ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AN ADEQUATE LEVEL OF FOREST FIRE CONTROL

214 Pages·08.342 MB·English

by  ARNOLD, RICHARD KEITH

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DETERMINANTS
OF AN ADEQUATE LEVEL OF FOREST FIRE CONTROL
by
Richard Keith Arnold
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in the
University of Michigan
1949
Committee in charge:
Professor Shirley W• Allen, Chairman
Associate Professor Gardner Ackley
Professor Samuel T. Dana
Professor Willett F* Ramsdell
Copyrighted
by
Richard Keith Arnold
1950
i
- ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
In addition to effective guidance by the committee
the author wishes to express appreciation to others who
contributed to the study which produced this dissertation,
Charles C. Buck, In Charge, Division of Forest Fire Research,
California Forest and Range Experiment Station, spent con­
siderable time in 1946 helping the author prepare a course
in forest fire protection. Some proposals which appear in
this study have been developed from those discussions with
Mr. Buck. Professor Kenneth C. Davis, School of Forestry,
University of Michigan, was particularly helpful and con­
structive in his critioism of parts of the manuscript.
Lawrence A. Jehu, Teaching Fellow in Mathematics, University
of Michigan, advised the author concerning the mathematical
appendix.
i
iii -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES.................................. vi
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS........................... vii
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION............................. 1
Conditions under which Forest Fire Con­
trol Must Function
The Work of the Fire Control Organization
Fire, a Public Problem
The Importance of Economic Studies Deal­
ing with Fire
Objectives of the Study
II. THE DEVELOPMENT OF FOREST FIRE PROTECTION IN
THE UNITED STATES....................... 11
General Considerations
The Prevention Era— Fire, a Reoognized
Danger
The Suppression Era— Fire, the Principal
Forestry Problem
The Present--Fire, a Recognized Tool in
Forest Management
III. ANALYSIS OF OBJECTIVES OF ADEQUATE FIRE
CONTROL................................. 70
General Critique i
Area and Size Objectives
Time Goals
Miscellaneous Objectives
Lea st-Cost-Plus-Damage
IV. A "MODEL*1 APPROACH TO THE LEAST-COST-PLUS-
DAMAGE SOLUTION......................... 107
Basis for the Model Approach
The Model
The Synthesis
Implications of the Model Least-Cost-
Plus-Damage Solution
- iv -
Chapter Page
V. FACTORS AFFECTING THE LEAST-COST-PLUS-
DAMAGE SOLUTION ....................... 150
Difficulties in Practical Application
Conflagration Potential
A Balanced Fire Control Effort
Fire Control and Depression
Fire Control and Forest Management
Appendix
I. MEANING OF SYMBOLS................... 186
II. MATHEMATICS OF THE LEAST-COST-PLUS-DAMAGE
SOLUTION ............................. 188
LITERATURE CITED ............................. 200
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Historic Forest Fires in the United States
and Canada.......................... 25
2* Area of National Forest in the United States,
Exclusive of Alaska and Porto Rico, Burned
»
over from 1904 to 1907 Inclusive.......... 28
3. Expenditures for Cooperative Fire Protection
on Private and State Forest Lands,
1911-47................................... 40
4« Importance of Unprotected Land to the Forest
Protection Problem......................... 68
5« Fire Occurrence on Protected Forest Lands
by State Groups and by Cause............... 69
6* Indexes of Effective Fire Control for Various
Forest Types........................ 77
7* Average Run-off and Erosion Damage from
Future Fires on Selected Watersheds of the
Angeles National Forest..................... 118
8* Average Suppression Cost and Damage per Fire
in Dollars...................................190
9* Total Suppression Cost and Damage per Million
Acfhes per Year............................... 192
10* Damage Plus Suppression Cost Plus Presuppres­
sion Cost per Million Aores per Year Assuming
No Prevention Effort • • • • • • • • • • • • • 193
11* Total Damage and Protection Costs per Million
Acres per Year Assuming Optimum "Shotgun”
Prevention Effort........................... 196
12* Total Damage and Protection Costs per Million
Acres per Year Assuming Optimum "Concentrated”
Prevention Effort......... 198
vi -
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
.
1 The Forest Fire Situation in the United
States ............................... 67
.
2 Sparhawk’s Illustration of the Least-Cost-
