-   **Seek concurrence from the Air District** to proceed with ignition.

-   **Hold briefing** and review burn plan operations with burn staff.

-   **Ignite a test-fire.**

-   **Make final go/no go decision on ignition** (burn boss and
    associates).

-   **Provide interpretative information** if adjacent to visitor-use
    area.

-   **Report daily fuel treatment accomplishments** to the Air District.

-   If the fire exceeds prescription criteria, **notify the
    superintendent of the escape and initiate a *Wildland Fire Situation
    Analysis* (WFSA).**

## [Post-fire: What do we do?]{.underline}

-   **Rehabilitation** will follow Minimum Impact Suppression Techniques
    (MIST)

-   **Assemble monitoring data** as part of the final fire package.

-   **Review incident** when deemed appropriate by fire management
    staff, superintendent, or fire management committee.

-   **Report final fuel treatment accomplishments** for the project to
    the Air District.

## [Staffing Needs and Responsibilities]{.underline}

The FMO and AFMO are responsible for the implementation of the annual
fuels treatment program. They are also responsible for the development
of the annual program and associated *Long Term Fuels Treatment Plan*.
The FMO, AFMO, GIS specialist and resource managers will create the
plan. The AFMO is responsible for ensuring burn plans are completed on
time.

Each burn will be staffed by an agency-certified burn boss (appropriate
to the level required), as well as other staff necessary to conduct the
operation safely and efficiently. Individual segment burn plans will
comply with requirements described in RM-18. Individual prescribed fire
operations can last from one day to several months. Close coordination
and strong communication is required between operational overhead, the
fire information and education specialist, fire effects and research
program staff, general park staff, local air quality control district
staff, and dispatchers.

All fire management activities in the park will rely on tactics that
minimize resource damage while maintaining the safety of the public,
firefighters, and other personnel. Tactical tools that are used will be
chosen based on a minimum requirement / minimum tool analysis.

## [Documentation and Cost Tracking]{.underline}

The fire package will contain copies of all documents. The package will
include: all planning documents (burn plan and any amendments, smoke
permit, incident action plans), monitoring data and summary reports,
fire time reports, maps, photos, and DI-1202. All expenditures
(personnel, aircraft, supplies, and equipment) will be tracked and
reported according to the standards established in the Department of the
Interior Individual Fire Occurrence Form (DI-1202). All prescribed fires
will have an appropriate accounting code.

It will be the responsibility of the burn boss on the fire to ensure
fire report completion. The report is a valuable tool as it provides a
historical record of the fire regime for the park. The DI-1202 is the
basic document used by the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) to
document fire occurrence for the Department of Interior.

## [Special Considerations]{.underline}

Climatological weather data analysis is used to assess the probability
of season ending weather events as an aid in prescribed fire planning.
It is especially important to determine ignition timing for landscape
scale burns with minimal control lines due to low social value effects.
The closest weather station at a similar elevation often serves as the
representative record.

### 4.7 Non-Fire Fuel Treatment Applications (Manual and Mechanical)

## [Definition]{.underline} 

***Manual treatment*** is the use of hand tools or hand operated power
tools. Manual treatments are used to cut, clear or prune herbaceous and
woody species to effectively reduce hazardous accumulations of wildland
fuels and to create defensible space near structures, or along
prescribed fire boundaries. In the park, manual treatment could be
used 1) to remove excess woody debris from the ground; 2) to remove
"ladder" fuels, such as low limbs and brush (which could carry fire from
the forest floor into the crowns of trees); and 3) to thin dense stands
of trees, near developed areas, to reduce the horizontal continuity of
fuels.

***Mechanical treatments*** include the use of larger mechanized
equipment such as front end loaders, tub grinders, and other large
equipment in order to move and process larger material. Mechanical
treatments are only considered for developed areas of the park that are
experiencing forest health decline and have a high fire hazard. In some
of the developed areas, stands of old growth mixed conifer are
experiencing insect and disease damage which is killing many large
trees. For forest health and the safety of visitors, larger trees as
well as dense pole size thickets need to be removed from these developed
areas.

Manual and mechanical treatments may be used in concert with prescribed
fire treatment. High hazard fuel conditions can be reduced while meeting
structural objectives in areas immediately adjacent to infrastructure
values or in boundary areas through a mix of mechanical treatment and
prescribed fire. Manual and mechanical treatment can be used as the
primary method of reaching structural goals while prescribed fire
actually removes the hazardous fuels.

## [Planned Treatment -- Manual or Mechanical Treatment: What do we do?]{.underline}

-   **Annually update GIS data** according to fuels management
    accomplishments from the previous year.

-   **Annually identify areas** that need prescribed fire and/or
    manual/mechanical treatments by evaluating values, hazards, and
    risks. The parks geographic information system (GIS) is the primary
    data storage and analysis system employed to achieve this goal.
    Where appropriate, treatment across agency boundaries is encouraged
    and facilitated.

-   **Select treatment priorities** based upon the analysis of the
    values, hazards, and risks. Consider managerial capabilities to
    accomplish treatments given any limitations in planning, finance,
    and logistical support. As manual treatments often must precede
    prescribed fire treatments, out-year planning is critical.

-   **Write the annual fuels treatment plan** that describes the program
    for the up-coming field season including descriptions of individual
    segment preparation and execution needs. Insert this annual plan
    into a revised *Long Term Fuels Treatment Plan*. This document is
    completed each spring following consultation with the FMO, AFMO, GIS
    specialist, and resource management staff.

-   **Assign project leaders, contracting officers representative (COR),
    and project inspectors to individual treatments.** These leaders
    scout the area so that the segment's mechanical treatment plan, and
    scope of work (if project is contracted) can be written. All NPS
    owned structures will be protected to a reasonable extent from
    unplanned fire events by the clearance of hazardous fuels on an
    annual basis. Work will be performed by a combination of park fire
    crews, park residents, and maintenance grounds-keeping crews. In
    areas where the NPS has jurisdiction over park concessionaires and
    private property in-holdings, the NPS will require building owners
    or leasers to comply with state county and local standards.

-   **Notify the public about the annual project list**. At the
    beginning of fire season, notify local communities, media,
    businesses, agency partners, and employees about upcoming projects
    for the year.

## [Project Implementation: What do we do?]{.underline}

-   **Notify the public about the upcoming manual/mechanical project.**
    Use contact lists and communication methods from chapter 9.

-   **If contracted,** schedule a walkthrough with vendor. Project
    inspector must review project status regularly to ensure compliance
    with contract.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Monitor vegetation/fuels** against prescriptive criteria.

-   **Assess effects of other park fire management workload** on
    successful outcome for the project.

-   **Notify the public** about the planned treatment.

-   **Hold briefing** and review treatment objectives and operations
    with treatment staff.

-   **Begin implementing project.** All projects involving treatment of
    fuels adjacent to structures must comply with California Public
    Resource Code 4290.

-   **Provide interpretive information** if adjacent to visitor-use
    area.

## [Post-Project: What do we do?]{.underline}

-   **Rehabilitation** will follow Minimum Impact Suppression Techniques
    (MIST).

-   **Assemble monitoring data** as part of the final fire package.

-   **Review incident** when deemed appropriate by fire management
    staff, superintendent, or fire management committee.

## [Staffing Needs and Responsibilities]{.underline}

The FMO/AFMO is responsible for the implementation of the mechanical
treatment program. They work closely with the park fuels technician to
make sure a COR and project inspector is assigned and available
throughout the project if contracted.

All fire and fuels management activities in the park will rely on
tactics that minimize resource damage while maintaining the safety of
the public, firefighters, and other personnel. Tactical tools that are
used will be chosen based on a minimum requirement / minimum tool
(MR/MT).

### 

## [Documentation and Cost Tracking]{.underline}

The project package will contain copies of all documents. The package
will include: all planning documents (treatment plan and any amendments,
scope of work, incident action plans), monitoring data and summary
reports, personnel time reports, maps, photos, and fuels accomplishment
summary reports. All expenditures (personnel, aircraft, supplies, and
equipment) will be tracked and reported according to the standards
established in the Department of the Interior Individual Fire Occurrence
Form (DI-1202). All projects will have an appropriate accounting code.

It will be the responsibility of the Fire Management Officer, or his/her
project leader to ensure treatment report completion. The report is a
valuable tool as it provides a historical record of the fuels treatment
history for the parks. At this time DI-1202's can not be completed for
mechanical treatments. They are only completed for projects involving
fire occurrence. Fuels accomplishment reports must be input into the
Shared Application Computer System (SACS) for budgetary tracking in
FIREPRO. Guidance on the new Fire Program Analysis system will be forth
coming.

## 

## [Special Considerations]{.underline}

All attempts will be made to utilize biomass generated from
manual/mechanical treatments in areas where it can be removed from the
site without causing resource damage. In all other areas, the biomass
(or *slash*) will be piled and burned on site following the "Park Wide
Pile Burn Plan" on file in the Fire Management Office.

##### 

##### **CHAPTER 5 -- ORGANIZATIONAL AND BUDGETARY PARAMETERS**

### 5.1 Description of Organization

The Fire Management Program at Lassen Volcanic National Park is a branch
within the Division of Visitor and Resource Protection and is supervised
by the Chief Ranger. The current Fire Management organization includes
eight permanent-full-time or subject-to-furlough employees. These
include: Fire Management Officer (FMO), Assistant Fire Management
Officer (AFMO), Fire Business Manager (FBM), Fire Information Officer
(FIO), Engine Captain, Assistant Fire Engine Operator (AFEO), Fire Cache
Manager and Fuels Crew Supervisor. In addition to the permanent staff,
the program receives 4 suppression seasonals. Two provide staffing for
the Park's Interagency Type III engine, one for the Park's Type VI
engine and a Fire Lookout. These positions are funded for 7 pay periods
during the fire season. The program also receives funding for one Fire
Monitor for seven pay periods. Staffing for the Fuels Crew and Fire
Biological Technicians are currently being provided through Hazard and
Wildland/Urban Interface projects.

The Chief Ranger has direct supervision over the Fire Management
Officer. The FMO is responsible for supervising the AFMO, Fire Business
Manager and the Fire Information Officer. All other positions are
supervised by the AFMO (Fire Captain, AFEO, Fire Cache Manager and Fuels
Crew Supervisor). These employees receive all of their funding through
FirePro and are expected to spend a minimum of 80% of their time working
on fire related projects. The approved organizational chart is included
in Appendix Q.

There are six shared positions with in the Klamath/Cascade Network. They
include: Fire Ecologist (Crater Lake NP), Fire GIS Specialist
(Whiskeytown NRA), Fire Archeologist (Whiskeytown NRA), two Fire Effects
Monitors (Redwood NP) and Fire Information Officer (Lassen NP). With the
exception of the Fire Ecologist, who is supervised by the Terrestrial
Ecologist at CRLA, all of these positions are supervised by their home
unit FMO, with input from the Network FMOs.

The Fire Management Program maintains one Department of Interior
Vehicle, a Type 4 engine that will be replaced with a Type 6 engine
during the winter of 2005. Fire Management also maintains eight GSA
fleet vehicles. The FMO, AFMO, FIO and Manzanita Lake Fire Station have
vehicles assigned to them. All other vehicles are for transporting the
suppression and fuels crews.

