Next week we will begin to discuss ways to assess wildfire risk and vulnerability.
 |
| USDA |
Please note the hyperlink in the course schedule and course reading list that is associated with the
"national wildfire risk map." Review the website and its components, which map wildfire risk to communities. We can talk about the mapping effort in class along with our readings.
Please enter at least three discussion questions based upon the assigned readings (and mapping effort, if you are interested). Spring Break makes this week a bit of an oddity in terms of reporting questions and gives you additional time. Please have your questions posted by Monday, March 17 at noon.
See you all on Wednesday, March 19th.
Schumman et al. 2024
ReplyDeleteThe social vulnerability of language stood out to me. Native Americans and Spanish speaking individuals/communities seem to perhaps be lacking educational, informative resources in their native language. Tying this into the website… the national wildfire map had an ASL video. How actually feasible would it be to create multiple versions of this content to make it more accessible? What does our lack of information that is accessible/multilingual/etc say without speaking? What if there was a section of an agency devoted to creating multilingual or ADA (vision, hearing, etc) websites, fliers, etc?
Paveglio et al. 2018
Adaptive capacity and social vulnerabilities focus on spatial information. To what extent was there also a focus or question of temporal influence. Meaning are certain areas over time experiencing gentrification, white flight, etc? Slight right--what about the general transactional sale of land? “Retention rates” so to speak. We also learned recent builds are more susceptible than older, existing properties. Would experience/local knowledge/’know how’ also influence this?
National Wildfire Map
I played around with a handful of different cities that I have lived in or visited. I was REALLY interested and shocked to find out that the city that my duty station is located in has a HIGH likelihood of wildfire. It did mention that just because the likelihood is high, that does not mean the intensity is inherently high also. I’m curious if our RX efforts are taken into account? I liked this website a lot! More than FireWise or Ready, Set, Go. I noticed this one actually incorporated some Ready Set Go material. This format was more user friendly, information rich, and inclusive/accessible like with ASL videos!
Schumann 2024
ReplyDeleteThe paper says that California is the one region to defy the trend observed in other regions regarding the percent of people with higher educational attainment experiencing greater wildfire occurrence. Why do you think that is? For instance, do socio economics and employment structure play a role?
Paveglio 2018
The paper states that residential areas close to city centers often experience reduced wildfire risk but, in the event of a large and intense fire these areas may experience greater risk due to less mitigations taking place due to this reduced wildfire risk. Generally speaking cities have a larger population than their surrounding residential and rural areas. How can support be acquired from city centers to reduce wildfire risk? For example, do they need to be informed that they too have areas at risk? Do you think the larger population from city centers can promote change even though they may not be in the WUI?
National Wildfire Map
It was neat to see how one region of a state can drastically increase its wildfire likelihood. For example, the Pinelands National Reserve in New Jersey experiences such a high likelihood that the overall state is designated as having medium wildfire likelihood. As a whole, it is intriguing to see how landscapes, as well as homes, vulnerable populations, and other factors dictate the state having medium risk of wildfire, higher than 66% of states in the US. It would be interesting to see how these factors all correlate in land use planning.
Is it possible that some of the social vulnerability characteristics noted by Schumann et al. (e.g. more people living in trailers and more unoccupied housing units in fire tracts) resulted from the fires? Separately, it seems like analyses conducted at smaller scales don’t really support broad, generalized correlations between fire incidence (or likelihood) and standardized social vulnerability metrics. So, I’m wondering if mapping at this scale is useful and/or if the correlations in this paper would hold true at smaller scales of analysis.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the best way to involve stakeholders in developing vulnerability assessments?
Would it be useful if mapping tools were developed in coordination with local representatives so they could reflect neighborhood or parcel-level information? The Wildfire Risk to Communities tool seems to provide data that is high-level enough to almost seem arbitrary, so maybe there is a need for another level of interpretation/refinement at the local level to make it more useful.
Schumann '24:
ReplyDeleteThe article asks "who has burned?" rather than "who could burn?" but the MTBS data used only considers larger fires (>500 acres for the eastern US, >1000 acres for the western US). How would results differ if small fires were included in the analysis? Would wildfire and social vulnerability still occur together?
Risk map:
For the town I live in, the area with the highest risk to homes is a rural, wooded area outside of town where land and homes are more affordable. This area is not tied to city water and many residents have to truck in their own water on a weekly basis. This lack of water is a local factor influencing fire response that is not included on the community risk map. What are some additional considerations or factors at the local level that may be "invisible" on these maps?
Paveglio '18:
Traditional hazard literature finds that socially vulnerable populations are more exposed to disaster. This article finds the opposite, but conducted study in an area with high levels of amenity migration and property value. How does research location and scale impact results? Do you think there is a bias in fire research towards studying areas with higher property value?
Paveglio:
ReplyDeleteHow could policy makers create better wildfire mitigation policies and strategies by using the fine-scale evaluation of social vulnerability proposed in this paper? How would this be implemented or utilized, and how would it better the strategies for future work?
Risk Map:
How actively are they updating the maps and information on the Risk Maps? Could this application have a community interaction page, allowing for members of the community to submit information about fuel conditions on the ground. It would be interesting to see how this information, if processed and put in correctly, would improve the accuracy and information of the website.
