Black Hills Resilient Landscapes Project

Black Hills National Forest

Fire & Fuels 

Specialist Report

Prepared by__/s/ Amy Ham______________ Date__1/19/18__
1

Contents

Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 2

Affected Environment..................................................................................................................... 4

Vegetation....................................................................................................................................... 6

Fire Regime and Condition Class................................................................................................... 7

Fire Risk........................................................................................................................................ 10

Values at Risk ............................................................................................................................... 12

Fire Hazard.................................................................................................................................... 15

Air Quality .................................................................................................................................... 17

Desired Conditions........................................................................................................................ 19

Environmental Consequences....................................................................................................... 19

Alternative A (Proposed Action) .............................................................................................. 19

Alternative B (No Action) ........................................................................................................ 24

Cumulative Effects........................................................................................................................ 27

Summary of Effects ...................................................................................................................... 29

Design Criteria .............................................................................................................................. 30

Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................................. 31

Limitations and Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 35

Works Cited .................................................................................................................................. 36

Appendix A................................................................................................................................... 39

Appendix B................................................................................................................................... 51
2

Introduction

The Black Hills Resilient Landscapes project area includes approximately 1,098,000 acres of 

National Forest System Lands. These lands are managed by the Black Hills National Forest

(BKF) within the areas designated by the Secretary of Agriculture under the amended Healthy 

Forests Restoration Act (HFRA, 16 U.S.C. 6591), excluding Inventoried Roadless Areas and 

certain management areas.

The project area includes the following management areas (MAs). 

MA Emphasis Acres* Proposed activities

3.31 Backcountry motorized recreation 6,870 Fuels/hazard trees

3.32 Backcountry non-motorized recreation 8,948 Fuels/hazard trees

3.7 Late succession landscapes 18,484 Fuels/hazard trees

4.1 Limited motorized use and forest products 41,374 All

5.1 Resource production 558,520 All

5.1A Southern Hills forest and grassland 27,845 Fuels/hazard trees

5.2A Fort Meade VA Hospital watershed 3,299 Fuels/hazard trees

5.4 Big game winter range 388,950 All

5.43 Big game and resource production 10,083 All

5.6 Forest products, recreation, and big game 34,043 All

*MA acres in project area Total 1,098,425

Ponderosa pine is the primary tree species in the Black Hills, however there are also some white 

spruce and hardwood communities scattered throughout. The BKF has been experiencing a 

mountain pine beetle epidemic since 1997. The epidemic is slowing and has left behind many 

dead and dying trees across the landscape. As these trees die they fall and pile up on the existing 

surface fuels creating uncharacteristically high fuel loadings. Due to the amount of private 

property, homes, businesses and critical infrastructure that exist within the Forest boundary as 

well as adjacent to the Forest, there are major concerns with respect to the wildland urban 

interface (WUI) and at-risk communities, specifically relating to public safety. 

This project is proposing treatments to move landscape-level vegetation conditions in the project 

area toward objectives identified in the 1997 Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for 

the Black Hills National Forest as Amended by the 2005 Phase II Amendment (Forest Plan). 

This will increase ecosystem resilience to insect infestation and other natural disturbances, 

contribute to public safety and the local economy, and reduce the risk of wildfire to landscapes 

and communities. These treatments are also in alignment with the three goals of the National 

Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy which; Restore and Maintain Landscapes, FireAdapted Communities, and Safe and Effective Wildfire Response. Proposed treatment activities 

would begin in approximately 2018 and continue for about 10 years. 
3

Summary of Proposed Activities:

Table 1: Proposed and Connected Activities

Fuel and hazard tree treatments

Mechanical and manual fuel treatments (shaded fuel break 

construction; thin, pile, and burn fuels; scatter, shred, or 

chip fuels; cut, lop, and scatter fuels); includes up to 4,000 

acres of shaded fuel breaks with commercial removal

70,000 acres (7,000 acres 

per year)

Prescribed fire 100,000 acres (10,000 

acres per year)

Hazard tree treatments As needed and funded

Enhancement of non-pine vegetation and within-stand diversity

Removal of pine/spruce from aspen stands 6,000 acres

Regeneration of aspen stands 4,000 acres

Removal of pine/spruce from aspen inclusions (possibly 

commercial) 22,500 acres

Removal of pine/spruce from aspen inclusions (noncommercial) 8,400 acres

Removal of encroaching pine from oak stands 5,400 acres

Removal of encroaching pine from grasslands 14,200 acres

Uneven-age individual tree selection or group selection

As stand conditions allow 

(max. 10,000 acres, out of 

the 185,210 acres below)

Pine structural stage modification

Overstory removal

By management area:

MA 4.1: Approximately 7,670 acres 

MA 5.1: Approximately 129,890 acres 

MA 5.4: Approximately 41,210 acres

MA 5.43: Approximately 250 acres

MA 5.6: Approximately 6,190 acres

185,210 acres

Precommercial and/or POL thin 250,000 acres (25,000 

acres per year)

Patch cut

By management area:

MA 4.1: 1,300 acres

MA 5.6: 600 acres

1,900 acres

Tree planting (MAs 5.1, 5.4, and 5.43) 5,000 acres

Mechanical site preparation 4,000 acres

Connected actions

Road construction – Specified 18 miles 

Road construction – Temporary 39 miles 

Temporary roads on existing templates 182 miles

Road conversion (unclassified to system) 20 miles (part of 182 miles above)

Road maintenance 2,500 miles (estimated)

Road reconstruction 375 miles (estimated)

*Maximum activity acres and miles are displayed. The amount implemented may be less.
4

Affected Environment

The recent mountain pine beetle epidemic has left approximately 215,000 acres of beetle killed 

trees across the Forest. In some areas that were first hit by beetles, numerous trees have already 

fallen to the ground or broken off creating large accumulations of hazardous surface fuels.

Stands that were more recently hit are beginning to experience this as well. There are many 

remaining impacted trees that will continue to die, decompose and fall creating an 

uncharacteristically high surface fuel loading for years to come. This surface fuel loading is 

characterized by what is described as coarse woody debris (CWD), standing or down woody 

material generally greater than 3 inches in diameter, and the presence of smaller surface fuels. In 

stands that were heavily affected by the beetles, the newly open canopy is and will continue to 

create an opportunity for pine seedlings to become established and prolific regeneration of pine 

to occur within and around the large accumulations of CWD further increasing fire hazard 

(photos below). In areas of the Forest that were not heavily impacted by beetles there remain

moderately stocked to well stocked stands of ponderosa pine. 

 Photo A
5

 Photo B

 Photo C
6

 Photo D

Vegetation

The ponderosa pine cover type dominates the landscape. Also interspersed throughout the 

project area are Quaking Aspen, Bur Oak, Paper Birch, and White Spruce. As a result of fire 

exclusion and past management activities, ponderosa pine has encroached on the non-forested 

communities, contributing to the reduction in size of the hardwood cover type and meadows. 

This also created dense, closed canopy ponderosa pine stands, prior to the mountain pine beetle 

epidemic. In light of the recent mountain pine beetle activity within and adjacent to the project 

area, changes have been seen in the fuels profile. Impacted trees are losing their needles, 

decomposing, and breaking off or falling to the ground increasing the surface fuel loading. 

Surface fuels include duff, small woody debris, dead down logs and long needle litter. Isolated 

areas of storm damage, and slash from past management activities also exist within the project 

area. 

Mountain pine beetle damage will continue to alter several stand characteristics including canopy 

fuels, down woody fuels, duff, ladder fuels, herbaceous fuels, and microclimate, in turn altering 

the fire hazard and potential fire behavior. The potential for crown fire will be reduced without 

as many closed canopy stands, but as a result of the increased surface fuel loading, more of the 

Black Hills is available for, and may potentially be affected by, large, intense wildland fires.
7

Vegetation Species Distribution:

Table 2: Dominant vegetation – all management areas combined

Dominant vegetation Acres Percent

Meadow 4,269 0.39%

Grassland 71,038 6.47%

Shrubs 4,662 0.42%

Quaking aspen 39,963 3.64%

Bur oak 13,212 1.20%

Ponderosa pine 848,322 77.23%

Mixed pine and aspen 56,512 5.14%

Mixed pine and oak 28,049 2.55%

Paper birch 4,248 0.39%

White spruce 24,289 2.21%

Other 3,861 0.35%

Total 1,098,425 100.00%

Fire Regime and Condition Class

Historically, fires burned more frequently and were less severe, with ignitions caused by both 

lightning and humans. This promoted fire tolerant species of vegetation and controlled 

regeneration of those species, maintained an open forest structure, reduced biomass, decreased 

the impacts of insects and disease, and maintained wildlife habitats for many species that utilize 

open stand structures (Graham, McCaffrey, & Jain, 2004). However, during the early 1900s the 

focus became aggressive fire suppression and prevention. Fire suppression, grazing, and 

intensive forest management have trended the forest outside historic ranges, creating uniformly 

stocked landscapes with numerous even aged stands, many of which are densely stocked or 

contain dense understories of regeneration (Hunter et al., 2007). This has lead to wildfires of 

increased severity and higher susceptibility of stands to mountain pine beetle outbreaks. 