[Fire Management Organization and Responsibilities]{.underline}

**Superintendent -- Mineral Headquarters**

-   Has overall responsibility for all fire management activities in the
    park

-   Is responsible for managing the program within Departmental and
    National Park Service policy and ensuring the Director's Order 18 is
    followed

-   Will ensure that a comprehensive fire management program is
    adequately planned and implemented, and the Fire Management Plan is
    reviewed annually and revised as necessary

-   Approves prescribed burn plans, WFIPS, etc

**Chief of Visitor and Resource Protection -- Mineral Headquarters**

-   Responsible to the Superintendent for managing all aspects of the
    fire management program

-   Reviews recommendations and plans submitted by the Fire Management
    Officer for preparedness and fuels management

-   Carry out fire activities called for in this plan

-   Manage wildland fire plan implementation, review, and revision

-   Approve filling vacant fire management staff positions

-   Make at least an annual inspection, with the FMO, of fire
    suppression, detection, dispatch, and training facilities and
    procedures

-   Direct the park fire suppression and preparedness program

-   Evaluate prescribed fire prescriptions

**Fire Management Officer -- Mineral Fire Station**

-   Provides comprehensive oversight for the wildland fire and aviation
    management programs

-   Coordinates the structural fire program

-   Coordinates with other Lassen Volcanic National Park divisions;
    participates in Park workgroups

-   Coordinates with the fire management staffs at PWR and other NPS
    units

-   Coordinates with interagency partners; serves on regional and
    national interagency workgroups

-   Directly supervises the Assistant Fire Management Officer, the Fire
    Information Officer, the Fire Business Manager, and jointly
    supervises the shared GIS Specialist, Fire Ecologist, and Fire
    Archeologist

**Assistant Fire Management Officer -- Mineral Fire Station**

-   Fuels program manager

-   Responsible for wildland fire readiness (initial attack
    suppression/fire use)

-   Supervisor of Fuels Tech, Engine Captain, Assistant Fire Engine
    Operator, and Cache Manager

-   Coordinates with interagency partners

**Fire Business Manager -- Mineral Fire Station**

-   Responsible for administrative operations of the program -- budget,
    payroll, travel, correspondence

-   Maintains park-wide red card qualification data base

-   Training Coordinator

-   Subject matter expert Fire Business Rules

**Fire Information Officer - Mineral Fire Station**

-   Provides year-round education on fire ecology and fire management
    activities for Lassen Volcanic National Park and Lava Beds National
    Monument

-   Provides accurate and timely incident information for local,
    regional and national incidents for fire operations and all risk
    assignments

-   Provides local communities, park residents, park permittees and park
    visitors with information on park fire safety, fire prevention,
    defensible space, and fuels management

-   Promotes interdisciplinary collaboration between fire, fuels
    management, interpretation, education, public affairs, research and
    resource management

**Fuels Technician --Mineral Fire Station**

-   Supervises field operations of fuels crew

-   Responsible for coordinating and maintaining fuel moisture tracking,
    fire management weather stations and data-loggers, fuels mapping
    plot installation, and other fire management programs as assigned

-   Lead Contracting Officer Representative (COR) for fire management
    program

-   Prepares fire monitoring, fuels mapping, and other prescribed fire
    reports

-   Assists with prescribed fire plan development

**Engine Captain -- Mineral Fire Station**

-   Responsible for a Type 6 Engine

-   Supervises engine crew of two firefighters

-   Acts as Duty Officer as needed

-   Responsible for Mineral Fire Station, including readiness and
    cleanliness

-   Park Coordinator for Fire Extinguisher/Smoke Detector Program

**Assistant Engine Operator -- Manzanita Lake Fire Station**

-   Assistant Fire Engine Operator on a Type 3 Interagency engine

-   Lead NPS employee on the Manzanita Lake interagency engine

-   Provides effective communication between the Forest and NPS
    management in regards to concerns and personnel

-   Ensures compliance with NPS policies with regard to employees and
    fire management within the park

-   Squad Boss on fuels crew after seasonal closing of Manzanita Lake
    Fire Station

**Fire Cache Manager -- Mineral Fire Station**

-   Manages fire caches at Mineral and Manzanita Lake fire stations

-   Supervises station maintenance, procurement, ordering, receiving of
    supplies, equipment issue, and fire vehicles

-   Assists with fire suppression and project work

-   Training coordinator for wildland fire training

-   Provides logistical support for wildland fire, prescribed fire, or
    other Park emergencies

### 5.2 FirePro Funding

As of 2004, FirePro continues to be the funding mechanism for Fire
Preparedness and Training at the Park level. Hazardous Fuel,
Wildland-Urban Interface and Community Assistance programs are funded
through NFPORS (National Fire Program Operations System). Over the next
two years these programs will be phased out and replaced by Fire Program
Analysis (FPA). This program will produce a budget for all federal fire
agencies on a landscape level. Currently Fire Planning Units (FPU)are
being developed. Lassen Volcanic National Park is within California FPU
2. This Planning Unit includes the Park, Lassen National Forest,
BLM-Susanville District and Plumas National Forest.

Emergency fire suppression funds will be requested through the Regional
Office for all incidents outside the Parks DPA (Dispatch Protection
Area). Accounts for local incidents may be established in house using
the FireCode provided by Susanville Dispatch Center.

Step-Up accounts will be created as conditions warrant under the
staffing plan. The FMO and FBM are responsible for tracking all
expenditure associated with these accounts and will maintain a file that
verifies the fire danger conditions or specific event that authorized
the expenditure of E11 funds. Severity requests will go through the
Regional Office with documentation from Fire Family Plus. The Regional
Office will establish a Regional account for Park Severity actions.
Comprehensive documentation must be kept on this account justifying all
expenditures.

The program receives its primary funding through four different PWE's
(Project Work Elements); Preparedness, (P11), Hazardous Fuels (H11),
Wildland/Urban Interface (W11) and Fire Effects (H14). The program also
receives funding through H12 and W12 for prescribed fires, H22 and W22
for mechanical or contract projects, H13 and W13 for compliance. A
breakout of the funding structure is shown in Table 5.1

Table 5.1 Fire Management Funding Structure

+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+
| Position           | PWE | Pay     | Comment                        |
|                    |     | Periods |                                |
+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+
| Fire Management    | P11 | 26      | Funded at GS12                 |
| Officer            |     |         |                                |
+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+
| Assistant FMO      | H11 | 26      | Funded at GS 11                |
+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+
| Fire Business      | P11 | 26      | Funded at GS 6                 |
| Manager            |     |         |                                |
+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+
| Fire Information   | H   | 13/13   | Funded at GS11                 |
| Officer            | 11/ |         |                                |
|                    | W11 |         |                                |
+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+
| Fire Cache Manager | P11 | 26      | Funded at GS7                  |
+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+
| Engine Captain     | P11 | 13      | Funded at GS7                  |
+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+
| Assistant Fire     | P11 | 13      | Funded at GS6 -- Interagency   |
| Engine Operator    |     |         | position                       |
+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+
| Fuels Crew         | H11 | 20      | Funded at GS7                  |
| Supervisor         |     |         |                                |
+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+
| Temporary          | P11 | 7       | Five suppression employees     |
| Firefighters       |     |         |                                |
|                    | H14 | 7       | One Fire Monitor               |
|                    |     |         |                                |
|                    | H   | 6-12    | Fuels Crew and Biological      |
|                    | 22/ |         | Technicians                    |
|                    | W22 |         |                                |
+--------------------+-----+---------+--------------------------------+

### 5.3 Relationship of Fire Management Organization to NPS Unit

Fire Management is a Branch within the Division of Visitor and Resource
Protection. The Branch has three main priorities which are; the
management of wildland fire and fuels, park aviation, and structure
fire. In addition, the Fire Branch also supports other Divisions based
on park-wide priorities. Due to the relative small size of the park and
staff, success for all Divisions often depends on the cooperation of all
employees.

The Fire Management Branch also supports numerous councils in the park.
Fire Management has representatives on:

Compliance Council

Safety Council

EO Council

Green Team

Board of Survey

Lassen Operations Team

Computer Workgroup

### 5.4 Interagency Coordination

Susanville Interagency Fire Center (SIFC) is an interagency dispatch
center which manages fires within Lassen, Tehama, Shasta and Plumas
Counties. It is comprised of four cooperators: Lassen National Forest,
BLM Susanville District, Lassen Volcanic National Park and Lassen-Modoc
Unit, CDF. SIFC provides all wildland fire dispatching for the park. The
park provides fairshare funding in support of the services received.
Susanville dispatches Lassen Volcanic National Park resources to initial
attack, mutual aid and support fires. The park provides daily resource
and fire status reports to Susanville for inclusion in the area resource
and fire status for the Northern California Area Command Center.

### 5.5 List of Key Interagency Contacts by Function

The park maintains close working relations with surrounding fire
agencies, including the Lassen National Forest and Susanville District
BLM.

Table 5.2 Key Fire Management Contacts

  ---------------------- -------------------------- ---------------------
  ***Position***         ***Office Location***      ***Phone Number***

                                                    

  Center Manager (BLM)   Susanville Interagency     530-257-5575
                         Fire Center                

  Center Manager (FS)    Susanville Interagency     530-257-5575
                         Fire Center                

  Forest FMO             LNF Headquarters           530-257-2151

  Forest DFMP            LNF Headquarters           530-257-2151

  DFMO                   Hat Creek Ranger Station   530-336-5521

  DFMO                   Almanor Ranger Station     530-258-2141

  DFMO                   Eagle Lake Ranger Station  530-257-4188

                                                    

  FMO (BLM)              Susanville - SIFC          530-252-5367

  AFMO (BLM)             Susanville - SIFC          530-252-5368

  DOI Rep                North Ops                  530-226-2801

                                                    

  ECC Chief (LMU)        Susanville - SIFC          530-257-8509

  ECC Chief (TGU)        Red Bluff                  530-528-5109

  DIV Chief (TGU)        Red Bluff                  530-528-5106
  ---------------------- -------------------------- ---------------------

Table 5.2 above notes the primary fire cooperators and the phone numbers
that are important to the operations of the fire management program. The
FBM and FMO maintain this information.

### 5.6 List of Fire Related Agreements

Lassen Volcanic National Park has a number of active agreements with
local, county, state and federal cooperators. These agreements are
essential to provide for a collaborated effort in the management of any
planned or unplanned incident related to the protection of life,
property and natural or cultural resources and general program support.

Most important to the purpose of this document is the Five Party
Agreement and the Manzanita Lake Interagency Engine Agreement. The Five
Party agreement is between the State of California, Office of Emergency
Services; State of California, Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection; Pacific Southwest Region, USDA Forest Service; USDI Bureau
of Land Management, California State Office; and USDI National Park
Service, Pacific West Region for effective and efficient exchange of
protection area responsibilities and emergency apparatus or personnel
(local responsibility area is not part of this agreement).

The Manzanita Lake Interagency Engine Agreement is between the USDI
National Park Service, Lassen Volcanic National Park and the USDA Forest
Service, Lassen National Forest. It describes responsibilities and
outlines the support that each agency is required to provide for
implementation of an interagency engine program.

A copy of all cooperative agreements that Lassen Volcanic National Park
is currently engaged in can be found on file in the Fire Management
office.

