Results
Authored By: P. F. Hessburg, K. M. Reynolds, R. E. Keane, K. M. James, R. B. Salter
We describe results in terms of the strength of evidence in support of the overarching proposition of low fire danger or of subordinate propositions under fire danger. Recall that all propositions take the null form; for example, low strength of evidence based on the underlying evaluation implies that the proposition of low fire danger has poor support.
Subsections found in Results
- Fire Danger : There were pronounced differences in fire danger between subwatersheds in the northern and southern portions of the study area (Map zones).
- Priorities for Fuels Treatment : The map for fuels treatment priorities took into account most of the same factors as used to produce the map for fire danger and its components but with weighting of criteria and subcriteria by a fire ecologist and also considering the influence of wildland-urban interface.
Encyclopedia ID: p3642