Fire regimes characterize the role fire plays in an ecosystem in the absence of modern human 

intervention but take into account possible influence from aboriginal fire use (Barrett et al., 

2010). Descriptions of fire regimes are done at a coarse scale because of the enormous 

variability of fire over time and space. Currently, there are three general types of fire regimes in 

the Black Hills (USDA Forest Service, 2005). Condition class describes the degree to which the 

composition and structure of vegetation has departed from historical fire regimes. Fire regimes 

have 3 condition classes which describe current vegetation conditions within the fire regime 

groups. The risk of loss of key ecosystem components from wildfires increases from condition 

class 1 (low) to condition class 3 (high). The fire regime condition class rating can be used to 

describe the degree of departure from the historic fire regime (reference conditions), possibly 

resulting in changes to key ecosystem components such as vegetation characteristics, fuel 

composition, fire frequency, severity, pattern, and other associated disturbances, such as insect 

and disease mortality, grazing, and drought (Barrett et al., 2010). Table 3 below describes each

fire regime followed by a typical stand structure for each condition class.
8

Table 3: Fire Regimes in the Black Hills (FEIS)

General Characteristics Major Controlling 

Variables Distribution

Frequent, 

Low-Severity 

Fire Regimes 

Fires recur within any 

stand at relatively short 

intervals (10 - 50 years), 

burning at low severity 

in the canopy and soil, 

and variable severity in 

the understory 

Weather (fires occur 

during dry periods), 

Climate (extensive fires 

tend to occur in dry years 

that follow 1- 3 wet 

years), and Fuels (fuels 

gradually accumulate 

during 

the intervals between 

successive fires)

Evidence of surface fire in ponderosa 

pine forests throughout the Black 

Hills, most frequent at the PrairieForest ecotone and less frequent in 

interior forests at mid to high 

elevations (Fisher et al. 1987, Brown 

and Sieg 1996, Brown and Sieg 

1999, Brown et al. 2000, Wienk 

2001, Brown 2003, Wienk et al. 

2004).

Infrequent, 

HighSeverity Fire 

Regimes

Fires recur within any 

stand at long intervals 

(100 – 500+ years), 

burning at high severity 

in the canopy and 

understory, and at 

variable severity to the

soil

Weather and Climate are 

the primary controllers 

(most ignitions extinguish 

by themselves because of 

wet conditions; extensive 

fires occur only in very 

dry summers; variability 

in fuels usually has little 

influence on fire 

frequency, extent, or 

severity)

Large areas of even-aged and dense 

forest and of closed canopy, mature 

or old-growth forest at the time of 

settlement are evidence of standreplacing disturbance (Graves 1899, 

Shinneman and Baker 1997).

Mixed 

Severity Fire 

Regimes 

These fire regimes are 

intermediate between the 

Frequent, Low- Severity 

and the Infrequent, 

High- Severity Fire 

Regimes. Fires occur 

at variable intervals 

(10 - >100 years), and 

burn at variable severity 

(patches of high severity 

intermingled with 

patches of low or 

intermediate severity) 

Weather, Climate, and 

Fuels all influence fire 

frequency, extent, and 

severity, in complex ways 

that are not well 

understood, with 

enormous variability over 

time and space 

Proposed as the dominant model for 

fire regimes in ponderosa pine forests 

of the Black Hills. Under this model, 

surface fire forms the background 

process creating forest structure and 

landscape pattern. However, fires 

sometimes burn with mixed severity, 

with both a surface fire and a standreplacing fire component, and may 

sometimes create large areas of high 

severity burns. Forest patches are 

variable in size and within patch 

structure (Lentile et al. in press)

The coarse scale national data characterizes the Black Hills as primarily condition class III

(Schmit, Menakis, Hardy, Hann, & Bunnell, 2002), high relative risk of significantly altering or 

losing key components of the ponderosa pine forest system. These conditions significantly 

increase the probability of a surface fire transitioning to a crown fire with increased burn severity 

and tree mortality. Evidence of past fires shows the potential for large, high intensity surface 

fires, and, given the right conditions, stand-replacing fires. Recent examples include the Jasper, 

Elk Mountain II, Battle Creek, Grizzly Gulch, West Hell Canyon, Ricco, Alabaugh, Whoopup, 

Coal Canyon, and White Draw wildland fires. 

 
9

 Table 4: Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) rating descriptions (Barrett et al., 2010).

Fire Regime Condition Class Description

FRCC1

Low Departure (<33%) from the 

*central tendency of the historic 

fire regime.

• Fire regimes are within the historical range.

• Risk of losing key ecosystem components is low.

• Vegetative attributes are intact and functioning 

within the historical range.

FRCC2

Moderate Departure (33-66%)

from the *central tendency of the 

historic fire regime.

• Fire regimes are moderately altered from their 

historical range.

• Risk of losing key ecosystem components is 

moderate.

• Vegetation attributes have been moderately 

altered from their historical range.

• Fire frequencies have departed from natural 

frequencies by one or more return intervals, 

resulting in changes to fire size, intensity, 

severity, and landscape patterns.

FRCC3

High Departure (>66%) from the 

*central tendency of the historic 

fire regime.

• Fire regimes are significantly altered from their 

historical range. 

• The risk of losing key ecosystem components is 

high. 

• Vegetation attributes have been significantly 

altered from their historical range.

• Fire frequencies have departed from historical 

frequencies by multiple return intervals, resulting 

in dramatic changes to fire size, intensity, 

severity, and landscape patterns. 

• Central tendency refers to a composite estimate of vegetation characteristics including: species composition, 

structural stages, stand age, canopy closure, and mosaic pattern; fuel composition; fire frequency, severity, and 

pattern; and other associated natural disturbances.
10

 Figure 1: Typical stand structure for each Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC)

Fire Risk

Fire risk applies to the probability of an ignition occurring as determined from historical fire 

record data. Fire history occurrence of both large and point fires were analyzed using the entire 

1.2 million acres of the Black Hills since the proposed project area spans most of the Forest. The 

fire history data includes fires occurring from 1970 to present. Of the 5,738 fires that occurred, 

4,038 were lightning-caused, 158 equipment-caused, 626 campfire-caused, 121 smoking-caused, 

140 debris burning-caused, 75 railroad-caused, 147 arson-caused, 114 children-caused and 315

miscellaneous. Both historical fire occurrence data and large fire history (those fires exceeding 

100 acres), in and around the project area are depicted. In addition, the percent of the project 

area impacted by large fires (greater than 100 acres) is displayed. (Figure 2, Table 5)

Table 5: Fire history occurrence and the size of the fires from 1970 to present

Fire Size Class Fire Size (acres) Number of Fires

A 0 – 1⁄4 3,541

B 1⁄4 to 9 1,978

C 10-99 149

D 100 – 299 22

E 300-999 17

F 1000-4999 15

G 5000 + 16
11

Figure 2: Large Fire History within the project area (100 acres or larger)
12

Table 6: Area of each large fire (1970-2016) falling within the project area 

Number of 

Large Fires

Large Fire 

Acres

Percent of Project Area 

Impacted by Previous 

Large Fires

Percent of Project Area 

Not Impacted by 

Previous Large Fires

70 241,064 22% 78%

The number of fires on the entire Black Hills National Forest system lands averages 123 per 

year, which remains fairly constant. The number of fires that have escaped initial attack has also 

remained constant. However, these escaped fires have become larger and more difficult to 

control with an average large fire size increasing from under 1,000 acres per fire in the early 

1900’s to nearly 10,000 acres per year in the last 20 years, having burned approximately 267,000 

acres since 1986. This may be due largely, to drought conditions experienced from 2000-2007.

Given severe fire weather conditions the average size of fires may be expected to increase due to 

the increased risk to firefighting personnel and limited tactical options for engaging fires in 

standing bug killed timber stands as well as in bug killed stands where the dead trees have fallen 

and significantly increased the surface fuel loading. This increased fuel loading results in 

increased resistance to control and makes direct attack with handtools extremely slow and 

difficult.

Values at Risk

Values are defined in the Forest Plan EIS (Appendix E-80) as any or all natural resource 

improvements, or other values that may be jeopardized if a fire occurs. There are 56 at-risk 

communities located within or adjacent to the Black Hills Resilient Landscapes project area. To 

further assess the level of wildfire risk for each community, buffer zones were created at 

distances of one half, one, two, and three miles around each community and supported through 

Community Wildfire Protections Plans. Based on county structure data from Crook, Weston, 

Lawrence, Pennington, Custer and Fall River Counties (Figure 3) there are approximately 29,335 

structures within 3 miles of the project area. Other values at risk include commercial timber 

stands, public water supplies, powerlines, communication sites (cell towers, radio towers, etc), 

recreational sites/facilities, range improvements, investments in timber stand improvement and 

reforestation, wildlife habitat, including snags, forage, riparian areas, security cover, and mid to 

late seral ponderosa pine stands, sensitive species, as well as water, air and visual quality.

The Healthy Forests Restoration Act contains two key items relating to community wildfire 

preparedness. They are the definition of the elements of an at-risk community and the 

establishment of the composition of a Community Wildfire Protection Plan. All seven counties 

containing portions of Black Hills NFS lands currently have approved Community Wildfire 

Protection Plans, including Crook, Weston, Lawrence, Meade, Pennington, Custer and Fall River 

counties.

1. At-Risk Community (ARC) means an area that meets the following conditions:

• the definition of a wildland urban interface community

• includes an environment that is conductive of a large-scale wildland fire

• involves a significant threat to human life or property as the result of a wildland fire
13

2. Community Wildfire Protection Plan is a collaborative plan for at-risk communities that:

• meets specific standards developed by Wildland Fire Leadership Council and agreed

to by applicable Federal, State and local government agencies affected by its 

 composition

• identifies and prioritizes areas for hazardous fuel reduction treatments; recommends the 

 types and methods of treatment on Federal and non-Federal land; and includes actions 

 that will protect 1 or more at-risk communities and essential infrastructure, and

• includes recommendations to reduce structural ignitability of public and private

 property throughout the at-risk community.
14

Figure 3: Structures Within 3 Miles of the Project Area
15

Fire Hazard

Fire hazard is defined as a fuel complex that determines the ease of ignition and the resistance to 

control. It is an expression of what kind of fire may potentially occur and how it affects human 

values. Although it’s commonly thought of in terms of torching and crowning, it is also 

determined by rate-of-spread, intensity, spotting, resistance to control, and fire persistence. The 

fire hazard rating increases as the amount and continuity of surface and canopy fuels increases. 

As the amount of fuel on a given landscape increases and fuel profiles become more horizontally 

and vertically continuous, the intensity of a wildfire in that landscape is expected to increase. 

