LAND USE PLANNING-FIRE MANAGEMENT
RELATIONSHIPS AND NEEDS IN THE U. 3. FOREST
SERVICE

Dissertation for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
RICHARD J. BARNEY
1976

   
     

IIIII IIIQIIIIII II II III! III I I“ III I L

  

LIB RA R Y
Midfiggmstage
University

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

Land Use Planning-Fire Management Relationships
and Needs in the U. S. Forest Service

presented by

Richard J. Barney

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph . D. degree in Forestry

 

Maj professor

Date May 7’ 1976

 

0-7639

 

 

ABSTRACT

LAND USE PLANNING-FIRE MANAGEMENT RELATIONSHIPS AND
NEEDS IN THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE

BY
Richard J. Barney

This study, covering the western Forest Service
regions including Alaska, was designed (1) to identify
existing land use planning-fire management relationships
including policy, direction, and guides at various organi-
zational levels; (2) to identify critical decisions and
determine requirements for integrating fire management into
the land use planning process at all levels; and (3) to
recommend inputs which can be used to modify the land use
planning procedures to include and integrate appropriate
fire management considerations. In approaching the first
objective, a thorough review was made of pertinent legis-
lation, the Forest Service manual, regional manual supple-
ments, and other appropriate guidance. Formal interviews,
using a normative forecasting technique, PATTERN (Planning

Assistance Through Technical Evaluation of Relevance

Richard J. Barney

Numbers), two relevance trees, and three planning situations
were made on 68 random locations to address the second
objective. The planning situations included an urban/forest
interface area, a well developed forest area and an
undeveloped area. Finally, the third objective was
approached using a standard question series at the close of
each interview session under part 2.

The general and fire relevance trees used in this
study were basically structured decision networks, in two
dimensions. In the general relevance tree, one dimension
dealt with forest resource potential considerations and the
second dimension involved various site factors and forces of
the basic natural resource. The fire relevance tree con—
sidered fire management factors in one dimension and fire
behavior factors in the second dimension. Resultant
relevance scores from either tree reflected respondents'
attitudes about the relative importance of specific factors
for each planning situation. A

Results indicate a general lack of specific unifying
national direction. There also is a dearth of land use
planning-fire management integration process advice; this
has resulted in a wide range of land use planning competence.
Expressed needs for the integration process range from "how-
to" and "state-of—the-art" papers to sophisticated studies

and field consultation.

Richard J. Barney

Results further indicated that in all problems and
for each relevance tree (general and fire), 25 percent of
the adjusted relevance scores accounted for at least 50
percent of the entire relevance tree values. Only a few
combinations of factors, site factors and forces, resource
potential, fire management, and fire behavior, for each
respective relevance tree maintained a consistently high
(top five) ranking between regions. These combinations
were: V

Political and Social Forces/Recreation

Political and Social Forces/Esthetics

Management Practices/Timber

Prevention/Fire Danger

Prevention/Time of Year
Only Prevention/Fire Danger were common to more than one of
the planning situations. Data pooling tended to mask
differences both between and within organization levels and
positions. The relevance trees, quartile diagrams, and
other stratifications provide a depiction of the respond-
ents' concepts of the importance of factors considered.

Respondents provided data for a series of relevance
trees that isolate significant interactions of site factors
and force-versus-resource potential, and fire management
factors-versus-fire behavior factors. Forest Service
personnel at three levels have developed functional relation-

ships for an array of factors for three planning situations.

Richard J. Barney

These results provide a simple quantitative means to assess,
in part, the relative importance of selected factors in the

planning process.

LAND USE PLANNING-FIRE MANAGEMENT RELATIONSHIPS AND

NEEDS IN THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE
by

Richard J. Barney

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Forestry

1976

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is with sincere appreciation that I acknowledge
the assistance of the U.S. Forest Service. Special notice
should be made of Dr. James E. Lotan, Program Manager, for
his continued financial, professional, and personal support
of this study; and William C. Fischer for promoting my
educational program during his tenure as my project leader.
Toni Rudolph deserves special credit; for without her
programing expertise the analysis could not have run so
smoothly. Louis T. Egging, systems analyst, and Michael A.
Marsden, statistician, are acknowledged for their analysis,
programing, and statistical advice respectively.

Von J. Johnson, North Central Forest and Range
Experiment Station, East Lansing, Michigan, provided support,
facilities, and continued encouragement while I attended
Michigan State University.

The respondents who participated at all levels
throughout the U.S. Forest Service are also noted; for
without their cooperation the study could not have been
completed.

Because of her excellent typing, editing, helpful

suggestions, and diligent efforts in meeting deadlines,

ii

Darlene Stefani, my typist, deserves a special thank you.
Without her patience, my efforts would not have reached the
printed page so smoothly.

Dr. Victor J. Rudolph, my major professor, is hereby
gratefully recognized for his direction and encouragement,
all of which made my return to school after many years
absence from the academic community a much more tolerable
and rewarding experience. The remaining members of my
graduate committee, Drs. J. James Kielbaso, Donald I.
Dickmann, and M. Rupert Cutler contributed much appreciated
counsel and assistance.

Lastly but by no means least sincere recognition
must go to my family for putting up with my absence during
the period of both academic and research activities. To
both my boys, thank you for your understanding and patience
when I didn't respond to your needs. To my wife Marilyn,
especial thanks for her continued patience, support, and
encouragement without which I could not have made it through
to this point.

To those not specifically mentioned but involved

with the study a sincere thank you, one and all.

RJB

iii

PREFACE

This study was conceived and planned as an integral
part of the U.S. Forest Service Fire in Multiple Use Manage-
ment Research, Development, and Application Program. The
Research, Development, and Application (RD&A) Program is
located at the Northern Forest Fire Laboratory, Missoula,
Montana. Because of the servicewide responsibility of the
RD&A the study was originally designed to cover all regions
of the U.S. Forest Service as well as the Washington, D.C.
headquarters. However, because of economic constraints it
was necessary to restrict study efforts to the Western
Regions including Alaska.

It is sincerely hoped that at some future time the
attitudes of staff members of the Eastern Regions, Forest
Service Regions 8 and 9, as well as the Washington Office,
can be sampled and analyzed. This continuation would allow
the servicewide comparisons originally envisioned. Although
the study has been revised in sc0pe, the sample to date
provides a representative analysis of the Western Regions.
Information gained will be another part in a continued
effort to improve the integration of fire management into

land use planning.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . .

Land Use Planning . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fire Management . . . . . . . . . . . . .

METHODS O I O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O 0

Policy, Direction, and Guideline Review .

Critical Land Use Planning Decisions and Needs

Sample Size . . . . . . . . .
Relevance Tree Structure . . .
Interviews . . . . . . . . . .
Conversion of Raw Scores . . .
Average Relevance Tree for Each Decision

Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Needs Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Legislation and Related Guidance . . . . .
Legislation . . . . . . .

Forest Service Manual an Advice . . . .
Regional Manual Supplements and Advice .

Critical Planning Decisions . . . . . . .
Sample Description . . . . . . . . . . .

Participants . . . . . . . . . .
Geographic Distribution . . . .
Respondent Characteristics . . .
Forms Used . . . . . . . . . . .

Page

21

21
22

31
32
35
42
45
47
48
48
48
61
67
73
73
73
74

74
81

Relevance Trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Situation 1 - Forest/Urban Interface Area
Situation 2 - Well—Developed Forest Area .
Situation 3 - Undeveloped Forest Area . .

Needs Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Planning Needs I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Category 1 - State-of-the-Art and "How-to"
Papers, Consultation . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Category 2 - Economic Evaluation, Benefit-Cost
Ratios, Trade-offs, Alternative Evaluations,
Value Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Category 3 - Prescribed Burning, Fire Use, Smoke
Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Category 4 - Management Practices, Fire
Ecosystems, Trade-off Relationships . . . . .
Category 5 - Fire Effects, Including Control
Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Category 6 - Fire Management, Fire Control, Fire
Behavior, Fire Danger Rating, etc. . . . . . .
Category 7 - Information Storage and Retrieval
Systems, Including Data . . . . . . . . . . .
Category 8 - Fuel Prediction and Inventory
Procedures, Fuel Management . . . . . . . . .
Category 9 - Feedback, Evaluation, Review
Procedures and Processes . . . . . . . . . . .
Category 10 - Computer Hardware, Software,
Analysis, and Display Procedures . . . . . . .
Category 11 - Hazard Evaluation, Fire
Probabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Category 12 - The Role of Fire, Fire Ecology . .

Accuracy Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Review, Response, and Literature . . . . . . . . .

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Legislation and Related Guidance . . . . . . . . . .
Critical Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Needs Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LITEMTURE CITED 0 O O O O C O O O O O O O O C O O O 0

General References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Page
85
85
89
96

103
116

117

118

119
120
122
123
125
126
127
128
129

130
131

132
135

137
139
141
145
149

157

Page
APPENDICES
Appendix

A. List of Regions and Randomly Selected Forests
Contacted for Interviews . . . . . . . . . . 159

B. List of Randomly Selected Ranger Districts
Contacted for Interviews . . . . . . . . . . 161

C. Definitions of Terms as Used in the Relevance
Trees I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O 165

D. Relevance Tree Identifier and Profile Codes . 170

E. List of First- and Second-Level Entries in the
Category "Other" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

F. Combined Data, Relevance Tree Summary . . . . 175

G. Combined Data, Relevance Tree Summary - All
Positions Except Fire Management . . . . . . 182

H. Combined Data, Relevance Tree Summary - Fire
Management Positions Only . . . . . . . . . 189

I. Region 1, Combined Data, Relevance Tree
summary 0 O O O O O I C C O O O I O O O O O 196

J. Region 2, Combined Data, Relevance Tree
Sumary O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O 203

K. Region 3, Combined Data, Relevance Tree
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

L. Region 4, Combined Data, Relevance Tree
sumary O O O O O O O O C O O O I O O O O O 217

M. Region 5, Combined Data, Relevance Tree
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224

N. Region 6, Combined Data, Relevance Tree
summary 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 23]-

0. Region 10, Combined Data, Relevance Tree
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1. Region Size and Sample Relationships . . . . . . 75

2. Summary of Respondent Characteristics by
Organizational Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

3. List of Respondent Positions Specified in the
Category "Other" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

4. Summary of Forms Used by Situation and
Organizational Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

5. Distribution of Situation Order . . . . . . . . 84

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure
1. Land Use Planning Hierarchy in the U.S. Forest
Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Fire Management and Land Use Planning
RelationShipS O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O
3. General Land Use Planning Relevance Tree . . .
4. Fire Management Relevance Tree . . . . . . . .
5. General Relevance Tree Matrix with Site
Factors and Forces in First-Order Position
(Form 1) O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
6. General Relevance Tree Matrix with Resource
Potential in First-Order Position (Form 2) .
7. Fire Relevance Tree Matrix with Fire Manage-
ment Factors in First-Order Position
(Form 3) O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O
8. Fire Relevance Tree Matrix with Fire Behavior
Factors in First-Order Position (Form 4) . .
9. A Completed Relevance Tree Matrix . . . . . .
10. The Calculated Adjusted Relevance Scores for
Figure 9 O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O 0
11. Sample Stop Locations . . . . . . . . . . . .
12. Forest Service Regions and National Forests .
13. Situation 1: Average General Relevance Tree

Quartile Ranges for All Data Combined . .

ix

Page

12

18

25

27

33

34

40

41
43

44
76
77

90

Figure Page

14. Situation 1: Site Factors and Forces and
Resource Potential Pooled Average and
Organizational Level Relevance Scores . . . . 92

15. Situation 1: Average Fire Relevance Tree
Quartile Ranges for All Data Combined . . . . 93

16. Situation 1: Fire Management and Fire Behavior
Pooled Average and Organizational Level
Relevance Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

17. Situation 2: Average General Relevance Tree
Quartile Ranges for All Data Combined . . . . 97

18. Situation 2: Site Factors and Forces and
Resource Potential Pooled Average and
Organizational Level Relevance Scores . . . . 99

19. Situation 2: Average Fire Relevance Tree
Quartile Ranges for All Data Combined . . . . 101

20. Situation 2: Fire Management and Fire Behavior
Pooled Average and Organizational Level
Relevance Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

21. Situation 3: Average General Relevance Tree
Quartile Ranges for All Data Combined . . . . 105

22. Situation 3: Site Factors and Forces and
Resource Potential Pooled Average and
Organizational Level Relevance Scores . . . . 108

23. Situation 3: Average General Relevance Tree
Quartile Ranges for All Data Combined . . . . 109

24. Situation 3: Fire Management and Fire Behavior
Pooled Average and Organizational Level
Relevance Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

INTRODUCTION

In August 1973 a charter was signed by John McGuire,
Chief of the Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

This charter formally established the Fire in Multiple Use

 

Management Research DevelOpment and Application Program
(RD&A) (USDA 1973b). Development of this program was one
response of the Forest Service to a growing concern on the
part of land managers to do a more professional job of
managing land. This agency, like others responsible for
public land management, is moving into a period in which
fire, under careful controls, will be used to manage various
forest and rangeland ecosystems to meet public demands. The
program, which is located at the Northern Forest Fire
Laboratory, Missoula, Montana, has three major goals as
follows (USDA 1975a):
1. Define the role of fire in forest and
range ecosystems;
2. Develop methods for incorporating fire manage-
ment into land management plans;
3. Apply and evaluate fire management alternatives
on National Forests.

It is the second goal towards which this study is directed.

Currently land use planning policies and directions
are described in the Forest Service Manual, Section 8200
(USDA l975e). Although general approaches are indicated,
there is no apparent universal nationwide method or system.
Each Region, Forest, and sometimes District or planning area
uses its own approach to accomplish the planning job. Some
local adaptation is often necessary as well as desirable,
however, too much resulting variability makes development of
procedures with nationwide applicability extremely difficult.
More universal procedures seem desirable to better integrate
between various adjacent planning boundaries at all manage-
ment levels.

Apparent lack of universal land use planning proce-
dures and approaches makes servicewide integration of new
considerations as well as universal data management diffi-
cult. Fire is an extremely difficult consideration to weave
into planning because there is no established or uniform
procedure for doing so. In some planning areas, forests, or
pianning units, fire is such an important factor that it
becomes necessary to examine and consider a great many
intertwining factors related to fire management when con-
structing a land use plan. Fire control, fuel management,
fire prevention, and fire use--a11 must be recognized as
interrelated activities directed to meet land management

goals.

Fire, like many other environmental forces, cuts
across traditional functional management boundaries. As a
result it often produces complex chain reactions in planning
and determining environmental impacts, alternatives, and
direction.

Planners need to be able to establish specific fire
influences and how sensitive these influences are to the
various socioeconomic and ecologic decisions the land
manager makes. Questions such as the following should be
addressed in a forest plan: How much fire control is
needed? How capable are existing and predicted fire control
forces? What are some of the relationships between fuel
reduction or treatment and fire control? Forest planners
must be able to integrate fire management objectively,
systematically, uniformly, and consistently if planning is
to be comprehensive and a truly viable management tool. No
procedure(s) or system(s) can be adequately designed to
satisfy user needs without a thorough understanding of those
needs (Gerlach 1974).

Researchers and managers need auxiliary aids to
isolate key elements in management decisions that affect
land use-fire management planning. One basic underlying
premise here is that fire management and land use planning
decisions significantly influence present and future land
management and use patterns. Therefore, any program

designed to deal with future land use management should

first isolate the most relevant features in the decision-

making processes that affect that land use and fire manage-

ment considerations.

The objectives of this study are:

1.

To identify existing land use planning-fire
management relationships including policy,
direction, and guides at the various levels in
the National Forest System of the U.S. Forest
Service.

To identify critical decisions and determine
information requirements for integrating fire
management into the land use planning process at
all levels.

To recommend inputs which can be used to modify
the land use planning procedures to include

and integrate appropriate fire management

considerations.

This study was based on a sample taken from through-

out the western regions of the USDA Forest Service National

Forest System. Contacts were made in each western regional

office, and the forests and ranger districts in each of

these regions. At each organizational level, available

personnel in fire management, land use planning, timber,

range, watershed, wildlife, recreation management, and State

and Private Forestry or other functional areas were

contacted.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Land Use Planning

 

Man has been "studying" land use, especially as it
relates to agriculture, for centuries (Curtis 1975). Land
use and land use planning have become an ever—increasing
issue of concern and interest since the environmental move-
ment of the early 1960's. The National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA) added emphasis to this topic with its
restrictions and directives. In the early 1970's, the
Public Land Law Review Commission (PLLRC) delivered its
extensive report on the nation's public lands. As one
portion of this report, an entire chapter was devoted to
land use planning (PLLRC 1970). This chapter made no less
than 15 specific recommendations relative to land use
planning and the nation's public lands. During the evolu-
tionary period of the 1960's, Cahart (1961) published a book
on wildlands planning, which although rather general,
identified a series of relevant planning issues. This work
was sponsored by several national natural-resource-related
organizations.

The literature is very profuse on the broad tOpic

of land use planning. Admittedly much of the planning

information revolves around urban problems. Nevertheless
the processes and principles expanded upon are applicable to
other areas of land use planning. One author produced a

classic text, entitled Desiganith Nature (McHarg 1969),

 

which emphasized the protection of the natural processes in
land use planning. The League of Women Voters of the United
States (LWV) has also taken land use as one of its primary
action commitments (LWV l975b), further illustrating wide-
spread interest. The "League" has also developed a position
statement on land use (LWV l975e). One of these statements
covers the need to "foster coordinated planning and manage-
ment of land resources by all levels of government." The
LWV has taken an additional step by producing a series of

Land Use Letters covering land use tOpics ranging from

 

national forests to available land use literature.

The federal government has also published numerous
documents on land use and land use planning. One example
entitled Land Use, states: "To define and achieve good use
of land may well be the most fundamental of all environ-
mental objectives . . . . But the issue of proper land use
is as complex as it is fundamental" (Council on Environmental
Quality 1974). The Water Resources Council, in response to
Congressional direction, developed principles and standards
for planning water and related land resources (Water
Resources Council 1973). These standards have become a

basic reference for other federal agencies.

In a speech, former Secretary of the Interior Rogers
C. B. Morton (1975) stated:
We can no longer tolerate the inefficient use and
wastefulness of our precious finite resources, and no
longer can we tolerate a neglect of our renewable
resources . . . . There is a role in land use planning
and land use implementation for the federal government,
for the state government, and for local government.

His position is one example of past interest at the

Washington level.

Duerr et_al. (1975) indicate that planning is the
process and plans are the outcome. They define a land use
plan as one that

depicts the way land may be allocated during a future
period and explains the objectives sought, the expected
flow of services, the projects needed to implement the
plan, the costs and benefits, and other matters, in-
cluding an environmental impact analysis, especially
when one is required by law.
They go on to note that generally land use planning tends to
establish a pattern of single use within zones and multiple
services within the planning unit as a whole. Curtis (1975)
has indicated that land use decisions are too critical to
our total environment to leave to the motivations of various
interest groups. Such decisions are long term and often
establish patterns that can endure for generations. He
recommended that a systematic and interdisciplinary approach
must be develOped for and communicated to those policy-

planning and decisionmaking processes which affect all

aspects of the environment.

In his discussion of policy analysis, Clawson (1975)
sets five criteria which he suggests must be considered in
any discussion of forest policy. His criteria, which also
appear apprOpriate for land use planning, are as follows:

--Physical and biological feasibility and

consequences

--Economic efficiency

--Economic equity

--Social acceptability

--Operational practicality

In considering uniformity of procedures, Zivnuska
(1961) stated, "Decisions affecting the multiple use of
forest land cannot be made by standard formulas or rules
learned by rote." This thesis is further supported by
Reilly (1973) who said, ". . . it is impractical to recom-
mend one approach or combination of approaches to encourage
more competent and consistent planning . . . . Needs and
Opportunities vary widely from place to place." Still
further support of this same position was made by Kaiser and
Reichert (1975) when they stated, "There is no single
inherently correct planning process to define land use
problems, establish objectives, design alternatives and
assess consequences." These references seem to give fairly

broad-based support to the issue that there is no "one

system for land use planning.

Decisionmaking and the decision process has volumes
written about it. However, in respect to the Forest Service
and land use decisions, two interesting comments were found.
In his recent book, Robinson (1975) had an appropriate
quote: "The web of decisionmaking events is so intertwined
that in most cases it is more reasonable to say decisions
emerge from the Forest Service rather than that they are
made in some definable office." Libby (1974) said, "Planning
and related resource-use decisions actually are a 'muddling
through' process . . . not a unidirectional, goal-oriented
procedure."

In addition to the wide interest expressed in land
use planning mentioned earlier, numerous symposia attest to
this interest. One such symposium was reported in the
Natural Resources Journal (1975) covering a range of land
use topics. The Society of American Foresters dedicated
their entire 1973 national convention to the tOpic of land
use planning. The proceedings of this meeting contain many
papers on forestry-related land use planning topics (Society
of American Foresters 1974).

Recently the Western Forestry and Conservation
Association (WFCA) developed a set of basic forest-land use
principles especially for planners (WFCA 1975). These
principles, developed by the basically industry-oriented
organization, detailed the necessity for continuing consid-

eration of long-term forestry needs in planning. In total,

10

15 principles were enumerated along with clarifying remarks.
The WFCA did, however, make a strong point that planning and
plan implementation are two very distinct and separate
processes.

Since 1975, the U.S. Forest Service has shifted from
multiple use planning to land use planning. The general
direction is found in the 8200 Section of the Forest Service
Manual. The current system is said to be essentially an
extension of the old multiple use system (Robinson 1975).

He indicates that the most important contribution of the new
system lies in the more substantial, more direct involvement
of interdisciplinary skills. He also believes that under
the old multiple use system, one major difficulty was in the
integrating of various components of the functional plans
(i.e., fire, timber, and transportation plans). The problems
of functionally oriented plans have also been discussed by
others. Hartgraves (1974) stated that past approaches to
land planning that placed separate emphasis on the various
land uses were becoming less adequate. According to Carder
and Oglesby (1973), Forest Service managers are problem
solvers working with complex dynamic systems and processes.
Many problems they face are ill-defined and transcend

functional and administrative boundaries.

11

The Forest Service Manual, Section 8200, states:
The purpose of land use planning for the National Forest
System is to develop ways to achieve Forest Service
objectives in the most efficient and effective manner
. . . . Any planning activity of the Forest Service must
be done within the context of national Forest Service
objectives and targets as a principal direction in
developing alternatives for actions or reaching
decisions.
The overall National Forest land management goal is to
Optimize public benefits from the public land while main-
taining its long-term productivity (Hartgraves and Moore
1974). These authors indicate that to meet this overall
goal, three major planning objectives must be attained:
-—Determine how the forest-land base CAN be used
--Determine how the forest-land base SHOULD be used
--Determine how the forest-land base WILL be used
Although the manual provides general planning guidance,
methods must be develOped locally. Various Forest Service
planning teams have put together local procedures. Some of
these teams have prepared formal documents; others have not.

One example of a published procedure is a report entitled

Land Use Planning, prepared by the Sandpoint Zone Planning

 

Team of the Idaho Panhandle National Forests. This document
covers in detail how the planning process works in that
area. To illustrate the whole planning spectrum in the
Forest Service, Figure 1 provides a generalized diagrammatic

look at the planning hierarchy.

12

.wofi>umm ammuom .m.D on“ CH hsoumumfln mcflccmam om: psmqll.H musmwm

.mnma .mo .msouo mcfiuompsm
new .mcflccmam .mcfiEmumoum H coamwm .mow>umm ummuom «om: "wouSOm

 

 
  

\\ \‘

Iiitnuttit mz<ras.z=
_ 25:5: Tfiozé 8.5m; nHHHHHI N 2:; -22: mm: oz: 5:81
_ d A a
_ 2:8: recital? SEE “HHHHHIH :5: -22: mm: 3:: SEE: 4
_ a L a
_ 25.8: T5322 220.0: IHHHHHHHF m3: 2;: Sig .323 Eil—
I

A

 

 

 

\
+-----

 

 

\\
_mezpsmmxw mo; E<moomm 4<h2m220m_>2m _ — mmapzuuxh mod xmogm2<mu _
‘

A/ \
, \\
l/If \\

_ mute—Lo... $295330: 52.23.84 A

 

>=O¢<¢u=— 02—22(4fl

13

In addition to general procedures, the Forest
Service has developed a series of computer programs to
assist in planning. Examples are: Timber RAM, Timber
Resource Allocation Method; RCS, Resources Capability
System; WRIS, Wildland Resource Information System; and
FOCUS, Fire Operational Characteristics Using Simulation.
They also use INVEST-III which is a benefit-cost program for
quantitatively examining alternative resource programs.
Although some of these resource-allocation models presently
offer the best solution to multiproduct output decisions on
Forest Service lands, they do not incorporate the important
policy issues involved in setting the appropriate production
goals (Whaley 1970).

Perhaps the most significant document concerned with
land use planning in recent times is the Forest and Range-
land Resources Planning Act of 1974 (hereinafter referred to
as RPA). This act by Congress may well have more impact on
the Forest Service than did NEPA. Greenfield (1975) in his
article on the Forest Service and RPA indicated that the
only way public lands could be effectively managed was with
public inputs at all levels of the management process.

Under RPA the process of planning is accelerated because of
the rigid timetable imposed by Congress. The agency will
now be accountable for achieving those management objectives
approved, or set, by Congress. RPA will further provide

data and trade—offs to allow Congress and resource managers

14

to consider the many needed-but-unimplemented programs. RPA
provides a new direction towards rational resource manage-
ment and total land use planning. In its response to
Congress and RPA, the Forest Service prepared three detailed
documents, covering an assessment of the nation's renewable
resources, a program for these resources with an environ-
mental statement, and a summary of both documents (USDA

Forest Service l975f,h,i).

Fire Management

 

Since this study deals not only with land use
planning but also with fire management, it seems appropriate

to first define the term. The term fire management is being

 

used on an ever-increasing basis. The evolution of the term
is unclear. There are numerous different concepts as to
what it is. To illustrate how some of the existing defini-
tions vary, several published versions read as follows:
Fire management is not striking at fires at all times
and all places. Neither is it simply letting fires
burn. It is a planned program for managing the energy
conversion requirements of wildland fuels. It combines
smoke management, fuel conversion, fire control and a
systematic contribution to qualify land management
(USDA Forest Service 1972a).
In December 1971, the Southwestern Interagency Fire
Council (SWIFCO) presented a symposium in Phoenix, Arizona,
entitled "Planning for Fire Management." In the published

symposium proceedings (SWIFCO 1971), there were two

definitions of fire management, which are worth repeating to

15

further illustrate the diversity of definition. In his
keynote address, Ed Schultz, Deputy Chief Administrator for
the USDA Forest Service, said: "Fire management . . .
includes fire suppression, presuppression, fire prevention,
detection, fuels management, and the necessary planning to
accomplish these tasks efficiently and safely." Another
definition by Neil T. Skill who discussed the fire manage-
ment planning process in Oregon stated: "Our major concern
in recent years has been oriented toward fire management;
that is, the direction and control of fire control
resources."

The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land
Management, Washington Office, in a illustrated report
entitled "Fire Training - A Report" (USDI 1973), provided
two definitions which are germane to this tOpic: "(1) fire
control - includes suppression, fire readiness, and preven-
tion; (2) fire management - beyond fire control, includes
implication of the fire program as it impacts and relates to
natural resource program."

This author has also developed a definition of fire
management which is used throughout this report (Barney
1975). Specifically, the definition is: "Fire management -
the integrating of fire-related biological, ecological,
physical, and technological information into land management

to meet desired objectives."

16

In the Fire in Multiple Use Management Research,
Development, and Application Charter (USDA 1973), the first
statement under the problem definition is: "Fire is not
fully integrated into the multiple use planning process."
Forest Service Chief John McGuire (1975) said:

Fire management cannot be separated from total forest
management. It must always be considered in land use
planning . . . . we are now realizing that lack of land
use planning can be far more devastating than any forest
fire . . . . fire management must be included in our
land use plans. I view fire as an equal environmental
component-~aldng with soil, air, water, land, and life
forms . . . . Fire managers must constantly insure that
fire is considered an equal component in forest

ecology . . . .

One of fire management's strongest advocates, W. R. "Bud"
Moore (1974) added additional support when he wrote:
Fire has to be integrated more thoroughly into land use
planning, beginning with the land capability inventories
and culminating in the prescriptions for managing fire
in each land unit . . . . All present-day fire knowledge
should be converted to operational guidelines, proce-
dures, and policies.
In their wildfire prevention analysis, three federal
agencies stated:
. . . comprehensive land use planning must be applied to
abate both risk and hazard . . . . Presently there are
few examples of coordinated land use planning systems
which include fire safety measures (USDA Forest Service
32 31. 1975).
In his challenge to trainees at the Forest Service Advanced
Fire Management Course, Resler (1975) stated: "The major
objective of this course is to integrate scientific concepts

and operational tools into fire management and land use

planning."

17

The preceding paragraphs are only a sample of the
comments, support, and expressed need to integrate fire
management and land use planning.

One approach for blending fire management and
planning is illustrated by Figure 2 (USDA Forest Service
l975a). The upper portion of the diagram above the fire
management block could be considered the objective-
formulation phase. It is at this point where land capa-
bilities and use demands are assessed. Key values are
identified as well as their relationship to fire. Below the
fire management block, the fire integration phase begins by
assessing fire danger or hazard for the planning area.
Included throughout this phase is the prediction of changes
relative to fire caused by any preposed management action or
alternative. Fire management considers possible alternatives
for fuels management as well as necessary fire control and
suppression. The assessment of benefits and damage resulting
from any proposed action can feed back to reshape planning
direction and emphasis, or it can support the use decision
made initially.

Although firm support has been voiced for the
integration of fire and land use planning, this was not done
without some cautions. In a recent Canadian research
article, this statement was made:

Fire management has to be based on both sound principles
and detailed knowledge of what fire means to specific

vegetation types in their varied geOgraphical, topo-
graphic, and climatic settings (Anon. 1975).

18

HZuEmmumma.
:1ng w mu<é<o

.mmflnmcofiumawn unaccmam mm: cam

      

  

 

my

 

H can unmeommcme wuHmII.N musmwm

 

bzfzmmmmmar

HINZwm a wo<2<o

 

 

  

20.2553

 

 

.

WIIIII/

«mom: ‘

 

fly: aozfi awo<sa<I_ _zo_pumawo_ mmo_L2w>wxa_

. u a

zo_mmmmmm:m

 

w Lompzou mm:

  

mm: numEQmwmm

IIH
E<u_ooEc.m
.B<u_zmxu
.E<U_z<x0wz

III.

 

 

 

 

H2m2w0<z<2 :3“.

 

 

TA

 

T
N

:

_.—.Zu$_u0<2<2 WET. _“

I; xu<mnw$ v

 

 

 

 

IF
—mo_::~mm<_ _:_._o:>) _ mmwzzmm:3_ _amxm

HI
awaaz _ —Loz<m _ muflmp<maowm_ fiwwm2_mg
: + . +

 

 

 

 

?Z_ZZ(JI mm: OZ<._iI_

 

:32— 8.3:;

19

In his remarks at a fire symposium, Connaughton (1970)
indicated we must learn the limits and potentials of fire.
We must know how to use fire. There is a real need to study
and learn the power and potential of fire as a tool. In his
judgment, this fact transcends in importance the need for
research in any other phase of fire activity: ". . . we
can't take liberties and gamble with fire, no matter what
the intent."

Several attempts have been made to initiate proce-
dures for the integration of fire management into land use
planning. One such example was develOped by the Washington
Office of the Forest Service (USDA Forest Service 1974a).
Although primarily a list of questions, it does provide a
point for reference. The Northern Region of the Forest
Service has also developed a brief guide which directs
planners to additional information sources (USDA Forest
Service l975b). Even individual planning team members have
tried to develOp aids for integrating fire into planning
(Kenops 1975). These aids too are searching for a solution
to the problem. Each effort, although not complete, does
add some information. A more specifically oriented procedure
was prepared for the White Cap Wilderness Fire Management
Study Area (Aldrich and Mutch 1974). Generally, a majority
of the planning-fire-related work of recent years has been

directed towards wilderness fire management. A recent

20

selected and annotated bibliography with 80 references,
directed towards wilderness fire managers attests to this

fact (Baker 1975).

The following quote by now-retired Forest Service
fire expert W. R. Moore (1970) appears to be appropriate to

this literature review:

I look forward to the day when management plans for all
lands--Federal, State, and private--will recognize land
capability and limitations, delineate key values in
descending order of importance, and contain fire manage-
ment direction statements for each unique geoqraphical
management unit. Only then will we know specifically
what we're trying to do with the land and how fire
management can fully support land management objectives.

Perhaps others involved with forest land use planning can

agree with Moore's statement and also look forward to "that"

day.

METHODS OF STUDY

Research activity was divided into two distinct
parts coinciding with study objective requirements outlined
in the preceding pages.

Policy, Direction, and
Guideline Review

 

 

In pursuing study objective No. 1, which is to iden-
tify existing land use planning-fire management relationships
including policy, direction, and guides in the National
Forest System, current Forest Service land use planning
material was obtained and reviewed. The Forest Service
Manual, Section 8200 and amendments, was screened for fire
and land use planning materials. Regional supplements to
this section of the manual were obtained and screened.
Special Regional and Forest planning guidance materials were
also secured and reviewed as available.

Summaries of relevant policies, guidlines, and
directions were developed. Narratives were prepared to
discuss the implications of these directions. When neces-
sary or appropriate, regional planning requirements of a
unique nature were given special attention.

In addition to the above outlined material, existing

pertinent federal legislation was also reviewed for policy,

21

22

direction, limitation, and guidance. Items of both an
explicit as well as an implicit nature in regard to the
criteria above, were identified and discussed. Landmark
legislation such as the Organic Act, the National Environ-
mental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the Clean Air Act, the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and most recently the
Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of
1974 (RPA) were covered.

Review of these laws, policies, and other formal
direction was conducted to identify those areas and places
where specific impact on land use planning-fire management
was either detailed or implied. Narrative summaries by type
of document and categories of material found within were
deve10ped.

Critical Land Use Planning
Decisions and Needs

 

 

Study objective no. 2, which was to identify critical
decisions and determine information requirements for
integrating fire management into land use planning, was
approached in part by formal interviews with a selected
sample. These interviews addressed a series of basic fire
management-land use planning directed questions to gain
insight and more specific information requirements.

Discussions and interviews were conducted with
personnel in fire management, land use planning, as well as

the various functional areas (i.e., timber, range, etc.).

23

Each group and level contacted were asked to respond to
three land use planning-fire management planning situations,
asking for specific planning decisions. A normative fore-
casting procedure, PATTERN (Planning Assistance Through
Technical Evaluation of Relevance Numbers), was utilized
(Esch 1969, 1970).

Several years ago, Honeywell's Military and Space
Sciences Department developed a forecasting technique called
PATTERN, which uses a requirement (or need) oriented rele-

vance tree (Esch 1969). The relevance tree has helped

 

corporate decisionmakers identify critical technology areas
that required attention. Several other authors have also
discussed and applied this forecasting technique in indus-
trial situations (Gordon 22.2l- 1973; Jantsch 1968; Martino
1972). More recently this procedure has been applied in the
recreation field (Shafer gt 31. 1974, 1969). This latter
study was geared towards determining social and physical
site variables which were important in determining recrea-
tion resource management decisions.

Although PATTERN was originally developed and used
most extensively for planning in the military sector, the
methodology is flexible and can be applied to other subject
matter areas where decisions must be made under conditions
of uncertainty-—such as decisions to meet future fire

management-land use planning requirements.

24

Consequently it seems reasonable that PATTERN could
be used to identify the most relevant factors in resource
allocation, fire management, and land use planning decisions
that are made today but which are presumably tied to some
future expected demand for products and services. It was
assumed that if a relevance tree (or matrix) could be
constructed for fire management-land use planning and
development decisions, the results would not only provide
more useful data to managers concerning the actual mechanics
of planning, but also help pinpoint--in order of priority--
some of the important elements in the decision process where
future research may, or may not be practical and feasible.
Once developed, a relevance tree would provide a fairly
simple structure for management to assess for any given
future date, the impact of changing conditions on fire
management-land use related develOpment decisions.

The major approach for meeting the second study
objective was to construct a basic framework--or relevance
tree--within which many of the complex, interrelated vari-
ables that affect today's decisions about certain fire
management-land use planning relationships could be evaluated
on a quantitative basis. Figure 3 illustrates a general
land use planning relevance tree which served as the basis
for developing the general land use planning working matrices
discussed later. Figure 4 illustrates the relevance tree

which is totally concerned with elements of fire. This

25

.mmnu wocm>oamu vcflccmam mms wand Hmumcowlu.m wusmflm

 

       

L<¢ahmzu L<m3~<z

>Ia<moo_m>:m

        

mmopu<m u_2<z>o

mzo—u<w L<u_ooLo_m

mmo»u<u mh_m L<o_m>xm

 

 

_
r _ _ _ _ _

a u
_ mmzho fi _ mwmzxmom_§ I; _mo_hwthu _ HIIrmp<§ MN; — mu_4n4_; _ _zo_h<mmUmm_ _ moz<m — —Ilwww2_k _
_ _ — _ - _ _ _
—

_ zo_p<:~_m hmwmom mmwmo<0m _zo.H<:~_m Hmmmom ommomm>mo 44m; _ zo.p<:H_m pmmmomlz<mm3
- -

 

 

 

oz<2ua mumDOmwm L(_P2uH0m momDOmwm

 

 

    
  

5:53.... mm: 3:.—
pom—.3“.

26

 

[DYNAMIC FACTORSI

 

 

I NATURAL 1 ICULTURALfiI

I-IWEATHER POLITICAL I
-IEROSION I ECONOMIC I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lr-I INSECTS J SOCIALJ
-LDIS£ASE I CULTURAL PRACTICE I

—LWILDFIRE J
_I OTHER J —LPRESCRIBED FIRE I

 

 

 

 

 

HARVESTING PRACTICE]

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3.--(cont.)

 

.wmuu mocm>mamu ucwEmmmcmE muflmii.v ousmam

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

macho<l mmoto<u
p2m2uu<z<2 ao_><:mm
.mm_1 um_1
filllllJ wIIIIIJ - _ , - —
_ _ _ . macho<1 mmohu<1
. _ _ _ mo_><zmm h2u2mo<z<s
FIIWIIL FIIfiIIL LEE 2:

 

 

mzoiozau
fl 50.3.5 5er # 75.234352 was.—

s - w _ I

 

 

27

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F , - , - ‘
zo_h<:h_m zo_H<:H_m zo_p<:h_m
<m¢< mmmmc<om hmmmom omm04m>mo hmmmom z<mm=
HI , I _ _

 

02.2241?— um: 0214
hmmflon—

 

 

 

 

28

 

 

 

 

A.ucoovii.v mudmflm

I_zo:<::m<$¢T

!

 

 

III whom“: um:

mug—20295

 

II zoZuP—mo

III zo_p2w>mmm

IIIII

 

 
 

 

um: r

 

II 35:88
E: I
LI LT LI LT L... LI LT LI LT , it
_ _ _ _ 52:3 2: E: to :5 _ “232, _ _ :82: 32:; to
5:8 .355 :1: 252:. as: :2 I :2 5.232.. L251 :5.
_ L _ _ _ F _ h L

 

_

 

 

QCOan‘t CO.>(INI NIX—4

 

9801.014 1N3H39VNVH SUI!

29

muxpo

Ir.
4.

LT
.H.

 

 

zo:<._._.__m<:um

 

 

mhutmw
mm:

 

A.u:oovni.v musmwm

      

  

._u>u..
zo:u:o~_a

 

_

L... L\ L...
_mu_zozo°w _ _ _ _ _
I ma_1 I am: wa_1I zo__owpmo

_ _ —

MKOh0¢m P2m:m0(2(: ”I:

 

 

 

 

_

Ill muoz<o mu:

m<m> ”.0 “2:

I ~2240> Us”.
I >Zm2u—z_

I zwozs us}:

I o<ummm “.0 “:2. L

}.

zo.—2m>u¢m

mm?— 3:“.

 

 

a

4..

L.

 

uUZumznouo
mm:

 

I—

 

—

 

SBOLOVJ HOIAVHBB 38H

30

latter tree was used as the basis for developing the fire-
oriented matrix also discussed later.

Current planning activities in the U.S. Forest
Service bridge a wide variety of conditions. These planning
situations occur in a range from the well-developed, highly
populated areas such as southern California to the virtually
undeveloped vast uninhabited expanses found in Alaska. In
order to provide information which will assist in addressing
such a wide range of conditions it seemed appropriate to
develop the relevance tree decision situations covering a
similar array of conditions. Therefore three situations
were develOped to provide as broad a base as possible. The
three situations discussed in the following paragraphs
attempt to provide anchor points at each end of the spectrum
as well as one point elsewhere inbetween.

The specific planning or decision situations utilized
in the investigation were as follows:

1. Development of multiple use management programs
in a forested-urban interface area.

Such an area would range from a few sections to one
or more townships. There would be intermixed federal,
state, and private ownerships. The vegetation would be
represented by mosaics of trees, shrubs, and lesser plants.
Use would be primarily suburban residential, recreation,
open space, and limited agriculture of various forms (small
farms, houses, ranchettes, etc.). POpulation density would

range from about 0.1 to approximately 1 person per acre.

 

31

2. DevelOpment of multiple use management programs
in a highly developed forest situation.

This area would encompass several townships of
primarily single ownership (in this case federal) forest
land. Resources within the area include timber, wildlife,
range, water (watersheds and lakes and streams) and recrea-
tion opportunities. It is truly a multiple use management
situation. Generally the management leVel is already well
developed. Access is basically established. Numerous
options for management and use exist. The value of most
forest products and services is high.

3. Development of multiple use management programs
in an undeveloped roadless forest situation.

This is an area of several townships with virtually
no developed access. It could be, but does not have to be,
adjacent to a designated wilderness area. All the potential
management options outlined for the highly develOped area
exist here also. The only difference lies in the fact that

no develOpment or access exists.

Sample Size

 

Results from this segment of the study will provide
data which can be used to describe how various groups and
levels of decisionmakers react to the three hypothetical
situations about fire management-land use planning decisions.
Management functions at each organizational level were

sampled, using at least one respondent, as manpower

1.1:. il}.4.|§ ”HQ

 

32

availability permitted. Twenty percent of all national
forest headquarters were sampled randomly. Ten percent of
all the ranger districts were sampled randomly on a national
basis. A minimum sample was one interviewee regardless of
function per sample category. All available respondents
were utilized. Appendices A and B provide a complete list
of locations selected. The basic sample was then reduced to
include only the western regions, forests, and districts

including Alaska.

Relevance Tree Structure

In this study, a relevance tree was basically a
structured decision network consisting of two dimensions
(Figures 5 and Figure 6).1 One dimension dealt with forest-
resource-potential considerations that may influence a
decision about fire management-land use planning and
development. The second dimension, or cross support of the
tree, involved various site factors of the basic natural
resource. Each cell in the resulting row x column matrix
eventually received a relevance score (or percentage) from
each of n decisionmakers during personal interviews. Each
score reflects the decisionmaker's attitude about the
relative importance of forest-resource-potential considera-

tions and site factors—-as they relate to each of the three

 

1Note that Figures 5 and 6 are identical except the
axes have been reversed. The rationale for this feature is
discussed later; however, this technique was used to deter-
mine how respondents preferred to approach planning problems.

33

.AH Euomv coHuHmom umpuo
Tumufim CH moouow can mnouomw mufim spas xwuumE coup wocm>oamu HmumchTI.m ousmwm

 

 

 

p _ ~ ~ woo.» _
— _ _ ~ Jake» ~
— _ ~ ~ ~
_ ~ _ u u
u rec.- _ o o o o o o . _ .>u~uuaw. _ _
_ _ — aurro — _
_ _ _ u u
p _ _ _ o _
_ poo—n a o o o o o o o _ u¢_u _ ~
_ _ ~ 5233.? u _
a _ _ ~ ~
_ _ ~ — o u
— poo—n _ o o o o o o o — muuupuaaa ~ ~
— u _ h2w7w0«211 _ u
— _ _ _ ~
_ ~ ~ ~ o u
_ coo—u _ o o o o o o o u mu—xozouu ~ _
_ u u ~ ~
_ a _ — ~
_ _ a muudou _ o _
_ coo—u ~ o o o o o o . ~ 4<~Uom o:¢ n a
— ~ ~ Jqu—p—Jon ~ ~
— u u — _
— ~ — u o u
u poo—n ~ o o o o o o o _ manned—3 — —
~ — _ ~ ~
_ _ u u _
_ _ u ww<um_o ~ . ~
~ soc—u _ o o o o o o o u cz< n —
~ _ _ mpummzu u u
_ _ _ ~ —
_ — _ u o —
— UGO—I — o o o o o O o u ZO—WOKU — ~
_ _ ~ ~ ~
— _ a a u
— _ ~ <23<u — o ~
— voo~u u o o o o o o o a 02¢ a a
— ~ u «some n u
_ _ u a u
_ _ — >rQ<u a . ~
_ uoo.u _ o . o o o o o _ Tco_m>ra ~ ~
~ — a C2. >0040wo ~ ~
_ _ — — ~
— _ ~ ~ u u _ — ~ — .>44cu~»du>
~ ache» ~ .>E_Owam. _ mmwz u mu—pwxpmw u «mean _ wu—Jonur — zoupa u merca ~ «wax—p ~ owrxav.
_ u auxao _ Tame._x _ u _ _ oucoua ~ _ _ umcocE
II I 021 macrtqu
wh_m
«>Jddauhca ouxzam. Jdnrzuhoaouuaaomua hmwaou
00.... 0...... C... 0.. 0.. 0.. 0..
.pma.t muuaou oz. maopoat wean awe—mzou o» warm.) xusmcaa zo.»«o=ou zo.».moa uu~>aum
hzwczoamwa maul) m1u~>awbz~ z~ 0mm: um 0p m— xaou m—I» z. w1~» z" wz~»
.czszz«4n z~ Quawo~mzou mwuaok 02¢ mac»U¢u u»_m 02¢ oo. .o. o.. co.

