National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Rocky Mountain National Park 

Colorado 

Fire Management Plan 

Cow Creek Fire 2010 Photo By: The Yenter Family 

 

 

June 2012 
Rocky Mountain National Park i | P a g e

This page intentionally left blank. 
Rocky Mountain National Park ii | P a g e
Rocky Mountain National Park iii | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Reason for the Fire Management Plan ......................................................................... 3

1.2 General Description of the Park ................................................................................... 3

1.2.1 Purpose of the Park .............................................................................................. 5

1.2.2 Management Environment .................................................................................... 7

1.2.2.1 Land Ownership, Significant Resources, Mission, and Management Direction .. 7

1.2.2.2 Overview of Physical and Biotic Characteristics of the Park .............................11

1.2.2.3 Role of Fire in the Park .....................................................................................14

1.3 Environmental Compliance .........................................................................................15

2.0 Policy, Land Management Planning, and Partnerships ...................................................17

2.1 Fire Policy ...................................................................................................................17

2.2 Park Management Planning ........................................................................................20

2.3 Partnerships................................................................................................................20

3.0 Park-wide Characteristics ...............................................................................................21

3.1 Park-wide General Management Considerations ........................................................21

3.1.1 Fire Management Goals and Objectives ..............................................................23

3.2 Fire Management Unit Characteristics ........................................................................28

4.0 Wildland Fire Operations ................................................................................................29

4.1 Safety .........................................................................................................................29

4.1.1 Employee Safety ..................................................................................................30

4.1.2 Public Safety ........................................................................................................32

4.2 Preparedness .............................................................................................................32

4.2.1 Coordination and Dispatching ..............................................................................32

4.2.2 Preparedness Activities .......................................................................................33

4.2.3 Staffing Plan ........................................................................................................36

4.2.4 Fire Response Plan .............................................................................................36

4.2.5 Wilderness ...........................................................................................................37

4.3 Management of Unplanned Ignitions ...........................................................................38

4.4 Burned Area Emergency Response ............................................................................47

4.4.1 Minimum Impact Tactics ......................................................................................48

4.4.2 Burned Area Emergency Response .....................................................................49

4.4.3 Emergency Stabilization ......................................................................................49
Rocky Mountain National Park iv | P a g e

4.4.4 Burned Area Rehabilitation ..................................................................................51

4.5 Management of Planned Fuels Treatments ................................................................51

4.5.1 Fuels Planning and Documentation .....................................................................52

4.5.2 Fuels Management Implementation Procedures ..................................................56

4.5.3 Prescribed Fire Treatments ..................................................................................58

4.5.4 Non-Fire Fuels Treatments ..................................................................................59

4.6 Prevention, Mitigation & Education .............................................................................60

4.6.1 Prevention/Mitigation ...........................................................................................60

4.6.2 Communications/Education .................................................................................60

4.7 Air Quality & Smoke Management ..............................................................................62

4.7.1 Air Quality Issues .................................................................................................63

4.7.2 Smoke Management Program .............................................................................64

4.8 Data & Records Management .....................................................................................65

4.9 Organizational & Budgetary Parameters .....................................................................66

5.0 Adaptive Management Strategy .....................................................................................69

5.1 Fire Management Objectives ......................................................................................70

5.2 Monitoring ...................................................................................................................71

5.3 Evaluation ...................................................................................................................74

5.4 Fire Research .............................................................................................................76

Appendix A – Literature Cited ...................................................................................................82

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1. Rocky Mountain National Park and Vicinity. ................................................................ 4

Figure 2. Rocky Mountain National Park Designated Wilderness. .............................................. 8

Figure 3. Rocky Mountain National Park and Surrounding Land Ownership. ............................10

Figure 4. Treatment Areas Included in the Long-Term Fuels Treatment Plan. ..........................54
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 1 | P a g e

Introduction 

An updated Fire Management Plan (FMP) is necessary to provide Rocky 

Mountain National Park (RMNP) with the flexibility to manage fire in accordance 

with the National Park Service (NPS) Wildland Fire Management Strategic Plan 

2008-2012 (2008d), 1995 and 2001 Federal Fire Policy (USDA and USDI 1995, 

2001) and the related guidelines in NPS Director’s Order #18: Wildland Fire 

Management (2008b), and NPS Management Policies (2006). These policies 

and directives, in addition to a Congressional mandate, require an approved FMP 

in order for RMNP to implement planned and unplanned fire management 

strategies. 

The purpose and need for the fire management program is summed up in the 

first three fire management goals, presented in priority order: 

1. Provide for the safety of employees and the public 

2. Protect communities, infrastructure, natural and cultural resources 

3. Restore and maintain fire adapted ecosystems 

Collectively, these goals are referred to as “The Fire Decision Framework.” The 

reason for this is that these three goals are forefront in all decision making 

throughout the program, from programmatic planning efforts to initial response of 

a wildfire. Chapter 3 of this FMP details all six fire management goals, but the 

first three are set apart in that they are the purpose and need of the program, and 

the second three support them. The importance of these three goals is reflected 

in the fire programs Mission Statement: 

Mission Statement:

 “Rocky Mountain National Park’s fire management program will protect 

employees and the public, communities and infrastructure, conserve natural and 

cultural resources and restore and maintain ecological health.” 

There are two main program elements of the fire management program that 

focuses all activities on achieving the Mission: 

1. Fuels Management 

Proactive planned activities such as prescribed fire, manual and mechanical 

thinning of forest vegetation with the objective of reducing hazardous fuels 

around local communities and infrastructure, restoring fire adapted 

landscapes, and other protection and resource management objectives. 

2. Response to Wildfires 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 2 | P a g e

Decisions and actions implemented to manage a wildfire based on ecological, 

social, and legal consequences, the circumstances under which a fire occurs, 

and the likely consequences on firefighter and public safety and welfare, 

natural and cultural resources and values to be protected. 

The Fire Decision Framework is the foundation for all planning in Fuels 

Management and the Response to Wildfires. All projects and response plans are 

designed based upon improving the ability to achieve the elements within the 

Framework. 

Fire Decision Framework:

1. Provide for the safety of employees and the public: 

All management decisions, plans, and actions will take into account the safety 

of our employees and the public. No structures or other resources are worth 

risking human lives. Effective risk management will guide all management 

actions. 

2. Protection of communities, infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources: 

Having provided for employee and public safety, fuels mitigation activities 

and fire response will strive to protect communities and infrastructure, natural 

and cultural resources. These values can be damaged or destroyed by 

unwanted fire; however long term protection of these values can be realized 

through managed fire. Fire management activities will use a risk 

management process to protect these values. Fuels reduction and fuels 

management will be accomplished through manual and mechanical means, 

prescribed fire, and management of wildfires. 

3. Restore and maintain fire-adapted ecosystems: 

Through a combination of manual and mechanical fuels reduction, prescribed 

fire, and management of wildfires, the fire management program seeks to 

maintain natural fire regimes to the greatest extent possible so that 

ecosystems can continue to function as they have for thousands of years, 

thus encouraging healthy interactions between fire and the environment. As 

described in section 1.4.6 of NPS Management Policies, “the ecological, 

biological, and physical processes that created the park and continue to act 

upon it” are recognized and valued as park resources in keeping with the 

NPS mission (NPS 2006). 

This FMP covers all of RMNP and is intended to provide guidance in the 

professional management of wildland fire and fuels management. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 3 | P a g e

Reason for the Fire Management Plan 

FMPs are required by NPS policy. From NPS Director’s Order 18, Wildland 

Fire Management (2008b): 

“Each park with burnable vegetation must have an approved Fire 

Management Plan that will address the need for adequate funding and 

staffing to support its fire management program. Parks having an approved 

Fire Management Plan and accompanying National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) compliance may use wildland fire to achieve resource benefits in 

predetermined fire management units. Parks lacking an approved Fire 

Management Plan may not use resource benefits as a primary consideration 

influencing the selection of a management strategy, but they must consider 

the resource impacts of fire management alternatives in their decisions.” 

Supplementary Purposes for the Plan: 

 Provide consistent operational guidance. 

 Provide stakeholders with a concise description of why and how fire will be 

managed in the park. 

 Provide park managers a concise communications tool for understanding 

actions, roles and responsibilities. 

 Demonstrate the connection of park-wide goals and objectives to fire 

management actions. 

 Document fire program logic and objectives. 

General Description of the Park 

RMNP is located in north central Colorado and encompasses approximately 

265,828 acres. The park lies within Larimer, Boulder, and Grand counties and 

is bordered by the towns of Estes Park, Allenspark, and Glen Haven on the 

east and Grand Lake on the west (see Figure 1). The Continental Divide runs 

northwest to southeast through the center of the park. This accounts for two 

distinct climate patterns—one arid on the east side, where Estes Park 

receives about 14 inches of precipitation annually on average, and the other 

more moist west side where Grand Lake receives just under 21 inches of 

annual precipitation on average.
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 4 | P a g e

Figure 1. Rocky Mountain National Park and Vicinity. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 5 | P a g e

Nearly 60 percent of the park is forested. At the lowest elevations on the east 

side of the park, forest types in the montane zone include ponderosa pine, 

Douglas-fir, and lodgepole pine communities. These three species often 

intermingle in ecotonal areas, forming mixed stands. Ponderosa pine tends to 

dominate the lower portions of the montane, increasing in density with 

increased elevation and gradually giving way to Douglas-fir, particularly on 

moist north-facing slopes (Clements 1910, Marr 1961, Mast et al. 1998). 

Following disturbance, upper montane sites often re-emerge as dense evenaged stands of lodgepole pine on drier sites and aspen on more mesic sites. 

In the absence of further disturbance, these lodgepole and aspen stands may 

gradually be replaced by Douglas-fir at lower elevations and Engelmann 

spruce and subalpine fir at higher elevations (Clements 1910, Peet 1978b, 

Whipple and Dix 1979, Veblen et al. 1991). In contrast to the variety of 

forested communities found on the east side, montane forests on the west 

side of the park are composed almost exclusively of lodgepole pine. 

Above approximately 9500 feet in elevation, the subalpine zone is dominated 

by widespread stands of Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir. These sprucefir forests extend up to treeline at approximately 11,500 feet. Scattered stands 

of limber pine can be found within the subalpine zone, primarily on exposed 

rocky ridges. Approximately one third of the park lies above treeline. 

The park has a very diverse ecosystem, with 276 bird, 66 mammal, 11 fish, 5 

amphibian, and two reptile species, as well as over 900 species of flowering 

plants. Elk, bighorn sheep, moose, and mule deer are representative of the 

large hoofed mammals found in the park. Wildlife viewing is a popular activity 

in the park, with herds of resident elk drawing many visitors. 

Purpose of the Park 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 6 | P a g e

Park Purpose 

The park purpose identifies the specific reason for the creation of a 

particular park. Purpose statements are crafted through a careful analysis 

of the enabling legislation and the legislative history that molded the 

creation and development of the park. Rocky Mountain National Park was 

first created in 1915 when the park’s initial enabling legislation was passed 

and signed into law. The purpose statement reinforces the foundation for 

future park management administration, and use decisions. The following 

purpose statement was based on the review of park legislation, previous 

management documents, and discussions with park staff: 

The purpose of Rocky Mountain National Park is to preserve the high 

elevation landscapes and wilderness character of the southern Rocky 

Mountains, and to provide the freest recreational use of and access to the 

park’s scenic beauties, wild life, natural features and processes, and 

cultural objects. Establishment 

Park Significance 

Significance statements express why the park’s resources and values are 

important enough to warrant national park designation. Statements of 

significance describe why an area is important within a global, national, 

regional, and system-wide context. These statements are linked to the 

purpose of the park, and are substantiated by data, research, and 

consensus. They describe the park’s distinctive nature and help inform 

management decisions, focusing efforts on preserving and protecting the 

park’s most important resources and values. The following significance 

statements have been identified for Rocky Mountain National Park. 

1. Rocky Mountain National Park provides exceptional access to 

wild places for visitors to recreate and experience solitude. Trail 

Ridge Road, the highest continuous paved road in the United 

States, and the 350 miles of trails bring visitors to the doorstep of a 

variety of wilderness-based recreational opportunities. 

2. Fragile alpine tundra encompasses one-third of the Rocky 

Mountain National Park, one of the largest examples of alpine 

tundra ecosystems protected in the contiguous United States. 

3. Glaciers and flowing fresh water carved the landscapes of Rocky 

Mountain National Park and also give birth to several river systems, 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 7 | P a g e

including the Colorado River and the Cache la Poudre, Colorado’s 

first and only designated Wild and Scenic River. 

4. The massive elevation range within the park boundary, which 

spans from 7,630 feet to 14,259 feet and straddles the Continental 

Divide, allows for diverse ecosystems, varied plant and animal 

communities and a variety of ecological processes. The park is 

designated as a UNESCO International Biosphere Reserve, with 

portions of the park’s montane, subalpine, and alpine ecosystems 

managed as research natural areas for scientific and educational 

purposes. 

5. The mountainous landscape of Rocky Mountain National Park 

has drawn people to the area for thousands of years. Visitors can 

see remnants of the different ways people have used this land over 

time, ranging from prehistoric big game drives to dude ranching to 

recreational tourism. 

Management Environment 

Land Ownership, Significant Resources, Mission, and Management Direction 

Most of the park (95 %) is designated wilderness (see Figure 2), with 

only 2.9 percent developed. Fire management actions will conform to 

the basic purposes of wilderness as described in the 1964 Wilderness 

Act. This plan, in combination with direction provided in the park 

Backcountry/Wilderness Management Plan and Environmental 

Assessment (NPS 2001a), identifies management actions to be 

considered for all wildland fires within the park. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 8 | P a g e

Figure 2. Rocky Mountain National Park Designated Wilderness.
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 9 | P a g e

The park is surrounded by a mixture of federal, state, local, and 

privately owned lands (see Figure 3). About 62 percent of the park is 

surrounded by national forest land, most of which (70%) is designated 

wilderness. The remaining 38 percent of land around the boundary is a 

complex mix of rural developments, summer homes, resort areas, 

subdivisions, and other property assets on private land. Most of these 

developments are concentrated in five communities: Grand Lake, 

Estes Park, Meeker Park, Glen Haven and Allenspark. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 10 | P a g e

Figure 3. Rocky Mountain National Park and Surrounding Land 

Ownership.
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 11 | P a g e

The park is accessible from the Denver metropolitan area, 65 miles to 

the southeast. Interstates 25, 70 and 76, which converge in Denver, 

provide access for visitors coming from all regions of the United States. 

Local thoroughfares that provide access to the park include State 

Highways 7, 34, and 36. RMNP is located near populated Front Range 

communities and receives over 3 million visitors annually. 

Overview of Physical and Biotic Characteristics of the Park 

Vegetation 

In RMNP, alpine systems occupy the high mountain summits, slopes 

and ridges above the upper elevational limits of tree species (Peet 

2000). Vegetation in this zone encounters the greatest extremes in 

temperature and insulation coupled with very thin, young soils (Salas 

et al. 2005). The alpine tundra in RMNP covers over 50 square miles 

above timberline (approximately 11,500 feet). 

Fire does not play a large role within the alpine systems of the park 

due to the cool, moist conditions and low fuel levels found within this 

elevational zone. However, over long time periods, fire may move into 

the alpine zone from adjacent spruce-fir forests with fire return intervals 

that are similar to or longer than this forest type. 

The subalpine zone occurs roughly between 9,500 ft. and 11,500 ft. 

elevation. Common ecological systems in this zone are limber pine 

woodland, spruce-fir forest, wet meadow, subalpine-montane riparian 

shrubland, and high gradient streams (Neely et al. 2001). At the upper 

elevational limit of this zone, trees take on a stunted growth form 

known as krummholz due to the harsh growing conditions encountered 

there. Tree line marks the elevational limit of the trees and is largely 

determined by a complex interplay of weather, topography, and soil 

(Arno and Hammerly 1984, Stevens and Fox 1991). 

Fire, insect outbreaks, avalanches, and wind events all play important 

roles in shaping subalpine forests. Fires in the subalpine forest are 

typically large, infrequent, and stand-replacing, thus creating a coarsescale mosaic across the landscape (Clements 1910, Peet 1981, Baker 

and Veblen 1990, Veblen et al. 1994, Agee 1999, Veblen 2000, 

Buechling and Baker 2004, Veblen and Donnegan 2004, Sibold et al. 

2006). Long fire-return intervals in spruce-fir forests occur primarily at 

high elevations that receive more precipitation and cooler temperatures 

than lower elevations throughout the growing season. Following spring 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 12 | P a g e

snowmelt, there is abundant soil moisture throughout the growing 

season and cool temperatures keep understory fuels moist. Therefore, 

fires are more likely to occur in the fall, late summer, or after an 

unusually dry winter rather than the spring (Veblen and Donnegan 

2004). 

The upper montane zone occurs generally between 7,500 and 9,500 ft. 

elevation, and is characterized by lodgepole pine forest, aspen forest, 

ponderosa pine forest and woodland, mixed conifer forests, montane 

grasslands, mountain sagebrush shrubland, montane riparian 

woodland and shrubland, high montane lakes and streams of highmoderate gradient. Montane forests on the east side of the park are 

dominated by ponderosa pine on south-facing slopes and mixed 

conifer stands on more moist north-facing slopes. Montane forests on 

the west side of the park are predominantly comprised of lodgepole 

pine and aspen. 

Lodgepole pine forests occur on gentle to steep slopes in extensive 

stands of pure lodgepole pine, or in association with other conifer 

species. Lodgepole pine is shade intolerant and is an aggressive 

pioneer, developing on sites recently opened up due to fire, insects, 

disease, windstorms, or other major stand removing disturbance. 

These stands tend to self-perpetuate in the presence of repeated 

disturbance. Depending on site conditions, lodgepole seedling 

reestablishment following disturbance may take 30-100 years (Peet 

1981). Fires are more frequent in lodgepole pine than spruce-fir 

forests, as lodgepole pine forests occur in warmer and drier 

environments. Lodgepole forests are typically characterized by a 

stand-replacement severity fire regime with fire return intervals in the 

50-200 year range (Clements 1910, Peet 1981, Sibold et al. 2006). 

Fire return intervals tend to be longer in lodgepole stands adjacent to 

forest types such as spruce-fir, that have long fire return intervals. 

Conversely, fire frequencies are often higher and may occasionally 

include a portion of low severity fire events where stands are adjacent 

to ponderosa pine or mixed conifer forests that experience more 

frequent fire (Peet 1981, Veblen and Lorenz 1991, Sibold et al. 2006). 

Aspen forests are found at elevations similar to those of lodgepole 

pine. They are also maintained by disturbance and usually occur as a 

mixture of many communities and may be surrounded by a variety of 

diverse ecosystems, including montane grasslands and wetlands. 

Aspen is confined to relatively moist sites that have cold winters and a 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 13 | P a g e

reasonably long growing seasons. Aspen ecosystems are rich in 

number and species of animals, especially in comparison to associated 

coniferous forest types (Neely et al. 2001, Salas et al. 2005). 

