{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015970188980569604, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0005323396326856535, 'mean_word_length': 5.391156462585034, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Application of Wildland Fire Assessments 1

Wildland fire assessment is an attempt to use spatial analysis to highlight priorities for program management. The techniques rely on mapping of risks, hazards, and values, which are aggregated to determine treatment or attack priorities. The process can be applied on a strategic basis in large landscapes across jurisdictional boundaries. Scaled to local situations, the assessment can ordinate fire management zones, providing the basis for tactical planning. The assessment is designed to be iterative, accomodaing changes over time and refined by integrating databases from partner agencies and stakeholders. The evolution of the Federal Fire Policy formally recognizes fire as a process essential for ecosystem function and process. As such, management decisions include a wider array of options and an increasing demand for coordinated interagency responses. Wildland fire assessments employ the use of spatial analysis to highlight priorities for program management. Managers are faced with the need to choose appropriate management responses. These decisions are influenced by the need to identify areas in which it is appropriate to use natural ignitions for resource benefit, prioritize the application of prescribed fire, and help to identify priorities for suppression responses and opportunities for intervention or fuel modification. The shift to ecosystem management dictates planning in different scales and broader scopes. Disturbance regimes will remain a driver in determining the resilience and resistance of ecosystems and an opportunity toward a more holistic approach to land management. The need remains for an ability to conduct large scale assessments that are responsive to interagency needs, adaptable to changing conditions, linked to resource stewardship, and serve as support for strategic and tactical decisions and actions. Wildland fire assessment is an iterative process that includes the mapping of risks, hazards and values. It ranks and aggregates elements within the landscape to develop sensitivity, goals, and priorities. Ranking can be based on quantifiable and detailed data if it is available. As an ordination process, it also allows for combining databases of different standards, an important consideration for interagency planning and cooperation. Simplicity in the ranking process remains the trademark and the attraction of the process. Given a set of criteria, it relies on planners to develop a relative ranking of high, moderate, or low for each mapping layer. Layers are then aggregated to provide a comprehensive view of existing wildland fire conditions. It can be designed at various scales to provide tiered planning, linking resource needs, community values, and managerial issues. For assessment purposes risk is defined as the potential for ignition on the basis of human or lightning activity. Occurrence data and fire records are the primary source of input. Hazards are defined as physical or biological features that result in similar fire behavior characteristics. In our experience, we used vegetative data, reduced them to fuel models, and ranked their relative flammability. Values remain the most complex element to map. They are natural or developed features within the landscape that are affected by fire. Effects can be positive or negative that vary by fire intensity, duration, or scale of disturbance. On the smallest scales, it accommodates the most detailed information and provides support for tactical decisions and responses. At the broadest scales, it accommodates a wide range of details and allows planners a strategic perspective with linkages among resource issues and an evaluation of interagency efforts across landscapes. 1