J1~>Zkhontwucaomwa hwwaou .wcahunabm wwuh UUZq>wam zouh—moa bu~ahm~o hwUUOu 20—owa

34

 

.AN Euomv cowuwwom

 

 

 

 

AOGMOIumuww EH Hmflucmuom OOHSOmmH spas xfluums menu mocm>mamu HEHOCOOII.G onsmflm
— a — a moo—u _
a u u — Jakob _
u ~ ~ u a
n u u u u
a vac—I u o o o o o o o o o n .>u~uwaw. ~ _
u u — awxrc u a
u u n ~ ~
u u u u o H
~ too.» u o o o o o o o o o ~ wmwzaucq~r u u
u ~ ~ ~ ~
~ — — n H
u ~ ~ n o u
— voo~n a o o o o o . o o o n muuhwrbmw u n
u n u ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~
— Ocean u o o o o o o o o o a amh<r ~ ~
— ~ ~ ~ _
u u u — ~
— ~ u u o u
n lea—n ~ 0 o o o o o o o o u uu—JCJ—w _ ~
— — ~ u u
— ~ ~ n u
u — u _ o u
u acouu u o o o o o o . o . ~ 70—»<uauma ~ _
u u . u m n
u ~ ~ — u
u u ~ ~ 0 n
u 500—. ~ 0 o o o o o o o o n w02(o u u
u ~ ~ _ a
— a u ~ ~
— u a _ o u
a iooul n o o o o o o o o o o a awmI—w — ~
— u a n —
u u u — n
_ _ u _ mmo: _ u mmuaou — ~ u ~ ~ >ra<aoo ~ .5135:
~ a _ mm: _ Tucua ~ _ 443cm — ~ .3338 a _ «23.. ~ T~m>ra ~ .8113.
— ~ a>u~uwamv — owmnmum n hzuz a mu— a 024 qu — want u 024 u n 024 n 024 n 44—»2wbon
— ache» u auxho ~ luau u Iuo<241 a Ixozouw ~ nub—Jon u 004—) n mbuuwz~ a zo—woau ~ cuedu ~ >0040wo u owuasomwa
bwwacu
.>44<awb(4 owxzam. mwuaou.oz< machu<u uhum
w OUOUOQOCOOOOCOOOO 0.0... 0.. .0. .0. .0.
ohma—k 4¢~h2Uhonlwu¢Domw¢ hmwcou awo—mzou oh murmur xw.moaa zo—bcunow zo—huwoa wo~>awm
bzwozoamua mam!) m3u~>mwhzu I” cum: we o» m— :aou m~xh z— urn» 2» wxub
.czuzzmda z~ owmwoumzou mwuaou 02¢ mach0(u uhum 02¢ o.. co. co. co.
zouhnmon huuahmno hmuaou zo—owa

dcuhzwhOQIHUCDOmwa hmchL uwGDhUDahm uwah w02¢>w4wa

— ._fl-.II.W”I¥H€.

| _

 

35

decision situations outlined earlier. The basis for these
two trees was shown earlier in Figure 3. In this figure,
the general environmental items to be inventoried prior to
planning are outlined. This illustrates that specific
resource potentials, as well as demand, must be evaluated
relative to some balanced View. The underlying theme here
is the stewardship concept, which implies that one should
not demand more than the potential can provide within a
reasonable time frame. For the short run, potential could
be exceeded, but not to the point of irreversibility of
future productivity.

It should be noticed that fire is specifically
mentioned in this relevance tree. It was anticipated that
both wildfire and prescribed fire would be placed in their
relative position of importance through this phase of the
interview. All terms used in the relevance trees were
defined (Appendix C) for respondents if needed. Standard
sources were used as a basis. These definitions were

provided at each interview.

Interviews

 

First, the interviewer explained the objectives of
the study, as outlined earlier. Once this was covered, the
general procedure was outlined. A very simple example of
PATTERN using a car—purchasing exercise was presented to the
group. Care was taken to go through the sample exercise

slowly to be sure everyone understood the process to follow.

 

36

This exercise was also used to show respondents how the
"critical decision" would be determined. Before going into
the actual relevance tree exercise, all questions were
answered. Based on the response, prOper technique, and
relative ease with which respondents filled in the actual
relevance trees, this introduction was well worth the time
and effort.

All personnel participating in the study at each
stOp were assembled at one time. Respondents were addressed
in a group situation; however, each completed his or her own
relevance tree forms. By use of the group meeting, each
sample stop could be completed in one-half day. If facil-
ities were large enough, respondents remained in one room.
If, on the other hand, individual work space was not ade-
quate, each respondent returned to his or her own desk
following the opening session. The interviewer moved around
to answer any questions that arose.

Upon completion of the sample exercise and question
period the formal interview began. All decisionmakers were
generally told the following:

Consider the first planning or decision situation. We
realize that the decision process is not a simultaneous
event, and furthermore, that such a process may or may
not include all of the factors in the relevance tree
matrix (Figure 5 or 6). Decisionmakers usually treat
the decisionmaking process as a chained set of decision
events that move over time from one man or group to
another, and that include several feedback loops.
However, we are interested in your overall impression of
what factors are important in the total process of

developing--from inception to final completion of
planning for:

 

37

1. An urban/forested area development.

2. A highly developed forest area.

3. A nondeveloped (roadless) forest area.
Personnel participating in develOpment trials for the
operational forms sometimes had a tendancy to skip through
their final relevance tree in the 2-1/2 to 3-1/2 hour
session. By the same token, individuals also seemed to
develop an improved ability for filling in the forms and
responding following the completion of each relevance tree.
Therefore, the first planning or decision situation for
each session as well as the subsequent situation order was
determined on a random basis. A die was used to arrive at a
number from 1 to 6. This number indicated the initial
situation to be addressed as well as the subsequent order to

be followed.

Die Result Situation Order

 

 

ONUliwaH
N
‘
DJ
‘
HNwl-‘Nw

Separate relevance tree forms were used for each of these
three decision situations. The respondents were then told:

Starting with the forest-resource—potential or site
factors--whichever you prefer--(the column on the left)
give me your imppession of the relative weights
(expressed as a percent) each of these factors generally
receives in reaching decisions in the type of planning
situations described first--depending on the results of
the die toss. The total of all weights you assign to
the forest-potential (or site) factors in the left—hand
column should equal 100 percent. (These values are
called first level relevance scores.) It is not neces-
sary to have numbers in each cell, they may be left

 

 

38

blank. These blank cells will be treated as if zeros
had been entered. If zeros are entered in the left-hand
column (first level relevance scores), the appropriate
row will also be left blank.

Notice that the respondent was permitted to select
either the resource potential or site factors form first in
orienting his response. Intuitively, it was anticipated
that as the decisionmaking situations changed from the urban
to the develOped forest and then to the undeveloped forest
(as outlined in the three decision situations noted earlier),
decisionmakers probably would shift their initial orienta-
tion from the forest-potential influences to site features
of the landscape or the reverse, depending on the situation
sequence. Each decisionmaker was given the choice, however,
in each of the three decision situations as to which of the
two categories--resource potential or site--he wished to use
when he assigned relevance numbers to the decision tree.
Figure 5 was used when decisionmakers started with site
factors, and Figure 6 was used when decisionmakers started
with resource-potential factors.

Forest Service decisionmakers may not always be
involved in all three types of planning situations listed,
but they are generally aware of the problems involved and
certainly have impressions of what is important in such
situations. Data obtained for the first and third situation

should provide some interesting comparisons between the

different levels of decisionmakers and planners.

 

39

The second step required of each decisionmaker was:
Now consider the resource-potential or site factors
(whichever factors were not chosen initially) that are
outlined in the body of the relevance tree, and based on
your experience give me your impression of the relative
weights each of these factors generally receives within
the bounds of each of the resource-potential (or srteI
factors. The total of all weights you assign to any one
resource-potential (or site) factor should equal 100
percent. These are the second level relevance scores.
Upon completion of the first general relevance tree
interview, a second and more specific tree was addressed.
This tree revolves solely around fire considerations. It
was addressed using the same three management planning
situations. When a respondent had assessed each planning
situation, he filled out one of the two general relevance
trees and one of two fire relevance trees. Two trees (one
general and one fire) were completed for each planning
situation or six for the entire exercise. Figures 7 and 8
illustrate the two fire relevance trees. Figure 7 was used
when the respondent wanted to consider fire management
factors first and Figure 8 was used when fire behavior
factors were considered initially. As in the general
relevance tree forms, the only difference between the two
fire forms is that the axes have been reversed. Again this
was an attempt to learn how respondents approached each
planning situation and also to see if there would be a shift
in form used for the three different decision situations.

On each of the relevance tree forms completed,

specific identifier and respondent profile information was

4O

lumuflw CH muouomw

.Am Euomv coauflmom umpuo

pcwEmmmcmE muww nufls xfluumE mmuu

wocm>mamu muHmII.b musmflm

 

 

 

u _ _ ~ woo—u _
— u u _ Jcboh _
~ ~ _ ~ ~
~ tooau _ o o o o o o o o _ .>u~uunv. _ _
u n — akzrc u u
_ ~ ~ _ u
a n u . _ o ~
~ voo~n _ . o o o o o o o ~ 70_»<»~ n u
u ~ ~ 34—marua ~ _
u _ _ u _
~ ~ ~ — o _
u locun — o o o o o o o 0 ~ Mbuuukw _ ~
u u . ~ wa—u u u
~ ~ u ~ ~
~ ~ . ~ _ o —
u woo—u _ o o o o o . o o _ mu_:ozouu — u
~ ~ _ ua~u ~ a
u ~ ~ _ _
u _ ~ . ~ o ~
~ soc—u u o o o o o o o o u mm: wa—u ~ u
u u ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
u u n u o u
_ tee—n ~ . o o o o o o . ~ zouhuupwo _ ~
a a _ ~ ~
~ _ ~ u u
~ ~ ~ u o ~
— seen. u o o . o . o o o _ Du>u4 _ u
u u . ~ zo_»uu»oan ~ ~
~ ~ ~ _ ~
u u u . .~ o ~
— too—u u o o o o o o o o u zo~»2u>wao a _
_ ~ ~ ~ _
~ ~ ~ u n
n a ~ — o n
u ioouu u o o o o o o o o ~ wuzuaaruuo w _
~ _ ~ wa—u _ ~
_ _ _ u _
_ _ _ u — _ a _ . u — _ .>44¢u~»au>
n J<boh ~ .ruuuuam. u wxozm — aw62<o — a¢w> a mm)» a w1340> a >h~m u IhOZuJ u O<wanm ~ ouzxsm.
~ _ «expo. _ u ma_u ~ no wt.» ~ 4w2u u JwDE _ :2w»z~ _ wtqqu _ no wh<a ~ veepuau
. I I I I pzwyuo<z<y
. wo~u
.>44<au»<4 omxznw. machu<u mo~><Iwm wank
....... .......... .... .O. 0.. ... ..O
.52.. £683 p513}... ma: cue—mzoo 2 $22: .6 Song 22:33 2223.. . 3:53
hzwozoamwa mam!) mxwu>awhz~ z~ owm: wm o» m— Icon m—I» z— urn» Izu wx~h
.bzwxaoaw>wo uuaaomwa z— owawo—mzou machu<u thawC¢24x co. co. go. go.

uauu ozc ¢o~><1um wank «wuzhuaahm wua» u02¢>w4wa zo—»~moa buuahm~o hmwaou zouowa

.Hv Euomv cofluflmom umpuo
Tumuflm EH muouomw uoH>mnwn muflm nuHS xfluuwe moan mocm>wamu muwmii.m musmflm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H H . H H mooHn H
H H H H Jaech H
H H . . H H. H
H dcoHn H o o o o o o o o H H>uHuwam. H H
H H H ourpc H H
H H H H H
H H H H o H
H acoHu H o o o o o o o . . H uxczu H H
H H H H H
H H H H H
H H H H o H
H JQOHN H o o o o o o . o H nuordc H H
H H H unHu H H
H H H H H
H H H H o H
H poo—u H o o o o o o . o o H r¢u> H H
H r H no utH» H H
H H H H H
H H H H o H
H nooHu H o o o o o o . o H uo>H H H
H H H HEL H H
H H H H H
H . H H H o H
H dooHu H o o o o o o o o H ut:I_O> H H
H H H 4%.... H H
H H H . H H
H H H H o H
H JeoHu H o o o o . o . . o H >HH12uH7H H H
H H H H H
H H H H H
H H H H o H
H soc—u H o o o o o o o o H erzwg H H
H H H urcnu H H
H H H H H
H H H H o H
H JcOHu H o o . o o o o o H cawaoO H H
H H H ac utqo H H
H H H H H
H 4<HOH H H H H H H H Ju>w4 H H uuzu: H H>44<UHHuu>
H H H>uHumamH H 20H Ha .: H wHuwuu—w HmUH rozouw H wv: H ZOHH H ZOHH H 20H... H IZCUO H ouxxtv.
H H amrpo H IJHmcrwz H umHu H waHu H waHu H Tumec H Tuwhcaa H tzu>maa H maHu H aaoHUau
IIII ITII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I acqurua
unHk
.>44<au»<4 cwxraw. woopuqu quch<z<x waHu
....... ........ .... 0.. 0.. ... 0..
.HmaHu mzohuqu aoH>¢rwm uaHm «onmzoo o» murmH) turmoao onheuDou onHHmoa uuH>awm
Hzmczoamw: wmwrr meH>mezH zH cum: mm o» mH 110a erH 2H er» zH NIH»
.sz1a04w>wo muabomua 2H owauonzou maoHu<u szxmc«2<z .oo .o. ... .o.

uaHa oza uoH><rum waHu "was—unahm mum» m92c>wsma onHcha HuHaHmHo Hmuaou onowa

42

obtained. This information provides a means to define the
sample population. In addition this information provides a
basis by which data can be stratified for analysis.

Appendix D shows the specifics of the identifier and profile

information obtained.

Conversion of Raw Scores

 

The relevance numbers entered by a respondent in the
two categories of the relevance tree are designated figgp
and second level scores respectively, according to their
order of selection and form used.

All second-level scores within the bounds of a given
first-level category were multiplied by that first-level
category score. This procedure adjusted all second-level
scores throughout the relevance tree matrix so that their
grand total equals 100 percent. Figure 9 illustrates an
example of a relevance tree completed by each respondent.
First the left-hand column (first-level relevance score) was
filled in so as to total 100 percent vertically. Secondly
the horizontal rows were completed so each row was con-
sidered within the item in the left-hand column and to total
100 percent horizontally. These were the second-level
scores. Figure 10 illustrates the adjusted relevance scores

calculated for Figure 9.

43

_~.

 

.xfluumE menu mocm>wamu poumHQEoo ¢II.m musmflm

~~

H acoHu H
H JapoH H

 

 

 

 

H H H H .
_ 2::- H . . . . . . . . H .333. H H
H H H curse H H
H _ H H H
H H A H H . H
H 32. H . . . . I \ . . . . x H 22:: H H
H H O Q\ O N. Q\ 0m .m. 0 H Idmarua H 0\ H
H H H H H
H H H H o H
H 52» H . . . . . . . . H $8.7m H H
H H In, Ox on. O\ In. Ow. M \oW _ on: H In H
H H H H H
H H H H . H
H 52.. H . O . t4\ . Ox . Q\ . Ih.\ . 0N . O\ . ow. H mixozoou H H
H H H to: H :0 H
H H H H H
H H H H . H
H 52.. H . O\ . In. . Q\ . Ifl\ . Q\ . OK . In.\ . In\ H mm: .8: H H
H H H H Qx _
H _ H H H
H H H H . _
H 32. H . . . . . . . . H 228ch H H
_ H O O\ Q\ 0\ ow. 0\ O 0 v _ _ o x H
H H H H H
H H IW nvx nu\. H H o H
H 82.. H . . . . . . . . H din H H
H H In; Q\ OW M. .MM H 20:88?“ H ow. H
H H H H H
H H H H . H
H 2::- H . Q\ . ON . O . Q\ . Q\ . Ow. . .m. . om _ 225263 H 0w. H
H H I H H I H
H H H H H
H H H _ . H
H .32. H . . . . . . . . H wozmaaaooo _ H
_ H In. ONT Om. Q\ Q\ 0\ .M, Q\ H we: H In\ H
H H _ H H
H H H H H H H H H H H .>44«uH»aw>
_ O‘Hop H ..uHuuam. H mxoxw _ auozao _ mam) H mo)» H erase) _ >HHm H xpczms _ camaam H ouxznm.
H H airHc H H maHu H no urHH H Ewan H Bmzu H IszzH H mxabu H no qua H macHuqu
II I IIIIIIII I I II III II I H5332?
, EaHu
.Hnsaaupan oczxav. maoHo¢u aoH><xum waHu
.521 macho: ~513qu we: awe—mzoo 2 $12.. \ 5-62:. w\ 20:32: N 2228a %\uo;aum
58238.. was; 3:355 2H 83 u: S 2 x13 2.: 2; my: 5 m1:
.Hztxaonu>wo uuaaomua z. ouawo_mzoo maopuau szstoqzqz ... ... ... ...

ma: oz« «22:; ma: 6.5535 Ht: 853...; b 2223a 0 2338 O 526.. 238..

44

.m musmwm mom mmuoom mocm>meu wwumsnwm cmuMHsono mnBII.OH musmflm

 

 

 

 

H H H H
H H H H
H oocc. u H o . ammo. . mmHH. . uNmH. . ocHH. . ooHH. . cuaH. . mHUH. . :Hc«. H .aHoH ”
H H H I
H H H H
H H H H
H o u H o o o o o . c o c o o .. c . o . H H H>uHLm1mH H
H H H auIHc H
H H H H
H H H H
H POOH. u H o o o 0 2:0. o ccno. o ouHc. . oo_c. . ccnc. . of}. . .62.. H rcHHcHH H
H H H I.H«H1ua H
H H H H
H H H H
H cove. n H o . m~co. . omoo. . ccHo. . owcc. . nwco. . och. . race. . man. H DHLwHHH H
H H H uaHu H
H H H H
H H H H
H oauo. u H o o o o whoa. o cmoo. . owcc. o cho. o och. . cwcc. . Hch. H JuH..ozouu H
H H H HQHIH H
H H H H
H H H H
H cooH. n H o o ooHo. o omoo. . cch. o ouHo. . oaHo. . ccmc. . cJHc. . :u.:. H HJ: LaHH H
H H H H
H H H H
H H H H
H oooH. n H o . o . ooHo. . ccHo. . och. . oomo. . cch. . c . Hoac. H :cHHomec H
H H H H
H H H H
H H H H
H ccom. u H o . ooHo. o oomo. . coHo. . come. . come. . oecc. . cch. . noHc. H 4w>w4 H
H H H :cHHLuHcaa H
H H H H
H H H H
H comm. u r o . omwo. . ammo. . mec. . . ommc. . ammo. . acme. . mch. . ouHc. H :cH.2H>uaa H
H H H H
H H H H
H H H H
H oomH. u H o . whoa. o oono. . cwco. o och. o cmHo. . cch. . mscc. o cch. H wuzuoaruuc H
H H H LaHu H
H H H H
H H H H H . H H H H H H rnrHcau
H H HHHHumeH H H amcz«c H acH> H uo>H H u1242> H >HH¢ H Ichu; H cauzam H H7u3wc¢241
H JQHCH H meHc H wxoxm H meu H no HzHH H Juru H chu . H IzuH7H H H2<4u H no u»«2 H uaHu
vacHgnu acH>HIua.waHu
n 1aou H xHHaoaa cH onHqUDOu m onHHuca :H waH uHH>ouJ H 2cHHHmco cu HHHoHvHo c: kuoou onoua

uHaqH Hurcoon vvcou HaroH>Hc2H

 

45

Average Relevance Tree for
Each DeciSion Situation

 

 

For each of the three decision situations, an
average relevance tree was computed for all respondents by
selected groupings. This average decision structure was
developed by averaging the adjusted second-level scores (as
in Figure 10) within each cell of the tree. That is, for
each cell the sum of the adjusted scores for all respondents
is divided by the total number of respondents in the
specified grouping.

Adjusted second-level trees were averaged for each
decision situation for each of the two basic relevance
trees. In addition to a combined summary for all levels for
each situation, several other summaries and stratifications
were made. Stratifications were made by the initial entry
into the tree (e.g., forest-resource-potential or site
factors and forces). Organizational level and general
geographic area (e.g., Intermountain Region, Southwestern
Region, etc.) were also used for stratification. Compari-
sons between various summary categories were made to facili-
tate determination and explanation of possible differences.
Several forms of tabular and graphic display are used.

When relevance tree data were compiled and averaged
across all respondents, several of the respondents were
contacted a second time, explaining the average results.
This contact was made by mail providing tentative results

prior to the preparation of a final report. Respondents

 

46

were asked to review the summaries and give their impres-
sions on what the "critical" relevance score value should
be. That is, in reviewing the adjusted relevance scores,
what score and above would they establish as the "critical"
value?

Initially, a .06 value was specified as a "critical"
cell value for the following reasons. If all forest-
potential and site factor categories were equally relevant
in the 8 x 10 decision matrix, each cell would have a
relevance value of approximately .013. Therefore, those
cells that contain values of .06 or larger--that is, five
times larger than an aVerage expected value--seem to be (on
a first approximation basis) not only important features in
the decision system, but also areas where future research
might be useful and appropriate. A value of .06 was used
for the second 9 x 9 decision matrix. The .06 value was
subject to revision to correspond with impressions based on
the field response, of what may or may not be a significant
"critical" value.

Upon completion of study segments discussed above,
results were compared to establish similarities and differ-
ences. The information has been summarized and categorized
as appropriate. Results of objectives no. 1 and 2 provide
the basis for supplying input into both the Research Develop-
ment and Application Program (RD&A) develOpment as well as

provide potential source material for interim modifications

47

of planning procedures designed to include fire management
considerations when appropriate (USDA l975a). This effort
was intended to satisfy the third study objective, which was
to recommend inputs which can be used to modify land use
planning procedures to include and integrate apprOpriate
fire management conditions. An important spinoff of meeting
this final objective was to more precisely define the
problem as well as provide the RD&A with a capability of

more specifically directing its efforts.

Needs Analysis

 

In addition to the above information, three questions

were asked of all respondents:

1. What kinds of systems and support do you feel
research should provide to help you integrate
fire into land use planning?

2. What kind of accuracy and resolution do you feel
you need now? What would you like eventually?

3. When the RD&A is developing processes and proce
dures, would you feel you have the time to
respond and provide inputs as we head down the
road? Do you want to be involved? How much?

Responses were both noted and taperecorded at the time of.
each interview. Subsequently these responses were cate-

gorized and summarized.

 

RESULTS

Legislation and Related Guidance

 

Legislation

 

As indicated in the objectives and methods sections
of this report, a screening of legislation which might have
relevance to land use planning-fire management matters was
undertaken. As a result, the following laws and their
Specific passages were noted as being appropriate for inclu-
sion in this study. Following each specific reference are
comments as to the applicability and possible impact of the
specific legislation noted. The basic sources for this
information were found in the USDA Forest Service, 1974c

Agricultural Handbook, No. 453; Grad, Environmental Law,

 

1971; Schroth and Plater, Nature, Law and Society, 1974; and

 

the statutes themselves.

Organic Administration Act of 1897.--Act of June 4,

 

1897 (30 Stat. 34, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 473-478, 479-482,
551). "The Secretary of Agriculture shall make provisions
for the protection against destruction by fire and deprada-

tions upon the public forests and national forests . . . .

48

49

It appears obvious from the above segment of the
Organic Act that the Forest Service must indeed consider
fire protection as an integral portion of its management.
Because of this basic fact, fire protection must certainly
be given initial consideration in management activities,

including the planning phases.

Clarke-McNarygAct.--Act of June 7, 1924 (43 Stat.

 

653, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 471, 505, 515, 564, 565, 566,
567, 568, 569, 570).

Sec. 1. The Secretary of Agriculture is hereby

authorized and directed, in cooperation with appropriate

officials of the various States or other suitable
agencies, to recommend for each forest region of the

United States such systems of forest fire prevention and

suppression as will adequately protect the timbered and
cut-over lands therein with a view to the protection of

forest and water resources and the continuous production
of timber on lands chiefly suitable therefore (16 U.S.C.

564).

Sec. 2. If the Secretary of Agriculture shall find
that the system and practice of forest fire prevention
and suppression provided by any State substantially
promotes the objects described in the foregoing section
he is hereby authorized and directed, under such condi-
tions as he may determine to be fair and equitable in
each State, to cooperate with apprOpriate officials of
each state, and through them with private and other
agencies therein, in the protection of timbered and
forest-producing lands from fire . . . .

Sec. 3. . . . investigate and promote practical
methods of insuring standing timber on growing forests
from losses by fire and other causes.

Although the Clarke-McNary Act is primarily one of

cooperation with states in regard to fire, it does seem to

indicate that the Forest Service must be aware of fire

50

protection and its "state of the art." It must be well
versed in existing suppression systems as well as the needs
of the ecosystems involved in order to determine what
"adequate" protection is. Although perhaps not directly
related to land use planning, this legislation certainly
does have impact on fire management. As an indirect effect
then, there is an implication that the agency must be
knowledgeable regarding fire. The net result is a clearer
definition of fire and its place in the overall management

spectrum.

McSweeney-McNary Act.--Act of May 22, 1928 (45 Stat.

 

699, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 581, 581a, 581a—l, 581b-S81i).

Sec. 1. The Secretary of Agriculture is hereby
authorized and directed to conduct such investigations,
experiments, and tests as he may deem necessary under
sections 2 to 10, inclusive, in order to determine,
demonstrate, and promulgate the best methods of
reforestation and of growing, managing, and utilizing
timber, forage, and other forest products, of main-
taining favorable conditions of water flow and the
prevention of erosion, of protecting timber and other
forest growth from fires . . . .

Although not directly connected to land use planning
and fire management, Congress did recognize the need for
research in the area of fire. It is this enabling legisla-
tion that provides for fire research activities of which
this very study is an integral part. Without this support
we would be unable to develop the scientific basis for

today's forest management activities.

51

Sustained Yield Forest Management Act.--Act of

 

March 29, 1944 (58 Stat. 132, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 583-
583i).

Sec. 1. In order to promote the stability of forest
industries, of employment, of communities, and of taxable
forest wealth, through continuous supplies of timber; in
order to provide for a continuous and ample supply of
forest products; and in order to secure the benefits of
forests in maintenance of water supply, regulation of
stream flow, prevention of soil erosion, amelioration of
climate and preservation of wildlife.

Although not explicitly stated in the above passage,
it appears implicit that adequate steps in protection as
well as all other phases of fire management must be taken to
meet the obligations of this act. Such terms as continuous,
ample, maintenance, prevention, amelioration, and preserva-
tion all indicate that forethought, planning, and care are
"musts" in the management of our forest resources. Implied
here is indeed a need to integrate fire and land use
planning. Without such a "marriage," it does not appear

that the legislative conditions can be met.

Cooperative Forest Management Act.-—Act of
August 25, 1950 (64 Stat. 473, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 568C,
568d).

Sec. 1. The Secretary of Agriculture is hereby
authorized to c00perate with State foresters or appro-
priate officials of the several States, Territories, and
possessions to provide technical services to private
landowners, forest Operators, wood processors, and
public agencies, with respect to the multiple use manage-
ment and environmental protection and improvement of
forest lands, the harvesting, marketing, and processing
of forest products, and the protection, improvement,

and establishment of trees and shrubs in urban areas,
communities, and open spaces.

52

Here again, although the above act revolves around
cooperation, it seems to be implicit that fire management-
land use planning relationships must be considered. Without
a thorough understanding of the management-fire ties, one
cannot provide technical services "with respect to multiple
use management and environmental protection and improvement
of forest lands . . . and their protection . . . ." It is
important to know where fire and land use planning, along
with the eventual application and implementation, go

together.

Forest Service Omnibus Act of l958.--Act of June 20,

 

1958 (72 Stat. 216; 16 U.S.C. 502, 554b, 555, 556, 556b,
5560, 565b, 579C, 580f).

Sec. 5. The Secretary is authorized, subject to such
conditions as he may prescribe, to transfer, without
reimbursement or at such prices and upon such terms as

he may impose, to States and political subdivisions or
agencies thereof fire lookout towers and other structures
or improvements used by the Forest Service for fire
prevention or suppression purposes, and the land used

in connection therewith if such land is outside national
forest boundaries, when they are no longer needed for
such purposes . . . .

Before one can determine whether something is needed
or not, he must have a thorough grasp of just where fire
fits into the overall management program. It is incumbent
upon appropriate personnel to have a good understanding as
to what the needs and relationships are. Without this

understanding, decisions are made primarily from the position

53

of fire control and prevention for fire control and preven-
tion's sake. Therefore, one truly must have a perspective

on land use and fire relationshipss.

Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act.--Act of June 12,

 

1960 (74 Stat. 215; 16 U.S.C. 528-531).

Sec. 4. As used in this Act, the following terms shall
have the following meanings:

(a) "Multiple use" means the management of all the
various renewable surface resources of the national
forests so that they are utilized in the combination
that will best meet the needs of the American people;
making the most judicious use of the land for some or
all of these resources or related services over areas
large enough to provide sufficient latitude for periodic
adjustments in use to conform to changing needs and
conditions; that some land will be used for less than
all of the resources; and harmonious and coordinated
management of the various resources, each with the
other, without impairment of the productivity of the
land, with consideration being given to the relative
values of the various resources, and not necessarily
the combination of uses that will give the greatest
dollar return or the greatest unit output.

(b) "Sustained yield of the several products and
services" means the achievement and maintenance in
perpetuity of a high-level annual or regular periodic
output of the various renewable resources of the
national forests without impairment of the productivity
of the land. (16 U.S.C. 531)

The above act, especially Section 4(b), indicates
the necessary consideration of fire and its place in the
management of resources. Terms used here indicate that a
thorough understanding of the role of fire and its place in
the system must be recognized. To meet the above criteria,
we may or may not consider control or use of fire. Here

again there must truly be an integration between fire and

management in all respects.

54

National Forest Roads and Trails Systems Act.--Act

 

of October 13, 1964 (78 Stat. 1089; 16 U.S.C. 532-538).
Sec. 1. . . . to provide for intensive use, protection,
development, and management of these lands under prin-
ciples of multiple use and sustained yield of products
and services. (16 U.S.C. 532)

Sec. 4. The Secretary is authorized to provide for the
acquisition, construction, . . . in locations and
according to specifications which will permit maximum
economy in harvesting timber . . . and at the same time
meet the requirements for protection, . . . .

Even legislation regarding roads relates to protec-
tion which in turn can be related to fire and fire manage-
ment. If one is to consider "maximum economy in harvesting
timber . . . and at the same time meet the requirements for

protection," then certainly there must be an understanding

of fire management-land use relationships.

Wilderness Act.—-Act of September 3, 1964 (78 Stat.

 

890; 16 U.S.C. 1131-1136).
Sec. 4(d)(l). . . . In addition, such measures may be
taken as may be necessary in the control of fire,
insects, and diseases, subject to such conditions as
the Secretary deems desirable.

This act has recently been of special interest with
respect to fire. In part this is due to the fact that fires
have been "allowed to burn" in wilderness areas under a
special exception to the Forest Service 10 a.m. policy. A
special Opinion from the Office of the General Council held

that the Forest Service provisions for exceptions are

reasonable and legal. They specifically referenced the

55

2 This decision, although not a

above section of this act.
court-set precedent, may well have far-reaching implications

with regard to land use planning and fire management.

Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.--Act of October 2, 1968

 

(82 Stat. 906; 16 U.S.C. 1271-1287).

Sec. 10(a) Each component of the national wild and
scenic rivers system shall be administered in such
manner as to protect and enhance the values which caused
it to be included in said system without, insofar as is
consistent therewith, limiting other uses that do not
substantially interfere with public use and enjoyment

of these values. In such administration primary emphasis
shall be given to protecting its esthetic, scenic,
historic, archeologic, and scientific features. Manage-
ment plans for any such component may establish varying
degrees of intensity for its protection and develOpment,
based on the special attributes of the area.

The above section of this act as in several of the
previous acts could also have implications regarding land
use planning and fire management. Although protection is
the primary emphasis here, the phrase, ". . . enhance the
values which caused it to be included in said system . . ."
Opens the door for other than a strict protectionist point
of view relative to planning and fire management. Fire

could indeed play an important role in the "protection and

develOpment" of a specific area.

 

2Fowler, Richard L. 1975. 10 a.m. fire control
policy exceptions. Letter (5130 Suppression) to John R.
McGuire, Chief, USDA Forest Service.

56

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.--Act of
January 1, 1970 (P.L. 91-190); (83 Stat. 852; 42 U.S.C.
4321, 4331-4335, 4341-4347). The National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) has perhaps caused more direct and indirect
impact on management activities of the U.S. Forest Service
than any other legislation since its beginning over 70 years
ago. Section 102 of this act, reproduced in part below, has
probably the most direct effect.

Sec. 102. The Congress authorizes and directs that, to
the fullest extent possible: (1) the policies, regula-
tions, and public laws of the United States shall be
interpreted and administered in accordance with the
policies set forth in this Act, and (2) all agencies of
the Federal Government shall--

(A) utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach
which will insure the integrated use of the natural
and social sciences and the environmental design
arts in planning and in decisionmaking which may
have an impact on man's environment;

(B) identify and develop methods and procedures, in
consultation with the Council on Environmental
Quality established by title II of this Act, which
will insure that presently unquantified environ-
mental amenities and values may be given appropriate
consideration in decisionmaking along with economic
and technical considerations;

(C) include in every recommendation or report on
prOpOsals for legislation and other major Federal
actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment, a detailed statement by the
responsible Official on--

(i) the environmental impact of the proposed
action,

(ii) any adverse environmental effects which
cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented,

(iii)alternatives to the proposed action,

57

(iv) the relationship between local short-term
uses of man's environment and the maintenance and
enhancement of long-term productivity, and

(v) any irreversible and irretrievable commit-
ments Of resources which would be involved in the
proposed action should it be implemented.

Prior to making any detailed statement, the respon-

sible Federal official shall consult with and obtain

the comments of any Federal agency which has juris-
diction by law or special expertise with respect to
any environmental impact involved . . .

(D) study, develop, and describe appropriate alter-
natives to recommended courses of action in any
prOposal which involves unresolved conflicts con-
cerning alternative uses of available resources . .

(G) initiate and utilize ecological information in
the planning and develOpment of resource-oriented
projects; . . .

Section 102 of NEPA certainly spells out what must

be done for any major federal action. Major federal action

has been interpreted to include the planning process itself.

It should also be clear that any major use of fire regard-
less of the purpose must fall into the identification and
review process set forth. Alternatives and consequences of
fire use must be discussed in depth. This in turn requires
a thorough understanding of the process and its effect on

the system.

Environmental Quality_Improvement Act Of l970.--Act
of April 3, 1970 (83 Stat. 852; 42 U.S.C. 4371-4374).

. . . (d) In carrying out his functions the Director

shall assist and advise the President on policies and
programs of the Federal Government affecting environ-
mental quality by-- . . .

58

(2) assisting the Federal agencies and departments
in appraising the effectiveness of existing and
proposed facilities, programs, policies, and acti-
vities of the Federal Government, and those specific
major projects designated by the President which do
not require individual project authorization by
Congress, which affect environmental quality;

(3) reviewing the adequacy of existing systems for
monitoring and predicting environmental changes in
order to achieve effective coverage and efficient
use of research facilities and other resources;

(4) promoting the advancement of scientific knowl-
edge of the effects of actions and technology on the
environment and encourage the development of the
means to prevent or reduce adverse effects that
endanger the health and well-being of man;

(5) assisting in coordinating among the Federal

departments and agencies those programs and acti-

vities which affect, protect, and improve environ-
mental quality;

This act takes additional steps, beyond NEPA, to
insure environmental quality. It attempts to insure
implementation of environmental quality policies already
established. Here, due to feedback to the President,
support or control is perhaps more probable. As in the
other noted acts, this too has important impacts on land use

planning and fire management relations.

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970.--(3O Stat. 853; 42
U.S.C. 4332). Considering state regulations now in effect
under this act in the Pacific Northwest and other areas,
this is indeed important to land use planning and fire
management. Existing and planned use of fire comes under
the regulatory powers of this act. Depending upon local

application, fire use can be heavily restricted.

59

Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of
lgzg.--(86 Stat. 816; 33 U.S.C. 1251). As in the Clean Air
Act above, this legislation too can have serious implica-
tions relative to fire. Contemplated extensive use of fire
in planning and practice could also be affected by this act
amendment. In turn, this would affect the fire-planning

relationship in some situations.

Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning

Act of 1974.--Act Of August 17, 1974 (88 Stat. 476; 16

 

U.S.C. 1601-1610). This act may well come to have as much
or more impact on the Forest Service management system as
did NEPA. Although it is a little early to completely
assess such impact potential, the requirements of this act
could well exceed the time and energy currently required to

comply with NEPA. The Resources Planning Act (RPA) states
in part:

Sec. 2. . . . The Assessment shall be prepared not
later than December 31, 1975, and shall be updated
during 1979 and each tenth year thereafter, and shall
include but not be limited to-- . . . .

(2) an inventory, based on information developed by
the Forest Service and other Federal agencies, of
present and potential renewable resources, and an
evaluation of opportunities for improving their
yield of tangible and intangible costs and direct
and indirect returns to the Federal Government;

Sec. 3. The Program shall include, but not be limited
tO-- O O O O

(2) specific identification of Program outputs,
results anticipated, and benefits associated with
investments in such a manner that the anticipated
costs can be directly compared with the total
related benefits and indirect returns to the Federal
Government;

60

Sec. 5(b) In the develOpment and maintenance of land
management plans for use on units of the National Forest
System, the Secretary shall use a systematic interdisci-

plinary approach to achieve integrated consideration of
physical, biological, economic, and other sciences.

Sec. 8. NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM PROGRAM ELEMENTS.--The
Secretary of Agriculture shall take such action as will
assure that the development and administration of the
renewable resources of the National Forest System are
in full accord with the concepts for multiple use and
sustained yield of products and services as set forth in
the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960. To
further these concepts, the Congress hereby sets the

year 2000 as the target year when the renewable resources

of the National Forest System shall be in an Operating
posture whereby all backlogs of needed treatment for
their restoration shall be reduced to a current basis
and the major portion of planned intensive multiple-use
sustained-yield management procedures shall be installed
and operating on an environmentally-sound basis.

Sec. 9. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM.--The Congress declares
that the installation of a proper system of transporta-
tion to service the National Forest System, as is pro-
vided for in Public Law 88-657, the Act of October 13,
1964 (16 U.S.C. 532-538), shall be carried forward in
time to meet anticipated needs on an economical and
environmentally sound basis . . . .

Upon reviewing the above-quoted segments of this
act, it appears implicit that fire is one of the serious
considerations. Fire can be considered both from the
control and use standpoints. The establishment of multiple
use objectives, interdisciplinary approach, and transporta-
tion systems imply the consideration of fire both as a
management tool and from the perspective of protection.

Generally, the legislation discussed above can have
severe impacts regarding fire and the planning process. In
the more recent legislation, some specifics may have to be

decided in the courts before definitive interpretations and

applications can be made. It seems axiomatic that one be

61

aware of the legal constraints, lest he be placed in an
indefensible position by exceeding his statutory authority
as a result. Much of the direction in respect to fire and
planning is implied. Therefore, additional interpretation
and guidance are necessary for implementation. The Forest
Service Manual discussed in the following pages is one
method of interpretation and application of legislation into

implementing action programs.

Forest Service Manual and Advice

3

 

The amount and depth of coverage regarding the inte-
gration of fire into the land use planning process found in
Forest Service Manual (FSM) Section 8200 was limited (USDA
l975e). The initial reference was found in FSM 8213-9,
Functional Planning. Here the manual states that functional
plans such as Forest Fire Protection Plans "will be coordi-
nated within the overall direction of forest plans. Forest
functional plans also provide guidance to the land use
planning job by providing information on present levels and
methods of management."

This section of the manual goes on to state that:
Functional plans thus help establish current production
and potential goals for planning units. Functional
plans will contain the technical specifics on the acti-
vities and projects that implement planning decisions
. . . . Functional plans are dependent upon land use
plans for validity and basic land use allocation.
Conversely land use plans depend upon responsive

functional plans and projects for information and
implementation . . . .

62

Chapter 8220, National Forest System Land Use
Planning Procedure, goes into considerable detail explaining
the planning hierarchy and general planning procedures.

Main topics covered are Planning Area Guides, Management
Zones, Forest Land Use Plan, Forest Coordinating Require-
ments, Planning Units, Maintenance, Availability, and
Graphics. Primarily the general "what" is outlined and the
"how" is left apparently to the planner's discretion.

The first specific mention of fire comes under FSM
8226.2, Priority of Study for Planning Units. 'Here the need
to order planning units as to priority for study is covered.
Criteria are enumerated for determining this priority level.
The last item in the list is: "Critical need to reevaluate
fire, insect, and disease protection." Fire becomes one
piece of the impact to establish which planning unit should
be studied first, second, etc. In a following section, FSM
8226.41, the next reference to fire evolves. The first
words of this section state, "In order to develop a series
of alternative management plans for a Planning Unit, one of
the basic requirements is a knowledge of what things are
available to work with or use." The section goes on to
cover additional points about planning and information. It
is specifically stated that,

A search of existing data sources should always be made
before starting field inventory projects . . . . Fol-

lowing are a number of data sources useful in developing
a complete inventory for planning.

63

. . . f. Fire Prevention Plans
. . . h. Preattach fire plans
. . . k. Historical records used as:

. . . (1) Fire occurrence maps
. . . (4) Fire weather records

The foregoing items are the only explicit references
to fire in Section 8200 of the Manual. However, one might
consider fire implicit in FSM 8226.42, Environmental Poten-
tial: ". . . An understanding of the biological system with
its inherent opportunities and constraints in producing
needed products and outputs is basic to planning . . ."
Here, the role of fire, basic ecological considerations, and
the inclusion or exclusion of fire relative to management
might be considered and integrated. How the latter is to be
accomplished is still, at this point, a mute question. The
consideration of fire might further be covered in the
process of alternate plan formulation and analysis as
covered under FSM 8226.6 and FSM 8226.7, respectively. Here
too, however, there is no specific process advice and any
fire inclusion is apparently the prerogative of the planner
or planning team.

Before leaving the national level advice and guidance
on land use planning with specific reference to fire, it
seems appropriate to cover fire control and fire protection
plans mentioned earlier. In FSM 5100, Fire Control, the
need and general direction for fire control and fire planning

are outlined. In section FSM 5102, Objectives, the following

is stated:

64

The overall objective of fire control is to provide
protection to an intensity commensurate with public
safety, values, hazards, risks, and management objec-
tives involved . . . . Resource and fire control managers
will determine the maximum fire losses that can be
tolerated . . . . Probable damages to multiple use
resources and ecological systems will be considered

in determining the maximum tolerable fire loss.

Then in 5102.11—2, the manual goes on to state:

Severe fire losses have a definite impact on all
resource management plans . . . . Resource managers must
carefully weigh effects of fire and fire control methods
on management plans when considering the maximum-size
fire and annual acreage loss that can be tolerated in a
management unit.

In the next subsection, Impact 9n Multiple Use, we find

 

further fire and planning ties as follows:
Resource managers must determine the maximum-size fire
and annual acreage loss that can be tolerated without
impairing multiple use management. This figure should
be based on the resource requirements without consid-
ering the impact on fire control.

The above-quoted segments certainly begin to tie
fire and land management together. It is implied here that
the role of fire control is a function of management needs.
Although the acreage-loss criteria may not be a biologically
or ecologically realistic measure for establishing needs, it

does provide a starting point from which to depart.