Ponderosa pine dominates the lower elevations of the montane zone 

on the east side of the park, before yielding to Douglas-fir, primarily on 

the moist, north-facing slopes. Once disturbed, these sites are 

succeeded by dense stands of lodgepole pine on drier sites and stands 

of aspen on moister sites. In contrast, the west side of the park is 

made up almost exclusively of lodgepole pine in the montane zone. 

Bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) and mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia 

tridentata ssp. vaseyanum) are the dominant shrub species found in 

the upland shrub habitat in the park. The natural or historic (pre-1860) 

coverage of bitterbrush and sagebrush in RMNP is unknown. By the 

time shrub communities in the park were studied in the 1930s, they 

had already been considerably altered. Market hunting during the 

1860s and 1870s significantly reduced elk and deer numbers, allowing 

upland shrubs to expand. However, fires in ponderosa pine forests 

during the 19th century (Veblen et al. 2000, Ehle and Baker 2003) and 

expanding deer population in the early 1900s (Stevens 1980) may 

have also greatly decreased shrub abundance. 

Wildlife 

Nearly 350 vertebrates are found in the RMNP area, including 276 

species of birds, 66 mammals, 11 fish, 5 amphibians, and 2 reptiles. 

The distribution of species within the park varies by season, elevation, 

and varieties of habitats present. 

Soils 

Soils are largely the result of geology and geologic processes. 

Mountains in RMNP were formed by a series of granitic batholiths 

intruding into Precambrian mica schists and pegmatites. Glacial 

activity, occurring as recently as 12,000 years ago, created much of 

the geologic landforms evident in the park today by decomposing the 

mountains. Glacier-carved valleys and their associated features are 

present along the St. Vrain River, Big Thompson River, Colorado 

River, and associated tributaries. Ultimately, the weathering of the 

glacial and alluvial granites, schist, and gneiss parent material 

developed soils in the park (Natural Resources Conservation Service 

2007). 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 14 | P a g e

Air Quality 

National parks, including RMNP, are categorized as Class I air quality 

areas under the 1977 Clean Air Act, as amended (CAA). 

Within 50 air miles of the park, Class II and III airsheds exist. The 

greater Denver metropolitan area airshed consistently exceeds 

national air pollution standards. Air quality at RMNP is adversely 

affected by Denver, other urban areas along Colorado’s Front Range, 

and areas as far away as southern California, Mexico, and Texas (NPS 

1992a). Increasing development around the park boundary, along with 

development extending from Colorado Springs to Fort Collins, affects 

air quality particularly when winds blow from easterly directions. 

Visibility and clean air are primary natural resource values at RMNP. 

Without the effects of pollution, a natural visual range is approximately 

140 miles in the park. Currently, visibility is impaired within the park 

about 90 percent of the time, primarily due to outside sources. The 

average summer (July- August) viewing distance from Rocky Mountain 

is 83 miles, 50 percent of the time. Viewing distances can vary from 

120 miles on a clear day to 30 miles on a high pollution day (NPS 

1998, 2008a). 

Water Resources 

RMNP contains 1143 acres of lakes and ponds, with 167 lakes greater 

than an acre and 397 less than an acre. Streams in the park total 532 

miles, with an additional 38 miles of intermittent streams. The 

Continental Divide splits the park into two distinct watersheds where 

water flowing west drains into the Colorado River, and water flowing 

east empties into the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers. The headwaters 

of four major river basins originate in the park, including the Big 

Thompson, North Fork of the St. Vrain, North Fork of the Colorado, 

and the Cache la Poudre Rivers. 

Role of Fire in the Park 

Of the many disturbance types found in natural systems, perhaps the 

most widespread is that of fire. The current structure, species 

composition, and dynamics of many ecosystems are often the direct 

result of past fires or the result of other processes that in themselves 

were affected by fire. In general, fire regimes in the southern Rockies 

are thought of as following an elevational gradient (Peet 1981, Romme 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 15 | P a g e

and Knight 1981, Romme et al. 2003). The lower montane is often 

characterized by more frequent surface fires, while forests in the 

subalpine typically experience infrequent stand replacement fire 

events. However, fires of any intensity can occur in both elevational 

zones (Veblen 2000). Please see the Environmental Assessment (EA) 

associated with this FMP for an in-depth discussion of the role of fire 

within RMNP. 

Environmental Compliance 

This FMP has been prepared in compliance with: 

 The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 United States 

Code (USC) 4321 et seq.), which requires an environmental analysis for 

major Federal Actions having the potential to impact the quality of the 

human environment; 

 Council of Environmental Quality Regulations at 40 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) 1500-1508, which implement the requirements of 

NEPA; 

 The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (16 USC 470 et seq.), 

which requires protection of historic properties significant to the Nation's 

heritage; 

 The Wilderness Act (16 USC 1131 et seq.), which requires the 

preservation of wilderness character and wilderness resources in an 

unimpaired condition for the park’s 252,256 acres of Congressionally 

designated wilderness; 

 The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (19 U.S.C. 1536 (c), 50 CFR 

402), which requires that the effects of any agency action that may affect 

endangered, threatened, or proposed species must be evaluated in 

consultation with either the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) 

or National Marine & Fisheries Study (NMFS), as appropriate; 

 Clean Water Act of 1972, as amended (CWA) (33 USC 1251-1387), which 

requires the protection of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of 

the Nation’s waters; 

 Executive Order 11990, "Protection of Wetlands", which requires federal 

agencies to avoid, where possible, impacts on wetlands; and 

 NPS Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision 

Making; Director’s Order #12 and Handbook (NPS 2001b). 

To guide wildland fire management decisions including the creation of this 

FMP, an interdisciplinary (ID) team of specialists established a set of wildland 

fire management goals and objectives for RMNP. Goals and objectives are 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 16 | P a g e

based on the park’s enabling legislation and federal, departmental, and 

agency-specific policies. The ID team also identified a number of potential fire 

management strategies, designed to provide support for achieving the goals 

and objectives. 

An EA was prepared for RMNP in conjunction with this FMP. The EA was 

made available for review to the general public; local, State, and Federal 

agencies; associated Native American tribes; the State Historic Preservation 

Office (SHPO); and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Ecological Services 

(FWS-ES) on September 15, 2011. A Biological Assessment was signed by 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Ecological Services on May 25, 2012. A 

letter of concurrence was received from the Colorado State Historic 

Preservation Office (SHPO) on June 29, 2011. A Finding of No Significant 

Impact was signed by the NPS on June 12, 2012 by Laura Joss, Acting 

Regional Director (Appendix D). 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 17 | P a g e

Policy, Land Management Planning, and Partnerships 

2.1 Fire Policy 

DIRECTION & INTENT: Management of RMNP is governed by federal law, 

NPS policy, and park planning, respectively. Each park in the national park 

system has a particular mandated purpose, which distinguishes each park 

unit from other federal land management agencies. RMNP was established 

by an act of Congress of January 26, 1915 as referenced in the Introduction. 

The RMNP Master Plan (1976) further states: 

“The park experience, now and in the future, should be a dynamic interaction 

of human values based on the perpetuation of natural features in as near to 

pristine conditions as possible. This plan recognizes man, where present, as 

part of the park's ecosystem, but the major emphasis is on the perpetuation of 

natural processes... Man's impact must be minimized and controlled. To this 

end, living plant and animal communities— the dynamic culmination of natural 

processes in the park—provide visible indicators against which to measure 

and evaluate the condition of those processes.” 

In addition, the 1976 RMNP Master Plan includes the following management 

direction: 

“Zealous efforts to extinguish all natural and human-caused fires resulted in 

favoring selected species at the expense of those developing after a fire.” 

“Providing opportunities for understanding and appreciation of the ecological 

and geological processes that have created this segment of the Colorado 

Rockies, while providing only the means of access and facilities necessary to 

allow for said appreciation and protect the park ecosystems.” 

“Designing corridors for use to provide safeguarding the park's vital land 

processes and restore the native ecosystems. Allowing natural wildfires to 

burn themselves out where they do not threaten an undesirably large area, 

lands outside the park, prime scenic resources near roads, trails, or 

developed areas.” 

The NPS policy on wildland fire is expressed in section 4.5 of Management 

Policies (2006) and supplemented by Director’s Order 18: Wildland Fire 

Management (NPS 2008b). Reference Manual 18 (RM-18, NPS 2008c), 

issued by the Associate Director of Visitor and Resource Protection, is a 

technical expression of background information, standardized definitions, 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 18 | P a g e

agency requirements, standards, and procedures for implementing Director’s 

Order 18. 

As stated in Section 1.1, NPS Director’s Order 18, Wildland Fire Management 

requires each park with burnable vegetation to have an approved FMP that 

addresses the need for adequate funding and staffing to support its fire 

management program. Parks having an approved FMP and accompanying 

NEPA compliance may use wildland fire to achieve resource benefits in 

predetermined fire management units. 

Background info, taken from NPS Director’s Order 18: 

“All fires burning in natural or landscaped vegetation will be considered 

wildland fires. Wildland fire is defined as any non-structure fire that occurs in 

the wildland.” ... continued... “All wildland fires will be effectively managed 

through application of the appropriate strategic and tactical management 

options. These options will be selected after comprehensive consideration of 

firefighter and public safety, the resource values to be protected and costs. 

 Prescribed fires are those fires ignited by park managers to achieve resource 

management and fuel treatment objectives. Prescribed fire activities will 

include effective communication on prescribed fire activity in the park and 

local community and the monitoring programs that provide information on 

whether specific objectives are being met. In conformance with the park’s fire 

management plan, a systematic decision-making process will be used to 

determine the most appropriate management strategies for wildland fires that 

are no longer meeting resource management objectives.” 

APPLICABLE LAWS AND LEGISLATION : Acts passed by the U.S. 

Congress and approved by the President. All laws must be consistent with the 

U.S. Constitution. Federal laws have supremacy over state and local laws. 

 Enabling Legislation (38 Stat. 798, January 26, 1915) 

“...hereby reserved and withdrawn from settlement, occupancy, or 

disposal under the laws of the United States, and said area is dedicated 

and set apart as a public park for the benefit and enjoyment of the people 

of the United States... with regulation being primarily aimed at the freest 

use of the said park for recreational purposes by the public and for the 

preservation of the natural conditions and scenic beauties thereof.” 

NPS Organic Act of August 25, 1916, P.L. 64-235, 16 U.S.C. Section 1 et 

seq. as amended 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 19 | P a g e

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as amended , P.L. 91-90, 42 

U.S.C. 4321-4347, January 1, 1970, as amended by P.L. 94-52, July 3, 

1975, and P.L. 94-83, August 9, 1975 

 Wilderness Act 1964 

NPS Directives System - The NPS has a three-tiered Directives System to 

direct policy and provide instructions for implementation. They are:

Level 1 - NPS Management Policies provide a framework for making 

management decisions and are approved by the Director after review by 

the WASO Office of Policy and the National Leadership Council (NLC). 

Compliance is mandatory. Other management policies relevant to fire are 

found in the Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy. The Interagency 

Federal Wildland Fire Policy Review Working Group revised the Federal 

Wildland Fire Management Policy in 2001 and it is titled: Managing 

Impacts of Wildfires on Communities and the Environment, and Protecting 

People and Sustaining Resources in Fire Adapted Ecosystems—A 

Cohesive Strategy (USDA, 2001). The document in its entirely is available 

online at: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/publications/2000/cohesive_strategy10132000.pdf 

Other management policies include: 

o NPS Management Policies (2006) 

o National Fire Plan 

o The Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire 

Management Policy (USDA and USDI 2001) 

o Guidance for Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy 

Level 2 - NPS Director’s Orders are instructions for implementing policy, 

and may articulate new or revised policy; provide specific instructions; 

outline requirements or standards for NPS functions, programs, and 

activities; are approved by the Director after review by the WASO Office of 

Policy and the NLC. Compliance is mandatory. FMP FEIS/AEF-related 

Director’s Orders include: 

o DO-12 Conservation Planning and Environmental Impact Analysis 

(NPS 2001b) 

o DO-18 Wildland Fire Management (NPS 2008b) 

o DO-41 Wilderness Preservation and Management (NPS 1999a) 

o DO-57 Occupational Medical Standards, Health and Fitness (NPS 

1999b) 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 20 | P a g e

o These can be found at the following online address: 

http://home.nps.gov/applications/npspolicy/DOrders.cfm

 Level 3 – Handbooks, reference manuals, and other professional 

materials. 

2.2 Park Management Planning 

 The RMNP Master Plan (NPS 1976) 

The Master Plan states that "lightning fires have always denuded large 

areas and have changed vegetative patterns for decades. Natural 

wildland fires should be allowed to burn themselves out where they do not 

threaten an undesirably large area, lands outside the park, prime scenic 

resources near roads, trails, or developed areas." 

The Master Plan also recognizes the significance of the landscape and 

specifies that "the park experience, now and in the future, should be a 

dynamic interaction of human values based on the perpetuation of natural 

features in as near to pristine conditions as possible." 

 The Backcountry/Wilderness Management Plan (NPS 2001a)

The plan states: “[t]he restoration of fire on the landscape is an important 

and immediate need. The longer the process is delayed, the more 

extreme the problem becomes. To restore natural fire regimes and 

maintain public safety, a systematic and comprehensive program of action 

with consideration for the immediacy of the need is critical.” 

2.3 Partnerships 

The Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests (USFS), Colorado State Forest 

Service (CSFS), as well as local fire departments collaborated with the NPS 

during the concept phase of this plan. Ongoing collaboration on fire planning 

continues with these partners multiple times per year. 

RMNP Wildland Fire Branch utilizes Fort Collins (FTC) Interagency Dispatch 

as its fire dispatch through an Interagency Agreement with the USFS. The 

FTC Zone is a network of agencies, municipalities, counties, and volunteer 

fire departments. 

 Annual Operating Plans (AOPs) 

o The Fire Branch maintains three AOPs with county cooperators: 

Boulder County, Larimer County, and Grand County. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 21 | P a g e

 Colorado Cooperative Fire Management Agreement (USDI et al. 2006) 

o An agreement of all the Federal Agencies and the State of Colorado 

committing to documentation of agreement and commitment to fire 

management assistance and cooperation. 

 Besides AOPs, a General Agreement exists with each of these offices: 

o Boulder County Sheriff’s Office 

o Estes Park Volunteer Fire Protection District 

o Town of Grand Lake 

o Grand County Sheriff’s Office 

o Town of Estes Park 

 Memorandums of Understanding exist with: 

o Allenspark Fire Protection District 

o Colorado State Forest Service 

o USFS Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests 

Park-wide Characteristics 

For the purposes of this FMP, the park will be considered one Fire Management 

Unit (FMU) within the context of the Fort Collins Dispatch Zone. Within this zone, 

the park has unique management objectives, constraints, access, values to be 

protected, and political boundaries. 

3.1 Park-wide General Management Considerations 

RMNP’s fire management program mirrors other park programs by 

designating safety of employees and the public as its first priority in all 

actions. Along with the safety of employees and the public, the goals of 

protecting communities, infrastructure, and cultural and natural resources; 

and restoring and maintaining fire adapted ecosystems provide guidance to 

all management planning and actions. 

Resource Objectives: Managing for Resilient Ecosystems 

Resilience is usually defined as the capacity of an ecosystem to absorb 

disturbance without shifting to an alternative state and causing fundamental 

changes in ecosystem function (Holling 1973). Managing for resilient 

ecosystems is essential for coping with uncertainty and surprise in a world 

increasingly shaped by human activity (NPS 2010). Ecosystems can be 

subject to abrupt regime shifts, and such shifts may more easily occur if 

resilience has been reduced as a consequence of human actions such as 

pollution, the alteration of natural disturbance regimes, and climate change. 

Ecosystems are resilient when ecological interactions reinforce one another 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 22 | P a g e

and dampen the effects of disturbance (Peterson et al. 1998). Preserving 

biodiversity and perpetuating natural disturbance regimes, therefore, are 

critical to maintaining ecosystem resilience and sustaining desired ecosystem 

states in the face of change. 

Most ecosystems are subject to disturbance regimes that operate across a 

range of temporal and spatial scales. Of the many types of disturbances that 

have shaped RMNP, fire is one of the most common. As described in section 

1.4.6 of NPS Management Policies, “the ecological, biological, and physical 

processes that created the park and continue to act upon it” are recognized 

and valued as park resources in keeping with the NPS mission (NPS 2006). 

One of the main goals of RMNP’s fire management program is to restore and 

maintain fire-adapted ecosystems throughout the park. By allowing (or in 

some cases mimicking) natural processes such as fire, that created the 

variety of naturally-functioning ecosystems found within the park, the vast 

majority of species that evolved within these ecosystems will be maintained. 

The majority of ecological systems within the RMNP landscape are thought to 

be within or close to their natural range of variability with respect to fire. For 

thousands of years, fire has played an important role in maintaining and 

creating conditions suitable for native flora and fauna in the park’s varied 

ecosystems. This plan therefore, seeks to maintain natural fire regimes to the 

greatest extent possible resulting in the continued health of park ecosystems 

and allowing for the continued interactions between fire and the environment. 

Utilizing fire as a dynamic ecosystem process to maintain ecosystem 

structure, composition, and function provides our best opportunity to conserve 

biological diversity in the park. 

Defining precise desired future conditions for entire landscapes is fraught with 

uncertainty. Stephenson (1999) compares two widely used approaches to 

address desired future condition: the structure-oriented approach and the 

process-oriented approach. The structure-oriented approach focuses on 

managing forests for particular stand structure, composition, and patch size, 

whereas the process-oriented approach focuses on restoring and maintaining 

the natural processes that historically shaped forest structure and 

composition. Neither approach is perfect. However, our knowledge of current 

fire regimes far exceeds our knowledge of forest conditions during the past 

100 to 400 years. 

The definition of precise structural or compositional targets for desired 

conditions is further complicated by the spatial and temporal variability 

inherent in plant communities as influenced by site conditions, climate, 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 23 | P a g e

disturbance response, and individual species recruitment and mortality 

patterns. Process oriented, functional definitions for target conditions (e.g. 

historic fire frequency and fire behavior) therefore may be more practical 

since they acknowledge the inherent variability in natural systems. Factors to 

be considered when considering historic fire regimes include: 

 Fire frequency 

 Fire intensity and severity 

 Fire extent 

 Seasonality 

Process oriented target conditions are appropriate for areas such as RMNP 

that have not been significantly altered by fire exclusion and do not require 

significant restoration efforts to return to natural conditions. This process 

oriented coarse-filter approach helps maintain ecosystem structure, 

composition, and function within the historic range of variability, thus 

preserving conditions suitable for the majority of species that have evolved 

with these ecosystems. However, this approach may not be suitable for some 

special status species and rare habitats. In these instances, habitat- or 

species-specific plans may be implemented to address particular concerns. 

3.1.1 Fire Management Goals and Objectives 

The purpose, goals and objectives of the park’s fire management program 

are result from agency mandates, policy statements, environmental laws 

and park planning documents. The FMP must reflect direction provided in 

Federal and NPS policy statements such as the 2001 Review and Update 

of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy (USDA and USDI 

2001). Fire management action must also comply with laws such as the 

National Park Service Organic Act, Endangered Species Act, Clean Air 

Act, Clean Water Act, Wilderness Act, National Historic Preservation Act, 

Archeological Resources Protection Act, and other laws related to the 

NPS. 

