Theses and Dissertations Collection

The use of wildfire to accomplish natural resource based outcomes has been an allowedpractice within US wildfire policy for over 50 years. Despite this, the scale of implementing wildfires with this strategy falls far short of those wildfires managed with a full suppression strategy, which is the dominant US wildfire response paradigm. Research has suggested that increasing the scale of wildfires managed to achieve resource benefits may help reduce the ‘fire deficit’ and increase the resilience of ecosystems to catastrophic wildfire outcomes. However, decision makers are often reluctant to assume the risk that breaking the suppression paradigm incurs. This dissertation presents three studies that examine the decision making process that US Forest Service agency administrators and their fire management staff consider whe deciding to manage a wildfire to achieve resource benefit or not. The first study conducted a review of the literature pertaining to decision making processes in this context, however it was limited to research conducted before the 2009 federal wildfire policy update. The second study examines the use of the Wildland Fire Decision Support System (WFDSS). It specifically probes how US Forest Service employees leverage WFDSS to help make decisions during wildfire incidents, and also explores their perspectives with the use of WFDSS and wildfire managed to achieve resource objectives. The final study largely builds on the first, expanding the decision factor set and updating it to the post-2009 wildfire policy context. While the first study was a literature review, the second two studies both were conducted by interviewing participants currently employed by the Forest Service. All three studies were thematically analyzed using qualitative data analysis methodologies; principally thematic analysis rooted in the practice of Grounded Theory. The conclusions from all three studies support the notion that wildfire decision making is complex and must consider many divergent, sometimes contradictory, and often uncertain factors. The level of complexity and uncertainty coupled with external pressures, internal cultures, and personal risk appetites appears to support the conclusion that choosing to manage a wildfire to attain resource based objectives is a riskier decision that deciding to suppress it. Risk is derived from uncertainty in the outcome, lack of comfort or resources to manage it, previous bad experiences, or loss of sociopolitical credibility. I provide a set of conclusions that supports using a framework to assist decision makers to choose the correct course of action for any wildfire that is considering of the most important and salient decision factors relevant to their current wildfire scenario.