## 3 Results
### Fire Behavior Simulation  
The input parameters used for the BehavePlus simulation and the simulated NFDRS Energy Release Component (ERC) and Flame Length (FL) are listed in Table 1. The ERC and FL values varied markedly among years, fuel loads, and fuel types, and results were consistent with our expectations. For instance, ERC and FL were greater in years with high to moderate fuel loads (2005 and 2007) than years with low fuel loads (2008) in both grass and shrub vegetation types (Table 1). Meanwhile, ERC values were higher in shrublands than in grasslands, while FL values were higher in grasslands than in shrublands. Depending on the fuel load, ERC and FL values in the high and moderate fuel load years were often very different from the values in the low fuel load years and the LANDFIRE (default) fuel loads.  
For the FARSITE assessments, we simulated the area burned with high (2005), moderate (2007), low (2008), and default fuel loads (Table 2). None of the simulations resulted in a total burned area that was similar to the actual area burned by the Murphy Wildland Fire Complex (260,000 ha). One important reason for the differences between the model simulation and the real fire event is that the Murphy Wildland Fire Complex comprised a series of fires with multiple ignition points rather than the single ignition point used in the simulation [21]. In spite of that, we found that the simulated burned area was more sensitive to the differences in 1 h dead fuel load than differences in the live herbaceous and live woody fuel loads. The live herbaceous and live woody fuel loads had higher values in 2005 than in 2007, but the simulated burned area was about 4% lower in 2005 than in 2007. The higher burned area in 2007 was probably a result of the larger 1 h dead fuel loads in 2007. We found that FARSITE simulated less burned area when the live woody fuel load increased in shrublands. All three scenarios have higher live woody fuel loads than the LANDFIRE fuel models yet the simulated burned areas were less than the burned area simulated with the LANDFIRE fuel model parameters. Our results indicated that increases in dead fuel loads may result in greater fire hazards than increases in live fuel loads.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Fuel Type**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Fuel LOAD**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Fuel loads (ton ha\({}^{-1}\))**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & **Live** & **Live** & **1-Hour** & **ERC 1 (KJ** & **FL 2(m)** \\  & & **Herbaceous** & **Woody** & **Dead** & **m\({}^{-2}\))** & **FL 2(m)** \\ \hline Grass & High (2005) & 3.27 & 0 & 3.92 & 10425 & 3.41 \\ Grass & Moderate (2007) & 2.6 & 0 & 4.5 & 10209 & 3.38 \\ Grass & Low (2008) & 2.08 & 0 & 0.45 & 3043 & 1.95 \\ Grass & Default (GR2) & 2.24 & 0 & 0.22 & 2953 & 1.92 \\ Shrub & High (2005) & 1.75 & 9.95 & 3.12 & 20043 & 3.23 \\ Shrub & Moderate (2007) & 1.3 & 9.64 & 3.52 & 19544 & 3.23 \\ Shrub & Low (2008) & 1.14 & 1.52 & 0.36 & 3770 & 1.58 \\ Shrub & Default (GS2) & 1.34 & 2.24 & 1.12 & 6348 & 2.16 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* 1. ERC: Energy release component. 2. FL: Flame length.  
\end{table}
Table 1: Fuel load values and simulated fire behavior indices for different fuel load scenarios.