Get reliable rangeland science

Paradoxically, perceptions by land managers and policy makers that using prescribed fire is risky business because it can lead to loss of life and property has contributed to increasingly destructive wildfire in the western USA. Such perceptions are often erroneously driven by sensationalized media coverage of the destructive nature of wildfires. However, recognition that decades of fuel accumulation under fire suppression policies are resulting in more destructive wildlife has led to calls for the use of controlled fire to reduce brush encroachment and accumulated fuel loads. Much of the discussion has focused on national forests but the use of prescribed fire it is equally relevant for maintaining healthy rangelands on private land. Recent studies have found that liability concern is a major reason for landowner reluctance to use prescribed fire. Such concerns are driven by a state's legal statues governing the use of prescribed fire and by a lack of knowledge, labor and equipment to apply fire safely. Significantly more hectares were burned in counties with gross negligence liability standards than in those with simple negligence standards; this suggests the need to change simple negligence standards to increase the use of prescribed fire. Other studies found that landowner attitudes towards the use of prescribed fire are strongly influenced by perceived support from family members and neighbors in the use of this management tool. Prescribed burning associations have helped change attitudes about prescribed fire by reducing landowner concerns over liability and lack of skills, labor and equipment to apply fire safely. This has led to widespread increase in the use of fire by landowners in the Southern Great Plains since 1997. Current research is exploring the interaction between the ongoing social and regulatory barriers to implementation of prescribed fire on private land. Results of this research are provided.