Schmidt et al GTR RMRS-87.

Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) Used by all 5 federal land management agencies –Performance measure –Strategic allocation of scarce resources –Prioritize areas for fuels management Required under the Healthy Forest Restoration Act Used by all 5 federal land management agencies –Performance measure –Strategic allocation of scarce resources –Prioritize areas for fuels management Required under the Healthy Forest Restoration Act

FRCC is an ecological departure index Reflects departure of current from natural (historical) vegetation & disturbance regime Improving condition class (3  2  1) associated with: –reducing hazardous fuels –reducing large fire hazard –improving habitat conditions –improving watershed conditions –improving forest/rangeland health –more sustainable landscapes Reflects departure of current from natural (historical) vegetation & disturbance regime Improving condition class (3  2  1) associated with: –reducing hazardous fuels –reducing large fire hazard –improving habitat conditions –improving watershed conditions –improving forest/rangeland health –more sustainable landscapes

Fire Frequency (years) Departure (%) - Veg-Fuel Composition/Structure CC 2 CC 3 Fire Regime Condition Class Departure (%) – Fire Frequency-Severity CC 1

Determining FRCC Stratify a landscape by biophysical setting –Potential natural vegetation group Determine reference conditions –Fire frequency and severity (fire probabilities and % severe) –Relative abundance of vegetation-fuel classes (simulation model) Characterize current conditions –Fire frequency and severity (fire probabilities and % severe) –Relative abundance of vegetation-fuel classes Calculate departure Online training (produced by University of Idaho FRAMES project, and and field training being provided by the Interagency FRCC Working Group made up of federal agencies and The Nature Conservancy Stratify a landscape by biophysical setting –Potential natural vegetation group Determine reference conditions –Fire frequency and severity (fire probabilities and % severe) –Relative abundance of vegetation-fuel classes (simulation model) Characterize current conditions –Fire frequency and severity (fire probabilities and % severe) –Relative abundance of vegetation-fuel classes Calculate departure Online training (produced by University of Idaho FRAMES project, and and field training being provided by the Interagency FRCC Working Group made up of federal agencies and The Nature Conservancy

Ponderosa Pine – Douglas-fir Fire Regime Group I – Frequent Surface and Mixed Result of 1990s timber harvest, thin, and prescribed fire in CC2 (60%) landscape FR Condition = 30; FRCC = 1

FR Condition = 25 FRCC = 1 Result of wildland fire use in CC2 (60%) fire-excluded landscape Ponderosa Pine – Douglas-fir Fire Regime Group I – Frequent Surface and Mixed

FR Condition = 62 FRCC = 2 Ponderosa Pine – Douglas-fir Fire Regime Group I – Frequent Surface and Mixed Result of Fire Exclusion – 100 years

FR Condition = 50; FRCC = 2 Result of 50 years of fire exclusion & late 1800s-1970s excessive grazing Sagebrush-grass with tree encroachment Great Basin fire regime group II – Frequent stand-replacing

FR Condition = 90 FRCC = 3 Ponderosa Pine – Douglas-fir Fire Regime Group I – Frequent Surface and Mixed Result of timber harvests

FR Condition = 90; FRCC = 3 Result of wildfire in drought year in CC2 (60%) fire-excluded landscape Ponderosa Pine – Douglas-fir Fire Regime Group I – Frequent Surface and Mixed

Uncharacteristic Conditions –fuel accumulation above natural –excessive grazing –invasive plants, insects, or disease –unchar. insect & disease epidemics –unchar. fire effects –soil & hydrologic dysfunction –fuel accumulation above natural –excessive grazing –invasive plants, insects, or disease –unchar. insect & disease epidemics –unchar. fire effects –soil & hydrologic dysfunction Restore uncharacteristic by emulating natural

Why FRCC? Recent decades with large, severe wildfires with high costs of suppression and threats to people and property Policy changes in 1995 GAO called for cohesive strategy in 1999 Cohesive strategy and National Fire Plan in 2000 Coarse-scale FRCC useful for strategic planning and prioritizing action and funding Recent decades with large, severe wildfires with high costs of suppression and threats to people and property Policy changes in 1995 GAO called for cohesive strategy in 1999 Cohesive strategy and National Fire Plan in 2000 Coarse-scale FRCC useful for strategic planning and prioritizing action and funding

