<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>R. Kimberlin</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>M. Arbaugh</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>J. Chew</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>G. Jones</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>J. Merzenich</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>M. Witala</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>R. Keane</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>M. Schaff</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Jan W. van Wagtendonk</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Greg Arthaud</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Tara M. Barrett</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>David R. Weise</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2003</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p class="Para"&gt;Understanding the trade-offs between short-term and long-term consequences of fire impacts on ecosystems is needed before a comprehensive fuels management program can be implemented nationally. We are evaluating 3 potential trade-off models at 8 locations in major U.S. fuel types. We present results of the initial testing of the 3 selected models/modelling approaches and a 4&lt;sup&gt;th&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;model on the Bitterroot National Forest (BNF) in western Montana. The selected models/modelling approaches were 1) the Fire Emissions Trade-off Model (FETM), 2) sequential use of the SIMPPLLE and MAGIS models, 3) the Vegetation Dynamics Development Tool (VDDT), and 4) the LANDscape Succession Model (LANDSUM). We simulated 3 fuel treatments over 50 years: 1) no action, 2) prescribed burning in ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir types at 2 different rates, and 3) timber harvesting that returns the stand to a reproduction stage. Simulation results for all models suggested that the acreage of Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine types would not be appreciably altered by the fuel treatments. Most models suggested the harvest treatment would reduce area burned by wildfire and smoke emissions; some models suggested the prescribed fire treatment would reduce wildfire acreage. All models suggested that the harvest treatment would reduce acreage of pole-size trees; some models suggested the fire treatment would increase acreage of sapling-size trees.&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1007/978-94-017-0307-9_2</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Springer</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Comparing potential fuel treatment trade-off models</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>