Fire Control and Suppression

The Southern states have as colorful and dynamic history of wildfire control as any region of the United States. Three primary influences give fire suppression in this part of the nation its particular character:

• the naturally rapid fire return interval in most of its ecosystems
• its continuous history of active burning by private landowners
• rapid urbanization amid fast-growing flammable vegetation

Although the science of fire control has advanced considerably over the years, the success of suppression efforts often depends as much on fortuitous breaks from the weather, as BROKEN-LINK BROKEN-LINK on firefighter knowledge and skills. The mechanics of firefighting are fairly straightforward, involving activities that essentially break a leg on the fire triangle. Numerous options exist, including depriving the fire of oxygen using soil or water, or cooling heat and flames with water and retardant chemicals.

Every fire presents unique challenges and learning opportunities for fire practitioners. The organization of fire control operations depends on the present and future fire danger, fuel types, values at risk, and land management objectives. These same considerations along with the fire’s behavior will dictate fire tactics and strategies. Managing fire control operations requires careful preparations, planning, and training before a fire breaks out. The proper equipment is an essential part of wildland firefighting.

Fire management plans are written to distinguish areas where fires will be fought most aggressively; plans also distinguish lower priority areas where responses might be less critical. Sensitive zones(such as cultural resource sites or wildernesses) also are identified. Minimal impact suppression guidelines reduce human impacts on the post-fire landscape. These guidelines advocate less reliance on mechanized equipment, tree cutting or other caustic activities that might endanger sensitive species or damage historic sites and artifacts. For example, felling of large trees or snags might be discouraged in red cockaded woodpecker habitat. Increasingly, firefighters are instructed to pay attention to archaeological or cultural resources that might be damaged by suppression activities. Also, firefighter safety considerations may sometimes dictate the need for less aggressive suppression strategies. For example, instead of confronting a raging inferno in a deeply dissected canyon, firefighters will back off BROKEN-LINK BROKEN-LINK and take a stand on a safer ridgeline. Managers may sometimes exercise a more nuanced approach to controlling a fire (Omi, In Press).

Early in the 20^th century, the primary tools of firefighting included shovels, axes, and manual saws. By the mid-20^th century, chainsaws, motorized vehicles (including tractors, bulldozers), and compressed-air water pumps improved firefighter capabilities. And today ground control techniques are augmented by aerial control using air tankers, helicopters, and sophisticated fire engines. Firefighters use soil and water as smothering and dousing agents, and often rely on chemical retardants for assistance.

Although the fire suppression arsenal has expanded considerably since the late 19^th century and early 20^th century, the basic tools of the trade haven’t changed much, as firefighters still rely on shovels, axes, and saws to build firelines and put the fire out. Regardless of the organizational complexity of the incident, firefighters on the ground are needed to carry out and complete suppression of any fire. Even as technologies for detecting, mapping, and monitoring fires become increasingly sophisticated, for example involving satellite or remote links to computers in fire camps, the brunt of the firefighting effort still relies on people with hand tools on the ground monitoring and controlling the fire.