##### **CHAPTER 6 -- MONITORING AND EVALUATION**

### 6.1 Introduction

Wildland fire monitoring at Lassen Volcanic National Park is a critical
task assigned to the Klamath Network Fire Ecology Program. As directed
by NPS fire management policy (DO-18), a program of wildland fire
monitoring has been developed for the park that: 1) determines whether
fire and resource management objectives are being met (at both treatment
unit and landscape scales); and 2) documents consequences to fuels and
vegetation from fire management activities. This chapter summarizes the
components of the wildland fire monitoring program for Lassen Volcanic
National Park. Specific details of the monitoring program can be found
in the Lassen Volcanic National Park Wildland and Prescribed Fire
Monitoring Plan (Appendix F).

### 6.2 Purpose and Need

Recent federal policy and fire/fuels program initiatives recognize that
the programmatic use of fire is important to fire-adapted landscapes to
sustain diverse, functioning ecosystems and to prevent damage from
uncharacteristically severe fire that is likely to occur from fire
exclusion. Information about the results of fire restoration efforts
supplied by the monitoring program are useful not only to land managers,
but also to policy-makers and the general public.

Environmental and fire condition monitoring is essential baseline
information needed for effective decision making, and the proper and
timely collection and transmission of this data is important. Feedback
from the monitoring of environmental and fire conditions can directly
affect how a wildland fire is managed. During wildland fire incidents,
the park's fire managers will use this information to prioritize fires
for assignment of critical resources. For example, a wildland fire that
is being suppressed might receive resources more quickly if the
information relayed indicates that the fire is about to spread into a
different fuel type that will result in a higher resistance to control.
For WFU projects, the environmental and fire conditions information will
be used to help determine the level of monitoring needed for each fire.

A vegetation and fuels monitoring program will help determine whether
specific fuel reduction and structural restoration objectives are
sufficiently met to accomplish prescribed and wildland fire use program
goals. The monitoring program provides a consistent and reliable method
of documenting the prescribed fire program's achievements. Additional
analysis can also be used to determine if any unexpected consequences of
fire and fuel treatments are occurring. If objectives are not met,
managers must determine whether management actions need to be adjusted
in order to attain objectives, or if management objectives need to be
revised given the current situation.

### 6.3 Wildland Fire Monitoring Framework

The NPS Fire Monitoring Handbook (NPS 2001) identifies four monitoring
levels to guide fire effects monitoring efforts as summarized in Table
6-1 below:

Table 6-1. NPS Fire Monitoring Handbook - Minimum Recommended Standards.

+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Monitoring Level           | Minimum Recommended Monitoring          |
|                            | Standards                               |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Level 1 -- Reconnaissance  | Fire cause, location, size, fuel and    |
|                            | vegetation types, relative fire         |
|                            | activity, potential for spread, current |
|                            | and forecasted weather, resource or     |
|                            | safety threats and constraints, and     |
|                            | smoke volume and movement.              |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Level 2 -- Fire Conditions | Fire monitoring period, ambient         |
|                            | conditions -- topographic and fire      |
|                            | weather, fuel model, fire               |
|                            | characteristics, and smoke              |
|                            | characteristics                         |
|                            |                                         |
|                            | .                                       |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Level 3 -- Immediate Post  | Fuel reduction, burn severity,          |
| Fire Effects               | vegetative change or other objective    |
|                            | dependent variables within 1 to 5 years |
|                            | post-burn.                              |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Level 4 -- Long-term       | Continued monitoring of Level 3         |
| Change                     | variables to measure trends and change  |
|                            | over time.                              |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+

### 6.3.1 Use of Monitoring Levels 1 and 2

The first two monitoring levels provide information to guide fire
management strategies for both wildland and prescribed fires.

[Monitoring Goal:]{.underline} Environmental monitoring and fire
observations provide the baseline information needed for decision-making
before, during, and after fire events.

[Monitoring Objectives:]{.underline} Collect information on
environmental conditions (current and forecasted weather, and fuel
models) and fire conditions (name, location, slope, aspect, spread,
intensity, smoke transport and dispersal) for all wildland and
prescribed fires. Use the information collected in a timely manner to
adapt to changing conditions and successfully manage each fire.

### 6.3.2 Use of Monitoring Levels 3 and 4

Monitoring levels 3 and 4 describe short- and long-term monitoring of
the effects of fire on fuels and vegetation to guide wildland fire
(prescribed and fire use) activities and can also be applied to non-fire
treatment activities aimed at reducing fuels and/or biomass including:
thinning, creation of shaded fuel-breaks, and pile burning.

[Monitoring Goal:]{.underline} Specific fire-related management
objectives guide fire program activities to achieve desired resource
target conditions. Vegetation and fuels monitoring provides information
needed to determine whether the fuels- and vegetation-related management
objectives are being met and to detect any unexpected consequences of
prescribed burning or other treatments.

[Monitoring Objectives:]{.underline} Collect information on fuels and
vegetation to determine if specific fire- and fuels-related management
objectives have been achieved. Use the information collected to
determine if progress is being made towards the desired resource target
conditions for each monitoring type as shown in Table 6-2 below.

Table 6-2 summarizes the resource target conditions for each forest type
found in the park. The desired target conditions vary with the state of
the ecosystem and the management phase (restoration versus maintenance).
The target conditions have been developed in response to the broader
resource management objectives documented in the park's current Resource
Management Plan.

The primary management objective for Natural Resources stated in the
1999 RMP is to perpetuate native plant life as part of a natural
ecosystem. Specific objectives include:

-   Plant communities that have been substantially altered by the
    effects of domestic grazing and fire suppression are restored to
    natural conditions.

-   The spread of exotic plants and exotic plant diseases are prevented.
    Existing exotic plants that have invasive characteristics are
    eliminated or controlled.

-   Rare plant species are protected from further impact and are
    monitored to detect significant changes in population trends. No
    native plant species now existing are lost from the park.

Table 6-2. Resource Target Conditions by Forest Type (Restoration and

Maintenance phases).

+-----------+---------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+
| **Forest  | **Fuel  | **Stand Density | **Fuel      | **Gap/Patch  |
| Type**    | Redu    | by diameter     | Load**      | Size         |
|           | ction** | class and       |             | Di           |
| **and**   |         | species         | **Dis       | stribution** |
|           | *       | composition**   | tribution** |              |
| **M       | *Goal** |                 |             | **(% of      |
| onitoring |         | **\[restoration | **(% of     | landscape)** |
| Type      | *       | phase\]**       | l           |              |
| Code**    | *\[rest |                 | andscape)** | **\          |
|           | oration |                 |             | [maintenance |
|           | ph      |                 | **\[        | phase\]**    |
|           | ase\]** |                 | maintenance |              |
|           |         |                 | phase\]**   |              |
+-----------+---------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+
| Jeffrey   | 30-80%  | 40 - 250        | \> 70% of   | 60-75%       |
| Pine      | re      | trees/ac all    | area is     | 0.25-2.5ac   |
|           | duction | sizes 10 - 80   | 2-10 tons   | 10-25%       |
| (13,739   | in      | trees/ac ≥ 31.5 | per ac      | 2.5-25.0 ac  |
| ac)       | total   | in              |             |              |
|           | dead    |                 |             | 1-5% 15-1247 |
|           | fuel    | (60-90% pine,   |             | ac           |
|           | load    | 10-30% other)   |             |              |
|           |         |                 |             | 0% 247-1483  |
|           |         |                 |             | ac           |
+-----------+---------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+
| White Fir | 60-75%  | 50 - 300        | \> 70% of   | 60-75%       |
|           | re      | trees/ac all    | area is     | 0.25-2.5ac   |
| (9,238    | duction | sizes           | 10-30 tons  | 10-25%       |
| ac)       | in      |                 | per ac      | 2.5-25.0 ac  |
|           | total   | 10 - 80         |             |              |
|           | dead    | trees/ac ≥ 31.5 |             | 1-5% 15-1247 |
|           | fuel    | in              |             | ac           |
|           | load    |                 |             |              |
|           |         | (40-60% fir,    |             | 0% 247-1483  |
|           |         | 15-40% pine,    |             | ac           |
|           |         |                 |             |              |
|           |         | 0-20% other)    |             |              |
+-----------+---------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+
| Lodgepole | 35-55%  | Unknown density | To be       | To be        |
| Pine      | re      |                 | determined  | determined   |
|           | duction | (80-90% pine,   |             |              |
| (13,389   | in      | 0-10% fir,      |             |              |
| ac)       | total   |                 |             |              |
|           | dead    | 0-10% hemlock)  |             |              |
|           | fuel    |                 |             |              |
|           | load    |                 |             |              |
+-----------+---------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+
| Red Fir/  | 60-75%  | 60 - 350        | To be       | To be        |
|           | re      | trees/ac all    | determined  | determined   |
| W. White  | duction | sizes           |             |              |
| Pine      | in      |                 |             |              |
|           | total   | 10 -100         |             |              |
| (47,827   | dead    | trees/ha ≥ 31.5 |             |              |
| ac)       | fuel    | in              |             |              |
|           | load    |                 |             |              |
|           |         | (30-70% fir,    |             |              |
|           |         | 20-50% pine     |             |              |
|           |         |                 |             |              |
|           |         | 0-20% other)    |             |              |
+-----------+---------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+
| Mtn.      | 35-55%  | Unknown density | To be       | To be        |
| Hemlock   |         |                 | determined  | determined   |
|           | re      | (15-60%         |             |              |
| (7,073    | duction | hemlock, 0-40%  |             |              |
| ac)       | in      | fir, 0-10%      |             |              |
|           | total   | pine)           |             |              |
|           | dead    |                 |             |              |
|           | fuel    |                 |             |              |
|           | load    |                 |             |              |
+-----------+---------+-----------------+-------------+--------------+

### 6.4 Monitoring Design

The following sections summarize when, where and how monitoring data
will be collected for each of the fire management options. Additional
information on fire regimes, resource objectives, and monitoring
objectives can be found in the Lassen Volcanic National Park Wildland
and Prescribed Fire Monitoring Plan (See Appendix F).

Table 6-3 shows the levels of monitoring that are necessary and
recommended for the fire management options available under the 2004
Fire Management Plan:

Table 6-3. Suggested Monitoring Levels by Fire Management Option.

  ------------------------- --------------- ------------ ----------------
  Monitoring Level          Fire Management              
                            Option                       

                            Wildland Fire   Prescribed   Non-Fire
                            Use             Fire         Treatment

  Level 1 -- Reconnaissance Yes             Yes          No

  Level 2 -- Fire           Yes             Yes          No
  Conditions                                             

  Level 3 -- Post Treatment Maybe           Yes          Maybe
  Effects                                                

  Level 4 -- Long-term      Maybe           Yes          Maybe
  Change                                                 
  ------------------------- --------------- ------------ ----------------

### 6.4.1 Wildland Fire Monitoring

[Field Measurements]{.underline}

The following information will be collected for all wildland fires
regardless of management strategy:

-   fire name

-   location

-   cause

-   current size

-   air temperature

-   relative humidity

-   wind speed & wind direction

-   percent slope & aspect

-   representative Fire Behavior Prediction System (FBPS) fuel model(s)
    and description

-   current fire activity (smoldering, creeping, running, torching)

-   rate of spread & direction of spread

-   flame length

-   perimeter and area growth

-   smoke transport & dispersal

All fires managed for resource benefits will have a Wildland Fire
Implementation Plan (WFIP) prepared. In addition to the data listed
above, the following information might be collected for fires managed
for resource benefits at the WFIP stage II and III:

-   canopy cover

-   tree inventory (seedling/sapling/overstory)

-   shrub inventory, non-native plant frequency

-   dead and down fuels inventory

-   photo record

[Timing of Monitoring]{.underline}

Weather conditions for all wildland fires will be monitored regularly
from the time of discovery/ignition and throughout the duration of the
fire. The monitoring frequency will be specified in the WFIP.

