We have been conducting research on how fuel treatments are considered during fires, Potential Operational Delineations (PODs), the Incident Strategic Alignment Process (ISAP), and Risk Management Assistance (RMA).
Potential Operational Delineations (PODs)
Potential Wildfire Operational Delineations (PODs) are a spatial fire planning framework that brings together firefighters’ local knowledge and analytical products developed and maintained by the U.S. Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station to promote safe and effective fire response. Our team has conducted research to understand the use of PODs in incident management contexts and non-incident management contexts to align forest and wildfire planning objectives. Through continued support with the Joint Fire Science Program and USFS Rocky Mountain Research Station’s Wildfire Management Risk Science (WRMS) Team we are engaging in the following research projects:
The Joint Fire Science Program is supporting a multi-phased research project to develop a monitoring, evaluation, and adaptive management approach for maintaining and using PODs across space and time and improving the approach based on lessons learned. To achieve this, we have the following research objectives: 1) Identify the conditions that support PODs utilization in fire and fuel management across space and time, and 2) Develop a monitoring and evaluation framework to increase the efficacy and use of PODs across jurisdictions as part of an adaptive management cycle. This work will be co-designed and implemented with the Colorado Forest Restoration Institute and the Ecological Restoration Institute.
To complement this work, the WRMS Team is supporting work to identify the factors that influence multi-jurisdictional adoption and use of PODs. Specifically, we are investigating how PODs are used to plan and implement cross-boundary forest and fuel management approaches. With U.S. states as our unit of analysis, we are conducting this work in states that have formally or informally mandated the use of PODs (e.g., California, Oregon, and Washington). To achieve this, we seek to answer the following research questions: 1) How are PODs utilized before, during, and after wildfire when mandated for use? 2) What factors within adopting units and in the external environment and governance context explain the pace and extent of PODs adoption? 3) What barriers are associated with the adoption of PODs when mandated for multi-jurisdictional use?
Peer-Reviewed Articles:
Buettner, W.C., Beeton, T.A., Schultz, C.A., Caggiano M.D., Greiner S.M. (2023). Using PODs to integrate fire and fuels planning. International Journal of Wildland Fire. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF23022
Greiner, S. M., Schultz, C. A., & Kooistra, C. (2020). Pre-season fire management planning: the use of Potential Operational Delineations to prepare for wildland fire events. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 30(3), 170-178. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF20124
Practitioner Briefs:
Schultz, C., Greiner, M., Kooistra, C. (2021). Research Findings: PODs, Decision Support, and Fire Management. CSU Public Lands Policy Group Briefing Paper #6, Fall 2021. PLPG Briefing Paper #6.
Greiner, M., C. Kooistra, and C.A. Schultz. 2020. Pre-Season Planning for Wildland Fire Response: An Assessment of the US Forest Service’s Potential Operational Delineations (PODs). CSU Public Lands Policy Group Practitioner Paper 5, Spring 2020. PLPG Practitioner Paper #5, Post-Fire Addendum
Greiner, S.M., Schultz, C., & Kooistra, C. (2020). Pre-Season Planning for Wildland Fire Response: An Assessment of the US Forest Service’s Potential Operational Delineations (PODs). CSU Public Lands Policy Group Briefing Paper 5, Winter 2020. PLPG Briefing Paper #5.
The Incident Strategic Alignment Process (ISAP)
The Incident Strategic Alignment Process (ISAP) is an emergent framework for considering risk and developing strategy during wildland fire management and all-hazard response. In partnership with ISAP developers, the U.S. Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, and the Colorado Forest Restoration Institute, we researched the ISAP through field observations and case studies of the Elkhorn Fire (Case 1), San Juan fires (Quartz Ridge, Bear Creek, Mosca fires; Case 2), and the Six Rivers Forest Lightning (SRF) Complex (Case 3). We generated several practitioner-oriented briefs and a peer-reviewed publication, which are available below. Through collaboration with the Colorado Forest Restoration Institute, we are utilizing this data to assess decision quality.
Peer-Reviewed Article:
Buettner, William Cole, Tyler Aldworth, S. Michelle Greiner, Tyler A. Beeton, and Courtney A. Schultz. 2025. “Innovation to Support Wildfire Risk-Based Decision-Making: Examining the Incident Strategic Alignment Process.” Fire Ecology 21 (1): 63. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-025-00403-1.