Areas with a high fire hazard rating have the potential to exhibit more extreme fire behavior with 

more severe effects than those with a low hazard rating. 

The Phase II Amendment quantifies fire hazard in terms of structural stage. The structural stage 

gives an indication of the current fire hazard and is a stand level rating of torching and crowning

susceptibility. The mountain pine beetle epidemic has altered the fuels profile across the 

landscape. Crown fire hazard will no longer be a concern in many stands due to lack of mature 

trees, however fire hazard in terms of surface fuels is a growing concern due to the large 

accumulation of dead, falling trees, especially in the wildland urban interface and along access 

and egress routes. 

Table 7: Existing Fire Hazard Ratings Based on Structure Stage Data

Structural Stage Fire Hazard 

Rating

Approximate

Acres

% of Project 

Area

1 – Grass/Forb, Low 78,567 7

2 – Shrub/Seedling Moderate 54,640 5

3A – Sapling-pole, <40% canopy closure, 1-9”

diameter

Moderate 66,009 6

3B – Sapling-pole, 40-70% canopy closure, 1-

9” diameter

High 42,681 4

3C – Sapling-pole, >70% canopy closure, 1-9”

diameter

Very High 23,993 2

4A – Mature, <40% canopy closure, >9” avg. 

diameter

Moderate 178,400 16

4A – Mature, <40% canopy closure, <9” avg. 

diameter

Very High 244,988 23

4A-Mature, <40%canopy closure, < or > 9” 

avg. diameter

High 12,290 1

4B – Mature, 40-70% canopy closure, >9” avg. 

diameter

High 53,070 5

4B – Mature, 40-70% canopy closure, <9” avg. 

diameter

Very High 92,571 9

4B – Mature, 40-70% canopy closure, < or 9” 

avg. diameter

Very High 6,833 1

4C – Mature, < or >70% canopy closure, < or 

>9” avg. diameter

Very High 56,187 5

5 – Late Successional, 16”+ diameter Very High 4,089 1

Non-Conifer Low 165,623 15
16

Graph 1: Existing Fire Hazard

Continuous aerial fuels, combined with steep and broken terrain, create the environment for a 

potentially fast moving stand replacing fire. Local experience has shown that continuous stands 

of ponderosa pine can easily support sustained runs of crown fire, either day or night, given the 

correct weather conditions. High fire severity is a significant threat to the existing forest 

resources but the real danger is to life safety. Rapidly moving fire can easily cut off escape 

routes for the public and emergency services. Continuous surface fuels in the form of coarse 

woody debris (CWD), also attribute to fire hazard. As CWD decays, the probability of a reburn 

is more likely due to the high fire persistence associated with it caused by smoldering. Large 

amounts of decaying CWD are also prone to spotting from log to log, which would result in high 

probabilities of ignition, even in the absence of torching trees, adding to an increased difficulty 

in controlling a fire. Also, with large woody fuel accumulation there is a greater chance of 

torching, crowning, and spotting due to the increased amount of energy released during a fire, 

similar to that of heavy slash burning. It’s assumed that high to extreme fire hazard potential 

exists when downed CWD exceeds 30 to 40 tons per acre (Brown, Reinhardt, & Kramer, 2003). 

Few studies have been done on fire effects in timber stands exhibiting MPB mortality. 

Consequently, we do not have a firm research basis on which to draw conclusions. Anecdotal 

evidence as well as field experience and observations are currently the best way to draw 

conclusions. Insect hazard closely correlates with fire hazard ratings and structural stages. As 

has been seen on the forest, one year post infestation, a ponderosa pine’s needles will begin to 

fade and ultimately turn rust red by season’s end (Hopkins 1905). A fading (dying) or “red top” 

(dead) ponderosa pine might more easily support the transition from a surface fire to the crowns 

due to the lack of foliar moisture present within the needles (given the correct weather 

conditions). The potential for crown fire may increase for this relatively short time while the 

needles are still attached to the tree. Needles fall from the dead tree in as little as six months or 

as long as two years depending on weather factors. The fire hazard, as defined by structural 

stage, will decrease dramatically due to the lack of crowns. With less vegetative cover, sites 

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

Very High High Mod Low

Acres

Fire Hazard Rating

Fire Hazard

Existing Fire Hazard
17

become dryer due to increased solar insolation and surface winds. Grasses and forbs soon begin 

to be the dominant vegetation. These fine fuels would then become the primary carrier of fire 

depending on weather conditions, potentially increasing rates of spread. Within five years, 70-

95% of the dead trees fall to the ground (Schmid, Mata, & Schaupp, 2009). The fuel profile is

being changed dramatically. The potential for crown fire is disappearing in areas severely 

affected by the MPB. However, with the additional accumulation of fine fuels and CWD from 

the falling dead trees, surface fire hazard is increasing. Fuel loadings on the forest floor are 

increasing from the typical 5 tons/acre seen in ponderosa pine stands to up to 50-100 tons/acre in 

previously dense stands that were highly impacted by beetles. A fire passing through this fuel 

model would be resistant to control due to higher fireline intensities, flamelengths exceeding four 

feet (flamelengths greater than four feet require mechanized equipment) and spotting from fire 

brands. Resulting damage to residual trees, regeneration, and soils would most likely be severe. 

Photo B, shown above, is an example of CWD resulting from MPB mortality. Three 50 foot 

transects taken in this location revealed an average of 82 tons per acre in the stand. The 

optimum CWD for an acceptable fire hazard that also provides benefits to soil and wildlife in 

ponderosa pine stands is 5 to 20 tons per acre (Brown, Reinhardt, & Kramer, 2003). With 

increased sunlight and less competition, natural pine regeneration will begin to take hold, 

changing the fuel model once again (Photos C & D). Embers falling into the crowns of beetle 

attacked and killed trees or the needle litter below these trees, have a high probability of 

independent ignition with no additional heat source. Transition in these stands from surface to 

active crown fire can be extremely rapid with little change of weather and atmospheric

conditions (Hoyt & Jolly, 2012). 

Air Quality

Air quality within the Black Hills National Forest is addressed in the Final Environmental Impact 

Statement for the 1997 Revised Forest Plan. Overall, air quality within the Black Hills National 

Forest is very good. Air quality is better than national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

for all pollutants. 

There are two Class 1 airsheds in South Dakota, Wind Cave and Badlands National Parks. These 

Class 1 airsheds are also those in closest proximity to the project area. Wind Cave is located 

adjacent to the Black Hills National Forest to the southeast, and Badlands is located 

approximately 50 miles east/southeast of the project area. 

A solid working relationship exists between the Black Hills National Forest and the South 

Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources. There have been few problems 

identified and communicated to the Black Hills National Forest regarding negative impacts to air 

quality relating to prescribed fire activity on the Black Hills National Forest in the last 10 years. 

The only case of known impacts was a short term event that lasted less than two hours.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) for six pollutants, called criteria pollutants, in compliance with the Clean 

Air Act. NAAQS include primary standards, which were established to protect public health; 

and secondary standards that protect public welfare. Of the “criteria” pollutants identified, one, 

particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size (PM2.5) is a primary component of smoke 
18

emissions from wildland fires and prescribed fires. The EPA issued two standards developed for 

PM2.5; an annual standard of 12 micrograms/cubic meter of air (μg/m3

), which was revised from 

the previous standard of 15 μg/m3 in 2013, and a 24 hour standard of 35 μg/m3. This means that 

the 3-year average of the weighted annual mean concentration measured at established 

monitoring stations must not exceed this level. EPA established the secondary standard as equal 

to the primary standard.

Data from four monitoring stations in the South Dakota portion of the Black Hills are reported 

for PM2.5 on EPA’s Airtrends website (https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/). One of these sites 

meets minimum trends completeness criteria. This site is located in Jackson County, near 

Badlands National Monument, some 90 miles east of the town of Custer. The other three sites 

record data but do not meet the minimum trends completeness criteria. 

South Dakota’s ambient air quality monitoring network for PM2.5 has continuously demonstrated 

attainment with the PM2.5 standards. Between 2007 and 2016, monitoring stations in Custer, and 

Jackson, and Pennington Counties in South Dakota showed PM2.5 concentrations averaging 4.01 

μg/m3 for the Jackson station, 3.97 for Custer station, and 6.62 for the Pennington station, based 

on seasonally-weighted annual averages. These measurements are well below the national 

average for PM2.5 concentrations, and are also well below the primary and secondary standards 

for this criteria pollutant. See Appendix B for graphs of average and highest PM 2.5 

concentration levels.

Air pollution in the form of PM10, particulate matter smaller than 10 microns diameter, was at 

one time an issue in the Rapid City area. The 1996 Forest Plan EIS notes that the Rapid City 

area had been classified as an area not attaining the NAAQS for PM10 particulates. In September 

2005, the State of South Dakota, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, petitioned 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requesting that the Rapid City area be redesignated from unclassifiable to attainment status for the PM10 standard. EPA published a 

proposed rule in the Federal Register on December 9, 2005, soliciting public comment on the 

proposal (70FR73183). On March 6, 2006, the EPA published a final rule approving the request 

from the State of South Dakota (71FR11162). The approval was based on the State’s 

demonstration that the Rapid City area was in attainment of the PM10 national standard, and 

commitment to continuation of fugitive dust controls. The Rapid City area was officially redesignated from unclassified to attainment status for PM10 effective April 5, 2006. 

The project area is in the vicinity of two Class 1 airsheds; Badlands National Park and Wind 

Cave National Park and several communities at risk (Figure 2). The project area is designated as 

a Class II area allowing higher concentrations of pollutants than the Class I airsheds. Smoke 

generated by wildfire is usually greater and cannot be mitigated; however, smoke generated 

under the controlled conditions, such as during a prescribed fire, can be mitigated using the 

following means:

• Limit treatment area size

• Specify wind directions and speed

• Specify minimum mixing heights 

• Stagger ignitions 
19

• Different lighting patterns

These design criteria techniques in addition to other control methods for smoke management 

minimize the impacts of smoke to visibility and human health. Smoke management and air 

quality is one of the required elements of the prescribed fire planning and implementation 

process. Prior to ignition, the Prescribed Fire Burn Boss must review the weather forecast and 

evaluate test fire observations to ensure the smoke emission will be in full compliance with the 

NAAQS. 