[Monitoring Site Locations]{.underline}

On-site environmental, weather and fire conditions for all wildland
fires will be monitored as indicated in the WFIP.

Vegetation and fuels data will be sampled at a density determined by the
Fire Ecologist in consultation with the Fire Use Manager at the time of
the incident, depending on current and predicted fire activity and
vegetation/fuel types.

All plot locations will be located using a handheld GPS. In addition,
accurate documentation of plot locations will be maintained by the Fire
Ecology Program office.

## [Sampling Design]{.underline}

Sampling unit shapes and sizes are described in the Lassen Volcanic
National Wildland and Prescribed Fire Monitoring Plan. A combination of
variable and fixed plots, and planar transects are specified to collect
information about short-term changes to vegetation.

## [Intended Data Analysis Approach]{.underline}

The following data summaries will be compiled if short-term vegetation
data is collected:

1)  tree density - grouped by species, dbh grouping, or crown code; live
    vs. dead

2)  percent crown -- calculated using tree height and height to live
    crown

3)  percent canopy cover

4)  percent shrub cover by species

5)  percent live versus dead for shrubs as a group and by species

6)  average height by shrub group and species

7)  tons per acre by fuel class

8)  percent frequency classified by herbaceous species, by native vs.
    exotic, and rare vs. common.

## [Data Sheet Examples]{.underline}

Please refer to the Lassen Volcanic National Park Wildland and
Prescribed Fire Monitoring Plan.

## [Information Management]{.underline}

Data will be entered, checked for errors, and managed by the Fire
Ecology Program staff and supervised by the Park Fire Ecologist.
Original copies of all data will be kept by the Fire Ecology Program
office and disseminated as requested.

[Responsible Party]{.underline}

The person in charge of the fire (duty officer, incident commander or
fire use manager) is responsible for ensuring that the fire monitoring
data is collected, transmitted, acted upon, and filed according to
established protocols.

The Park Fire Ecologist is responsible for collecting, analyzing, and
managing vegetation and fuels data collected on fires managed for
resource benefits.

### 6.4.2 Prescribed Fire Monitoring

[Field Measurements]{.underline}

The following information will be collected for all prescribed fires:

-   ignition type (aerial, hand)

-   planned size

-   National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS) fuel model appropriate
    index (energy release component (ERC) or burning Index (BI))

-   live fuel moisture (if applicable)

-   dead fuel moisture (1 hour, 10 hour, 100 hour, 1000 hour, litter,
    duff) as indicated in the site specific burn plan prescriptions

-   road or sensitive site visibility

-   smoke column mixing height

-   smoke transport and dispersal direction; smoke particulate data may
    be collected at smoke sensitive locations as indicated in the
    site-specific burn plan.

The field measurement protocols follow those found in the NPS Fire
Monitoring Handbook (NPS 2001) to acquire standardized information on
fire behavior and the effects of fire on fuels and vegetation.
Exceptions to the standard protocols are noted in the park-specific fire
monitoring plan. This monitoring plan offers a complete description of
the monitoring design (measurements, timing, location, objectives, etc.)
that will be used to monitor short-and long-term changes that result
from prescribed fire.

[Timing of Monitoring]{.underline}

All prescribed fires will have the environmental conditions monitored at
least two weeks in advance of the planned ignition date. On-site weather
and fire conditions monitoring will occur throughout all active ignition
phases of each fire on a schedule determined by the burn boss with
consultation from the lead Fire Effects Monitor (FEMO) assigned to the
fire.

All prescribed fires will have short-term and long-term fuels and
vegetation data collected prior to the ignition date. Timing of data
collection will be coordinated through the Fire Ecologist. Generally,
data will be collected at the peak of flowering season. Depending on
elevation and aspect, this time may vary from late May through July.

[Monitoring Site Locations]{.underline}

On-site environmental conditions for all prescribed fires will be
monitored at a representative location within the burn area, as
determined by the burn boss with consultation from the lead monitor
assigned to the burn.

Permanent sampling points for vegetation and fuels data collected as
part of the short-term and long-term monitoring effort will be located
using stratified random techniques coordinated by the Park Fire
Ecologist.

No monitoring plots will be established on slopes greater than 60%, or
on any areas identified by specialists as having significant resource
value (e.g., cultural resource isolated finds).

All plot locations will be located using a handheld GPS. In addition,
accurate documentation of plot locations will be maintained by the Fire
Ecology Program office.

## [Sampling Design]{.underline}

Sampling unit shapes and sizes are described in the Lassen Volcanic
National Park Wildland and Prescribed Fire Monitoring Plan. Pilot
sampling may be used during the establishment of plots in previously
un-sampled monitoring types.

A minimum sample size will be calculated as soon as data from the
initial 10 plots per monitoring type are available. Minimum sample size
will be calculated for each objective variable in a monitoring type,
based on pre-burn or pre-treatment data and then recalculated
post-treatment to determine final sample sizes.

## [Intended Data Analysis Approach]{.underline}

Data will be analyzed by running minimum sample size equations after all
plots have reached one-year post-burn. Tests will be performed to
determine if the data fit a normal distribution or if data are skewed.
If normal, a paired t-test will be used to determine if objectives have
been met. If the data is skewed a statistician will be consulted for
assistance.

## [Data Sheet Examples]{.underline}

See the National Fire Monitoring Handbook and/or the Lassen Volcanic
National Wildland and Prescribed Fire Monitoring Plan.

## [Information Management]{.underline}

Data will be entered, checked for errors, and managed by the Fire
Ecology Program staff and supervised by the Park Fire Ecologist.
Original copies of all data will be kept by the Fire Ecology Program
office and disseminated as requested.

[Responsible Party]{.underline}

The person in charge of the fire (burn boss) is responsible for ensuring
that the fire monitoring data is collected, transmitted, acted upon, and
filed according to established protocols.

The Lead Biological Technician (Fire Effects), in coordination with the
Park Fire Ecologist is responsible for hiring and training seasonal fire
effects monitors, collecting field data, storing data electronically,
performing data quality checks, and assisting with data analysis as
needed.

### 6.4.3 Non-Fire Treatment Monitoring

[Field Measurements]{.underline}

The following information will be collected for all non-fire treatments:

-   project name

-   location

-   treatment objectives

-   project size & project perimeter

-   treatment prescription & methods

Additional data collection may include all or some of the following,
based on treatment objectives and resource monitoring needs:

-   canopy cover

-   tree inventory (seedling/sapling/overstory)

-   shrub inventory

-   non-native plant frequency

-   dead and down fuels inventory

-   photo record

[Timing of Monitoring]{.underline}

All non-fire treatments (thinning, shaded fuel breaks, etc.) may have
short-term and long-term fuels and vegetation data collected prior to
treatment. Timing of data collection will be coordinated through the
Park Fire Ecologist. Generally, data will be collected at the peak of
flowering season. Depending on elevation and aspect, this time may vary
from late April through mid-June, or as necessary for effective project
completion.

[Monitoring Site Locations]{.underline}

Permanent sampling points for vegetation and fuels data collected as
part of the short-term and long-term monitoring effort will be located
using stratified random techniques coordinated by the Park Fire
Ecologist.

No monitoring plots will be established on slopes greater than 60%, or
on any areas identified by specialists as having significant resource
value (e.g., cultural resource isolated finds).

All plot locations will be located using a handheld GPS. In addition,
accurate documentation of plot locations will be maintained by the Fire
Ecology Program office.

## [Sampling Design]{.underline}

Sampling unit shapes and sizes are described in the Lassen Volcanic
National Park Wildland and Prescribed Fire Monitoring Plan. A
combination of variable and fixed plots, and planar transects are
specified.

## [Intended Data Analysis Approach]{.underline}

The following data summaries will be compiled for data if collected:

-   tree density - grouped by species, dbh grouping, or crown code

-   live vs. dead

-   percent crown will be calculated using tree height and height to
    live crown

-   percent canopy cover

-   percent shrub cover by species

-   percent live versus dead for shrubs as a group and by species

-   average height by shrub group and species

-   tons per acre by fuel class

-   percent frequency by herbaceous species, by native vs. exotic, and
    by rare vs. common

## [Data Sheet Examples]{.underline}

See the Lassen Volcanic National Park Wildland and Prescribed Fire
Monitoring Plan.

## [Information Management]{.underline}

Data will be entered, checked for errors, and managed by the Fire
Ecology Program staff and supervised by the Park Fire Ecologist.
Original copies of all data will be kept by the Fire Ecology Program
office and disseminated as requested.

[Responsible Party]{.underline}

The Park Fire Ecologist is responsible for collecting, analyzing, and
managing vegetation and fuels data collected on non-fire treatment
projects in coordination with the project manager.

##### **CHAPTER 7 -- FIRE RESEARCH**

### 7.1 Introduction

The primary objective of fire research in the National Park Service is
to provide information for making fire management decisions (RM 18,
chapter 15). Research plays a critical role in fire management programs
by identifying area-specific fire regimes; determining whether human
activity has affected native ecosystems and natural processes;
developing techniques for predicting fire behavior; documenting and
analyzing fire effects and other topics as needed. Research may also
provide the framework needed to justify maintaining historic scenes,
investigate techniques to create these scenes, and determine the impacts
of fire control actions and management on cultural and natural
resources.

Research serves to define the natural and aboriginal role of fire for
use in formulating and implementing such fire use actions as prescribed
fire, suppression strategies and tactics, hazard fuel abatement, and
prevention measures (RM 18, chapter 15). As the park's fire management
plan is implemented and tested, additional research will inevitably be
identified for such purposes as refining prescriptions, improving the
understanding of fire behavior and fire effects, developing monitoring
protocols, defining fire return cycles, describing fuels dynamics,
describing the impacts on cultural and natural resources, threatened and
endangered (T&E) habitat areas, etc. as well as other information needed
for operational fire and resource management.

### 7.2 Summary of Existing Fire Research

[Forest Fire Regime Studies]{.underline}

Bekker and Taylor (2001) found that plant species distribution and
abundance in the southern Cascades are influenced by both environmental
gradients and fire regimes; and that variation in fire regimes may not
be independent of environmental gradients or vegetation patterns.
Furthermore, modifications to historical fire regimes can and has led to
shifts in landscape scale vegetation patterns.

In various studies, Taylor (1990a, 1990b, 1995, 2000) found that
approximately 35% of the park's vegetation has been substantially
altered by 20^th^ century anthropogenic activities. These changes have
been wrought by excessive grazing and logging (both inside and outside
the park), fire suppression, and park management activities. Studies
from other similarly affected ecosystems in California and the west have
shown that more than a century of widespread fire suppression has
produced dense, low vigor forest stands which are highly susceptible to
insect epidemics, increased pathogen incidence, and high intensity
wildfire. An aggressive ecosystem restoration program using prescribed
and wildland fire use has been recommended to help restore natural
regimes to the park's major forest types. Changes brought about by
anthropogenic agents, however, must be clearly separated from natural
vegetation changes (such as those resulting from climatic changes) which
have been recently documented in the park's sub-alpine forest
vegetation.