Within the framework of larger agency policy and environmental law, the 

FMP Interdisciplinary Team has identified the following goals for the fire 

management program. Each goal is further refined through associated 

objectives which assist managers in measuring the success of fire 

management actions. An adaptive approach will allow the fire program to 

refine fuel treatment prescriptions and fire applications to assure desired 

outcomes are achieved. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 24 | P a g e

As stated in Chapter 1, the first three goals are set apart from the latter 

three and referred to as the “Fire Decision Framework.” 

Goal 1: Provide for the safety of employees and the public through all 

phases of fire management.

Objectives: 

 Ensure firefighter, employee, and public safety is the first priority for all 

fire management activities. 

 Ensure that all assigned fire personnel are appropriately trained and 

qualified for the assignments they receive. 

 Through organized, comprehensive, and systematic risk management, 

an acceptable level of risk will be determined that allows for providing 

safety yet achieve fire management goals. 

Goal 2: Protect communities and infrastructure, as well as natural and 

cultural resources from the potential adverse impacts of unwanted wildfire.

Objectives: 

 All fire response strategies will be developed utilizing state of the art 

wildland fire decision support processes that reduce risk of adverse 

impacts of wildfires to public and private property, cultural resources, 

and ecologically sensitive areas. 

 Utilize planned fuels management actions to achieve protection 

objectives on public and private facilities, infrastructure, natural and 

cultural resources. 

 Ensure all unplanned ignitions are evaluated and considered for their 

potential to achieve long-term protection benefits to public and private 

facilities, infrastructure, natural and cultural resources. 

 When necessary or appropriate, implement emergency stabilization 

and burned area rehabilitation in a timely manner to prevent resource 

degradation and promote recovery in critical watersheds in accordance 

with methods described in this plan and other park planning 

documents. 

Goal 3: Restore and maintain fire-adapted ecosystems and implement 

strategies that use fire to the maximum extent possible, allowing park 

ecosystems to exhibit a high degree of resiliency. 

Objectives: 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 25 | P a g e

 Having provided for the safety of employees and the public, and the 

protection of values at risk, ensure all naturally ignited wildfires are 

evaluated and considered for their potential to achieve ecological 

restoration and maintenance objectives. 

 Allow wildland fire to perform its ecological role as a dynamic 

ecosystem process, to the greatest extent possible. 

 Utilize prescribed fire, manual and mechanical treatments to restore 

and maintain fire-adapted ecosystems in defined locations where 

wildfire is not likely to achieve those objectives. 

 Fire management program actions will be implemented in collaboration 

with cooperators and affected partners with due consideration of all 

management objectives. 

 All resource benefit response strategies will be developed utilizing 

state of the art wildland fire decision support processes. 

Goal 4: Base the RMNP fire management program on sound data 

obtained through scientific investigation, the evaluation of monitoring 

results, and the development of local data-driven models.

Objectives: 

 Monitor and evaluate all fire management activities, while assessing 

effects on natural and cultural resources. 

 Determine fire-related natural resource data needs and develop 

strategies to address those needs. 

 Utilize an adaptive management approach to fire management using 

monitoring results and the best available scientific data to continue to 

develop and refine a range of ecologically sound fire and resource 

management objectives. 

Goal 5: Promote greater understanding and support for all aspects of fire 

management through public information and education efforts. 

Objectives: 

 Keep stakeholders informed about fire operations, including wildfire 

response, prescribed fire and manual/mechanical fuels treatments. 

 Inform the public and staff regarding the natural role of fire within 

ecological systems and the value of using fire to meet resource goals. 

Goal 6: Fire management activities conducted in designated or potential 

wilderness areas will conform to the basic purposes of wilderness. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 26 | P a g e

Objectives: 

 Actions taken to manage wildland fire in wilderness including the full 

range of management alternatives will use the minimum requirement 

concept and will be conducted in such a way as to minimize, and 

where necessary rehabilitate, the unwanted impacts of the 

management actions (Section 2.1.2.5 Backcountry/Wilderness 

Management Plan). 

 All fuels management activities conducted in wilderness will be 

designed and implemented within the guidelines of the 

Backcountry/Wilderness Management Plan and with the primary intent 

of maintaining wilderness values for future generations. 

Wildland Fire Management Actions 

The wildland fire management program includes a broad scope of actions 

in order to be comprehensive and successful. The following is a brief 

summary of these actions approved for use in the park. Operational 

aspects of each program element are detailed in Chapter 4 and the 

appendix. 

Preparedness Activities 

Preparedness activities include detailed procedures and standards for 

wildland fire operations, including pre-season and ongoing activities 

throughout the fire season. It also includes pre-planned procedures for 

initial response and incident management. 

Wildland fire preparedness activities include a wide range of readiness 

and program elements that are essential for dealing with unplanned 

ignitions and fuels treatments. Current versions of these documents can 

be found in the Appendix: 

 Annual Delegation of Authority to the Fire Management Officer (FMO) 

from the Superintendent. 

 Response plan 

 Step Up Plan 

 Strategic fire size-up procedures 

 Minimum Impact Tactics and Wilderness Guidelines 

 Fire Danger Operating Plan 

 Job Hazard Analysis 

 Agency Administrators Guide to Critical Incident Management.
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 27 | P a g e

Safety Program 

Firefighter and public safety is the first priority of the RMNP wildland fire 

management program. This FMP, and the activities defined within, reflect 

this commitment. This commitment to, and accountability for safety is a 

joint responsibility of all firefighters, managers, and administrators. As 

such, individuals must be responsible for their own performance and 

accountability, and every supervisor, employee, and volunteer is 

responsible for following safe work practices and procedures, identifying 

and reporting unsafe conditions. All firefighters, fireline supervisors, fire 

managers, and agency administrators have the responsibility to ensure 

compliance with established safe fire management practices. It should be 

stressed that no natural or cultural resource, home, or item of property is 

worth a human life. All strategies and tactics will be designed to mitigate 

the risk to firefighters and the public. 

All actions defined in this FMP conform to safety policies defined in 

agency and departmental policy, including, but not limited to:

 Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations (the "Red 

Book", USDI and USDA 2011) 

 Director’s Order 18 - Wildland Fire (NPS 2008b) 

 NPS Reference Manual 18 (NPS 2008c) 

Management of Unplanned Ignitions 

All wildfires will receive an initial response and management strategy that 

will consider the goals and objectives defined in this plan and the Fire 

Decision Framework. Those actions are identified in section 4.3 of this 

plan. 

The full spectrum of management actions will be employed on unplanned 

ignitions depending on the needs of a given fire; from aggressive initial 

attack for full perimeter control, to monitoring of a wildland fire burning 

over time and space for multiple objectives. 

Management of Planned Fuels Treatments 

The wide range of fuels treatments, including prescribed fire, manual 

treatments (work completed by hand tools, including chainsaws) and 

mechanical treatments (work completed using machinery) will be utilized 

in the park. Those actions are identified in Section 4.5 of this plan. A 

Multi-Year Fuels Treatment Plan (see Appendix E) has been developed 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 28 | P a g e

describing a combination of all available tools that will be used within the 

scope of park management documents to accomplish park wide goals. 

Communication and Education 

The Communication and Education program concentrates on internal and 

external outreach emphasizing the goals and objectives of the program. 

This outreach is critical to the success of the fire program. RMNP utilizes 

traditional and innovative communication and education strategies to 

affect program success. The Interpretation Division assists with this 

outreach. Those actions are identified in Section 4.6 of this plan.

Adaptive Management 

An adaptive management approach to all fire management activities will 

be applied. This approach will promote achieving park management goals 

in the face of unanticipated changes in environmental conditions, 

inaccurate predictions, and/or subsequent information that might affect the 

original environmental assumptions. 

3.2 Fire Management Unit Characteristics 

Under this FMP, the entire park is considered one Fire Management Unit 

(FMU). Detailed operational descriptors and guidance are provided in 

Chapter 4. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 29 | P a g e

Wildland Fire Operations 

4.1 Safety 

Employee and public safety is the first priority of every fire management 

activity. This FMP and the activities defined reflect this commitment. The 

commitment to and accountability for safety is a joint responsibility of all 

firefighters, managers, and administrators. Individuals must be responsible for 

their own performance and accountability. Every supervisor, employee, and 

volunteer is responsible for following safe work practices and procedures, as 

well as identifying and reporting unsafe conditions. All firefighters, fireline 

supervisors, fire managers, and agency administrators have the responsibility 

to ensure compliance with established safe firefighting practices. 

In the 2009 Employee Safety Handbook, the Park Superintendent 

communicated RMNP’s commitment to a safe work ethic through his safety 

message, which reads as follows:

Safety is a state of mind. If we truly think safety in everything we do, we 

minimize and control the risks that we and others are exposed to as we go 

about our jobs. A Forest Service colleague said, “Our job is not done until 

we get home safely.” That struck a chord, as it says we’re not just 

concerned about safety in the office or at the work site, but also with how 

you arrive in the morning and go home in the evening. Routine tasks may 

be our biggest challenge in terms of safety. When facing something that is 

non-routine, we often include safety as a primary concern so that it is front 

and center in our planning. However, as we go about our daily routine we 

don’t as often pause to analyze risks and then mitigate them. Thinking 

safety in everything we do will take a cultural shift in our busy work days. 

A few years ago, we adopted the following safety policy for the park— 

In RMNP we believe: 

All people are important. 

There is nothing that we do that is so important or urgent to justify 

unsafe decisions or actions. 

Everyone is responsible for safety. 

People should go home each day without injury or illness. 

Achieving zero injuries/illnesses is the only acceptable goal. 

Therefore: 

We will make safety a part of all activities. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 30 | P a g e

We all share accountability and responsibility for safety. 

Appropriate safety training and a safe work environment will be 

provided. 

Safe performance is required in all that we do. 

Safety problems will be addressed promptly. 

Before any of us undertakes an activity, we should ask “What’s Going to 

Get Me Hurt?”-- then take the time to eliminate or manage the hazards, or 

stop the activity until it can be done safely. 

One final thought for each of you -- taking risks where your personal 

safety is concerned is not expected, is not encouraged, and is not an 

acceptable means to accomplish a task quicker or cheaper. There is 

nothing that we do that is so important or urgent to justify unsafe decisions 

or actions. 

Please be safe out there. 

/s/ Vaughn Baker 

Superintendent 

4.1.1 Employee Safety 

The commitment to employee safety is demonstrated in our programmatic 

goals and objectives for the program. The number one goal in everything 

we do is “provide for the safety of employees and the public.” This goal is 

written with intent; that it is in priority order with the employee being our 

highest value. 

Fire management maintains a Fire Branch Safety Plan. This plan serves 

as a reference which provides guidance for our safety program. Safety is 

the responsibility of every employee, but this responsibility is shared at all 

levels of the organization. The requirement of safe work practices is 

shared, supported, and expected by the NPS Fire Director as well as our 

Park Superintendent. 

There is a wealth of safety material included in agency and departmental 

policies and guidance. All actions of the Fire Branch will conform to these 

and other applicable policies, including: 

 Interagency Standards for Fire and Aviation Operations (the "Red 

Book", USDI and USDA 2011) 

 NPS Director’s Order 18 – Wildland Fire (NPS 2008b) 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 31 | P a g e

 NPS Reference Manual 18 (NPS 2008c) 

Elements of the Safety Program implemented at RMNP: 

 Job Hazard Analysis: The Park uses Job Hazard Analysis as one tool 

to determine project and incident hazards and their subsequent 

mitigations. This folder can be found on the: 

O:Drive\resmgmt\Safety\JHA’s and also printed in a folder located at 

the Interagency Fire Station. 

 Operational Leadership (OL): OL practices help employees identify 

risk factors and provide practical tools for individuals and teams to use 

in assessing and mitigating risks. The OL program empowers 

employees to be assertive about their safety and the safety of their 

team, and it encourages them to participate in the decision-making and 

risk management process. To successfully do this each employee 

must be able to inspire, influence, and guide; this is the essence of 

leadership. 

 Physical Fitness and Wellness: Due to high elevation (over 8000 feet), 

long fire seasons, and a laborious work environment, an elevated level 

of physical fitness is desired in all Fire Branch employees. The 

minimum fitness standard is successful completion of the work 

capacity test; however, higher standards are desired. To enforce this 

commitment to fitness, those Fire Branch employees maintaining fire 

qualifications at the “Arduous” level are allowed one hour of physical 

training per day as outlined in the Red Book.

Additional Safety Program elements are included below: 

 Health Screening – Annual Physical for Duty. In addition to health 

screenings the park also hosts periodic Safety Fairs. 

 First Aid/CPR training 

 Wildland Fire Branch Safety Plan which includes: 

o Work/Rest Standards 

o Job Hazard Analysis 

o After Action Reviews 

o Length of assignment standards 

o Driving standards 

o Personal Protective Equipment 

o Fireline safety standards 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 32 | P a g e

o Summary of standard fire checklists, i.e. Fire Orders/Watch out 

Situations, etc. 

 Safety Training – Daily, Weekly, and Monthly 

 Safety Committee Oversight 

 Serious Accident and Review Procedures 

 Critical Stress Debriefing Procedures 

 Right of Refusal of Assignment 

4.1.2 Public Safety 

The number one programmatic goal is: “Provide for the safety of 

employees and the public.” All of the wildland fire program activities and 

elements are built around the protection of human life. The second goal 

is: “Protect communities, infrastructure, natural and cultural resources.” 

Operationally, there are two main fire management program elements: 

how we respond to and manage wildfires and fuels reduction projects. 

These program elements are fundamentally designed to reduce risk to 

employees and the public. These program elements are described in 

detail in sections 4.2-4.5. 

4.2 Preparedness 

Preparedness activities provide detailed procedures and standards for: preseason and readiness activities, wildland fire response and ongoing 

operations. These procedures and standards are designed to provide safe, 

effective, and efficient response to wildland fires or other incidents. 

4.2.1 Coordination and Dispatching 

All wildland fire activities are coordinated through Fort Collins Interagency 

Dispatch Center (FTC). The purpose of the FTC is to manage wildland 

fires and the mobilize wildland firefighting resources in north-central 

Colorado and the northern Front Range area. The Northern Colorado 

Front Range Wildfire Cooperators (NFRWC) Board of Directors is made 

up of representatives from the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests, 

RMNP, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Colorado State Forest 

Service, Boulder County, Larimer County, the City of Boulder, and Poudre 

Fire Authority. Numerous volunteer fire departments and fire protection 

districts in the northern Front Range and northeastern Colorado 

participate in local, regional, and national interagency wildland fire 

management through the FTC Zone Dispatch. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 33 | P a g e

RMNP also hosts a dispatch center for daily park operations, radio call 

sign “ROMO.” RMNP fire staff uses the ROMO dispatch operation as a 

redundant dispatch in an effort to keep the park informed of fire activities. 

Incident and project specific communications plans specify dispatch 

responsibilities. Additional dispatch centers also exist in Boulder County, 

Larimer County, Estes Park, Grand Lake, and Grand County. 

The Wildland Fire Branch coordinates operational activities with the state 

of Colorado, various municipal and volunteer fire departments, and the 

county wildland fire organizations through the use of three Annual 

Operating Plans -- Larimer County, Boulder County, and Grand County. 

4.2.2 Preparedness Activities 

Wildland fire preparedness activities include a wide range of readiness 

activities and program elements that are essential to dealing with 

unplanned ignitions and fuels treatments. It also includes pre-planned 

procedures for initial response and incident management. 

These can be found in the FMP appendix and include: 

Annual Delegation of Authority from Park Superintendent 

Response Plan (Interagency response plan coordinated with FTC) 

Step-up Plan and Staffing Plan (included in the Fire Duty Officer 

Manual, Appendix G) 

Strategic fire size-up procedures 

Minimum impact tactics guidelines that are used in the park, including 

wilderness considerations if applicable 

Fire Danger Rating Operating Plan (located at FTC) 

Job Hazard Analyses for wildland fire and fire aviation operations 

(O:\resmgmt\Fire Management\FM JHA Master) 

Agency Administrators Guide to Critical Incident Management (NFES 

1356)

Various other elements go into being prepared to implement fire 

operations. These include: 

Incident Qualifications and Training - An annual 8 hour Firefighter 

Safety Refresher training is currently required for all who possess a red 

card. That refresher is intended to include fire shelter use and care. 

Qualifications for all positions will conform to minimum standards 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 34 | P a g e

established in the Wildland Fire Qualification System Guide (National 

Wildfire Coordinating Group 2011). 

The park has assembled a Fire Qualifications Committee (FQC) to

assess needs, determine final certification, and to address position 

task book inquiries. The Fire Management Officer has final certifying 

delegation, and as such, acts as the chair of the committee. The rest 

of the committee is comprised of fire management program leads. 

This committee convenes on an as-needed basis. The group can 

provide direction for identifying critical qualification needs in the park, 

prioritizing training needs, and ensuring employees are meeting the 

quality standards and intent of the position. 

Fitness and Physical Examinations - All employees possessing fire 

qualifications which require and “arduous” fitness level are required to 

pass a baseline “arduous” level physical exam. After the baseline, 

employees are required to follow current agency policy regarding 

physical exams. Upon successful completion of the exam, employees 

are also required to pass an annual working capacity test (aka “pack 

test”) congruent with national guidance and position qualifications. 

Those employees maintaining fire qualifications at the “arduous” level 

are authorized to participate in one hour of physical fitness activity 

daily and employees with non-arduous qualifications are allowed three 

hours a week to promote ongoing general fitness and wellness. 

Fire Prevention - - Fire prevention is a critical aspect of any fire 

program. RMNP will coordinate fire prevention activities with 

neighboring cooperators and conduct fire prevention activities in 

accordance with regional and national guidance to include, but not 

limited to: public messages, inspections, community assistance, 

hazardous fuel reduction including removal adjacent to structures, 

restrictions, and education programs through the Interpretation division 

and other park staff. Increased park patrols may take place during 

periods of higher fire danger. 

Fire Readiness - Readiness is a year-round cycle of: organization, 

cache inventory, procurement, equipment assessments, and position 

management. Additionally, a general Fire Readiness Review is 

conducted annually to assess and address fire module, fire crew, and 

fire engine function. This review is formal in nature and the findings 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 35 | P a g e

are forwarded to the IMR Deputy FMO upon completion. Normally the 

checklists that are completed are: 

o Agency Administrator 

o Fire Management Administrator 

o Facilities and Cache 

o Training 

o Individual Firefighter 

o Engines 

o Interagency Hotshot Crew 

o Handcrew non-IHC 

Fire Weather - The park hosts two Remote Automated Weather 

Stations (RAWS) located on opposite sides of the continental divide. 