Desired Conditions

The desired condition in the Black Hills Resilient Landscapes Project emphasizes moving 

landscape-scale vegetation conditions toward Forest Plan objectives in order to reduce risk of 

wildfire to landscapes and communities, increase ecosystem resilience to insect infestation and 

other natural disturbances, and contribute to public safety and the local economy. Crown fire 

hazard is a key component of fire hazard, especially in WUI areas. In addition, the correlation 

between beetle hazard and crown fire hazard is strong, with stands that have a high crown fire 

hazard in most cases also having a high risk for MPB activity. High levels of surface fuel 

loadings also are a contributor to fire hazard causing higher fire severity and greater resistance to 

control during fire suppression efforts. The project design would use a combination of 

treatments to reduce hazardous fuels thus reducing current fire hazard ratings consistent with 

Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) Objective 10-01 (to manage for 50%-75% 

moderate to low fire hazard within the wildland urban interface). Fuels are to be treated around 

all non-National Forest lands to meet standards set by National Fire Protection Association 

(NFPA) 1144: Protection of Life and Property from Wildfire. This is consistent with Goal 10, 

LRMP, Phase II. 

Fuels treatments would be designed to protect values identified above. The treatments would be 

arranged to break up the continuity of both the surface fuel loading and vertical structure thus 

creating a mosaic pattern. This pattern will be especially critical in reducing the threat of a large 

scale stand replacement fire to communities and other values at risk. Residual crown spacing 

should provide open space between trees thus reducing the likelihood of a crown fire’s ability to 

sustain itself. Treatments resulting in denser tree spacing should be isolated by stands of thinner 

trees to limit crown fire potential. Treatments should also be placed adjacent to natural barriers 

such as meadows and nonconiferous stands to maximize the effectiveness of barriers and allow 

for increased tactical fire management opportunities. Fuels treatments will primarily be focused 

on areas in the WUI, near at-risk communities and non-NFS lands, critical infrastructure, and 

adjacent to roads and trails, focusing first on egress routes, although they may occur in other 

areas following timber sales. 

Environmental Consequences

Alternative A (Proposed Action)

Alternative A is designed to increase ecosystem resilience to insect infestation and other natural 

disturbances, contribute to public safety and the local economy, and reduce risk of wildfire to 
20

landscapes and communities. It would move structure stages toward Forest Plan structural stage 

objectives which would help reduce current and potential future insect and fire hazards. 

Activities would also maintain and perpetuate aspen, oak, and grasslands. Activities include 

commercial and non-commercial treatments, mechanical fuels treatments, hazard tree removal, 

and prescribed burning. 

Proposed fuels treatment includes mechanical fuels treatment on up to 7,000 acres per year, 

prescribed fire of up to 10,000 acres per year, and hazard tree removal. Mechanical fuels 

treatment includes fuel break construction, thinning, piling, burning piles, scattering, shredding 

(masticating), or chipping fuels, or lopping and scattering of activity fuels. Priority criteria for 

treatment include wildland-urban interface (specifically, within one-half mile of at-risk 

communities and within 300 feet of other private property) and areas adjacent to egress roads 

and critical infrastructure. Treatments in these areas would increase firefighter and public safety, 

create tactical fire suppression opportunities enabling more successful protection of values at 

risk, and provide safer egress routes in the event public evacuations were necessary. 

Proposed timber treatments include overstory removal on up to 187,000 acres of SS 4A stands, 

precommercial and/or POL thinning on up to 25,000 acres per year to increase SS 3A and 3B to 

promote growth toward 4B, patch clearcuts on up to 1,300 acres in MA 4.1 and 600 acres in MA 

5.6, and planting of ponderosa pine seedlings on up to 5,000 acres where large wildfires have 

recently occurred. Mechanical site preparation would occur in open, mature pine stands on up to

4,000 acres. 

Pine and spruce removal from aspen stands would take place on up to 6,000 acres. On up to 

30,900 acres of pine stands, pine and spruce would be removed from aspen inclusions. 

Regeneration of declining aspen stands would occur on up to 4,000 acres. Pine removal from oak 

stands would take place on up to 5,400 acres. Pine would be cut from encroached grasslands on 

up to 14,200 acres. Uneven-age management would occur on up to 10,000 acres of SS 4A stands.

Direct and Indirect Effects

The treatments proposed in Alternative A would have a significant effect on the fuels profile and 

potential fire behavior across the landscape. Overstory removal, uneven-age individual tree 

selection, precommercial thinning, POL thinning, patch cuts and pine encroachment treatment 

would all break up the horizontal and vertical continuity of the fuels in both ladder fuels and the 

canopy. This would reduce the likelihood for crown fire initiation and spread by creating 

openings in the canopy as well as reducing the canopy bulk density of the stand, decreasing the 

fire hazard associated with torching and crowning. Following thinning, there are two primary 

options for managing the remaining activity fuels, whole tree yarding and lopping and scattering. 

Whole tree yarding removes the entire tree, with the tops piled and burned when there is 

adequate snow cover. When lop and scatter is the method utilized, the boles are removed and the 

activity fuels are left and scattered across the forest floor adding to the surface fuel loading. Of 

the two methods, whole tree yarding contributes to reduction of surface fuels in addition to 

decreasing crown fire hazard, therefore this method is preferred when dealing with activity fuels.

Proposed mechanical and manual fuels treatments include fuel break construction, thinning, 
21

piling, and pile burning, scattering, shredding or chipping fuels, and prescribed burning

(broadcast). In areas that were thinned, residual slash would be piled and burned at a later date. 

This would break up vertical continuity, and reduce surface fuel loadings which would decrease 

torching, crowning and spotting potential, reduce flamelengths, fireline intensity, and resistance 

to control in the event a wildfire occurred. Shredding and scattering surface fuels with a 

masticator, or chipping fuels, modifies the vertical and horizontal distribution of fuels. It 

compacts fuels and makes it more difficult for a fire to move from the surface into the crowns of 

trees. It would reduce rates of spread, spotting potential, flamelength, fireline intensities, 

duration, crown fire potential, and resistance to control. These types of treatments would move 

the CWD toward the optimum range of 5-20 tons per acre, which would represent moderate to 

low fire hazard. Broadcast burning would also reduce surface fuel loadings and CWD. It would 

raise canopy base heights, reduce seedling and sapling densities, and help mature trees become 

more resilient to future fires. While thinning will decrease the likelihood of crown initiation, 

thinning that is not followed by reduction of surface fuels, such as whole tree yarding, prescribed 

burning, or both won’t be as effective at decreasing potential fire intensity or severity. 

Post treatment fire behavior is expected to be low to mixed severity surface fire with isolated 

pockets of group torching, especially in areas that have been whole tree harvested or where 

thinning was followed by prescribed burning. This would create more strategic and tactical 

firefighting opportunities resulting in greater success during initial attack, increased firefighter 

and public safety, reduced wildfire risk to communities, wildland urban interface (WUI), and

natural resources, as well as lower suppression costs. In addition a change in FRCC can be 

expected moving from a FRCC 3 to a FRCC 2. Where multiple treatments are occurring, such as 

thinning followed by prescribed burning, a FRCC 1 may be the result. This would create a

landscape that is more resilient to future disturbance events such as wildfire or insects.

Table 8: Principles of Fire-Resilient Forests (Graham, McCaffrey, & Jain, 2004)

Objective Effect Advantage Concerns 

Reduce surface 

and ladder fuels 

Reduces potential 

flame length 

Fire control 

easier, less 

torching 

Surface disturbance less with 

fire than other techniques 

Increase canopy 

base height 

Requires longer 

flame length to 

ignite tree crowns 

Less torching Opens understory, may allow 

surface wind to increase 

Decrease crown 

density 

Makes 

independent 

crown fire less 

probable 

Reduces crown 

fire propagation 

Surface wind may increase, 

surface fuels may be drier 

Increase 

proportion of 

mature fireresilient tree 

species 

Thicker bark, 

taller crowns, 

higher canopy 

base height 

Increases 

survivability of 

trees 

Removing smaller trees is 

sometimes problematic 
22

Road construction and maintenance, associated with timber sales, would create better access for 

fire suppression activities in the event a wildfire occurs in that area. Hazard tree reduction is a 

proposed treatment in areas with heavy beetle infestation, where the dead standing trees are 

threatening structures, private property, critical infrastructure, or open roads or trails. This 

treatment will reduce the threat of falling trees to the public and private landowners. 

 

In the grass fuel model, fires will still have the potential for high rates of spread due to less 

canopy cover resulting from MPB caused mortality and thinning. Grass production will increase 

as well as the potential for higher winds moving across the landscape through open stands. The 

reduced canopy cover will also enable fuels on the surface to receive more sunlight and become 

drier. 

Post treatment fuel models will be best represented by GR4, TL8, and SB1. Fuel model GR4 is a 

moderate load, dry climate grass fuel model. TL8 is moderate load long-needle pine litter. SB1 

is light dead and down activity fuel.

Table 9: Alternative A-Fire Behavior Outputs (Behave Plus 5.0.5)

Pre-treatment

Fuel Model

Flamelength

(ft)

Fireline 

Intensity

(btu/ft/sec) 

Post-treatment

Fuel Model

Flamelength

(ft)

Fireline 

Intensity

(btu/ft/sec)

SB3 9.6 774 SB1 3.2 73

SH5 16.1 2373 TL8 3.6 91

GR4 9.8 819 GR4 9.8 819

*Based on 90th percentile weather data from Fire Family Plus 4.1

Table 10: Existing and Post Treatment Fire Hazard Ratings

Fire Hazard 

Rating

Existing Acres

(Approximate)

% of Project 

Area

Post-treatment Acres 

(Approximate)

% of Project 

Area

Very High 428,661 40 167,974 22

High 108,041 10 104,821 10

Moderate 299,190 28 355,817 45

Low 244,190 23 469,729 23
23

Graph 2: Alternative A-Fire Hazard Rating

Prescribed burning, regardless of whether pile burning or broadcast burning, would affect air 

quality. The main pollutants that would be emitted include: PM2.5, PM10, carbon monoxide and 

volatile organic compounds. PM10 emissions may also be present resulting from logging 

operations, log hauling and road construction/reconstruction or rehabilitation. Dust may also be 

generated through timber harvest activities adding fine particulate emissions locally.