The historical fire regime characteristics for the major vegetation
types found within the park are summarized in Table 7-1. Descriptions
from the Interagency Fire Regime Condition Classification (FRCC) system
are included as a cross-reference. More information on the Interagency
FRCC system can be found at \< [http://www.frcc.gov]{.underline} \>.

> Table 7-1. Historical fire regime characteristics and the Fire Regime
> Classes -Interagency FRCC Guidebook.

+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| *           | *       | **Fire Regime**   | *       | **Fire       |
| *Vegetation | *Mean** |                   | *Fire** | Frequency    |
| Type**      |         | **                |         | &**          |
|             | **Fire  | Characteristics** | **R     |              |
| **(park     | Return  |                   | egime** | **Severity   |
| acres)**    | Int     |                   |         | Class**      |
|             | erval** |                   | **      |              |
|             |         |                   | Class** |              |
|             | **(r    |                   |         |              |
|             | ange)** |                   |         |              |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
|             | (conso  |                   | (from   |              |
|             | lidated |                   | Hann &  |              |
|             | from    |                   | Bunnell |              |
|             | fire    |                   | 2001)   |              |
|             | ecology |                   |         |              |
|             | liter   |                   |         |              |
|             | ature¹) |                   |         |              |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Sedge       | Unknown | Infrequent Fire   | ?       | Unknown      |
| Meadows     |         |                   |         |              |
|             |         |                   |         |              |
| (886 ac)    |         |                   |         |              |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Montane     | Unknown | Fields maintained | II      | 0-35 years   |
| Chaparral   |         | or cycled by      |         |              |
|             | (10-50) | frequent fire;    |         | frequent     |
| (1,823 ac)  |         | shrubs typically  |         |              |
|             |         | re-sprout and     |         | stand        |
|             |         | dominate within 5 |         | replacement  |
|             |         | years             |         |              |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Jeffrey     | 16      | Frequent surface  | I       | 0-35 years   |
| Pine        | years   | fires             |         |              |
|             |         |                   |         | frequent     |
| (13,739 ac) | (9-32)  | Low/Moderate      |         |              |
|             |         | severity          |         | low severity |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| White Fir   | 30      | Frequent surface  | I       | 0-35 years   |
|             | years   | fires             |         |              |
| (9,238 ac)  |         |                   |         | frequent     |
|             | (15-38) | Low/Moderate      |         |              |
|             |         | severity          |         | low severity |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Lodgepole   | 47      | Mix of            | IV      | 35-100 years |
| Pine        | years   | crown/surface     |         |              |
|             |         | fires             |         | less         |
| (13,389 ac) | (28-54) |                   |         | frequent     |
|             |         | Mixed severity    |         |              |
|             |         |                   |         | stand        |
|             |         |                   |         | replacement  |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Red Fir     | 41      | Mix of            | III     | 35-100 years |
|             | years   | crown/surface     |         |              |
| (14,669 ac) |         | fires             |         | less         |
|             | (4-127) |                   |         | frequent     |
|             |         | Mixed severity    |         |              |
|             |         |                   |         | mixed        |
|             |         |                   |         | severity     |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Red Fir/    | 70      | Mix of            | III     | 35-100 years |
|             | years   | crown/surface     |         |              |
| Western     |         | fires             |         | less         |
| White Pine  | (       |                   |         | frequent     |
|             | 26-109) | Mixed severity    |         |              |
| (33,158 ac) |         |                   |         | mixed        |
|             |         |                   |         | severity     |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+
| Mountain    | 115     | Mix of            | V       | \>100 years  |
| Hemlock     | years   | crown/surface     |         |              |
|             |         | fires             |         | infrequent   |
| (7,073 ac)  |         |                   |         |              |
|             |         | High severity     |         | stand        |
|             |         |                   |         | replacement  |
+-------------+---------+-------------------+---------+--------------+

¹ (Bekker & Taylor 2001, Taylor 1993, Taylor 1999, Taylor 2000, Taylor &
Solem 2001)

![](media/image9.jpeg){width="6.75in" height="8.729166666666666in"}

[Effects of Litter and Duff Mound Removal on Tree Mortality]{.underline}

Another example of ongoing research at Lassen Volcanic National Park
concerns the slow decline and eventual mortality of large diameter trees
after prescribed burns. The cause of death appears to be cambium injury
from the duff mound smoldering at the base of the tree. Fire suppression
has led to much more duff than had been present historically. As a
result, wildfires or prescribed fires can ignite duff mounds that
smolder for hours around trees. This type of fire is much less dramatic,
but can cause fatal damage to trees. Consequently, attempts to use
prescribed fire to reduce fuel in areas of large diameter and old-growth
trees are causing increased mortality of these high-value trees.

Studies are being conducted to meet the local management need of knowing
how to best prescribe burn in areas of large-diameter and old-growth
trees to reduce fuels without killing desirable trees. Objectives
include evaluating the economic feasibility and biologic effectiveness
of removing duff mounds away from trees to reduce large tree mortality
and developing prescribed fire guidelines to reduce damage to
large-diameter ponderosa and Jeffery pine in areas of deep duff.

### 7.2.2 Lassen Volcanic National Park Fire Ecology Publications 

There have been numerous articles published which contain specific
references to the plant community types, fire effects to vegetation
and/or fire regimes found in or associated with Lassen Volcanic National
Park. The following is a partial list of available publications:

Agee, J.K. 1994. Fire and weather disturbances in terrestrial ecosystems
of the Eastern Cascades. 1994 Portland, OR: U.S. Depart of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. GTR-PNW-320. 52 p.

Agee, J.K. 1993. *Fire Ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests*. Island
Press, Washington, D.C.

Agee, J.K., R.H. Wakimoto, and H.H. Biswell. 1978. Fire and fuel
dynamics of Sierra Nevada conifers. Forest *Ecology and Management*
1:255-265.

Barbour, M.G. 1988. Californian upland forests and woodlands, pages
131-164. *In*: Barbour, M.G. & W.D. Billings, (eds.), North American
Terrestrial Vegetation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Beaty, R.M., and A.H. Taylor. 2001. Spatial and temporal variation of
fire regimes in a mixed conifer forest landscape, Southern Cascades,
California, USA. *Journal of Biogeography* 28:955-966.

Bekker, M. F., and A. H. Taylor. 2001. Gradient analysis of fire regimes
in montane forests of the southern Cascade Range, Thousand Lakes
Wilderness, California USA. *Plant Ecology* **155**:15--28.

Brown, J.K., and J.K. Smith (eds.). 2000. Wildland Fire in Ecosystems:
Effects of Fire on Flora. United States Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Ogden, Utah. General
Technical Report. RMRS-GTR-42-Vol. 2.

Kauffman, J.B., and R.E. Martin. 1989. Fire behavior, fuel consumption,
and forest-floor changes following prescribed understory fires in Sierra
Nevada mixed conifer forests. *Canadian Journal of Forest Research*
19:455-462.

Kilgore, B.M. 1973. The ecological role of fire in Sierran conifer
forests. *Quaternary Research* 3:496-513.

Nelson, R.L. 1971. Trees and shrubs of Lassen Volcanic National Park.
Loomis Museum Association, Mineral CA.

Parker, A.H. 1991. Forest environment relationships in Lassen Volcanic
and Yosemite National Parks, California, USA. *Journal of Biogeography*
18:543-552.

Parker, A.H. 1992. Spatial variation in diameter structures in forests
of Lassen Volcanic National Park, California. *Professional Geographer*
44:147-160*.*

Parker, A.H. 1993. Structural variation and dynamics of lodgepole pine
forests in Lassen Volcanic National Park, California. *Ann. Assoc. AM.
Geog.* 83:613-629*.*

Parker, A.H. 1994. Latitudinal gradients of coniferous tree species,
vegetation, and climate in the Sierran-Cascade axis of Northern
California. *Vegetatio* 115:145-155.

Parker, A.H. 1995. Comparative gradient structure and forest cover types
in Lassen Volcanic and Yosemite National Parks, California. *Bull.
Torrey Botanical Club* 122(1):58-68.

Pinder III, J.E., G.C. Kroh, J.D. White, and A.M.B. May. 1997. The
relationship between vegetation type and topography in Lassen Volcanic
National Park. Plant Ecology 131:17-29.

Savage, M. 1994. Anthropogenic and natural disturbance and patterns of
mortality in a mixed conifer forest in California. *Canadian Journal of
Forest Research* 24:1149-1159.

Savage, M. 1997. The role of anthropogenic influences in a mixed conifer
forest mortality episode. *Journal of Vegetation Science* 8:95-104.

Skinner, C.N., and C.R. Chang. 1996. *Fire regimes past and present.
Sierra Nevada Ecosystem project: final report to Congress, II,
Assessments and scientific basis for management options,* pp. 1041-1069.
University of California Davis, Center for Water and Wildland Resources,
Davis CA.

Taylor, A.H. 1990a. Habitat segregation and regeneration patterns of red
fir and mountain hemlock in ecotonal forests, Lassen Volcanic National
Park, California. *Physical Geography* 11:36-48.

Taylor, A.H. 1990b. Tree invasion in meadows of Lassen Volcanic National
Park, California. *Professional Geographer* 4:457-470.

Taylor, A. H. 1993. Fire history and structure of red fir (*Abies
magnifica)* forests, Swain Mountain Experimental Forest, northeastern
California. *Canadian Journal of Forest Research* 23:1672-1678.

Taylor, A.H. 1995. Forest expansion and climate change in the mountain
hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana) zone, Lassen Volcanic National Park,
California, USA. *Arctic and Alpine Research* 27:207-216.

Taylor, A.H. 2000. Fire regimes and forest changes in the mid and upper
montane forests of the southern Cascades, Lassen National Park,
California, USA*. Journal of Biogeography* 27:87-104.

Taylor, A.H. 2001. Fire regimes and stand dynamics in an upper montane
forest landscape in the southern Cascades, Caribou Wilderness,
California. *Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society* 128(4):350-361.

Taylor, A.H., and C.B. Halpern. 1991. The structure and dynamics of
*Abies magnifica* forests in the southern Cascade Range, USA. *Journal
of Vegetation Science* 2:189-200.

Taylor, A.H., and C.N. Skinner. 1998. Fire history and landscape
dynamics in a late-successional reserve, Klamath Mountains, California,
USA. *Forest Ecology and Management* 44:1-17.

Taylor, A.H., and C.N. Skinner. 2003. Spatial patterns and controls on
historical fire regimes and forest structure in the Klamath Mountains.
*Ecological Applications* 13(3):704-719.

White, J.D., G.C. Kroh, and J.E. Pinder III. 1995. Mapping forest
species at Lassen Volcanic National Park, California using Landsat
Thematic Mapper data and a geographical information system.
Photogrammetric Eng. & Remote Sensing 61:299-305.