Section 5106, Multiple Use Coordination, of the

 

Manual goes on to strengthen the fire and multiple use ties
with numerous references to planning coordination needs.
This section states:
The success of multiple use management is tied directly
to the degree of coordination between the various

resources and activities on each area of land in the
National Forest System . . . . Multiple Use management

65

is accomplished by providing for and carrying out the

prescribed multiple use coordination in all action

programs.
Following this statement is a series of broad coordinating
instructions for the functional areas of Range Recreation,
Timber, Watershed, and Mineral Management. Other areas
covered are coordination with land use management and forest
insect and disease control. Although perhaps limited in
sc0pe within the pages of the Manual, Regional Foresters do
have the option of expanding this section in developing
their multiple use management guides. Coordination and a
tie between fire and planning is certainly explicit in this
segment of the directives system.

The Fuel Management chapter provides additional
implicit support for integrating fire and land use planning.
Under Objectives, 5150.2, we find the following:

The objective of fuel management is to obtain fuel
conditions which permit protection forces to meet fire
control objectives established to ensure a sustained,
high level of productivity of renewable resources,
using methods which maintain environmental quality.
It would seem necessary here that to meet this objective,
fire and land managers must coordinate activities. The land
use planners and the fire managers must go through series of
give-and-take sessions to arrive at plans which are feasible.
Land managers must state their needs and fire managers the

resultant requirements. An eventual compromise will provide

the viable action.

66

Finally, in the last chapter of this section of the
Manual, 5190, Management, we come to National Fire Planning.
Objectives 1 and 2 quoted in part are as follows:

1. To study scientifically the needs and application
of fire control . . . .

2. To provide nationwide fire control performance
standards to meet current resource management
Objectives . . . .
Here again is additional direction and support for fire
managers and land managers to get together to plan. It is
quite obvious that the support to integrate in the various
phases of planning is authorized. Perhaps the problem lies
not in the "what" but the "how." Even though the general
direction exists, the specific direction for implementation
either does not or is relatively weak at this time.

Although not a manual issue or supplement from the
Washington Office level, some additional advice has been
provided through a publication entitled, "Fire Management
Considerations for Land Use Planning" (USDA 1974a). This
paper develops three basic questions relative to fire
management:

--How does fire relate to the ecosystem within and
adjacent to the unit of planning?

--In terms of the above considerations, are the manage-
ment alternatives being prepared really viable?

--Given some viable management alternatives, what is
the apprOpriate fire management direction?

The stated main objective of this publication is to

". . . facilitate the preparation of high quality and

67

meaningful land use plans . . . . None of the individual
'considerations' are to be construed as management direc-
tions." The paper is divided into the six RPA resource
systems: land and water; timber; recreation and wilderness;
range; wildlife and fish; and human and community develop-
ment. Following each of these headings is a list of appro-
priate actions someone could take presumably in the planning
process.‘ This appears to be a "laundry list" of items with
no defined purpose and role towards reaching a goal. No
process is outlined showing how this might fit together, let
alone specific instructions how all these questions or tasks
might be answered or accomplished. It does provide, however,
an assembly of questions that may be relevant to a specific

planning situation.

Regional Manual Supplements and Advice

 

Regional manual supplements which were requested and
reviewed are those issued prior to January 1, 1976. It is
assumed that apprOpriate materials requested were indeed

sent and received. Any omission has been inadvertent.

Region l.--The Northern Region of the U.S. Forest
Service apparently has no special regional amendments to the
8200 Section of the Manual. However, several types of
relevant planning guidance materials have been prepared at
the regional level for field use. Although some of these

documents may be in draft stage, they are used throughout

68

the region by field personnel. The region developed one
document which discussed in more detail the process of
preparing unit plans (USDA 1973a). Although no specific
mention of fire is made, its inclusion could be implied in
several areas. The most relevant regional advice has been
issued as an informal interim guideline and is entitled,
"Fire Management in Land Use Planning" (USDA 1975b). This
document goes beyond the very general guidance issued from
the Washington Office and discussed earlier (USDA 1974a).
Rather than a general "laundry list" this material provides
more specific guidance for the planning team. Although this
advice is admittedly skeletal at this time, the need for and
desire to develop more detailed and specific guidance has

been recognized.

Region 2.--The Rocky Mountain Region does not have
any FSM 8200 supplements with specific reference to fire.
Their supplement does, however, direct the use of the
region's multiple use guide (FSM 2100) for develOpment Of
forest land until the regional area guides are completed
(USDA 1975d). In this manual amendment, fire implications
are covered in the coordination checklist under the air
pollution and fire headings in Sections 2141.4--8. The
primary emphasis revolves around slash burning and smoke in
the air pollution category. Under the fire heading, fire
questions are listed covering prevention, hazard, protection

level, and type conversion.

69

In transmitting the draft COpy of the Washington
Office "Fire Management Considerations for Land Use Planning"
document, the Assistant Regional Forester for Fire in Region
2 made the following statement:

To bring the broad concept of fire management into our
planning process will require:

1. Understanding of fire as a process in forest
land ecosystems and its impact upon ecosystem
components . . .

2. Integration of our understanding and knowledge

of fire processes and effects with the management

objectives of each specific land unit. Plans should
detail how management objectives may be enhanced or

aggravated by fire management . . . .

3. Identification of proper fire management actions

and constraints . . . .

Region 3.--The Southwestern Region, has no manual
supplements which have either explicit or implicit reference
to fire and land use planning in the FSM 8200 category.
Recently, however, there has been developed an extensive
document relative to planning methods and decisionmaking
methods and criteria (Layser 1975). This paper mentions
fire and fuels management in its discussion of inventory
needs for planning. Throughout the remainder of this paper,
one must infer that fire is or could be input in the various

processes outlined. One might also infer that additional

reference to fire might be included in a publication

 

3Sanderson, E. J. Memorandum, Region 2, 8210(5100),
Elements of Land Use Planning, to Forest Supervisor,
April 15, 1974. 2 p. with attachments.

70

currently in preparation on inventory criteria for land use
planning in that region. Essentially fire and land use

planning related material appears to be limited in Region 3.

Region 4.--The Intermountain Region, although
heavily involved in fire management and wilderness fire
management, currently has no FSM 8200 supplements with
reference to fire. The region is apparently operating under
the 2100 Multiple Use Management section as are other
regions. The only reference to fire was encountered in FSM
2131.2, Region 4 Supplement 1, where areas Of high fire
hazard and/or risk were listed as a category which might be
considered as a specific management unit for multiple use
planning (USDA 1966). The coordinating checklist developed
in the regional amendment 2141.4-5 poses several questions
relevant to planning (USDA 1964). The emphasis is basically
towards fire control. However, fire management can be
implied under several of the enumerated items for the other
functional categories. The land use planning - fire related
direction is not very strong regardless of how one interprets
the amendments. NO other specific advices have been located
relative to the land use planning process and fire in this

region.

Region 5.--The California Region has the largest
fire control organization of any region in the country. The

southern portion of the state has long been noted for its

71

large and devastating brushland fires. In reviewing supple-
ments for the region, no reference to fire in the FSM 8200
section were encountered. The FSM 2100 Multiple Use Manage-
ment regional supplements (2131 and 2141) were the only
source to yield any fire-land use planning type of direction.
Fire was mentioned as one of the required functional over-
lays to be used in the multiple use planning process (USDA
l970a). For each use or activity that creates a hazard and
risk, a fire plan must be prepared. Fire protection was
also one Of the outlined items to be included in a Multiple
Use and Impact Survey Report (USDA 1968, l970b).

The region does have an emergency directive to the
5110, Fire Suppression chapter (USDA 19750). This directive
deals primarily with the potential necessity to modify
current fire suppression policy in wilderness management.
The directive further discusses the basic requirements of a
fire management plan. The entire discussion relates to a
specific situation where land use planning and fire manage-
ment join together. Although this is geared towards wilder-
ness, there are implications for broader application.

In mid—1975, the California Region presented a
series of programs throughout the state to place land use
planning in perspective (USDA l975g). These sessions
covered the entire spectrum of land use planning in the
region. One of the specific subtopics in the presentation

centered around the relationship of fire planning to land

72

use planning. A portion of the discussion covered the
establishment of values and appropriate fire plans for
protecting the resource and area involved. They noted that
a land use alternative might not be feasible because of the
cost of the necessary fire control. They did not cover,
apparently, the application of fire as an integral manage-
ment tool. This series of presentations, however, was an
attempt at putting planning into perspective. Hopefully
fire was also placed in a realistic perspective relative to

the total task in planning.

Region 6.--As in other regions, there are no amend-
ments for the Pacific Northwest Region which specifically
relate to fire and land use planning. It is assumed that
any planning-fire related material has been covered in the
2100 chapter as in other regions until 8200 chapter supple-
ments are prepared. If regional guidances have been prepared
other than those directly tied to the manual system, they

were not made available for review.

Region 10.—-As with a majority of the other regions,

 

the Alaska region's only references to fire and land planning
are found in the regional supplements to FSM 2100, Multiple

Use Management. The same type of information found in other
regional supplements outlined earlier can be found in Region

10 supplements.

73

Even though much specific information and manual
advice may not exist, many planning teams have developed
some type of informal methods for identifying fire-land use
planning relationships. Because of the current lack of
unifying national direction on this and perhaps related
topics, each planning level does basically what it perceives
as best and most important. The obvious results are planning
products ranging from excellent to poor in regard to their
consideration of fire when appropriate. Without strong

central direction one perhaps has no right to expect more.

Critical Planning Decisions

 

Sample Description

Participants.--As indicated earlier, the study

 

sample was determined using a nationwide random selection.
This national sample was subsequently reduced to include
only those locations selected for the Western Regions,
including Alaska. On this basis, 68 locations were visited
including 7 regional headquarters, 15 forest headquarters,
and 46 ranger districts. In each of the regions, sample
stops ranged from a low of 2 in Region 10 and a high of 14
in Region 4. The number of individuals encountered at any
one of these stops ranged from 1 respondent on a small
ranger district to 14 respondents at a regional and a forest

headquarters. General distributions by region for various

74

sample attributes is shown in Table l. The number of
respondents per stOp averaged from 3.8 to 8.5 by region.

The general average for personnel per stop for the entire
study was 5.2 individuals. A grand total of 355 respondents

was interviewed at the 68 locations throughout the West.

Geographic distribution.--Based on the Forest

 

Service land in each region the overall acres per stOp per
region was generally around 2 million acres with some
variation for Region 5 and Region 10. By-and-large, however,
the distribution based on land ownership was satisfactory.
The spatial distribution of the random sample also
worked out very well. Figure 11 illustrates the sample
stops and their distribution within each region. Again
based on Forest Service ownership depicted in Figure 12, the
sample did give a good geographical distribution within each
region and throughout ownership pattern. Coverage was good
both east and west as well as north and south. A broad
spectrum of districts with both heavy and light timber and
range workloads was encountered. Based both on numbers and
spatial distribution, the sample was apparently quite

representative.

Respondent characteristics.--Not only did the basic

 

sample work out well, but also the individual respondents
constituted a representative cross section of Forest Service

personnel. Since this part of the study was solely dependent

75

.m can d mmowpcmmmm wwm mCOHumOOH Omawmump mom

.a mm ..O.o .coumcflnmmz .moHHHo mcHucHum .>oo .m.o .eHmH
mo mm mmmum Emum>m ummHom Hmcofiumz .nvhma

n
.om maze

. OOH>H0m UmeOh fiDmDM

 

 

ooa m.m mmm III: we mmmum>¢ no amuoa
m . m.m Ha mmm.>mm.oa m vom.man.om oa
MH h.v Hv mmv.vmm.m 0H wom.vvm.mm m
mm m.m mm mmm.mmv.a ma mmm.wmv.ma m
ha m.v Hm Hmm.mmm.m ea Hom.mma.am v
ha o.m om mam.mho.~ 0H maa.mm>.om m
oH m.m vm www.5mw.m m omm.omm.am m
ma h.v he vmm.mam.m OH Hem.mma.mm H
Hamuou mo QOHm umm Omuomusou moum me mmoum mmmmmuod coflmmm
uswoummv HOGOOmHmm HOOOOmumm mmuom mHmEmm
pmuomucou mmmum>¢ Q
HOOOOmumm

 

 

.mmflnmcoflumamu mHmEmm paw muflm coemmmll.a OHQOH

76

.mcofiumooH moum

 

 

 

 

 

mHmEmmII.HH musmflm

 

 

 

 

\ 1 . “utopcaom .96ng .3
uaocuaoan? . o o» H09 HOHHHHHQ 89.3. 1
1© 0., Wu HOmH mHoHHgapoux SOHO". o
1 \ . v. . H05 850 .228”. O
I 1 . .. H» ... ">3.
m _ 1 a. an... a «In 199 1
m .H C n" . Ill-Ill 00000 m,
H l H H .V
O 1 a o 1
H..-I|--l:l._ ......O . . H .....o...
o. u 1 1 o. 021E
H- ..l- ... Vb .... o
.. N Id . JrJ a... .. m .....
001/ H n- \, ION no 1
u fl\/lll| " 'l C.
- IIIL 1 II a
u H .... HH /~.. .- v
u H fl H I .- D.C...." ' .
u . \ .- ' . ......
u a h 110‘
... ”I 1 u N 1 1 u :3.
C I I H I I
H u H 0151.“. 3’10 h"
I H 1
fl- . 1 “to. ...-I”. V V
m . 1 1 .1H 05 no 1 0
II H F ' (anon?! «H fr i'qhko O
... .. © ,/ iI/Imo
.F 1 .. 0

 

77

.mumwnom Hmcoflpmz was mOOHmOm O0fl>umm ummuomII.NH wusmflm

 

 

 

 

  

        

   

H33. 58:3. a
23:38:: O

DUNN H§W§m / >¢hmu¢°u lunar-oz

/./. W. “.1...on Ho uHatHHzHQ

    

 

 

 

o nu_¢1az:8§ a. o ._ 9.2:
a gr I n ‘ H
20:15 53!:qu / 3 2.3.3... .31.
«52533... D . x:
/-l.. /

:5 H1 1 a
2:53ng i

 

 

I nw.¢1o-HDOI|
4<zo_ou¢

           

   

H :3:

_ I .

.H . .. .H 90¢ r7).\.((
I _ H. 0.. Wm?!
. .. . . LEIP 1% at ,—
.A\.. H H v aHIfrl.

 
   

   

  

19:ch :3...ng .
54250.. 56.9.3 ,I,..
- I ~

_

\

. ._ . ‘ §§.\ 1'1“.er .
4., \v w .. .\bpr.'u

. \\ N \ . \. J“

\A. H

. A H

    

.w I .
1.. . I 1 ...
\\.w
1w .Ib.\.\..~ «“538. H I II I
. .\.V. .4 m . _ L
H“. . ‘3‘ . it‘EIV
a H a} {tux
L .I. clashxl .I.
. (.\ . 5.3....le
I..\.I, . 445.3... icon

03.

 

mzo_.H.<.rm hzuziwuxm 021 mzoauc u>F<¢hmHZHSO<

 

78

upon personnel availability and perhaps interest, the
general results were quite gratifying. The distribution of
positions was representative not only in total, but also at
each organizational level (Table 2). Fire management might
be considered somewhat over represented. However, because
this was a fire and land use study, such functional interest
exhibited is perhaps to be expected.

Table 3 provides a listing of individuals who chose
to list their current position in the "Other" category. It
appears that some of the respondents could have placed
themselves in some of the existing specific categories.
However, they were given the Option of listing themselves in
the manner they thought most apprOpriate.

Average service time and time in current position
were generally similar for each region. The time in service
increased along with the organizational level, as could be
expected. The educational level also goes up with the level
in the hierarchy. Although the majority of stratification
for Table 2 was on a region and all-regions-combined basis,
one other sort was made. All personnel in the fire manage-
ment position versus all others were compared using all the
data. In this case, the service time and position time went
up slightly for fire personnel. At the same time, the
education level went down. Such a response can be expected
since many of our fire management specialists worked their
way up in the organization through the technician rather

than the professional career ladder.

79

Table 2.--Summary of respondent characteristics by
organizational level.

 

 

Level

 

Regional Forest District

 

Characteristics Office Office Office Total
POSITION
Supervisor or Ranger 0 9. 42. 50.
Timber 7. 13. 36. 56.
Water 6. 9. 0 15.
Range 3. 9. 21. 33.
Recreation 5. 8. 15. 28.
Wildlife 5. 7. 3. 15.
Fire Management 13. 16. 40. 69.
Planning 8. l4. 5. 27.
State and Private
Forestry 6. 0 0 6.
Other 6. 23. 23. 52.
SERVICE TIME (average) 20.8 15.1 13.8 15.4
POSITION TIME (average) 3.9 4.3 4.2 4.1

EDUCATION (average) 16.5 16.2 15.2 15.7

 

80

Table 3.--List of respondent positions specified in the
category "Other."

 

 

 

Specified Position Number
Administrative Officer 1
Botanist 1
Deputy Forest Supervisor 2
DevelOpment Forester l
Drafting/Planning l
Ecologist 1
Engineer 8
Environmental Services 1
Fuel Management Specialist 1
Information and Education 1
Lands 7
Landscape Architect 5
Minerals 1
Plans and Other Resources 1
Public Information Officer 2
Recreation and Lands 1
Resource Forester 8
Silviculturist 1
Soil Scientist 4
Technician 2

 

Total soa

 

aDiscrepancies in totals are a result of
imprOperly completed form headings.

81

The overall sample appears to provide not only a
geographically well-distributed grouping, but also a very
satisfactory internal—position representation. It would be
difficult to make many improvements at the same intensity

level.

Forms Used.--An additional and perhaps more detailed

 

description of the sample can be made by reviewing the forms
or relevance trees selected for completion. As pointed out
in the Methods Section, each respondent had to fill out one
general and one fire relevance tree form for each planning
decision situation. In each case there was a choice. It
had been anticipated that there might be a shift in form
used depending on the planning situtation. Table 4 shows
that the general form use pattern was fairly consistent
throughout the study when looking at the combined (ALL)
total. However, there were some shifts by region in use of
form 1 (Site Factors and Forces) versus 2 (Resource Potential)
and form 3 (Fire Management) versus 4 (Fire Behavior) for
each of the planning problems. The district level tended to
favor form 2 and form 3. Although form 3 was favored over
form 4, at all levels, form 1 was preferred in two cases at
the regional office level and one case at the supervisor's
office (forest) level.

It had further been anticipated that as the planning
situation shifted from the urban/forest interface, through

the well-develOped situation and on to the undeveloped area,

82

 

 

 

 

 

.mOHmmo UOHHumHo u 00 .mOHmmo mHOmH>mesm u 0m .mOHmmo Hmconmm 0mOH
.HHO>Huommmmu .mmu9 HoH>msmm mHHm u 1 Hucmswmmcmz mHHm HHMHucmuom mousommm u m
Hmmouom 0cm muouomm muHm H «owns snow wmuu mosm>meH ou mummmmm
mm oMH NNH 1m 1m m1H mNH 10 mm on 00 H1909
mm m9 om pm on up H0 01 mm mm 0m H1909
0H 01 mm om mH m1 mm mm mH mm bom H1909
mm m1m Hom HmH H» Hum mmm mmH mm 1mH HH1 H1909
m 1H m mH m mH H HH m 1H 0H
m hm om mH m mm mm mH mH mm 0
mm mm m1 mm om mm mm 1m 0H Hm m
5H 11 mm mm 0H Hm m1 mH 0H on 1
mm Hm mm on mH 91 mm mm 1H on m
m 1N Hm mH m 1m 1m OH m 9H m
NH 1m mm mH mH om mm mm NH mm H
onwmm
1 m N H 1 m N H m1 H HEHOH mmu9
mocm>mHmm
sOHumsuHm soHumsuHm ummnom :oHumsuHm

ammuom OOQOH0>OOGD

meon>molHH03

ummuom\cmnua

 

 

.Hm>mH HmcoHumNHcmmuo 00m GOHumsuHm HQ Owns mEHOm mo

NHMEESmII.1 mHQm9

83

there would also be a shift in type of form used. Here it
was expected that resource potential (form 2) would show up
considerably more important than it did. It was also
thought that site factors might be considered more relevant
for planning situations 1 and 2, but such was apparently not
the case. In situation 1 and situation 3, the ratios of
respondents selecting site factors versus resource potential,
as most important to their planning, were very similar. In
situation 1, 44 percent chose form 1 and 56 percent selected
form 2, while in situation 3, the percentages were 43 and 57
percent, respectively. However, for situation 2 the emphasis
did shift slightly towards resource potential with 63
percent of the respondents chosing that category as being
most important.

There were no preconceived ideas as to the probable
fire relevance tree selection (forms 3 and 4) distribution
by planning situation. From the use count in Table 4, the
fire management factor (form 3) tree was clearly more
popular. This fact was further confirmed during the inter-
view session when respondents had a difficult time working
with the fire behavior relevance tree forms (form 4).
Apparently it was just not as easy for most respondents to
work with this latter relevance tree.

Generally, three-fourths of the respondents elected
to consider fire management factors as most important in all
problem situations. The remaining respondents, of course,

selected fire behavior factors as being of prime importance.

84

Perhaps one final item of interest regarding the
specific situation is in the situation-order distribution.
As pointed out under Methods, the order in which the
planning situations were addressed was a function of a die
toss. The actual frequency and order that respondents
worked on each planning situation are shown in Table 5.
There seems to be a fairly good distribution of usage
resulting from this process used for situation~order

randomization.

Table 5.--Distribution of situation order.

 

 

 

Situationa Number of Percent
Die Toss Order Occurrences of Total
1 l, 2, 3 5 7.3
2 l, 2, 3 17 25.0
3 2, 3, l 8 11.8
4 2, l, 3 13 19.1
5 3, l, 2 11 16.2
6 3, 2, 1 14 20.6
Total 68 100.0

 

a . . .
Situation Order refers to the planning Situations:
Urban/Forest Interface Area; 2 = Well-Developed Area;
UndevelOped Area.

0»
II II

85

Relevance Trees

 

General.--The largest portion of the study revolves
around the relevance tree results. Every effort was made to
utilize all forms completed. However, in a few instances,
either respondent identifier coding was inappropriate or
incomplete, the information was illegible, or rows and/or
columns were omitted, so that the forms had to be discarded.

Following calculation of adjusted relevance scores
and some of the initial data summaries, it became apparent
that many respondents had trouble adding to 100. To save a
rather large percentage of the remaining forms from being
rejected, it was necessary to check and normalize each
first-order and second-order relevance column or row. When
errors in addition were found, not totaling to 100, the
respective row(s) or column(s) were normalized. This seemed
the only reasonable solution to the problem. Without such
a procedure, a large portion of the responses would have
been rejected.

In conducting each of the interviews, many respond-
ents indicated more time, in excess of my normal one-half
day visit, would be desirable for filling out the relevance
tree forms. Several days, to in excess of a week, were sug-
gested as perhaps a more realistic time frame. However, the
consensus was that relevance value changes made as a result
of more time being available to complete the form would

result primarily in "fine tuning." The important items

86

would still be important (the higher values) and the less
important (low or zero items) would keep their relative
positions. More time would result primarily in adjusting
and readjusting values between the two "tails" of the curve.
The respondents often added, however, that their ability and
perspectives, while using this PATTERN technique, shifted
some with each successive problem they addressed. There-
fore, the order randomization was a worthwhile procedure.

In all levels of data summaries made, the number of
respondents using the category "Other" in either the first-
order or second-order position was very small. The values
assigned were also relatively low compared to the specific
factors already on the forms. The net result was that
"Other" was never of a sufficiently high-value, adjusted
relevance score to warrant further consideration. In
Appendix E a list of "Other" items which were entered on the
forms is provided. Minerals and soil were mentioned most
often. This list does not indicate how many times each item
appeared, but only the items considered. The very low
adjusted relevance scores obtained for this category appear
to confirm that the overall impact was small.

To assist data analysis and facilitate interpretation
of average relevance tree values, scores were stratified
into quartile ranges. In the general relevance tree (forms
1 or 2), each quartile range contained 20 site factors and

forces-forest resource potential combinations (Figures 13,

87

17, and 21). The fire relevance tree (forms 3 or 4) was
handled in a similar manner; however, the lower quartile
group contained 21 fire management-fire behavior factors
whereas the other three quartiles each contained 20 of the
combination factors (Figures 15, 19, and 23).

The quartile ranges have been generally cataloged to
indicate the relative overall importance of each level.
These descriptions are used in the following discussions.
The upper quartile range of any relevance tree is considered
as being very important or having high priority in the
planning decision. That is, the combination item (site/
resource potential or fire management/fire behavior factors)
is considered of most importance for the planning situation
involved. The upper-middle quartile range is considered
somewhat important. Any of the combinations falling into
either the lower-middle or lower quartile were considered
least important and basically of low or very low priority.

The overall importance of any individual factor in
the relevance trees was established by adding the individual,
adjusted relevance scores either across rows or down columns.
In this type of compilation, each set of factors, site
factors and forces, resource potential, fire management, and
fire behavior equaled 100 percent. For each of these total
scores the average, maximum value, minimum value, and
standard deviation have also been developed. These data

provide additional help in interpreting the results.

88

Average relevance trees were developed by pooling
data from both forms 1 and 2 as well as forms 3 and 4
respectively. The output format used to display these data
was entirely one of convenience. No inferences should be
made because the average outputs resemble forms 1 and 3.
The data matrices of forms 2 and 4 were simply rotated so as
to provide a common matrix and then the matrix cell means
and other appropriate information developed. The process
could have just as easily been reversed resulting in the
Opposite output format.

The five top combination values within each average
relevance tree were also summarized. The individual,
adjusted relevance score for combination factors was noted
and a cumulative percentage prepared. To provide more
detailed information to the reader, several appendices have
also been prepared. Appendices F through 0 provide the
average relevance tree for each problem, including the
general forms and fire forms for combined data. These
tables allow inspection of individual matrix cell and
individual factor values. They further provide the oppor-
tunity to make comparisons, other than those discussed and
displayed. Average relevance trees presented include: all
data pooled, fire management position only, all positions

except fire management, Regions 1 through 6 and Region 10.

89

Situation 1 - Forest/urban interface area.--In

 

reviewing the quartile breakdown of the general relevance
tree for this situation, we find that the 20 most important
items (upper quartile) account for 57.7 percent of the total
adjusted values. The upper and upper-middle quartiles when
combined account for 86.4 percent of the total (Figure 13).
Resource Potential Factors, Recreation, Water, and Esthetics
provide the greatest share of the upper-quartile values.
This seems appropriate in light of the planning situation
presented. In terms of Site Factors and Forces, however,
Political and Social Forces and Management Practices appear
to be the leaders. Individual factors, Political and Social
Forces, Management Practices, Flora and Fauna, and Wildfire
ranked 1 through 4, respectively. On the other axis,
Recreation, Esthetics, Water, and Wildlife ranked 1, 2, 3,
and 4, respectively, for this situation.

Based on ranking, there is agreement at all organi-
zational levels on the first- and second-place site factors
and forces. There appears to be considerable disagreement,
however, as to which items are ranked third and fourth by
each level in the sample. The fourth-ranked item has no
agreement, while two of the three organizational levels
concur as to the third-place ranking. Resource Potential
illustrates similar disagreement. Here the district and
forest levels concur on all of the first four ranked items,

whereas the regional level agrees only in the third ranked,

9O

MOM mmmcmu mHHuumsv wmuu mocm>meu

.ooo.nn.oo.

.UmcHQEoo mump HHm

Hmumcmm ommum>1 "H coHuMSuHmII.MH musmHm

 

 

o.oo.u~o.o. mo.o.-oo.o. No.0.ooo1o. U4.~qqoo r010 2.1..)
man—Zwuxua no Nazca
m.. ..N. ~.m~ nosm u4..aq:0 r0<w 2.x..1
mu¢a~Zuozua ux. uo 33m
..... --~ manna 11111
«0:04 04co.z 04co_x «and: ”04._x¢:o
«0304 111a:
. . .
. . .
. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... . .>u.ouam. .
~ . aux—c .
. . .
. . .
. ..... ..... --~ --~ --~ --~ NNNNN --~ . ux.u .
. . owx.ao¢uxi .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ 11111 11111 11111 11111 annnn mnnnn . muo.»o<xa .
. . hzuawc1z<1 .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ nnnnn nnnnn --~ 11111 nnnnn nnnnn . mo.:ozoou “
. .
. . .
a . wwua©u .
. ..... --~ 11111 11111 11111 11111 manna nnnnn . 41.oor :21 .
. . 410.»_4oa .
. . .
. . . _
. ..... --~ 11111 11111 manna 11111 --~ nannn . wn.uC4.x .
. . .
. . .
. . wmqmm.0 .
. ..... ..... nnnnn m-- --~ --~ --~ nnnnn . 021 .
. 1 $39: _
. . .
. . .
. ..... ..... 11111 11111 -~M~ nnnnn nnnnn nnmmn . ro.mozu .
. . .
. . .
. . «1311 .
. ..... --~ 11111 nnnnn 11111 11111 Hanan manna . 221 .
. . 11041 .
. . .
. . >r111 .
. ..... --~ 11111 11111 nnnnn 11111 --~ annnn . cco.x1ra .
. . ozq >004owo .
. . .
n _ u . u . . . _ mwuaou
. .>u.ouam. . mmuz . . . . zo.»1 . . . 021 110—01;
. zurho . umua4.) . mo..mr.mw . au»<) . wu.4a4.n . nwxuua . 00211 . «wax.» . w».¢

 

0.6 .2 N 2605 ouh<poa — tack

Acuhzwpoaowumaomum bmwaom

.

xuqmoma

441 4w)u4 oo zo.oum :01 04.11130

91

water. This same type of variable pattern exists for each
region and within each region as well as between regions.

The value ranking appears to be, in part at least, a function
of current activities, regional direction, and future
estimated or predicted resource use (Figure 14).

Review of the t0p five general relevance tree
combination factors for this problem illustrates that they
account for 19 percent of the total tree. This means 6
percent of the cells are accounting for about one-fifth of
the importance. The combination items scoring in the top
‘five in descending order are:

1. Political and Social Forces/Recreation

2. Political and Social Forces/Esthetics

3. Management Practices/Recreation

4. Flora and Fauna/Recreation

5. Management Practices/Esthetics
The top two of the above list (1 and 2) not only ranked in
the tOp five for the pooled data, but also for each region.
These two combinations were the only ones consistently
ranked in the top five. Some combinations, however, were in
the top five, ranking in four or five regions and in a few
cases all but one region.

The quartile summary for the situation 1 fire
relevance tree showed a clustering of upper-quartile values.
Figure 15 shows this grouping quite vividly. The upper

quartile accounted for over 50 percent of the total tree

92

.mmuoom mocm>mHmn Ho>wH HmcoHumecmmuo cam ommuo>m UmHoom

Hmecouom mOHDOmmH 0cm mwouom 0cm muouomw ouHm

ucoopoa

mm om mH 0H

4|“

mOflhsk ulll

Hpfid idodhi no

0

 

l 1 4

H<Hfizmbom
mumuommm hmumom

l umzuc

Oflfll mmocuoc..2

mo4uwcumm

OMHHwHHB

co.udou00m

wwccm

umn:.9

 

Ho>cg awoken

Ho>Qg HUHHumHQ

u. cofiumsufimuu.1. musmflm

unmouoa

 

Cm. nonuO

LL”

I. Ou.m HODHuommua

 

91.0 muo.uuaua
ucoficrncmx

mu.fiocoum

U 0+ vauOm .m.u©m
can 116111.01

mpHuUHH3

mmnmm40
nun muummc.

conOMM

+0 0 9:41,.
0:0 wuon

to >nacumo.m>cm

0cm xooHomO

 

 

mmumom 02¢
mmOFUdm thm

93

HHm “cm momcmu mHHuuwsv mmuu mocm>mHmu muHm mmmum>1

.cmcHnEoo mumv
"H coHumsuHmll.mH musmHm

 

 

o o1noc. ~1oo.uoo.o. mo.o.c~m.o. no.o.uo11o. u4.»m<:o ro1u z.r—.3
auoahzwuzua no w021a
1.. ..m. 1.1m o.nm w4..a13c roam 2.x».3
mquhzuoaua um» uo 13m
..... --~ manna 11111
«0104 m4co_z m4co.x «wan: "m4..aqzo
a1304 . «nan:
. . .
. . .
. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... . .>u.omam. .
. . ourho .
. . .
. . .
. ..... ..... --~ nnmmn 11111 nnnmn 11111 m-m~ nnnnn . :o..1.. .
. . u4.mqrmw .
. . .
. . .
. ..... nnnnn mnnnn manna 11111 11111 11111 -~m~ nnnnn . whuuuuu .
. . uq.u .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ mnnmn --~ nnrnm nmwmn --~ ..... nannn . wo.yozoou .
. . wa.u .
. . .
. . . .
. ..... nmnnn --~ -~m~ ~m-m manna -~m~ -~m~ ~m-~ . ~12 ma.u .
. . .
. . .
. . . .
. ..... nmnnn 11111 11111 nmnnm manna mwmwm --~ 11111 . zo.»ou.uo .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ 11111 11111 11111 11111 nnmnn wm-~ 11111 . 4u>m4 .
. . zo.pouhoaa .
. . .
. . .
_ ...... --~ 11111 11111 11111 11111 --~ ..... nnmnn . zo.»7m>u:a .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ 11111 11111 11111 nnnnn -~m~ ..... manna . uozwmm:uoo .
. . mo.u .
. . .
. . . . . . . . . . machoqu
. .>u.uumm. . . awozcc . m<u> . we». . wta4o> . >p.m . rpoqu . 01uaam . FZuzm0<z<z
. xurho . uxoxm . ma.u . no ax.» . 4w3u . 4u2u . nzu.z. . uxq4u mm.“

H no nhdm ~

 

waobU1u ao~>ctwm um~u

”NO «2 1 rack Oubdboa n lack

~ thQOJQ 44¢

4w>u4 DU ZOHOux mom uq—hmdna

94

value. Combining the upper and middle quartiles, we can
account for 83 percent of the rated importance from 40 cells
(50 percent) of the matrix. In the Fire Management Factors,
Prevention and Protection Level have the most upper-quartile
cells. Fire Behavior Factors are represented most by upper-
quartile scores for Time of Year and Fire Danger.

Based on the pooled data, Fire Management Factors,
the individual items of Prevention ranked first; Protection
Level second; Fire Effects third; and Detection, fourth
(Figure 16). Variation between organizational level still
exists. The items are generally agreed upon; the difference
comes primarily in the ranking order. This condition also
prevails for the Fire Behavior Factors. In this latter
case, all levels agree on the top four items, but not on the
order of ranking each has. The pooled ranking of Fire
Behavior Factors shows Fire Danger, Time of Year, Fuel Type,
and Fuel Volume first through fourth, respectively. There
is also continued inter- and intraregional variation.

Combination items in the top five individual
relevance scores have a cumulative value of 18 percent. The
top five combination items for the fire relevance tree and
situation 1 are:

l. Prevention/Fire Danger

2. Prevention/Time of Year

3. Protection Level/Fire Danger

4. Protection Level/Time of Year

 

 

 

UmHoom uoH>mzmn oHHm 6cm ucmEmcmcmE mnHm

.mmuoom mocm>mHmH Hm>mH HmcoHumNHcmmuo can mmmum>m
"H coHpmsuHmln.mH musmHm

ucouuwa
m. 0H

ooflm5<hulll

Hflfifl Hflkfimmmnuo

 

95

1

. tango

oxOEm

noocmo

 

mu.u

“mow

 

we made

mm>9 .osm

mE:.0>

 

seam

su.mcouc.

zumcvq
05m.u

cmoumm

 

meFU<L
mOH><Imm mmHh

 

no wumm

HQKJ umwxm

.ppes uofiuuwfio

om

unmouom
m. 0H m o

 

1 4 4

$5

11:10

I, coHumu. HHnmnmm

0+.u

 

+00

 

 

mmOHU1h
FZMZMU<2<Z wank

muoouwm wu.m

mo.Eocoom
mu.u

wma prm

cofiuoouva

Ho>oq
co.uoou0um

couucm>uua

vocwuusooo
muwm

96

5. Prevention/Fuel Type
The first two items in this list were also considered in the
top five by each region. It is obvious that prevention is
an important key item, at least in respect to this planning

situation.

Situation 2 - Well-develOped forest area.--This

 

planning situation was like most of the "real-world" situa-
tions in progress throughout many areas visited. Personnel
seem generally well able to relate to this condition. As in
the first situation, the upper quartile accounted for over
50 percent cell relevance values. The upper and upper-
middle quartiles combined to total slightly over 84 percent.
Timber was far ahead of any other factor in Forest Resource
Potential with 8 out of 10 cells in the upper quartile.
Site Factors and Forces were dominated by management prac-
tices which had 6 out of 10 cells in the upper quartile.

The entire pattern of this quartile diagram (Figure
17) is much different from the general relevance tree
quartile diagram in problem 1. In this situation the
emphasis is definitely timber oriented with management-
practice emphasis. Recreation did end up with four quartile
cells as did Flora and Fauna on the opposite axis.

Individual ranking of Site Factors and Forces
factors for this situation show Management Practices first;
Flora and Fauna, second; Geology and Physiography, third;

and Political and Social Forces, fourth. All three

97

wow mmmcmu mHHuumsw mmuu wocm>onu Hmuosom mmmum>1 um coHumsuHmll.nH madman

.wmcHQEOO mumw HHm

 

 

.ooo.ao~oo. -oo.u~n.o. mm.o.a.o~o. nome.u1mno. u4.»a<:o 2040 2.x..3
muc¢hzwumua no uoz«a
9.. o.1. o.nn 1..m w4..a1ao ru1u 2.19.)
muoahzwuaua urn no 13m
..... wmwmw manna 11111
au304 U4cc.t u400.x quad: .u4.»z<:o
au104 uuaa:
. . .
. . .
. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... . .>u.uuam. .
. . aur.o .
. . .
. . .
. ..... ..... --~ -~m~ nnnnn --~ --~ manna . 01.1 .
. . oum.aumuaa .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ 11111 111.1 11111 11111 11111 11111 . mwu.»u<ma .
. . .201001211 .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ --~ nnnnn --~ nnnnn nnnnn 11111 . mu.:ozouu .
. . .
. . .
. . muoaou .
. ..... --~ nmnnm nnmnm nnmnn 11111 manna 11111 . 4<.uom oza .
. . 410...4oa .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ nnnnn nnnnn nnnnn nnnnn ~m-m 11111 . ua.uO4.x M
. .
. . .
. , . umcmm.o .
. ..... ..... -m- --~ ~m-~ --~ --~ 11111 . oz< .
. . mbuumz. .
. . .
_ . _
. ..... ..... --~ 11111 --~ nnnnn nnmnm 11111 . zo.momu .
. . .
. . .
. . «2:11 .
. ..... --~ nnnnn nnnnm 11111 11111 11111 11111 . ozc .
. . «1041 .
. . .
. . >ra<a .
. ..... --~ nmnnn 11111 nnnnn 11111 nnnnn 11111 . uco.m>ra .
. . ozq >004omo .
. . .
. . . . . . . . . muuaou
. .>u.uuaw. . mnuz . . H . 20.94 . . . 02¢ machu¢u
. aux—o . umwo4.n . mu.»ur.mm . a4p1r . 41.4c4.n . ouauma . 4121a . «amt.» . w».m

 

can

“2 N 110m cwb¢~o¢

4<HthponowUCDOmuz hmwQOm

. two; N xw4moaa 44¢ 4w>m4 ou zo.oua Con u4_hm«Do

98

organizational levels agreed on the first and second ranking;
however, the regional level ranked third and fourth just
opposite of the district and forest levels. All levels
agreed on the top four items but could not establish a
consistent order for these (Figure 18).

Reviewing Forest Resource Potential showed all
levels agreeing on first-, second-, and third-ranked factors
which were Timber, Water, and Recreation, respectively. The
fourth-ranked factor was Wildlife for the district and
regional levels, while Range was ranked fourth by the forest
level.

The top five combination relevance scores for this
solution accounted for slightly over 15 percent of the
total. Situation 2, general relevance tree top five combi-
nation scores are:

1. Management Practices/Timber

2. Erosion/Water

3. Economics/Timber

4. Flora and Fauna/Wildlife

5. Management Practices/Water
Number 1 of this list was also found in the top five for all
individual regional pooled summaries. The remaining four
combinations did not consistently appear in each regional
summary.

The fire relevance tree quartile makeup for situation

2 is quite similar in several respects to that in situation 1.

99

.mmuoom mocm>mHmu Hm>mH HmcoHuwNHcmmuo 0cm mmmum>m meoom
"N coHumsuHmla.mH ousmHm

HMHucmuom mOHSOmmH 0cm moon0m 0cm muouomm mUHm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ucoouoa
mm on mH OH m 0
0m.
$0
I
DO
Om“
00
0.
0+0
+00
Hdmfizmhom

mUmDOmmm memom

m09fi$1uulll

.93 388...: n o

18:10

nmocuoc.13

mo.uwcumm

umufiz

wuHHUHHS

cofiummuomm

momma

uwnEH9

H929.ummupmunn

.wnd.flxuum:uu +

mm

0N

unmoumm

mH 0H

 

‘

4 4

01.0

 

D¢

 

I.

 

.V O

 

mwumOh 024
mebU1h thm

 

uocuo

wuHm onHMUmoum

mmoHuumum
ucwewvmcoz

mo.Eocoom

WOUHOE HMHUOW
1cm .mo.ufi.oa

wunUHHz

mmommfio
paw muowmcH

COHmOuw

ucsmm
Uco whlo

>£Qmuoon>£m
0cm 9moHooo

100

In situation 2, Fuel Type shows up with the most upper-
quartile cells for Fire Behavior Factors. Fuel Volume and
Fire Danger follow with four upper-quartile cells each.
Fire Management Factors are best represented by Protection
Level which reports five upper-quartile cells. Prevention
is second with four cells (Figure 19).

In this summary, the upper quartile accounts for
slightly over 50 percent of the cell values. A very large
cluster of upper-quartile cells appears and contains 12
individual cells. The remaining eight upper-quartile cells
are scattered throughout the figure.

Individual factor ratings show the top four Fire
Behavior Factors were agreed upon at all organizational
levels. Again the variation that does exist is because each
level has its own order of priority, with the pooled order
being different from each of the individual-level rankings.
In the pooled averages for this problem, Fuel Type ranks
first; Fire Danger, second; Fuel Volume, third; and Time of
Year, fourth. In situation 2, the top four behavior factors
are the same as the top four in situation 1, but the ranking
order is different (Figure 20).

The pooled ranking order for Fire Management Factors
in situation 2 is exactly the same as found in situation 1
for the top four factors. However, the organizational level

variation is different. Prevention, Protection Level, Fire

101

.omcHnEoo mumo
HHm pom mmmcmu wHHuumsq mom» mocm>mHmu mHHm ommum>1 “N coHumsuHmII.mH mudem

 

 

 

o Innoo. nnoo.u1n.o. 1m.o.c1o.o. oo.o.un0no. w4..u1:o ru<m 2.1—.3
muoa»2uoawa no uozca
1.. com. n.~n 1.om u4..a<30 ruqu z.rh.w
muo<»2u0awa Ur. uo 23m
..... --~ nmnnn 11111
au104 m4co.x u4co.x zuada "U4..1«Do
muzo4 mung:
. _ _
. . .
. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..._. ..._. ..... . .yu.uman. .
. . awrbo .
. . .
. . .
. ..... ..... --~ nnnnn 11111 mnnan 11111 --~ --~ . :o_»1.. .
. . u4.marua .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ --~ nnnnn 11111 11111 11111 --~ nnmnn . ¢huuuuu .
. . mx.u .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ nnnnn --~ nnmmn manna -m- -~m~ --~ . mo.yozoou .
. . 11.1 .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ nnnnn manna 11111 11111 nnnnn -~m~ manna . uv: ma.“ .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. ..... nnnnn 11111 nnmnn nnnnm nnmnn mmmww -~m~ mnnnn . 7o..0ubuo .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. ..... ..... 11111 11111 11111 11111 nnrnn --~ 11111 . 4u>u4 .
. . :o..uu»01a .
. . _
. . .
. ..... --~ 11111 11111 11111 11111 -m- ..... nnmnn . zo.»zw>mza .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ 11111 11111 11111 annnn m~m- ..... manna . uuzmazcuuo .
H . ux.u .
. _ .
. . . . . . . . _ . mar—oak
. .»u.uuam. . . «woz1o . a1u» . ua>p . wts4o> . >..m . rhozm4 . ocmzam . ~Zuyuc121z
. zwzpo . wzoxm . u1.u . no m1.» . 4m3u . 4w0u . |2w.z. . ux<4u . no u.11 . ua_u

 

mzohu<k ao~><rmm wm~u

9mm I2 1 Icon oubdbom n tack N Iw4moaa 44¢ 4u>u4 Du 20.0u1 mom u4.91130

.mwuoom mocm>mHmu Hm>mH HMCOHumNHcmmHo 0cm wmmum>m
ooHoom HOH>mnmn ouHm Ucm ucmEmmmcmE mHHm "N coHumsuHmll.om musmHm

00391 n I .981. umouon. u 0

H93 H9539. u 0 H93 “.3330 u +

 

102

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ucwouoa ucmuuom
mm om m. o. m 0 mm ow m9 0H m n
1‘ 1 1 d 1 . 1 1 1
a. 5330 5 .1930
08l, meEm a coHumu...bazmm
o .0 ummcno 91 muOOwwm an“...
1111
+0 D an...» 0 S muHEocoom
l
we och... my...
0 09.9 .94.. C +9 0mg my...
9 063.09 00 coHuuoumo
.csm
a 6 13.9352. 0+ H9201.
co.uoou0ua
.fQ m. J +.B
cu.Lo. ) co.ucw>mua
I “€ch
0 1O .50»an $0 wocwpusouo
me 051 0.3.1
mmOBU<L meBU<h

MOH><:mm meh ...»umfimcdzfi... wan...