These stations record weather observations which are then processed 

in the Weather Information Management System (WIMS) application to 

determine fire danger indices, staffing classes, and fire danger 

adjective classes in accordance with National Fire Danger Rating 

System (NFDRS) (National Wildfire Coordinating Group 2002)

protocols. This process provides daily fire danger indices relating to 

potential and expected fire behavior. The stations are owned and 

managed by the USFS – Arapaho/Roosevelt National Forests at the 

Fort Collins Interagency Dispatch Center. Both of these stations are 

located within the park. The park Fire Ecologist currently serves as the 

liaison with the USFS in managing these stations. Their assigned 

NFDRS station identifiers are: 

o 050507 – Estes Park (East Side) 

o 050402 – Harbison Meadow (West Side) 

Energy Release Component - The park uses the Energy Release 

Component (ERC) as the primary indicator for preparedness planning 

and step-up actions. Step-up activities are designed to direct 

incremental preparedness actions in response to corresponding fire 

danger. Preparedness and Response Plan actions are implemented 

according to “Staffing Class.” In accordance with RM-18, the step-up 

plan addresses five staffing classes with corresponding adjective 

classes (1-low, 2-moderate, 3-high, 4-very high, and 5-extreme). The 

park currently uses the 90th and 97th percentile of ERC as the break 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 36 | P a g e

points for staffing class 4 and 5, respectively. The park monitors all 

NFDRS elements to inform daily staffing and preparedness level. 

4.2.3 Staffing Plan 

Upon completion of daily fire weather plotting, and determination of fire 

danger ratings, the Fire Duty Officer (FDO) will implement preparedness 

staffing following the Preparedness and Step Up Plan (Found in the Fire 

Duty Officer Manual Appendix G). This ensures and justifies adequate 

and appropriate fire staffing levels are available for the day. The plan 

includes guidelines for increasing or decreasing staffing, changing the tour 

of duty, etc. 

Fire Danger Determination - The FDO will track daily NFDRS indices and 

set staffing needs accordingly. The Fort Collins Interagency Dispatch 

Center is responsible for posting the Fire Danger Ratings on a daily basis 

at: 

http://gacc.nifc.gov/rmcc/dispatch_centers/r2ftc/DobsFindForm_jsp.htm. 

The ERC is an NFDRS index related to the potential energy release per 

unit area within the flaming front at the head of a fire. As determined from 

the Estes Park and Harbison Meadow RAWS, ERC is the most 

representative NFDRS output for determining relative expected wildland 

fire behavior for all ignition sources. 

The Fire Duty Officer may adjust to the next higher Staffing Level during 

periods of increased visitation, (e.g., holiday weekends, hunting seasons, 

special events, etc.) or when the geographic area preparedness level is 

elevated due to resource draw-down or fire activity. 

4.2.4 Fire Response Plan 

Each fire receives an appropriate response consistent with fire 

management goals following the Fire Decision Framework. A more 

detailed outline on how the Fire Decision Framework is implemented is 

included in Section 4.3 Section C. Each fire, and subsequent request to 

respond, will include communication and approval by the Fire Duty Officer. 

Within the boundaries of the park, initial response normally is one engine 

or squad as available. FTC hosts a Wildcad Dispatch System that 

includes increased response based on fire danger. This Wildcad 

response plan is Zone wide and is consistent with the “closest forces” 

concept. The FDO can raise or decrease the response based on 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 37 | P a g e

conditions at the time of dispatch. In all cases, the FDO should be notified 

immediately. 

The Fire Duty Officer Manual (Appendix G) includes valuable information 

that addresses much of the information needed for the FDO to make wellinformed decisions. Upon confirmation of a wildfire, notification will include 

at a minimum the FMO (or acting). Based on availability, the FMO and/or 

FDO will coordinate additional notifications to include Chief of Resource 

Stewardship, Chief of Visitor Protection, “ROMO” Dispatch, 

Superintendent, Information Officer, Deputy Superintendent, and Chief of 

Interpretation. 

4.2.5 Wilderness 

The park recognizes the need to integrate responsible wildland fire, 

ecosystem, and wilderness management practices with the protection of 

community and public safety. The FMP identifies the natural and historical 

role of fire in the wilderness and defines the management response to all 

wildfires, including the full range of management alternatives from 

aggressive control strategies to monitoring. The park’s 

Backcountry/Wilderness Management Plan (NPS 2001a) states: “[t]he 

restoration of fire on the landscape is an important and immediate need. 

The longer the process is delayed, the more extreme the problem 

becomes. To restore natural fire regimes and maintain public safety, a 

systematic and comprehensive program of action with consideration for 

the immediacy of the need is critical.” 

Nearly 95% of RMNP is designated wilderness (251,945 of 265,800 

acres). As such, all actions taken in the wilderness will conform to the 

basic principles of managing wilderness. The park will apply the ‘minimum 

requirement’ concept procedures known as ‘minimum tool,’ and ‘primitive 

tool’ as much as feasible and in accordance with the park 

Backcountry/Wilderness Management Plan (NPS 2001a), NPS Reference 

Manual 41 (NPS 1999c), and NPS Director’s Order #41 (NPS 1999a). 

All wildfires, whether wilderness or non-wilderness, will be effectively 

managed considering resource values while providing for firefighter and 

public safety using the full range of tactics and strategies. The FMO or 

FDO will coordinate with the Branch Chief of Natural Resources to 

determine when a line-qualified Resource Advisor (READ) should be 

assigned. This is usually for all incidents lasting longer than one 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 38 | P a g e

operational period. Minimum Impact Tactics (MIT) (Appendix J) will be 

applied to all fire response activities. 

4.3 Management of Unplanned Ignitions 

A. Preparing for Unplanned Ignitions 

Management response to wildfires within RMNP is based on the goals and 

objectives established in this FMP with respect to the Fire Decision 

Framework, firefighter and public safety, values to be protected, and cost 

efficiency. Wildfires may be concurrently managed for one or more 

objectives and objectives can change as fire spreads across the 

landscape. Objectives are affected by changes in fuels, weather, 

topography; varying social understanding and tolerance; and involvement 

of other governmental jurisdictions having different missions and 

objectives. 

Prior to the full implementation of strategic and tactical options, RMNP will 

meet the following criteria: 

 Make direct contact with the Regional Fire Management Officer 

(RFMO) (or delegate) regarding wildland fire situation and 

management options. RFMOs are responsible for appraising all 

wildland fire activities within the region; on rare occasions, 

circumstances or situations may exist which require the Regional 

Director to intervene in the wildfire management decision process. 

Approval of the management decision by the Park Superintendent. 

Once published, a decision becomes a system of record and the 

published decision cannot be undone. 

RMNP will use the most current decision support process (currently 

WFDSS) to guide and document wildfire management decisions. The 

process will provide situational assessment, analyze hazards and risk, 

define implementation actions, and document decisions and rationale for 

those decisions. There are several operational aspects that are 

addressed by the RMNP fire management program: 

 A decision process to evaluate new fire starts and assess ongoing 

wildland fires in the park. This process will consider the following 

elements: 

o Determination of fire origin and cause 

o Immediate and projected threats to life and property 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 39 | P a g e

o Smoke and health concerns 

o Necessary qualified personnel and fire management resources 

availability 

o Availability of a qualified incident commander for the fire 

o Immediate and potential impacts to visitors, users, and local 

communities 

o Projected fire growth under normal and drought conditions 

 Documentation of Wildland Fire Decisions. The Park Superintendent 

must carefully consider the long-term benefits of fire in relation to risks 

both in the short and long term based upon on-site information, fire 

location, and management objectives. This process must use the 

decision process and land management objectives defined in this 

FMP. Wildland fires that begin outside of the park must receive the 

same consideration as new starts once they enter the park, unless the 

park and adjacent landowner collaborated on a plan before the fire 

entered the park. The Park Superintendent must validate the decision 

support process in consultation with cooperators. RMNP will interact 

and communicate with neighbors about all wildland fires that have the 

potential to leave or enter park lands. Joint decision making and 

planning processes should involve all affected agencies. A single 

interagency decision support document prepared with all agencies’ 

input during the initial decision-making phase of the fire will be actively 

pursued. For each wildland fire, the Park Superintendent (or delegate) 

is required to affirm periodically that adequate organizational capability 

exists to continue management of the fire. 

 Development of a Wildland Fire Decision Support Document. The 

decision support document is a progressively developed strategic plan. 

Not all fires will warrant and receive intensive on-the-ground 

management actions. The progressive developmental nature of a 

decision support document allows prioritization of immediate needs 

and reduces the workload by minimizing unnecessary planning. 

 Fire Planning Area. All wildland fires will be managed within a planning 

area. This is to ensure that there is a clear and common understanding 

among the various layers of NPS managers and cooperators of the 

authorized size and location of the fire. 

 Selection of New Strategies. When any of the following conditions 

occur, the decision support process must be amended: 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 40 | P a g e

o Fire does not meet every element of the decision criteria, or is 

exceeding management capability to implement the decision. 

o Fire is projected to leave NPS jurisdiction, and the adjoining 

jurisdiction will not/cannot accept management of the fire. 

o The Park Superintendent (or acting) will not approve the decision 

support document for the wildland fire. 

o The regional fire management officer, with the concurrence of the 

Park Superintendent, determines that regional and/or national 

conditions outweigh potential benefits of the fire and more 

aggressive strategies and tactical actions are warranted. 

1. Objectives - The first three Fire Management Goals, (listed in section 

3.1.1) have been formalized into a Fire Decision Framework that 

shapes how the program prepares for and responds to wildfires. The 

following objectives are utilized as the Fire Decision Framework and 

are considered in priority order: 

 Provide for the safety of employees and the public through all 

phases of fire management. 

 Protect communities and infrastructure, as well as natural and 

cultural resources from the potential adverse impacts of unwanted 

wildfire. 

 Restore and maintain fire-adapted ecosystems and implement 

strategies that use fire to the maximum extent possible, allowing 

park ecosystems to exhibit a high degree of resiliency. 

This Fire Decision Framework is the foundation from which the 

decision support process is formulated. In every step of the decision 

process, from initial response to Superintendent’s approval, fulfilling 

the elements of the Framework should be forefront in the decision 

making process. 

2. Risk Assessment - The first step in the risk assessment process for an 

initial response on an unplanned ignition starts with the implementation 

of the Fire Decision Framework (Implementation procedures described 

in next section). For all wildland fires managed longer than the first 

operational period, state of the art wildland fire decision support 

processes will aid managers in a systematic risk assessment process. 

This process can include: 

 Potential incident area mapping to include values at risk in the 

planning area 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 41 | P a g e

 Fire behavior and fire spread modeling 

 Relative Risk Analysis that evaluates Hazards, Probability and 

Values: Federal Fire Policy requires that sound risk management 

be a foundation for all fire management activities. All wildland fires 

present an inherent level of risk, given that we are dealing with a 

number of unknowns and uncertainty in what the future will bring. 

The relative risk rating is intended to characterize the general 

magnitude of risks associated with implementing wildland fire 

management activities as a snapshot in time. It is an attempt to 

qualify the level of uncertainty regarding the eventual outcomes of 

the fire in relationship to the management objectives and other 

mandates. The Wildland Fire Relative Risk Assessment provides 

the Agency Administrator with a quick but comprehensive 

assessment of the relative risk of the fire. This is a qualitative 

process that can be completed in less time than a quantitative longterm risk assessment. 

 Organizational Needs Assessment to guide appropriate staffing and 

management 

The Organizational Needs Assessment (ONA) guides the Park 

Superintendent in determining the management organization 

selection both in escalating and moderating situations (i.e., can be 

used to go up or down in organizations). The Organizational Needs 

Assessment will provide managers information pertaining to Type 

1, 2, and 3 organizations while Types 4 and 5 will be addressed 

through the Incident Complexity Analysis. Organizational Needs 

Assessment is based on the following variables: 

o Relative risk 

o Implementation difficulty 

o Decision concerns 

The ONA allows management to evaluate risk in relationship to 

resources needed and available. RMNP will assess Relative Risk 

before completing the organizational needs assessment. The ONA 

is incorporated into online decision support tools. 

 Incident Complexity: For all incidents, managers will determine 

incident complexity to establish the appropriate Incident Command 

System (ICS) management structure. Complexity Analysis direction 

is provided in the Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation 

Operations (USDI and USDA 2011), the Incident Response Pocket 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 42 | P a g e

Guide (National Wildfire Coordinating Group 2010), and the Fireline 

Handbook (National Wildfire Coordinating Group 2004). For Type 1 

and Type 2 incidents, and for incidents managed for resource 

benefit, managers may use the ONA to supplement the complexity 

analysis. The ONA provides a more selective assessment of 

implementation difficulty, decision concerns, and overall risk. As 

with the Complexity Analysis, this assessment can be used to 

assist in the selection of the appropriate management organization 

for a complex incident. 

 Implementation Difficulties: The Implementation Difficulty is a 

measure of how the specific circumstances associated with a 

particular fire combine to represent potentially intricate 

implementation concerns. While many specific situational elements 

are addressed by Relative Risk, Implementation Difficulty 

addresses potential fire duration, special functional concerns, and 

requirements for the selected course of action. This assessment 

area also allows the Agency Administrator to identify local 

information regarding historic fire durations, special needs and 

concerns, and potential tactical responses. 

 Decision Concerns: The Decision Concerns are an indicator of 

how difficult and involved the decision is for the specific situation 

associated with a particular fire. The following key areas influence 

and affect an Agency Administrator’s decision space and range of 

options: 

o The type of objectives to be implemented on the fire 

o The particular ownership situation 

o Any external influences that may exert strong influences on the 

Agency Administrator and his/her decision. This assessment 

area also allows the Agency Administrator to identify local 

information regarding attention to fire activity, local public and 

political opinions, and local knowledge. 

 Identification and implementation procedures for management 

action points (MAP’s) 

The risk assessment process is a collaborative effort and will be 

initiated by the FMO (or acting) and/or FDO and other fire and park 

managers, as well as fire specific stakeholders. The Superintendent 

has ultimate decision authority. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 43 | P a g e

3. Implementation Procedures 

 Monitor and track seasonal fire severity indices 

 Ensure that preparedness activity elements are reviewed and 

updated annually 

 Ensure all interagency agreements are in place 

 Ensure employees maintain required currency commensurate with 

their fire qualifications 

 Annual FMP review completed 

 Annual readiness reviews completed 

 Decision support data current and available 

Implementation Process: 

 Initial response and long term management will utilize the Fire 

Decision Framework 

 Size-up reported to FDO 

 The FDO has authority to make initial response decisions for 

immediate protection strategies. 

 For fires lasting more than one operational period, the FMO and/or 

FDO will assemble a “Fire Decision Team.” The make-up of the 

team will depend on the complexity of the incident. At a minimum, 

the FMO and/or the Chief of Resources Stewardship (or acting) will 

participate on the team, prior to obtaining management approval 

from the Superintendent. 

 Initiate the wildfire decision support process. This process will aid 

in determining short and long-term management of the fire. FDO 

will ensure the decision support process is initiated and take 

ownership and create a shared group. 

 Ordering of resources will be through FTC. Initial Response 

Incident Commander will order direct with FTC and coordinate with 

the FDO 

4. Staffing 

 The park will have an assigned FDO on duty. If an NPS FDO is not 

available, the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests can provide 

FDO coverage for the park as available and negotiated at the time 

of request. 

 Based on the complexity of a fire incident, the Fire Decision Team 

will be made up of representatives from appropriate park divisions, 

affected stakeholders and interagency partners. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 44 | P a g e

5. Information 

 The park Public Affairs Officer (PAO) or designated acting, will be 

the lead for all public information activities on wildfires. The PAO 

may assign information duties to other information officers. 

Ordering Regional level Fire Public Information Officers (PIO’s) 

should be considered. 

6. Record Keeping 

 Records will be kept following agency standards. These standards 

can be found in the following location: 

http://www.nwcg.gov/policies/records/index.html

 Wildland fire incident records retention guidance is found in the 

following location: 

http://www.nwcg.gov/policies/records/docs/RetentionGuidanceRef

Sheet.pdf

B. Expected Fire Behavior 

In general terms, the RMNP fire season begins in June and lasts through 

September, at times lasting into October. Large fires have occurred in the 

Zone at all times of the year due to dry conditions and strong winds. 

1. In the montane zone, fire behavior is expected to be understory 

burning with occasional single tree and group torching. 

2. In the Sub-Alpine Zone most fires are single tree events, with limited 

creeping and smoldering fire spread. Under more extreme conditions, 

these forest types are expected to have single tree torching to running 

crown fire. Downslope winds on the east side of the park can 

contribute to extreme fire behavior and very fast rates of spread. 

Crown fire thresholds have not been established, however a 

correlation with several days of low nighttime humidities, warm dry 

conditions with wind can produce extreme fire behavior. 

C. Initial Response Procedure 

All wildfires will receive an initial response that focuses on the safety of 

employees and the public, protection of communities and infrastructure, 

natural and cultural resources, and restoring and maintaining fire-adapted 

ecosystems. The range of initial response strategies and tactics can vary 

from aggressive perimeter control to management over time and space. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 45 | P a g e

Initial response decisions will be based on the following Fire Decision 

Framework and followed in priority order: 

1. Employee and public safety 

 Is it safe or necessary for firefighters to engage? 

 Is there an immediate or anticipated threat to life? 

o Evacuation may be the priority 

 Can identified risks be mitigated? 

 What strategies and tactics will be the safest for firefighters and the 

public? 

 How can we continually re-assess risk management process? 

2. Protection of communities and infrastructure, natural and cultural 

resources 

 Is there a current or potential threat to communities and 

infrastructure, natural or cultural resources? 

 What protection measures can be successfully implemented 

considering the safety of firefighters and the public? 

 What strategies and tools will best protect these values? 

 What management efforts will minimize undesirable impacts on 

natural and cultural resources? 

 Is there strategic placement of viable holding lines using existing 

improvements such as trails or roads and/or other natural features? 

 Can the fire achieve protection benefits to the communities and 

infrastructure, natural or cultural resources? 

 Is the fire providing long term protection of structures, natural or 

cultural resources through fuels consumption? 

3. Ability of the fire to restore and/or maintain fire adapted ecosystems. 

 Is the fire exhibiting behavior and producing fire effects typical of 

historic fire regimes? 

 What management strategies and tactics can be implemented to 

allow wildland fire to perform its ecological role on the landscape 

while maintaining priority number 1 (employee and public safety) 

and priority number 2 (protection of communities and infrastructure, 

natural and cultural resources)? 

In addition: 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 46 | P a g e

1. Information Needed To Set Initial Response Priorities 

 Location of the fire 

 Natural/cultural values of concern 

 Resources available 

 Forecasted weather 

 Tactical options available 

2. Incident Documentation and Reporting 

 A record for each unplanned ignition will be initiated per most 

recent policy guidance. 

 Each fire will be reported in the most current fire occurrence 

reporting system within three weeks of a fire being called out. 

3. Criteria for Selecting the Initial Response 

 The closest available resource will be dispatched to fires. The 

strength of initial dispatch will be based on the predefined response 

plan in the Wildcad System at FTC. 

