In reply to the discussions on wilderness and wildfire, I disagree with agency assumptions behind the rush to do agency/human ignitions within the Wilderness. I do agree, however, that lightning caused fires should be allowed to burn in Wilderness. 1- Fire intervals in most designated Wildernesses have been little affected by suppression. There is an excellent paper prepared by Robert Ament of American Wildlands (NOTE: Rob is a fire ecologist) that discusses the scientific literature in the Northern Rockies. Most Wildernesses here (even more so elsewhere) are higher elevation and/or have forests that evolved under stand-replacing regimes. In fact, Ament cites Hutto (1995) who, in turn, cites others and concludes, "the origin of most Rocky Mountain forest stands can be traced to stand-replacement fires as opposed to mild understory burns (Arno 1980, Heinselman 1981, Debyle et al. 1987)." Ament further notes that Barret and Arno (1991) and Weir et al. (1995) indicate there is good evidence that moderate and severe fire regimes have not been affected by fire suppression. Even what Ament calls the agency's "poster child" which is the ponderosa pine type, fire regimes are variable. Arno et al. (1995) found that even in pre-European invasion times, stand replacing fires occurred in ponderosa pine types. ICBEMP clearly indicates that the forests within HRV and forest stands that are the healthiest are in unroaded (Wilderness and other) areas. Thus, it seems most forests, especially national forests, and even more especially designated Wildernesses, evolved under stand-replacing fire regimes (long intervals) where suppression, since 1930 (the approximate date of effective fire suppression) has not had an effect on their structure. It also seems most wild forests have not been affected by fire suppression as have the roaded and logged forests. (NOTE: While the breaklands of the Salmon River in the F-RONR may seem to be an exception, it should be noted that according to the FS's own documents, fire suppression here has not been as effective because of costs and danger. Lightning fires have burned in the area recently. The FS admits on the dry ponderosa pine stands (see FC-RONR fire plan), there has not been a change in forest structure. Letting fires burn here rather than human ignitios is appropriate). 2- Forest structure is variable because of climatic factors (see Webb and Bartlein 1992). Even Oregon's Blue Mountains were not always ponderosa pine. Climatic fluctuations have changed the vegetation in this area. Johnson et al. (1994) note that the modern forests we identify with the Blue Mountains didn't begin until somewhere between 1000 years ago (about 1000 AD) to 2500 years ago (500 BC). (NOTE Walde, 1995, MS Thesis U of MT is a good synthesis on issues surrounding forests in the Blue Mountains). The Little Ice Age seems to roughly correspond to the establishment of modern forest types in the West. However, that era is over and we are entering an unprecedented period of rapid warming. Some researchers suggest (U of Washington Marine Research Unit recently compiled a list of some research findings) that the effects of CO2 increase on forest types is nearly identical to that of fire suppression. In other words, recent so-called changes in forest types the manipulators ascribe to fire suppression may actually be due to climatic change. Even absent previous fire suppression, the 1910 fires burned with far more intensity than anything Euro-Americans have ever witnessed. These fires burned in areas that were ostensibly short-interval, low-intensity fire regimes with massive force just as they did in the stand-replacing forest regimes. Climatic conditions drive large-landscape altering, stand-replacing fires. The overshelming concern over fuel loading from recent fire suppression is misplaced given what happened in 1910. Weather and climate are far more important in determining large wildfire behavior than are vegetational age and fuels. All the emphasis placed on fuels is a tempest in a teapot. Thus, I question the long-term role that low-intensity, high-frequency fire played in forest types in the No. Rockies. It seems stand-replacing fire and climatic/weather factors were/are the most influential components of forest (and non-forest) communities, even in ponderosa pine types. Our time frame of reference (a human life span or two) has seriously clouded our perception. Basing the HRV for forest types on what things were like in 1850 is misguided. 3- Because of changing climatic factors, it may not be possible to set back the ecological time clock. Current/recent past forest types may be relic sites and clinging on after major climatic chnages because of the longevity of trees. (see Agee 1993). In fact, successional theories (steady state and climax) do not apply beyond 200 year time frames. (see Webb and Bartlein 1992). Thus, I question using HRV in Wilderness "management" (yes, management is antithetical to wilderness) for vegetation communities (weeds are arguably a different matter). 4- West of the Divide in the No. Rockies, lightning strikes are very frequent. I have compiled some information, through FOIA, of lightning strikes and other fire information on the Nez Perce National Forest. The frequency is astounding and is more than adequate to maintain fire-dependent communities at pre-European settlement fire intervals. 5- The goal should be to allow Wilderness to be wild (that is guidance contained in the Wilderness Act). I agree with Scott that means more wildlands should be protected and natural processes should be allowed to occur over public lands. Fire suppression should be ended. However, human prescribed ignitions in Wilderness Areas are rarely, if ever, justified. Gary Macfarlane Friends of the Clearwater PO Box 9241 Moscow, ID 83843 Cove/Mallard Coalition PO Box 8968 Moscow, ID 83843 Shared phone: (208) 882-9755 Shared fax: (208) 883-0727 ********************* "The WILDNET listserve is a service of Wilderness Watch. WILDNET is designed to enhance the Wilderness community's collective knowledge of issues impacting Wildernesses and Wild Rivers nationwide. WILDNET is an interactive listserve. By sharing information, ideas and strategies all of our efforts to keep Wilderness wild, quiet, and full of native biodiversity can be helped. If you know of an organization or individual who should be part of this listserve, or if you want to unsubscribe, send a message to mailto:wild@wildernesswatch.org