103

Effects, and Detection are ranked 1, 2, 3, and 4, respec-
tively. Although the order is the same, the relevance value
for each factor is generally smaller in problem 2.

Returning again to the tOp five combination relevance
scores, only one of the five tree combinations can be found
in each regional and the pooled summary, Prevention/Fire
Danger.- The five combination fire factors account for
slightly over 15 percent of the relevance values. The list
of these tOp five combination relevance factors for situation
2, is as follows:

1. Prevention/Fire Danger

2. Protection Level/Fire Danger

3. Prevention/Time of Year

4. Fire Effects/Intensity

5. Prevention/Fuel Type

Situation 3 - Undeveloped forest area.--This third
and last problem situation allowed decisionmakers an Oppor-
tunity to consider an area essentially without prior commit-
ments. The population pattern did not dictate certain types
of direction or use. The resource-utilization pattern also
had not been established. Individuals could impose their
own personal resource-management philosophies on this
planning situation. Although several respondents stated
_such a condition does not exist, this is not the case.

Alaska is a prime example of where resource managers are

104

faced with exactly these conditions. Therefore the problem
is by no means a hypothetical situation.

As might be anticipated, the general relevance tree
quartile summary for this situation has no real resemblance
to the previous two. There appears to be much more_diversity
in the upper-quartile locations. In comparing situations 2
and 3, Timber now has less of the quartile cells for Resource
Potential. Wilderness now has three upper-quartile cells,
which might be expected. The previous two situations perhaps
did not lend themselves as well to this resource. Esthetics
also made a slight gain.

Based on the site factors and forces, Geology and
Physioqraphy gained several upper-quartile cells as did
Flora and Fauna. Political and Social Forces made signifi-
cant advances in importance. The importance of Management
Practices, as expressed by numbers of upper-quartile cells,
dropped compared to situation 2 (Figure 21).

A slight drop in the sum of percentages accounted
for by the upper-quartile values was noted here. The
combined total of both the upper and middle quartiles
managed to account for just about 80 percent of the entire
tree values. The lower-middle and lower quartiles gained
slightly. This latter fact, combined with the greater
diversity in the upper—quartile cell distribution pattern,
indicates respondents were not as specifically oriented in

this planning situation. The relevance values are being

105

.vmcHnEOO

momcmn oHHunmsq mmuu mocm>meu Hmumcmm mmmum>1

mump HHm new
um coHumsuHmll.Hm oustm

 

 

.ooo.o»1oo. p1oo.-on.o. nn.o.n.o~o. .o~o.un~no. w4..m1ao ru1u 2.2..)
muoc.zuuaua no uoz1a
o.~ 1.~n 1.51 u4.»m<:o ru<u z.r__n
muo1bzuuaua wt» no tam
...: ~m-~ nnnnn 11111
mu304 u4co.x w4co.x quad: uw4.»a<30
11:04 ataan
. . .
_ . .
. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... . .>u.ouam. .
. . nuzpo .
. 1 .
. . .
. ..... ..... --~ --~ nnmnn --~ --~ --~ . wm.u .
_ _ cum—181111 _
. . .
. . .
. ..... nnnnn nmnnn 11111 11111 11111 nnnnn 11111 . muo..o<aa .
. . .zwzwo<z<: .
. . .
. . .
. ..... --~ --~ --~ --~ nnnnn nnnnn 11111 . mu.1ozoow "
. .
. . .
. . wuomOK .
. ..... 11111 manna manna nnnnn 11111 --~ 11111 . 44.001 021 .
. . 410.1.4oa .
. . .
. . .
“ ..... --~ nnnnn nnnnn manna nnnnn --~ nannn . No.104.u H
.
. . .
. . umqum.a _
. ..... --~ --~ ..... --~ --~ ..... nnnnn . czq .
. . muuumz. .
. . .
. . .
_ ..... --~ --~ 11111 --~ --~ manna nnnnn . zo_mo:u .
. . .
. . .
. . 12:11 .
. ..... 11111 11111 nnnnn 11111 11111 11111 11111 . 3:1 .
. . 11041 .
. . .
. . yrA¢m .
. ..... 11111 11111 11111 manna 11111 manna 11111 . cco.m>rq .
. . 021 >oo40uo .
. . .
. . . . . . . muumou
. .>u.uuam. . mmuz . . zo.~1 . . . oz< machocu
_ zuzpo . 12004.: mu.pwr.mu «0.1: . uu.404.3 . nwmoua . woz<a . mumx.. . w».m

 

Gan at N tack owbchoa

4(szwhoauuuubomua .mumou

a tack n tw4ooaa 441 4w>w4 ou 20.0um mom u4.»mdbo

106

distributed throughout more of the factors. More Resource
Potential or Site Factors and Forces are being valued as
important or more equally important when compared to situa-
tions 1 and 2. This could be interpreted perhaps as being
more closely allied to a multiple use philosophy.

The top five combination factors account for only 14
percent of the total, which is a further indicator that
respondents were spreading their relevance rating throughout
more factors. None of the five combination factors listed
below received a unanimous rating for all regions. Again
the increasing diversity expressed would help account for
this condition. The five tOp combination factors listed for
this situation general tree are:

1. Flora and Fauna/Wildlife

2. Erosion/Water

3. Political and Social Forces/Wilderness

4., Management Practices/Timber

5. Geology and Physiography/Wilderness
Wilderness obviously is considered more strongly as an
Option for undeveloped lands. This, in part, is probably
due to current agency policy including wilderness-candidate
area and roadless area designations.

Reviewing the individual factors and their relative
importance, we find Flora and Fauna first; Geology and
Physiography, second; Management Practices, third; and

Political and Social Forces, fourth for the Site Factors and

107

Forces. These same four factors are essentially repeated in
each of the situations; however, the expressed importance
order is different (Figure 22). It seems that what the
reSpondents are rating falls into a recognizable and perhaps
predictable pattern for not only this situation, but all
three. The four basic Site Factor and Force considerations
revolve around the land, the vegetation, the people, and the
cultural practice. The order of importance becomes a
function of the use options.

Forest Resource Potential, by-and-large, follows the
pattern established in the previous two situations. The
order of importance based on the ranking is identical to
situation 2. The l-through-4 order is Timber, Water,
Recreation, and Wildlife. This order, however, as well as
the specific factors does not remain constant for each
region. Depending upon the region, however, all the resource
potential factors have been ranked in the top four.

Fire continues to maintain a similar quartile
pattern. Over 82 percent of the tree values are accounted
for in the upper and upper-middle quartiles. A strong
cluster of upper-quartile cells persists. In problem 3 it
has even grown somewhat as it contains 14 of the 20 upper-
quartile cells. Time of Year and Fire Danger have the most
cells for all fire behavior factors with four each. Protec-
tion Level is top in the Fire Management category with five

upper-quartile cells (Figure 23).

108

.mmnoom mocm>mamu Hm>ma Hmcofiumwwcmmuo can mmmum>m omaoom

Hmflucmuom moHDOmmH Usm mmouom can muouomw muwm

mm

0N

ucoouwd

ma ca

 

1

nfi

 

51

 

AdeszOQ
BUMDOmmm memOm

 

mxéugimu-Il AQfiJ fimcpm

Hm>Qa Hacosvmm u o Ao>oa unauumso

 

ucouumm
MN fin MA ow, Mw o
a
on
socno +_B
mmocuoUHAZ +3‘u
mofiuwcumu Ill
noun: 0&0
muaapaaz r
coHuoouoom r,
wmcmm om
honefib 8+
0 .40

um aofiumsuflmuu.mm assess

horse

I. Guam nonwuomoum

 

 

 

 

 

mmUmOm O24
mmOBU<L wFHm

 

mwoauomud
ucoEoUcccz

moa50coom

moouom Hmaoom
ncm Havanaaoa

muflwwafiz

ommomfio
can muoomcH

cosmOHu

canon
can csoHL

snacumoamhna
pcm mmoHcoo

109

Ham MOM mmmcmu mafluumsq won» mocm>oamu Hmumcwm mmmnm>4

 

.owcfinfioo mumo
"m coflumsufimuu.m~ museum

 

 

 

o ormoo. enco.unn.o. mm.o.-_o.o. memo.u1.mo. u4~_a<na ro1u z~z~_)
muocpzwomua so uozqa
o.~ ..o~ w.~n $.11 mo_~x1ac ro1u z_th_x
ququwuaua ur— no 13m
--~ mm-~ nmmmn 11111
mule; unoo_z woos—z quad: "wJN—quo
acne; «can:
_ ~ _
_ _ _
_ ....~ ~.~_~ ...._ .____ __.- ~____ __~__ _-_. .~_.d ~ .»u_ouan. _
~ _ cur—o _
H _ ~
_ _ _
~ _~—_— --~ --~ nannn nnmnn nnnnn 11111 --~ --~ _ zo_»1p_ _
_ _ u4_maxuq u
_ ~ _
~ _ ~
~ __.~_ --~ nnnnn nnmnn 11111 11111 11111 -~m~ nnnnn _ whomuuu _
~ _ ma_u _
_ _ _
_ _ _
_ ~_._~ --~ nnnnn -m~m manna manna wwmmm --m manna _ mo~1ozoou _
n _ uq_u ~
~ _ _
_ _ ~
_ __‘~_ --~ --~ Manna nnmmn nnnmn nnmmn NNNNN --~ ~ um: wx_u ~
_ _ _
_ . _
_ _ _
_ ~_~.. nnmnn 11111 11111 nmmmn nnnnn ~m-~ --~ 11111 _ zo_»ou»uo .
_ _ ~
~ _ _
n _ _
u -.__ ...—A 11111 11111 11111 11111 nnmmn --~ 11111 _ 4m)“; ~
_ _ zo_»ouboxa _
_ . u
_ _ _
_ -__.. ‘_~—~ 11111 11111 11111 11111 --~ _~_—~ nnnnm _ zo_»7u>uqa _
~ ~ _
_ u n
u _ _
_ ____~ --~ 11111 11111 11111 11111 --~ --~ nnnnn _ mozuzatooo _
_ _ ua_u _
n _ ~
_ u ~ ~ . ~ ~ _ _ _ mzc»o1u
_ .>u~oumm. — . auoz<o _ «an» _ may» _ wrano> _ >._m _ zpozun _ O1uxam ~ hzuxuo<z1x
— awrpo ~ wxoxm u um~u ~ no wt.» u Amok u qwau _ Iprz— _ uzqgu _ no mp<a — wa~u
mao~u<u ao~>¢rum um—u

nnn n2 0 1:0; ouhdhoa n Icon n thQOQQ 44¢ Jw>uJ ou zo—oum mom u4~h¢<bo

110

Consideration of the individual factors indicates a
little more diversity in the Fire Management Factor area.
Fire Effects ranked number 1 for the first time. Protection
Level was ranked second; Fire Occurrence, third; and Detec-
tion, fourth overall. The shift away from a people-and—
product centered situation generally implied in situations
1 and 2 apparently caused the change in ranking order.

Fire Behavior Factors, considered individually,
maintained the pattern established in the previous two
situations. Fuel Type, Fuel Volume, Time of Year, and Fire
Danger were the first-through-fourth ranked factors, respec-
tively. The order for this situation is different from the
previous two, but the tOp four individual factors are the
same (Figure 24).

The combination items in the t0p five show several
repeats of those listed earlier. None of the top five
combination factors was ranked similarly in each region.

The cumulative total for the top five relevance scores only
accounted for 14.5 percent. This slight drop appears to
indicate the continuation of more diverse ratings by respond-
ents. Following are the top five fire combination factors:

1. Fire Effects/Intensity

2. Protection Level/Fire Danger

3. Prevention/Fire Danger

4. Fire Occurrence/Fire Danger

5. (Fire Occurrence/Time of Year

lll

omaoom nofi>mnmn muflm can ucmEmmmcmE muwm

.mmuoom mocm>mamu Hm>ma Hmsoflumecwmuo can mommm>w
"m coaumsufim||.1m musmflm

 

accouwa
mm om ma 0H m
D 9
IIIIIIIl,
O +~u
O 0
BY
69
U+n1
QIu
01.0
mmOhU<h

 

 

 

 

 

 

mOH><xmm wmmh

 

momeZanll

awn: assumomuuo

Macao

waEm

noocoa
when

use»
we wEMe

wm>9
aosm

mssao>
Honk

xuamcvucH

zuwswq
cecam

vacuum
no wucm

ucoosom
om Ma 0H

4

0 U

«m

 

 

 

nuf

 

meBU<h
PZMINOQZ<Z mmHm

 

smcuo

cofiuauaaanmnom

muouuum onus

mofleocoom
must

own mush

cofiuowuoa

ao>oq
c0wuomu0um

coaucw>mum

QUCQHHDUUO
oust

112

Considering the pooled regions, for the tOp five fire
combination factors discussed, only two combinations were
repeated in each situation. Protection Level/Fire Danger
and Prevention/ Fire Danger were ranked in the top five for
the three situations.

Generally, summarized data pooled for all regions
tended to mask the diversity found on a region-by-region
basis. There was further smoothing of variation observed
for the organizational level differences when data were
pooled. This smoothing effect was found for both the
general as well as the fire relevance trees. The only
exception might be the Fire Behavior Factors. In this case,
factor ranking on a regional level or almost any basis was
quite consistent. Although the general summaries are
important, it appears that specific interpretation should be
made on a regional basis.

Interregional differences certainly can be expected
as a result of the variable leadership styles of top manage-
ment. In regions where strong policies and guidances are
exerted from the top down, greater general agreement through-
out all organizational levels could be expected. A more
permissive management style, on the other hand, would tend
to produce a greater diversity of thought throughout the
organization. Neither style should be construed as being
right or wrong; however, they do help to partially explain

variations or lack of variations which were found in the

113

summarized data. Products derived from the forest, the
socioeconomic considerations, as well as other factors also
contribute to apparent differences between regions.

The general variations in responses found on an
intraregional basis can also be partially explained.
Reasons discussed for interregional differences above are
applicable here, too. Additionally, however, the basic role
of each level can perhaps account for the greatest impact.
The district level is essentially the action level. In this
position of the organizational structure, plans are imple-
mented; personnel are next to the ground. The forest level
provides localized direction and staff assistance. This
level provides direction, coordination, and control of work
done on the districts. The regional level has a much
broader role and provides administration and coordination
for several forests. At the regional level, considerable
authority exists in charting and approving management
policies covering vast acreages. Because of the different
role at each level, variations in concepts and perceptions
exist. This condition is illustrated by intraregional
differences in rating the relative importance of specific
planning factors.

A special look was taken into the possible differ-
ences in response made by fire management personnel versus
all others in the study. The responses were not greatly

different. 'To be sure, there were some specific variations.

114

However, overall the quartile summaries were quite similar
between groups. Due to the differences in sample size
between groups and the internal variability, it is difficult
to say if differences are really significant. In many
respects the differences between fire management personnel
and all others is less than inter- and intraregional differ-
ences exhibited.
The differences exhibited, however, support the need
for fire management personnel and others involved in land
use planning to improve communications. In this specific
comparison, the top five combination relevance factors, for
all personnel except fire managers, showed perfect agreement
with the pooled data discussed earlier. Fire managers
differed in their rankings of the top five combination
factors. Many of the same items were considered by fire
managers in their tOp five, but the rankings differed.
Further and most important, one factor differed or was a new
item in the tOp five list in each problem and for each
relevance tree. These new combination factors, as well as
those replaced by fire managers in their rankings, are as
follows:
--Situation 1 - General
Wildfire/Recreation replaced Management Practices/
Esthetics

--Situation 1 - Fire
Protection Level/Rate of Spread replaced

Prevention/Fuel Type

115

--Situation 2 - General
Wildfire/Timber replaced Flora and Fauna/Wildlife
--Situation 2 - Fire
Protection Level/Rate of Spread replaced
Prevention/Fuel Type
--Situation 3 — General
Wildfire/Recreation and Economics/Timber replaced
Political and Social Forces/Wilderness and Geology
and Physiography/Wilderness
--Situation 3 - Fire
Protection Level/Fuel Volume replaced Fire
Occurrence/Time of Year
Based on the preceding summary of fire managers'
changes to the top five combination factors, it is obvious
that their functional responsibilities came to the fore-
front. Wildfire was considered in some combination in each
of the general relevance trees. The top five pooled
groupings made no such ranking. In each of the fire
relevance trees, the fire managers added a protection level
combination item, two of which dealt with rate of spread and
one with fuel volume. These additions certainly show a
greater concern for both wildfire and protection level by
the fire specialists than shown by the remaining respond-
ents. This fact provides additional support for the need to
consider fire in land use planning and at the same time
determine the prOper role, mix, and impact for integration

of all legitimate planning considerations.

116

Needs Response

Once all the individual respondents completed the
various relevance tree matrices, they were reconvened and
asked to address three questions ad discussed in the methods
section. Their reSponses were noted and recorded on tape.
Results of the questioning interview segment were grouped
into 12 generic categories which will be addressed subse-
quently.

It is important to emphasize that one of the most
difficult chores anyone has to do in management or research
is first, to ask the right questions or define the problem;
and second, establish objectives. No priority is implied
here. It is very difficult to ask the "right" question
which needs answering. The time respondents had in this
portion of the interview was limited. Some of the answers
could be considered "off the cuff," even perhaps of the
searching nature. Many respondents had not had the oppor-
tunity before nor perhaps found the necessity to consider,
in any depth, questions like those asked. Nevertheless
through the results of the discussion period and in the
pooling of similar responses, useful information regarding
needs as viewed by personnel at all levels has been
assembled. Researchers must keep in mind the fact that this
is information viewed by field personnel as needed to

accomplish their job.

117

The responses perhaps are not the "right" question
but they do indicate the type of thinking that is going on
in the field at all levels. Research should be aware of
the types of answers and responses necessary to satisfy
these actual and implied needs. After all, research is a
service function and it should respond as such, giving the
field what they request. One additional comment before
delving into these specific responses, is that although some
of the answers or responses were not as definitive as one
might like, the basic ideas involved in the questions have
been planted with all the interviewees. As resource managers
continue down the land-use-planning road, and hurdles are
encountered, they will be in a better position to identify
them as such and hopefully respond by relaying questions and

needs to researchers for action.

Planning Needs

 

The initial question was: "What kinds of systems
and support do you feel research should provide to help you
integrate fire into land use planning?" The following
summarization of these responses is in a general priority-
rank order. This order was based on the frequency of all
questions falling into each of the generic categories.
Differences between the top five or six groups are quite
small and they perhaps should be considered of equal impor-
tance. Nevertheless, on a frequency basis, the following

rank ordering was possible.

118

Category 1 - State-of-the-art and "how-to" papers,

consultation.--The generic response category repeated most

 

often as being important to respondents revolved around the
area of "state-of-the-art publications," "how-to" material,
and on-the-ground consultations. Perhaps this might better
be labeled as a category concerned with communications and
technology transfer. There was a very broad-based interest
expressed by individuals as to the need for and desire to
have the "how-to" type publication indicating to the field
personnel at all levels, specific steps to which they may
address themselves to accomplish given objectives.

A need was also expressed for what could be classed
as "state-of-the-art" publications. Although some public-
ations of this type have been developed, there was a concern
as to the length and breadth of these normally prestigious
documents. There was a loud cry by the respondents that the
state-of—the-art publications should be much simpler or else
include a good, condensed, summary section which would
highlight the critical or key issues contained within the
publication. There was also a desire to have researchers'
comments on the accuracy and applicability of information
contained within the various state-of-the-art publications.

In this category, an expressed need was for on-the-
ground consultation with researchers. This would include
field observations and assistance by subject-matter

specialists in an attempt to get information transferred,

119

get the expert into the woods, and perhaps make the
scientist more aware of what is going on in the real world.
Field personnel implied that there would be more relevance
in research efforts if they could get the researcher down on
the ground level more frequently.

There was a need expressed for determining the
current status of research in fire as well as what was going
on at the various research facilities throughout the country,
including when results would be available, etc. It goes
without saying that if the field personnel could be on a
first-name basis with researchers there would be better
rapport and the transfer mechanism would more or less fall
into place without formal applications or needs for a

specific system.

Category 2 - Economic evaluation, benefit-cost
ratios, trade-offs, alternative evaluations, value systems.--
The next and second-ranked generic category of responses
revolved around economic evaluations, benefit-cost ratios,
trade-offs, and management alternative evaluations. Here
the most universal expression dealt with the need to be able
to develop, maintain, and defend benefit-cost ratios of
fire-related management activities, including slash disposal,
fire control, and fuel management. Part of this request was
admittedly tied to NEPA; however, there was a strong desire
voiced to be able to better develop and establish legitimate

alternatives, weigh them, and defend the eventual choice.

120

Field personnel wanted to be able to determine the odds of
success for different management strategies, determine what
the various trade-offs might be, what values might actually
be foregone, and what the benefit-cost values are. Field
personnel want better systems to determine values of the
various resources and activities on a more rational and
equitable basis and with greater uniformity.

There was even a very candid and widespread ques-
tioning as to the necessity and level of fire control
activities undertaken in certain situations. Personnel
believed that they must be able to show benefit-cost and
trade-off information to the public in a very legitimate and
supportable manner. If they did not take aggressive action
in a specific situation, it could be shown quite vividly as
to why such action was in the best interest of the public or

the site under management.

Category 3 - Prescribed burning, fire use, smoke

management.--The third-ranked generic category response was

 

directed at prescribed burning, fire use, and smoke manage-
ment. There is really no need to belabor some of the
specific items mentioned; but there is indeed a desire, a
need, and an interest to use fire in management activities
in the western regions. There is a need to know how to
prepare specific prescriptions for vegetative manipulation
to meet management objectives. There is a need for evalu-

ating procedures to review prescribed burning and determine

121

if the desired objectives were met. Potential applications
for prescribed burning are broad, ranging from understory
burning and type conversion, to range enhancement and
management. In every region visited, there was a keen
interest in using fire as a management tool. Some of the
reluctance to do so revolved around a lack of confidence in
their abilities to meet objectives. There seemed to be less
lack of confidence in being able to keep fires within
certain designated boundaries. They did believe, however,
that they should be able to manage resources using fire in a
broader context than only hazard reduction. In the geo-
graphic areas where airshed management is a critical issue,
smoke and smoke management questions were raised. If
managers are to continue using fire as a management tool and
increase its use, then at the same time they must be able to
cope with smoke management. There was a keen interest for
this item in some of the areas visited.

Use and application of fire in all aspects of
management activities needs to be broadened and explored.
Basically, they would like to know what can be done with
fire at this time. This includes the entire array of
management potentials including smoke management. The use
of fire beyond the traditional role of hazard reduction in
the West has apparently become a more viable management

option.

122

Category 4 - Management practices, fire ecosystems,

trade—off relationships.——The fourth-ranked category was

 

fairly general including management practices, fire
ecosystems, and trade-off relationships. It was perhaps
a catch-all, somewhat akin to a miscellaneous category.
Nevertheless, some very important items were voiced from
all levels of the organization.

As an indicator, interviewees wanted better overall
guidance from the Washington Office. They wanted a better
idea of how much detail is needed for the various levels in
land use planning. They stated that there was a need for
clarification of the relationship between land use planning
and fire management. More basic, however, were the needs
to clarify the objectives of land use planning itself. Many
people at all levels indicated the need for better direction
on land use planning from the top down with an explanation
of really where the organization was going. There is a need
for clarification of policy and direction regarding fire
and its role in the system. Basically they want to improve
uniformity of planning systems and procedures throughout.

An array of other items, many of which were still
management problems, were reiterated. Such statements as:
We need better technical support from staff specialists who
must function as subject—matter experts. We need to be able

to show how the fire inputs will differ by various management

123

situations. We must quantify the required tolerances
(losses) that are acceptable for the various functional
management activities. We need evaluation procedures for
planning not only fire elements, but all elements, in terms
of their role in the planning process. We must be able to
cope with the impacts of resource develOpment, fire activi-
ties, and impacts of fire activities on management develop-
ment as well. We need help in getting our people to think
of the system as a whole and not fragments as in the past.
Where does fire fit as a management tool and where can we
not tolerate it? We need alternatives to fire. We must be
able to make links between silvicultural practices, logging
prescriptions, and fire as well as other management acti-
vities. We need to know how much input from any given
activity is necessary to make adequate management decisions.

We must understand man's effect on the fire environment.

Category 5 - Fire effects, including control

 

effects.--Fire effects, including the effects of control
efforts is the next broad generic category. This category
is understandably somewhat related to Category 12; however,
it is more specific. This broad group essentially ranked
fifth in overall importance of all the groups discussed
here.

Several questions asked in response to the basic
interview question indicated a need to better understand the

effects of fire in almost all of the possible ramifications.

124

We need to be able to evaluate the impact of a given fire
and at the same time evaluate the potentials or actual
impact of our fire suppression efforts in relation to the
overall land management objectives. There is a need to go
beyond the first level effects of fire and explain what the
secondary and tertiary effects might also be. Not only is
there a need to evaluate the effects of fire, but also to
evaluate the impacts of land management activities on fire
management alternatives using a universal scale and common
language.

Because of legislative requirements, we need to know
effects of fire, not only on the landscape and various site-
specific situations, but also what changes in water quality
might occur with respect to types of vegetation burned and
intensity of burn. In a similar vein, we need to know what
types of impacts or potential impacts there are regarding
smoke and air quality. Fire intensities and soil fertility
are additional relationships for which more specific infor-
mation is needed. Effects of fire on insect production,
small animal populations, and their dynamics is another
piece of system information which the resource managers
need.

Projections of fire effects must not only be for a
short-term basis of 5 to 10 years, but extend further into
the ecosystem rotation. Nutrient loss or gain, relative to

multiple burns, must be explained along with an explanation

125

and understanding of other physical site changes resulting

from fire. Not only is it important to understand what are
the effects of fire in specific ecosystems and site situa-

tions, but also we must understand the effects of fire

exclusion.

Category 6 - Fire management, fire control, fire

behavior, fire danger rating, etc.--A broad spectrum of

 

items fell into this generic category, which was to be
expected when considering the broad nature of items making
up this group. Questions ranged from how to do better
presuppression to the need for better application of the
National Fire Danger Rating System. They pointed out the
need to determine and predict if protection can be provided
for specific management alternatives. If protection needs
can be provided, how can costs and effectiveness of the
system be evaluated? There is a need to clarify the
relationship between land use planning and fire management
itself. Along this same line, the fire organization should
respond in a more positive fashion to the land use planning
process.

Part of the above is perhaps an administrative
responsibility; however, research should be able to assist.
Obviously, tools and processes are needed by which fire
control planning can tie more closely into the total
resource planning process. Personnel must be trained to

insure that concepts are understood. District level

126

personnel need a much broader concept: what is beyond the
district level in terms of land use planning and management
considerations. Guidelines for various activities ranging
from planning to equipment use are necessary tools.

The protection, prevention, and social aspects of
fire were indicated as areas where there is a current
weakness. More specifically, how can fire become accepted
as a management tool in the western United States to the
same degree that it has been accepted in the South and
Southeast? They would like a simple consideration checklist
for land use planning and how fire fits into alternatives so
that important items would not be left out as they go through

the planning process.

Category 7 - Information storage and retrieval

 

systems, including data.--The next category revolved around

 

information storage and retrieval systems including a data
base. This category ranked seventh out of 12. One specific
issue addressed was the need to have some form or forms of
information storage and retrieval systems. The content
envisioned ranged from general and research literature to
very specific, site-compartment data for management decision-
making processes. Also fire history, vegetative typing,
wildlife inventories, timber inventories, etc., might be
included. These data would provide a better statistical

base from which to proceed in the decisionmaking and plan-

ning process. Information and retrieval systems should be

127

computerized. The data base should also be set up with
nationwide standards to insure a common thread between
Forest Service regions. It must be a system that a local
district or forest unit could afford to use. It must be a
system that can be used by the local practitioners without
the necessity to hire a data systems individual. A catalog
or a summary of information and retrieval systems presently

available and accessible would be worthwhile.

Category 8 - Fuelgprediction and inventory proce-

 

dures, fuel management.--The eighth generic category included

 

fuel inventory and prediction procedures and the broad item
of fuel management. Surprisingly, even with current service-
wide fuel management direction and action, this group did

not rank as high as anticipated. Basically all levels in

the western regions wanted to know how to go about the job

of fuels management. How do we classify our fuels? They
indicated a need for nutrient-cycling information related to
various aspects of fuel management. Furthermore they
indicated a need for information on the effects of various
fuel reductions in ecosystems on small-mammal populations.

In the area of fuel inventory, a desire was expressed
that research develOp methods by which fuels could be
measured and evaluated on a much simpler basis than available
today. Photo keys or other quick methods were mentioned as
possibilities. A need was expressed to be able to predict

the fuel-loading additions resulting from various management

128

activities. These fuel-loading additions must also be
related to fire potential on the given site. The economics
of fuel management were also mentioned as a need. They
further indicated that they want to know if the increase in
activity fuels could be measured in relationship to the
changes in resultant risks. Perhaps they could gather fuels
information at the same time that other resource-inventory

data is gathered.

Category 9 - Feedback, evaluation, review proce-

 

dures andyprocesses.--The ninth category by which responses

 

were grouped revolved around information feedback, evalua-
tion, and review of material. There was a very strong need
expressed to know what research is doing currently and where
they are in relation to completion of active projects.

There is a need for periodic updates of material. They were
normally unaware of what research was doing until some sort
of published result was out. They also wanted to have
stronger inputs into planning and development of research
projects. This comment came from all levels with particular
emphasis from the ranger district level.

They wanted to know if new, research-developed
procedures really worked, if so, how well, and what were
some of the ramifications relative to implementing them in a
field situation, etc. The implication here seemed to be
that research leaves the job once the results are published

and does not follow through to see if any modifications are

 

129

necessary. There was strong support to tie research into
field activities and problems rather than do research for
research's sake. There was a definite criticism of research
which was not problem oriented.

The need to get research results on the ground was
forcefully brought out and several avenues to do this were
indicated. Very simple one- and two-page summary publica-
tions, training programs, seminars, and on-the-ground
consultations were suggested. One request was that they
would like a national list of Forest Service researchers, as
well as an area list, with notations as to the subject-area
specialities for individual scientists. This would allow
them to contact researchers for help in answering specific
questions, either in relation to publications or to actual
field problems. There is an obvious, overriding need to
improve the communication chain between the researcher and
the practitioner. If there were more contact with researchers
throughout the year, the doubt, distrust, and lack of viable

,communication would soon disappear.

Category 10 - Computer hardware, software, analysis,

and display procedures.--Another generic category, one which

 

is very closely allied with the information and retrieval
system, deals with computer hardware-software analysis and
display procedures. There was strong interest expressed by
field personnel about computer software assisting them in

their management activities. Here, as in the previous

130

category, an expressed need was for catalogs of available
computer programs with research commentary as to the
availability, types of data required, input-output costs,
reliability, etc. Many voiced the concern that often some
of the available computer material was too costly for normal
Operations, and that office calculations (using desk-top
calculators and computers) could be done in less total time
than some of the system computer Operations.

They were interested in display and analysis
procedures for land use planning. They all could see the
need and desirability of fire input into such processes.
They reiterated that any computer system must be usable by
the field personnel. They indicated that they do not have
trained personnel to use many of the packages now available
and they don't know how to run them or perhaps are reluctant
to try when they have that Option. They feel that there is
a good need to use the analysis-display procedure capabili-
ties of the computer world to help generate good overviews
of the management alternatives that they are developing in
their planning processes. Computerized planning procedures,
they believe by-and-large, are on the horizon and will be a

must in the not-too-distant future.

Categoryyll - Hazard evaluation, fire probabilities.--
The eleventh generic category deals with hazard evaluation
and fire probabilities and received minor attention relative

to the others. Nevertheless, there was a need expressed to

131

determine how one could really measure the hazard existing
in the woods, much of which revolves around slash. How do
you determine what moderate resistance to control is? Is
slash really going to be a problem; if so, how much and for
how long? What are the probabilities of fire occurring in
slash versus nonslash areas? How can we identify these
hazard levels and how can we identify them in such a manner
so that we can be sure to meet our management objectives?

Better procedures are also needed to determine when
to burn and when not to burn. Can we predict increases in
hazards as a result of our management activities, and not
only the increase, but also the magnitude of the increase?
If this is possible, we need guides of some sort to assist
us. A strong voice was raised in the area of establishing a
process for arriving at a standard for "living with fire."
When can we do this and under what conditions? For example,
do we treat slash or in what condition can we assume the
risks? All these issues seem to center around the necessity
to evaluate hazard and establish probabilities of fire

occurrence .

Category 12 - The role of fire, fire ecology.—-The
twelfth generic category dealt with the role of fire and
fire ecology, in its broadest sense. The demand for infor-
mation in this area, specifically at least, was one of the
lowest categories of those develOped. It is difficult to

determine why this happened, but perhaps it is because fire

132

ecology may be implied under one or more of the other
categories. In addition, perhaps field professionals
believe that they have a general comprehension of the
ecological situation. In this twelfth and last generic
category, the basic question asked was that we need to know
more about the role of fire in the various ecosystems.
There was an interest in obtaining specific infor-
mation relative to fire ecology and the role of fire in
various ecosystems. Some individuals wanted to know how
they might maintain various vegetation types using fire as
a management tool, and perhaps a corollary to this was the
expressed need to understand the role of fire as related to
the various management systems that were at their disposal.
One of the Specific questions voiced by individuals in the
Intermountain area was a need to obtain a better definition
of succession following fire, based on prefire habitat types
and prefire land types. In this same general area was an
expressed need to determine and categorize fires as to
intensities so that relationships and probabilities of

successions expected to follow could be predicted.

Accuracy_Requirements

The second specific question asked in the inter-
view segment of the study in each location was as follows:
"What kind of accuracy and resolutions do you feel that

you need now? What would you like eventually?" Although

133

the first major question on needs created some problems
and hesitation, the second question presented even more.
Perhaps the most obvious and important issue regarding the
tendency to delay response centered around the need to be
situation or site specific. In general, however, the
major point made by respondents at all levels throughout
the sample was that any improvement over what we have
today would be very helpful. They tried to indicate the
researcher's desire to get 99 percent accuracy was well
beyond their ability to utilize such information and make
applications in the real world.

The district level response varied between 51
percent on up to 99 percent for special situations; but the
majority were saying if they could have from 60 to 80
percent accuracy, they would be well ahead of where they
are right now. They fully realized that many of the
responses were indeed site specific and would vary depend-
ing upon the situation. Some areas and some conditions
would require much more accuracy or probability of success
than others. The general forgiveness of many of the eco-
systems being manipulated in our management practices
helps cover up some of the low-accuracy applications.

What they seemed to be saying was that if they could improve
their decision probabilities for success by 5 or 10 percent,

that this would be a giant step forward.

134

Eventually, of course, they would like to be able to make
more decisions with a greater probability of success.
However, they are well aware of the fact that they will
continue to make decisions regardless of whether there is
any more research information or not. In that respect,
then, any improvements certainly will be an assist.

The need to keep resolutions in pace with their
intended application was spelled out.; They would be more
than willing to accept first-approximation information that
might come from what could be classed as "quick-and-dirty"
studies. All they are asking for is point out how good,
how applicable, and what the chances might be in respect
to a specific situation. They believe that it is their job
to determine what to do from that point forward. After all,
they are responsible for the land, not the researcher.

They also believe that once they begin refining our manage-
ment objectives, then the need for more specific information
falls in place with that change.

In summary, what the field personnel seemed to be
saying was that they need to get existing information into
the system. They need to be professional enough to extend
,that information as far as their expertise will allow for
the situation at hand. They will tell research when they
need more specific information. They will indicate when
they can't do something because the kind of information is

not good enough. They do, however, need some idea as to

135

the reliability existing in the information and applications.
They would like to have some ideas as to how far the infor—
mation can legitimately be extrapolated for the situation

at hand. To use an old research cliche, they just want

to know what time it is, they don't want research to build

a clock for them.

Review, Response,
and Literature

 

The third and final question asked during the inter-
view process was: "When the RD&A is developing processes
and procedures, would you feel that you would have the time
to respond and provide input as we head down the road? Do
you want to be involved? How much?" The response to this
question, although it may be considered somewhat of a
"loaded" one, was very gratifying. There was a unanimous
concurrence from all interviewees involved that they must
keep abreast with what research is doing. Theymust pro-
vide inputs and feedbacks. The only reservations voiced
were those of a time element and the necessity to limit
such inputs to perhaps a few pointed remarks. They could
not respond in great length and depth upon reviewing the
various materials presented them. They could come back
with marginal notes and some type of assessment as to -
whether research had met the goal. This was one of the

important outcomes of the study. It illustrated that in

136

the past we had perhaps not utilized this avenue to the
extent we could have; and that there is, indeed, a real
interest and input to be included as well as a need. They
sincerely believed that they had an obligation to respond.
In short, the answer to the basic question was an unequi-
vocal "yes, we want to be involved and we will be involved

as much as our other tasks allow us to be."

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDAT IONS

A study was conducted to identify existing land use
planning-fire management relationships including policy,
direction, and guides at the various levels in the National
Forest System of the U.S. Forest Service. In addition, the
study was designed to identify critical decisions and
determine information requirements for integrating fire
management into the land use planning process at all levels
and to provide inputs which can be used to modify the land
use planning procedures to include and integrate appropriate
fire management considerations. Information relative to the
first part of the study was obtained through a review of the
legislation, policies, and other formal direction. An
attempt was made to identify those areas where specific
impact on land use planning-fire management was either
detailed or implied. Narrative summaries and comments were
develOped. The second portion of the study was approached
by using, in part, a formal interview. These interviews
were conducted with personnel in fire management, land use
planning, as well as the other traditional functional areas
in the Forest Service such as timber. Contacts were made

using a random sample at all levels in the organizational

137

138

hierarchy throughout the western regions including Alaska.
Each sample location group was asked to respond to three
land use fire management planning situations. A normative
forecasting procedure, PATTERN (Planning Assistance Through
Technical Evaluation of Relevance Numbers), was used. Two
relevance trees, one general and one fire, were developed
for application with three diverse planning situations.
These ranged from an urban/forest interface planning situ-
ation, to a well-developed forest planning situation, and
finally to an undeveloped area planning situation.

A relevance tree, as used in this study, was
basically a structured decision network consisting of two
dimensions. In the general relevance tree, one dimension
dealt with forest-resource-potential considerations that may
influence a decision about fire management-land use planning
and development. The second dimension, or cross support of
the tree, involved various site factors and forces of the
basic natural resource. The fire relevance tree considered
fire management factors in one dimension and fire behavior
factors in the second dimension. Relevance scores for
either tree reflected the decisionmakers' attitude about the
relative importance of selected factors for each planning
situation.

The final aspect of the study was addressed by
asking all groups contacted a series of standard questions,

then summarizing the results.

139

Legislation and Related Guidance

 

The review of pertinent legislation and related
agency guidance revealed several points. In respect to some
of the legislation, there were several items of an explicit
nature which have an impact on land use planning-fire
management relationships. These points were found as far
back as the agency's Organic Act of 1897 and as recently as
the Resources Planning Act of 1974. In much of the legisla—
tion reviewed, there were also many areas where the consid-
eration of fire management in combination with land use
planning was implied. No lengthy or really specific guidance
was found relative to the rather narrow subject area of
integrating fire in land use planning.

The legislation reviewed can indeed have a restric-
tive impact regarding fire and the planning process. Mana-
gers must be aware of the legal constraints to avoid being
placed in an indefensible position by exceeding their
statutory authority.

The review of agency guidance, primarily the Forest
Service Manual, in this specific planning area did not
reveal much more direction other than in a broad context.

No Specific processes were found and much of the advice only
enumerated items to consider or coordinate between functions.
Even though general direction exists, the specific direction
for implementation either does not or is relatively weak at
this time. 'Regional Manual supplements did not improve the

situation to any great degree.

140

Although much Specific information and manual advice
may not exist, some planning teams have developed informal
methods for identifying and integrating fire-land use
planning relationships. Because of the current lack of
unifying national direction on this and perhaps related
topics, each planning level does what it perceives as best
and most important. Resulting planning products range from
poor to excellent in regard to their apprOpriate considera-
tion of fire management.

Results of this study have indicated that the
legislation, the servicewide manual guidance, regional
manual supplements, and other related material are sorely
lacking in specific direction for integrating fire management
with land use planning. Before solid progress can be made,
existing guidance must be more clearly interpreted, become
more specific, and processes and procedures included to the
extent of providing unifying direction. Without such action
the nondirectional efforts of today will continue.

It is recommended that more centralized and stronger
guidance be provided at all levels in land use planning,
with particular emphasis on the fire management integration
area. In addition, better interpretation and specific
processes and procedures are needed to assist in integrating

fire and land use planning.

141

Critical Decisions

 

The use of PATTERN and attendant relevance trees has
provided a series of data illustrating what respondents
throughout the West believe are important considerations for
the three planning situations outlined earlier. Agreement
and disagreement have been identified among, between, and
within regions, organizational levels, and respondent
positions. These relevance tree data provide the interacting
priorities for the management decisions presented. In all
cases, 25 percent of the adjusted relevance scores accounted
for approximately 50 percent of the entire relevance tree
value. This was true in both the general as well as the
fire relevance trees for all situations. Very few of the
combination factors for each relevance tree maintained a
consistently high (top five) ranking between regions.

The factors that maintained their top five combi-
nation positions were as follows:

--Urban/Forest - General

Political and Social Forces/Recreation
Political and Social Forces/Esthetics
--Urban/Forest - Fire
Prevention/Fire Danger
Prevention/Time of Year
--Well Developed - General
Management Practices/Timber
—-Well Developed - Fire

Prevention/Fire Danger

142

—-Undeveloped Forest
None

Generally, pooling data for all samples tended to
mask the diversity found on a region-by-region basis. The
smoothing further tended to hide organizational level
differences. One exception might be considered since the
Fire Behavior Factors generally maintained their ranking and
relative position regardless of the stratification used.
Specific interpretation for any regional applications should
be made.

Data presented in this report should permit land
managers and land use planners alike, at varying levels and
in different geographic locations, to better understand just
how the others approach the three selected planning
situations used in this study. These data will also help in
indicating just what are some of the important constraints
in various decision situations. Through a more complete
understanding, as well as a more objective evaluation of
important factors, planners can better coordinate activities
both between units and among various levels in the organi-
zational hierarchy.

The relevance trees, quartile diagrams, and other
types of stratification provide a depiction of the respond-
ents' concepts as to the various functional relationships of
the factors considered for the defined situations. Using

such established functional relationships, one can identify

" 143

areas where information is available and usable at the
present time, as well as identify areas of information
scarcity. The described functional relationships can
further be used in various forms of training relative to
land use planning. Comparisons of models to the functional
relationships expressed can provide certain validation as
well as material for model building and refinement. Vari-
ables of apparent importance have been described by per-
sonnel at all levels. These factors can be further evalu-
ated as to their true value. They can also be used to
provide starting points for further development and appli-
cation.

As indicated by Shafer et 31. (1974), priority
values computed in this study can also be helpful in
developing fire management-land use planning decision games.
These can help the decisionmakers evaluate the consequences
of various alternatives. Furthermore, data resulting from
this study can be used as a reference point by which future
changes in perception of important factors in planning
situations can be evaluated.

The relevance tree scores can be used by research
personnel to delineate subject areas and priorities for
future research activities. By and large, the information
from this study has provided material for a more specific
problem analysis relative to fire management-land use

planning in the U.S. Forest Service. Results of objectives

144

l and 2 further provide the basis for supplying input into
both the RD&A Program development and source material for
interim modification of planning procedures designed to
include fire management considerations when appropriate.

Additional evidence, as shown by the comparative
analysis, indicates fire must be included in the planning
process. Fire factors in both relevance trees obtained high
adjusted relevance values in all three problems. Further-
more, the differences shown in comparing responses of fire
managers to nonfire managers support the need to include
fire personnel directly in the planning activities. The
differing perceptions of fire managers would add new insights
and greater breadth to any planning effort.

