Register      Login
International Journal of Wildland Fire International Journal of Wildland Fire Society
Journal of the International Association of Wildland Fire
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > WF > WF05015
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 15(2)

Evaluation of MM5 model resolution when applied to prediction of National Fire Danger Rating indexes

Jeanne L. Hoadley A F , Miriam L. Rorig A , Larry Bradshaw B , Sue A. Ferguson A , Kenneth J. Westrick C , Scott L. Goodrick D and Paul Werth E
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 400 N 34th Street #201, Seattle, WA 98103, USA.

B USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station Fire Sciences Laboratory, 5775 US W Highway 10, Missoula, MT 59808-9361, USA.

C 3Tier Environmental Forecast Group, 2825 Eastlake Avenue E #301, Seattle, WA 98102, USA.

D USDA Forest Service, Southeast Research Station, 320 Green Street, Athens, GA 30602-2044, USA.

E US Department of Interior, Northwest Interagency Coordination Center, 5420 NE Marine Drive, Portland, OR 97218-1007, USA.

F Corresponding author. Email: jhoadley@fs.fed.us

International Journal of Wildland Fire 15(2) 147-154 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF05015
Submitted: 20 January 2005  Accepted: 25 October 2005   Published: 31 May 2006

Abstract

Weather predictions from the MM5 mesoscale model were used to compute gridded predictions of National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS) indexes. The model output was applied to a case study of the 2000 fire season in Northern Idaho and Western Montana to simulate an extreme event. To determine the preferred resolution for automating NFDRS predictions, model performance was evaluated at 36, 12, and 4 km. For those indexes evaluated, the best results were consistently obtained for the 4-km domain, whereas the 36-km domain had the largest mean absolute errors. Although model predictions of fire danger indexes are consistently lower than observed, analysis of time series results indicates that the model does well in capturing trends and extreme changes in NFDRS indexes.


References


Burgan RE (1988) ‘1988 Revisions to the 1978 National Fire-Danger system.’ USDA Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Research Paper SE-273. (Asheville, NC)

Burgan RE, Hartford RA (1993) ‘Monitoring vegetation greenness with satellite data.’ USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report INT-297. (Ogden, UT)

Burgan RE, Hartford RA (1997) Live vegetation moisture calculated from NDVI and used in fire danger rating. In ‘Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Fire and Forest Meteorology’, 27–31 October 1997, Lorne, Australia. (Ed. J. Greenlee) (IAWF: Fairfield, WA, USA)

Burgan RE, Hartford RA, Eidenshink JC (1996) ‘Using NDVI to assess departure from average greenness and its relation to fire business.’ USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report INT-GTR-333. (Ogden, UT)

Cressman GP (1959) An operational objective analysis system. Monthly Weather Review  87, 367–374.
Deeming JC, Burgan RE, Cohen JD (1977) ‘The National Fire Danger Rating System – 1978.’ USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report INT-39. (Ogden, UT)

Hoadley JL, Westrick KJ, Ferguson SA, Goodrick SL, Bradshaw L , Werth PA (2004) The effect of increased model resolution in predicting meteorological parameters used in fire danger rating. Journal of Applied Meteorology  43, 1333–1347.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Maidment D (Ed.) (1993) ‘Handbook of hydrology.’ (McGraw-Hill: New York)

Schlobohm P, Brain J (2002) ‘Gaining an understanding of the National Fire Danger Rating System.’ PMS 932 NFES 2665. (National Wildfire Coordinating Group)