Smoke generated from prescribed burning may affect visibility and air quality, and may be 

noticed by nearby residents, recreational users, adjacent communities, and perhaps in sensitive 

areas such as the Class 1 airsheds in Wind Cave or Badlands National Parks depending on 

transport wind direction and mixing heights. Of the six criteria air pollutants identified by the 

EPA, particulate matter with diameters less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) is the pollutant of greatest 

concern. Most of the mass of wildfire smoke (80-90%) falls into the PM2.5 classification. A 

1997 amendment to the Clean Air Act established a national goal of prevention of any future and 

remedying of any existing impairment of visibility in mandatory Class 1 federal areas where 

impairments result from human caused pollution.

Fire intensities and fuel consumption are expected to be lower during prescribed fire than during 

a high intensity wildfire because a significant amount of biomass will be utilized as part of 

commercial harvest activities. This results in short-term emissions to the atmosphere, with 

generally low concentrations of pollutants that dissipate fairly quickly. 

Any prescribed burning is subject to prescriptive elements as defined in an approved Prescribed 

Fire Plan. These prescriptive elements may include mixing height, transport windspeed and 

direction as well as the adjective smoke dispersal forecast. Monitoring of potential smoke 

impacts occurs at different levels during prescribed burning activities and may include on-site air 

monitoring stations, ocular estimation of visual smoke impacts or referencing of air monitoring 

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

Very High High Mod Low

Acres

Fire Hazard Rating

Fire Hazard

Existing Fire Hazard

Post Treatment Fire

Hazard
24

sites at Wind Cave or Badlands National Parks or the monitoring site in Rapid City, SD. 

Secondly, the prescribed burn planning process itself incorporates the Interagency Prescribed 

Fire Planning and Implementation Procedures Guide (April 2014) and undergoes technical 

review prior to Line Officer review and approval. Potential short-term effects would be 

minimized by project design criteria and by following applicable smoke permit conditions 

identified in the appropriate State Implementation plans. Public notification procedures prior to 

initiating a prescribed fire project would be specified in the approved burn plan. Weather 

forecasts are requested through the National Weather Service and are one of the primary factors 

when making the decision to proceed with ignition. 

Effects of treatment would be visible for approximately 10 years. Beyond that, resistance to 

control would increase as the pine regeneration grows more quickly filling in the open areas 

where the canopy has been opened up as well as where mechanical site preparation occurred. 

Surface fuels would also once again accumulate. If wildfire occurred in the next 10 years, 

mortality in the regeneration could be high, but later in the life of the stand, the effects of a fire 

would be less as the fire resistance of pine regeneration increases (Battaglia, Smith, & Shepperd,

2008). Consecutive treatments would maintain treatment effectiveness characterized by an 

FRCC close to historical conditions with low intensity mixed severity wildfires. Without 

consecutive treatments, in 20 years, fire behavior would increase due to an increase in ladder 

fuels enabling torching and crown fire initiation to contribute to fire spread.

Alternative A would meet the Forest Plan Goal 10 by establishing and maintaining a mosaic of 

vegetative conditions to reduce occurrences of large-scale, high intensity fire, insect, and disease 

events, and facilitate insect and disease management and firefighting capabilities. It will also 

meet Goal 11 by enhancing or maintaining the natural rate of recovery after significant fire or

other natural events while maintaining a mosaic of fuel-loading conditions to facilitate future fire 

suppression activities. In addition, it would meet the intent of Standard 4103 by utilizing 

prescribed fire to achieve management objectives for specific management areas and 4105 by 

using broadcast burning to dispose of slash in order to return the inorganic and organic chemicals 

in the foliage and small woody material to the soil, to reduce fire hazard, and to provide seedbeds 

for natural regeneration. 

This alternative would meet the intent of the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management 

Strategy by helping to restore and maintain landscapes so they are resilient to fire-related 

disturbances, creating fire adapted communities, and making wildfire response safer, more 

effective and more efficient. It would also meet objectives of CWPPs.

Alternative B (No Action)

The no action alternative assumes that none of the vegetation management proposed in this 

analysis would take place within the project area, however other ongoing and planned activities 

would still occur. Fire suppression would continue to be practiced. The only other changes that 

would occur on the landscape would be those changes that occur as a result of natural 

occurrences including Mountain Pine Beetle activity, wildland fire or those resulting from other 

project decisions.
25

Direct and Indirect Effects

Change towards desired conditions as outlined in the Forest Plan (USDA Forest Service 2006a)

would not occur. Fuels would not be altered in order to move the landscape toward being more 

resilient to future disturbance. The wildfire hazard to at-risk communities, WUI, and natural 

resources would not be reduced. Objectives presented by the Healthy Forests Restoration Act, 

National Fire Plan, and the affected Community Wildfire Protection Plans would not be met.

Fire exclusion would continue, furthering the departure from historic fire return intervals. 

The current mountain pine beetle outbreak is expected to run its course by 2019. Crown fire 

potential could increase in the short term as needles go from green to the red stage in newly 

impacted stands. In a laboratory study done by the Rocky Mountain Research Station, it was 

determined that ignition rates were faster for the red needles than healthy green needles due to 

their lower foliar moisture (Jolly et al., 2012). Within 3-5 years following beetle caused 

mortality, 70%-90% of a stand is expected to be on the ground (Schmid et al., 2009). In many 

stands this has already taken place. In others it will continue as newly infested trees die. 

Without treatment, surface fuel accumulation will increase greatly due to the additional CWD 

from broken and fallen trees as well as fine fuels from the trees during the early stages of 

mortality (fuel model SB3). In stands hit heavily by MPB the resulting fuel loadings may be 50-

100 tons per acre. Due to the reduction in overstory, grass production will increase (fuel model 

GR4) followed later by prolific regeneration of pine seedlings. When ponderosa pine 

regenerates itself in the Black Hills, it often grows like “dog hair” (overstocked with saplings) 

and can burn like a shrub (fuel model SH5). Fire hazard in terms of torching and crowning as 

well as surface fire hazard determined by rate-of-spread, fireline intensity, spotting, resistance to 

control, and fire persistence would increase across the project area. If a fire burns through the

heavy dead and down fuel, the high resistance to control would be due to high fireline intensities, 

flamelengths greater than 4 feet, and log to log spotting from firebrands. With the open canopy, 

windspeeds are likely to increase throughout the forest. The complex fuels arrangements will 

create an environment conducive to fast moving, high intensity, long duration wildfires that 

would result in a greater likelihood of increased risk of loss to private property, communities,

natural forest resources, and threaten firefighter and public safety. Residual trees, regeneration, 

and soils would be greatly impacted as well. Refer to Appendix A, for Forest Vegetation 

Simulator images of wildfire in 3C, 4A, and 4C stands, and prescribed fire.

In areas of the forest, with little to no MPB mortality, tree densities and canopy cover would 

continue to increase, as would ladder fuels, leading to an increased torching and crowning 

hazard. The ultimate result in many areas would be even-aged, dense stands of ponderosa pine 

creating an environment conducive to large severe fires and MPB outbreaks. When untreated 

stands are impacted by MPB and deteriorate to where the surface fuel loading may be in excess 

of 40-50 tons per acre, coupled with future prolific regeneration, increased fire potential may 

exist well into the future.

Representative fuel models would be GR4, SH5, and SB3. Fuel model GR4 is a moderate load, 

dry climate grass fuel model. SH5 is high load, dry climate shrub (representative of pine 

regeneration 4-6 feet tall). SB3 is heavy dead and down activity fuel or moderate blowdown 

(representative of CWD). 
26

Table 11: Alternative B Fire Behavior Outputs (Behave Plus 5.0.5)

Fuel Model Flamelength

(ft)

Fireline Intensity 

(btu/ft/sec) 

GR4 9.8 819

SH5 16.1 2,373

SB3 9.6 774

*Based on 90th percentile weather data from Fire Family Plus 4.1

Graph 3: Alternative B-Fire Hazard Rating

Fire risk would increase with more people and resulting infrastructure moving into the WUI. As 

fire hazard and risk increase, the potential for a large stand replacing fire event would become 

more likely. Continuous stands of ponderosa pine would become denser and surface fuel 

loadings high creating the opportunity for human caused wildfires to increase. Damage to forest 

resources would correspond with fire size, intensity, and severity. Values-at-risk in the WUI 

would also be threatened to a higher degree. The threat to life safety of the public and 

emergency services personnel would become more of an issue. The ability to safely engage a 

fire during high fire danger would become more difficult as time passes.

Although air quality would not be directly impacted under the no action alternative, there would 

not be any control over the timing or amount of emissions released into adjacent airsheds in the 

event of a wildfire. A large wildfire has the potential to make a much greater impact on adjacent 

communities and Class 1 airsheds. The EPA addresses smoke from wildland fire under their 

natural events policy at https://www.epa.gov/natural-disasters. 