### 7.3 Current Fire Research Needs 

Park managers have identified several fire-related resource management
questions and concerns that need to be answered as funds become
available. Each concern has been described using a format that consists
of a problem statement and a description of a recommended project or
activity and is fully documented in the current Resource Management
Plan. The following is a list of some of these research needs: Conduct
Forest Fuel Inventory, Prepare Vegetation Map, Establish Permanent
Yellow Pine Ozone Injury Plots, Develop Protocols for Monitoring
Vegetation changes and Monitor Blister Rust on White Pine

More recent management concerns related to fire management that have not
been documented in the Resource Management Plan include: 1) uncertainty
about the historic abundance and distribution of montane chaparral
within the park; 2) effects of spring burning on landbird breeding and
montane chaparral habitat; and 3) the effects of fire suppression in
altering natural successional pathways related to tree encroachment in
the park's wet meadow habitats.

##### **CHAPTER 8 -- PUBLIC SAFETY**

### 8.1 Description of Public Safety Issues and Concerns

Managing a fire program is among the highest risk operations that any
land management agency can undertake. The first priority consideration
in any fire management action is firefighter and public safety. Safety
of visitors, employees, residents and incident personnel will be the
number one responsibility given to any supervisors acting on behalf of
Fire Management. Evacuation of visitors at risk is the first priority
for all fire responses. Accurate and consistent monitoring and
evaluation of current and expected fire behavior will provide the basis
for developing contingency plans, contacts, and briefings that ensures
public and personnel safety.

In addition to active wildland fire, fuels treatments and prescribed
fire activities are potentially hazardous. The burn boss or project
leader will identify potential public safety hazards and ensure the
public has been notified. The Superintendent or designee may close all
or some portions of the park (including roads and trails) when a
wildland fire or a prescribed burn poses an immediate threat to public
safety. The Superintendent may also close park areas during fuels
treatment projects, such as mechanical thinning or prescribed fire. For
longer term restrictions or closures (e.g., Stage 1, 2 or 3 fire use
restrictions), a special order will be approved by the Superintendent
and given wide distribution. For all restrictions and closures, signs
will be posted and maintained in appropriate areas.

During a fire, the Chief of Resource and Visitor Protection will inform
the other divisions of all potentially hazardous fire situations. The
Superintendent and Fire Information Officer will coordinate public
notification efforts within and outside the Park. The Chief Ranger will
coordinate evacuation efforts with the fire command. Fire activity
reports will be updated daily, or when significant changes warrant, to
inform park personnel of potential threats. The extent of public notice
and evacuation will depend on the specific fire situation. A list of
public safety actions is as follows:

1.  Initial attack Incident Commander will determine the proximity of
    visitors and neighbors to the fire, identify current and potential
    hazards, and initiate evacuations if necessary.

2.  The Fire Information Officer will prepare and distribute information
    listing location, behavior, expected hazards, areas to avoid, and
    precautions to be taken. Information will be posted on appropriate
    park bulletin boards, at visitor service facilities and trailheads,
    along roadways, and distributed to park concession operations. The
    park website will contain similar information.

3.  The Superintendent will close roads, trails, campgrounds, and day
    use sites if public safety hazards are identified by the Incident
    Commander.

4.  Visitor use may be limited or prevented near wildland fires and
    potentially affected areas. Park personnel will patrol and contact
    visitors and educate them about the fire status and potential safety
    hazards.

5.  Press releases and public notifications will be delivered by the
    Fire Information Officer.

6.  Park personnel will inform visitors obtaining backcountry use
    permits of the exact location of fire activity.

7.  Nearby residents, adjacent to the park, will be notified if a fire
    poses a threat to their property.

8.  Burned over areas will be evaluated for hazards and will remain
    closed until those hazards are mitigated.

### 8.2 Mitigating Actions

The following program elements will be followed, with the intention of
mitigating the issues and concerns:

-   The local police, fire, and emergency medical services will be
    notified of the location of any wildland fires, and prior to the
    ignition of prescribed burns.

-   Interagency coordination will continue to assure an appropriate
    response to National Park Service incidents.

-   The park's Incident Information Plan will be implemented.
    Information will be provided to the public by means of the media,
    public meetings, park interpretive programs, and through signing key
    locations within affected communities, park entrance stations, trail
    heads, campgrounds, picnic areas, and other recreational sites.

-   Initiated closures through close cooperation with the Ranger
    division. Closures may consist of but not be limited to trails,
    roads, campgrounds, areas and/or air space through a Temporary
    Flight Restriction.

-   In areas where trails or roads remain open escorts or pilot cars may
    be provided to insure safe passage.

-   Execute public evacuations is areas threatened by an incident or
    event.

##### **CHAPTER 9 -- PUBLIC INFORMATION AND EDUCATION**

### 9.1 Description of Public Safety Information Capabilities and Needs

Lassen Volcanic National Park is dedicated to providing high-quality
fire information and education for as many people as possible while
maintaining a level of service that demonstrates the parks'
professionalism. Based on the ecological principles and operational
procedures outlined in the 2004 revised Fire Management Plan, the Fire
Information and Education (FI&E) Program has three goals:

> GOAL #1 -- To provide year-round educational activities on fire
> ecology and fire history of the Southern Cascades and Lassen Volcanic
> National Park to target audiences. Communicate how fire and fuels
> management practices meet natural resource management goals and thus
> the mission of the National Park Service.
>
> GOAL #2 -- To provide accurate and timely incident information for
> local, regional, and national fire operations as needed.
>
> GOAL #3 -- To provide local communities, park residents, and park
> permitees with year-round informational opportunities on fire safety,
> fire prevention, defensible space, and fuels management.

The FI&E Program will emphasize the major goals of the Fire Management
Plan to increase public awareness and support. While there is a variety
of management tools used in the park, the fire program's overall mission
is to benefit park resources and society by restoring and maintaining
the natural fire regime. The FI&E program will focus on this mission and
will avoid dividing the program into small parts and isolating
individual tools. For example, the park will not interpret the concepts
of prescribed fire separate from wildland fire use, suppression, or
mechanical treatment since it is the combination of all four strategies
that supports the parks' program.

Similarly, the FI&E Program will provide the public with unique fire
information based on data specific to this park. Park visitors in Lassen
Volcanic National Park want to connect with this park and the fire story
here, not just with generic messages about fire ecology nationwide. The
park will generate interpretive stories for the public while maintaining
a level of sophistication appropriate to the topics of fire ecology,
fire history, research, monitoring, operations, safety, and fire
prevention.

The National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) prepared the first *National
Fire Communications Strategy* for the National Park Service in 2002.
Lassen Volcanic National Park contributed to that document's development
by attending the *Fire Connections Workshop* in November 2001. The FI&E
Program outlined here, while tailored for the local area, complements
the national strategy in its goals, target audiences and communication
methods.

## 

## [Staffing]{.underline}

The Fire Information and Education Specialist (in this document referred
to as the FIO) is responsible for coordinating the FI&E Program. The
success of this program depends on the cooperation and participation of
many different partners: Interpretation, Natural Resources Management,
Maintenance, Administration, Fire and Visitor Management, United States
Geological Survey (USGS), Lassen Loomis Museum Association (LLMA),
concession employees, and volunteers. The FIO will serve as the liaison
between these different groups to ensure the transfer of information and
the consistency of content. When large incidents occur in the park, the
FIO will recruit personnel for specific duties or outside resources will
be requested through dispatch procedures. The parks' Public Information
Officer (PIO) will perform coordination duties and the FIO will assist.
In the event that the PIO is unavailable, the FIO will take the lead and
coordinate all information resources.

## [Target Audiences]{.underline}

The park has identified five target audiences for fire information and
education messages:

1.  **Park Visitors** (including in-park visitors, internet visitors,
    and special groups)

2.  **Park Employees** (including NPS, LLMA, USGS, concessions, and
    volunteers)

3.  **Local Communities** (including residents, businesses inside or
    near the park, civic groups, and clubs)

4.  **Students/Teachers** (including K-12 students, college students,
    elder hostel groups, and teachers)

5.  **Scientific/Professional Peers** (including other federal, state,
    and county agencies, and professional associations)

## [Communication Methods]{.underline}

The following methods will be used to communicate with the five target
audiences listed above. There are both personal (face to face) and
non-personal methods which will facilitate reaching the greatest number
of people. Table 9-1 matches these communication methods with the
appropriate target audiences. The park will continue to improve and
expand this list.

### 

## [Personal]{.underline} 

1.  **Interpretive Programs** -- Park staff will integrate fire messages
    into hikes, walks, campfire programs, and special off-site
    presentations. The FIO will monitor these programs to ensure content
    quality.

2.  **Education Programs** -- Park staff will incorporate fire ecology
    concepts into curriculum-based education with the Education
    Specialist in the Division of Interpretation.

3.  **Employee Training** -- The FIO will coordinate park-wide employee
    training sessions to improve staff understanding of the fire and
    fuels management program. These sessions will be open to NPS, USGS,
    LLMA, concessions, and volunteers.

4.  **Roving** -- During fire operations, park employees will be
    stationed in high-use visitor areas, including trails, to answer
    questions about the current activity and/or explain the fire and
    fuels management program. Backcountry rangers will also provide
    information to backpackers about fire operations in their area.

5.  **Conference Presentations** -- Park staff will give peer
    presentations at conferences about current fire research, planning,
    or operations. These presentations will share information, generate
    feedback, and ultimately improve the park's fire and fuels
    management program.

6.  **Special Events** -- The park will, when possible, participate in
    local events to promote the fire and fuels program. For example,
    park employees can staff booths at local fairs or host community
    meetings.

## [Non-Personal]{.underline}

1.  **Media Stories --** The FIO will communicate with print, radio, and
    television outlets through press releases and interviews. When
    necessary, the FIO will facilitate special media projects (books,
    documentaries, etc.) by guiding research, scheduling interviews with
    park staff, and coordinating filming schedules.

2.  **Printed Handouts** -- The Park will include fire information in
    regular park publications (like the park newspaper).

3.  **Visitor Center Exhibits, Waysides, and Bulletin Boards** -- The
    park will maintain and update the interpretive information in
    visitor centers and wayside exhibits on fire and fuels management.
    The FIO will maintain permanent and non-permanent bulletin boards
    both inside and outside the parks.

4.  **Webpage** -- The park will develop a fire and fuels management
    webpage that is linked to the main park webpage, with fire planning
    documents, research papers, GIS maps, interpretive information, and
    photos.

5.  **Scientific Papers** -- Park researchers will publish papers in
    scientific journals and/or periodicals regarding new information
    from the park's fire and fuels management program.

6.  **Updates** -- The FIO will use email, fax, and bulletin boards to
    provide specific fire updates. In general, updates will appear as
    needed (perhaps biweekly during fire season) but during fire
    operations they will be released more often.