Schumann:
This paper acknowledges the negative financial implications of wildfire on lower income houses and properties. How do we accommodate and aid these individuals? If this is a known fact, how can we mitigate it to prevent future ignitions or wildfire events.
1. Which actors need to be involved at a local level in planning efforts to advocate for communities marked as socially vulnerable? How does uptake in assistance vary among population types - such as, what tools are in place to assist mobile home communities?
ReplyDelete2. How common is it for a CWPP to use external mapping resources (e.g., state or federal assessments)? What is needed for local governments to complete vulnerability assessments - should they? How might community characteristics beyond SVI metrics be incorporated?
3. How might risk mapping be reincorporated in wildfire risk management? In your opinion - where is it most useful?
Shumann et al.:
ReplyDeleteHow can we use the information they found to improve conditions for those in WUI areas?
Paveglio et al.
We know that part-time ownership creates issues regarding fuels reduction on properties, does this occur due to a lack of understanding of the amount of work it takes or lack of concern due to it not being their primary residency?
One thing that comes to mind regarding part-time residents and fuels reduction is a system similar to renters insurance. Regardless of where you rent, you have to have it but you have a choice between finding your own or signing up for the one the facility offers. Could a program be implemented with those who are part-time owners that would require them to find a company to do fire mitigation on their property (or do it themselves if possible) or they can just sign up for the one recommended by the local agencies?
ReplyDelete1. What are the risks of prioritizing wildfire prevention in high-WUI areas over vulnerable rural communities?
2. How does using simulations help or complicate understanding wildfire risk?
3. Does wildfire risk always mean higher vulnerability, or are there exceptions?
-Paveglio et al. 2018:
ReplyDelete1) Given the context of: “We found that parcel characteristics provide the most significant explanation of variability in wildfire exposure, sensitivity and overall risk from wildfire. Respondents views about agency or government management of wildfire helped explain a significant amount of variance in wildfire sensitivity, but the same was not true for metrics of exposure and overall risk. Demographic characteristics such as age, income, residency status, and the presence of young populations displayed mixed utility as indicators of social vulnerability components…” how do you think the feeling of belonging and identity within one’s community/sense of community in the place where one lives impacts this result? More specifically, how does a feeling of belonging/sense of community impact how homeowners perceive risk, want to mitigate that risk, and take ownership of factors within their control?
2) How can we counter the idea breached in the results section of this paper, stating that “fire suppression and fire management help subsidize the unsustainable burden of fire protection for high-value private property.”? What might this look like at a community level?
3) Do you think that the result of “overarching perceptions of fire risk were quite high among residents in our study area, but the perceived probability that wildfire would directly affect any given individual was much lower.” Is true overall or is this a case of “ignorance is bliss” when it comes to homeowner perception?
4) How might we combat the resulting issue stemming from “older populations are significantly more vulnerable to wildfire losses, but are less likely to perform the high levels of mitigation necessary to reduce that risk. Older populations might not have the physical ability or opportunity to clear forests near their homes, which implies a need for outside assistance that will increase the costs of wildfire mitigation.”? What are examples of what this might look like (elder assistance programs, subsidies, tax breaks, etc.) that older populations might actually want to take part in?
-Schumann et al. 2024:
ReplyDelete1) In regards to management implications of social vulnerability to wildfires, how might the fact the findings “People in tracts that have experienced wildfire possess lower social vulnerability. Additionally, these very places that have experienced wildfire in the past are likely to burn again” and “Our findings suggest several ways in which residents of areas that have burned in the past may have lower capacity to prevent future ignitions or mitigate wildfire impacts.” impact the communities perception of fire managers and therefore their cooperation and participation in fuels mitigation measures, evacuation orders, community wildfire protection plans, prescribed burn associations, etc? How can fire managers account for both these findings and these perception shifts?
2) How can we account for and combat the following issue and associated iterative loop: “Places that have experienced wildfire tend to be more economically vulnerable: they contain higher rates of poverty, lower levels of educational attainment, higher employment in extractive industries, higher proportions of social security recipients, and a higher percentage of residents lacking health insurance. This combination of factors suggests that residents may have fewer options to pay for wildfire risk reduction on their own property (e.g., home hardening, vegetation removal) and may have fewer financial safety nets to recover successfully when wildfire does occur.”? If we are working on behalf of a community/population like this, what can we apply for, work towards, and keep in mind when working against these issues?
-National Wildfire Risk Map:
1) How can we account for differences between this map and say PODS dilienations when it comes to fuels planning, community firebreaks, etc. when it comes to the WUI? Oftentimes, at a large scale, PODS delineations make sense, but when it comes to on-the-ground implementation, they don’t align with what makes sense for local managers and communities.
2) What factors and resources may not be well respresented or left out of these maps? (Very rural, remote communities come to mind, Tribal resources (particularly with cultural sensitivity surrounding GIS and mapping efforts), etc.)
3) In some states, nearly the entire state is listed as “very high risk”. How might this be impacted by recent fire scars, etc. that aren’t represented?
4) How might communities utilize resource like this to inform the public on fire risk without falling into the “fear mongering” realm? Particularly in areas very sensitive to fire loss (from previous bad experiences, lack of fire knowledge and higher perception of risk, etc.)?