"We're going to be looking at fire suppression costs far in excess of what we have available".
The Forest Service's 2008 report on the smoke jumper program estimated that it saves millions of dollars annually in fire suppression costs.
fire suppression costs, area burned (ha), numbers of fatalities, number of injuries.
This scenario identified a most likely perceived reduction potential of fire suppression costs of 22.8%%.
The fire suppression costs are of key interest in terms of specific case study analysis for this paper.
Variable suppression costs are a subset of those identified by Gould et al. (2013), and are as follows: fire suppression costs, area burned (ha), numbers of fatalities, number of injuries.
Fig. 2 Cumulative probability distributions for Fire suppression costs as elicited from the combined experts' estimation of percentage change within four scenarios (status quo, 25, 50 or 100%% RPA use) for monitoring wildfires.
For example, National Forest land in the southeastern US US Forest Service Regionn 8) represents only 10percentt of the total Forest Service land base, but between 2007 and 2012 the region accounted for almost 70percentt of the Agency's prescribed burned area while accounting for only 6percentt of large fire suppression costs (USDA Forest Service internal reports).
In terms of fire suppression costs, the status quo (scenario 1) had a wide distribution of values, hence initially the incorporation of 25 % RPA use was considered to have in approximately 27%% of cases a reduction of the area burnt by at least approximately 5 %, at 50 % RPA use costs could be further reduced by 10.5%%, and at 100 % RPA use such cost could be further reduced by 7%%.
"We urgently need to address the runaway growth of fire suppression costs," the Interior report said. .