The technique used in the study, PATTERN, appears to
have application in developing individual plans. The
process provides an objective procedure to assess, order,
and eventually resolve the integration of multiple factors
in a two-dimensional matrix. Planning teams can use such a
procedure to quantitatively assess their posture on various
planning issues for which relevance trees can be constructed.
The public sector might also be included in the process,
especially in situations where great diversity of opinion is
likely to exist.

To monitor changes in values and priorities, a
subsample of the original respondents should be revisited in

about 5 years. Followup relevance tree material should be

145

obtained for comparison and evaluation of shifts in impor-
tance values. Summaries of data should also be made on a
region-by-region basis to supplement this general work for

more specific, local applications and interpretations.

Needs Response

 

The question asked all respondents concerning their
needs for integrating fire into land use planning evoked a
wide array of responses. Because of this breadth of
responses, it was necessary to group them into twelve
"generic" categories, ranging from "state-of-the-art" and
"how-to" papers and consultation to the expressed desire for
feedback, evaluation, and review mechanisms. Throughout the
entire sample many of the responses were repeated again and
again. The compilation prepared provides an indicator for
future research direction. These responses also assist in
sharpening the focus on current research and management
activities.

The broad category of communications and technology
transfer rated top as a need to integrate fire management
into the land use planning process. Basic methods suggested
included "state-of-the-art" papers, "how-to" publications,
and on-the-ground consultation. Economics, benefit-cost
ratios, trade-off procedures, and value systems comprised
the second most important need. The major concern centered
around the need to be able to develop, maintain, and defend

benefit-cost ratio material of fire-related management

146

activities. Third, the use and application of fire in all
aspects of management activities needs to be broadened and
explored. Some of the more specific concerns include
prescription preparation and execution, smoke management,
and postfire evaluation. Under the fourth-ranked category
(Management Practices . . .) personnel wanted better overall
guidance from the top down including more specific process
advice and clarification of land use planning objectives.
In the fifth-ranked position, Fire Effects, quantification
became important. Broad-based needs were expressed to
provide numbers on fire effects (good or bad) and on the
effects of fire control action for given situations.

Based on the above and more detailed discussions
earlier, it appears more specific direction (Manual advice)
'is indicated. Processes for getting the job done must be
developed and spelled out for general use. A strong,
universal data base is also a "must" item. Training in
planning phiIOSOphy and process would go a long way in
resolving some of the questions posed. Much is known and
can be brought to bear on the issues, but transfer mechanisms
must be developed, improved, and implemented. Field person-
nel must also be better able to define their problems for
research, not symptoms, which has usually been the case.

Replies to what kinds of accuracy and resolution
were needed now and in the future also brought forth a range
of answers. The major point made was that any improvement

would be helpful. The response would necessarily have to be

 

147

site and/or situation specific. Respondents need information
now, but would like some measure of its applicability. How
far can it be extrapolated, what are the probabilities of
success or failure?

All respondents indicated a desire to become involved
in the development of procedures for the Research, Develop:
ment, and Application PrOgram. They believe they have an
obligation to respond contingent upon their time available
and interest in the specific topic in question.

Three important items have evolved on the periphery
of the study. These items could perhaps be classed in the
everyday vernacular as "spinoffs." As a direct result of
this study, a wide and varied audience in the U.S. Forest
Service now has a clearer understanding of the purpose,
scope, and intent of the RD&A Program. Well over 300 field
personnel have had a face-to-face confrontation with research
on a current, pressing, and practical issue. These meetings
provided both important communications and feedback for both
sides. Finally, the sample used in this study, as a result
of the field's universal commitment to help review RD&A
material, provides a widespread and generally representative
series of entry pOints for continued field contact.

Because we now have some relative values on factors
affecting three decision situations, we have a much better
idea of what to change and where, in the event such change

is desirable. To very crudely paraphrase Lord Kelvin, now

148

that we have numbers (relevance scores) for some of our
planning factors, we know more about them. Again as
indicated by Shafer et_al. (1974), we can consider, in a
sense, that the relevance trees are simulated chessboards,
and we have tried to identify those squares containing the
most powerful pieces.

Finally, this study should be completed as originally
planned to include Forest Service Regions 8 and 9 and the
Washington Office. Upon completion, servicewide comparisons
and stratification of the data should be made. This basic
study should be expanded at some future date to include
federal, state, and private land management agencies outside

the USDA Forest Service.

LITERATURE C ITED

149

LITERATURE CITED

Aldrich, David F., and Robert W. Mutch.
1974. Fire management prescriptions: a model plan for
wilderness ecosystems. USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap.
(In preparation for publication by Intermt. For.
and Range Exp. Stn.)

Anonymous.
1975. Let 'er burn? For. Rep. 4(4):8. Canadian Forestry
Service, Edmonton.

Baker, Junius O.
1975. A selected and annotated bibliography for wilderness
fire managers. USDA For. Serv., Washington, D.C.
36 p.

Barney, Richard J.
1975. Fire management: a definition. J. For. 73(8).

Bright, James R.
1974. A brief introduction to technology forecasting--
concepts and exercises. 248 p. Permaquid Press:
Austin, Texas.

(ed.).

1968. Technological forecasting for industry and govern-
ment. 484 p. Prentice-Hall, Inc.: Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey.

, and Milton E. F. Schoeman (eds.).

1973. A guide to practical technological forecasting.
651 p. Prentice-Hall, Inc.: Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey.

Cahart, Arthur H.
1961. Planning for America's wildlands. 97 p. Telegraph
Press: Harrisburg, Pa. National Audubon Society,
National Parks Association, The Wilderness Society,
Wildlife Management Institute.

150

151

Carder, D. Ross, and Clarkson H. Oglesby.
1973. Unified planning and decisionmaking: a conceptual
framework for Forest Service management. Stanford
Univ., Calif. Rep. REP-49, 252 p.

Clawson, Marion.
1975. Forests for whom and for what? 175 p. John
Hopkins Univ. Press: Baltimore.

Connaughton, Charles A.

1970. Fire related research and development needs. In
The role of fire in the Intermountain West: sympo-
sium proceedings. Fire Research Council, Missoula,
Montana, p. 199-201.

Council on Environmental Quality.
1974. Land use. U.S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington,
D.C., 92 p.

Curtis, Virginia (ed.).
1975. Land use and the environment: an anthology of
readings. Environ. Prot. Agency, Office of Res.
and Monit., Environ. Studies Div., Washington, D.C.
200 p.

Duerr, William A., Dennis E. Teeguarden, Sam Guttenburg, and
Nels B. Christiansen.
1975. Forest resource management. Vol. I and II. Oregon
State Univ. Book Stores, Inc.: Corvallis.

Esch, Maurice E.
1969. Relevance tree methodology. 17 p. Military and
Space Dep., Honeywell, Inc.: Arlington, Va.

 

1970. Relevance tree methodology--application to R. & D.
investment planning. 12 p. Military and Space
Dep., Honeywell, Inc.: Arlington, Va.

Gerlach, Frederick L.
1974. An examination of forest fire control information
systems and remote sensing applications. 79 p.
Univ. Montana, Final Rep. (Draft), Missoula.

Gordon, Theodore J., and M. J. Roffensperger.

1973. The relevance tree method for planning basic
research. p. 126-146. In,A Guide to Practical
Technological Forecasting. Prentice-Hall, Inc.:
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

152

Grad, Frank P.
1971. Environmental law. Matthew Bender & Co., Inc.:
N.Y. (with 1973 supplement).

Greenfield, Rand.
1975. The National Forest Service and the Forest and
Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974.
Nat. Resour. J. 15(3):603-628.

Hartgraves, Rex.

1974. Unified planning process. In Analytical methods
computer applications in USFS planning and decision-
making. School of Bus. and Tech., Oregon State
Univ., Corvallis. Chapter 1.

Hartgraves, Charles R., and J. N. Moore.
1974. Land use planning on public lands. Mont. Bus.
Quart. 12(4):45-53. Univ. Montana, Missoula.

Jantsck, Erich.

1968. Integrating forecasting and planning through a
function-oriented approach. In Technological
Forecasting for Industry and Government. p. 426-
448. Prentice-Hall, Inc.: Englewood Cliffs,

New Jersey.

Kaiser, Edward J., and Peggy A. Reichert.
1975. Land use guidance system planning for environmental
quality. Nat. Resour. J. 15(3):530—565.

Kenops, Darrel L.
1975. Fire management and land use planning in the
Northern Region - an opinion from a peon. USDA
For. Serv., Idaho Zone Planning Team, Sandpoint,
Idaho. 8 p. mimeo.

Layser, Earle F.
1975. Methods and criteria for a planning and decision-
making process. USDA For. Serv., Southwestern
Region, Albuquerque, (draft) 51 p.

League of Women Voters.
l975a. The national voter. 25(1) Pub. No. 582, 45 p.

l975b. The national voter. 25(2) Pub. No. 592, 29 p.

 

Libby, Lawrence W.
1974. Comprehensive land use planning and other myths.
J. Soil and Water Conserv. 29(3):106-108.

153

Martino, Joseph P.
1972. Technological forecasting for decisionmaking. 750
p. Elseview Pub. Co., Inc.: N.Y.

McHarg, Ian L.
1969. Design with nature. 197 p. Doubleday/Nat. Hist.
Press: Garden City, N.Y.

McGuire, John R.
1975. Fire as a force in land use planning. J. For.
81(1):36-38.

Moore, William R.

1970. Fire management in the Northern Rockies. In The
role of fire in the Intermountain West: symposium
proceedings. Intermt. Fire Res. Council, Missoula,
Montana, p. 167-171.

1974. From fire control to fire management. Western
Wildlands l(3):ll-15.

Morton, Rogers C. B.
1975. Increasing renewable resource potential - an
insurance policy. J. For. 73(3).

Natural Resources Journal.
1975. Symposium on land use planning. 15(3):473-580.

Public Land Law Review Commission.
1970. One-third of the nation's land. U.S. Gov. Printing
Office, Washington, D.C. 342 p.

Reilly, William K. (ed.).
1973. The use of land: a citizens' policy guide to urban
growth. 318 p. Crowell CO.: N.Y.

Resler, Rexford A.
1975. A challenge to trainees. Fire Management, USDA
For. Serv., Washington, D.C. 36(1):3-5.

Robinson, Glen 0.
1975. The Forest Service. 337 p. John Hopkins Univ.
Press: Baltimore.

Schroth, Peter W., and Zygmunt J. B. Platter.
1974. Nature, law, and society. 5th preliminary edition.

Shafer, Elwood L., Jr., and Douglas A. Morrison.

1969. Some relevant factors for selecting recreation-
development decisions. Unpub. study plan on file
at the USDA For. Serv., Northeastern For. Exp.
Stn., Syracuse, N.Y. 17 p.

154

, George Moeller, Douglas A. Morrison, and Russell

 

Getty.

1974. Recreation, resources, and right decisions. USDA
For. Serv., Res. Pap. NE-293, 16 p. Northeastern
For. Exp. Stn., Upper Darby, Pa.

Society of American Foresters.
1974. Foresters in land use planning. In 1973 national
convention: proceedings, Washington, D.C., 275 p.

Southwestern Interagency Fire Council.
1971. Planning for fire management: symposium proceedings.
108 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.
(n.d.) Land use planning. Planning Team, Sandpoint Zone,
Idaho Panhandle National Forest. 206 p.

1964. Forest Service Manual, Title 2100, Multiple Use
Management. Region 4, Supplement 13, Ogden,
Utah.

 

1966. Forest Service Manual, Title 2100, Multiple Use
Management. Region 4, Supplement No. l, Ogden,
Utah.

 

1968. Forest Service Manual, Title 2100, Multiple Use
Management. Region 5, Supplement No. 3, San
Francisco, Calif.

l970a. Forest Service Manual, Title 2100, Multiple Use
Management. Region 5, Supplement No. 5, San
Francisco, Calif.

 

 

l970b. Forest Service Manual, Title 2100, Multiple Use
Management. Region 5, Supplement No. 6, San
Francisco, Calif.

1972a. Land unit prescriptions, basis for fire management.
Div. of Fire Control, Region 1, Missoula, Mont.

 

 

1972b. National fire planning. Washington, D.C. 121 p.

1973a. Guidelines for development of unit plans. Northern
Region, Missoula, Mont. (working draft III), 38 p.

 

155

1973b. Research, DevelOpment, and Application Program
Charter - Fire in Multiple Use Management.
Intermt. For. and Range Exp. Stn., Ogden, Utah.
23 p.

 

1974a. Fire management considerations for land use plan-
ning. Washington, D.C., 28 p.

 

1974b. Forest Service, National Forest System acreages as
of June 30, 1974. U.S. Gov. Printing Office,
Washington, D.C., 38 p.

 

1974c. The principal laws relating to Forest Service
activities. Agric. Handbook No. 453, U.S. Gov.
Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 265 p.

 

l975a. Fire in Multiple Use Management, Research, Develop-
ment, and Application Program documentation.
(Review Draft), 91 p.

 

l975b. Fire management considerations for land use
planning. Region 1, Missoula, Mont., 5190
Management, 3 p. mimeo.

 

1975c. Forest Service Manual, Title 5110, Fire Suppression.
Region 5, Emergency Directive No. 4, San Francisco,
Calif.

 

l975d. Forest Service Manual, Title 8200, Land Use
Planning. Region 2, Supplement No. 1, Denver,
Colo., l p.

1975e. Forest Service Manual, Title 8200, Land Use
Planning. Washington, D.C.

l975f. The Forest Service program for the nation's
renewable resources, draft environmental state-
ment. U.S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington,
D.C., 598 p.

19759. Land use planning overview. Region 5, San
Francisco, Calif., 50 p.

156

I975h. The Nation's renewable resources - an assessment.
1975 Draft, U.S. Gov. Printing Office, Washington,
D.C., 385 p.

19751. A summary of the program and assessment for the
Nation's renewable resources. Draft, U.S. Gov.
Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 127 p.

; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land
Management; and National Association of State Foresters.
1975. Wildlife prevention analysis - problems and pro-

grams. Washington, D.C., 28 p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management.
1973. Fire training - a report. Washington, D.C., 34 p.

Water Resources Council.

1973. Water and related land resources - establishment
of principles and standards for planning. Federal
Register, 38(174) Part III, Washington, D.C.,

167 p.

Whaley, R.S.
1970. Multiple use decisionmaking - where do we go from
here? Nat. Resour. J. lO(3):557-565.

Zivnuska, John A.
1961. The multiple problems of multiple use. J. For.
59(8):555-560.

157

General References

 

Ayres, Robert U.
1969. Technological forecasting and long-range planning.
237 p. McGraw-Hill: N.Y., St. Louis, San Francisco,
London, Sydney, Toronto, Mexico, Panama.

Chadwick, George.
1971. A systems view of planning. 390 p. Pergamon
Press: Oxford, N.Y., Toronto, Sydney, Braunschweig.

Goode, William J., and Paul K. Hatt.
1952. Methods in social research. 386 p. McGraw-Hill:
N.Y., Toronto, London.

Holsti, Ole R.
1969. Content analysis for the social sciences and
humanities. 235 p. Addison-Wesley: Reading,
Mass.; Menlo Park, Calif.; London; Don Mills,
Ontario.

Raiffa, Howard.
1970. Decision analysis. 309 p. Addison-Wesley:
Reading, Mass.; Menlo Park, Calif.; London; Don
Mills, Ontario.

Sackman, Harold.
1975. Delphi critique. 142 p. Lexington Books, D. C.
Heath & CO.: Lexington, Mass.; Toronto; London.

Sokal, Robert R., and F. James Rohlf.
1969. Biometry. 776 p. W. H. Freeman & CO.: San
Francisco.

Stoltenberg, Carl H., Kenneth D. Ware, Robert J. Marty,
Robert D. Wray, and J. D. Wellons.
1970. Planning research for resource decisions. 183 p.
The Iowa State Univ. Press: Ames.

APPENDICES

158

APPENDIX A

LIST OF REGIONS AND RANDOMLY

SELECTED FORESTS CONTACTED FOR INTERVIEWS

159

Regions

10

 

APPENDIX A

LIST OF REGIONS AND RANDOMLY

SELECTED FORESTS CONTACTED FOR INTERVIEWS

National Forests

 

Bitterroot*

Black Hills
Rio Grande*

Carson
Cibola*
Coronado*
Kaibab
Tonto*

Salmon
Sawtooth
Wasatch

Angeles
Six Rivers

Siuslaw*

Chugach

*Indicates one or more districts on the forest also
were sampled.

APPENDIX B

LIST OF RANDOMLY SELECTED

RANGER DISTRICTS CONTACTED FOR INTERVIEWS

161

Region

 

APPENDIX B

LIST OF RANDOMLY SELECTED

National Forests

 

Beaverhead

Bitterroot*

Custer
Deerlodge
Gallatin
Idaho Panhandle
Lewis and Clark
Grand Mesa -
Uncompahgre
Medicine Bow
Rio Grande*
Shoshone

White River

162

RANGER DISTRICTS CONTACTED FOR INTERVIEWS

Ranger District
Madison

Stevensville
West Fork

Ft. Howes
Butte
Gardiner
Wallace

Musselshell

Collbran

Centennial
Conejos
Wapiti

Aspen
Dillon

*Indicates the forest headquarters was also sampled.

Region

 

163

National Forests

 

Cibola*
Coronado*
Santa Fe

Tonto*

Ashley

Boise

Bridger - Teton
Challis
Dixie

Humboldt

Manti - La Sal

Targhee

Inyo
Klamath
Los Padres
Plumas
Sequoia

Shasta - Trinity

Sierra

Tahoe

Ranger District

 

Sandia
Nogales
Jemez

Globe

Flaming Gorge

Lowman
Mountain Home

Big Piney
Lost River
Pine Valley

Ely
Jarbridge

Price

Teton Basin

Mono Lake
Oak Knoll
Mt. Pinos
Oroville
Greenhorn
Yolla Bolla
Weaverville
Sacramento

Minarets

Sierraville

*Indicates the forest headquarters was also sampled.

164

 

 

Region National Forests Ranger District

6 Ochoco Big Summit
Okanogan Tonasket
Olympic Soleduck
Rogue River Prospect
Siskiyou Chetco
Siuslaw* Waldport
Wallowa - Whitman Bear Sleds
Willamette Lowell

10 NONE

 

*Indicates the forest headquarters was also sampled.

APPENDIX C

DEFINITIONS OF TERMS

AS USED IN THE RELEVANCE TREES

165

SITE FACTORS

APPENDIX C

DEFINITIONS OF TERMS

AS USED IN THE RELEVANCE TREES

AND FORCES

 

Geology and
Physiography

Flora and
Fauna

Erosion

Insects and
Disease

Wildfire

The geology and topography of the planning
area, both base and surficial. Included are
such characteristics as productivity, percola-
tion, construction material, slope steepness,
accessability, number of peaks, landslide and
avalanche potential.

Types of vegetation in the planning area
including diversity, amount, distribution,
and its use potential. Types and numbers of
fish and wildlife that live in or can be
introduced into the planning area.

The susceptibility of the area to erosion
relative to development activities and
potential use.

Major insect and disease considerations in
the planning area which could or would impact
on the specific management activities.

Any fire other than controlled or prescribed
burn occurring on the area. (Wildfire under
this definition is totally unacceptable in
all decision situations. Wildfires which are
allowed to burn because they meet certain
criteria are no longer wildfires, see pre-
scribed fire. Type of ignition is not an
issue here.)

166

Political
and Social
Forces

Economics

Management
Practices

Prescribed
Fire

167

Constraints coming from executive, judicial,
or legislative branches of the government.
Effects of development on the sociological
structure within and adjacent to the planning
area. Included here is the influence of the
various problem situations and resulting
decisions on social institutions, the family,
employment, education, and value systems.

Impact of development on local, regional,

and national economics. Includes present and
potential opportunities for public and private
capital investment in complementary and
supplementary industry.

The cultural practices associated with
developing and maintaining the resource until
harvest. Included might be fertilizing,
thinning, transplanting, breeding, etc. The
technological procedures used to convert the
resource to another use. e.g., clearcutting
high lead logging, fishing, hunting, etc.

The use of fire in such a manner so as to
enhance management objectives. The source of
ignition is of no consequence. Only the
forethought of the implications is necessary.
Examples of use include land clearing, site
preparation, type conversion, fuel reduction,
and habitat improvement.

FOREST RESOURCE - POTENTIAL

 

Timber

Range

Recreation
nities

Wildlife

Water

Esthetics

The fiber resource available now or in the
future within the planning area.

The grass and browse resource available now
or in the future within the planning area.

The present and future recreation opportu-
within the planning area.

The wildlife resource, including fish, birds,
and animals, available now or in the future

within the planning area. '

The water resource available now and in the
future within the planning area.

The esthetic values existing now and available
in the future within the planning area.

Wilderness

168

". . . an area where the earth and its
community of life are untrammeled by man

. . . . an area of undeveloped Federal land
retaining its primeval character and influ-
ence . . . generally appears to have been
affected primarily by the forces of nature,
with the imprint of man's work substantially
unnoticeable . . . ." (Wilderness Act of
1964).

FIRE MANAGEMENT FACTORS

 

Fire
Occurrence

Prevention

Protection

Level

Detection

Fire Use

Fire
Economics

Fire Effects

Rehabili-
tation

The number and cause of fires occurring
within the planning area.

concerned with the attempt to
number of fires through education,
hazard reduction, and fuel

Activities
reduce the
law enforcement,
management.

The amount of resources, including men,
dollars and machinery involved in fire
management activities including the activities
involved in controlling and extinguishing
forest fires.

The activities involved in discovering the
presence of fires.

The intentional application of fire to
management activities.

The costs and benefits of fire including
nonmonetary values.

The physical, biological, economic, and
other impacts of fire upon the management
area and management system.

The activities involved in restoring an area
to productivity following fire including
those measures necessary to avoid accelerated
degradation.

FIRE BEHAVIOR FACTORS

 

Rate-of-
Spread

The spread at which the fire advances.

Flame Length - The average length of the flame measured

along its major axis.

Intensity

Fuel Volume

Fuel Type

Time of Year

Fire Danger

Smoke

169

The heat energy output of the fire after
expressed in btu/sec/ft of fire front.

The amount of fuel on an area. Often
expressed as tons/acre (Oven Dry Wt.).

The identifiable association of fuel elements
such as species, form size, and arrangement
that will cause a predictable rate-of-spread
or difficulty of control under specified
weather conditions.

The time of year such as spring or fall.
The probability of ignition, spread,
resistance to control, and damage of a fire
usually expressed as one or more indexes.

The particulate production resulting from
the combustion process.

APPENDIX D

RELEVANCE TREE

IDENTIFIER AND PROFILE CODES

170

4.

ITEM

 

Region

_Forest

District

Position*

APPENDIX D

RELEVANCE TREE

 

CODE
1 = 1
2 = 2
10 = 10
W0 = 11
l = 1
etc.

as assigned
leave blank
if NA

1 = 1

etc.

as assigned
leave blank
if NA

Supervisor
& Ranger
Timber
Water
Range
Recreation
Wildife
Fire
Manage.
Planning
S&PF
Other
(Specify)

171

\OCDxl

mU'lubWNI-J

IDENTIFIER AND PROFILE CODES

CARD

COLUMN

1,2

3,4

NUMBER
OF

PEI-.12

2

 

172

 

CARD
ITEM CODE COLUMN
Service Time 1 = l 7,8
2 = 2
Enter time in etc
F8 to nearest
whole year
Position Time 0 =.: 6 months 9
l = 1 year
Enter time to 2 = 2 years
nearest year
9 = 3.9 years
Education 8 = eighth grade 10, ll
12 = high school
Enter highest 16 = college
grade attended etc.
Management Problem Situation 12

(Scenarios)

Forest-Urban Interface
Highly Developed Forest
Roadless Area

NUMBER
OF
DIGITS

2

APPENDIX E

LIST OF FIRST- AND SECOND-LEVEL

ENTRIES IN THE CATEGORY "OTHER"

173

APPENDIX E

LIST OF FIRST- AND SECOND-LEVEL

ENTRIES IN THE CATEGORY "OTHER"

Air Management
Animal Control
Archeologic History
Area (Size)
Climate
Control Limit
Coordination with

other Agencies
CrOps
Cultural History
Cultural Resources
Damage Potential
Economics
Ecosystem Integration
Endangered Species
Endangered Species Habitat
Environmental Damage
Environmental Effects
Esthetics
Existing Land Use Patterns
Fire
Fire Control Policy
Food-Agriculture
Future Need
Hazard
Human Occupancy
Improvements Protection
Information and Education
Land Ownership Pattern
Land Uses
Lightning
Location
Minerals
Minerals Resource

174

Number of People
Occupancy
Occupancy/Use
Open Space

People

People Use
Politics
Pollution
Productivity
Public Reaction
Rainfall
Recreation
Resource Objective
Risk

Roadless Designation
Roads ’
Site Potential
Social

Social Acceptance
Soil

Soil Productivity
Soil Quality
Solitude

Special Uses
State/Private
Suburban Residential
Urbanization

Use

Use Man-Days

Use Patterns
Visability

Wind

Zoned Public Use

APPENDIX F

COMBINED DATA, RELEVANCE TREE SUMMARY

175

176

 

 

 

_ _ _ _
. _ ~ _
_ coco.—u _ 1~co. . pm.o. . m1~u. . 1oo_. . o1~_. . ~u1~. . ..oo. . n_~_. _ 4¢»o_ _
_ _ _ _
~ ~ _ ~
~ ~ ~ _
_ 111°. n _ .ooo. . ~ooo. . mooo. . coco. . 1ooe. . oooo. . sooo. . o_oo. _ .>u_uuam. _
u _ _ awrho _
_ _ _ _
_ ~ . u u
. .s1o. u _ nooo. . coco. . coco. . okoo. . coco. . coco. . mmoo. . mooo. _ ua_a _
u _ _ cum—cumuaa _
~ _ _ _
~ _ u u
_ ~_m.. . _ -oo. . s~oo. . 1~no. . oowo. . ~o~o. . 1ono. . 11.1. . -_o. _ mwo~pu<za _
_ _ _ pzwzuoqz¢1 ~
_ 1 ~ _
_ _ — _
" .ooc. n _ ~_oo. . o_oo. . om_o. . m~_o. . mooc. . o-o. . o_.o. . n~.o. _ muuxozouu u

_ ~ _
a _ ~ _
. _ a muuaoa _
_ o-~. n _ o.oo. . o1oo. . oono. . wows. . mo~o. . 111°. . 1n~o. . moao. n 41—Oow oza m
_ _ u 41u_»_40a _
_ _ _ _
_ _ ~ ~
. 1s... a _ oooo. . oaoo. . 1-o. . m.~o. . mn_o. . ammo. . 110°. . .m_o. u ua~a14~3 _
~ _ ~ ~
_ u u u
_ n . _ umamm.o _
_ n~mo. u _ 1oco. . coco. . onao. . 110°. . kooo. . ~o_o. . mnoo. . .~_o. _ 021 ~
_ _ _ m.oum:. ~
_ u _ _
_ _ . _ _
_ 11o—. n _ ..oo. . n.oo. . “1‘0. . o_no. . aces. . 11‘s. . _..o. . -_o. _ zo_mouw _
n _ _ _
_ _ _ _
u _ _ <231a _
u ~.1.. u _ mooo. . 1~oo. . hdno. . more. . mmwo. . mnno. . a1_o. . mn_o. _ czq _
~ ~ _ «mOJu L
_ _ _ ~
~ — _ >ra<a u
_ 11... u _ 101°. . m~oc. . ms~o. . ammo. . o._o. . mowo. . ~1oo. . mo.o. _ 'co~m»za _
_ _ ~ oz1 >0053uo _
_ u _ _
_ n _ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ omoaoa
_ _ _»u_ouafi. _ mmuz _ _ u _ zo_p1 _ _ _ oz< uaoboca
_ 41cc» ~ auz»o _ names—n _ mo_»uz_mu u an»1r _ us.5g4_x _ -uaoua _ uozaa _ «an:_» _ u._m

41—»zwhoa-uuaaomuu hmuuou
.o_n u 2 ~ race up1poz . tact oz.m: . zuaxsz zuamoua

«on u4¢<p pUDOOCQ mmoau a<4~tum to wo<¢u>4

.oo 1 cm 1 0a. DMZ—mtou mzo—owm 44¢ «on (~40

1-1 115111

177

 

 

 

_ _ 4 n
_ _ ~ _
_ oooo._n _ once. . coke. m1~_. . 111.. o¢m_. . ~o1_. . o1o_. o1nc. . 1-_. . 4<»o» ”
_ _ _
_ ~ _ ~
— _ a _
_ ~noo. « _ o . maoo. sooo. . .oco. ~ooo. . nooo. . 1ooo. .ooo. . mooo. _ .>u_ouam. _
_ _ _ mur»o _
_ _ _ ~
~ ~ ~ —
_ mmoo. u _ mooo. . -oo. ~ooo. . m1_o. no~o. . .mdo. . ammo. m1oo. . mc~o. _ roubqbu _
_ ~ _ o4.mcrua _
u _ ~ _
~ _ _ _
_ omn4. u _ mocc. . ~1—o. on—o. . 45.9. n-o. . n4~o. . o1~o. msoo. . 014°. _ mpuuuum n
_ u _ mama _
u _ _ ~
~ _ _ ~
~ capo. n _ .ooo. . sooo. m‘_o. . coco. o~.o. . nn_o. . coco. 1noo. . oo_o. _ mo_:ozoou 4
_ _ _ ua_a .
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ 4
_ .~ko. u _ .ooo. . o~_o. omoo. . mooo. oo_o. . coso. . 1moo. m1oo. . oboe. _ um: ua_a H
_ _ _
_ _ n _
_ _ ~ _
_ -n_. u u mooo. 1 ~o~o. ammo. . a.mc. s04o. . ~o_o. 1 mooo. ~1oo. . node. a zo_»umhwo “
~ ~ _
~ . _ _
u _ u _
_ om~_. u _ mooo. . oooo. mono. . oomo. nswo. . Lama. . m1Lo. o1oo. . o-o. _ 4u>u4 _
_ ~ . zoupouboaa ~
. _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ oop_. n _ o_oo. . oeoo. 111°. . ammo. oawo. . mawo. . nooo. m~oc. . 511°. " zoupzm>uma M
_ _
_ _ — _
_ _ _ _
_ o1~.. u _ coco. . oooo. dowo. . -~o. n-o. . o~_o. . oogo. o~oo. . sm4o. _ uu2uaa=ooo .
u _ _ ma_u ~
_ _ _ _
~ ~ _ n _ _ _ ~ mmcpu<u
_ _ .>u_ouam. _ zuozao . a1u> ua>p u waJO> _ >—_m :bozu4 _ o<uaam ~ bzuzuo<z¢z
_ 41»Op ~ aurpo ~ 4x0:m na_a _ no wt.» 4usa ~ 445k _ -zu»z_ uz¢4a _ no up¢a _ ua~a
mac»o<a aon>1rum ua.u
.m~n u z 1 zmou weapon n tack ozum: _ mucxaz zw4moaa

aou w4¢(» huaooma mmoau 144—z—m no wo<au><
.oo 1 on 1 oz. ou2—mxou mzo~0uc 44¢ man (pcc

Nib musmflh

178

 

 

 

 

. . . .
. . . .
n 1111... . pooo. . eons. . om~.. . 1.... . can.. . m1o.. . o1n.. . ~m-. . 41.0. .

. . .
. . . .
. . . .
. coco. . . .ooo. . ~ooo. . nooo. . coco. . «coo. . ~.oo. . ..oo. . 1.09. . .>..uwam. .
. . . aux... .
. . . .
. . . .
. mnoc. . . mcoo. . ..oo. . 1~oo. . mooo. . 11.o. . amoo. . .o.o. . om.o. . ua.. .
. . . owm.aumuaa .
. . . .
. . . .
. omo.. u . o.oo. . ~1oo. . o-o. . cm~o. . on~o. . oa~o. . 1-o. . 1mno. . muu..u<aa .
. . . .zuxmoazax .
. . . .
. . . .
" noo.. » “ coco. . m~oo. . choc. . mo.o. . m..o. . 11.1. . m..o. . homo. " mu.xozouu "
. . . .
. . . mmouoa .
. on~.. « . coco. . ..oo. . om.o. . 15.1. . ~..o. . .o~o. . n1.o. . 11~o. . 51.uom oz1 .
. . . SaO...4oa .
. . . .
. . . .
. .111. u . nooo. . -oo. . p1.o. . oo.o. . 1n.o. . oo.o. . nnoo. . no~o. . uo.uo4.z .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . umaum.o .
. oomo. u . .ooo. . n.oo. . omoo. . n1oo. . oooo. . ence. . omao. . -~o. . oz< .
. . . mhuumz. .
. . . .
. . . .
. 110.. u . n.oo. . o~oo. . ~n.o. . n.no. . n.0o. . nn.°. . 11.1. . on~o. . 2o.moau .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . 12:1. .
. nm1.. u . .ooo. . s1oo. . .o~o. . mo.o. . m1~o. . ammo. . .-o. . o1~o. . oza .
. . . «mos. .
. . . .
. . . >za<a .
. oo~.. u . 1.11. . omoo. . mm.o. . .mNo. . pn.o. . 1n~o. . .m.o. . ~m~o. . -oo.m»za .
. . . oza >oo.ouo .
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . muons.
— n .>u.uudm. _ wmwz ~ ~ ~ ~ zo~ ~¢ u _ u 02¢ vao»u¢u
. 11.o. . 1.1.0 . -116... . mo..uz.mu . 11.1) . ma.4og.x . umaouu . uoz¢a . mmmx.. . u..m

.1..2u.oaauoaaomua .muaoa
.onn 2 ~ 11o. u.1»oa . :zoa Oz.m: ~ xumzaz zuamoma

men w4¢¢p buzaoma mmoau a44—x—n to U0¢uu>¢

.oo o Om 1 on. ou2~mxou mzo—oua 44¢ can ¢~¢Q

mum wasmwm

179

 

 

 

 

. . . .
. . . .
“ 1111..n “ nn11. . .011. 111.. . 101.. . ~np.. . -o.. . ~m~.. cano. . mo~.. “ .«.o. w
. . . .
. . . .
. 1111. n . 1 . 1111. 1111. . 1111. . .111. . .111. . ~111. 1111. . .111. . .>1.1111. .
. . . 111.1 .
. . . .
. . . .
. on1.. u . 1111. o 1.11. 1111. o 10.1. . 1.11. . 11.1. . 11N1. 1:11. . 1011. . zo..<.. .
. . . -1.11311 .
. . . .
. . . .
. o~¢.. u . 1111. o 1011. «n.1. . 01.1. . cmmo. . 1n~1. . no~1. 1111. . 11.1. . 1.11111 .
. 1 . 11.1 .
. . . .
. . . .
. nnoo. u . ~111. . 1111. 11.1. . 1..1. . n..1. . 11.1. . 1..1. 1111. . .1.1. . 11.312111 .
. . . 11.1 .
. . . .
. . . .
w 11... n . .111. . h..1. 1n.1. . 11.1. . 11.1. . oomo. . 11.1. 1.11. . .1.1. . 111 11.1 W
. .
. . . .
. . . .
. o-.. n . .111. . 11.1. cm~1. . 11.1. . 11.1. . 11.1. . .1.1. 1111. . 11.1. . 21..11.11 .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. 111.. n . 1111. . nn11. ~.n1. . .m~1. . me~1. . 1:11. . 11.1. 1111. . mn~1. . .111. .
. . . 20.111.011 .
. . . .
. . . .
. 111.. u . 1111. . 1111. 1111. . 1111. . 11~1. . 1111. . 1111. 1~11. . 11.1. . 21..21>111 .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. 11... u . 1111. . nn11. 1111. . 1.11. . nm~1. . .1.1. . nooo. .~11. . 1n.1. . 1121111111 .
. . . 11.1 .
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . 111.111
. . .11.1111. . 11oz<1 . «11> . 11>. . 1:141) . >..m 1.121. . 111111 . .21111421x
. .1.1. . 11:.1 . 111:1 11.1 . 1o 12.. . .111 . .111 . -21.2. 1:111 . 11 1.11 . 11.1
110.141 ao.>1111 11.1

.mnn I z

0 lack uh¢poa n Icon oz.m3 N tucxaz xuqmoma

101 me<» babooxm mmoau add—tum to uo<zu>(
.00 1 cm 1 Oz. 012.0190 mzo.oua 44¢ can (~10

1am musmwm

180

 

 

 

_ _

_ _

. oooo._u _ «goo. . om~.. . ¢a~_. . onm_. . __e_. . oee~.

_ _

_ ~

~ _

_ once. u _ ~ooo. . coco. . mooo. . «coo. . coco. . mooo.

_ _

_ _

_ ~

_ Nome. a _ noao. . ~:oo. . -oo. . oboe. . .a_o. . mmoo.

_ _

~ ~

~ _

_ sm:~. u _ m_oo. . Noao. . _o~o. . mwwo. . ooNo. . ~.~o.

~ _

~ _

~ _

a move. u _ nooo. . ...o. . ¢~oo. . on_o. . oo_o. . om.o.

_ _

_ ~

~ _

_ onn_. u . mooo. . o-o. . mm_o. . wm_o. . fio_o. . n-c.

. _

_ _

~ _

" «mac. n _ nooo. . coco. . m:.o. . os_c. . an_o. . om_o.
_

_ u

a _

“ .~mo. « _ .ooo. . ~:ao. . sroo. . o:oo. . -°o. . omoo.
_

_ _

_ _

_ -o_. u _ ndoo. . coco. . 90.0. . nowo. . osoo. . m~_o.

_ _

_ _

_ _

“ n~o_. u _ o.oo. . ‘omo. . omuo. . ¢o_o. . awno. . o-o.
_

_ _

_ ~

_ one". u _ n.oo. . ocNo. . n-o. . ammo. . ~o~o. . .nwo.

_ _

_ _

_ _ _ u _ _ _

_ _ .pu.uuam. _ mnmz _ _ _ . zo_~c

_ 4<~0p _ amt—o _ unmoJ_u _ mu~puzhmm _ :u»¢n _ uu_434_t _ ouxuua

 

Jc~r2wpcaouuaromua bmuaoL

own” a z N 1105 wbcpoa _ tack Oz—mD n twmtDz ZwJEOGQ

Gog macaw PUDOOIm mmoau add—x~m no uo<1w><
.00 0 am 0 on. awz_mtau ch—Oua JJ< can «>43

m-m musmflm

0

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

. O

O

O

_
~
_

~n_~.

mooo.

wroo.

00—0.

nnao.

tN—o.

msoo.

maoo.

.:.o.

o_~o.

ca—o.

dozdm

O

0

a
_
_

~:¢_.

n_oo.

o_—o.

oowo.

c:~o.

cwmo.

nm_o.

Nude.

n1_oo

o-o.

mmwo.

nuns——

~
_
u Jqpop
u

.>u_uuom.
«wt—o

uq_u
cur—aUwaa

«go—buaza
h2u7w6¢2<3

wuusozouw

mwuaau
4<_uov 024
Jaw—“.401

wa—uc;~3

wm«Un~c
o~.¢
mhuumz~

PO—mOQm

«rscu
oz«
«304;

.raqa
Icr_/»za
ozc >6040uc

———l—_~~~~—~fl~~~~—_~_—~————_—~~~_—————-‘~—~

_ vaq.u
~ 014 awopuqu
_ uva

_
—
_
_

.~~~~~~~~_—~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~_—_—~~~~_~__—~h_

181

 

 

 

 

_ _ _ _
_ _ ~ ~
_ oooo..« _ osoo. . coco. soo_. . coc.. . 050.. . 030.. . o:~_. . mmmo. . oo~_. _ Jcpo» _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ o~oo. » _ o . .ooo. .ooo. . .ooo. . acco. . oooo. . ~ooo. . o . .ooo. _ .»u_uuam. _
_ ~ _ muz»o _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ 0:9o. n _ nooo. . -oo. .ooo. . ao_o. . ma_o. . on.o. . s_~o. . .coo. . mo_o. _ :o_h<__ _
_ _ u n4.m¢:uz _
_ _ _ _
_ . _ _
~ :nm.. a _ hoco. . coco. n¢_o. . mo_o. . ~m~o. . Nome. . o.no. . mooo. . .o_o. _ «puuuuu _
_ _ a ua_u _
_ . _ ~
. _ _ _
_ oooo. u _ coco. . saoo. m:‘o. . .~_o. . n~.o. . 25.0. . .p_o. . .coo. . ac_o. _ ¢u_sozouu _
_ _ ~ ua_u _
_ _ _ ~
_ _ _ .
H -o_. u _ Nooo. . coco. mn_o. . sc_o. . os_o. . :n_o. . _m_o. . ~ooo. . -~o. _ my: ux_u _
~ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ _ ~ _
u -n.. u _ uooo. . ~m.o. ~m~o. . c.~o. . ~s_o. . n~.o. . mo~o. . «coo. . mo~o. _ zo_»um_uo _
_ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ ~
_ poc.. u _ :ooo. . o~oo. moNo. . n:~o. . m¢~o. . ss~°. . on_o. . ~aoo. . n-o. _ 4u>u4 _
_ _ . zo.»uw»oaa _
_ . _ _
_ _ _ _
H :-_. u _ coco. . oNao. em~o. . mmNO. . ¢-o. . :-o. . ~qoo. . swoo. . ,nuo. _ zc_.zu>uza “
_ _
~ _ _ ~
~ _ _ _
_ .on_. u _ o_o°. . o¢oo. _m~o. . cowo. . oc~o. . o.~o. . mo_o. . onoo. . :m_o. _ uuZUamauuo ~
_ _ — ua~u _
_ _ — _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ mac.u«u
_ _ .>u_uwamv _ amozao _ a«m» _ may» . u1340> _ >p~m ~ :bozuq _ O<uaam _ pzwzuo«z¢x
_ 44—0» _ 1wrpo _ uxoxm u;_u _ 50 wt.» _ Juan _ Juan _ nzwpzu ~ ux<4u _ go ubcq _ ma_u

 

.nnn u z

0 Ice; Ubdhoa n 8105 62—»:

much04u co~>axum um-u

n tuxtaz qumoza

can w4m1» pUDocxm wmoau C(Juxqw no UO<zu>¢
.OO 0 cm 0 Ca. Out—mlou v20~9wa 444 can (pcc

mum musmflm

APPENDIX G

COMBINED DATA, RELEVANCE TREE SUMMARY -

ALL POSITIONS EXCEPT FIRE MANAGEMENT

182

183

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . . .
. . . .
. 0000..u . 0000. . 00.0. . m0.~. . ~00.. . ~0~.. . 000~. . 0000. . 00... . 00.0. .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. mmoc. a . .000. . 0000. o 0000. . 0000. o 0000. o ..00. o 0000. . ~.oo. . .0u.uwnm. .
. . . 00:00 .
. . . .
. . . .
. 0000. u . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 00.0 .
. . . 000.000000 .
. . . .
. . . .
. .~m.. u . 0.00. . 0~00. . 0000. . 0000. . ..~0. . 0000. . 00.0. . 00.0. . 000.00000 .
. . . .207000202 .
. . . .
. . . .
n 0000. u . ..00. . 0.00. . ~m.0. . 00.0. . 0000. . 00~0. . 00.0. . 0~.0. . 00.202000 “
. .
. . . .
. . . 000000 .
. 000.. u . 0.00. . 0:00. . 0000. . 0000. . 0.~0. . 0.00. . 00.0. . 00~0. . 00.000 020 .
. . . .4u.0.400 .
. . . .
. . . .
. 00... u . 0000. . 0.00. . 0000. . 00.0. . 00.0. . 00~0. . 0000. . 00.0. . 00.004.: W
. . .
. . . .
. . . um«um.o .
. 0000. u . 0000. . 0000. o 00.0. . 0000. . 0000. . 00.0. . 0000. . 0..0. . 02¢ .
. . . 000002. .
. . . .
. . . .
. 000.. u . 0.00. . 0.00. . 00.0. . 0000. . 0000. . 00.0. . 0..0. . 0~.0. . 20.0000 .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . 42:40 .
. 0.0.. n . 0000. . m~00. . .~00. . 00.0. . ~0~0. . 0000. . 00.0. . 00.0. . 02< .
. . . «ac.u .
. . . .
. . . 0:040 .
. 00... u . ..00. . 0000. . N000. . 0:00. . 0..0. . 00~0. . 0000. . 00.0. . -00.w>:0 .
. . . 02¢ 0000000 .
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 000000
. . .0u.00an. . 0002 . . . . 20.00 . . . 024 «00.040
. 44.0. . 20:.0 . -2004.: . mu_.0r.mu . 10.02 . 00..04.m . owxuua . 00240 . 2007.0 . 00.0
44.020000uuuz:ovua 000100
.0m~ 2 ~ 1200 000000 . 2000 02.00 . 200202 2040000

no; w4¢<h buzooza mwcau OCJ—X~w no UO¢1u><

020200420: 00.0 0nuuxu cwz.axou 020—0—000 0.0

HIU musmwm

184

 

 

 

 

 

 

. .

. .

. 0000..» . 0000. . ~000. ~00.. . 000.. . .00.. . ~00.. . 000.. . m~00.
. .