 The FDO can increase or decrease the response depending on the 

current situation, such as other fires in the area, fire location (near 

structures?), availability of resources, etc. 

 Following initial size up, the Incident Commander will execute 

management tactics in accordance with the strategic direction 

provided by the FDO. 

 Selection of every initial response strategy will be based on the Fire 

Decision Framework. 

4. Response Times 

 Response times can vary from five minutes on a front-country fire 

to several hours, depending on location. Many fires are not near 

roads and require hiking in. The goal is to have personnel on 

scene within an hour. If this is not possible, aerial reconnaissance 

is desired, helitack, and/or smokejumpers may be an alternative. 

5. Management Requirements and Restrictions 

 Bulldozers will not be used within park boundaries without prior 

approval from the park superintendent. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 47 | P a g e

 The use of fire retardant will be minimized. If used, it will be at least 

300 feet away from all streams. Usually the decision to use 

retardant is time sensitive, therefore the decision to use retardant 

has been delegated to the FMO. 

 During the initial response, low level flights, chainsaws and pumps 

are allowed in wilderness to implement protection strategies. After 

the first operational period, the Fire Decision team will discuss 

Minimum Impact Tactics (MIT) and recommend appropriate 

minimum tools needed to achieve safety and wilderness objectives. 

D. Transition to Extended Response and Large Fire 

Criteria for Transition 

 WFDSS Decision and Decision Rationale are documented. 

 Decisions in WFDSS are approved and published by the appropriate 

individual by position title as defined in the Red Book. 

 Periodic assessments must be completed by the designated approver 

at the timeframe set during the publication process. 

 Based on Organizational Needs Assessment 

 Based on Complexity Analysis 

E. Implementation Plan Requirements and Responsibilities 

 The current decision support system will be used to develop and 

document decisions and support extended response needs. 

 Resource Advisors will be deployed for each incident when 

appropriate. 

 The individual by position title as defined in the Red Book will approve 

and publish the decision. 

F. Delegation of Authority 

 A copy of a sample Delegation of Authority is in the RMNP Wildland 

Fire Transition Package (Appendix H) 

4.4 Burned Area Emergency Response 

Large wildland fires that involve protection actions or resource damage may 

necessitate rehabilitation efforts. Rehabilitation will conform to agency 

management policies. Rehabilitation efforts may be required where the fire or 

associated management actions have impacted human life, physical 

improvements, cultural resources, and threatened or endangered species 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 48 | P a g e

significantly and where those efforts have a high likelihood of success in 

mitigating those impacts. There are two separate phases of rehabilitation: 

emergency stabilization (ES) and burned area rehabilitation (BAR). These 

phases are described below in sections 4.4.3 and 4.4.4.

If the minimum impact actions are used, only minimal rehabilitation should be 

necessary. The management objectives for emergency stabilization and 

burned area rehabilitation in the park are to:

 Determine the potential for an emergency condition after a fire. 

 Alleviate emergency conditions to help stabilize soil; control water, 

sediment and debris movement; prevent impairment of ecosystems; 

mitigate significant threats to health, safety, life property and downstream 

values at risk. 

 Monitor the implementation and effectiveness of emergency treatments. 

4.4.1 Minimum Impact Tactics 

All fire management activities in the park will rely on tactics which cause 

minimum resource damage while maintaining minimal risk to the safety of 

firefighters, the public, and other personnel. Tactical tools will be chosen 

based on a minimum requirement / minimum tool (MR/MT) analysis. 

Superintendent approval (delegated to FDO’s) is required for aerial 

retardant application, off-road use of vehicles, and use of bulldozers. The 

Minimum Impact Techniques (MIT) Guide can be found in Appendix K. 

When determining management actions and tactics on unplanned 

ignitions, collateral damage to park resources as a result of the proposed 

protection action must be considered. Least cost or minimum acres 

burned are not the primary determining factor in choosing tactics. 

Considering firefighter and public safety first, tactics selected are those 

which create the least collateral damage to park resources. 

MIT is not intended to represent a separate or distinct classification of 

firefighting tactics but rather a framework for identifying ways to manage a 

wildfire while minimizing the long-term effects of the management action. 

Use of MIT must not compromise firefighter safety or the effectiveness of 

management efforts. Safety zones and escape routes must continue to be 

a factor in determining fire line location. In implementing MIT, follow these 

recommendations: 

 Emphasize firefighter and public safety (safety cannot be 

compromised). 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 49 | P a g e

 Evaluate fire management tactics during planning and strategy 

sessions to ensure they meet agency administrator objectives and 

MIT. Include the agency resource adviser and/or designated 

representative. 

 Communicate MIT where applicable during briefings and implement 

during all phases of operations. 

4.4.2 Burned Area Emergency Response 

Burned Area Emergency Response consists of two separate phases: 

emergency stabilization (ES) and burned area rehabilitation (BAR). ES 

and BAR are part of a holistic approach to post-wildfire issues, one which 

also includes management action damage repair and long-term (>3 years) 

restoration. The incident management team begins the process by 

repairing or mitigating management activity damage. ES consists of 

planned actions performed by burned area emergency response (BAER) 

teams within one year of wildfire containment in order to stabilize and 

preserve natural and cultural resources, to minimize threats to life or 

property resulting from fire, and/or to repair/replace/construct physical 

improvements necessary to prevent degradation of land or resources. 

BAR consists of efforts undertaken within three years of wildfire 

containment to repair or improve fire-damaged lands that are unlikely to 

return naturally to management approved conditions, and/or to repair or 

replace minor facilities damaged by fire. The process concludes with longterm restoration. 

BAR and ES activities are an integral part of wildfire incidents, but are 

planned, programmed, and funded separately from each other. ES is part 

of the Emergency Operations appropriation and BAR is a separate nonemergency appropriation. All ES and BAR plans will be prepared in 

accordance with the Department of the Interior Departmental Manual, Part 

620: Wildland Fire Management, Chapter 3: Burned Area Emergency 

Stabilization and Rehabilitation (2004), RM-18, the Interagency Burned 

Area Emergency Response Guidebook (USDI 2006a), and the 

Interagency Burned Area Rehabilitation Guidebook (USDI 2006b) and 

require approval by the Intermountain Regional READ coordinator. 

4.4.3 Emergency Stabilization

Emergency stabilization efforts consist of planned actions to stabilize and 

preserve natural and cultural resources, to minimize threats to life or 

property resulting from fire, or to repair/replace/construct physical 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 50 | P a g e

improvements necessary to prevent degradation of land or resources. ES 

actions may be implemented concurrently while the fire is still being 

actively managed and must be taken within one year following 

containment of a wildland fire. ES plans will conform to the following 

objectives: 

 Locate and stabilize burned conditions that pose a direct threat to 

human life, property, or critically important cultural and natural 

resources. 

 Recommend post-fire emergency stabilization prescriptions that 

prevent irreversible loss of natural and cultural resources. 

 Conduct immediate post-burn reconnaissance for fire management 

related impacts to threatened and endangered (T&E) species, riparian 

areas, water quality, flooding/debris flow, cultural sites and others as 

identified. 

 Develop monitoring specifications designed to document whether 

emergency stabilization treatments were implemented according to 

plan specifications and the relative effectiveness of emergency 

stabilization treatments (did the treatments achieve their objectives?). 

The ES plan will specify only emergency treatments and activities to be 

carried out within one year following containment of a wildland fire. If ES 

needs are unknown, the ES plan may contain specifications for completing 

assessments that will be used to later define and implement ES needs 

within one year following containment of a wildland fire. Generally, ES 

activities are prescribed only within the perimeter of a burned area. 

Acceptable treatments or activities outside a burn perimeter could include 

such things as emergency stream channel work to protect structures, 

roads, and other improvements from flood damage. 

ES actions will be based on a plan developed immediately post-fire, or 

through plan amendments, except where programmatic plans are already 

in place. Programmatic plans include an environmental assessment, and 

are developed at the landscape level, with public input. The decision to 

develop the programmatic plan is based on the size and diversity of the 

ecosystems involved, fire history, resource values, and resource 

management objectives and decisions in land use plans. The 

development and implementation of an ES plan and its associated 

treatments and activities are the responsibility of the local Agency 

Administrator. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 51 | P a g e

4.4.4 Burned Area Rehabilitation 

Burned area rehabilitation (BAR) consists of non-emergency post-fire 

efforts (< 3 years) to repair or improve lands unlikely to recover to a 

management approved condition from wildland fire damage, or to repair or 

replace minor facilities damaged by fire. Restoration is the continuation of 

BAR beyond 3 years. BAR project management conforms with a bureau's 

normal resource management procedures. 

A rehabilitation plan will be written as a separate plan, independent of an 

emergency stabilization plan. The rehabilitation plan will specify nonemergency treatments and activities which meet approved land 

management plans to be carried out within three years following 

containment of a wildland fire. Rehabilitation plans should be developed 

with full public involvement and cannot be completed until all assessments 

are concluded. The rehabilitation plans may use approved programmatic 

plans when amended for site specific conditions. Generally, rehabilitation 

activities are prescribed only within the perimeter of a burned area. The 

rehabilitation plan generally contains: 

1. A discussion demonstrating how the specifications are consistent and 

compatible with approved land use plans, and how the proposed 

actions are related to damage or changes caused by the wildland fire 

2. Provisions for monitoring and evaluation of treatments (including 

criteria for measuring a successful treatment) and techniques, and a 

procedure for collecting, archiving, and disseminating results 

3. Clear delineation of funding and responsibilities for implementation, 

operation, maintenance, monitoring, and evaluation throughout the life 

of the project, including rehabilitation actions and follow-up actions 

beyond three years if necessary to ensure the effectiveness of initial 

investments. However, funding for such activities beyond three years 

may not be available from the wildland fire management account. 

4.5 Management of Planned Fuels Treatments 

Planned fuels treatments in wildland fire management include prescribed fire, 

manual treatments (work completed by hand tools, including chainsaws) and 

mechanical treatments (work completed using machinery). These fuels 

treatments are aimed at achieving hazardous fuels reduction, creating and/or 

maintaining desired landscapes or other site specific objectives. Limited 

application of chemicals may be utilized to limit exotic weed invasions 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 52 | P a g e

following planned fuels treatments. This application is under the scope of the 

Exotics Plant Management Plan. 

The intent of fuels treatments is multi-faceted, including to reduce the risks to 

firefighters and the public, help protect communities, infrastructure, natural 

and cultural resources, and to restore and maintain fire adapted ecosystems. 

Fuels treatments at RMNP are NOT intended to stop wildfires by themselves. 

Wildfires burn at varying intensities and few fuels reduction projects can stop 

the most intense. 

Fuels reduction treatments increase the likelihood of firefighters implementing 

management actions on unplanned ignitions that: 

 Provide for the safety of firefighters and the public in potential 

ingress/egress situations around communities and roadways. 

 Reduce potential fire intensity in and around communities, infrastructure, 

natural and cultural resources. This allows firefighters a better chance at 

protecting these values. In addition, it increases the survivability of these 

values in the absence of firefighters. 

 Provide firefighters with defensible area to work from when initiating 

burnout operations when fighting wildfires, ensuring greater safety for 

firefighters. 

 Promote the ability to restore and maintain fire adapted ecosystems. 

This is not an all-inclusive list, but provides examples of the relationship 

between fuels treatments to managing wildfires and resource stewardship. 

4.5.1 Fuels Planning and Documentation 

The fuels management program will implement fire management policies 

and help achieve resource management and fire management goals as 

defined in: 

 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and Program Review 

 Managing Impacts of Wildfires on Communities and the Environment, 

and Protecting People and Sustaining Resources in Fire Adapted 

Ecosystems – A Cohesive Strategy (USDA 2001) 

 A Collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to 

Communities and the Environment: 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy 

Implementation Plan. 

a. Fuels Planning Participants 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 53 | P a g e

Fuels Planning Group will be comprised of the FMO, Fire Ecologist, 

and Fuels Specialist at a minimum. Others will be brought in to aid 

planning as needed. 

b. Identifying Candidate Projects: 

In general, fuels treatments are selected due to their proximity to 

values at risk, prioritized using the Fire Decision Framework. The 

2011 “Long Term Fuels Treatment Plan” (LTFTP) (Figure 4) has been 

approved in the 2011 EA, (Appendix D). The LTFTP provides 

approved areas where fuels treatments may occur over the life of the 

EA, approximately 20 years. Within the identified areas of the LTFTP, 

a “Multi-Year Fuels Treatment Plan” (MFTP) identifies a short term (up 

to five years) schedule of planned fuels projects and is updated 

annually (Appendix E). 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 54 | P a g e

Figure 4. Treatment Areas Included in the Long-Term Fuels Treatment 

Plan.
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 55 | P a g e

Individual projects will be identified and implemented within the 

boundary of the LTFTP area. These project boundaries will be 

determined on a project by project basis and prioritized by their ability 

to meet the Fire Decision Framework. This prioritization will also 

include consideration of the ecological benefits from the treatments. 

Projects will be implemented as planning efforts and budget allow. 

c. Project Prioritization 

RMNP fire managers will use a variety of tools, models, and decision 

support systems to prioritize treatment projects utilizing the Fire 

Decision Framework. Fire and fuels management analysis tools and 

systems continue to evolve to reflect improvements in technology, 

advances in fire science, and changes in fire policy. Fire managers at 

RMNP will use the currently accepted fuels management analysis tools 

available at the time a treatment project is proposed. 

Fuels treatments are identified and prioritized based on: 

 Proximity to values at risk (prioritized by the Fire Decision 

Framework) and the degree of risk 

 Practicality of implementation 

 Effectiveness of treatments 

 Cost effectiveness 

 Logical project sequence (e.g. there may be a logical sequence to 

implementing linked or adjacent projects that suggests a priority) 

Spatially, many of these projects are located along the park boundary 

near and /or adjacent to the communities of Estes Park, Allenspark, 

and Grand Lake and other properties next to the park that have values 

at risk. Other projects are located throughout the park, protecting site 

specific values. Projects will also occur along the park boundary, roads 

and trails. 

Individual priorities are set during the yearly update of the MFTP. 

During winter meetings with various park staff, priorities for the year 

are discussed and forwarded to the Superintendent for approval as 

part of the yearly FMP update. 

d. Updating the Fuels Treatment Plan 

The park has two working documents related to long-term fuels 

planning. In the EA, the LTFTP was identified. Within this document, 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 56 | P a g e

areas are identified that allow fuels treatments for the life of the EA, 

estimated at 20 years. If the LTFTP needs to be updated or changed, 

an Environmental Screening Form (ESF) will be completed and direct 

any further NEPA. 

Within the LTFTP, the MFTP identifies specific areas for individual 

projects. The MFTP is updated annually and is revised to include new 

projects and drop or revise previously proposed projects. This process 

occurs during the yearly review of the FMP and is approved by the 

Superintendent. Each project goes through the parks “Project 

Proposal” process which includes Management Team concurrence 

and approval by the Superintendent. 

4.5.2 Fuels Management Implementation Procedures 

a. Guidance 

All fuel reduction activities (prescribed fire, mechanical reduction, and 

manual reduction) will be planned and implemented in accordance with 

RM-18 chapter 7 Fuels Management, the Interagency Standards for 

Fire and Fire Aviation Operations, and the Interagency Prescribed Fire 

Implementation Procedures Reference Guide 

b. Annual Actions 

Fuels reduction as a management tool requires that certain annual 

activities be performed to implement the program. The funding cycle 

associated with fuels activity requires that project funds for the next 

fiscal year be requested the spring before the end of the current fiscal 

year. This cycle requires that on-the-ground project assessment and 

planning must be completed 6 to 12 months prior to the intended 

project implementation. Additional annual needs for fuels reduction 

activities include: 

Update previous fuels data to include previous year fuels reduction 

accomplishments, fires, and other forest disturbances to reflect the 

current state of fuels and vegetation. 

Complete surveys and acquire knowledge of planned project areas. 

These surveys include a suite of sensitive wildlife, cultural, historic, 

prehistoric, and vegetation. 

Establish highest fuel reduction priorities. 

Involve known stakeholders. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 57 | P a g e

Submit project proposals. 

Complete an annual Fuels Treatment Plan and submit for funding, 

usually by March. 

Contract solicitation/advertisement by January. 

Complete the pre-implementation process by April. 

Implement 

c. Implementation Standards 

All work proposed in the FMP will be planned and implemented in 

accordance with RM-18, and the Interagency Standards for Fire and 

Fire Aviation Operations, and the Interagency Prescribed Fire 

Implementation Procedures Reference Guide. Manual fuels reduction 

will comply with park policies regarding chainsaw use. Standards to 

minimize other adverse impacts are generally included in each project 

proposal, but include: minimum stump heights, rehabilitation 

requirements, actions to reduce or remove saw cuts, and actions to 

minimize the spread of exotic invasive plants. In general, fuels 

management activities are implemented in such a manner to remove 

any obvious evidence of work performed when feasible, and, when it 

does not compromise the effectiveness of the treatment. 

d. Planning & Reporting Requirements 

Reporting and documentation requirements contained in RM-18 will be 

used as a guide for tracking fuel reduction activities. Additional yearend reporting requirements will include internal accomplishment 

updates for park management and regional fiscal and project 

accomplishment reports detailing activities. The overall cost accounting 

for projects will be tracked using the National Fire Plan Operations and 

Reporting System (NFPORS). Prescribe Fire Burn Plans will adhere to 

the Interagency Prescribed Fire Planning and Implementation 

Procedures Guide. 

e. Monitoring 

Monitoring data is essential to evaluate whether projects are achieving 

objectives, to understand the changes in vegetation structure and 

composition, and to detect undesirable effects from project 

implementation. The data is also used as a basis to improve future 

projects for better effects. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 58 | P a g e

All prescribed fires will be monitored in accordance with guidance in 

the NPS Fire Monitoring Handbook (2003b) and the RMNP Wildfire 

and Prescribed Fire/Fuels Treatment Monitoring Plan (Appendix F). 

Monitoring will seek to record and analyze fire weather and fire 

behavior during project implementation, as well as, short- and longterm fire effects on vegetation and fuels. The intensity and character of 

monitoring will vary with the complexity and purposes of the burn. This 

monitoring will allow managers to document basic information, 

revealing trends and ensuring that actions are meeting fire and 

resource management objectives. 

To measure success within manual or mechanical treatment areas, 

plots will be installed that can capture changes in fuel loads and fuel 

arrangements. These plots may also provide information on vegetation 

composition for the pre-treatment and post-treatment environment. 

Permanent photo points may also be used to meet these monitoring 

objectives and will be an additional source of information. 

f. Historic Treatment Map 

A map of past treatments is located in Appendix E and is maintained in 

conjunction with the park’s GIS office and the Fuels Management 

Specialist. The GIS data layers should be maintained annually to 

include each treatment’s location, the type of treatment, and the date 

of completion. 

