Mountain pine beetles and Colorado forests : findings from a re-survey of Colorado community residents

North Central Colorado has experienced an extensive mountain pine beetle outbreak over the last 20 years. We conducted a survey of Colorado residents about their response to forest disturbance by mountain pine beetles in 2007. A survey questionnaire was sent to randomly selected households in Breckenridge, Dillon, Frisco, Granby, Kremmling, Silverthorne, Steamboat Springs, Vail, and Walden, Colorado. In 2018, we did a follow-up mail survey to see how local communities and residents have experienced and reacted to the mountain pine beetle outbreak and the accompanying changes in Colorado forests over time. These reports describe major findings of the 2018 re-survey for the whole study area and for individual study communities.This research was supported by the Decision, Risk and Management Sciences Program of the National Science Foundation (Award #1733990).This research was supported by the Decision, Risk and Management Sciences Program of the National Science Foundation (Award #1733990).Hua Qin, Elizabeth Prentice, Christine Sanders (University of Missouri-Columbia), Hannah Brenkert-Smith, Jamie Vickery (University of Colorado Boulder)Colorado re-survey report (20 pages : illustration) -- Breckenridge community survey report (13 pages : illustration) -- Dillon community survey report (13 pages : illustration) -- Frisco community survey report (13 pages : illustration) -- Granby community survey report (13 pages : illustration) -- Kremmling community survey report (13 pages : illustration) -- Silverthorne community survey report (13 pages : illustration) -- Steamboat Spring community survey report (13 pages : illustration) -- Vait community survey report (13 pages : illustration) -- Walden community survey report (13 pages : illustration

Interactions between Resident Risk Perceptions and Wildfire Risk Mitigation: Evidence from Simultaneous Equations Modeling

Fire science emphasizes that mitigation actions on residential property, including structural hardening and maintaining defensible space, can reduce the risk of wildfire to a home. Accordingly, a rich body of social science literature investigates the determinants of wildfire risk mitigation behaviors of residents living in fire-prone areas. Here, we investigate relationships among wildfire hazards, residents’ risk perceptions, and conditions associated with mitigation actions using a combination of simulated wildfire conditions, household survey responses, and professionally assessed parcel characteristic data. We estimate a simultaneous model of these data that accounts for potential direct feedbacks between risk perceptions and parcel-level conditions. We also compare the use of self-reported versus assessed parcel-level data for estimating these relationships. Our analysis relies on paired survey and assessment data for approximately 2000 homes in western Colorado. Our simultaneous model demonstrates dual-directional interactions between risk perceptions and conditions associated with mitigation actions, with important implications for inference from simpler approaches. In addition to improving general understanding of decision-making about risk and natural hazards, our findings can support the effectiveness of publicly supported programs intended to encourage mitigation to reduce society’s overall wildfire risk

Cost Shared Wildfire Risk Mitigation in Log Hill Mesa, Colorado: Survey Evidence on Participation and Willingness to Pay

Wildland–urban interface (WUI) homeowners who do not mitigate the wildfire risk on their properties impose a negative externality on society. To reduce the social costs of wildfire and incentivise homeowners to take action, cost sharing programs seek to reduce the barriers that impede wildfire risk mitigation. Using survey data from a WUI community in western Colorado and a two-stage decision framework, we examine residents’ willingness to participate in a cost sharing program for removing vegetation on their properties and the amount they are willing to contribute to the cost of that removal. Wefind that different factors motivate decisions about participation and about how much to pay. Willingness to participate correlates with both financial and non-monetary considerations, including informational barriers and wildfire risk perceptions, but not with concerns about effectiveness or visual impacts. Residents of properties with higher wildfire risk levels are less likely to participate in the cost sharing than those with lower levels of wildfire risk. We find widespread, positive willingness to pay for vegetation removal, with the amount associated negatively with property size and positively with respondent income. These results can inform the development of cost sharing programs to encourage wildfire risk mitigation on private property

Resistance and Representation in a Wildland–Urban Interface Fuels Treatment Conflict: The Case of the Forsythe II Project in the Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest

Land treatments in wildland–urban interface (WUI) areas are highly visible and subject to public scrutiny and possible opposition. This study examines a contested vegetation treatment—Forsythe II—in a WUI area of the Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest in Colorado. An initial phase of the research found vocal opposition to Forsythe II. The purpose of the present study was to understand how well the resistance narrative represented the broader community in the WUI area affected by the Forsythe II treatments. More than one third (36%) of households responded to a census survey focused on Forsythe II, demographics, wildfire risk perceptions, and variables associated with generic land management activities and place attachment. Overall, while public opposition to Forsythe II has resulted in a nearly 25% reduction in the project’s size, the survey data demonstrate that just over a quarter of respondents (27%) opposed or strongly opposed the Forsythe II project, and the majority of survey respondents reported broad support for forest management approaches similar to those detailed in the project plans. Notably, a similar portion (28%) did not report an opinion on the project. Results include a systematic comparison of opinion/no opinion respondents

Where you stand depends on where you sit: qualitative inquiry into notions of fire adaptation

Wildfire and the threat it poses to society represents an example of the complex, dynamic relationship between social and ecological systems. Increasingly, wildfire adaptation is posited as a pathway to shift the approach to fire from a suppression paradigm that seeks to control fire to a paradigm that focuses on "living with" and "adapting to" wildfire. In this study, we seek insights into what it means to adapt to wildfire from a range of stakeholders whose efforts contribute to the management of wildfire. Study participants provided insights into the meaning, relevance, and use of the concept of fire adaptation as it relates to their wildfire-related activities. A key finding of this investigation suggests that social scale is of key importance in the conceptualization and understanding of adaptation for participating stakeholders. Indeed, where you stand in terms of understandings of fire adaptation depends in large part on where you sit

Where you stand depends on where you sit: qualitative inquiry into notions of fire adaptation

Wildfire and the threat it poses to society represents an example of the complex, dynamic relationship between social and ecological systems. Increasingly, wildfire adaptation is posited as a pathway to shift the approach to fire from a suppression paradigm that seeks to control fire to a paradigm that focuses on "living with" and "adapting to" wildfire. In this study, we seek insights into what it means to adapt to wildfire from a range of stakeholders whose efforts contribute to the management of wildfire. Study participants provided insights into the meaning, relevance, and use of the concept of fire adaptation as it relates to their wildfire-related activities. A key finding of this investigation suggests that social scale is of key importance in the conceptualization and understanding of adaptation for participating stakeholders. Indeed, where you stand in terms of understandings of fire adaptation depends in large part on where you sit

Interactions between Resident Risk Perceptions and Wildfire Risk Mitigation: Evidence from Simultaneous Equations Modeling

Fire science emphasizes that mitigation actions on residential property, including structural hardening and maintaining defensible space, can reduce the risk of wildfire to a home. Accordingly, a rich body of social science literature investigates the determinants of wildfire risk mitigation behaviors of residents living in fire-prone areas. Here, we investigate relationships among wildfire hazards, residents’ risk perceptions, and conditions associated with mitigation actions using a combination of simulated wildfire conditions, household survey responses, and professionally assessed parcel characteristic data. We estimate a simultaneous model of these data that accounts for potential direct feedbacks between risk perceptions and parcel-level conditions. We also compare the use of self-reported versus assessed parcel-level data for estimating these relationships. Our analysis relies on paired survey and assessment data for approximately 2000 homes in western Colorado. Our simultaneous model demonstrates dual-directional interactions between risk perceptions and conditions associated with mitigation actions, with important implications for inference from simpler approaches. In addition to improving general understanding of decision-making about risk and natural hazards, our findings can support the effectiveness of publicly supported programs intended to encourage mitigation to reduce society’s overall wildfire risk

Developing Behavioral and Evidence-Based Programs for Wildfire Risk Mitigation

The actions of residents in the wildland–urban interface can influence the private and social costs of wildfire. Wildfire programs that encourage residents to take action are often delivered without evidence of effects on behavior. Research from the field of behavioral science shows that simple, often low-cost changes to program design and delivery can influence socially desirable behaviors. In this research report, we highlight how behavioral science and experimental design may advance efforts to increase wildfire risk mitigation on private property. We offer an example in which we tested changes in outreach messaging on property owners’ interest in wildfire risk information. In partnership with a regional wildfire organization, we mailed 4564 letters directing property owners to visit personalized wildfire risk webpages. By tracking visitation, we observed that 590 letter recipients (12%) sought information about their wildfire risk and response varied by community. This research–practice collaboration has three benefits: innovation in outreach, evidence of innovation through experimental design, and real impacts on interest in wildfire mitigation among property owners. Future collaborations may inform behavioral and evidence-based programs to better serve residents and the public interest as the risks from wildfires are projected to grow