. .

. .

. 0000. u . 0 . 0000. 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . .000.
. .

. .

. .

. 0~0.. u . 0000. . 0~00. 0000. . .0.0. . 0000. . 00.0. . .0~0. . 0000.
. .

. .

. .

. 000.. a . 0000. . 00.0. 00.0. . 0..0. . 0000. . ~.~0. . 00~0. . 0000.
. .

. .

. .

. ~000. u . .000. . 0000. 0..0. . 0000. . 00.0. . 00.0. . 0000. . 0~00.
. .

. .

. .

. 0000. a . .000. . ~0.0. 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000.
. .

. .

. .

. .00.. a . 0000. . ~0~0. .000. . ..00. . 00.0. . 00.0. . 0000. . 0000.
. .

. .

. .

. ~00.. u . 0000. . 0000. 0000. . .000. . 0000. . 0.00. . 00.0. . 0000.
. .

. .

. .

. 000.. u . ..00. . 0000. 0000. . 0000. . 0.00. . 0.~0. . 0000. . 0000.
. .

. .

. .

. .0~.. « . 0000. . 0000. 0000. . 0mm0. . 0000. . 00.0. . ~000. . 0000.
. .

. .

_ . . . . . . .

. . .00.uumn. . 100240 . 200» . 00.. . 0::43> . ...m . 1.0204
. 40.0. . 001.0 . 00020 00.. . 00 02.. . 00:0 . 40:0 . -20.2. . 00000

000.00. 00.>¢z0: 00.0
.00~ « 2 0 0000 0.0.00 0 1000 02.0: . 200702 20.0000

:00 v.11» puaooza wmoau UGJ—xqv no u¢<lu><
pzuxwo<z<r wz_u pawuxw Cu2_cxou AZO—b—mon 44¢

NIU wusmwm

0 NON—o

.
_
_
_

40.0.

. .000.

. no.0.

o nc_o.

o ...o.

0 0000.

. .0.0.

o 40NO.

. 00.0.

0 :m.o.