4.5.3 Prescribed Fire Treatments 

a. Guidance 

Prescribed fire planning and implementation will be in accordance with 

RM-18, and Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation 

Operations, and the Interagency Prescribed Fire Implementation 

Procedures Reference Guide. In addition, prescribed fire must conform 

to the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division’s permitting process. This 

process is being constantly refined and improved; the most current 

description of the permit standards and permitting process can be 

found at: http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ap/smoke/. 

b. Prescribed Fire Treatment Reviews 

After post burn monitoring plots are read, a written analysis of the burn 

will be prepared. Quantifiable results will be used to determine if burn 

objectives were met and to make recommendations for prescription 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 59 | P a g e

refinement. This evaluation is part of the adaptive management 

process as described in RM-18.

4.5.4 Non-Fire Fuels Treatments 

Scope and Description 

Comprised of manual or mechanical fuels reduction, non-fire fuels 

treatment will be designed to reduce fire behavior to levels that can be 

managed in a safer manner and that significantly reduce the threat to 

adjacent or incorporated values. Such treatments are not stand-alone 

defenses, but rather are designed to improve or augment protection 

objectives during wildfires or prescribed burning efforts. Goals of 

treatments would include, but are not limited to reducing flame length, 

reducing burn duration, reducing torching or crowning potential, 

reducing spotting potential, reducing resistance to control, increasing 

fire line safety, and reducing potential for fire damage or fire 

management impact. Specific objectives to meet these goals would 

include, but are not limited to limbing trees, removing brush or ladder 

fuels, removing dead and down material from the forest floor, removing 

dead snags, thinning to increase crown spacing, reducing canopy 

cover, and manipulating vegetation to favor fire resistant species or 

fire-adapted species (e.g. increasing aspen density, retaining 

ponderosa, removing Douglas-fir or spruce). 

Limited application of chemicals for exotic weed control following fuels 

treatments is expected and falls within the scope of the Exotic Plant 

Management Plan. 

a. Guidance 

The planning and implementation of non-fire fuels management 

projects will be in accordance with RM-18.

b. Planning 

Non-fire treatments will follow RM-18 on Non-Fire fuel treatment 

requirements. 

c. Treatment Review 

Immediately after treatments have been implemented, monitoring 

data will be recorded and a written analysis of the treatment will be 

prepared. Quantifiable results will be used both to determine if 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 60 | P a g e

objectives were met and to make recommendations for prescription 

refinement. This evaluation is part of the adaptive management 

process as described in RM-18.

4.6 Prevention, Mitigation & Education 

4.6.1 Prevention/Mitigation 

The fire prevention program is intended to provide for the safety of 

employees and the public, and to protect communities and infrastructure, 

natural and cultural resources. This is accomplished by working with 

interagency cooperators implementing fire restrictions, public outreach 

and implementing hazard fuels reduction projects. 

Public outreach on the natural role of fire and the prevention of human 

caused wildfires is the focus of the prevention program as well as the 

overall mission of the NPS and RMNP specific Fire Management 

Programs. Fire prevention specific messaging is addressed in the park’s 

communication and education strategy. 

4.6.2 Communications/Education 

RMNP is located along the heavily populated Colorado Front Range in 

close proximity to the Denver metropolitan area. The park has an annual 

visitation of over three million people. These two factors – proximity to a 

heavily populated urban area and high levels of park visitation – contribute 

to an intense amount of public interest in events occurring within or near 

RMNP. It is therefore very important that all fire management activities be 

proactively and accurately communicated to the public. 

The Fire Management Public Information and Education program is 

committed to the expansion of ongoing efforts to educate employees and 

the public about the scope and effect of wildland fire management, 

including the response to unplanned ignitions, incident management, fuels 

management, resource protection, prevention, hazard/risk assessment, 

mitigation and rehabilitation, and fire's role in ecosystem management. 

RMNP is dedicated to providing fire information and education for a variety 

of audiences while maintaining a level of service that is consistent with the 

park's professionalism. 

The Fire Management Officer, working in conjunction with the Public 

Affairs Officer (PAO) will be responsible for informing the public and the 

media about the park's fire management program. As there is no 

permanently funded fire information officer in the park, employees with an 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 61 | P a g e

interest in fire information are encouraged to pursue further training and 

experience in this area. 

Communications plans will be developed as required, identifying 

objectives, audiences, messages or talking points, communication 

methods and tools, organization, and assignments. 

The objectives of fire information are to proactively provide the public, 

media, and park staff with accurate and timely information and to enlist 

public support for professional fire management practices. 

Audiences may include local residents, the local business community, 

park visitors, park in-holders, park management, employees and 

volunteers, regional or national office staff, cooperating agencies, 

legislators, media, etc. 

Messages or talking points may include such topics as prescribed fire, 

fuels management activities, management of wildfires, wildland-urban 

interface issues, fire safety and prevention, fire wise and defensible 

space concepts, and implementation of fire restrictions, etc. 

Communication Methods 

Personal Services

Interpretive Programs – Fire management will work with the Interpretive 

Division to integrate fire messages into hikes, tours, displays, site 

bulletins, and campfire programs. Relevant fire literature and information 

will be shared with the interpretive staff. 

Employee Training - Fire management will offer an overview of the fire 

management program to be presented annually at new employee and 

seasonal trainings to give NPS employees a basic understanding of fire 

management in the park. 

Education Programs -Fire management will work with the park's 

Education Specialist to develop programs and incorporate fire ecology 

concepts into curriculum-based education programs, summer day camp 

programs, and teacher workshops as requested and available. 

Roving - During fire operations, park employees (including temporary 

hires, interns, interagency partners) will be stationed when possible at 

strategic locations to answer questions about the current fire activity 

and/or explain the fire management program. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 62 | P a g e

Special Events - Fire management staff, when possible, will participate in 

local events to promote the fire management program and fuels 

management practices. 

Non-Personal Services 

Media Stories - The Fire Management Office will communicate with print, 

radio, and television outlets through press releases and interviews. This 

will be coordinated with the park's Public Affairs Office. 

Visitor Center Exhibits, Waysides, and Bulletin Boards - The Fire 

Management Office will work with other divisions in the park to provide 

interpretive information in visitor centers and wayside exhibits as 

requested. 

Step Up Activities 

Public Information Step-Up Activities, that will be used to increase 

awareness of fire danger, may include the following: 

Interagency Coordination of Fire Danger Levels - Interagency fire 

managers work together to coordinate the implementation of partial or full 

fire restrictions. 

"Trapline" for Fire Information - A list of park and concession facilities 

notes locations where fire information updates, posters, maps, etc. should 

be distributed when appropriate. 

Sign Boards – Park staff will post sign boards with fire information 

updates, press releases, maps, etc. in field locations. 

Staff Email - Regular staff updates on park fire activities keep internal 

audiences informed and give them updated, accurate information to share 

with park visitors and local residents. 

Roving Contacts - During fire incidents, available personnel may be 

stationed when possible at strategic locations to answer questions about 

the current fire activity. 

Special Events - Fire Management staff occasionally participates in local 

community events to promote the fire management program and fuels 

management practices. If one of these scheduled events coincides with a 

local fire incident, current fire information will be incorporated into the 

display area. 

4.7 Air Quality & Smoke Management 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 63 | P a g e

Clean air and visibility are important natural resource values of RMNP. The 

park has been designated as a Class I area by the 1977 amendments to the 

Clean Air Act (Public Law 95-217), which requires the prevention of significant 

deterioration in air quality and gives added protection to areas of unique 

scenic value. In addition the park is required to protect public health by 

managing planned smoke emissions so that specific air pollutants (e.g., 

smoke, PM 2.5, PM 10, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, and other pollutants 

from fires) do not exceed established unhealthy limits as established by the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) both inside and outside unit 

boundaries. To ensure these limits are not exceeded the Colorado 

Department of Public Health and Environment has been delegated the 

authority to establish regulatory procedures for the discharge of air pollutants 

produced by prescribed fire. These can be found at 

http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ap/smoke/. The NPS is required to follow these 

regulatory procedures along with all applicable federal, state, interstate, and 

local air pollution control requirements, as specified by Section 118 of the 

Clean Air Act, as amended (42 USC 7418). 

Smoke emissions from a healthy and naturally functioning fire-adapted 

ecosystem are an inevitable and a necessary occurrence. The objective is 

not to eliminate or reduce these emissions, but rather to manage them in 

frequency, duration, and size so that emissions do not adversely impact air 

quality. When managing planned emissions (prescribed fire), the park has 

the ability and expectation to prevent any adverse impacts. In the case of 

unplanned emission (wildfire) the ability to manage the emission may be 

restricted. However, when available, the park should use any means 

available to reduce adverse impacts that may occur. DO #41 reflects this 

concept when it provides the following direction: “Managers will be 

responsible for reducing the impacts of smoke from wildland fires on visibility 

in Class I wilderness, while understanding and promoting the need to reintroduce the natural role of fire into wilderness ecosystems.” It is important 

to understand that some adverse impacts on air quality from wildfires is 

inevitable, but are relatively infrequent and of short duration. 

The management of smoke must recognize the influence of offsite pollutant 

sources impacting the park and the effects of smoke leaving the park and 

impacting other receptors. Often it is the combination of several emissions 

from different sources that can generate unacceptable impacts. The number, 

close proximity, and valley locations of communities both east and west of the 

park play a significant role in managing air quality associated with fire. 

4.7.1 Air Quality Issues 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 64 | P a g e

 As previously noted, the park in its entirety is a class I air shed. 

 Smoke-sensitive areas can best be defined as the public property 

within 5 miles of the park and all major roads and highways within 5 

miles of the park 

 At times the park experiences non-attainment for ozone. During such 

times prescribed burning is not permitted. 

 As previously noted smoke management restrictions and procedures 

are defined by the Colorado Department of Public Health and 

Environment. These can be found at 

http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ap/smoke/. 

4.7.2 Smoke Management Program 

To the greatest extent possible the park will manage the inevitable and 

necessary smoke events in a manner that avoids or lessens impacts to air 

quality and public health and in a manner that protects the class I air shed 

as one of the park’s many natural resources. 

The Colorado Air Pollution Control District’s (APCD) prescribed burn 

permitting process is designed to ensure that these values are protected. 

The mitigation measures often outlined in the permits include but are not 

limited to the following: 

 Burning under fair or better smoke dispersion 

 Terminating ignitions several hours before sunset 

 Burning under wind speed and wind direction constraints 

 Notifying the public in advance 

 Limiting the volume of material ignited on any given day 

 Limiting the frequency of heavy ignitions within a one week period 

 Monitoring smoke density and locations prior to dissipation 

 Preplanning methods to shut down or reduce smoke emission if it 

becomes problematic 

 Utilizing past smoke experiences to understand and tailor future 

emissions 

In the arena of unplanned emissions associated with wildfires, protection 

of life is the number one priority and objective of the NPS fire programs. 

As such, if smoke emissions reach threatening levels, the park would seek 

to reduce or eliminate emission to the best of the parks ability without 

putting fire fighter safety at risk. Such actions could include but are not 

limited to the following: 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 65 | P a g e

 Direct attack on all sides to limit growth and the volume of smoke 

produced 

 Actively mopping up to reduce smoldering 

 Temporarily checking an edge or side to reduce the daily growth rate 

 Spreading the smoke out over time 

 Actively lighting sides or sections when dispersion and other variables 

are favorable, thus reducing the impacts of the smoke produced. 

Over the duration of a wildfire all of these techniques may be utilized as 

appropriate for keeping smoke levels to acceptable levels. 

In addition to specific techniques that are employed at the time of the 

smoke event, the park will also utilize strategic fuels reduction prior to fire 

events to reduce the impacts of inevitable smoke emissions near sensitive 

receptors. Using prescribed fires or mechanical fuels reduction to remove 

an acceptable volume of fuel and burning it during favorable conditions 

reduces the volume of smoke produced later during the inevitable, 

unplanned wildfire. 

4.8 Data & Records Management 

Considerable time and effort is dedicated to acquiring and managing fire 

program information and data. Information is used by the park, regional, and 

national offices for a variety of purposes. 

Data and recordkeeping represent a significant investment and must be well 

managed to be readily available for use when needed, and must be 

safeguarded from damage or destructions. 

Required reports, timeframes, and responsible individuals are outlined in the 

table below. 

Required Report Timeframe Physical Location Employee 

Responsible

Final Budget Data 

Call

July prior to next fiscal 

year

PDS FMO, FPMA

Fiscal Reporting

“Budget calls” 

throughout the year, 

determined by ROMO 

and IMR admin

AFS3, PDS, etc. FMO, FPMA
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 66 | P a g e

FMP Review

Annually, prior to fire 

season and 

comprehensively 

every 5 years

Hardcopy in FMO

Digital copy on 

ROMO public drive

FMO, all fire branch 

personnel

Incident Reporting 

(Fire Reports, 

Treatment Plans, 

Monitoring Reports)

Within 10 days of 

declaring a fire “out”

WFMI, hardcopies in 

FMO, digital copies 

on ROMO public drive

FMO, FPMA, Incident 

Commander, Fire 

Ecologist

Pre-season Budget 

Submissions

April prior to next 

fiscal year PDS FMO, FPMA

Pre-season 

Preparedness 

Planning

Annually, prior to fire 

season

Hardcopy in FMO. 

Digital copy on 

ROMO public drive

FMO, Fire Staff, 

FPMA

Program 

Accomplishments

Decided upon by 

FMO staff Various FMO, all fire branch staff

Project Fiscal 

Reports

After all projects costs 

have hit the account. NFPORS Fuels Specialist

Project Proposals

2 or more years prior 

to proposed project 

start

NFPORS Fuels Specialist

4.9 Organizational & Budgetary Parameters 

The park is located within the Intermountain Region of the NPS and is 

supported by the Intermountain Regional Office – Division of Visitor and 

Resource Protection, Branch of Wildland Fire and Aviation Management. The 

RMNP Wildland Fire Branch is positioned within the Division of Resource 

Stewardship, a science-based division. The Wildland Fire Branch hosts a 

fuels crew, a type 6 engine crew and the Alpine Interagency Hotshot Crew. 

(See Organizational Chart – Appendix G). 

For organizational roles and responsibilities, refer to the Interagency 

Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations (the "Red Book", USDI and 

USDA 2011), Chapter 3-“National Park Service Program Organization and 

Responsibilities.”

Budget and Funding 

The budget of the Wildland Fire Branch at RMNP is allocated through 

appropriations directly for wildland fire through the Department of the Interior. 

This funding includes monies for preparedness and fuels related activities. In 

2010, the total was roughly $1.3 million and was based on the obsolete 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 67 | P a g e

outputs from the now extinct FIREPRO budget analysis system. This is 

exclusive of extended wildland fire operations or any other emergency type 

funds. The Alpine Hotshots account for nearly $700k of that funding. 

Fire Duty Officer (FDO) 

The FMO is responsible for assigning FDO coverage during any period when 

a wildfire is conceivable or when field operations are occurring. The FDO’s 

responsibilities may be performed by any individual qualified as an Incident 

Commander Type 4 (ICT4) and will be assigned by the FMO who has been 

delegated that authority from the park superintendent. At a minimum, the 

required duties for all FDOs are: 

 Monitor unit incident activities for compliance with NPS safety policies. 

 Coordinate and set priorities for wildland fire unit response actions and 

resource allocation. 

 Keep agency administrators, fire resources, and information officers 

informed of the current and expected situation. 

 Plan for and implement actions required for future needs. 

 Document all decisions and actions. 

FDOs provide operational oversight of these requirements as well as any 

specific duties assigned by fire managers through the fire operating plan. 

FDOs do not fill any ICS incident command functions connected to any

incident. In the event that the FDO is required to accept an incident 

assignment, the FMO will ensure that another authorized FDO is in place 

prior to the departure of the outgoing FDO. (See Appendix G-Duty Officer 

Manual.) 

Agreements 

Interagency coordination is an integral aspect of wildland fire management in 

the Northern Colorado Front Range. The park itself resides within three 

counties: Boulder, Larimer and Grand counties. In Colorado, the County 

Sheriff has wildland fire authority on all wildland fires on private land; 

therefore close coordination with each county entity is required. Furthermore, 

the park requires response assistance from and delegates structure fire 

response responsibilities to Estes Park Volunteer Fire District on the east side 

and Grand Lake Volunteer Fire District on the west side. Lastly, the park is 

surrounded by its largest neighbor and cooperative partner, the Arapaho and 

Roosevelt National Forests and Pawnee Grasslands. This environment is 

rich with cooperation and agreements. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 68 | P a g e

Title of Agreement Cooperators Purpose of Agreement

Annual

Update

Required?

Colorado 

Cooperative 

Agreement

Bureau of Land 

Management/Colorado, National 

Park Service/IMR, Bureau of 

Indian Affairs/SW Region, Fish 

and Wildlife Service/Mountain 

Prairie Region, Bureau of 

Reclamation/Great Plains and 

Upper Colorado Region, Forest 

Service/Rocky Mountain Region

The purpose of this 

Cooperative Fire 

Management Agreement 

(hereinafter referred to as

the Agreement) is to 

document agreement and 

commitment to fire 

management assistance 

and cooperation.

NO

Boulder County 

Annual Operating 

Plan

Boulder County Sheriff’s Office, 

Colorado State Forest Service, 

US Forest Service, Bureau of 

Land Management, Rocky 

Mountain National Park

The purpose is to set forth 

standard operating 

procedures, agreed 

procedures and 

responsibilities to 

implement cooperative 

wildland fire protection on 

all lands within Larimer 

County.

YES

Larimer County 

Annual Operating 

Plan

Larimer County Sheriff’s Office, 

Colorado State Forest Service, 

US Forest Service, Bureau of 

Land Management, Rocky 

Mountain National Park

The purpose is to set forth 

standard operating 

procedures, agreed 

procedures and 

responsibilities to 

implement cooperative 

wildland fire protection on 

all lands within Larimer

County.

YES

Grand County Annual 

Operating Plan

Grand County Sheriff’s Office, 

Colorado State Forest Service, 

US Forest Service, Bureau of 

Land Management, Rocky 

Mountain National Park

The purpose is to set forth 

standard operating 

procedures, agreed 

procedures and 

responsibilities to 

implement cooperative 

wildland fire protection on 

all lands within Larimer 

County.

YES

Interagency 

Agreement for 

Wildland Fire 

Management

Bureau of Land Management, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

National Park Service, Fish and 

Wildlife Service, and the Forest 

Service

Provide a basis for 

cooperation, resource and 

equipment exchange 

among the agencies on all 

aspects of wildland fire 

management, and in all 

hazard emergency support 

function activities as 

requested and authorized

under the Robert T. 

Stafford Disaster Relief 

and Emergency 

Assistance Act.

NO
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 69 | P a g e

Adaptive Management Strategy 

As described in Adaptive Management: the U.S. Department of the Interior 

Technical Guide (Williams et al. 2009), adaptive management is a decision 

process that: 

“promotes flexible decision making that can be adjusted in the face of 

uncertainties as outcomes from management actions and other events become 

better understood. Careful monitoring of these outcomes both advances scientific 

understanding and helps adjust policies or operations as part of an iterative 

learning process. Adaptive management also recognizes the importance of 

natural variability in contributing to ecological resilience and productivity. It is not 

a ‘trial and error’ process, but rather emphasizes learning while doing. Adaptive 

management does not represent an end in itself, but rather a means to more 

effective decisions and enhanced benefits. Its true measure is in how well it helps 

meet environmental, social, and economic goals, increases scientific knowledge, 

and reduces tensions among stakeholders.” 