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

Very High High Mod Low

Acres

Fire Hazard Rating

Fire Hazard

Existing Fire Hazard
27

Cumulative Effects

In the Black Hills Resilient Landscapes Project area past, present and reasonably foreseeable 

future actions as well as the MPB, past drought effects, and wildfires contributed to changes in 

fuel conditions and profiles. Past management activities may have created situations that could 

have increased and/or decreased the risk of large scale high intensity wildland fires. For 

example, wildfire suppression can lead to an accumulation in down and dead fuels, increased 

stocking levels and an increase in ladder fuels, which all lead to an increase in fire hazard. Had 

fires been allowed to spread across the landscape unchecked, instead of being aggressively

suppressed over the last 100 years, stands would have burned at more frequent intervals with 

expected lower intensities resulting in fire adapted ecosystems. This, however, has not been 

possible due to fractured ownership patterns that include interspersed private lands and at-risk 

communities. In addition to fire exclusion, the recent MPB epidemic has added an even greater 

complexity to the fuels arrangement across the forest. There are trees in varying stages of 

mortality, with some just becoming red needled and others broken off and fallen to the ground. 

The end result of impacted stands is a heavy dead and down accumulation of surface fuels. As is 

already evident, in areas that were hit by MPB, the canopy becomes more open, allowing for 

grass production to increase and greater windspeeds to flow through the stands. Fuel conditions 

of today are conducive to more severe wildfires that exhibit greater resistance to control than in 

the past. 

There are numerous examples of past, present and foreseeable management activities across the 

forest and adjacent to the project area that have helped to reduce the fire hazard. These include 

the Prairie Project, Mountain Pine Beetle Response Project, Bugtown, Vestal, Elmo, Thrall, 

Lightning, Rifle Pit, Doghouse, and Burner timber sales, as well as many others. Prescribed fire 

projects include Martin, Bitter, Picnic, Fossil, Bullock, Prairie, Lemming, Sundance, Rifle Pit, 

Bitter, Medicine, and Needles, as well as others. The most effective treatments with the greatest 

longevity are different types of thinning followed by broadcast burning. Vegetative treatments 

identified on state and private lands within the cumulative effects area may serve to reduce fire 

hazard from both crown fire and surface fire. In areas not being treated, the potential for 

sustained crown fire and expected fireline intensities can reasonably be expected to increase. 

Wildfires will continue to occur in the future and add to the cumulative effect of any 

management actions that are implemented. The severity and duration of fires can be expected to 

increase due to accumulation of heavy down and dead surface fuels. These fuel conditions and 

expected fire behavior may result in forest fire suppression not being able to be achieved under 

certain weather conditions.

Wildland fires occurring outside of the project area and proposed treatment areas may also affect 

the project area when conditions allow. There are examples of fires making sustained, high 

intensity crown fire runs, some of which are estimated at nearly 12 miles (Jasper 2000). 

Although rare and requiring extreme conditions, a large scale, high intensity fire is more likely if

no treatment is implemented. A fire starting in the project area under the right conditions, would 

not only damage or destroy improvements within a given stand, but could have the potential to 

burn into or affect one of the 56 at-risk communities or private property within a fairly short

timeframe. A high intensity wildfire brings with it numerous risks and effects. Homes in the 
28

path of a wildfire are perhaps the most immediately recognized value at risk, however, numerous 

other important values include: critical infrastructure, fish and wildlife habitat, firefighter and 

public health and safety, soil productivity, clean air, and functional fire-adapted ecosystems 

(Graham et al., 2004). Some of these values are also threatened by the secondary effects of 

wildfire, such as soil erosion, and the spread of exotic species (Graham et al., 2004). 

The action alternative is expected to have positive long term cumulative effects to both overstory 

and surface fuel loadings and potential fire behavior. The proposed treatments combined with 

monitoring, past projects and foreseeable future projects would decrease the potential of largescale, high intensity damage of wildfire as well as decrease fuel loadings moving the project area 

to a more desirable condition and a resilient fire adapted ecosystem. The proposed treatments 

would reduce stand density, canopy closure, and surface fuels bringing the forest back to a more 

historical type condition, improving condition class. Fire managers would have greater 

opportunities to conduct suppression activities and have a safer environment to work in. Public 

safety would be enhanced and communities and values easier to protect. The possibility of 

losing key ecosystem components would be minimized. Adjacent area projects would also have 

a beneficial impact on fire hazard. This would move conditions toward meeting Forest Plan 

Goal 10, Objective 10-01, and Objective 10-04. Treatment impacts would be evident for 

approximately 10 years, until regeneration has filled in under the open canopies and once again 

created a higher fire hazard, but at a lower rate than if no treatment had taken place. In order to 

maintain treatment effectiveness over time, maintenance treatments would be necessary.

The no action alternative would not reduce the buildup of fuels or return the forest structure to 

reference conditions. Fire hazard would increase. The condition class would not see 

improvement and the ecosystem would move away from becoming resilient and fire adapted. 

This is in conflict with Forest Plan Goal 10, Objective 10-01, and Objective 10-04.

The smoke and other emissions that may be generated by activities planned under the selected 

alternative may contribute to local and regional pollutant loading. The cumulative effect of pile 

burning activities, broadcast burning, or other planned land management activities would be 

short-lived and once smoke and/or dust has dissipated, the impact is over and will have no 

further overlap in time or space with other pollutants that are generated by non-Forest Service 

activities. As a result, planned land management activities (including prescribed burning) are not 

expected to have long term or significant impacts to National Ambient Air Quality Standards and 

should not contribute to significant future impairments of visibility in Class 1 airsheds.

Approved burn plans for prescribed burning use design criteria. These design criteria have 

proven effective over the last ten years in maintaining smoke emissions at acceptable levels, as 

demonstrated by State monitoring which has shown only two temporary violations of PM2.5

standards at the monitoring site in Rapid City that may have resulted from prescribed fire activity 

on the Black Hills National Forest. The design criteria that have been shown to be effective in 

the past can be expected to be effective under the action alternative for this project as well.
29

Summary of Effects

Forest vegetative and fuels conditions in the Black Hills Resilient Landscapes project area would 

continue to deviate from their historic range under Alternative B (No Action). With the MPB 

epidemic, large amounts of dead, dry fuels have been and will continue to be added to an already 

uncharacteristic hazardous fuels condition. Wildfire hazard in the project area will continue to 

increase if no action is taken to modify or treat the fuels. The end result could be high intensity 

wildfire over much of the project area that would remove a large amount of the existing forest cover. 

This could cause significant negative effects to the ecosystem, area infrastructure, public and private 

lands, and threaten the lives of residents and firefighters. 

Treatments planned in Alternative A would decrease the potential for a large-scale, high intensity 

wildfire by reducing fuel loadings or breaking up the continuity of existing fuels, moving the forest 

closer to a Condition Class 1 or 2, conditions more closely approaching the natural (historical) range 

of variability of vegetation characteristics relative to fuel composition, wildfire frequency, severity 

and pattern, and other associated disturbances. It would also create a greater diversity of stand 

conditions and cover types, create more strategic and tactical firefighting opportunities resulting in 

greater success during initial attack, increased firefighter and public safety, reduced wildfire risk to 

communities, wildland urban interface (WUI), and natural resources, as well as lower suppression 

costs. This alternative would result in a landscape that is more resilient to future disturbance events 

such as wildfire or insects. 

Treatments would be implemented on a landscape basis and designed so that they would 

complement existing or natural fuel break features such as hardwood stands, meadows, private land 

pastures, and moister habitats.

Fire Hazard is expected to be reduced significantly with Alternative A, but conditions change 

quickly in a fire regime 1 forest, and fire hazard will eventually escalate post-treatment as the 

vegetation grows and fuels once again accumulate. However, the fire hazard in twenty years is 

expected to be much lower with Alternative A than the no action alternative.

Table 12: Fire Hazard Rating Summary

Fire Hazard Rating Alternative A (proposed)

Approximate Acres

Alternative B (no action)

Approximate Acres

Low 246,090 244,190

Moderate 484,266 299,049

High 108,041 108,041

Very High 241,544 428,661

The action alternative would meet Forest Plan Goal 10, establishing and maintaining a mosaic of 

vegetative conditions to reduce occurrences of catastrophic fire, insect, and disease events, and 

facilitate insect and disease management and firefighting capabilities, and Standard 4103, 

utilizing prescribed fire to achieve management objectives. The no action alternative would not 

reduce the buildup of fuels or return the forest structure to reference conditions. The condition 

class would not see improvement and the ecosystem would move away from becoming resilient 

and fire adapted. This is in conflict with Forest Plan Goal 10.
30

Air quality would be affected by Alternative A. Smoke generated by prescribed burning can be 

mitigated using the methods identified in Alternative A. Smoke generated by wildfire is usually 

greater and cannot be mitigated.

It is important to understand that fuel treatments would not prevent wildland fires from 

occurring. However, with fuel treatments, the risk of an extreme wildfire event would be greatly 

decreased and establish breaks in fuel arrangement that provide opportunities to attack the fire, 

enabling firefighters to conduct effective suppression activities in a safer environment. Fuel 

treatments would also need to occur in adjacent planning areas in order for treatments to be more 

effective at the landscape scale. 

Design Criteria

• Prescribed burn treatments which include burning of piled material and broadcast burning 

will meet with the provisions of the Clean Air Act. District personnel would monitor burn 

conditions, and the SASEM (Smoke Model) or equivalent program would be used to assure 

provisions are met. The impacts of burning on metropolitan areas such as Rapid City would 

be assessed at the time of burning.

Smoke impacts would be minimized utilizing the following design criteria and are 

incorporated into the burn plan as appropriate: 

o Limit treatment area size 

o Specify wind directions and speed 

o Specify minimum mixing heights to ensure dispersal of emissions 

o Stagger ignitions 

• Revegetation of prescribed burned areas will be promoted by:

a) If piled and burned fuel creates ash piles deeper than three inches, scatter the ash, 

scarify and mix it with mineral soil, or bury it. Guideline 4106

• Prescribed burn plans (which includes the Forest Level III Programmatic Burn Plan for Pile 

Burning) will identify acceptable levels of tree mortality for seedlings/saplings, poles and 

sawtimber; burning prescriptions will be estimated to meet these levels. Guideline 4108

• Slash piles that are scheduled for burning will be located outside of meadows that contribute 

to Waters of the United States. Use a buffer distance designed to keep sediment, ash and 

debris out of channels. Guideline 4111

• Activity fuels will be treated along forest collector roads and forest development trails to 

meet the adopted Scenic Integrity Objectives (SIO). Along arterial roads, remove 70-90 

percent of activity fuels up to 300 feet from roads edge. Debris piles will be burned as soon 

as practical after remaining on-site for at least 2 years. Where mechanical treatment and 

prescribed burning of piled material is proposed within the same site, mechanical treatments 

will be completed prior to burning. 