—
— eqwzan
— 09 0.41

~~~~—~~~-~~~~~—~~~~~~~~~_~~—_~——~——~~

a
n
_

ahk~UU3fi~
azr.o

TO~»¢»_
IJ~T¢Iu1

0.00000
00..

wu—zozouw
w3.0

00: 01.0

Zo—puu.uo

Ju>u4
20.0uw.oaa

zo..7w>0zn

0uzuua:uuo
03.0

000.00.
02070042<1
00.0

.
_
.
_
_
_
.
.
.
.
_
.
.
_
.
.
.
_
_
.
.
_
u
_
.
.
.
_
.
.
_
.
.
_
.
_

185

 

 

 

_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
“ oooo._u _ nooo. . oono. . ~o~_. . ooo.. . mon_. . o¢o.. . o~n_. . md-. _ 4cpo» _

_ _ _
u u — _
u _ _ _
_ ~hoo. a _ dooo. . nooo. . nooo. . o—oo. . «coo. . c.oo. . c.oo. . o~oo. u .>u_uuam. _
u _ ~ auxho _
_ _ _ ~
_ _ ~ _
— sooo. u — nooo. . ouoo. . ocoo. o _ooo. . n:_o. o nmoo. o no—o. . ~:.o. _ ua~u ~
~ _ _ cum—mummua o
_ _ H _
_ _ . _
a moo_. n _ o~oo. o acoo. o on~o. . ammo. . sc~o. . omNo. o .nwo. . memo. _ muuupu<ma a
_ _ _ pzuruo¢2<s a
_ _ _ _
u _ _ ~
“ oqod. u _ wooo. o «moo. . ouoo. o ~o~o. . c.~o. . sm~o. . os_o. o so~o. ~ mu—rozouu _

_ _ _
_ _ _ _
~ ~ _ mwuaou _
_ oo~_. u _ o_oo. . choc. . .o—o. . os_o. . ss_o. . homo. . o:_o. . memo. _ 4<_uow oz« .
_ _ _ J«u_»_ooa _
~ ~ _ a
_ _ ~ _
u mmoo. u _ cooo. o o—oo. o sn~o. o oo~o. . s~‘o. o oqqo. . msoo. . undo. ~ uwuuo4_n —
_ ~ _ a
_ _ u _
~ _ u wwaum_o _
~ Nemo. u ~ .ooo. o -oo. o nmoo. . onoo. . mooo. . nsoo. o omoo. o «awo. _ oz< _
~ ~ — mpuumz_ ~
_ ~ a a
u n _ ~
_ omo_. - _ o_oo. o o~oo. o o-o. o oqno. . osoo. . sn~o. . oogo. . onwoo _ zo.moaw ~
— _ ~ ~
_ _ u _
_ _ _ «2:4u _
— not—o u ~ mooo. o m:oo. o mo~o. . oo_o. . coho. . uowo. . o-oo . ~o~o. _ 024 ~
_ _ _ «coon ~
~ _ ~ _
_ _ _ >ta<a _
_ .onn. u _ n.oo. . smoo. . no.0. . smwo. . .a.o. . p¢~o. . mo.o. . ¢o~o. _ neo_m>za _
u a n oz< >ooqouo _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ a a _ n _ _ nuuaou
_ _ .»u_uumn. _ mmwz _ _ _ _ zo_»a o _ _ oz< maobucu
~ 4(p0» — aux—o . umwca_r _ mu_—w1_mw _ awpcr _ wuuaoaur — lumuwa ~ m0241 ~ munx~» _ wh~m

4<_»zupoaouua:omua pwwzou
.-~ u 2 ~ xaou whaboa . :aou c2_m: ~ zumaoz qumoaa

mom wJ¢<h puzooza mwoau a<J—x—m no wacau><

pzwxuo<z<x ua~u pawuxw owz_axou wzo_p_moa 44¢

mum musmwm

186

 

 

 

_ _ u _
_ _ _ _
_ oooo..u _ .coo. . a:mo. .:o.. . -o.. . oc~_. . o_o.. . o¢~_. . ocno. . as... ~ 4¢»o_ “
_ _ _
_ _ _ .
_ . _ _
_ ~_oo. u _ o . mooo. .ooo. . coco. . .ooo. . .ooo. . ~ooo. . oooo. . .ooo. _ .>u.uuam. u
_ _ _ aux; _
_ _ _ _
_ _ . a
o nno_. « _ sooo. . o_oo. smoo. . coNO. . n-o. . oa_o. . cm~o. . snoo. . coco. _ 7o__<__ a
_ _ ~ -4_m«zuz .
_ _ . _
_ _ o o
h :n:.. u _ mooo. . nooo. e~‘o. . ~m_o. . om~o. . aq~o. . ~o~o. . choc. . am.o. . mbuukuu u
_ . ~ um_u _
_ _ _ _
_ . _ _
_ m:oo. u _ nooc. . «moo. mn_o. . n~_o. . ms~o. . n~_c. . o_~o. . onoo. . o~_o. _ mu_xozouu _
o _ _ wa.k —
_ _ _ u
_ _ ~ ~
_ no-. u _ ~ooc. . ~._o. mono. . ~o_o. . eo~o. . co~o. . ~c_o. . oooo. . mn_o. _ mm: uaog “
_ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ s¢~.. a _ ~ooo. . oo_o. om~o. . oo.o. . whoa. . ~:~o. . oo_o. . coco. . ~o.o. _ zo_»uu»uo “
_ _ ~
_ _ _ _
_ _ u u
_ moc.. u _ «coo. . mnoo. coma. . on~o. . ~¢~o. . ~n~o. . on.o. . hnoo. . m-a. _ 4u>m4 o
_ _ ~ zouhuwpoaa —
_ _ _ .
_ _ o ~
~ ooc_. . _ o_oo. . mnoo. mono. . mono. . ~o~o. . ~m~o. . .ooo. . o~oo. . nmdo. _ zoopzu>uaa .
_ . _ .
_ _ o _
_ _ _ .
_ -_.. u . coco. . o~oo. ~m~o. . ~_~o. . a.mo. . o~_o. . ccoo. . «Noe. . o.~o. _ uuzuaaauuo _
_ _ ~ “mom ~
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ .. u o o . mac»u<u
_ _ .>m.uumm. _ auozqo _ «cu» _ ua>p ~ u234o> A. >p.m . zpozwo _ o¢uaam _ pzuzuo<z<x
o 4¢~op _ awzpo _ uxoxm wa.u _ no ux_» _ Jung _ Juan o uzw.z_ _ wx.4u _ no w»«a _ ua_u
maopu¢u ao_>¢xwm w¢_u
.-~ u z a :mou wb¢poa n smog cz_n: ~ zumxoz xudmoaa

wen w;m(b pUDooza mmoau 1(J—xnm u: wc<mu>4

bzwtwoqz<t wa—g pnwunw Owl—ctou mzo—b~moa 441

one mnsmwm

187

 

 

 

 

 

 

_ _ ~ _
_ _ ~ _
“ oooo.~u _ mooo. o mow—o o sp~_. o o~m~. o eo¢_. o menu. o ~o~no . ~¢¢_. _ 4¢»o— “

_ _
~ _ u _
_ _ _ .
_ mooo. u _ ~ooo. . oooo. o oooo. . oooo. o o.oo: o cooo. . sooo. . :aoo. ~ .>k_uuam. _
_ _ . _ «orpo _
— a _ ~
_ _ _ —
u memo. I ~ ~ooo. o ocoo. . meoo. o nsoo. o ¢n~oo o mooo. . acoo. . oo.o. — uc~u _
_ _ ~ cum—aumwma u
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ oc¢_. n ~ o.oo. o mm~o. . mo.o. o o-o. o mo~o. . cowo. . .m—o. . mm~o. _ muo-04ma _
u u _ pzuzuo<z«z _
_ _ _ u
_ _ _ ~
_ smoo. u _ oooo. o m.~o. o ~soo. o s~_o. . oo~oo . ~m~oo o oado. o demo. a mu—sozouu “
~ _ u
_ _ _ _
u _ . muuzon —
~ Non—o u — oooo. o oo~o. o ow.o. . omuo. o o~_o. . o-o. o on.o. . onmoo _ 4<~uow o2¢ _
o _ _ 4¢u_»_ooa _
_ _ _ .
~ _ _ ~
“ ooco. u . mooo. . oooo. . on_o. . oooo. . o~_o. . ~_.o. . -oo. . .~_o. _ ua.ao4~3 “

_ ~
_ _ _ ~
_ _ _ wm<um_o _
_ ooeo. u _ ~ooo. o oeoo. o ~moo. . anoo. . sooo. . ~moo. o ~¢ooo . oo~o. u 024 u
_ u . m»uuwz~ u
_ ~ _ ~
_ ~ _ u
_ o—o_. u _ ogoo. . oooo. . no.o. . _o~o. . ohoo. . a~_o. . ocno. . mo_o. _ :o_nomu ~
_ _ _ . _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ «roam _
_ ooo_. u _ n_oo. o o—wo. . .n~o. . so~o. . mmno. . .nNo. . ¢-o. . onwo. ~ 024 _
_ _ ~ «zoom _
_ _ . _
_ _ u >ra<a _
_ oom~. n _ m~oo. . nowo. . sn~o. . ¢¢~o. o es_o. . ammo. . oono. . ~a~o. _ ucc~m>za a
_ _ ~ ozc yooqouo _
u — — u
a — _ _ _ u u u o u muuaou
_ — .>u~uwan. _ mmuz _ u u — zo—p4 u — ~ 0:4 vao»u<u
~ 4(p0p _ murpo ~ Icwoq_n — mu_»u:»mu _ awpcr ~ uu~434_r — cwzuua _ uozqm _ aunt.» _ u»_m

Jaapzmboaouuazomua pnuacu
._s~ u 2 ~ zaou ub¢pou _ xaou c2_m= n xumznz :u4xoma

cog me<h puaooaa mmoau z<4~t~m 59 U013w><
bzwtwc(z<! ua—u mewa Cuz_1!ou MZO—h—moa 44¢

mum wusmwm

188

 

 

 

 

_ _ o _
_ _ _ ~
“ oooo... _ maoo. . mooo. oom_. . ono.. . ~_o_. . oco_. . o.~.. mono. . oo~.. ~ dope» _

_ ~ _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ ~
_ m~oo. u _ o . oooo. .ooo. . wooo. . mooo. . mooo. . ~ooo. o . .ooo. _ .>u_uuam. _
_ _ _ auzho ~
o . ~ ~
_ _ ~ _
_ oooo. u _ eooo. . o_oo. omoo. . o~.o. . ~o_o. . oo_o. . nn~o. ~coo. . oo~o. _ zo_Ȣ- _
_ _ — noomoxua _
~ _ ~ _
_ _ o _
o m~m_. a _ oooo. . oooo. mn_o. . oo_o. . .o~o. . moNo. . homo. oooo. . oo_o. _ mpuuuuu _
_ _ _ ua~u —
_ _ o o
_ _ ~ _
_ mmoo. u _ nooo. . oeoo. «o.o. . o..o. . oo_o. . e~_o. . o__o. onoo. . o¢_o. _ wu_yozouu _
_ _ _ ua_u _
_ _ a u
_ _ u u
_ noo_. n _ .ooo. . oooo. .e—o. . _m_o. . _o_o. . mooo. . om_o. omoo. . -.o. _ ow: uaou _
_ _ _ u
_ ~ _ ~
. _ _ _
_ ¢:n_. u _ cooo. . mo_o. nm~o. . n-o. . .p.o. . mo_o. . mo_o. scoo. . oo~o. . zo_»uu»uo ~
~ _ u _
_ ~ — n
_ _ o o
_ ¢¢¢_. - _ coco. o o~oo. :aNo. . mewo. . m¢~o. o ~c~o. o s-o. onoo. o -~o. o 4u>w4 _
_ _ _ zo.puu»oaa _
— _ _ u
_ _ _ _
o ~on.. . _ oooo. . s~oo. mo~o. . ~o~o. . soNo. . on~o. . oooo. «woo. . ~¢_o. _ zo_»zw>uma o
~ ~ n u
_ ~ ~ ~
. _ u _
_ song. » o ~_oo. . ~noo. o-o. . os~o. . mm~o. . -~o. . oooo. nnoo. . so.o. ~ uuzuaaauoo _
_ _ — maou _
_ . o o
~ ~ ~ ~ o m — ~ ~ mac»u«u
_ _ .>u_uuam. o «mozoo _ a<w» _ ma>» _ uxaoo> _ >__m zoozuo _ o<uaam _ ozuzuo<z<x
_ Jopop _ zwzoo _ uzoxm ux_u _ mo wz_» o Joan _ Juan _ ozuo2_ ozoou _ uo whoa _ ua_u

waoou<u ao_>¢zum u«.u
.oo~ u z a rack whopoa n zaou oz.w: n auoxoz xuomoaa

cog wqtdp ~UDOOCQ mmoau mtg—tum no wo<au>(

hzwzwc(Z<x wm—b hawuxu cw2~meu mZO—h—mon 44¢

mum wusmflm

APPENDIX H

COMBINED DATA, RELEVANCE TREE SUMMARY -

FIRE MANAGEMENT POSITIONS ONLY

189

190

 

 

 

 

_ - ~ ~
u u u u
“ oooo... ~ oooo. . oo_o. . o_o~. . omcu. . no.—. . c.c~. . ..o_. . o.n_. . Ache» "

_ o
— n u _
~ ~ ~ _
— o u u o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o u .>u~uuamo u
_ u _ a9¢o~
. _ ~ ~
_ _ u u
_ nooo. - _ cooo. . ~.oo. . on.o. . nooo. . o..o. . sooo. . .ooo. . ~._o. . ua_u _
_ ~ ~ own—cumuaa _
o _ u u
_ _ o o
_ no... a _ cooo. . m~oo. . no~o. . mo~o. . ~o_o. . oono. . .o.o. . no.o. _ muu_.u¢aa u
o . _ ozuxuoozox o
u u u n
a _ — u
“ mooo. - _ oooo. . o_oo. . no.o. . oo_o. . oooo. . mo~o. . nn~o. . on_o. u wuuzozouu "

_ u
_ _ u _
_ — — muuaou u
_ occ.. u . oooo. . o~oo. . o~no. . m-o. . oa_o. . o_co. . -.o. . mo.o. _ 4<_uom oz« _
a _ — 4<unhooon —
_ ~ ~ n
u _ u a
u no... u _ n~oo. o mNoo. o ~o~o. . o-o. o nmdo. . mono. . n_—o. . mo~o. ~ wc—uoaua “

u n
_ — u u
— u — um<um~o u
_ come. a . oooo. . oooo. . mm_o. . «moo. . npoo. . oooo. . «moo. . mc.o. _ ozo _
_ u u whammz— -
_ ~ n u
_ ~ ~ —
o moo.. - _ oooo. . n—oo. . ~o~o. . m.no. . nooo. . -~o. . o—.o. . o..o. _ zo.mo¢u —
_ n a u
u u u n
— _ — «23¢» _
. mono. n _ oooo. . .noo. . ~ono. . .-o. . m-oo . onno. . «o—o. . o~_o. _ ozo u
_ _ ~ oaoou ~
~ ~ _ o
_ o - >ra¢¢ n
_ ocoo. - a ~ooo. . o~oo. . ~o~o. . .o.o. . oo.o. . o-o. . .ooo. . oooo. — noo~m>ra _
o _ — ozo >ooqouo .
— u o u
u — ~ — ~ ~ u a u — mwuaou
_ _ .>u.uuam. _ mmuz _ _ o . zo~p< ~ ~ _ ozo mcooucu
_ Jonah ~ aux—o _ cameo—x — mu_ouz»mw _ «who: _ unoao4~y . nuauwa u uoz¢¢ _ «was.» ~ whom

4o.»zwooa-uuaoomwc pmucou
..c n 2 ~ xmo. upooou _ smog ozom: _ aunts: suaooua

mou ~40¢h nunboua mmocu C(Juxum to U¢(aw><

bzwxu012(l wank 44¢

Hum musowm

191

 

 

 

 

_ _ _ o
_ _ _ u
” oooo... “ onoo. . oooo. ono.. . 0.0.. . ~om_. . .nm_. mm... coco. . .mn_. “ Joye» “
_ . _ ~
_ n _ u
_ oooo. u . o . oooo. o . o . o . o o o . o ~ .>u.uuam. .
~ ~ _ curpo a
_ ~ . _ u
_ ~ _ a
_ o~oo. - _ o . onoo. omoo. . on_o. . nm.o. . o~_o. _o_o. omoo. . oooo. _ zoopop. .
_ . _ noomozwa o
_ u _ o
u u _ ~
_ oon_. - _ o . o_.o. oc_o. . mo_o. . ~_~o. . o-o. o¢~o. oo_o. . mmao. _ mbuuuuu .
_ _ _ um_u .
_ _ _ _
o _ _ o
_ .ooo. u _ o . osoo. on.o. . n__o. . me_o. . ~o_o. no.o. ~moo. . oooo. . muoyozouu .
_ _ _ wank _
u _ _ n
n _ _ .
“ ~ooo. n _ o . 444°. cooo. . coco. . ~__o. . cn4o. ~o4o. nsoo. . oooo. _ um: um.“ _

u _ ~
_ _ _ .
o _ _ _
“ on~.. u _ .ooo. . mo.o. on~o. . so~o. . oo_o. . oo_o. oooo. «moo. . no~o. _ zo_puu»uo “

_ _
_ ~ ~ —
o u _ o
_ ~.o_. . . oooo. . oooo. omno. . onno. . ~s~o. . oo~o. .o_o. «moo. . oo~o. _ on)”; o
_ _ _ zo_»uu_oaa .
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ moo.. - . oooo. . nooo. .ono. . .sno. . oo~o. . mo~o. -_o. mnoo. . _n~o. _ zooozu>uaa o
. _ _ .
_ _ _ _
_ u _ u
_ con.. a _ mooo. . .ooo. mn~o. . mo~o. . _-o. . oooo. on_o. peoo. . oo_o. _ uuzuaaouuo _
a n _ um: _
_ u _ _
_ ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ macho:
_ _ .>u.uunm. . cuozoo _ m<u> _ ma». _ ux34o> >__m zoozuo _ o<umam . pzuxuoozcx
_ 4<poo _ auzbo . uxoxm ua_u _ so ox.» _ own. . Juan -zu»z_ wxooo _ mo whoa _ “no.

maopuou ao_>.zuo u«_u
.mo u z e such whopoa n :«ou oz_m: . sworn: xuomoaa

mom w4m‘h huaoma mmocu c<4~x~m no HOCmu><
hzuxuogoct wank 44¢

mum wusmwm

192

 

 

 

 

_ u n u
_ a u _
“ oooo... " o . sono. o ~m~.. . «~04. . ncn_. o coon. un~_. . o_c~. “ 4cuo» “
u 4 ~ ~
. 4 _ —
_ oooo. - _ o . o . ~ooo. . uooo. . oooo. . oooo. oooo. . oooo. o .>g.uuam. _
— 4 n auxpo .
o . _ _
n _ _ u
_ mmgo. a _ o . odoo. . oooo. . ~o_o. . om.o. . ogoo. mooo. . oo~o. u ua_g o
_ _ u cum—cumuag —
_ _ u n
u o n _
_ omm_. . o o . mooo. . og.o. . oo~o. . mo~o. . .o~o. ~o_o. . oono. _ mug—puoag .
o _ _ pzuxuoozox .
_ ~ _ u
_ — u u
_ n~... - . o . ~noo. . ~ooo. . ~o.o. . o..o. . no~o. ¢m_o. . omno. . mu.xozouu “
_ _ _
_ _ . _
_ o _ muumog o
_ oo... . _ o . onoo. . onoo. . oo.o. . ~m.o. . nn~o. o..o. . mm~o. . 4¢_uom oz< .
_ o u 4tu-~4oa .
~ o u o
_ . u o
" onn_. u _ o . .coo. . _o_o. . o-o. . oo_o. . mn~o. o~_o. . n4no. _ ua.go4.s M
_ ~
_ _ _ u
u _ _ um.um.o _
_ ~ooo. . _ o . _~oo. . .o_o. . omoo. . mooo. . ~ooo. oooo. . om~o. _ ozo ~
o o _ mpuumz_ u
o _ ~ ~
_ . _ u
_ ooo4. . _ o . .~oo. . c:.o. . o~no. . oooo. . a~_o. ~m_o. . c-o. — zoomouu —
~ _ _ a
_ _ _ 4
_ _ _ «z:<g _
. co~.. . . o . ~¢oo. . no.o. . oo.o. . cm~o. . .n~o. »o_o. . ~o_o. _ ozc u
_ _ _ oao4g _
_ _ _ ~
_ _ _ ngca _
_ goo.. - _ o . .moo. . mo_o. . m-o. . _~.o. . o~.o. -.o. . o-o. _ -co_m»zg .
_ _ . ozc >oooowo _
_ _ _ o
u _ _ _ — ~ ~ _ _ muumog
. _ .»g_umam. _ mmuz _ o . _ zo_»< 4 _ oz. mucou<g
_ Jooop _ :wxpo _ -zuo4_: _ mu_p4:»ma _ coho: . ug_4o4.: . ugauwa uozoa . cums.» . w».m
4«_»zu»oguuua:omua omumog
.co - 2 ~ smog whopoa _ :aog oz.m= ~ aunts: xuamoag

«on u4¢¢~ hugoma mmoau c(4nzum kc U01¢w>¢
pzwxwmv¢2¢t wa—u 44¢

mum musmwm

193

 

 

 

_ u o _
u _ ~ o
“ oooo..u " o . o~mo. «so_. . ns«_. . p.04. . gno.. . ~_n~. o««o. . ..n.. “ oohop “
o _ n ~
~ _ _ o
_ o u u o . o o . o . o . o . o o . o _ .>g_umam. —
_ ~ _ auxpo —
_ u _ o
_ _ _ ~
_ o«oo. - _ o . o.oo. ~ooo. . on_o. . om4o. . on_o. . osoo. omoo. . oooo. ~ zo_g¢o_ _
u u — -4~o<zua —
_ _ _ _
o _ _ _
_ no«~. n u o o agoo. «ugo. o mono. . on~o. o n-o. . oo~o. oooo. . on—o. ~ mpuwggu u
_ u _ uq.g o
_ _ _ u
_ _ _ _
_ ogoo. n ~ o o oooo. ~n—o. . oo~o. . mo—o. . o«~o. o m_—o. «moo. . nooo. _ mu~xozouu _
_ _ _ uaog _
~ _ _ _
_ _ . _
o oo~_. n _ o . on.o. oaoo. . «n_o. . «o.o. . -~o. . ~o4o. pogo. . on_o. o um: uaog _
~ _ o o
_ _ _ _
~ _ . ~ ~
“ om~_. a u o o mooo. o«~o. . cm4o. . om—o. o «04o. . oo4o. mNoo. . no~o. ~ zo_»uu»uo _

_ _ .
u _ a _
_ _ . _ _
u one—. u ~ o . o~oo. -no. . o«~o. . omwo. . ogNo. . «g_o. .moo. . oo~o. _ 4u>u4 _
n 4 ~ zo—puwpoma u
o _ _ o
_ _ ~ .
H .mm—. n — o o n«oo. mmno. o homo. . 4mmo. o n«~o. . on4o. onoo. . mo~o. — zoupzu>waa “

. _
~ ~ _ _
o _ ~ a
_ n«n_. a u o o smoo. «owo. . sO—o. . ammo. o mNNo. o _n_o. onoo. . moao. ~ uu2uazouuo —
_ u _ um_g _
_ ~ _ _
o _ _ _ _ o u _ _ macgo<g
_ _ .>g~uugmo ~ cuozoo _ a<u> _ map» _ uxooo> _ >p_m xpozuo _ ocumgm _ pzuxuo<z<x
_ 4<pop ~ zwxpo _ uzoxm u¢_g ~ go wz_» u Jung — Jung — ozwpzo uxaog _ go who: _ ua_g

mao»u<g ao~>¢xum wmng
.oo n z « smog whopom n :mog ozom: ~ zumzoz zuoooaa

mom U401» huacoan mmoau C¢4~x—m to wo<mw><
pzwsuc42(x wa~g 44¢

vim musmwm

194

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
“ oooo.4n “ n~oo. . om44. . «on4. . osm4. . n««4. . noo4. nooo. soo4. “ oopoo "
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 -oo. u 4 o . o . nooo. . nooo. . «ooo. . ~ooo. o oooo. 4 4»g4uuam4 4
4 4 4 xuzpo 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 oooo. u 4 «ooo. . ~4oo. . 4o4o. . mo4o. . oo4o. . oooo. ~ooo. 4m4o. 4 ua4g 4
4 4 4 oum4aumuaa 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 «~m4. - 4 «ooo. . o44o. . o-o. . n«~o. . o-o. . m«~o. o~4o. 4n~o. 4 muu44u¢aa 4
4 4 4 pzuxuo¢z¢z 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 mooo. u 4 ~ooo. . mooo. . ~ooo. . ««4o. . ~n4o. . «44o. 4o4o. oo~o. 4 wu4zozouu 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 muuaog 4
4 ~m44. u 4 ~ooo. o ~4~o. . om4o. . o«4o. . nm4o. . o4~o. whoo. OoNo. 4 4<4uom oz< 4
4 4 4 4¢u4w44cn 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 o~n4. u 4 «ooo. . on4o. . oo~o. . ~4~o. . oo4o. . no~o. mooo. o-o. 4 ua4go44: “
4 4 4

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 um<um4o 4
4 o«oo. u 4 4ooo. . ~moo. . oo4o. . «coo. . nooo. . mooo. naoo. oo4o. 4 ozc 4
4 4 4 mouumz4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4no4. a 4 ~ooo. . sooo. . nn4o. . oono. . osoo. . mo4o. o~4o. oo4o. 4 204moau 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 «23¢g 4
4 ~«n4. u 4 4ooo. o mo4o. o ooNo. o on4o. o soNo. o -~o. sn4o. 4o4o. 4 oz« 4
4 4 4 «aoog 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 >xa¢a 4
4 «~44. u 4 nooo. o om4o. o ~o4o. . oo4o. . on—o. o ~4~o. oaoo. oo4o. 4 noo4m>ta 4
4 4 4 ozo >oo4ouo 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4. 4 mwumog

4 4 .»g4umgm. 4 mmuz 4 4 4 4 zo44< 4 oz< mmo4u<g

4 444°» 4 14:40 4 oamO44n 4 mu44wzpmu 4 mu»<) 4 ug44044) 4 Iuauua. moz<¢ «4314» 4 u44m

 

.Qo

N 2105 wh¢hom

«on w4m¢h noncoma mwoau «(44:4m kc U¢¢¢u>¢

4(4bzwhoulwucbomwa bmmaou

h2w3u9¢z¢x wa4u 44¢

mum musmwm

4 2104 oz4m3 n amass: xu4moaa

 

 

195

 

 

waopu<g ao4>oxwm uc4g

0 lack 44140: n rack cz4m: n lucraz xu4mcma

mum wnsmflm

cog U4m¢~ buaocma wmccu «<4414m no U6¢¢u>¢
pzwwa¢Z¢x uc4g 44¢

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
“ oooo.4u 4 omoo. ~nmo. ono4. . oo«4. . ««m4. . ««o4. . omn4. smoo. . oo~4. 4 4¢4o4 4
4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 «ooo. u 4 o «ooo. o . o . o . o . o o . o 4 4>g4uunm. 4
4 4 4 «414° 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 oooo. - 4 ~ooo. o4oo. msoo. . o«4o. . 4n4o. . o44o. . mm4o. ocoo. . 4ooo. 4 2044444 4
4 4 4 -44oozua 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 ngm4. . 4 nooo. ogoo. o44o. . no4o. . 44~o. . sc~o. . memo. m44o. . oo~o. 4 m4uuggw 4
4 4 4 ua4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 oo44. u 4 4~oo. mooo. oe4o. . «04o. . no4o. . 4o~o. . «o4o. omoo. . mo4o. 4 mu4zozoou 4
4 4 4 ua4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
H 4444. u 4 oooo. o~4o. o~4o. . ~n4o. . «o4o. . oo4o. . 4m4o. oooo. . -4o. 4 no: uc4g 4
4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
“ on~4. u 4 4ooo. oooo. oc~o. . oo4o. . os4o. . oo4o. . mo4o. onoo. . mo4o. 4 zo44uu4uo “
4 4 .
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4om4. u 4 oooo. o~oo. o4no. . nn~o. . o«~o. . oo~o.. . no4o. nmoo. . 4n~o. 4 ououo 4
4 4 4 zo44uw4omg 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
“ on44. u 4 ~ooo. ~noo. om~o. . oowo. . oo4o. . oo4o. . oooo. o~oo. . o~4o. 4 zo44zu>uag “
4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 o4«4. - 4 nooo. oooo. 4o~o. . o-o. . -~o. . 4n~o. . on4o. ocoo. . oo4o. 4 uozmaaoouo 4
4 4 4 ua4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 maC4u<g
4 4 4>g4uwam4 auozoo 4 «<4» 4 ma)» 4 uxooo> 4 >44m 24ozuo 4 oouagm 4 4zuxuo<z<x
4 4<4o4 4 uux4o uzoxm ua4g 4 go 4244 4 4g:g 4 4w:g 4 -zg4z4 uxoog 4 go 44¢: 4 ga4g

APPENDIX I

REGION 1, COMBINED DATA,

RELEVANCE TREE SUMMARY

196

197

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
H oooo.4. M scoo. . on~o. . o«n~. . nop4. . «044. . o44~. . moo4. ««~4. “ 4.4o4 "
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 o«oo. n 4 o . o . o . o . nooo. . «4oo. . cooo. n~oo. 4 4>g4uuam4 4
4 4 4 aux4o 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4cmo. u 4 mooo. . ~4oo. . mo4o. . nsoo. . o44o. . «coo. . 4ooo. ~4oo. 4 ua4g 4
4 4 4 ouo4aumuca 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 ooo4. n 4 mooo. . mnoo. . ocno. . o4po. . ro~o. . mono. . o¢4o. oowo. 4 mgo44ucuo 4
4 4 4 4zuauo¢zoz 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
” o4oo. u “ mooo. . m4oo. . on4o. . mn4o. . no4o. . ooNo. . «m4o. -4o. “ mu4xozouu “
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 muoaog 4
4 mc44. u 4 mooo. . meoo. . ~ooo. . ammo. . o4~o. . -ao. . mm4o. oo4o. 4 oo4uom ozo 4
4 4 4 4.04444oa 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
“ o«oo. u “ oooo. . o~oo. . ommo. . «ono. . «o4o. . wo4o. . omoo. oo4o. “ uo4go442 "
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 umoum4o 4
4 m4mo. u 4 ~ooo. . a4oo. . 4o4o. . «coo. . wooo. . oooo. . 4ooo. ~44o. 4 oz« 4
4 4 4 m4owmz4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 oco4. u 4 oooo. . o4oo. . o-o. . 4Nno. . Nooo. . om4o. . 4~4o. m~4o. 4 7o4momu 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 «224g 4
4 co«4. u 4 ~ooo. . 4~oo. . mono. . so4o. . cn~o. . mmno. . ~c4o. no4o. 4 oz. 4
4 4 4 «aoog 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4.14244 4
4 4~44. u 4 mooo. . naoo. . oo~o. . 44mo. . m44o. . 4m~o. . oooo. -4o. 4 uco4m>za 4
4 4 4 oz« >oo4ouo 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 mguaog

4 4 4>g4uugm4 4 mom: 4 4 4 4 2044. 4 4 oz< vco4o¢g

4 4¢4c4 4 awx4o 4 nauo44: 4 mu44uz4mg 4 aw4<z 4 ug44o44u 4 -uaoua 4 mozqa aumx44 4 g44m

4‘442g4oa-uoa:omua 4muaog
.n« u 2 ~ zmog 44¢4oa 4 xuog oz4mo 4 amazoz xuoooun

cog w4C¢4 FUDCCCQ mmoau C¢44x4m to wc¢au>¢
4 204040 cog CUZ—GSOU ¢h¢o 44¢

41H musmflm

198

 

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
“ oooo.4. " o . m«oo. 0:44. . mwo4. . o4m4. . ~m«4. w4o4. onno. . ~444. 4 4(4o4 4
. 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 o~oo. I 4 o . mooo. mooo. . o . ~ooo. . nooo. nooo. mooo. o o 4 4>g4uwam4 4
4 4 4 34140 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 coo4. I 4 o o ««oo. whoo. . oe4o. . oo4o. . ««4o. owwo. m«oo. . 444o. 4 2044¢44 4
4 4 4 n44¢oxua 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 Qo~4o I 4 o . h«4o. ~44o. . ¢n4o. . «mmo. o o4~o. on~oo «occ. . 4N4o. 4 v»uwggw 4
4 4 4 un4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 o«so. I 4 o . oooo. 4o4o. . wooo. . ~o4o. . 4n4o. aooo. ~«oo. . ocoo. 4 mu4rozouu 4
4 4 4 ua4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 coho. I 4 o . 4o4o. «44o. . oaoo. . no4o. . oooo. oooo. meoo. . «moo. 4 my: ua4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4o«4. u 4 o . oo4o. oo~o. . 4o~o. . no4o. . ~o4o. m44o. onoo. . oo4o. 4 :o44uu44o 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 mns4. I 4 o . m44o. 4ooo. . ¢«no. . come. . ~n~o. o~4o. ~«oo. . ~m~o. 4 ow>uo 4
4 4 4 2044ow4oaa 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 «ss4. I 4 o o mooo. sn«o. . w4«o. . ~¢~o. . mmNo. mcoo. o~oo. o mo4o. 4 2044zu>waa 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 «m~4. u 4 o . mooo. oo~o. . o4~o. . ooNo. . 4o4o. «coo. o~oo. . 004°. 4 muzgaa:uoo 4
4 4 4 wa4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 mmC4UIg
4 4 4>g4uwam4 4 awozoo 4 now» 4 mn>4 4 urooc> >44w 14o244 4 oowaam 4 4zuzmc¢z¢z
4 4(404 4 awx4o 4 uxoxm wa4g 4 go gx44 4 4g:g 4 4wng -24424 wx¢4g 4 go w4¢a 4 ga4g
wac4cog ao4>oxuc wa4g
.«« a z « xaog g4¢4oa n xaog oz4mo 4 aucxoz zu4¢caa

Gog U4m¢4 FUDGCQQ mmcau a¢44x4m k0 u0¢au>¢

4 ZO—Owa cog ou24wxou ¢b¢o 44¢

NIH mnsmwm

199

 

|—~_—~_~————_~—_~.‘~———-—~_—~~~~_~—~~—u~~~~

 

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
” oooo.4I 4 4ooo. . no4o. . ««~4. . V4.4. . o4v4. . ~4v4. . con4. . omn~. 4 44404 4
4 4 4
4 4 4
4 4 4
4 o~oo. I 4 o o o . o . o . nooo. . o . vooo. . o4oo. 4 4>g4uwam4
4 4 4 agr4o
4 4 4
4 4 4
4 m«4o. I 4 o . oooo. . 4o4o. . mooo. . oo4o. . 4ooo. . :44o. . mo4o. 4 ga4g
4 4 4 oua4acvwoo
4 4 4
4 4 4
4 o«s4. I 4 ~4oo. . nwoo. . o-o. . s«ro. . «mwo. . ~mmo. . mnNo. . moro. 4 m4u44uoaa
4 4 4 4zgsuo.z.r
4 4 4
4 4 4
” oooo. I 4 «4oo. . o4oo. . «coo. . cw4o. . o~4o. . 4m4o. . oc4o. . o¢~o. 4 mu4zo2ouw
4 4
4 4 4
4 4 4 mmuaOg
4 no44. I 4 o4oo. . 4~oo. . oc4o. . oo4o. . oo4o. . mn~o. . cn4o. . ammo. 4 4.4Lov oz.
4 4 4 4.c4444on
4 4 4
4 4 4
4 coo4. I 4 o . m4oo. . om4o. . o4no. . oo4o. . oo4o. . oooo. . wwwo. 4 wc4gc44)
4 4 4
4 4 4
4 4 4 wmqum4c
4 «00¢. I 4 o . o4oo. . oo4o. . ecoo. . cooo. . oo4o. . smoo. . ~m~o. 4 c2.
4 4 4 V4umm24
4 4 4
4 4 . 4
“ Q444. I 4 o4oo. . m4oo. . c44o. . unpo. . nooo. . ...o. . co4o. . o-o. 4 :o4zoaw
4 4
4 4 4
4 4 4 «2:.g
4 o«~4. I 4 ~ooo. . «woo. . sm4o. . «o4o. . ocwo. . no4o. . oo4o. . o«~o. 4 oz.
4 4 4 .aCJg
4 4 4
4 4 4 >xoca
4 n4~4. I 4 o4oo. . «moo. . om4o. . oomo. . «m4o. . o4~o. . cm4o. . «ago. 4 ucc4m>za
4 4 4 oz. >co4owo
4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 wgcacg
4 4 4>g4Uwam4 4 mmuz 4 4 4 4 2044. 4 4 4 oz. ua04u.g
4 4(404 4 awz4o 4 Iauo44) 4 mu44ux4mg 4 amp.) 4 4g44a44) 4 uuauwn 4 492.0 4 a.mx44 4 g44u
4.44zg4oa-gga:owua poumog
... 2 ~ xaog 44.4oa 4 :aog o24mo ~ :moxoz xwoccan

con U4c¢p hUDOcaQ wmoau a¢44t4¢ k0 wG¢au>¢
4 zo4owa acg out—c309 ¢b¢= 44¢

mIH musmwm

200

 

 

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 oooo.4u 4 o . coco. . m~o4. . s4«4. . on44. . 4mo4. . con4. 4~«o. . n4o4. 4 4.404 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 o u 4 o . o . o . o . o . o . o o . o 4 4>g4uwgm4 4
4 4 4 oux4c 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 m~o4. « 4 o . 4~oo. . «moo. . «b4o. . oa4o. . oo4o. . «two. nnoc. . oooo. 4 7044.44 4
4 4 4 :44c.:wa 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 ~o«4. n 4 o . «soc. . ~04o. . ob4o. . wcwo. . nsNo. . mnno. msoo. . 4~4o. 4 m4uwggw 4
4 4 4 ga4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 «Noo. n 4 o . nmoo. . co4o. . «coo. . on4o. . 4¢4o. . ~r4o. smoo. . o44o. 4 mu41ozouu 4
4 4 4 ga4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4on4. n 4 o . ~m4o. . mm4o. . nw4o. . m4mo. . ano. . ~4~o. cho. . om4o. 4 uv: wa4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 m~n4. u 4 o . mo4o. . ooNo. . oo4o. . oo4o. . oo4o. . ~p4o. scoo. . om4o. 4 2°44uu4wo ”
4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 «4«4. I 4 o . ncoo. . o~no. . ¢4~o. . ~«wo. . meo. . mn4o. .«oo. . n4~o. 4 44>44 4
4 4 . 4 zo44uw4oao 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 som4. n 4 o . snoo. . n~no. . «nwo. . o4~o. o o-o. . no4o. omoo. . ~44o. 4 zo44zw>uma “
4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 oo44. u 4 o o nnoo. . omwo. . ~04o. . mmwo. o oo4o. . oooo. nnoo. . oo4o. 4 wozmaaouuo 4
4 4 4 ma4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 . 4 4 4 mcC4u.g
4 4 4>g49gom4 4 4 auoz.o 4 «.4» 4 ug»» 4 4:240) 4 >44m 14o244 4 e.ganm 4 pzwxuo.z.x
4 44404 4 mwx4o 4 uxoxm 4 wa4g 4 go 4144 4 443g 4 4w3g 4 324424 41.4g 4 go 44cc 4 ma4g
m¢¢»u.g cc4>.xgm ua4g
.N. u z « smog g4.4oa n xqog oz4mo w «mayo: xuoccuo

cog u4a¢h mu:occn mmcau C¢4414m go w0¢aw>¢
4 zc4oga acg ogz4caou ¢h¢o 44¢

v-4 muao4m

201

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
“ oooo.4I “ onoo. . ~«n4. . s¢~4. . «os4. . 4no4. . omn4. . «oo4. . 04m4. ” 4.404 n
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 onoo. I 4 o . o . o . mooo. . oooo. . ~ooo. . «ooo. . 5400. 4 4>g4umom4 4
4 4 . 4 aur4o 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 n4so. I 4 4ooo. o «woo. . oooo. . caco. . nm4o. . ocoo. . oooo. . F440. 4 ga4g 4
4 4 4 ouc4auvwao 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 ~om4. I 4 oooo. . 4o4o. . mowo. . 4ooo. . nmwo. . 494o. . 4m4o. . 4-o. 4 mwo44o¢aa 4
4 4 4 4Zusgc.z.x 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
“ mmoo. a “ ~000. . «ooo. o nsoo. . 4o4o. . e~4o. . on4o. . m«4o. . oo4o. 4 mu4zozouu “
4

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 vuoaog 4
4 0044. I 4 ~ooo. . 4ogo. . cm4o. . on4o. . oo4o. . co4o. . cooo. . 4m4o. 4 4.4cow oz. 4
4 4 4 4.944440o 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
” omoo. I 4 4ooo. . 444o. . ~n4o. . .4go. . ow4o. . on4o. . smoo. . mo4o. 4 wo4gco4r 4

4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 gm.wm4o 4
4 onmo. I 4 o . owoo. . rooo. . oooo. . «poo. . meco. . anoo. . o«4o. 4 oz. 4
4 4 4 m4uumz4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 ono4. u 4 @400. . nooo. . oaoo. . n4ro. . oxoo. . mo4o. . or4o. . ~m4o. 4 ro4¢omw “
4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 .z:.g 4
4 0004. I 4 4ooo. . cono. . c-o. . 4nno. . ropo. . w-o. . ooNo. . n-o. 4 c2. 4
4 4 4 .aoog 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 >ru.u 4
4 4~«4. I 4 oooo. o o«~o. . «4~o. . womo. . «Q40. . m4mo. . o~4o. . no4o. 4 ucc4¢>xa 4
4 4 4 oz. >ccoowo 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 vgoacg
4 4 4>g4umom4 4 wow: 4 4 4 4 2044. 4 4 4 07. «ao4u.g
4 4(404 4 our»: 4 umwo44) 4 mo44ux4mw 4 nw4¢1 4 wg44o443 4 cuaoma 4 mcz.a 4 aumx44 4 w44¢

4o44zg40a-wca:owwa powan
.o. I 2 ~ :aog g4.4oa 4 xaog cz4m: n agaroz :uomcaa

cog 44c.» 402ccaa vmcco c.44z4w g0 wo.aw>.
4 zo4oua cog ogz4zaou .4.0 44.

mIH mnsmom

202

 

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
” oooo.4I 4 onoo. . ammo. . ~«m4. . I404. . ~co4. noo4. . ~mn4. . oo4o. . mm44. 4 4.404 n

4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 o I 4 o . o . o . o . o o . o . o . o 4 4>g4uuam4 4
4 4 4 ag140 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4ooo. I 4 nooo. . o4oo. . cooo. . oo4o. . nv4o. om4o. . oa4o. . snoo. . 4ooo. 4 3044.44 4
4 4 4 I44a.xua 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 oom4. I 4 .ooo. . oooo. . 4n4o. . cmmo. . mono. o«~o. . mono. . 4ooo. . 4«4o. 4 u4uuggw 4
4 4 4 ga4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0.04. I 4 owoc. . 4ooo. . «n40. . 444o. . nc4o. ~o~0. . ««4o. . omoo. . o44o. 4 mu4yozoow 4
4 4 4 go4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4m~4. n 4 oooo. . o~4o. . no4o. . oc4o. . 4ooo. oo4o. . ca4o. . 4ooo. . -4o. 4 mu: uu4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4m44. n 4 4ooo. . o~4o. . n4~o. . owuo. . oo4o. ~nmo. . o44o. . mmoo. . .NNo. 4 2044ou4uo H
4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 «4.4. I 4 o . onoo. . omwo. . og~o. . omwo. 4omo. . n.4o. . ~4oo. . cowo. 4 ouooo 4
4 4 4 zo440440aa 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 44o4. n 4 o . -oo. . on~o. . o4~o. . oc4o. sowo. . 4ooo. . «goo. . 4o4o. 4 204Izu>uag “
4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4«n4. u 4 o . «coo. . oo~o. . ammo. . 4omo. memo. . «o4o. . mnoo. . mn4o. 4 uuzuaaouuo 4
4 4 4 ua4g 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 . 4 4 4 4 mac4ucg
4 4 44g4ugau4 4 4 a4o2.o 4 com» 4 un»» wxooo> 4 >44m 4 140244 4 o.uaam 4 4zwzoc.z.x
4 4.404 4 :gx40 4 4.01m 4 434g 4 go 4144 4 443g 442g 4 -24424 4 41.4g 4 go 44.x 4 ga4g

mac»o.g ac4>.xuo ua4g
.m. u z « yaog g4.40a n :aog ¢z4mo n auozoz xuoocau

cog w4¢¢p pubocaa wmcau a¢4414m go UO¢uU>¢

4 20404a acg 04241200 .4.o 44.

oIH musmflm

APPENDIX J

REGION 2, COMBINED DATA,

RELEVANCE TREE SUMMARY

203

204

 

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
H oooo.4u 4 44oo. . 44~o. . n4oa. . 0444. . m444. . oocm. . ammo. . noe4. 4 4c4o4 4
. 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 o~co. u 4 nooo. o o o o . woco. . vooc. . o4oo. o ~ooo. o nooo. 4 4>u4uuam4 4
4 4 4 cuzhc 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 mane. n 4 o . ~ooe. . 44cc. . 40cc. . (mac. . 40cc. . m~oo. . ~¢oo. 4 ua44 4
4 4 4 oua4aumwan 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 mor4. n 4 943°. . ¢~oo. . acne. . a4nc. . c4~o. . eneo. . 444°. . «m4c. 4 ¢4u44ucma 4
4 4 4 4zhauc«z«z 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 oao4. u 4 o . omoo. . ammo. . 4¢4o. . 4coo. . 4ono. . :mco. . ~ooc. 4 vu4yczouw 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 uuumou 4
4 coo4. « 4 :coo. . 44cc. . owec. . acme. . c«~o. . o4cc. . «o4o. . o4~c. 4 4<4uov 02¢ 4
4 4 4 4444444oa 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4°44. u 4 o . ~4co. . ammo. . «04°. . «44o. . mmwc. o mmoo. . 044°. 4 mo4uC44) 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 mm-uv4c 4
4 ¢~mo. n 4 4coc. . coco. . 044°. . ncco. . osoo. . 044°. o 4~oo. . N444. 4 czc 4
4 4 4 m4uu¢24 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 ~4o4. - 4 c . ~4co. . m4~o. . «44¢. . omoo. . c44o. . mo4o. . «04°. 4 zo4mo¢w 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 c72<4 4
4 «on4. u 4 o . 44cc. . ~4rc. . «44o. . 4m~o. . ommc. . «~40. . «:44. 4 czq 4
4 4 4 caC44 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 >Ia<a 4
4 coc4. u 4 o . oooo. . ¢4~o. . 44nc. . «44o. . ~cmo. . nxoo. . mooc. 4 -cc4¢4xa 4
4 4 4 oz. >004ouo 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 nucacu
4 4 4444uwau4 4 vmuz 4 4 4 4 zo44q 4 4 4 07¢ unc4u«4
4 44404 4 74:40 4 uauC443 4 mu44ux4mw 4 a44qx 4 4444544: 4 ouauuo 4 wczqa 4 numz44 4 w44w

 

 

Ja—wZuhoaouUatomuc hmwaou

oom u 2 N Icon urchoa 4 fuck 624w: 4 mumxbz xw4toaa

«04 u4c¢4 403ccmn wmcag 3‘44x4m no ue¢au><
~ zo4o4a aou 04:41:00 «pco 44¢

Hun musm4m

205

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0000.4» 4 0 . com0. 40v4. . 4004. . 0004. . 4004. . 00~4. mwrc. . 0004. 4 44404 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0 n 4 0 . 0 0 o 0 o 0 . 0 o 0 0 . 0 4 44444uum4 4
4 4 4 04:40 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0444. a 4 0 . c400. 0000. . 0440. . 04~0. . 00~0. . 4400. 0m00. . 0440. 4 :044044 4
4 4 4 -4400140 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0044. u 4 0 . 0~40. 0000. . 0440. . ~040. . 04N0. . 0400. 0400. . 0040. 4 u404444 4
4 4 4 4a4u 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0040. u 4 0 . 4000. 0040. . 4400. . 0440. . 4:40. . «440. «400. . m440. 4 vu4yczouw 4
4 4 4 4044 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 o~m0. a 4 0 . 0000. 0400. . 0400. . Naoc. . 0000. . o¢00. 0000. . 0000. 4 4a: 4044 4
4 4 . 4 4
4 4 4 r
4 4 4 4
w 0004. u 4 0 . N040. 00~0. . o-0. . 0040. . 40~0. . 4040. 0000. . como. 4 :c44044wc 4

4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4404. u 4 0 . 0000. ~400. . 4440. . cane. . 4440. . 0040. 4400. . m0~e. 4 44404 4
4 4 4 2044044000 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
n 4044. u 4 0 . nm00. 0000. . m400. . m4~0. . 0040. . N400. 0400. . ~o4c. 4 zc44zm>uaa 4

4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0004. u 4 0 . 0000. n-0. . 04~0. . 0o4c. . m040. . ec0c. 0wcc. . 4440. 4 uuzwaazuuc 4
4 4 4 4044 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 mac4004
4 4 4444uwam4 4 «40200 4 «044 4 4044 4 4x040> 4 >44m 140:44 4 cauaam 4 424140420:
4 4<404 4 04x40 4 uxozm 4044 4 40 4:44 4 4404 4 4404 4 -24424 41.44 4 40 44.0 4 4044

rc04004 oo4>exw¢ 4044
.00 u z c 1004 44.400 0 soon 0240: 4 zmuxaz xu4zcaa

004 u4cc4 4u:coaa wmcap 0044x4w 40 ucqaw>¢

N 44¢—Own 0444.4 3.4746140 44¢... 4.41

Nib mudmflm

206

 

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
” 0000.4u 4 0000. . 0000. . 4404. . ru04. . 4~04. . 0444. . 0004. . 4004. 4 40404 n
4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0400. u 4 0 . 0 . 0 o 9400. . 4000. . 0 o 4000. o 0000. 4 444404004 4
4 4 4 04:40 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 ~4mo. u 4 0 . 0400. . V000. . ~400. . 4440. . 0:00. . 4000. o 0040. 4 4044 4
4 4 4 0404000420 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0044. u 4 0 . «000. . 4040. . 4440. . 4~40. . 4~40. . 40~0. . 0000. 4 «40440000 4
4 4 4 424140420: 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 ¢4~4. - 4 0 o 0000. o 4440. o 0040. . 4040. . memo. . 0040. . 0040. 4 wu4sozouw 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 u40004 4
4 c4v4. u 4 0000. . 0m40. o wmwc. o 0040. . «4&0. . 0~n0. . 4040. . n440. 4 4¢4gov 02¢ 4
4 4 4 404444400 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4400. u 4 0 . ~400. . 4440. . 0040. . wn40. . nm40. . 0400. . 0440. 4 4044044: “
4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 um¢u¢4c 4
4 «:00. u 4 0 o moco. . 0000. o 0000. . 4m00. . 2000. . 4000. . 4m40. 4 020 4
4 4 4 0404u24 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4000. a 4 0 . 4400. . 0440. . 0400. . 0000. . 4440. . 0040. . 0040. 4 2040004 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 «2:04 4
4 ~004. u 4 0 . 0000. . q4~0. . 0040. . 4o~0. . n4~0. . ~n~0. . N040. 4 020 4
4 4 4 «0044 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4:04: 4
4 0444. u 4 0 . 0400. . 0040. . 0040. . 0040. . 0-0. . 0040. . ~040. 4 ucc4w4za 4
4 4 4 020 >004040 4
4 4 . 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 vucacu
4 4 444404044 4 wmuz 4 4 4 4 2044. 4 4 4 020 0004004
4 44404 4 24:40 4 -04044; 4 004441400 4 04403 4 44440443 4 :40040 4 40200 4 «40:44 4 u44¢
404424400-ucazovua 404004
.~n u 2 ~ 2004 440400 4 1004 024v: ~ «40:32 1440000

«04 w4a¢4 4030010 vwcau 0.44140 40 u0<au>¢
~ 2040wa «cu Cuz4rzou «4(0 44¢

man musmfim

207

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
" 0000.4” 4 0400. . 4400. . 0044. . 0004. . 0044. . c044. . m4~4. . 4000. . «~44. 4 40404 4

4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0 n 4 0 o 0 . 0 . 0 o 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 4 44040u0m4 4
4 4 4 04140 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0004. u 4 0000. . 0000. . ~m00. . U440. . 0400. . 0040. . mrwc. . 0000. . 0400. 4 :044044 4
4 4 4 n44¢0140 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0004. n 4 0000. . 4000. . 0040. . 0440. . 0400. . 4-0. . 0000. . 4000. . m040. 4 0404440 4
4 4 4 uo4k 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4000. u 4 0 . Nmoo. . 0040. . 4440. . 0040. . r~00. . 0440. . 4000. . 0000. 4 004102004 4
4 4 4 0040 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4404. n 4 0 . 4400. . 0040. . 4040. . 0040. . 4040. . c440. . ~000. . 0440. 4 4v: 4040 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0-4. n 4 0 . 0~40. . c400. . omwo. . 0040. . 0440. . 4000. . 0400. . 0040. 4 204400440 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0004. n 4 0 . 0000. . 4000. . 0000. . ~4m0. . 00~0. . 0440. . 0~00. . 40~0. 4 4w>44 4
4 4 4 2044044000 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4004. n 4 0 . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . ~0~0. . m4~0. . 4400. . 0400. . -40. 4 204.zm>000 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0004. u 4 0 o 0400. . 40~0. . a~00. . mcmc. . mowo. o 0040. . 0~00. . m¢40. 4 wuzwauzuuo 4
4 4 4 0040 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4. 4 4 v0c4040
4 4 4>44040w4 4 4 040200 4 0044 4 4044 4 41:40) 4 >44m 4 140244 4 aqmanm 4 4zw1wc<z¢1
4 40404 4 04:40 4 wxoxm 4 4040 4 00 0144 4 44:4 4 4404 4 -24424 4 41040 4 40 440: 4 0044

0004000 cc4>4xw¢ 4:40
.00 u z o 1004 040400 0 1000 0240: ~ 100102 1440000

 

 

 

004 44004 4000000 mvouc 0044140 40 ~0¢0u>¢

N 20404a acu 04241300 «4(o 441

0:0 musmwm

208

 

 

 

 

 

 

4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
“ 0000.4. 4 0 . ~004. . 0004. . 00u4. . 0004. . 0404. . 04~4. . ~004. 4 40404 4

4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0~00. n 4 0 o 0 . 0 . 0400. . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 4 44440400. 4
4 4 4 0414c 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4000. u 4 0 . m400. . ~000. . 4000. . «040. . 0000. . 0400. . 0000. 4 4044 4
4 4 4 0404000000 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0044. u 4 0 . 0440. . 0000. . 0040. . 00~0. . ~0~0. . 04~0. . 0040. 4 000440000 4
4 4 4 424240020: 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4~04. u 4 0 . 0000. . 0440. . 0440. . 4440. . 0440. . 4040. . 0040. 4 004sczcuu 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 «40004 4
4 0004. u 4 0 . 0400. . 04~0. . 0040. . 00~0. . 00N0. . 0040. . 4040. 4 404000 020 4
4 4 4 400444400 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
” ~000. - 4 0 . 0400. . 0040. . 0040. . 4440. . 4040. . 0000. . 0040. 4 4044044: 4

4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 40.4040 4
4 4000. u 4 0 . 0000. . 4440. . 4000. . 0000. . ~000. . 4~00. . 0040. 4 020 4
4 4 4 0404024 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 0004. n 4 0 . 0000. . 0440. . ~040. . 0000. . 4~40. . ~040. . N040. 4 2040004 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 02:04 4
4 ¢~m4. n 4 0 o n-0. . cwwo. . 0m40. . -00. . 0040. o 0-0. . ~040. 4 cz0 4
4 4 4 00044 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 . 4 41000 4
4 40~4. u 4 0 . 0040. . m040. . 0040. . 4040. . 4040. . 4040. . 0440. 4 ncc4m>ra 4
4 4 4 920 4004040 4
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 040004
4 4 44440000. 4 0002 4 4 4 4 20440 4 4 4 020 0004004
4 40404 4 04:40 4 -10044) 4 00440x404 4 0440: 4 0444044: 4 -00040 4 00200 4 040144 4 4440

4044zw4oaomuatomwa 404004
.00 u z m :004 440400 4 xaou 0240: 0 «40:32 audacaa

an: u4m¢4 buaocaa mmoau 44¢-441404 .40 “44.44049;
N 2040.444 no.4 0.4241700 14.15 .4144

mun 9304.4

209

 

 

 

. _ _ _
_ u _ _
. oooo._n — pcoo. . m—oo. ono_. . oso.. . .00.. . ooe_. . _c__. capo. . on_—. _ 4<»o» _
p _ _ _
_ u . _ u
_ _ _ _
_ ceco. n _ o . oooo. ~_oc. . n_oo. . nooo. . nooo. . o o . ~ooo. _ .>u.uuam. _
_ _ _ aux»o ~
_ _ _ H
_ _ _ _
_ no~.. . _ ocoo. o owoo. oooo. . ¢~_o. . ~emc. . ~_mc. . nr~o. smoo. . .a.o. _ :o_»<»_ _
_ _ _ n4_¢¢an ~
~ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ osw_. u _ o_oo. . nsoo. n_.o. . so_a. . cp~c. . o.no. . ¢_no. .o—c. . oo~o. _ uwcuuuw _
_ _ _ ua_u _
_ _ _ ~
_ ~ _ _
_ co... u _ nooo. . once. o~_o. . _n_c. . name. . onwo. . o-c. coco. . om_o. _ vvupsczcuu _
_ _ _ uq_k _
p _ _ _
_ ~ _ _
. o~o~. u _ o . no.9. mm_o. . ¢~_o. . ns_o. . so_o. . o._c. coco. . mooc. _ ma: ua_u “
u _ _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ na-. . _ coco. . -_o. o¢~o. . so~o. . o.~o. . mo~o. . coco. .aoo. . on.e. _ :c.»uu»wc _
u _ _ u
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
— oqcn. n _ o o o~cco «owe. o o-o. . cowc. . come. o .c—o. nwcc. . ~o_o. ~ 4w>u4 _
_ _ _ zo~yuwpczn _
_ _ _ _
u _ _ _
H no.—. I u a o o_co. ¢o~o. . r_~o. o ~vmc. . cn~o. . 04cc. n_oo. . no_o. ~ :c_»2w>uaa —

_ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ mo_.. n _ n_oo. . o—oo. ~o~o. . ¢-o. . ~cmo. . mouo. . m¢oo. o.co. . ao_o. _ uuzmaazuuo _
— u _ harm _
_ ~ _ _
_ _ u _ _ u u _ _ vac»u¢u
— a .>u—uwam. _ awoz<o ~ a¢u> ~ ua>p — wx340> _ >»_m I—ozwg a Oawaaw _ bzu,wc<zcx
u 4<»o» ~ mwxpo ~ wxoxm wa—u _ go u:_» . Juzu _ 4m:u — u2up2. ux«4u _ go aha: _ ua_u

«mergqu co_>c1w¢ wank
.mn u 2 c xmou uȢ>oa r rack ozpm: n uwcznz zwgacao

«on waadb hunccaa mmcau aca—tum he wodaw>¢

~ 20.0mm acu owzyazou «pa: 44¢

mnh musmwm

APPENDIX K

REGION 3, COMBINED DATA,

RELEVANCE TREE SUMMARY

210

211

 

 

 

_ u _ _
u a _ _
” oooo._n “ ~o~o. . oo_o. . o-~. . ccc.. . ..n.. . ~m-. . a.mo. . ~ooo. _ 4¢pop _
_ _
_ u _ _
_ _ _ _
_ .coo. a _ nooo. . o . coco. . pace. . nooo. . 0.90. . sooo. . coco. _ .>u_uuam. .
~ — a awxpo _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ nono- u - mooo. o o_oo. . nooo. o mace. . nsoo. . «moo. . onoo. . scoo. — uznu —
_ _ _ oum~aumuua _
~ _ _ ~
_ _ _ _
_ ~co.. n _ onoo. . o_oo. . ~cno. . ~m~o. . m_~o. . oe¢o. . ¢:_o. . ~:_o. _ mmu—~u¢ma _
_ _ _ .zuxu0¢z<x _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
“ mno_. n _ o_oo. o -oo. . mo_o. o oc~o. . o_~o. . ammo. o n‘_o. . o_—o. “ mu—rozouw “
~
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ mwuzou ~
_ onm.. u _ scoo. o «moo. . -¢a. . oo~o. . cn~o. . ammo. . ~n~o. . om.o. _ 4¢_uom oz¢ ~
~ _ _ 4<u~»_doa .
_ _ ~ ~
~ _ ~ _