Practitioner Briefs:
Aldworth, Tyler, William C. Buettner, S. Michelle Greiner, Tyler A Beeton, and Courtney A. Schultz. 2024b. “Implementing the incident strategic alignment process on the 2023 Six Rivers Lightning Complex.” Colorado Forest Restoration Institute, no. 2413. https://cfri.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2024/09/ISAP_SixRivers_Brief_Aldworth_CFRI_2413.pdf.
Aldworth, Tyler, William C. Buettner, S. Michelle Greiner, Tyler A. Beeton, and Courtney A. Schultz. 2024a. “Improving the incident strategic alignment process: recommendations from the 2023 fire season.” Colorado Forest Restoration Institute, no. 2048. https://cfri.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2024/06/ISAP_Recommendations_Brief_Aldworth_CFRI_2408.pdf.
Aldworth, Tyler, William C. Buettner, S. Michelle Greiner, Tyler A. Beeton, and Courtney A. Schultz. 2024c. “Implementing the incident strategic alignment process on the 2023 Quartz Ridge, Bear Creek, and Mosca fires.” Colorado Forest Restoration Institute, no. 2412. https://cfri.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2024/09/ISAP_BearCreek_Brief_Aldworth_CFRI_2412.pdf.
Aldworth, Tyler, William C. Buettner, S. Michelle Greiner, Tyler A. Beeton, and Courtney Schultz. 2024d. “Implementing the incident strategic alignment process on the 2023 Elkhorn Fire.” Colorado Forest Restoration Institute, no. 2411 https://cfri.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2024/09/ISAP_Elkhorn_Brief_Aldworth_CFRI_2411.pdf.
How fuel treatments are considered during fires
We conducted 59 interviews with fire and fuel personnel in the western United States to understand how incident management teams consider and incorporate U.S. Forest Service fuel treatments into wildfire response. Our goals were to: 1) understand how forest and fire personnel communicate about existing treatments; 2) understand what treatment characteristics they look for to meet different objectives; and 3) gather recommendations for improving fuel treatments to support incident management.
Greiner, S. M., Schultz, C., Novak, K. M., & Lohman, A. (2025). The role of fuel treatments during incident management. Fire Ecology, 21(1), 25. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-025-00369-0
Greiner, M., McGrath Novak, K., and Schultz, C. 2023. Assessing How Fuel Treatments are Considered During Incident Response: Final Report. CSU Public Lands Policy Group Practitioner Paper #17. Spring 2023. PLPG Practitioner Paper #17 Note that this is an update to our Interim Report: PLPG Practitioner Paper #13.
Greiner, M., McGrath Novak, K., and Schultz, C. (2023). Assessing How Fuel Treatments are Considered During Incident Response. CSU Public Lands Policy Group, Briefing Paper for Practitioner Paper #17, Spring 2023. Note that this is an update to our Interim Briefing Paper: Briefing Paper for Practitioner Paper #13
Risk Management Assistance (RMA)
To support improved wildfire incident decision-making, in 2017 the U.S. Forest Service implemented risk-informed tools and processes, together known as Risk Management Assistance (RMA). We assessed RMA to understand the approach’s efficacy and options for expanding the use of RMA concepts going forward.
Kooistra, C. & Schultz, C. (2021). Data and dialogue: Assessing Forest Service Risk Management Assistance. Fire Management Today, 79(1),61-68. Available here.
Schultz, C. A., Miller, L. F., Greiner, S. M., & Kooistra, C. (2021). A Qualitative Study on the US Forest Service’s risk management assistance efforts to improve wildfire decision-making. Forests, 12(3), 344. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12030344
Schultz, C., Kooistra, C., Miller, L., Ferguson, M. (2020). Findings from a Third-Party Assessment of the Forest Service’s Risk Management Assistance Team. CSU Public Lands Policy Group Practitioner Paper 4, Winter 2020. PLPG Practitioner Paper #4, Decker Fire Addendum.pdf
Schultz, C., Kooistra, C., Miller, L., & Ferguson, M. (2020). Findings from a third-party assessment of the Forest Service’s Risk Management Assistance efforts. CSU Public Lands Policy Group Briefing Paper 4, Winter 2020. PLPG Briefing Paper #4.
Want to learn more about research at the PLPG?
Click here to return to fire management research.
Click here to return to all research activities.