In this study, the Fire Effects Tradeoff Model (FETM) was used to evaluate the economic tradeoffs between fuels treatment and fire suppression on the Angeles National Forest located
in southern California of the United States. FETM uses historical weather data, fire history data, current vegetation maps, prescribed-fire planning data, fuels treatment and wildfire costs and benefits, and surface and stand composition data to simulate the future annual wildland fire area burned, landscape composition, smoke emissions, and the present net value of fire suppression and fuels treatment over any time period. Five fire suppression and fuels treatment alternatives were evaluated, combining one of two fire suppression program options with five prescribed-fire intensities ranging from 0 to 52 percent of the available chaparral area per decade. Our results show that maintaining a larger suppression program with a low level of fuels treatment substantially reduces the wildfire area burned. However, the increased costs associated with this program are not met with a commensurate reduction in resource loss and suppression costs. Similarly, our results show that a smaller fire suppression program coupled with an aggressive prescribed-fire treatment option substantially reduces the wildfire area burned, but the increased costs of treatment are likewise not met with a commensurate
reduction in resource loss and suppression costs. We found instead that a smaller and less costly fire suppression program, matched with a moderate intensity fuels treatment program targeting only the highest loading classes of chaparral, provides the most cost-beneficial fire protection strategy for the study area.