• Reduce or otherwise treat all fuels adjacent to non-forest lands so the potential fireline 

intensity does not exceed 200 BTUs/second/foot on 90 percent of the days when fires occur, 
31

or break up continuous fuel concentrations exceeding the above intensity into units 30 to 40 

acres maximum size, surrounded by fuel breaks. Deadfall treatments are included in all 

treated sites adjacent to all non-National Forest lands. 

Regulatory Framework

Land and Resource Management Plan Phase II Amendment Direction

Forest-wide goals/objectives and standards/guidelines identified for fire and fuels management in 

the Phase II Amendment of the Land and Resource Management Plan include Goal 2 objective 

234 and Goal 10 objectives 10.01 – 10.08, Goal 11; as well as standards/guidelines 4101 - 4112. 

The objective of fuels treatment is to reduce fuel levels and/or redistribute it to reduce fire 

behavior and the risk of catastrophic, stand-replacing fire. Fuel characteristics include amount 

(tons per acre), size, arrangement, continuity, and moisture content. The amount of fuels 

remaining after treatment would vary depending on stand structure prior to treatment and what 

level of cutting takes place. Protecting resource values, including water quality, timber, and 

wildlife habitat are also included. 

Goals and Objectives:

Goal 2: Provide for a variety of life through management of biologically diverse ecosystems.

Objective 234. *NEW. Create or maintain a moderate-to-low crown-fire hazard adjacent to 

occurrences of R2 sensitive [species] and species of local concern; [and] plants and botanical 

areas bordered by continuous, dense conifer stands where long-term persistence is at risk from a 

single high-intensity fire.

Goal 10: Establish and maintain a mosaic of vegetation conditions to reduce occurrences of 

catastrophic fire, insect, and disease events, and facilitate insect and disease management and 

firefighting capability.

Objective 10-01. *NEW Manage for 50- to 75-percent moderate-to-low fire hazard in the wild 

land-urban interface and reduce fire hazard within proximity of structures to current NFPA 

standards except in Management Area (MA) 1.1 Black Elk Wilderness, MA 2.2 Research 

Natural Areas, MA 3.1 Botanical Areas, MA 4.2B Peter Norbeck Scenic Byway, and MA 5.4A

Norbeck Wildlife Preserve. Manage the remainder of the Forest for 50 percent moderate-to-low 

fire hazard except in MA 1.1 Black Elk Wilderness, MA 2.2 Research Natural Areas, MA 3.1 

Botanical Areas, MA 3.7 Late-successional Forest Landscapes, MA 4.2B Peter Norbeck Scenic 

Byway, and MA 5.4A Norbeck Wildlife Preserve. 

Objective 10-02. *NEW. The scenic integrity objectives (SIO) within the wildland-urban 

interface will be moderate to low for 2 to 4 years after management activities have been 

completed.

Objective 10-03. *NEW . Within 5 years of a formal research natural area (RNA) designation, 

manage for a moderate-to-low fire hazard between RNAs and at-risk communities (ARCs) and 
32

other resources as needed where the topography, wind conditions, and fuels could create the 

potential for high-intensity crown-fire spread to the ARCs or resources (e.g., sensitive plants, 

heritage resources), except those designated in Management Area 1.1 Black Elk Wilderness.

Objective 10-04. MOVED FROM OBJECTIVE 224. Reduce or otherwise treat fuels commensurate 

with risks (fire occurrence), hazard (fuel flammability), and land and resource values common to 

the area, using the criteria in Forest-wide Guideline 4110. 

Objective 10-05. MOVED FROM OBJECTIVE 225. Manage wildfires using the appropriate response 

based on management area emphasis, existing values, risk of ignition, and fuel hazards within a 

given area.

Objective 10-06. MOVED FROM OBJECTIVE 226. Develop fuel management and protection 

strategies for intermixed land ownerships in partnership with private, state, and other federal 

agencies.

Objective 10-07. MOVED FROM OBJECTIVE 228. Where outbreaks of mountain pine beetle could 

present risks to management objectives for ponderosa pine, reduce acreage of ponderosa pine 

stands that are in medium or high risk for infestation.

Objective 10-08. MOVED FROM OBJECTIVE 229. Using analyses of insect-and-disease occurrences 

prioritize suppression strategies to meet management objectives and minimize value loss of tree 

vegetation affected by outbreaks of insect-and-disease pests.

Standards and Guidelines:

Standard 2301. Retain all snags greater than 20-inch dbh unless a safety hazard. If snag 

densities within a project area are below Objective 211, retain all snags unless they are a safety 

hazard. If large snags (>14 in DBH) are not available, retain snags in the largest size class 

available. This standard does not apply to areas salvaged under Objective 11-03.

Standard 2308. During vegetation management activities on ponderosa pine forested sites, 

retain an average of at least 50 linear feet per acre of coarse woody debris with a minimum 

diameter of 10 inches. On white spruce forested sites retain an average of at least 100 linear feet 

per acre of coarse woody debris with a minimum diameter of 10 inches.

Standard 4101. Use the appropriate suppression response for each management area as shown 

in the fire management direction summary table in Chapter 2 on pages 42 and 43. 

Standard 4102. Protect heritage resources, R2 sensitive species and plant species of local 

concern (SOLC), botanical areas (BAs), research natural areas (RNAs), streams, stream banks, 

shorelines, lakes and associated vegetation from degradation by wildfire suppression efforts. 

a. Avoid the use of earth-moving equipment within national register eligible heritage 

resource sites, known locations of R2 sensitive species and SOLC plants, BAs, RNAs, or 

in stream channels, except at designated points and with proper mitigation. Prohibit this 

use in the Wilderness.
33

b. Discourage the application of fire-retardant chemicals over riparian areas, wetlands 

and open waters. Avoid applications in these areas in the Wilderness and RNAs.

c. To prevent soil erosion, re-vegetate burned areas that will not naturally re-vegetate 

quickly. See Management Area 1.1A for re-vegetation in the Wilderness. No revegetation efforts will occur within designated RNAs. 

Standard 4103. Utilize prescribed fire through planned and natural ignitions to achieve 

management objectives for each management area as shown in the fire management direction 

summary table 3-46. 

Standard 4104. Visual effects of prescribed fire will comply with the approved scenic integrity 

objective of the area. 

Guideline 4105. When feasible and appropriate use broadcast burning to dispose of slash in 

order to return the inorganic and organic chemicals in the foliage and small woody material to 

the soil, to reduce fire hazard, and to provide seed beds for natural regeneration. (Amended Regional 

Guide Silviculture Guideline)

Guideline 4106. Promote revegetation of prescribed burned areas. 

b. If piled and burned fuel creates ash piles deeper than three inches, scatter the ash, 

scarify and mix it with mineral soil, or bury it.

Guideline 4108. Prescribed burn plans will identify acceptable levels of tree mortality for 

seedling/saplings, poles, and sawtimber; burning prescriptions will be established to meet these 

levels. In planning prescribed burns, consider how the potential loss of trees is offset by the 

beneficial effects of fire in terms of overall stand health and wood fiber production. Consider 

value recovery if tree mortality exceeds project objectives. 

Guideline 4109. Utilize the Black Hills National Forest Fire Protection Assessment (FPA) for 

purposes of identifying and prioritizing fire management program activities. 

Guideline 4110. Base activity and natural fuel treatment on area matrix values within the Black 

Hills National Forest FPA in accordance with the following treatment options. 

a. In areas identified as having high ratings for risk, hazard or value:

(1) Reduce or otherwise treat all fuels (activity fuels within three years of cutting) so 

the potential fireline intensity does not exceed 200 BTUs/second/foot on 90 percent 

of the days when fires occur, or break up continuous fuel concentrations exceeding

the above intensity into units 30 to 40 acres maximum size, surrounded by fuel 

breaks.

(2) Interim activity fuel treatment will be accomplished by requiring all slash to be 

lopped to 18 inches or less at the time of cutting. 

b. In areas identified as having moderate ratings for risk, hazard or value:

(1) Reduce or otherwise treat all fuels (activity fuels within three years of cutting) so 

the potential fireline intensity does not exceed 300 BTUs/second/foot on 90 percent 

of the days when fires occur, or break up continuous fuel concentrations exceeding 

the above intensity into units 40 to 50 acres maximum size, surrounded by fuel 

breaks. 
34

(2) Interim activity fuel treatment will be accomplished by requiring all slash to be 

lopped to 18 inches or less at the time of cutting.

c. In areas identified as having low ratings for risk, hazard or value:

(1) Reduce or otherwise treat all fuels (activity fuels within three years of cutting) so 

the potential fireline intensity does not exceed 400 BTUs/second/foot on 90 percent 

of the days when fires occur, or break up continuous fuel concentrations exceeding 

the above intensity into units 40 to 50 acres maximum size, surrounded by fuel 

breaks.

(2) Interim activity fuel treatment will be accomplished by requiring all slash to be 

lopped to 24 inches or less at the time of cutting.

Guideline 4111. Locate slash piles that are scheduled for burning out of meadows that contribute 

to Waters of the United States. Use a buffer distance designed to keep sediment, ash and debris 

out of channels. See Appendix J.

Guideline 4112. Treat activity fuels adjacent to roads and trails as follows: 

a. For Forest Development Roads classified as collectors, and Forest Development Trails, 

manage activity fuels to meet adopted SIO.

b. For federal, state, county and Forest Development Roads classified as arterials, remove 

70 to 90 percent of the activity fuels seen from the road’s edge up to a maximum distance 

of 300 feet. Treat debris within one year of harvest completion. 