Adaptive management requires stated management objectives to guide 

decisions about what actions to take and to make unambiguous assumptions 

about expected outcomes to compare against actual outcomes. Adaptive 

management is a learning process as well as a structured approach to decision 

making that emphasizes accountability and explicitness in decision making. Key 

points of the adaptive management approach: 

 Adaptive management openly acknowledges uncertainty about how 

ecological systems function and how they respond to management actions. 

 Adaptive management is designed to improve understanding of how a system 

works so as to achieve management objectives. 

 Adaptive management is about taking action pursuant to desired outcomes 

 Adaptive management requires the participation of stakeholders. 

An adaptive management approach to all fire management activities will be 

applied within the framework of the FMP. This approach would account for 

unanticipated changes in environmental conditions, inaccurate predictions, 

and/or subsequent information that might affect the original environmental 

predictions. This approach is critical to meeting the desired outcomes. 

The basic steps of the adaptive management process include: 

1. Plan – Develop plan of action based on current management goals and 

objectives. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 70 | P a g e

2. Predict – Predict the outcome of the action based on current information and 

understanding. 

3. Mitigate – Mitigate for any anticipated impacts. 

4. Implement – Implement the plan of action. 

5. Monitor – Monitor the resources prior to, during, and following the action. 

6. Adapt – Revise plans based on new information and understanding as well as 

monitoring results and begin adaptive management process again. 

The development of the FMP for RMNP will accomplish steps 1- 3 in the adaptive 

management process. Following the NEPA process, fire management activities 

would be implemented, as described in steps 4 and 5. The FMP will be evaluated 

on an annual basis (step 6) and fire management activities may be revised or 

changed based on monitoring information and as new information from research 

and other sources becomes available. If such revisions or changes to the fire 

management activities are outside the original scope of the FMP and NEPA 

documentation, then additional NEPA analysis would be required. 

5.1 Fire Management Objectives 

The purpose, goals and objectives of the park’s fire management program are 

derived from agency mandates, policy statements, environmental laws and 

park planning documents. The FMP must respond to direction provided in 

Federal and NPS policy statements such as the 2001 Review and Update of 

the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy (USDA and USDI 2001). 

Fire management action must also comply with laws such as the National 

Park Service Organic Act, Endangered Species Act, Clean Air Act, Clean 

Water Act, Wilderness Act, National Historic Preservation Act and 

Archeological Resources Protection Act, and other laws related to the NPS. 

Within the framework of larger agency policy and environmental law, the 

Park’s staff has identified six goals for the fire management program. Each 

goal is further refined through associated objectives which aid managers in 

measuring the success of fire management actions. An adaptive approach 

will allow the fire program to refine prescriptions and fire applications to 

assure that desired outcomes are achieved. 

Please see Chapter 3.11 for the fire management goals and objectives 

Desired Future Conditions 

There is general consensus among scientists and the research community 

that the majority of ecological systems within the RMNP landscape are 

thought to be within or close to their natural range of variability with respect to 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 71 | P a g e

fire. For millennia fire has played an important role in maintaining and creating 

conditions suitable for native flora and fauna in the park’s varied ecosystems. 

This plan therefore, seeks to maintain natural fire regimes to the greatest 

extent possible so that ecosystems can continue to function and the 

interactions between fire and the environment can occur essentially 

unimpaired by human interference. Utilizing fire as a dynamic ecosystem 

process to maintain ecosystem structure, composition, and function provides 

our best opportunity to conserve biological diversity in the park. 

The definition of precise structural or compositional targets for desired future 

conditions is complicated by the spatial and temporal variability inherent in 

plant communities as influenced by site conditions, climate, disturbance 

response, and individual species recruitment and mortality patterns. Process 

oriented, functional definitions for target conditions (e.g. historic fire frequency 

and fire behavior) may be more practical since they acknowledge the inherent 

variability in natural systems. 

This process oriented, coarse-filter approach will maintain ecosystem 

structure, composition, and function within the historic range of variability, 

thus preserving conditions suitable for the majority of species that have 

evolved with these ecosystems. However, this approach may not be suitable 

for some special status species and rare habitats. In these instances, habitator species-specific plans may need to be implemented to address particular 

concerns. Additionally, there are some areas, such as those within the 

wildland urban interface, where the use of naturally occurring fire may not be 

practical due to safety or smoke concerns. In these areas, manual or 

mechanical fuel treatment methods may be used in addition to prescribed fire 

to reduce hazardous fuels. 

Please see the “Vegetation” section in Chapter 3 (Affected Environment) of 

the EA for detailed descriptions of the major vegetation communities in the 

park and associated disturbances. 

5.2 Monitoring 

Monitoring is not only part of the adaptive management process, but also a 

fundamental NPS management policy to be fulfilled. Monitoring provides an 

avenue for evaluating whether management goals and objectives are being 

met and whether undesired effects are occurring. When goals and objectives 

are not being met, monitoring data can be used to facilitate management 

changes. This practice is part of the adaptive management cycle that the NPS 

fire management program uses to improve land management practices and is 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 72 | P a g e

required under NPS Management 

Policies(2006)(2006)(2006)(2006)(2006)(2006)(2006) (2006). A monitoring 

plan has been developed to fulfill this requirement (Appendix F). The 

following provides a brief description of the monitoring levels and activities 

that will be used to monitor fire management activities: 

Short and Long-Term Fire Effects Monitoring Programs 

Short and long-term fire effects monitoring programs will be developed to 

assess wildland fire management accomplishments and to determine the 

effects of fire management activities on cultural and natural resources. 

Monitoring the fire effects on natural and cultural resources will allow 

managers to determine whether fire management objectives are being met 

and if, not, when fire management strategies need revision. Monitoring fire 

efforts will be incorporated into the FMP adaptive management process. 

The primary aim of these monitoring programs is to provide information to fire 

and resource managers, which allows them to determine whether treatment 

objectives (prescribed fire, wildfire, or non-fire) are being met or to identify 

and correct deficiencies. Fire effects monitoring involves the systematic 

collection, documentation, and analysis of a variety of data such as fuel 

loading, vegetation structure and composition, topography, weather 

conditions, air quality, and fire behavior. Monitoring should, whenever 

possible, result in digital data including GIS compatible data. 

Wildland fire and resource staff will follow appropriate fire effects monitoring 

protocols to meet fire objectives. One example is the National Park Service 

Fire Monitoring Handbook (2003b). However, when appropriate, other 

monitoring protocols may be used [for alternative fire monitoring protocols see 

(Coulloudon et al. 1996, Elzinga et al. 1998, Hall 2002a, b)]. Depending on 

treatment type, resource objectives, and variables to be monitored, a variety 

of monitoring techniques may be used. 

Fire Monitoring Levels 

Fire management activities will be monitored at the appropriate level with 

relation to the type and scale of each project. The NPS Fire Monitoring 

Handbook identifies four fire monitoring levels. 

These levels include: 

Level 1: Environmental Conditions 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 73 | P a g e

This level of monitoring provides baseline data that is collected in preparation 

for the fire season or prescribed fire projects. Environmental monitoring data 

provide the background information needed to make fire management 

decisions. The following are examples of environmental data that may be 

collected by fire management: 

 Local Weather 

 Fire Danger Rating 

 Fuel Conditions 

 Values at Risk 

Level 2: Fire Observations 

Fire observation monitoring provides a basic overview of the physical aspects 

of a fire event or fuels management activity. The following are examples of 

monitoring variables; the level of data collection may vary with the fire 

management activity: 

 Fire cause, fire location, fire date

 Fire or project size 

 Fuels and vegetation description 

 Fire regime and condition class 

 Current and predicted fire behavior 

 Current and forecasted weather 

 Smoke volume and movement 

Level 3: Short-term Change 

Monitoring for short-term changes provides information on the immediate or 

short-term effects of a fire or fire management activity, at a level sufficient to 

evaluate whether stated project or program-level management objectives are 

achieved. Monitoring provides information on identified variables of interest 

either in a specific predefined vegetation and fuel complex (monitoring type or 

monitoring unit) or for a specific project. Data are collected through sampling 

of permanent monitoring plots, temporary plots, Composite Burn Index (CBI) 

plots or photo points. Monitoring is implemented at varying intervals -- preburn, during the burn, and immediately post-burn -- and continues for up to 

two years post-burn. Level 3 monitoring requires a data stewardship plan to 

ensure effective long-term management and use of data. 

Level 4: Long-term Change 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 74 | P a g e

Monitoring for long-term change involves identifying the long-term effects of 

management activities that can be used to guide management decisions. 

Long-term monitoring of prescribed fire in pre-defined vegetation/fuel 

complexes is required to document that overall programmatic objectives are 

being met and undesired effects are not occurring. It may entail the 

continuation of Level 3 monitoring over a longer period. Monitoring frequency 

is based on a predefined interval appropriate to both the vegetation and fuels 

complex and the anticipated duration of treatment impacts. Level 4 monitoring 

requires a data stewardship plan to ensure effective long-term management 

and use of data. 

The following are the minimum monitoring requirements for fire management 

activities: 

The Fire Monitoring Plan is included as Appendix F. 

5.3 Evaluation 

Monitoring data will be archived and reviewed for future refinement of target 

conditions and treatment prescriptions. Managers and staff will also use 

wildland fire and fuels treatment data to analyze program success and 

effectiveness by: evaluating the actions and effects of the previous fire 

seasons, examining monitoring results, and incorporating new information 

into the management strategy. Data collected will also be measured against 

the National Fire Plan and the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy 

Implementation Plan. 

Quantitative and measurable management objectives and proposed 

treatments with specific prescriptions are developed under the guidance 

found in resource management plans (RMPs) and the FMP. A monitoring 

design derived from the management objectives is developed and includes: 

defined monitoring units (what is being monitored and where), monitoring 

protocols (how and when monitoring is conducted), and monitoring objectives 

(why). The monitoring design is implemented prior to the proposed treatment 

Wildfire Levels 1, 2; Request burn severity assessments for fires > 500 acres

Prescribed Fire Levels 1, 2, 3, 4; Request burn severity assessments for fires > 500 

acres

Non-Fire Treatment Documentation of treatment prescription, location, objectives, and 

evaluation of results
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 75 | P a g e

through the establishment of plots, or through other appropriate monitoring 

techniques (such as photo point documentation). Monitoring continues 

following the treatment. Analysis of monitoring data compares the posttreatment conditions with the pre-treatment conditions to assess whether the 

management objectives of the treatments are being met. Results from the 

analyzed monitoring data must be communicated to park resource and fire 

management staff so they can examine the results and evaluate the progress 

being made towards meeting objectives. 

If management objectives are being met then treatments may continue as 

appropriate to achieve desired conditions. If management objectives are not 

being met then the following questions should be addressed: 

 Are the objectives realistic? 

 Should there be changes made to the treatment prescriptions? 

 Are there other management actions that should be taken in conjunction 

with the treatment? 

 Could other management actions be more effective than the actions 

prescribed in the treatment plan? 

 Is additional research needed? 

Adaptive management requires continual evaluation. As the monitoring is 

conducted and data are analyzed, refinements to the monitoring design may 

need to be made. Results from data analysis should be incorporated into 

planning documents. Objectives and treatments must also be re-evaluated as 

new information from research and other sources becomes available. 

All wildland fires and fire-related incidents must be reviewed in accordance 

with RM-18, Wildland Fire and Program Reviews chapter 17 (NPS 2008c) 

and the Interagency Standards for Fire and Fire Aviation Operations (the 

"Red Book", USDI and USDA 2011). All prescribed fires will be reviewed as 

appropriate. Reviews are conducted for one or more of the following 

purposes: 

 To examine the progress of an on-going fire incident and to confirm 

effective decisions or to correct deficiencies. 

 To identify new or improved procedures, techniques, or tactics. 

 To compile consistent and complete information to improve or refine park, 

regional, or national fire management programs. 

 To examine anomalous fire-related incidents in order to determine 

cause(s), contributing factors, and where applicable, to recommend 

corrective actions; if negligence is indicated, the circumstances will be 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 76 | P a g e

reported and investigated in accordance with applicable regulations, 

policies, or guidelines. 

 To determine the cost effectiveness of a fire operation. 

5.4 Fire Research 

The following is a summary of previous fire research directly related to RMNP 

or to Front Range ecosystems directly similar to those found in the park. 

Of the many disturbance types found in natural systems, perhaps the most 

widespread is that of fire. The current structure, species composition, and 

dynamics of many ecosystems are often the direct result of past fires or in 

other cases, the result of other processes that have themselves been affected 

by fire. In general, fire regimes in the southern Rockies can be thought of as 

following an elevational gradient (Peet 1981, Romme and Knight 1981, 

Romme et al. 2003). The lower montane is often characterized by more 

frequent surface fires, while forests in the subalpine typically experience 

infrequent stand replacement fire events. However, fires of any intensity can 

occur in both elevational zones (Veblen 2000). 

On the east side of the park, forest types in the montane zone include 

ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and lodgepole pine communities. These three 

species often intermingle in ecotonal areas, forming mixed stands. Ponderosa 

pine tends to dominate the lower portions of the montane, increasing in 

density with increased elevation and gradually giving way to Douglas-fir, 

particularly on moist north-facing slopes (Clements 1910, Marr 1961, Mast et 

al. 1998). Following disturbance, upper montane sites are often pioneered by 

dense even-aged stands of lodgepole pine on drier sites and aspen on more 

mesic sites. In the absence of further disturbance, these lodgepole and aspen 

stands may gradually be replaced by Douglas-fir at lower elevations and 

Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir at higher elevations (Clements 1910, 

Peet 1978a, Whipple and Dix 1979, Veblen et al. 1991). In contrast to the 

variety of forested communities found on the east side, montane forests on 

the west side of the park are composed almost exclusively of lodgepole pine. 

There is an increasing body of evidence that suggests ponderosa pine and 

mixed conifer communities in the upper montane zone of RMNP are 

characterized by a mixed-severity fire regime, including both stand replacing 

and surface fire events (Laven et al. 1980, Veblen and Lorenz 1986, Brown et 

al. 1999, Arno 2000, Veblen 2000, Brown and Shepperd 2001, Ehle 2001, 

Sibold 2001, Romme et al. 2003, Sherriff and Veblen 2006). This highly 

variable fire regime results in a complex mosaic of stand ages, densities, and 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 77 | P a g e

structures. This complexity is reflected in reported fire return intervals for 

ponderosa pine (which frequently include a component of Douglas-fir and 

lodgepole pine in the upper montane), ranging from 1-125 years for low 

intensity fires and 200-300 years for stand replacing fires (Rowdabaugh 1978, 

Laven et al. 1980, Skinner and Laven 1982, Skinner and Laven 1983, 

Goldblum and Veblen 1992, Hadley 1994, Mast et al. 1998, Ehle and Baker 

2003). This contrasts with the fire regime typical of ponderosa pine 

ecosystems at lower elevations on the Front Range and other areas of the 

west, in which stand replacement fires were rare and open “park-like” stand 

structures were maintained through frequent low intensity surface fires 

(Veblen et al. 2000). Comparison of fire scar and climatic evidence recorded 

in tree rings suggests that fire occurrence in the montane zone of the northern 

Colorado Front Range is strongly associated with climatic variation. Fires tend 

to occur in years with below average spring precipitation that are preceded by 

2-3 years of above average spring precipitation (Veblen et al. 2000). 

In a study of disturbance patterns and stand structure, Ehle and Baker (2003) 

found widespread evidence of small crown fires that resulted in the 

regeneration of dense even-aged ponderosa stands in the park. Over time, 

subsequent surface fires reduced overall tree density in these stands and 

created sites for post-fire seedling establishment. This process resulted in a 

highly variable mosaic of stand structures, densities, and ages across the 

landscape. Stand densities decreased for a period of about 200 years, after 

which tree density became relatively stable. 

Although the study did not determine the spatial extent of crown fires in 

ponderosa, in only one instance did crown fires occur in separate plots in the 

same year. These two plots were located less than 2 miles apart. Study sites 

were located in Beaver Meadows, Upper Beaver Meadows, Hondius Park, 

and the south facing slopes of Deer Mountain and Eagle Cliff. This mixed 

severity fire regime is consistent with research conducted in ponderosa pine 

communities in the Wild Basin area (Sibold 2001). In contrast to the pattern of 

increased tree density following the adoption of fire suppression policies 

documented in the southwest, Ehle and Baker (2003) suggest that fire 

exclusion has greatly limited turnover (both mortality and recruitment) of 

ponderosa pine in the park. 

The lodgepole pine dominated forests of the park are typically characterized 

by a stand replacement severity fire regime with fire return intervals in the 50-

150+ year range (Clements 1910, Peet 1981). These stands tend to selfperpetuate in the presence of frequent disturbance. Depending on site 

conditions, lodgepole seedling reestablishment may take 30-100 years 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 78 | P a g e

following stand replacing fire (Peet 1981). Fire frequencies in lodgepole are 

often higher and may include low severity fire events where stands are in 

proximity to ponderosa pine or mixed conifer forests that experience more 

frequent fire (Peet 1981, Veblen and Lorenz 1991). Sibold et al. (2006) 

determined that all lodgepole stands in RMNP originated within the last 400 

years following stand-replacing fires. 

Although evidence of occasional surface fires also has been found in the 

Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir (spruce-fir) dominated subalpine zone, 

fires in this zone are typically “all or nothing” events. They are either single 

tree events that do not spread, or large, infrequent stand replacement fire 

events (Kipfmueller and Baker 2000, Veblen 2000, Sherriff et al. 2001, Sibold 

2001, Romme et al. 2003, Buechling and Baker 2004, Sibold et al. 2006). 

These large fires typically coincide with regional-scale drought conditions and 

occur at intervals of well over a century (Veblen 2000). In Wild Basin, Sibold 

(2001) found spruce-fir stands that had not burned in over 400 years. Given 

the long-interval fire regime typical of the subalpine, it appears that these 

forests are still within their natural range of variability and have not been 

considerably impacted by fire suppression efforts in the last century (Clagg 

1975, Sherriff et al. 2001, Sibold 2001, Romme et al. 2003, Veblen 2003). 

Fire does not play a large role within alpine systems due to the cool, moist 

conditions and low fuel levels that are found within this elevation zone. 

However, over long time scales, fire may move into the alpine zone from the 

adjacent spruce-fir forests. Fire return intervals within alpine systems, 

therefore, are potentially similar to or longer than (i.e. greater than 300 years) 

the adjacent forest type.

Summary of ongoing fire-related research: 

Sibold, Jason. (in progress) Investigation into relationships between 

disturbance history and mountain pine beetle outbreak severity and 

consequences in the lodgepole pine forest type of Rocky Mountain National 

Park, Colorado. 

The primary objective of this study is to assess mortality and regeneration 

patterns in lodgepole pine stands on the west side of the park that have been 

affected by mountain pine beetle in relation to stand age, management 

activity, and other disturbance. 