### 

Table 9-1 --Target Audiences and Communication Methods

+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| **Target Audiences**              | **Communication Methods**        |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Park Visitors                     |                                  |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| In-park visitors                  | Interpretive Programs            |
|                                   |                                  |
| Internet visitors                 | Visitor Center Exhibits &        |
|                                   | waysides                         |
| Special Groups                    |                                  |
|                                   | Publications                     |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Bulletin Boards                  |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Roving interpreters              |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Print, radio, and television     |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Special events                   |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Webpage (local and national)     |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Documentary film projects        |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Park Employees                    |                                  |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| NPS employees                     | Updates: email or fax            |
|                                   |                                  |
| LLMA employees                    | Voice mail                       |
|                                   |                                  |
| USGS employees                    | Radio Announcements              |
|                                   |                                  |
| Concession employees              | Trainings                        |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Publications                     |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Webpage (local and national)     |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Daily Situation Report           |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Local Communities                 |                                  |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Residents                         | Print, radio, and television     |
|                                   |                                  |
| Businesses inside/near the park   | Direct mail (newsletter)         |
|                                   |                                  |
| Civic Groups/Clubs                | Bulletin Boards                  |
|                                   |                                  |
| (Mineral, Chester, Old Station,   | Phone calls to smoke sensitive   |
| Burney, Susanville, Red Bluff,    | people                           |
| Redding & Chico)                  |                                  |
|                                   | Community meetings/events        |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Publications                     |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Updates: email or fax            |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Students/ Parents/Teachers        |                                  |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| K-12 students                     | Interpretive Programs /          |
|                                   | Presentations                    |
| College students                  |                                  |
|                                   | Curriculum-based education       |
| Elder Hostel groups               | programs                         |
|                                   |                                  |
| Teachers                          | Teacher workshops                |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Field experiences (Manzanita     |
|                                   | Lake Discovery Center)           |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Webpage (local and national)     |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Scientific/Professional Peers     |                                  |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Lassen National Forest            | Updates: email or fax            |
|                                   |                                  |
| Lassen Volcanic National Park     | Talks/Presentations at           |
|                                   | conferences                      |
| CDF Tehama-Glen Ranger Unit       |                                  |
|                                   | Cooperation on interagency       |
|                                   | incidents                        |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Participation in working groups  |
|                                   |                                  |
|                                   | Publish scientific papers        |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------+

##### **CHAPTER 10 -- PROTECTION OF SENSITIVE RESOURCES**

### 10.1 Summary of Cultural Resources Requiring Sensitive Treatment or Special Protection

Numerous archaeological sites, historic structures, and other cultural
sites and objects exist throughout the park from an elevation of 5,500
feet to 7,000 feet. Based on artifacts collected to date from park
sites, it is hypothesized that the archaeological record extends back
some 4,000 years. Only a small percentage, approximately 13% of the
park, has been archaeologically surveyed. Nearly all the cultural sites
have been impacted by natural processes, collection, or park and
concession developments.

Over five hundred fifty acres within the park have been designated as an
historic zone and have been entered into the National Register of
Historic Places as a regional level of significance. The Preservation
Subzone and the Nobles Emigrant Trail comprise 505 acres of this
historic zone. The remaining Adaptive Use/Preservation Subzone of 50
acres includes structures being used for administrative purposes but of
sufficient historic importance to merit preservation of their original
character and appearance. These structures include a potential historic
district of rustic administrative, residential, and maintenance
buildings at Mineral, and a second historic district at Manzanita Lake
including the kiosk, ranger residence, park signs, Chief Naturalist's
residence and the Loomis Museum, seismograph vault and home. Other
significant structures within the park include: the Horseshoe Lake,
Summit Lake, and Warner Valley ranger stations; and the Prospect Peak
and Mt. Harkness fire lookouts.

There are no structures listed on the National Register of Historic
Places within the Caribou Wilderness. Only a small percentage of the
Caribou Wilderness has been archaeologically surveyed. However, since
the Caribou lies so close to the park, archaeologists have concluded
that Native American use and site characteristics would be consistent
with those found within the park.

The following is a list of values at risk within Lassen Volcanic
National Park:

Table 10.1 Values at Risk with Lassen Volcanic National Park

  ------------------ ----------------------------------------------------
  **Name**           **Type**

  Hat Creek          Private lands w/ bldgs

  Twin Lakes         NPS ranger station

  Horseshoe Lake     NPS ranger station

  Summit Lake        NPS ranger station, horse camp, campground, water
                     supply

  Juniper Lake       Private lands, ranger station, campground, horse
                     camp

  Mineral            NPS Admin. Site

  Manzanita Lake     Campground, housing, ranger station, museum and
                     education center, water supply

  Mt. Harkness       NPS fire lookout

  Warner Valley      NPS ranger station, historic bldgs, campground,
                     guest ranch

  Southwest Entrance SW Visitor Services Facility, other bldgs,
                     campground, water supply

  Butte Lake         NPS ranger station, campground, water supply

  Crags and Lost     NPS campgrounds
  Creek              
  ------------------ ----------------------------------------------------

Fire program activities have the potential to adversely affect cultural
resources present at Lassen Volcanic National Park. Effects from these
activities include the direct effect of fire itself, the direct effect
of fire program operational activities, and the indirect effects of fire
and operational activities on cultural resources. Identification of
historic properties located within the area of potential effect,
assessment of potential adverse effects, and development of appropriate
management actions to minimize or mitigate identified potential adverse
effects to historic properties will be completed for all planned fire
management projects. These procedures will ensure compliance with the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. Typical
strategies used to protect cultural resources include fire-fighter
awareness training, fuel reduction near cultural materials, excluding
fire from cultural materials with hand lines, water/foam, or fire
shelters, use of MIST strategies, and consulting with cultural resource
specialists.

In general, and under normal weather conditions, fuel levels within the
planning unit should produce only low to moderate fire-line intensities.
Also, it is reasonable to assume that the majority of surface artifacts
within the park have been exposed to surface fire of moderate intensity
during the last two centuries.

[Protection Measures]{.underline}

-   Fire control methods near cultural sites, especially the
    construction of control lines that expose mineral soil, will be
    developed in consultation with an archeological technical specialist
    to avoid adverse effects to cultural materials;

-   Prior to all prescribed fire and non-fire fuel treatments, project
    areas will be inventoried for cultural resources and strategies to
    negate or minimize identified potential adverse effects will be
    developed and implemented;

-   During all wildfire and wildland fire use activities, known cultural
    resources in affected areas will be identified and mitigation
    measures will be implemented to prevent adverse impacts;

-   Fire retardant use will be prohibited in the vicinity of any
    historic structure, unless there is imminent threat from wildfire to
    the historic structure;

-   A designated Cultural Resource representative will conduct an
    inspection and develop a plan to protect any existing or new
    cultural resources identified before and after prescribed fires.

-   Cultural resource digital databases and GIS layers will be
    maintained in a current status and available on CDs during fire
    season to expedite the management decision making process.

-   The Park Cultural Resource Specialist, Klamath/Cascade Network Fire
    Archeologist, or PGSO Fire Archeologist, if available, will be
    notified in the event of a wildfire or Wildland Fire Use (WFU) and
    will participate in the WFU go/no-go process.

-   An archeological resource specialist and/or resource advisor is
    recommended if extended attack is required and the wildfire is in an
    archeologically sensitive area.

-   When American Indian Cultural Sites are threatened by a fire or fire
    suppression activities the affiliated American Indian Tribes will be
    notified.

-   Identified historical structures, cultural landscapes, ethnographic
    and archeological sites determined eligible or listed on the
    National Register of Historic Places will be priorities in resource
    protection planning.

-   All WFUs will include an archeological monitor as part of the
    incident management team if documented archeological resources are
    threatened or the fire is located in an archeologically sensitive
    area.

-   An archeologist will participate in the planning and execution of
    rehabilitation efforts following wildfires and WFUs.

-   No handlines exposing mineral soil will be allowed through cultural
    sites as defined or delineated in archeological survey reports;

-   Camps and toilet facilities are restricted from being located within
    200 feet of known cultural resource sites;

-   Crews will implement Minimum Impact Suppression Techniques (MIST)
    fire suppression guidelines to minimize and/or eliminate adverse
    soil impacts resulting from ground crew activities.

### 10.2 Summary of natural resources requiring sensitive treatment or special protection

[Scenic Resources and Air Quality]{.underline}

The Park has identified scenic views extending beyond park boundaries
that are an important part of the park experience and worthy of
protection. For example, key features that can be viewed from Lassen
Peak include: Eagle Lake, Crater Mountain, Antelope Mountain, Kelly
Mountain, Morgan Mountain, Turner Mountain, Inskip Hill, Potato Buttes,
Clover Mountain, and Burney Mountain.

Lassen Volcanic National Park is designated as a Class 1 airshed and
protecting visibility is a major concern to park management. This
designation provides for the highest degree of regulatory protection
from air pollution impacts. The primary means by which the protection
and enhancement of air quality is accomplished is through implementation
of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

[Protection Measures]{.underline}

Since federal land managers (National Park Service, Forest Service, Fish
and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Land Management) were required by
the Clean Air Act to protect visibility at designated Class 1 areas,
these agencies established the Interagency Monitoring of Protected
Visual Environments (IMPROVE) particulate monitoring network. Among
other measurements, IMPROVE gathers data on particulate matter of 2.5
micrometers and 10 micrometers (PM~2.5~ and PM~10~) (DOI, 2001c). In
addressing air pollutant emissions from fires managed for resource
benefits (prescribed fire and wildland fire use), the EPA considers
PM~2.5~ and PM~10~ as the primary indicators of public health impacts
(EPA, 1998). In general, IMPROVE uses scenery, optical, and aerosol
monitoring (DOI, 2001d). Lassen Volcanic NP is a part of the IMPROVE
network and monitors particulate and ozone levels for its visibility
program.

[Plants]{.underline}

Periodic fire from natural ignition sources has influenced this
ecosystem for several thousand years. The area's flora and fauna have
evolved with this powerful natural force and have adapted to its
presence. In some cases, fire-induced adaptations allow for coexistence
with fire. In others, fire is necessary for species perpetuation and
vigor. Fire can also play a role in the management of many rare,
threatened and endangered plant species. A detailed list of listed plant
species is included in Appendix C.

[Protection Measures]{.underline}

-   If threatened, endangered, or sensitive plant species are found in a
    treatment unit, a buffer surrounding the plants will be imposed that
    prohibits physical damage to the identified population. The assigned
    Resource Advisor will be consulted when determining the appropriate
    buffer;

-   Park staff will stage fire management operations away from known
    noxious weed infestations, and will construct fire lines away from
    known patches;

-   Park staff will survey for noxious weeds in treatment units prior to
    ignition of prescribed fires.

[Threatened, Endangered or Sensitive Wildlife]{.underline}

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) was passed in 1973. The purpose of the
act is to conserve the ecosystems in which endangered and threatened
species depend and to conserve and recover listed species. Under the
law, a species is listed as either "endangered" or "threatened".
Endangered means a species is in danger of extinction throughout all or
a significant portion of its range. Threatened means a species is likely
to become endangered within the foreseeable future. The act mandates
that all Federal Agencies are to protect species and preserve their
habitats. National Park Service policy also states that species that are
listed by the State will be treated as if they are Federally listed.

There are currently no species that are listed as endangered within
Lassen Volcanic National Park. There is one species that is Federally
listed as threatened that occurs in the park and that is the bald eagle.
The little willow flycatcher, American peregrine falcon and California
spotted owl occur in the park and are all listed by the State of
California as endangered but are not federally listed. The Sierra Nevada
red fox and greater sandhill crane are listed as threatened by the State
of California but are not Federally listed. The Sierra Nevada red fox
does occur in the park and the greater sandhill crane may occur in the
park.

The Cascades frog is a Federal species of special concern that may
inhabit lakes and meadows in the park. Numerous amphibian studies have
shown this species to be declining throughout the Sierra Nevada and
Cascade ranges.

Sensitive species and their critical habitat can potentially warrant
special protection from the negative impacts from fire or fire
management activities such as smoke, heat, ground disturbance, fire
retardants, etc. Potential impacts on sensitive species will be analyzed
and mitigation measures specified for prescribed burns and wildland
fires used for resource benefit. Location maps and habitat information
will be maintained in the Resources Management Office and on-site
surveys will be conducted for unsurveyed areas or when impacts seem
likely.