Guideline 8401. Keep natural and activity fuels to a minimum in timber stands to reduce the 

threat of wildfire to the public and to reduce potential fire damage to facilities.

National Fire Plan (2001)

The National Fire Plan provides fire management long term goals:

• Reduce the threat of severe, destructive fires

• Provide for safer living conditions

• Restore fire-adapted communities

• Improve the health, resilience, and sustainability of forests and grassland

• Conserve priority watersheds, species, and biodiversity

• Reduce overall wildland fire management costs

The National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy (2012)

The National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy is a strategic framework designed to 

coordinate multiple agency and homeowner efforts toward three goals:

1. Restore and maintain resilient landscapes

2. Create fire adapted communities

3. Ensure safe and effective wildfire response

It provides guidance for vegetation and fuels treatments and supports management options of 

prescribed fire, managing wildfire for resource objectives, and fuel treatment using mechanical, 

biological, or other non-fire methods.
35

• Where wildfires are unwanted or threaten communities and homes, design and prioritize 

fuel treatments to reduce fire intensity, structure ignition and extent. 

• Where allowed and feasible, manage wildfire resources objectives and ecological 

purposes to restore and maintain fire-adapted ecosystems and achieve fire-resilient 

landscapes. 

• Use and expand fuel treatments involving mechanical, biological, or chemical methods 

where economically feasible and sustainable, and where they align with landowner 

objectives.

Healthy Forests Restoration Act Title 16-Conservation 6501 (2003)

The purposes of this chapter are—

(1) to reduce wildfire risk to communities, municipal water supplies, and other atrisk Federal land through a collaborative process of planning, prioritizing, and 

implementing hazardous fuel reduction projects;

(2) to authorize grant programs to improve the commercial value of forest biomass 

(that otherwise contributes to the risk of catastrophic fire or insect or disease 

infestation) for producing electric energy, useful heat, transportation fuel, and 

petroleum-based product substitutes, and for other commercial purposes;

(3) to enhance efforts to protect watersheds and address threats to forest and 

rangeland health, including catastrophic wildfire, across the landscape;

(4) to promote systematic gathering of information to address the impact of insect 

and disease infestations and other damaging agents on forest and rangeland health;

(5) to improve the capacity to detect insect and disease infestations at an early stage, 

particularly with respect to hardwood forests; and

(6) to protect, restore, and enhance forest ecosystem components—

(A) to promote the recovery of threatened and endangered species;

(B) to improve biological diversity; and

(C) to enhance productivity and carbon sequestration.

Limitations and Assumptions

• All figures are approximate.

• Actual acres/miles implemented will depend on weather, funding, priorities, and other 

factors.

• Mapped stand boundary locations are approximate. Stand structure determinations are 

preliminary. Stand delineation and structure are subject to corrections based on field 

review.

• Fire hazard rating acre estimates under Alternative A are based on all treatments being 

implemented.

• Assumptions were made regarding number of treatment acres for 4A stands that fall in 

the moderate versus very high fire hazard categories (>9” dbh vs <9’ dbh) as well as fuel 

treatment location based priority areas listed above. 

• The BehavePlus 5.0.5 model uses site-specific input data to predict fire behavior for a 

point in time and space, using weather and fuels inputs for that specific time. It predicts 

free burning fire at the flaming front, assuming fuels are uniform.

• Fire behavior calculations are based 90th percentile weather data from Fire Family Plus 

4.1
36

Works Cited

Barrett, S., Havlina, D., Jones, J., Hann, W., Frame, C., Hamilton, D., Schon, K., Demeo, T., 

Hutter, L., and Menakis, J. 2010. Interagency Fire Regime Condition Class Guidebook. Version 

3.0 [Homepage of the Interagency Fire Regime Condition Class website, USDA Forest Service, 

US Department of the Interior, and The Nature Conservancy]. [Online], 

Available: https://www.frames.gov/frcc

Battaglia, Mike A.; Smith, Frederick W.; Shepperd, Wayne D. 2008. Can prescribed fire be used 

to maintain fuel treatment effectiveness over time in Black Hills ponderosa pine forests? Forest 

Ecology and Management. 256 (12): 2029-2038.

Brown, James K.; Reinhardt, Elizabeth D.; Kramer, Kylie A. 2003. Coarse Woody Debris: 

Managing Benefits and Fire Hazard in the Recovering Forest. USDA Forest Service, General 

Technical Report RMRS-GTR-105, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO.

Graham, R.; McCaffrey, S.; and Jain, T. 2004. Science Basis for Changing Forest Structure to

Modify Wildfire Behavior and Severity. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report 

RMRSGTR-120, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ft. Collins, CO.

Healthy Forests Restoration Act. 2003.

Hopkins, A.D., 1905. The Black Hills Beetle. USDA, Bureau of Entomology, Bulletin No. 56, 

Washington.

Hoyt, Stu, and Jolly Matt. Probability of Ignition of Mountain Pine Beetle Affected Trees. 2012

Hunter, M.E.; Shepperd, W.D.; Lentile, J.E.; Lundquist, J.E.; Andreu, M.G.; Butler, J.L.; Smith, 

F.W. 2007. A comprehensive guide to fuels treatment practices for ponderosa pine in the Black 

Hills, Colorado Front Range, and Southwest. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report 

RMRS-GTR-198, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Fort Collins, CO.

Jolly, W. Matt; Parsons, Russell A.; Hadlow, Ann M.; Cohn, Greg M.; McAllister, Sara S.; Popp, 

John B.; Hubbard, Robert M.; Negron, Jose F. 2012. Relationships between moisture, chemistry, 

and ignition of Pinus contorta needles during the early stages of mountain pine beetle attack. 

Forest Ecology and Management. 269: 52-59.

Parsons, Russ; Jolly, Matt; Langowski, Paul; Matonis, Megan; Miller, Sue. 2014. Post-epidemic 

fire risk and behavior [Chapter 3]. In: Matonis, M.; Hubbard, R.; Gebert, K.; Hahn, B.; Miller, 

S.; Regan, C. Future Forests Webinar Series, Webinar Proceedings and Summary: Ongoing 

Research and Management Responses to the Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreak. Proceedings 

RMRS-P-70. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station. p. 19-28.

Photo Series for Quantifying Forest Residues in the Black Hills Ponderosa Pine Type and Spruce 

Type. 1990. USDA Forest Service. Rocky Mountain Region.
37

NWCG. 1998 Fireline Handbook, NWCG Handbook 3, PMS 410-1.

Scott, Joe H, and Burgan, Robert E. 2005. Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Models: A 

Comprehensive Set for Use with Rothermel’s Surface Fire Spread Mode. USDA Forest Service,

General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-153, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Fort Collins, 

CO.

Scott, Joe H.: Reinhardt, Elizabeth D. 2001. Assessing crown fire potential by linking models of 

surface and crown fire behavior. USDA Forest Service, RMRS-RP-29, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station. Fort Collins, CO.

Schmid, J. M.; Mata, S. A.; Schaupp, W. C., Jr. 2009. Mountain Pine Beetle-Killed Trees as 

Snags in Black Hills Ponderosa Pine Stands. USDA Forest Service, Research Note RMRS-RN40, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Fort Collins, CO.

Schmidt, Kirsten M.; Menakis, James P.; Hardy, Colin C.; Hann, Wendall J.; Bunnell, David L. 

2002. Development of coarse-scale spatial data for wildland fire and fuel management. USDA

Forest Service, Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-87, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Fort 

Collins, CO.

USDA-Forest Service 2012, Calumet Environmental Impact Statement, US Department of 

Agriculture-Forest Service Black Hills National Forest, Custer South Dakota.

USDA Forest Service. 2006. 1997 Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Black 

Hills National Forest, as Amended by the Phase 2 Amendment. US Department of AgricultureForest Service, Black Hills National Forest. Custer, South Dakota. March, 2006. Available online at 

http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/blackhills/landmanagement/planning/?cid=STELPRDB5112303

USDA Forest Service. 2005. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Phase 2 Amendment 

to the 1997 Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Black Hills National Forest. 

US Department of Agriculture-Forest Service, Black Hills National Forest. Custer, South 

Dakota. October, 2005. Available on-line at 

http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/blackhills/landmanagement/planning/?cid=STELPRDB5112303

USDA Forest Service. 2005. Record of Decision for the Phase 2 Amendment to the 1997 

Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Black Hills National Forest. US 

Department of Agriculture-Forest Service, Black Hills National Forest. Custer, South Dakota. 

October, 2005. Available on-line at 

http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/blackhills/landmanagement/planning/?cid=STELPRDB5112303

USDA Forest Service. 1996. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Revised Land and 

Resource Management Plan for the Black Hills National Forest. US Department of AgricultureForest Service, Black Hills National Forest. Custer, South Dakota. December, 1996. Available 

on-line at 

http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/blackhills/landmanagement/planning/?cid=STELPRDB5112303
38

USDA Forest Service; US Department of the Interior. 2001. National Fire Plan. A report to the 

President in response to the wildfires of 2000, Sept. 8, 2000: managing the impact of wildfires on 

communities and the environment. Washington, DC.

USDA-Forest Service 2011, Vestal Environmental Impact Statement, US Department of 

Agriculture-Forest Service Black Hills National Forest, Custer South Dakota.

Wildland Fire Leadership Council. 2012. A National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management 

Strategy. Available on-line at https://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/index.shtml
39

Appendix A-Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) runs

3C stand-preburn, during wildfire, postburn, and 10 years postburn:
40
41
42

4C stand-preburn, during high intensity fire, postburn, and 20 years postburn:
43
44
45

4A stand with MPB-snags preburn, during wildfire, postburn, and 10 years postburn:
46
47
48

Prescribed burn with regeneration-during burn, postburn, and 10 years postburn
49
50
51

Appendix B