Preliminary results suggest that outbreak severity and stand-development 

trajectories were not influenced by differences in stand-replacing fire history 

(stand age), or the occurrence of past surface fires. In contrast, severity and 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 79 | P a g e

development trajectories were influenced by the occurrence of the 1970s 

mountain pine beetle outbreak, and ecosystem management treatments 

including tree thinning with and without subsequent burning of slash piles, 

and high-severity prescribed fire. 

Rocca, Monique and William Romme. (in progress) Imagining landscapes of 

the future: predicting the impacts of climate change, insect outbreaks, and fire 

on Colorado lodgepole pine forests. 

Stands will be sampled representing a range of beetle-caused mortality from 

light to heavy, to characterize changes in tree density, basal area, canopy 

fuels, and species composition. From these data, landscape patterns of 

change in forest structure, at multiple spatial scales, including percent tree 

mortality and patch sizes of various mortality classes will be characterized. 

Fuels data will be applied to a variety of forest growth models (e.g., the Forest 

Vegetation Simulator, FVS), and fire behavior models (e.g., the FVS Fire 

Fuels Extension (FFE) and NEXUS) to explore future forest structure and 

potential fire behavior under a range of likely weather conditions. 

In addition, the study will use planned, prescribed burning operations in 

beetle-impacted stands to investigate three important issues: the flammability 

of lodgepole pine crowns, the mechanisms of pine seed dispersal following 

beetle attack, and survival of beetle larvae following burning. 

Preliminary results indicate that under typical late winter/early spring 

conditions, the crowns of green trees (whether attacked or unattacked) are 

not receptive to fire. Red-needled crowns are more receptive to fire, but, the 

period of increased risk is only about 2 years. Following the loss of 20% or 

more of the needles, the resulting lower crown bulk density limits fire spread 

in beetle-killed trees. Hence, the perception of increased fire risk due to 

mountain pine beetle activity may be exaggerated. Managers of landscapes 

that include lodgepole pine should keep in mind that it is a fire-adapted 

species and there will always be a risk of high intensity fire with or without the 

mountain pine beetle. 

Allen, Craig D., Jessica Montag, and Jenny Briggs (in progress) Impacts of 

Mountain Pine Beetle infestation on forested ecosystems and social values in 

the Front Range, Colorado. 

Faced with the potentially major disturbance of an MPB epidemic in 

ponderosa forests of the Front Range, neither managers nor researchers 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 80 | P a g e

have sufficient evidence from past studies or experience to predict its effects 

or plan appropriate responses. 

Study objectives: 

1. Evaluate and predict the potential transition of MPB between lodgepole 

and ponderosa pine ecosystems. 

2. Assess the impacts of MPB on ponderosa pine forests with different 

management histories, and predict future changes in succession 

dynamics and fire hazard in this ecosystem. 

3. Identify public perceptions of potential changes in ponderosa pine 

ecosystems and public support for mitigation of MPB impacts on public 

and private lands. 

Research needed to implement or refine the wildland fire management 

program: 

 Investigation of upland shrub establishment patterns and response to 

prescribed fire. 

Data regarding the immediate and long-term response of antelope 

bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) and big sagebrush (Artemisia

tridentata) to fire are sparse and often conflicting. Fire may be 

necessary to rejuvenate senescent shrub stands. However, current 

levels of ungulate herbivory following fire may result in a net loss of 

shrub habitat in the Park. 

Specifically, information is needed regarding post-fire shrub 

recovery rates, historic fire frequencies and burn severity in upland 

shrub habitat, as well as establishment patterns and historic extent 

of upland shrub habitat. This information would allow the 

development of sound prescribed fire objectives in upland shrub 

systems and shed light on the interaction between fire and ungulate 

herbivory. 

 FARSITE landscape development: fuels map and fire history crosswalk 

Considerable effort has gone into the development of a detailed 

fuels map and associated FARSITE landscape of the park. 

However, during the Cow Creek fire of 2010, the FARSITE 

landscape did not adequately represent the surface fuels present 

within the fire. In older subalpine stands (> 250 since previous 

stand-replacing event), fuel models were changed to slash models 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 81 | P a g e

to better reflect the higher surface fuel loading present and to more 

accurately represent observed fire behavior. 

The fire history of much of the forested subalpine of the park has 

been mapped in recent years (Buechling and Baker 2004, Sibold et 

al. 2006). We propose taking the GIS data associated with the 

existing fire history research and crosswalking that data with the 

park’s vegetation map and fuels map. Correction factors could then 

be developed and applied to the fuels map based on vegetation 

type and time since last fire (e.g. within the same vegetation type, a 

stand that has not experienced fire in over 200 years will likely have 

higher surface loading than a stand that has experienced fire within 

the last 100 years). Predicted fire behavior utilizing such correction 

factors would better represent what fire management staff could 

expect (and have observed) on wildfires in the park. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 82 | P a g e

Appendix A – Literature Cited 

Agee, J.K. 1999. Disturbance ecology of North American boreal forests and 

associated northern mixed/subalpine forests. Pages 39-82 in L. F. Ruggiero, 

K. B. Aubry, S. W. Buskirk, G. M. Koehler, C. J. Krebs, K. S. McKelvey, and J. 

R. Squires, editors. Ecology and conservation of lynx in the United States. 

USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-30WWW. 

Arno, S.F. 2000. Fire in western forest ecosystems. Pages 97-120 in J. K. Brown 

and J. K. Smith, editors. Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on flora. 

USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 2. 

Arno, S.F. and R.P. Hammerly. 1984. Timberline: mountain and arctic forest 

frontiers. The Mountaineers, Seattle, WA. 

Baker, W.L. and T.T. Veblen. 1990. Spruce beetles and fires in the nineteenthcentury subalpine forests of western Colorado, U.S.A. Arctic and Alpine 

Research 22:65-80. 

Brown, P.M., M.R. Kaufmann, and W.D. Shepperd. 1999. Long-term, landscape 

patterns of past fire events in a montane ponderosa pine forest of central 

Colorado. Landscape Ecology 14:513-532. 

Brown, P.M. and W.D. Shepperd. 2001. Fire history and fire climatology along a 5° 

gradient in latitude in Colorado and Wyoming, USA. Palaeobotanist 50:133-

140.

Buechling, A. and W.L. Baker. 2004. A fire history from tree rings in a high elevation 

forest of Rocky Mountain National Park. Canadian Journal of Forest 

Research 34:1259-1273. 

Clagg, H.B. 1975. Fire ecology in high-elevation forests in Colorado. M.S. thesis. 

Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. 

Clements, F.E. 1910. The life history of lodgepole burn forests. Bulletin No. 79, 

USDA Forest Service. 

Coulloudon, B., K. Eshelman, J. Gianola, N. Habich, L. Hughes, C. Johnson, M. 

Pellant, P. Podborny, A. Rasmussen, B. Robles, P. Shaver, J. Spehar, and J. 

Willoughby. 1996. Sampling vegetation attributes. Interagency Technical 

Reference 1734-4, USDA Forest Service, Natural Resource Conservation 

Service, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 83 | P a g e

Ehle, D.S. 2001. Spatial and temporal patterns of disturbance and ponderosa pine 

forest structure in Rocky Mountain National Park. M.S. thesis. University of 

Wyoming, Laramie, WY. 

Ehle, D.S. and W.L. Baker. 2003. Disturbance and stand dynamics in ponderosa 

pine forests in Rocky Mountain National Park, USA. Ecological Monographs 

73:543-566. 

Elzinga, C.L., D.W. Salzer, and J.W. Willoughby. 1998. Measuring & monitoring 

plant populations. BLM Technical Reference 1730-1, The Nature 

Conservancy, USDI Bureau of Land Management. 

Goldblum, D. and T.T. Veblen. 1992. Fire history of a ponderosa pine/Douglas fir 

forest in the Colorado Front Range. Physical Geography 13:133-148. 

Hadley, K.S. 1994. The role of disturbance, topography, and forest structure in the 

development of a montane forest landscape. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical 

Club 121:47-61.

Hall, F.C. 2002a. Photo point monitoring handbook: part a - field procedures. 

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-526, USDA Forest Service. 

Hall, F.C. 2002b. Photo point monitoring handbook: part b - concepts and analysis. 

General Technical Report PNW-GTR-526, USDA Forest Service. 

Holling, C. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of 

Ecology and Systematics 4:1-23. 

Kipfmueller, K.F. and W.L. Baker. 2000. A fire history of a subalpine forest in southeastern Wyoming, USA. Journal of Biogeography 27:71-85. 

Laven, R.D., P.N. Omi, J.G. Wyant, and A.S. Pinkerton. 1980. Interpretation of fire 

scar data from a ponderosa pine ecosystem in the central Rocky Mountains, 

Colorado. Pages 46-49 in M. A. Stokes and J. H. Dieterich, editors. 

Proceedings of the fire history workshop. General Technical Report RM-GTR81. USDA Forest Service, Tucson, AZ. 

Marr, J.W. 1961. Ecosystems of the east slope of the Front Range in Colorado. 

University Press of Colorado, Boulder, CO. 

Mast, J.N., T.T. Veblen, and Y.B. Linhart. 1998. Disturbance and climatic influences 

on age structure of ponderosa pine at the pine/grassland ecotone, Colorado 

Front Range. Journal of Biogeography 25:743-755.
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 84 | P a g e

National Wildfire Coordinating Group. 2002. Gaining an understanding of the 

National Fire Danger Rating System. NWCG Fire Danger Working Team, 

Boise, ID. 

National Wildfire Coordinating Group. 2004. Fireline Handbook. PMS 410-1. Incident 

Operations Standards Working Team, Boise, ID. 

National Wildfire Coordinating Group. 2010. Incident Response Pocket Guide. PMS 

461. Operations and Workforce Development Committee, Boise, ID. 

National Wildfire Coordinating Group. 2011. Wildland Fire Qualification System 

Guide. PMS 310-1. Operations and Workforce Development Committee, 

Boise, ID. 

Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2007. Soil survey of Rocky Mountain 

National Park, Colorado. 

Neely, B., P. Comer, C. Moritz, M. Lammert, R. Rondeau, C. Pague, G. Bell, H. 

Copeland, J. Humke, S. Spackman, T. Schulz, D. Theobald, and L. Valutis. 

2001. Southern Rocky Mountains: an ecoregional assessment and 

conservation blueprint. The Nature Conservancy with support from the U.S. 

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Colorado Division of Wildlife, and 

Bureau of Land Management. 

NPS. 1976. Master plan for the Rocky Mountain National Park. Rocky Mountain 

National Park, CO. 

NPS. 1992a. Fire Management Plan and Environmental Assessment. Rocky 

Mountain National Park, CO. 

NPS. 1992b. Rocky Mountain National Park Statement for Management. Rocky 

Mountain National Park, Estes Park, CO. 

NPS. 1998. Rocky Mountain National Park Resources Management Plan. Rocky 

Mountain National Park, CO. 

NPS. 1999a. Director's Order 41: Wilderness Preservation and Management. US 

Department of Interior, Washington, DC. 

NPS. 1999b. Director's Order 57: Occupational Medical Standards, Health and 

Fitness. US Department of Interior, Washington, DC. 

NPS. 1999c. Reference Manual 41: Wilderness Preservation and Management. US 

Department of Interior, Washington, DC. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 85 | P a g e

NPS. 2001a. Backcountry/Wilderness Management Plan and Environmental 

Assessment. Rocky Mountain National Park, CO. 

NPS. 2001b. Director's Order 12: Handbook: Conservation Planning, Environmental 

Impact Analysis, and Decision Making. US Department of Interior, 

Washington, DC. 

NPS. 2003a. Emergency operations plan. Rocky Mountain National Park, CO. 

NPS. 2003b. Fire Monitoring Handbook. Fire Mangement Program Center, National 

Interagency Fire Center, Boise, ID. 

NPS. 2005. Strategic plan for Rocky Mountain National Park: 2005-2008. Rocky 

Mountain National Park, CO. 

NPS. 2006. Management Policies. US Department of Interior, Washington, DC. 

NPS. 2008a. Air quality fact sheet. Rocky Mountain National Park, CO. 

NPS. 2008b. Director's Order 18: Wildland Fire Management. US Department of 

Interior, Washington, DC. 

NPS. 2008c. Reference Manual 18: Wildland Fire Management. US Department of 

Interior, Washington, DC. 

NPS. 2008d. Wildland fire management strategic plan 2008-2012. US Department of 

Interior, Washington, DC. 

NPS. 2010. Climate change response strategy. US Department of Interior, 

Washington, DC. 

Peet, R.K. 1978a. Forest vegetation of the Colorado Front Range: patterns of 

species diversity. Plant Ecology 37:65-78. 

Peet, R.K. 1978b. Latitudinal variation in southern Rocky Mountain forests. Journal 

of Biogeography 5:275-289.

Peet, R.K. 1981. Forest vegetation of the Colorado Front Range: composition and 

dynamics. Vegetatio 45:3-75. 

Peet, R.K. 2000. Forests and meadows of the Rocky Mountains. Pages 75-121 in

M. G. Barbour and W. D. Billings, editors. North American terrestrial 

vegetation. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. 

Peterson, G., C.R. Allen, and C.S. Holling. 1998. Ecological resilience, biodiversity, 

and scale. Ecosystems 1:6-18. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 86 | P a g e

Romme, W.H. and D.H. Knight. 1981. Fire frequency and subalpine forest 

succession along a topographic gradient in Wyoming. Ecology 62:319-326.

Romme, W.H., T.T. Veblen, M.R. Kaufmann, R. Sherriff, and C.M. Regan. 2003. 

Part 1: Historical (pre-1860) and current (1860 – 2002) fire regimes. Pages 

181-195 in R. T. Graham, editor. Hayman Fire Case Study, General 

Technical Report RMRS-GTR-114. USDA Forest Service. 

Rowdabaugh, K.M. 1978. The role of fire in the ponderosa pine - mixed conifer 

ecosystems. M.S. thesis. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. 

Salas, D., J. Stevens, and K. Schultz. 2005. Rocky Mountain National Park, 

Colorado, 2001-2005 Vegetation Classification and Mapping. Final Report. 

Technical Memorandum 8260-05-02, US Bureau of Reclamation. 

Sherriff, R.L. and T.T. Veblen. 2006. Ecological effects of changes in fire regimes in 

Pinus ponderosa ecosystems in the Colorado Front Range. Journal of 

Vegetation Science 17:705-718. 

Sherriff, R.L., T.T. Veblen, and J.S. Sibold. 2001. Fire history in high elevation 

subalpine forests in the Colorado Front Range. Ecoscience 8:369-380. 

Sibold, J.S. 2001. The forest fire regime of an upper montane and subalpine forest, 

Wild Basin, Rocky Mountain National Park. M.A. thesis. University of 

Colorado, Boulder, CO. 

Sibold, J.S., T.T. Veblen, and M.E. Gonzalez. 2006. Spatial and temporal variation in 

historic fire regimes in subalpine forests across the Colorado Front Range in 

Rocky Mountain National Park. Journal of Biogeography 32:631-647. 

Skinner, T. and R.D. Laven. 1982. Background data for natural fire management in 

Rocky Mountain National Park. Fort Collins, CO, Department of Forest and 

Wood Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. 

Skinner, T.V. and R.D. Laven. 1983. A fire history of the Longs Peak region of Rocky 

Mountain National Park. Pages 71-74 In: Proceedings, seventh conference 

on fire and forest meteorology. American Meteorological Society, Fort Collins, 

CO. 

Stephenson, N. 1999. Reference conditions for giant sequoia forest restoration: 

structure, process, and precision. Ecological Applications 9:1253-1265. 

Stevens, D.R. 1980. The deer and elk of Rocky Mountain National Park: a 10-year 

study. National Park Service Report ROMO-N-13.
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 87 | P a g e

Stevens, G. and J. Fox. 1991. The causes of treeline. Annual Review of Ecology and 

Systematics 22:177-191. 

USDA and USDI. 1995. Federal wildland fire management policy and program 

review. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Washington, DC. 

USDA and USDI. 2001. Review and update of the 1995 Federal wildland fire 

management policy. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of the 

Interior, Washington, DC. 

USDI. 2004. Departmental Manual, Part 620: Wildland Fire Management, Chapter 3: 

Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation. 

USDI. 2006a. Interagency Burned Area Emergency Response Guidebook. Version 

4.0 edition. 

USDI. 2006b. Interagency Burned Area Rehabilitation Guidebook. Version 1.3 

edition. 

USDI and USDA. 2011. Interagency standards for fire and fire aviation operations. 

NFES 2724. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of the Interior 

National Interagency Fire Center, Boise, ID. 

USDI, USDA, and CSFS. 2006. Colorado Cooperative Fire Management 

Agreement. 

Veblen, T.T. 2000. Disturbance patterns in southern Rocky Mountain forests. Pages 

31-54 in R. L. Knight, F. W. Smith, S. W. Buskirk, W. H. Romme, and W. L. 

Baker, editors. Forest Fragmentation in the Southern Rocky Mountains. 

University Press of Colorado, Boulder, CO. 

Veblen, T.T. 2003. Key issues in fire regime research for fuels management and 

ecological restoration. Pages 259-275 in P. N. Omi and L. A. Joyce, editors. 

Fire, fuel treatments and ecological restoration: conference proceedings. 

Proceedings RMRS-P-29. USDA Forest Service, Fort Collins, CO. 

Veblen, T.T. and J.A. Donnegan. 2004. Historical range of variability assessment for 

forest vegetation of the National Forests of the Colorado Front Range. Final 

Report: USDA Forest Service Agreement No. 1102-0001-99-033 with the 

University of Colorado, Boulder. 

Veblen, T.T., K.S. Hadley, E.M. Nel, T. Kitzberger, M. Reid, and R. Villalba. 1994. 

Disturbance regime and disturbance interactions in a Rocky Mountain 

subalpine forest. Journal of Ecology 82:125-135. 
Fire Management Plan 

Rocky Mountain National Park 88 | P a g e

Veblen, T.T., K.S. Hadley, and M.S. Reid. 1991. Disturbance and stand 

development of a Colorado subalpine forest. Journal of Biogeography 18:707-

716.

Veblen, T.T., T. Kitzberger, and J. Donnegan. 2000. Climatic and human influences 

on fire regimes in ponderosa pine forests in the Colorado Front Range. 

Ecological Applications 10:1178-1195. 

Veblen, T.T. and D.C. Lorenz. 1986. Anthropogenic disturbance and recovery 

patterns in montane forests, Colorado Front Range. Physical Geography 7:1-

24.

Veblen, T.T. and D.C. Lorenz. 1991. The Colorado Front Range: a century of 

ecological change. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, UT. 

Whipple, S.A. and R.L. Dix. 1979. Age structure and successional dynamics of a 

Colorado subalpine forest. The American Midland Naturalist 101:142-158.

Williams, B.K., R.C. Szaro, and C.D. Shapiro. 2009. Adaptive management: the U.S. 

Department of the Interior technical guide. Adaptive Management Working 

Group, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.