Coarse Scale Data Layers – 2000 Fire Regime Condition Class Fire Regime Condition Class 1 Fire Regime Condition Class 2 Fire Regime Condition Class 3 Water Ag & Non Vegetative Areas 1 km (250 acre pixel) – too coarse for local use Underestimated CC3 – could be as high as 45% Coarse-scale was designed for National strategic assessment & planning Should not be used for local assessment & planning All Wildland – Lower million acres 40% Forest 60% Rangeland FRG1&2 – Frequent – 60% FRG3&4 – Infrequent– 35% FRG5 – Rare -- 5% CC1 – 45% CC2 – 40% CC3 – 15%

FRCC Value for Integration Not a direct fire & fuel hazard Associated with increasing hazards Not a direct resource hazard Associated with increasing hazards Not a direct cost of mgt or mitigation Associated with increasing costs Index of sustainability Index of forest & rangeland health Common to all Collaborative

Recent and ongoing FRCC approaches Coarse scale –GTR RMRS-87, –Lower 48 states, expert opinion, 1km 2 Guidebook ( –FRCC working group: Interagency & The Nature Conservancy Rapid assessment LANDFIRE ( Science review Coarse scale –GTR RMRS-87, –Lower 48 states, expert opinion, 1km 2 Guidebook ( –FRCC working group: Interagency & The Nature Conservancy Rapid assessment LANDFIRE ( Science review

Strengths and limitations Landscape scale Ecological Simple Uncharacteristic vegetation, pattern & fire Reference conditions –Estimated through simulation based on experience and often very limited data –Are they relevant? Restorable? Useful? Landscape scale Ecological Simple Uncharacteristic vegetation, pattern & fire Reference conditions –Estimated through simulation based on experience and often very limited data –Are they relevant? Restorable? Useful?

Determining FRCC Stratify a landscape by biophysical setting –Potential natural vegetation group Determine reference conditions –Fire frequency and severity (fire probabilities and % severe) –Relative abundance of vegetation-fuel classes (simulation model) Characterize current conditions –Fire frequency and severity (fire probabilities and % severe) –Relative abundance of vegetation-fuel classes Calculate departure Online training (produced by University of Idaho FRAMES project, and and field training being provided by the Interagency FRCC Working Group made up of federal agencies and The Nature Conservancy Stratify a landscape by biophysical setting –Potential natural vegetation group Determine reference conditions –Fire frequency and severity (fire probabilities and % severe) –Relative abundance of vegetation-fuel classes (simulation model) Characterize current conditions –Fire frequency and severity (fire probabilities and % severe) –Relative abundance of vegetation-fuel classes Calculate departure Online training (produced by University of Idaho FRAMES project, and and field training being provided by the Interagency FRCC Working Group made up of federal agencies and The Nature Conservancy

HRV varies with scale

HRV is useful for... Evaluating and assessing change Establishing goals for ecological restoration Determining desired future conditions Setting priorities for action Understanding and illustrating change Evaluating and assessing change Establishing goals for ecological restoration Determining desired future conditions Setting priorities for action Understanding and illustrating change

HRV is less useful when Focus is on an individual species Historical patterns and processes are socially unacceptable Risk and uncertainty are high Biophysical conditions have changed greatly Focus is on an individual species Historical patterns and processes are socially unacceptable Risk and uncertainty are high Biophysical conditions have changed greatly

Historical information has been used to guide management Colorado River (Poff et al. 1997) Everglades (Harwell 1997) Forests in the Midwest (Mladenoff and Pastor 1993), Southwest (Moore et al. 1999), and Northwest (Lesica 1996, Lertzman et al. 1997, Hessburg et al. 1999) National Forests in Idaho (USDA 2000b) Fire regime condition class system now required of five federal land mgt agencies in US ( Colorado River (Poff et al. 1997) Everglades (Harwell 1997) Forests in the Midwest (Mladenoff and Pastor 1993), Southwest (Moore et al. 1999), and Northwest (Lesica 1996, Lertzman et al. 1997, Hessburg et al. 1999) National Forests in Idaho (USDA 2000b) Fire regime condition class system now required of five federal land mgt agencies in US (