Plus-Damage Analysis......................... 93
Flint*s Least-Cost-Plus-Damage Analysis . . . 97
3.
4* Sum of Damage Plus Suppression Plus Prevention
Plus Presuppression Costs for Various Levels
of Variable Prevention Plus Presuppression
Cost, Private Land, Southwest Virginia, 1940-
4 4 .......................................... 101
5. Relation of Sum of Variable Costs and Damage
to Total Variable Costs for Prevention, Pre­
suppression and Suppression, South Carolina
Coastal Area, 1941-45 102
.
6 Rate of Held Line Construction for Suppression
Forces of Various Sizes .................... 114
7. Suppression Cost and Damage per Fire in
Relation to Intensity of Suppression ......... 127
.
8 The Sum of Suppression Cost and Damage in
Relation to Intensity of Suppression ......... 128
9. Least-Cost-Plus-Damage Solution Based on
Annual Sums of Suppression Cost, Damage, and
Presuppression Cost for One Million Acres • • 130
.
10 Determination of the Least Annual Sum per
Million Acres of Suppression Cost, Damage,
and "Shotgun" Prevention Cost for Various
Attack Times in Relation to Percentage
Reduction in Number of Fires................. 133
11. Least-Cost-Plus-Damage Solution Based on
Suppression Cost, Damage, Presuppression
Cost, and "Shotgun" Prevention Cost per
Million Acres per Year....................... 135
- vii -
Figure Page
12* Determination of the Least Annual Sum per
Million Acres of Suppression Cost, Damage,
Presuppression Cost, and "Concentrated"
Prevention Cost for Various Attack Times
in Relation to Percentage Reduction in
Number of Fires........................ 136
13« Least-Cost-Plus-Damage Solution Based on
Prevention Cost, Damage, Presuppression
Cost, and "Concentrated" Prevention Cost
per Million Acres per Y e a r ............... 138
14* Relation of Damage to the Sum of Suppression
Cost and Damage........................... 144
15. Comparison of Least-Cost-Plus-Damage
Solutions................................. 147
»
- viii -
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Conditions under whioh Forest Fire Control
Must Function
Forest fire oontrol1 has been defined as the "pro­
tection of wild land and the growth thereon from fire," (U.S.
Forest Service, 1939:8) but like many general definitions this
is useful only as the foundation for a frame of referenoe whioh
delineates the problem area of the field in question. An im­
portant part of the frame of reference of forest fire control
is the description of limiting assumptions or conditions under
which it operates.
The first oonditlon is that the wild land and growth
thereon must have value. Unless these resources provide
directly for the creation of utilities whioh are soaroe and
which satisfy human wants their protection oannot be justi­
{
fied. However in practice this oondltion is easily satis-
fied: for forest values derived from products such as lum­
ber, fuel wood, pulpwood, naval stores, forage for livestock,
wildlife, recreation; and indirect values derived from the
forest as a oondltion (regulation of stream-flow, erosion
Fire protection is used synonymously with fire con­
trol in this work.
- 1 -
control, reduction of wind velocity, and social values) are
well established. (U.S. Forest Servloe, 1948:13-21) (U.S.
Forest Service, 1933*91-117)
The second condition is that the effeot of fire oust
be to decrease these forest values. Damage from oomplete de­
struction of merchantable timber, or any forest raw material,
or of improvements is dearly a harmful effeot of fire. But
other types of fire losses such as the reduotion in quantity
or quality of growth, deorease in soil productivity, incep­
tion of inseot and disease attaoks, increase in flood and
erosion damage, and their resultant eoonomio and sooial mal­
adjustments, though not always so evident, may in the aggre­
gate deorease forest values more than oomplete destruction of
raw materials. As an extreme example, on some southern Cal­
ifornia watersheds, damage from inoreased run-off and erosion
has been oomputed to be greater than $300 per aore, when the
brush cover has been removed by fire. (Buck, Fons, and
Countryman, 1948b)
The third condition is readily established by ooour-
renoe reoords: there must be fire, and aocording to the
U.S. Forest Servioe, there is fire. 1 From 1946 to 1948,
inclusive, the average number of forest fires in the United
States per year was 182,415» whioh is equal to 280 fires per
*U.S. Forest Servioe, Div. of State Cooperation,
jj0r??t Fire Statistics. Calendar Year (published annually,
Washington) • Hereafter in this worV data from this souroe
will be acknowledged by the title, Forest Fire Statistics.