Special protection measures for sensitive species may be appropriate in
accordance with the management goal of preserving natural biological
diversity. Special protection may be warranted if sensitive species have
declined due to human impacts on critical habitat or individual
populations. Impact analysis for sensitive species must include
information about the beneficial as well as detrimental effects of
burning.

Generally, direct impacts of fire on fauna include disturbance or
mortality of individuals or groups of individuals. Larger mammalian
vertebrates such as deer will generally move away from a fire. However,
the availability of adjacent suitable habitat may be critical for some
local populations. A local herbivore population decline may in turn
result in a loss of prey for carnivores.

Birds are less likely to be directly affected by fire, but some loss in
nesting sites may occur if fires coincide with nesting season.
Riparian-dwelling reptiles and amphibians are usually protected from
heat and loss of cover. Loss of some snakes, salamanders, lizards, and
toads will occur, but immediate population declines are typically
insignificant.

Indirect effects on wildlife include habitat modification and shifts in
species composition of communities. Animals with specific habitat
requirements or territorial animals with narrow ranges may be impacted
by habitat loss.

[Protection measures]{.underline}

-   A Resource Advisor will be assigned to the incident during extended
    attack and during all subsequent phases of fire suppression. The
    Resource Advisor will work with the Incident Commander to identify
    and mitigate the effects of fire and fire suppression actions on
    listed sensitive features.

-   The sensitive natural areas will be clearly identified on the
    pre-attack map and in the pre-attack plan.

-   Sensitive areas have been identified as high priority areas for
    protection in the constraints for each Fire Management Zone.

-   Fuels adjacent to these areas are considered high priority zones for
    fuels treatments.

-   Fuel reduction will be conducted directly adjacent to old growth and
    mature ponderosa pines, sugar pines, and Douglas fir trees in bald
    eagle and spotted owl habitat prior to prescribed burning.

-   The use of water from sensitive areas for fire suppression or
    holding actions must be approved by the resource advisor, or the
    Chief of Natural Resources Management.

> [Bald Eagle]{.underline}

-   A limited operating period (LOP) will be placed from January 1^st^
    to August 31^st^ (nesting season) around all known bald eagle nest
    sites. This consists of a half-mile diameter circle around the nest
    tree.

-   Avoid disturbance in the LOP during nesting season (January 1^st^ to
    August 31^st^). Disturbance includes mechanical thinning operations,
    controlled burning operations, line -clearing operations using power
    tools, heavy equipment use and aircraft noise.

-   No nest trees or known perch trees will be removed.

-   Avoid using Snag Lake as a helicopter dip site (unless approved by
    Resource Advisor) during fire suppression activities.

-   Use of helicopters during fire suppression would be allowed no lower
    than 1,300 feet (1/4 mile) above the canopy within the LOP.

-   After the nesting season, cooler burn prescriptions would be used
    and some degree of hazard fuel removal could be used to limit the
    potential for crown fires in nest areas and suitable habitat.

-   For prescribed burns implemented after the LOP, construct a fire
    line around the nest tree a radius of 50 feet and burn out from the
    fire line to protect the nest tree.

-   Park staff will continue to monitor bald eagle populations annually.

[California Spotted Owl]{.underline}

-   A limited operating period (LOP) will be placed from March 1^st^
    through August 31^st^ (nesting season) around all known spotted owl
    nest trees. This will consist of a quarter-mile diameter circle
    around known nest trees.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Avoid disturbance in the LOP during the nesting season (March 1^st^
    to August 31^st^). Disturbance includes mechanical thinning
    operations, controlled burning operations, line -clearing operations
    using power tools, heavy equipment use and aircraft noise.

-   No nest trees or known perch trees will be removed.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Use of helicopters during fire suppression would be allowed no lower
    than 1300 feet (1/4 mile) above the canopy within the LOP.

-   After the nesting season, cooler burn prescriptions would be used
    and some degree of hazard fuel removal could be used to limit the
    potential for crown fires in nest areas and suitable habitat.

-   For prescribed burns implemented after the LOP, construct a fire
    line around the nest tree a radius of 50 feet and burn out from the
    fire line to protect the nest tree.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Park staff will conduct surveys for spotted owls in treatment areas
    prior to ignition of prescribed fires.

[American Peregrine Falcon]{.underline}

-   A limited operating period (LOP) will be placed from February 1^st^
    through July 31^st^ (nesting season) around all known peregrine
    falcon nest sites. This will consist of a half-mile diameter circle
    around known nest sites.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Avoid disturbance during the nesting season (February 1^st^ to July
    31^st^). Disturbance includes mechanical thinning operations,
    controlled burning operations, line -clearing operations using power
    tools, heavy equipment use and aircraft noise.

-   No known perch trees will be removed.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Use of helicopters during fire suppression would be allowed no lower
    than 1300 feet (1/4 mile) above the cliff within the LOP.

-   Park staff will continue to monitor peregrine falcon populations
    annually.

[Sierra Nevada Red Fox]{.underline}

-   Construct a fire line around known den sites a radius of 50 feet and
    burn out from this line to protect the den.

-   Avoid controlled burning or mechanical thinning projects if pups are
    known to be in the area.

[Cascades Frog]{.underline}

-   Lakes with current existing populations of Cascades frogs will be
    avoided as helicopter dip sites and drafting sites. A list of the
    current populated lakes will be given to the Resource Advisor upon
    request.

[Little Willow Flycatcher]{.underline}

-   Construct fire line around patches of willow or alder where known
    nest sites occur.

-   Park staff will conduct surveys for willow flycatchers in treatment
    areas prior to ignition of prescribed fires where suitable habitat
    exists.

# [Wilderness]{.underline}

The National Park Service wilderness management policies are based on
statutory provisions of the 1916 NPS Organic Act (16 USC 1), the 1964
Wilderness Act, and legislation establishing individual units of the
national park system (DOI, 1999b; DOI 2001f).

In 1972, Congress designated two areas of Lassen Volcanic NP as
wilderness totaling 78,982 acres. Additionally, the 21,440 acre U.S.
Forest Service Caribou Wilderness adjoins Lassen Volcanic NP. In order
to ensure the perpetuation of a wilderness atmosphere, the construction
of roads or other artificially made structures in the designated
wilderness areas without the consent of Congress is prohibited.

Under the Wilderness Act, "there shall be no commercial enterprise and
no permanent road within any wilderness area designated by this chapter
and, except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the
administration of the area for the purpose of this chapter (including
measures required in emergencies involving the health and safety of
persons within the area), there shall be no temporary road, no use of
motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of
aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or
installation within any such area" (16 USC 1133).

All management decisions affecting wilderness must be consistent with
the "minimum requirement" concept as outlined in the Wilderness Act. The
minimum requirement concept is intended to minimize adverse impacts on
wilderness character and resources and must guide all management actions
in wilderness. This requirement includes decisions concerning
administrative practices, historic properties, proposed special uses,
research, and equipment use in wilderness (DOI, 1999b).

Planned administrative actions that may result in an exception to a
prohibited use (e.g. chainsaws, aircraft use, and mechanical equipment)
or have the potential to impact wilderness resources and values must be
documented in accordance with the park's minimum requirements process.

[Protection Measures]{.underline}

-   Wildland fire operations within the proposed Wilderness Area will
    adhere to the requirements of the Wilderness Act, NPS Management
    Policies, and the NPS Director's Orders 18 and 41 Wilderness
    Preservation and Management;

-   All fire management activities within the proposed Wilderness Area
    will employ minimum actions and tools necessary based upon the
    Minimum Requirement and Minimum Tool Determination;

-   All fire management activities within the proposed Wilderness Area
    will follow established MIST implementation guidelines;

-   All fire management activities within the proposed Wilderness Area
    will follow established Rehabilitation Guidelines for Wilderness
    Fire Suppression Activities;

-   A Resource Advisor should be available for advice and support with
    the crew(s) as well as for quality control;

-   When Wilderness campsites or travel routes are closed during fire
    management activities, visitors will be rerouted to alternative
    travel routes or campsites;

-   Educational/informational materials will be developed and
    distributed to the wilderness visitor on what to expect during fire
    management activities including potential noise from chainsaws
    during line construction, smoke dispersion, safety, helicopter and
    airplane use, and information on where and when these activities
    would occur.

##### 

##### **CHAPTER 11 -- FIRE CRITIQUES AND ANNUAL PLAN REVIEW**

All wildland and prescribed fires will be reviewed. The level and extent
of each review will be commensurate with the scope and complexity of the
incident. Lowest level reviews start at After Action Reviews (AAR) and
increase in complexity to Incident Management Team (IMT) Closeout and
Review, Park Level Review, Regional Level Review, National Review,
Entrapment and Fire Shelter Deployment Review, and various Program Level
Reviews. Detail on these reviews can be found in RM-18, Chapter 13.
Reviews are conducted for one or more of the following purposes:

A.  To examine the progress of an ongoing fire incident and to confirm
    effective decisions or correct deficiencies.

B.  To identify new or improved procedures, techniques, or tactics.

C.  To compile consistent and complete information to improve or refine
    park, regional, or national fire management programs.

D.  To examine anomalous fire-related incidents in order to determine
    cause(s), contributing factors, and where applicable, recommends
    corrective actions. If negligence is indicated, the circumstances
    will be reported and investigated in accordance with applicable
    regulations, policies, or guidelines.

E.  To determine cost effectiveness of a fire operation.

### Program Certification

The fire management officer will present the annual updates and proposed
program to the Lassen Operations Team (LOT) by mid-April along with an
Environmental Screening Form. LOT will review the proposals and confirm
that the changes and actions proposed are within the scope of the
companion Environmental Assessment (EA) for the *Fire Management Plan*.
If the nature of any part of the proposal is found to be outside the
scope of the plan's EA, additional environmental compliance will be
required for the non-conforming actions. After LOT is satisfied with the
proposed program, they will recommend adoption to the superintendent.
The update and annual program must be signed by the superintendent prior
to implementation.

### Periodic Review

Five years after final approval, and every five years thereafter, the
*Fire Management Plan* will receive thorough review to determine whether
it remains adequate to direct future fire and fuels management actions.
If significant new information, policy changes, or scientific knowledge
(such as new information on the effects of global climate change) needs
to be incorporated into the fire and fuels management program resulting
in effects or consequences not evaluated in the current EA, the plan and
EA will be revised. If no substantial changes to program direction or
effects are discovered during the review, the plan may be renewed for an
additional five years with proper documentation.

##### 

##### **CHAPTER 12 -- CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION**

Debra Frein, NEPA Coordinator, Lassen Volcanic National Park

Eric Hensel, Assistant Fire Management Officer, Lassen Volcanic National
Park

Louise Johnson, Chief of Natural Resources, Lassen Volcanic National
Park

Cris Jones, Fire Business Manager, Lassen Volcanic National Park

Mike Lewelling, Fire Management Officer, Lassen Volcanic National Park

Mike Magnuson, Wildlife Biologist, Lassen Volcanic National Park

Robert Noyes, GIS/Cartographic Technician, Lassen Volcanic National Park

Mary Rasmussen, Fire Ecologist, National Park Service

Robin Wills, Regional Fire Ecologist, Pacific West Regional Office