_ cog". u _ o.oo. o o—ao. . n-o. o :~.o. o ~o~o. . ~nno. . coco. . «N‘s. _ un~uo4~3 u
_ _ _ _
~ _ _ _
u _ . umcmm_o _
_ ~ccc. n _ sooo. o coco. o No.0. o onoo. o secs. . owuo. o n~oo. o nmoo. _ 02¢ _
_ _ _ mhuum2_ _
~ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ -mo. n _ coco. . -oc. o no.0. . cwwo. o —moo. o No.9. o coco. . nouo. n :o_woqu u
_ _ _ _
. _ _ _
_ _ . «22¢; _
_ cm:—. a _ coco. o onoo. o smno. o cm—o. o no~o. o awnc. o cw—o. o oouo. _ 92¢ _
_ _ ~ («04m _
_ ~ ~ _
_ _ _ >xn¢¢ _
_ ooua. u _ coco. o o~oo. o m-o. o ~owo. . owuo. . m~noo o -oo. . «moo. _ Ico~n>ro _
_ _ _ ozc >coaowo _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ a _ . _ — mwuaou
a _ .»u_uuan. _ mmuz u u u _ zo_»¢ — _ ~ 92¢ ¢a0p0¢u
_ 4¢~0p _ zmzhe ~ uzwoa_s a mu_»uxpmw _ aw»¢) — mm~4o4—n — uuzuua — uoz¢a _ aunzm» ~ u»_m
4¢~pzwboanuua:omwa hammou
.om u 2 ~ :20; u_¢»am . :aou oz_m: ~ zunxaz xuamoza

{on wgcdb pubcoza mmoao C¢J~8~m no u¢<mu>¢
n 20—Dwa com owz~xtou (pta 44¢

HIM musmwm

212

 

 

 

 

_ u _ _
_ — _ _
" cocoon: “ once. o oosc. h—nn. . c.o.. . cmo_. . .mm_. o ow—no o oono. o on~_. — 4¢»o» ~
~ —
_ u _ _
_ _ _ _
— ~moeo I u e . .~noo. coco. . ccoo. o o . oooo. o o o o o coco. u _>L~uwaw. —
u n _ amrho _
— . _ _
_ _ _ _
— coco. n u nooo. o .Noo. -oo. . oc_o. . "one. o ~:.o. o mm~o. o omoo. . omoo. _ zo~p¢- —
_ _ _ n4_m<xua .
_ _ _ _
_ ~ _ ~
_ 059—. n _ noco. o 0__o. oo—o. . no_c. . oc~o. . nnwo. o ncwo. o once. o ~0—o. _ mpuwuuw _
_ n u wa.u _
u _ _ _
_ ~ _ _
_ -ho. I _ o . ~soo. omoc. . caco. o om~o. . fi-o. o coco. o owoo. . ~¢oo. — vu—sczouw _
~ ~ _ ua.u —
_ _ _ _
_ ~ _ _
“ coco. a u o o o-o. .500. o ~ooo. o coco. . no.o. . o«oo. . smco. . choc. “ wv: ua.u M
~ ~ . _
u _ _ _
— —ec.. - _ mooo. . ~o~o. ~o~o. . s-o. . ¢o_o. . mo~o. . .ooo. . owco. . aa~o. _ zo_»uu—uo _
_ _ _ _
_ _ ~ _
_ _ _ ~
~ ompno I _ coco. o coco. ammo. o mo~o. o Nowo. o oono. . enao. . .moo. o no~o. _ Jw>u4 ~
_ _ _ 70—»cwpoam ~
_ _ _ _
u _ . _
_ hoon. - — acoo. o anoo. osco. . .occ. o ~o~o. . «one. o o—_o. o ~_oo. . ~o~oo _ zoupzw>mta _
_ _ _ _
_ _ ~ _
— _ _ a
— .ne.. I u mooo. . coco. oo~¢. . o_~o. . oo.o. . ~o.o. . sooo. . :_oc. . am_o. _ uuzmaasuuo _
_ ~ _ mama _
_ u _ _
a _ — _ _ _ _ u u _ wackuau
_ _ .>u_uuam. u muoz<o _ a<u> _ ua>~ _ usago> _ >~_m _ zboqu _ camxam . pzuruo¢z<x
— 4¢po» — zwxpo _ uxoxm um—u — no at.» — Just _ awn; — Izupz— ~ wzqau u no uhcm _ un—u
vacuu¢u cou>¢xwm uznu
.cm u z o tack up¢poa n xaou oz_m= . rumxaz xuaxcxa

com UA¢¢p buzocaa mmoau 144—x—w no wccxw><

n 2o—Owa com owl—ozou ¢~¢o 44¢

NIM Guzman

213

 

 

_ u u _
_ . _ _
“ coco... “ _‘_o. . coma. . smn.. . -p.. . non.. . .no_. co... . oooN. ~ 4¢»ou _
~ _
_ _ _ _
a a — . _
. oo.o. a _ ~ooo. . coco. . nooo. . p.99. . oooo. . ~noo. mnoo. . o:oo. ~ .>u_uuam. _
_ _ ~ awzho _
_ _ _ _
_ u _ _
_ cumo. u _ coco. . n_oo. . sooa. . ~moo. . ~n_o. . omoo. coco. . .o.o. ~ uz_u _
_ _ . ouc_aumuaa _
_ _ . .
_ . _ g
_ coon. n . ncoo. . coco. . __~c. . chmo. . n¢~o. . eoNo. mawo. . wane. _ muo.»u«aa _
_ _ ~ hzw:uo¢z<t _
_ _ ~ _
a _ ~ _
_ 099.. a _ ~ooo. . ~noo. . coco. . ns—o. . n__o. . no~o. oc~o. . ~m~o. . mu_:ozouu _
~ _ _ u
u a — u
_ _ . muuaou _
_ .o... u _ ~ooo. . omco. . oe~o. . ~o_o. . oo.o. . cn~°. o~.o. . m_~o. _ 4¢~uom ozc _
_ _ ~ 4¢u.h_aoa _
_ — ~ .
~ ~ ~ _
“ hnoo. a ~ uooo. . mnoo. . oo_o. . Nowa. . m~_o. . ~¢_o. _moo. . o~_o. ~ manuOJ_n M
_ _ _
_ ~ _ u
_ _ _ mm.um.a _
_ once. u . ~ooo. . ndoo. . ~moo. . o~oo. . nsoo. . omoo. ~moo. . om~o.w _ oz¢ _
. u _ mpuumz_ _
. ~ _ _
. _ _ _
_ asou. u _ o.oo. . n~oo. . ~c.o. . oo~o. . whoa. . nn.d. .-o. . .-o. _ zo_moau _
u . _ _
u _ ~ _
. . ~ «zacu _
. a.m.. a . c.oo. . coco. . o¢~o. . ~o~o. . mo~o. . om~o. ¢-o. . n.~o. _ ozc _
_ ~ _ «ao4u _
_ _ _ .
u _ _ >xa«a _
_ o_n_. - . m_oo. . coco. . o_~o. . oc~o. . mn.o. . on~o. ~m_o. . on~o. _ 'co_m>xa _
~ _ . ~ 02¢ >oo4°uo _
u . u _
~ u a n _ u — ~ — mwuaou
_ _ .>u_uuam. . mmuz . _ . _ zo_»¢ . . az¢ maopu¢m
_ 4<pop u zuxpo _ nauo4_x _ mu.pux»mu _ awp«u ~ uu_4a4.n _ umauua mozca _ mung—h ~ wp~m

com

N tack chhom

com w4¢¢b huaooma mmoau a¢4~x~m no w¢¢mu>(
n zo—owm con owl—mtou ¢p¢o 44¢

4¢~pzuhoalu0020mua pmuaou

— 110k @z—m:

mum musmwm

N IUQIDZ thmcaa

214

 

 

 

_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
" oooo.‘n - onoo. . oomo. _~o-. o onmuo o nos—o o omo—o o conu. meno. o nn_~. _ 4¢pob ~

_ _ u
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ ~
_ o~oo. - u o o o~oo. o o o o o o o o o o o o _ .>u~uuam. _
_ ~ _ awz»o _
_ ~ _ ~
~ . _ _
_ :~o_. u _ pooo. . oooo. smoo. . ~o~o. . o.~o. . o~.o. . s-o. ccoo. . omoo. _ 7o__<~_ .
_ _ _ n4_¢¢xua _
o _ _ _
_ _ _ _
~ onm.. - . oooo. . cooo. on.o. . oo_o. . oo~o. . -~o. . .~no. eooo. . .c.o. _ mbuuuuw _
_ _ _ ua_u _
_ _ ~ _
_ _ _ _
_ m:oo. u _ oooo. . oooo. ~n_o. . -_o. . os_o. . no.o. . n~_o. «moo. . ...o. _ munyozouw _
_ _ _ uc.u .
. ~ _ n
— a _ _
u co-o a ~ ~ooo. . oo_o. soao. . ~o~oo o ~¢~o. o :9.o. . .cgo. asoo. . o.~o. n u¢3 wzuu “
— ~ ~
_ _ _ o
_ _ _ _
" o~n_. - _ o . ~o~o. no~o. . no.o. . o_~o. . -.o. . oooo. c~oo. . :m.o. _ zo_»uu~uo M

. _
a _ u _
~ _ _ _
_ n~¢_. - _ ~ooo. . o~oo. ~ono. . oo~o. . .mNo. . mmNo. . m4.o. .noo. . ma~o. ~ 4u>u4 _
~ ~ — zoupuwpoza _
. _ _ _
_ _ _ _
” o~m~. a _ nooo. . scoo. .sno. . no~o. . sc~o. . omwo. . m~_o. swoo. . om.o. _ zoopzu>uma ~

_ o _
u _ — _
_ _ _ _
_ moo_. u _ sooo. . o~oo. c—~o. . oo.o. . oo.o. . o~_o. . msoo. o_oo. . ¢__o. _ uuzwaaouuo _
_ _ _ ua_a _
_ _ ~ _
_ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ macpuau
_ _ .»u.uuam. . :wozqo _ u¢u> _ ua>» _ u234o> . >p_m zpozug . o<umam _ pzuxwo¢zoz
_ 4<pop _ xuzho _ uxoxm ux~g _ mo wxuh _ Ju:u . 4u2u _ uzw—z_ uquu _ no u»«: _ ma_u

muopoou ao_>arum um_u
.oo u z c sac; upcuo: n xaou oz_n: ~ zwmxaz :qucan

con wamdb pUDOOca wmcmu adautum no wa<zw>¢

n Zo—oum mom owl—c100 (~40 44¢

vim musmwh

215

 

 

 

 

0 u _ u
. u 0 0
“ oooo.~n “ c:—0. . on~_. . m:¢-. . coca. . 0e-. . comm. . :0~—. . n30—o u J¢»0» W
0
0 ~ 0 o
_ _ _ ~
_ -oo. - ~ .ooo. . -oo. . mooo. . o_oo. . w.oo. . oooo. . oooo. . o_oo. 0 .>u.uu1m. 0
_ _ ~ auzpo 0
_ . ~ _
u _ _ _
_ coco. - ~ oooo. . nooo. . pooo. . oooo. . .n~o. . mmoo. . osoo. . .~.o. _ 0:0; 0
_ 0 _ ouzoaumuma —
_ ~ _ _
~ 0 ~ _
0 mon_. a _ omoo. . o¢_o. . ~o~o. . 30.0. . no.0. . 00_o. . ooNo. . -~o. ~ wuu_»0¢aa _
0 ~ _ 02020042¢x _
~ ~ _ 0
0 ~ _ _
_ oooo. a _ nooo. . on.o. . oooo. . ~._o. . omoo. . «0.0. . maao. . s~_o. _ mu-sozouu M
_ ~ 0
~ ~ _ . u
_ . _ muuxou 0
_ no~—. I.— ~ooo. . cowo. . ¢m~o. o on_0. . 00.0. o ncwo. . s¢~o. . oomo. _ 4¢_uom 02¢ _
_ u u 4¢u~p~400 _
_ _ _ _
0 . _ _
_ _Joo. - _ oooo. . «moo. . m~.o. . o:_o. . o~.o. . _o_o. . “poo. . ~a_o. 0 uc_504~n ~
_ a _ 0
_ _ _ 0
_ 0 _ wmqumuo _
_ nomo. u _ ~ooo. . ~coo. . .0oo. . mnoo. . ‘coo. . emoo. . omoo. . n~_o. 0 02¢ .
~ ~ _ mbuwmzu u
_ _ 0 _
_ ~ ~ ~
_ so... u . nnoo. . oooo. . on.o. . o-o. . .moo. . me_o. . ~m_o. . oo~o. _ 20~momw a
u u _ u
_ . _ 0
_ _ _ ¢20¢u _
_ one“. u — ~_oo. o 05.0. . mo~o. . oo—o. . ao~o. . onwo. . o¢~o. . 0-o. _ 02¢ n
_ _ _ ¢aoau o
n . 0 _
_ _ _ >2a¢m _
— omm_. n _ n_o0. . ~.~o. . 0‘00. . Nomo. . «0.0. . oo~o. . no~o. . os—o. — uc0~n>za ~
~ _ . _ 02¢ >ooaowo _
_ _ ~ ~
_ _ _ ~ _ — ~ ~ 0 _ muuacu
_ _ .»u_uuan. _ mnmz _ ~ _ _ 20.0. 0 _ _ 07¢ vaopu<u
_ 4400p 0 auxpo 0 umwo;.n — mu_~mzpmu _ aup¢n _ uu_404_u ~ nuxuuc _ 00240 0 «war—h _ up_m
4¢~pzwpoauuuzromwa pnuaOu
.mm a 2 ~ xmou uhcpom _ 220g 02—m: n 202202 2042010

cob w4m¢h hunooaa mmoau C<J~t~m no w0¢1u><
n 20—owm mom DMZ—cxou (p40 44¢

mIM musmwm

216

 

 

 

_ n 0 .
_ _ 0 ~
“ oooo._I a o . Icon. . econ. . ~co_. . _I~_. . o_o_. . -n~. . Ammo. . o-_. _ 4¢~00 _
— u 0
~ ~ _ n
u u . ~ ~
_ «~00. I 0 o . c~oo. . o . o o 0 . 0 . 0 . o o o u .>u~uuam. u
0 a _ auzpo _
_ ~ ~ 0
_ u _ ~
0 o~o—. I u 0 o n—oo. o mmco. . no~0. . no.0. . :nuo. . nm~o. . snoo. . souo. _ 20~»¢»~ ~
~ _ _ u0_m¢2um ~
0 0 _ _
_ u _ _
u com—o I — 0 o 0000. o ~n~0. . no.0. . oc~0. . ns~0. . «.00. . oo—o. . c-0. — Vbuwuuw —
_ ~ _ ua.u ~
~ ~ _ 0
_ ~ ~ 0
_ oo~_. I ~ 0 . onoo. . «0.0. . oc_o. . os~o. . ~_~o. . oo~o. . snoo. . no.0. _ wouaozouw u
0 ~ 0 wa0u _
n n _ _
~ _ a _
“ mnou. I ~ 0 o msoo. . ~n_0. . s-0. . ~o_0. . o0~o. o nc_0. . 0000. . ouuo. — uv: wean "
u _
_ _ ~ 0
_ u _ _
— ecu-o I u 0 o n~uo. . ~c~0. . 00.0. o 00.0. o wo~0. o ~0~0. . 0~00. . ~o_0. ~ zouuuubuo u
0 _ n _
o a _ _
_ _ _ 0
~ moon. I u 0 . o~00. o so~0. . oc~0. . hswo. . s-0. . ~¢_o. . ~¢00. . 00.0. a 4w>u4 —
~ 0 _ zoopuuboaa _
_ _ ~ _
u _ _ _
“ sow—o I — 0 o 0.00. o 0n~0o . mc~0. . ~o~0. . oc~o. o @000. . o—00. . -_0. — 20002u>w¢n “
_ _
_ u u _
u u u 0
_ con—o I a 0 o 0000. o mm~0. . cowo. . mn~0. . ~o~0. o hsoo. . onoo. . .4—0. a uuzwamzuuo _
_ u n 0200 _
_ _ ~ _
_ u 0 _ u _ _ a u _ _ mac»u<u
a — .>u_uwam. n u «~02¢0 — a¢u> _ w0>p _ usage) n >h~m u zpozwq. — 0¢uaam _ hzuzuo¢2¢2
~ 4¢~0~ _ aux»0 _ uxoxm _ 02.0 _ no 02.» _ 4w:u _ 40:0 0 uzupz_ 0 uzoau _ go who: ~ wa_u .

 

com I 2

m¢0»u¢u 20_>¢2wo ua_u

Q ICOK thboa n tack OZ—MD n zwmxaz twamoaa

com U4¢¢p bUDooaa mmoau C¢J~t~m to UO¢zw><

n zo—owa men owl—c100 ¢~¢o 44¢

mum musmwm

APPENDIX L

REGION 4, COMBINED DATA,

RELEVANCE TREE SUMMARY

217

218

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . . .
. . . .
. 0000..n . 0000. . n~.0. . 000.. . c.0w. . pp«.. . ~0¢~. . ocoo. . 0n... . .000. .
u . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. 0.00. n . «000. . V000. . .000. . .000. . .000. . .000. . .ooo. . «000. . ....Lmam. .
~ _ ~ nzxpc .
. . . .
. . . .
. 0000. u . .000. . 0000. . «000. . 0000. . 0..0. . .000. . rvoo. . ouoo. . 01.0 .
. _ _ aka—ouvuaa —
. . . .
. . . .
. 5.... u . 0000. . 0.00. . memo. . «<00. . .o~0. . 0.00. . 0~.o. . 30.0. . v.0..001a .
. . _ .zuywc¢z¢y .
. . . .
. . . .
. ..00. u . ..00. . 0000. . 00.0. . momo. . 0000. . c000. . 0000. . 4900. . v0.2ozoum .
. . . .
p . . .
p _ . uugacu .
. «00.. u . p.00. . 0.00. . .omc. . cano. . ocmo. . .Nmo. . ...0. . no.0. . .¢.c0m 07¢ .
. . . .0L....0a .
. . . .
. . . .
. as... u . 0000. . «.00. . .000. . 9.00. . 00.0. . ..00. . ~..0. . m~.0. . mn.uc..r .
p . . .
. . . .
. . . umcuw.c .
. camc. u . «000. . 0000. . 0m.o. . ucco. . «(00. . ~..o. . «V00. . ~n.o. . cro .
0 _ . Vbuuvz~ —
. . . .
. . . .
. pm... u . 1000. . 0.00. . V000. . 0000. . 0.00. . -mo. . c~.0. . 00.0. . :0.w0:u .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . ¢20¢u .
. 000.. u . 0000. . 0.00. . msmo. . oqno. . 00~0. . mmmo. . 50.0. . 00.0. . , 07¢ .
p _ ~ 0004u —
. . . u
. . . >740: .
. sm~.. u . .000. . emco. . 0.00. . cano. . 0..0. . «000. . 0000. . 0000. . -cc.a>xa .
. . . 020 >00.0u0 .
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . VILacu

. . .>0.0wan. . mmwz . . . . 20... . . . 0?. 000.000

. .chc» . yurpc . nauc..r . mu..02.wu . 00.0: . mu..0..y . numuua . w¢2¢a . sums.» . up.v

00.02uboanuuorovuo 0000:.
.cu u z w lac. u>¢hoa. — 1003 c7.r: . zucsaz zwdmcao

ocu 0.00. pu:ccaa vanu 004.2.v no uo¢nm>¢
c zo—oua 0cm 002—c:ou ¢p¢0 44¢

Hun mudmflm

219

 

 

 

 

 

. . . _
. — _ .
. 0000..I . ..00. . 0.00. 000.. . 000.. . osv.. . n~w.. . 000.. . 0.00. . 000.. . .¢.0. .
. . . .
_ . . .
. . . .
~ 0000. u u 0 . 0000. 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . .>u.uuam. .
p . . aux»: .
. . . .
. _ _ .
0 0.0.. u . 0000. . .000. .000. . $0.0. . 0..0. . .m.0. . armo. . 0000. . 00.0. . :0..0.. .
. _ . 10.00100 .
. . . .
. . . .
. ¢m~.. n . o . 0~.0. ...o. . .w.o. . 00.0. . ~.~0. . ammo. . 0000. . no.0. . v.00000 .
u . . 03.0 .
0 . . .
. _ . .
. 0w00. I _ 0 . 0000. 0..0. . «000. . rv.0. . m¢.0. . 0..0. . xncc. . 00.0. . ¢0.:02000 .
p — — no.0 —
0 . . .
— . . .
n 0000. u . o . 0..0. 0000. . 00.0. . 00.0. . m~.o. . .000. . 0000. . ~000. . 0.: 0a.. .

. . .
. . _ . _
. . .. .
b 020.. u — 0 . 00.0. _n~0. . 00.0. . m¢.0. . ~0.0. . 0000. . 0000. . 0.~0. . 20.000000 _
p . . .
. . . .
. . . . .
. 00... u . o . 0000. .000. . .000. . ..00. . mpwo. . 00.0. . 0000. . oamo. . .000. .
p . . 00.000.030 .
0 . . .
p — . .
n 000.. u . o . 0000. 00:0. . 0000. . 0000. . omwo. . .000. . «~00. . ~0~0. . rc..2u>uzo .

. . .
. — . .
. . . .
. w-.. u . nooo. . .000. 0:00. . cvwo. . 0000. . 00.0. . 0000. . omoo. . 00.0. . 00-000.000 .
u u — 03.0 p
. . . .
p . . . . . . . . . wnc00¢u
. . .>0.00a¢. . 000200 . 000> . 00>» . 02000> . >..v . 2.020. . 00000m . 020200¢2¢a
— .¢»c> . ouxpc . 02020 00.0 . I: I2.» . .uzu — .u:u . -2002. . 020.0 . 00 00.0 . no.0

00000¢u ucp>0202 00.0
.00 u 2 c 2000 0papoa m 2000 02.0: . 000202 20.0000

con UJCGb hutocaa vvcau add—tum kc KO¢30>¢

a 2c.cua acu 002.0200 ¢~¢0 ..¢

NIH musmwm

220

 

 

. .

 

 

 

 

. 0

. 0000..» . 0000. .o .000. o 000.. o 000.. . 000.. . mn0.. . 00m..
. .

. .

. .

. «000. n . ~000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . ~000. . «000.
. .

. .

. .

. 0000. u . 0000. . 0.00. . 0000. . .000. . «0.0. . .000. . 00.0.
0 .

. .

. .

. 000.. u . 0000. . 0000. . 00.0. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . 0:00.
0 .

. .

. .

. «00.. u . 0000. . .~00. . 0000. . .000. . 00.0. . 00.0. . 00.0.
. .

. .

. .

. «c... u . ..00. . 0000. . 00.0. . .0.0. . 00.0. . 0000. . 00.0.
. .

. .

. .

0 0000. u . 0000. . 0000. . 00.0. . 00.0. . on.0. . 00.0. . ...0.
. .

0 .

. .

0 0000. n . 0000. . 0.00. . 0000. . 0000. . 0000. . ~0.0. . m000.
. .

. .

. .

0 00... u . ..00. . 0N00. . 00.0. . 0.00. . «000. . 00.0. . 00.0.
0 .

. .

. .

. 00m.. u . 0000. . 0400. . 00.0. . 0000. . 0000. . mamc. . .m~0.
0 .

. .

. .

0 0.0.. u . 1000. o «000. . (0.0. . 0:00. . «0.0. . vane. . 00.0.
. .

0 .

. . . . . 0 . .

. . .00.u0ar. . 0002 . . . . 20.00 .

. 040C» . :0I0c ~ I:.C0.J . wu.0010¢0 . 0000) 0 w0.404~1 n luxuwo . LcZaa

—

. .
. .
«00.. . 40000 .
. .
. .
. .
«000. . 200.0000. .
. 00100 .
. .
. .
00.0. . 01.0 .
. 000.000030 .
. .
. .
«000. . 000.00013 .
— hZKSBCCZd: —
. .
. .
cmmc. . vu.:crouw .
. .
. .
. v00300 .
«000. . .0.L¢m :zq .
— 400.0.400 .
. .
. .
V7.0. . 0..03..r .
. .
. .
. 00000.0 .
nn~0. . 0:0 .
. V0va;. .
. .
. .
0000. . :c.voz0 .
. .
. .
_ 07:00 .
0.«0. . 070 .
. 0104. .
. 0
. .1300 .
..«0. . nrr.r>11 .
. 020 >00.00c .
. 0
_ J00360
_ 02¢ u0C0000
nw£1_» — by»-

 

40.»Z0»oac0un:omuc hwwacu

.10 a 2 ~ 2000 000000 . 1000 c200: ~ «00:02 xugacao

000 0.000 0030030 00000 000.2.0 00 000au><
c 7c.o0n 000 002.0100 «000 .40

min musmwm

221

 

 

_ _ _ _
_ ~ _ _
_ ooco..u _ scoc. . coco. . ~c¢_. . onc.. . csc.. . oom.. . ¢v~.. oerc. m-_. _ 4¢~¢p _
u _ p _
p _ — _
p _ _ _
— o~oco u — o o o o o o «coo. . neoc. . nooo. . c.oo. o Nooo. ~ .>u_uuuw. _
r _ _ auzhc _
p _ _ _
— ~ _ —
_ smc~. u _ ncco. . ewoo. . nsoo. . a_~o. . co_c. . c¢_c. . m_~c. oaoc. sooo. _ ;c_~¢»_ _
_ _ ~ od_aqrua _
_ _ _ _
_ _ . _ ~
» n4n_. n u c o wooo. o coco. . rc—o. . onnc. . x—mc. . s¢mc. nmao. wage. _ apLuuuw —
_ _ _ unuu —
_ _ _ —
_ _ _ _
. coco. u _ o . «soc. . c__o. o qr_o. . m¢_c. . _o_o. . np_c. coco. o4_c. _ wu—zczouw ~
— — ~ uQ—k _
_ _ p _
— _ _ _
» n_m~. u u o . nn-o. o ~¢_co . U¢_c. o acme. . c_mc. o c¢~c. x0c¢. me_c. ~ wu: uo—u _
» _ ~ _
_ _ — _
~ _ n _
. n_~_. n _ o . ~c_o. . s_~o. . »¢_o. . n¢_c. . 4n_o. . ca_c. ~>cc. nm_c. _ roybgubwc _
. _ _ _
_ _ _ p
p _ _ _
_ -¢_. u _ o . oaoo. . meo. . o_«c. . ~vmc. . ammo. . sa_o. oooc. n_~c. _ 4w>w4 _
_ _ _ :o—pgupoan _
p p — p
_ h — _
— 4¢r_. u — o . once. o a_n¢. o (sac. . Home. o a—mo. o oc—c. mace. cc—o. u 7c..2w>ua1 u
p _ _ w
_ _ w _
_ _ _ _
» «o~_. u _ mcoo. . ecco. . ms~o. . armo. . .qwc. . .cmo. . moot. 04cc. 0¢_c. _ wu:uuo:uuo _
h _ u 3.7; —
_ . p .
p _ _ . _ h _ ~ _ wrcpu<u

_ _ .>u_uuax. _ _ auczuc _ nag) a an)» _ u234c> _ >»_v xpozwq cquxOM ~ ~2w:u¢¢z¢x

. aqpc» _ ouxpc ~ mxozu _ uz_u _ me uz_» _ Juzu _ 4w2u _ u2upz_ micau no uhcw _ un»u

 

 

.c: u 2

o VQCK uhchoa n 1305 GZ—m:

 

 

machccu oc_>c1wa m:_u

N IwQIDZ thacao

con w4aa» bu:ccaa vvcau aca_z_w uo wcqau><

a 2c.cwa acu ouz»530c «vac 44¢

via musmwm

222

 

 

 

 

_ . _

_ — ~

_ oooc..u _ race. up... . «r... . mcp.. . aoe.. . m_n_. . can_. . .55.. — Jqpc_
_ _ _

_ ~ _

— _ _

» s_co. u — mcco. .ooc. . ~occ. o ~ccc. o .oco. o nooo. . :coo. . coco. _ .>u_uwum.
— — — ouxbc
_ . _

p — _

. .eco. u — coco. pmco. . croo. . «sco. . mc.o. . occo. . ¢«_o. . :_.o. — u1_k
p _ _ emz.auJuxo
_ _ _

_ _ h

. ~xc.. u _ rccc. mo.o. . .o_o. . .pno. . r.mc. . ¢z_c. . o-o. . cnmc. ~ vmg_ku«xa
p _ _ p2usuc<z<z
_ _ h

p _ p

_ .moc. u _ ~_co. osco. . race. . am_c. . o_—c. . ¢¢_c. . wc~o. . anmc. _ vu_:czouw
» _ _

p _ .

p _ _ Luganu
. ns__. u _ :ccc. o¢_o. . am_o. . _a_c. . a¢_o. . o¢.c. . \¢.e. . c:_o. _ 4<.£Cu czq
. u _ acc_»_4co
_ ._ _

u _ .

_ coo.. u _ ccco. rxco. . .m_c. . r¢_o. . ¢n_o. . mn_c. . «n.o. . ~o_o. _ mo~u24~7
. _ _

_ _ _

b m u hmcwvmf
. .ecc. u ~ .cco. ccco. . wo~o. . cacc. . race. . oscc. . omoo. . acme. _ are
p u h whguv7_
_ _ _

. _ H

— cm... n _ o_cc. caco. . o__o. . «are. . «ace. . _n_c. . osuo. . eono. _ :c_uczu
_ _ _

_ _ _

p — — «Iran
_ see.. u _ woco. n¢_o. . __mc. . .mno. . ammo. . ommc. . s.uo. . mo.e. _ c7.
_ _ . cacqu
_ — ~

. — _ >1n<a
. pcp_. n _ sccc. acme. . rs_o. . mwno. . oo~o. . m~_c. . «c—o. . come. _ Ice—«yra
— ~ _ 02¢ >cCJCmc
_ _ . ~

— _ _ p p _ p _ _ vugqcu

_ _ .yu.c;a¢. mm»: ~ . u _ zouhc _ u _ oz. anewoqu
. dqpc» » zuxpc named—x ~ mu_»mr»uu _ ow»<z _ mu_4oq_r _ smxuua . mczqa _ awry.» _ u»_r

 

 

.cu

4c~p2khonnucarovwa hmwaCh

w 29cm ubopco . xaou c:—

OOu u.c<» puzccaa umcog aa4_:~v no mocnw><
a zc—cuo ecu ouzpa:ou <>co J;«

 

v: n mwataz IUchau

mug musmwm

|bFIFE—hu—~—.—_——~_—~—_~»—~—_'—o—D—’fl_—_>Dun—hr»C-OI'DIO-Fl.bpj—v.

223

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_ _ _ _
— _ _ _
” cocc._u _ nooc. . sumo. onc_. . «cr_. . __c_. . mnm~. . -~_. . cncc. . .np_. _ days. ~

_ . _
— — h _
. _ _ .
— ence. n — a o c o o c . neoc. . coco. o mooo. . o . Noce. _ .»u_Luow. _
u — ~ warhc _
_ _ _ _
_ u _ _
p smmc. u _ :ccc. . .acc. mace. . ¢p_o. . _¢~c. . oq.c. . s>_c. . :aac. . nocc. _ rc_»¢»_ w
_ _ _ n..a«1ux..
_ — _ _
b _ _ w
— scn—o u u o . asco. -_c. o ~m~c. . c.«c. . owmc. . ms~c. . m_.c. . mo_c. _ Lacuuuw _
p _ p ufi—u —
» ~ » ~
~ _ _ _
— mnoe. n _ e . mcoo. nm_o. . ~__o. . ov_c. . m:_o. . po_c. . 14cc. . ~m_¢. _ r;.rczcuw _
u — » ui~u —
. _ _ _
— ~ . _
u oa-o u _ o . acoo. ~o_o. . no_o. . ¢a_c. . «owe. . m«_c. . .cgc. . m¢_c. _ uL: w3_u _
_ _ > _
. _ _ _
_ _ _ h
» mnnu. u _ o . ~o~o. -~o. . «o_c. . ~a_c. . o~_c. . cm_c. . (ace. . ca_c. ._ 7:.»Lu.mc w

_ y _
_ u _ _
_ — . a p
» oc¢_. u _ c . ocoe. mowo. . «.Nc. . mrnc. . mmwo. . cu_c. . ogcc. . .nmc. _ 4m>w4 .
~ » _ ;o_»Lu»cun —
~ _ _ —
_ _ p _
H ~xn_. u _ o . meco. ammo. . rxmo. . .nwc. . m~nc. . pace. . cwcc. . ow_c. _ zc_.zu>u7; _

— ~ _
p _ ~ _
p — _ _
. m~¢.. u _ ncco. . coco. ~ono. . Vsmo. . mmnc. . x_mc. . ~_~o. . pace. . oc_r. _ wuzuoazuur _
p ~ — u~._u —
_ _ _ . _
» ~ _ _ _ p _ _ u _ farpgcu
_ _ .>u~uwar. _ mwozco u cam» _ w0>h _ u1340> . >»_¢ p Ipc:u. _ oqwaur . hzusucazqz
. Jqpc» _ auxpc _ wxoxm ea.» . uc ux_» _ Ju:u _ gut“ . -2u»2_ _ ua‘uu . to khan _ up.u

maopgcu oc_>¢xkr wa.u
.om u z e 1&0; whapoa r xoou czpv: p :uaxnz :mgacao

aou u;u<» huacccn vvcag a.4_:_v go maczu>¢
4 zepoua acu ouzpaacu ¢>¢c 44c

mun musmfim

APPENDIX M

REGION 5, COMBINED DATA,

RELEVANCE TREE SUMMARY

224

 

225

 

 

_ — _ ~
_ n _ _
” cooo.~u — Ncoo. . ammo. . sc-. o pa¢.. . .swq. . oo4~. . pace. . on... _ J<»o» "
u , _
h — p _
u _ u _
» nnoo. u — o o nooo. o hooc. o moco. . ~ooo. o coco. o coco. . coco. — .>u~uuom. _
u n . — aux»: _
— ~ ~ _
_ _ ~ ~
— mace. u _ Ncoc. o -c0o o scoc. o rmoo. . 0o_c. o noco. . omoo. . ~ccc. p uo_u _
— u — can—oumwmo _
_ _ a _
— _ _ _
» cucu- I _ ecoo. o o¢c0o o o_nc. o smmo. o wowo. o onno. o QN_Co . ca—co — va~pu<ao —
— u a h2u3uc¢247 —
u u — _
~ _ _ r
” acco. I — Ncoo. o c—oa. o h¢_¢. o nc—o. o «woo. . —o~c. o so—o. . om—a. u uu_:czcuw ~
_ w —
u _ — _
u — _ uuLacu _
_ Now-o u ~ woco. o mcoo. o o~no. o echo. o ox-c. . ~oao. o -_o. . sc_o. — danOV czc _
p _ _ 4(L_>_4cn p
— ~ _ —
p u _ .
p n~n~o u — 00cc. 9 m~ooo 0 «one. o _h«e. o 50.9. o more. o 9009. . s:~o. — wo—uCJ_) ~
— — _ _
u — ~ _
_ _ _ umawm_c u
u Nch. u — Ncoo. o unoc. o n~.o. o omoo. o ssoo. o Nacc. o (rec. o mn—c. ~ czq —
— _ _ v»ngz. _
_ _ _ u
p — u _
— co... u _ m_oo. . o~oo. . _o_o. . more. . ”moo. . ~a~e. . o._c. . o¢_o. _ .c_¢cau _
n _ a _
p ~ ~ _
p u — <7:<u —
u m¢€—. I — coco. o NQOOo o ammo. o hw—c. o (two. o Name. 0 tn—o. o hh—Oo p ::< ~
~ _ — «aogu _
p _ ~ _
— u _ >roqo _
~ coo—o u — coco. 0 Once. o «owe. o Oono. . moco. o wowc. o cfioOo . a_~o. ~ acr~m>xo _
w _ _ c2c >cc;0uc »
p _ _ p
~ ~ ~ — u u — — _ — sumacu
_ _ .>L_Uuan. _ mmuz _ u _ _ zo~pq _ u _ crc uncbuqu
— J¢ho> — rut»: — Iawca_) —

MU—pwxumw u awhdx — wu—464~3 — luxuua — weld; _ owxvuh — uh~J

 

lal-"----'--'---l-lv-"' I‘

4a-pzu»caouga:omuo pwuacu

.nu u 2 ~ Icon mb4uoa ~ xaou cz.m: w amaxaz xwaacan

com wJaqp puzccaa vmoog a<4~z_m uc uc<aw>¢
w z:_Owa acu aux—«vac <~<c 44¢

HIS madman

226

 

 

 

. _ _ _
_ _ h .
_ coco-- ~ nmoo. o 0059. om-. o r~m_. o n_¢_. o coo—. o oao.. -¢co . ~_n—. » 4¢»c» —
p u u _
— u — —
— ~ _ _
_ .coo. u _ o . coco. ._oo. . «coo. . «coo. . sooo. . nooc. Nooo. . meoo. _ .>u~uwnm. u
p _ ~ ouxpc _
_ — _ _
_ _ ~ _
_ mmoo. u _ .~oe. . owoo. ocoo. . mw_c. . ..nc. . xm_o. . ~c~c. mace. . no_c. w :c.»«—_ _
— _ ~ n4_a¢xua _
_ _ k _
— u — ~
— c~m—. u — 4.09. . mn~o. oo_o. o ~c_c. o senc. o -~o. o muwc. cocc. . np_c. u upcmuuu _
_ _ n wn_u _
p _ ~ _
~ . h _
_ cmeo. - _ coco. . mceo. oo_o. . «ace. . er_c. . mc_o. . (coo. smco. . m-o. u vu_:crouu _
~ _ _ wo~u ~
_ _ u _
u . _ _
p case. a _ .coe. . _n_e. nmoo. . pooo. . nc.o. . o__o. . mcoo. «woo. . .aco. _ mu: uo~u _
p _ ~ _
_ ~ ~ _
~ _ p _
w as... u _ nooo. . po.c. o_~o. . ss_c. . m4_c. . owyo. . .coc. cecc. . sm.c. _ 2chpaupwc “
_ _

a _ — _
p _ _ ~
_ soo.. n — mcoo. . ~noo. keno. . acme. . orac. o oewo. o ow.c. sooo. o ~o~o. _ 4u>u4 _
p p _ zo_»uwpcon _
_ ~ ~ —
_ _ _ _
_ mns_. u _ m_oo. . ~moo. «Nae. . come. . mmmo. . om~a. . oc.o. cacc. . .~.c. _ :c..zu>waa _
h _ _ u
p _ _ p
u — p p
p ¢o~_. n . mooc. . mace. mo~o. . eo_o. . wmmc. . a~_c. . m_.c. oaoc. . ss_c. h muruaazuuo _
u _ , _ uo~u u
_ _ _ _
~ _ _ . ~ ~ _ _ ~ racyu.u

— _ .>u_uuav. _ muoz<o _ cam» _ ma>p . w1240> _ >»_¢ xpczua _ cauaom _ pzmch«zcz

_ 4<~op _ awxpo _ wzcxm wa_u _ no wx_» _ Juzu . 4u2u — azuhz~ w2¢4u — no aha: _ uu—u

wac»c¢u ac_>¢:uc w1.u
.m« u z o zaou upcpoa n :aou cz.¢: . zuctaz :w4acao

cog waa<p puzcoza vmcau add—I—v to wO¢aw><

w 2:.owc ncu ouz.a:au ¢»<o 44¢

mnz musmwm

227

 

 

 

 

— _ _ _
u _ _ _
H cacao—u — «soc. o mono. o co~—. o eh¢—. a (Uru. o pet—o o¢-o o coa~. _ 4(bo» _

_ ~ u
p _ ~ ~
_ _ _ _
— cmco. u a o o mcco. o coco. o coco. . (coco o N—cco moooo o oooo. _ .>u—uuom. u
_ _ — our»: _
u _ _ _
p _ _ _
u —:Cc. u ~ cocc. o oooo. o whoa. o wuco. . or_o. o nmoc. oo_o. o oo_o. _ wu_u _
u _ , ~ cwahauuwao _
p a _ h
u _ _ _
» Noe—o n _ m~oo. o —coo. . s-o. o thc. . c-o. o cowo. come. . more. _ mmuphucmn .
— _ — p7usuc¢?qy ~
~ _ . _
_ _ h _
— c¢c_. u ~ moco. o onoo. . 0590. o ¢w_o. . coco. o ~o~c. 9m.o. o mnno. _ vu—vozouu —
b u _ u
_ ~ _ ~
— _ _ auuacu ~
. co-. u _ «coo. . choc. . mm_o. . mc_o. . ¢n_o. . :omo. pc_o. . ammo. _ 4¢_LCm :24 m
_ _ _ Jay—p.40a —
_ _ _ _
h _ _ ~
H n¢o~o u _ noco. o m~oco o ecuo. . came. . ~m_o. o m¢_o. coco. . s—«0. _ mo—uc;~s u

_ _ u
a _ _ _
y _ _ uwcww_c p
_ oomo. u _ coco. . ~.oo. . spec. . «ace. . spec. . ~5oo. ocoa. . .mma. ~ cza ”
h _ _ mbuuv2—.~
_ _ ~ ~
u a . ~ _
u con—o n — o—oo. o o~oc. o cm—o. o o~roo o whoa. . m~_o. cm_o. o omwc. a ro~¢ozw a
_ . ~ ~
— _ _ p
_ _ u «2:4u _
» ooeu. u _ ~—oo. o 0369. o n—wo. o mc_c. o «Nae. o uome. ~_~¢o . ~ono. — 024 h
u n _ «aoau _
h _ _ a
u — _ >xn¢a _
u om~.. u _ m-oc. . umoo. . mm.o. . oruc. . s_~c. . -~c. cn~c. . nomc. _ ucc—¢>za _
_ _ a are >co;ouc _
~ _ — _
. _ p _ _ r u _ _ muuocu
u — .>u_uuam. — mmwz u — ~ — zc_»« u _ ozc vco»uau
_ 4(p0» _ awxpo ~ oawo4_n u mu_»mxpmu _ amh¢n ~ mu~a¢4~r _ nwmuua mozqo _ owns.» ~ u»_u

4<_»zu»cauuua:owwa pmuacu
.mc u z N xaou mhchoc — tack crhma N auxin: tugaoao

con Udaa» bubooaa macaw adJutmm to weduw>(
m ZC—me ccu ouZ—aaou (hdo 44¢

mu: muzmwm

 

228

 

 

u 2

mac»u«u oop>¢rwa wa~u

c IQOK ubchou n Incu C?»mD N awEIDZ zwdmcan

aou wacqp purocua mmcac cad—rum no wc<aw><
m ?c_owa ncu cuz~6509 «pco 44¢

«12 madman

_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
H oooo..n _ ~_co. osec. -s_. mom_. c¢s.. . cmm_. . nmm.. .Nrc. . scn_. _ ;¢»c» _
_ _ —
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_ o _ o o o o o o o o c o o o _ .>u_guam. _
p — — auxhc —
_ _ . _
_ _ _ _
_ sooo. _ «coo. c—aa. coco. c~_o. nrmo. . mo_c. . n—mc. snco. . mace. _ 2c_»¢»_ —
_ ~ ~ a;~m<ruo ~
~ _ p _
_ _ ~ _
. onc_. _ coco. ~moo. os_o. msuc. smwc. . ¢-o. . osmc. acoc. . op.o. _ vpuuuuu .
_ _ _ wa_u _
_ _ _ _
p _ _ _
. o.oo. . ~coo. mnoo. ~o_o. a-o. o¢_o. . mm_o. . po.c. -co. . o~_o. . ru_sozouu _
_ _ _ ua—u ~
~ _ _ _
p _ _ _
” cc~_. _ .coo. coco. e-o. nc_o. m¢_c. . ..wo. . s¢~c. osco. . m¢~o. _ mw: wa.u _
. . _
. _ a _
_ — _ _
. so... _ o os_c. ncwo. va_o. c¢~o. . .¢_o. . ~eoo. “nee. . ~s_c. _ 7c~»uu»uo ~
_ ~ _ u
. u _ _
~ _ _ _
_ ham—o _ o n~oo. c~noo ccwo. Newc. . :ewo. . >v~c. coco. . coma. _ 4w>u4 _
p _ _ zo_»cu.oaa _
_ ~ _ _
_ u _ _
_ seo.. _ coco. o_co. oono. oweo. mqwc. . nh~o. . _ooo. c~co. . _m_o. _ roupzw>uaa _
_ _ _ .
_ ~ _ _
p _ _ u
_ ~n... _ a once. cn~c. n_no. m_mc. . :o_o. . ~c~c. ¢~oo. . ~e_o. _ uozuaa:uuo _
. ~ _ ua_u _
_ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ ~ vac»uau
— .>u_uuam. awozco a¢w> wa>h _ u124c> _ >~_m xpcqu _ c<waam bzuxmcazcx
u 4«»o» awxho uxozm wz~u me u:_» Juan _ Juan _ uzw»z_ mxcdu u no when uo_u

229

 

 

 

» u — ~
_ ~ _ ~
” oooo..u _ «wee. . ~ma.. . oca_. . o~¢_. . a~n_. . sem.. . ~noo. . ¢~¢_. — chc» _
. ~ _
. ~ ~ _
u _ _ _
u snoc. - _ o o coco. o coco. . occo. . «coo. . uooo. . coco. . coco. _ .>u~uunm. a
p — ~ omrpc —
— ~ _ u
u _ ~ _
_ ~cmo. a _ coco. . once. . psoo. . mnco. . 4n_o. . cmoo. . coco. . coca. _ ua.u ~
~ _ _ aux—auvuao _
_ _ _ ~
~ _ _ _
_ ~pn—o u _ mace. . co~oo o m-o. . m¢_o. . 4¢—°. . owmo. . -_o. . nmwc. — muu—»U(aa .
_ ~ ~ »zu:uc<z<x ~
. _ _ —
. _ _ _
_ coco. a _ Nooo. o o-o. o occo. . .¢_o. o «coo. . ss_o. o page. . owmc. ~ mu_sozcuw W
_ _ _
b _ ~ H
_ ~ _ vuuaou _
_ ao¢_. n — mooo. . cane. o -.o. . aw_o. . o:~o. . oNNo. . cc—o. . ocmc. u 4<~cov c2¢ _
_ _ h Jqu~»_gon _
a _ _ p
_ ~ ~ _
» omoc. n _ ncoo. o sacc. . nc—o. . ¢m_o. . cm—o. . no.0. . scoo. . -_o. _ wo—uCJ—x u
. _ _ _
_ ~ _ _
h _ u umawmuo _
_ oo4o. u _ .ooo. . «coo. . oboe. . ence. . choc. . o¢o°. . mnoo. . _o~o. _ c2¢ _
. _ _ rpuwmzu ~
_ ~ ~ _
_ _ p _
. ..oc. u ~ coco. . _coo. . co.o. . come. . «coo. . o~_o. . pooo. . o~_o. _ :o_noau _
_ _ _ —
_ _ ~ _
_ ~ _ «:34; _
. ooo_. u a ~_oa. . nmwo. . ne~o. . wo_c. . swno. . oqwc. . no—o. . o-o. _ cz< _
— — _ «cedu ~
~ _ _ _
_ _ _ >xo¢a _
_ ooo.. u _ coco. . o_no. . mama. . coho. . pc~o. . nmwc. . sn.o. . pnwo. _ ucc_¢>za _
_ ~ ~ 02¢ >c04°wc _
_ _ _ _
u — _ u _ u _ _ u _ «muocu
— — .»u_uwar. _ wmwz ~ _ u — zo_»¢ _ n u 024 unopucu
_ 4«»o» _ amt»; _ uawc4_n ~ mu.»ur»wu _ awpqx . _ woz<a _ aunt.» _ uhuu

uu_494_1 _ nmauua

 

 

 

4c—prupoauwuozovwa pmuacu

occ n 2 N Sack upcboa — Icon 02~v2 n mwwiaz tu.acmn

com wJUc» hutccaa vmcnu aqqnzum no m0<uw>¢
w Zc—Owa acu Du2_arou (hdo Ja<

ml: musmflm

230

 

 

 

 

 

 

o _ o _
o _ o o
H oooo... _ mooo. . oomo. ono.. . noao. . maoo. . onm_. . noNP. . more. . _¢¢_. . 41.0» _

o _ _
o _ . _ _
— ~ _ _
_ oooo. « _ o . .ooo. o . o . o . o . o . o . o _ .>u_ouqm. _
o n _ aux»o ~
_ n o _
o _ _ _
_ .soo. u _ oooo. . o_oo. oooo. . on_o. . a¢.o. . ¢n_c. . mo_o. . once. . ___o. _ :o.».»_ o
_ _ — uJ—moxun —
o _ _ _
o o o o
o memo. n _ p_oo. . osoo. ~»_o. . _»_o. . memo. . _m~o. . sono. . nooo. . oo_o. _ uouuuuu _
o o _ uaou _
o _ o o
o _ o _
_ sooo. - _ 4_oo. . cnoo. ~c_o. . ¢_~o. . cc.o. . om_o. . oooo. . «moo. . xa_o. _ mu_y02ouu _
o u _ ma_u u
_ u _ _
_ — o o
” ooo_. u _ o . osoo. n-o. . cr_o. . ow_o. . ms—o. . .eoc. . .sco. . m~.o. _ mu: moo. _

_ o _
o _ _ ~
~ — _ _
_ oon_. - . o_oo. . ¢_~o. ~m~o. . momo. . oo_o. . om_o. . oc_o. . «moo. . o¢~o. — rc_»uu»uo _
~ ~ o o
o _ o _
_ _ o —
o __m_. u _ oooo. . m_oo. soNo. . .axo. . ammo. . ~nwo. . _¢.o. . omoo. . -~o. _ ou>w4 _
u n — .aO—hthbcan —
o o _ _
o o _ _
_ son_. a _ sooo. . mnoo. -no. . paao. . name. . smmo. . —._c. . o~oo. . ~m_c. _ reopzw>uua _
o n o _
_ — o _
o _ o o
_ .mn—. n _ mooo. . mnoo. oo~o. . owno. . orwc. . ow.c. . on—o. . nnco. . nooo. _ wuruaoruuc _
w n a war. _
o _ o _
o _ o o _ o o o o o vuc»o.u
. _ .»u_ouam. _ «mozqc o a¢u> _ mn>p _ wxaoo> _ >»_m o xpczoo _ cowanm _ pzozuc<zox
_ o<»c» _ mwzoo _ uxoxm wxo. _ kc m2.» _ Juan _ ou:u _ nzwozo _ oxaou _ no w»¢q _ uo_u

vao»ocu aco>¢zwc uaou .
.mm a z o xaou upoooa n xaou ¢:_m: m aumraz zmoaczo

mom woaco poaccaa umcao aoo_x_w mo weaau>a

m. 2C—Owa an: CkZ—aflou (pco 44¢

ml: mudmflm

APPENDIX N

REGION 6, COMBINED DATA,

RELEVANCE TREE SUMMARY

231

232

 

 

 

 

— — u —
o — u o
” oooo..n " maoo. . mo_o. . coo~. . capo. . oo__. . oo-. . noo.. . a.m.. _ Jopoo _
u _

o _ o o
o _ ~ o
o onoo. a o o . o . oooo. . coco. . o_oo. . oooo. . oooo. . nooo. o .>u~uunm. _
~ _ — ayfio—
— _ o o
o o o o
_ Nomo. u _ oooo. . ~ooo. . o~.o. . .o.o. . «coo. . sooo. . mooo. . ~o.o. _ ua_u o
o _ o owc~cumuca —
o _ _ —
o _ ~ u
_ cam.. . _ ~ooo. . c.oo. . oono. . moNo. . n¢_o. . onno. . co.o. . oc~o. _ moo—ouoaa _
o _ _ ozoxuoozoz _
o o _ o
o _ o _
w some. a _ ~ooo. . oooo. . oooo. . ¢c_o. . sooo. . ~n~o. . »n_o. . whoo. _ mu—sozouu .

o o o
o _ o o
o _ _ mwoaou o
o nooo. a _ ~ooo. . o~oo. . capo. . c~mo. . oo—o. . mo¢o. . oooo. . sowo. o o«_gom ozo _
o o _ Jooo»~aoa —
o _ o o
o _ ~ _
o ns~.. « _ .noo. . o_oo. . .ono. . ¢_ao. . s__o. . oono. . ~ooo. . mo.o. _ ua..o4_x _
o _ u o
o _ o _
o _ _ um<uw.o _
o mmmo. u _ nooo. . mooo. . mo_o. . mcoo. . opoo. . ~ooo. . oooo. . ~¢_o. o oz¢ o
o _ — mpuuvz— _
o _ _ o
_ _ u o
_ c~oo. a — oooo. . mooo. . mc.o. o smno. . occo. o ~muo. o .__o. . nc.o. _ zoomoau _
o — o _
u u n u
o o o «zoom _
_ menu. a _ .ooo. . o_oo. . so~o. . oo_o. . cnmo. . sono. . cm_o. . ocoo. _ czc _
o _ — «coon _
o _ _ _
_ o — >1a¢c _
u no——. u — .coo. . ¢.oo. . sono. . pc«o. . ¢—_o. o m-o. . co—o. . swoo. a nco—w>za u
o . _ oz< >oo3ouo .
o _ o o
o u _ o _ o a o a — kuaou
_ _ .>u_ouan. _ mmwz . o o _ zoo—o _ o _ oz: unobuou
_ dope» _ autos _ nau04on _ mu_.ux.mw _ «who: o uu_4oqoz _ uuzuuu _ uozou _ cums.» _ u»_w

4ooozu—oauwua2owua pmwaou
.oo . 2 ~ zaou upohou . xcou cz_m: . amass: xuocoan

can udcqh hUDooaa mmoau add—tum no wataw>1
o IC—oua aou ow2~mtou dude 44¢

HIz musmwm

233

 

 

 

_ o o ~
_ u u u
" oooo._u " oooo. . mpoo. . «moo. . aos.. . ~we_. . o~n_. . ooo_. ocuo. . ~_~o. “ oopo» “
o o _ o
o o o o
_ oooo. a _ o . o . o . o . o . o . ~ooo. .ooo. . mooo. o .puouunm. _
_ _ n nuzhc —
o _ o o
_ o o _
_ sooo. » _ o . -oo. . mooo. . nomo. . o¢_c. . neoo. . ¢a~o. onoo. . mooo. _ zoopopo _
o _ _ noocoxuc _
_ _ o o
o o _ _
_ ~nn.. n _ o . oo_o. . s__o. . «omo. . n¢.o. . oo~o. . m-o. smoo. . om—o. _ wpouuuu _
o o u mama _
o _ _ _
_ _ o o
o ~mso. u _ o . mooo. . ~._o. . oo_o. . om.o. . o_~o. . mooo. o.oo. . no.o. . muoxozouu .
o _ _ wa_u _
_ _ _ _
_ o _ o
» ~nso. - _ oooo. . ~o_o. . cooo. . s_.o. . ...o. . oo_o. . opoo. -oo. . mcoo. _ uv: man. u
_ o
o o o o
_ o o _
” nowo. n _ o~oo. . o~_o. . m.no. . ¢¢.o. . oe_o. . o-o. . mooo. o~oo. . «poo. _ zcoouuouo "
o _
o o _ o
o _ o o
_ o~m_. n _ o_oo. . oo_o. . -co. . rwno. . opNo. . nmNo. . o__o. ncoo. . ocmo. _ 4u>u4 .
o o — zoopuu»oan o
o _ o _
_ o _ u
_ osp.. u _ -oo. . ~n_o. . omqo. . cano. . ~m~o. . ammo. . mcoo. o~oo. . os_o. _ zoopru>uaa .
o o _ o
o o o _
_ _ _ o
_ .on_. u o snoo. . ~ooo. . nmno. . .swo. . oo.o. . em.o. . co_o. o~oo. . .ooo. _ uuzuaa:uuo _
u u u not. H
_ _ o o
o o o o o o o o o _ vacpu<u
_ _ .>u_uuam. _ o zwozac o «cu» _ ua>o _ u::Jo> _ >pom xpozuo o oouaam _ ozuawocz¢x
_ 4<poo _ moxoo _ uzozm _ waou _ no o:_» _ Juno o Juan _ czwhzo “1‘4. . no m».a _ goo.

 

.ma u z c

vao»u¢u co—>«zww um—u

Icon whchoc n tack tzumD a aumzbz rugmcaa

com w461h buzocun mmoau a¢J~1~m no wo<aw>(

c rc—owa acu ouz—czou abdo 44¢

«12 munmflm

‘

234

 

 

 

. . . .
o n . .
" oooo... “ onoo. . m.oo. . noo.. . oo~.. . «on.. o ..o.. .n... . omen. . 41.0» n
.

— o . o
. . . .
. o~oo. u . o . o . ~ooo. . sooo. . o.oo. . mooo. .ooo. . cooo. . ....uuam. .
o o . . awrpo .
. . . .
. . . .
. coco. - . .ooo. . o.oo. . omoo. . .ooo. . oc.o. . oooo. oooo. . o.~o. . .... .
. . . ouo.auwwan .
. . . .
. . . .
. see.. u . oooo. . omoo. . ~o.o. . mono. . wooo. . nm~o. ss.o. . oooo. . muu.po«oa .
. . . pru:uo¢z¢z .
. . . .
. . . .
“ .ooo. u . .ooo. . n~oo. . omoo. . on.o. . cooo. . mo.o. o~.o. . apno. . mu.xozoou .

. . .
. . . .
. . . «mono. .
. an~.. u . .ooo. . nooo. . c..o. . s».o. . n..o. . omoo. o~.o. . oo~o. . ...oom oz. .
. . . .«u.»..oa .
. . . .
. . . .
. oooo. . . ~ooo. . «Noo. . o..o. . ~o.o. . oo.o. . ~..o. smoo. . s-o. . un..o3.3 .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .m.um.o .
. onmo. u . .ooo. . .~oo. . .soo. . onoo. . mooo. . nooo. omoo. . o-o. . oz. .
. . . m.oumz. .
. . . .
. . . .
. ooo.. - . nooo. . -oo. . sooo. . memo. . «poo. . o..o. oo.o. . mo~o. . zo.moou .
. . . u
. . . .
. . . «72¢. .
. .9... n . ~ooo. . ~soo. . .o.o. . ...o. . sowo. . ~¢~o. o.~o. . noNo. . oz. .
. . . coco. .
. . . .
o u . >rn¢m _
. 5.... a . nooo. . sooo. . so.o. . sc~o. . cm.o. . n.~o. ~m.o. . oo~o. . uco.¢»:. .
. . . oz. >oooouo .
. . . ~
. . . . . . . . . muoao.
. . .»..uu.m. . mmuz . . . . 2o... . . . or. voopoo.
. .«po. . aux.o . uauo..n . mu..w:.m. . a...) . u...o..a . uuauwa uozoa . quot.» . . ....

....z..o.-.gcromuc .muao.
.cc a 2 ~ zoo. ....oc . zoo. o2.m: ~ aucxaz xuoooao

aou Haw.» nugoan mmoag «(J—xum to gtau.‘
c ZO—owa to. omZ—ayou «~10 ......1

mlz musmwm

235

 

 

 

. — . .
. . a .
“ oooo... . ~o.o. . nomo. ooo.. . as... . o.o.. . ooo.. . om... ~ono. . on... . oo.o. .
. . .
. . ~ .
u . . .
. o.oo. u . o . nooo. nooo. . .ooo. . ~ooo. . ~ooo. . .ooo. .ooo. . .ooo. . .>..ouam. .
. u a 9.1.8 .
. . . .
. . . .
. pm... - . n.oo. . m.oo. «moo. . na~o. . o.~o. . oo.o. . oo~o. mnoo. . oooo. . 2o..¢.. .
. . . a..o«xua .
. . . .
. . . .
. .~c.. u . o . s..o. o~.o. . .o~o. . ovoo. . ~¢~o. . cho. osoo. . oo.o. . whom... .
. . . .a.. o
. . . .
. . . .
. aooo. - . o . nsoo. oo.o. . c..o. . oo.o. . mo.o. . oo.o. .noo. . -.o. . vu.:ozcuu .
. ~ . .a.. .
. — . .
. — . .
" oo... u . oooo. . ~m.o. oo.o. . oo.o. . .ooo. . oo~o. . ov.o. ~moo. . s..o. . mu: uo.. .
— . .
— — . .
. . . .
” 4o... - . mooo. . ohoo. mo~o. . co~o. . ~n.o. . ...o. . «poo. .ooo. . ou.o. . :c..ou.uo .
. . .
. . . .
. o . ~ .
. moc.. n . s.oo. . onoo. o.no. . Nmmo. . .nNo. . .cwo. . oo.o. nnoo. . m.~o. . 4w>w4 .
_ . . 2c.>u.»oma _
. . _ .
. . . .
“ oom.. - . oooo. . mmoo. o~no. . «Nno. . ocoo. . oo~o. . saoo. -oo. . oo.o. . zo.»2u>.c. H
. .
_ _ . .
~ . u .
. oo~.. n . ~noo. . «moo. o-o. . powo. . ~.mo. . o~.o. . «poo. o.oo. . oo.o. . uurwaaouoo .
— — . .a.. .
. . . .
. o . . . . . . . mac.u..
. — ....uuam. . amazon . cow» . un». . w::40> . >».m 1.02.. . ocwmnm . .zwameozox
— ache» _ a.x»o _ axoxm woo. . .0 .1.» u 4.3. . .w:. . uzwpz. quJ. . .o wpqa . .a..
vaopuo. oo.o«xuo u...
.s: u z c zoo. ...»oo o too. c2.m: ~ quota: swoooaa

cog watch purcoaa mmoau 1(J—I~m to modaw>¢

c ZC—cuu 0cm cwzucaou «#40 441

viz munmwm

236

 

 

— o u _
. . . .
. oooo..u . o~.o. . sooo. . ooo.. . on... . omn.. . ~na.. . ooo.. . cmn~. . .coo» .
. . . _
_ . ~ —
. . . .
. om.o. n . ..oo. . .Noo. . c.oo. . oooo. . ouoo. . «woo. . oooo. . ~ooo. . .>..cunm. .
. . A . aux»o .
. . . .
. . . .
. mcoo. a . mooo. . .coo. . cwoo. . oooo. . .c.o. . omoo. . «goo. . oo.o. . ua.. .
. . . ouc.«u¢uan .
. . . .
. . — .
. ~nc.. n . oooo. . ~ooo. . om.o. . oo.o. . oo.o. . .-o. . oo.o. . mono. . muo..u<a. .
o . . .z.:wc<z¢x .
. u _ —
o o . .
. move. a _ o.oo. . coco. . eooo. o ...o. . oooo. . o¢.o. o .~.o. . .cno. . mu.1czouu .
. . . .
. . u .
o _ ~ wwuao. —
. .on.. u . coco. . smmo. o «m.o. . (0.0. . oo.o. . owwo. . oo.o. . h.no. . 4¢.uom 02¢ .
. . — .«c.»..on .
. . . .
u . . . _
. mooo. u . nooo. o omoo. . o..o. . oo.o. . c..o. . .e.o. o nooo. . ~n~oo _ uo—.c..2 .
. u . .
. . . .
. . . um«um.o .
. ammo. u . .ooo. . oeoo. . «poo. . o¢co. . «coo. . .Ooo. . oooo. . oo.o. . cz< .
. _ _ m»uww2~ .
. . . .
. . . u
. mno.. a . cooo. . onoo. . occo. o o.po. . choc. . oo.o. . oo.o. . mcwo. . zo.momw .
. . . .
. o _ _
u _ — «23¢. —
. a.m.. u . «woo. . om.o. . oo.o. . oo.o. . .ono. . mn~o. . oo.o. . oo~o. . oz< .
. ~ — «coo. .
. . . .
o _ . >xo¢a .
. men.. n . ..oo. . o~.o. . oo.o. . .mmo. . ~a_o. . ~.~o. . .~.o. . o¢~o. . uco.m»z. .
. . . ozo >oooowo .
. . . .
. . . . o . . u _ _ vuuco.

. . .»..uua¢. . mmwz . . . . zo.»¢ . . . oz< weapuo.

_ 4<.o» . auxpc . nuwcq.) . mu.—.x.mw . cube) — u..4o4.3 . quuwm . wozcu . aum:.p — wp—m

 

do..z.»oaouuc:omua pmwao.

.00 u 2 N 2&0. wbdhoa — Icon cZ—mD n CUCIDZ ZUJCCIQ

com uqaob bUDooao mmOOL acduxuw to wadau>1
c zo—owc «Ck 0.2—1300 (ch 44¢

mlz musmwm

237

 

 

 

— ~ — .
. . . .
” oooo..I . oo.o. . omco. on... . o~¢.. . nso.. . ooc.. an... echo. . no... . oo.o. .
. . .
. . . .
~ . . .
— osoo. u _ o . m.oo. .ooo. . .ooo. . o~oc. . .~oo. sooo. o . mooo. . .>..uuomo _
. . . ourpo _
. . . .
~ — u .
— o~__. I . o . mooo. omoo. . a.mo. . oomc. . como. .c~o. «coo. . oo.o. . 7o_»<». _
— . u Ia~¢¢xwa _
u _ o .
_ ~ . .
. o~o.. u . o . oo.o. oo.o. . .mmo. . oo.o. . oono. omwo. .soo. . oo.o. . ubuu... .
u o . ma.. .
. . ~ .
. _ . .
. «coo. u . o . smoo. ~c.o. . om.o. . oo.o. . oo.o. «coo. ¢~oo. . oo.o. . wu.aozouu .
— _ . ma.. .
. . . _ .
— _ . _
w ..o.. u _ coco. . o~.o. a..o. . rm.o. . oo.o. . oo.o. ~0.o. once. . moco. _ uu: wa.. —
. . .
. . . .
~ — . .
” o.~.. n — n~oo. . «poo. cowo. . .rmo. . oo.o. . ¢~.o. nooo. mwco. . oo.o. u 7c.»uu»uo H
. .
. . . .
_ _ — .
— ~o¢.. I — oooo. . .~oo. keno. . (smo. . ncmc. . mn~o. coco. .noo. . ¢o~o. — 4u>w4 .
p . _ :o.»..»oaa .
o . . .
o u . .
» ¢n~.. I — .Noo. . o.oo. n.no. . memo. . h.~o. . oo.o. «woo. omoo. . ~_.o. _ zoubzu>waa "
. .
u . . .
_ — a .
. con_. u ~ swoo. . s~oo. ..no. . oomo. . cowo. . mo_o. .Ooo. owoo. . s~.o. — wu:.ca:uuo .
. — _ .u.. .
_ . n .
. _ . o . ~ . — machuc.
. . .>..uu.m. . awozco . acu> _ mu». . wx:.o> >».m 1.02.. _ oowaaw . hzm:.o<zox
. oo.o. . «oz.o . .zoxm u... . .o u:.. . 4.3. . Jun. uzupr. ox... . .0 upon . .o..
ua¢>c¢. aco>¢xuo ua..
... u z c :ao. .».»oa n zoo. c2.w: n a.mxoz xuoacaa

ouz musmflm

CC. w461» buaooaa mmcub c<J~x_m kc uo<aw><
c rc—Owa 3C. Okzoczou dude 44¢

APPENDIX 0

REGION 10, COMBINED DATA,

RELEVANCE TREE SUMMARY

238

239

 

 

 

 

 

. u u .
. . . .
. oooo..« . .omo. . o-o. . ono.. . mo... . no... . ~.o.. . coco. . o¢o.. . ..po» .
. . . .
. . . . .
_ . u n —
. cowo. u . o . sooo. . cnoo. . owoo. . o~oo. . omoo. . omoo. . .ooo. . .>..uwam. .
. . . owxpo —
. . . .
. . . .
. ...o. u . o . .oco. . ocoo. . «coo. . cooo. . oooo. . ~noo. . ssoo. . wa.. .
. . . ow¢.aumua. .
. . . .
. . . .
. no... u . mfioo. . .nco. . .cmo. . «moo. . sm.o. . ..~o. . oooo. . mo~o. . muu.»u.an .
. . . .zuzmo.r.x .
. . . .
. . . .
. :m... u . oo.o. . Onoo. . oo.o. . soNo. . choo. . -~o. . mooo. . ¢-o. — mu—tozouu ~
. . . .
. . . .
. . . muuuo. .
. msc~. u . so.o. . sooo. . .mno. . oo.o. . ..mo. . o~.o. . m».o. . oo.o. . 4..uom oz. .
. . . 3......o. .
. . . .
. . . .
o -oo. u . o . o . n._o. . ...o. . oo.o. . sm.o. . .o.o. . oooo. . mo..oo.x .
. . . .
. . . .
_ u _ wm4um—o —
— ooco. u — ..oo. . o . «coo. . c.oo. . .hoo. . ncoo. . onoo. . cn—o. u oz< —
. — — whowmzu ~
. . . .
. . . .
. whoo. a . apoo. . o . ..oo. . oswo. . opoo. . oo.o. . nooo. . o..o. . ro.moau .
. . . .
. . . .
u — — (rzcu u
— cwou. n — .Noo. . ¢_oo. o oo.o. . .~_o. . no—o. . owmo. . cqoo. . oowo. — 021 ~
~ — u «604. ~
. . . .
_ u — >1n¢m u
. .o~.. u . ~o.o. . .moo. . «oxo. . om.o. . aooo. . ~n~o. . o~.o. . mm.o. . ucc.m>za .
. . . oz. >oooouo .
. . . .
~ ~ _ . . . ~ u u — muuao.

— n .>.~Uuamo n mrwz _ u u — zo_>¢ u n a 024 vaowucu

. ...0. . a.m.o . -a.c..x . mu...r.¢. . o.».t . m...o4~) . u.qu.u . uoz.a . a.my.» . ...m

 

...»2.»o.umun:omua pmwac.

.c— u 2 ~ tack Lhaboa — lack fizpmz — mwctbz tu4¢oaa

ac. wand» huaccan mmcau ¢¢J~Ium no uctaw>d
o. zc—oum ac. Caz—atou «>10 444

due musmwm

240

 

 

 

. . . .
. . . .
” oooo... . onoo. . oowo. .oo.. . ..m.. . ~.o.. . co... noo.. -no. . onn.. . 4.»o» .

. . .
. . . . .
. . . o
. oo.o. - . o . o cmoo. . o . o . o owoo. o . omoo. . ....uwam. .
. . . u§to.
. . . .
o . . .
— o.oo. n . o . o cwoo. . «c.o. . n.no. . oooo. ~o.o. oooo. . ncoo. — 7o~.<». _
o . . u..a.xwa .
. . . .
. . . .
u on... a _ o . .o.o. mo.o. . Ȣ.o. . mnwo. . oo.o. oo.o. nmoo. . m..o. ~ upow..u .
. . . .a.. .
. . ~ .
. . . .
. .soo. u . o . mooo. cooo. . ecoo. . scoc. . msoo. oooo. o~oo. . oooo. — mu.3020uw .
. . . ma.. .
o . u o
. . . .
. o.oo. . . oooo. . c..o. cmoo. . scoo. . mooo. . .ooo. .ooo. onoo. . oooo. . .v: ua.. “
. . .
. . u _
. . . .
. mon.. u . n.oo. . ~..o. c-o. . .¢.o. . .omo. . .o.o. oooo. .~oo. . oc~o. . 2c.»uu.uo .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. ~.o.. n . Oooo. . o~oo. ammo. . n.~o. . oemo. . -mo. no.o. whoo. . ~o~o. n 4u>m4 .
u _ n zo.»cu»oca .
. . . .
. . . .
_ .m.~. n — oooo. . onoo. n~mo. . oo.o. . cano. . memo. oo.o. n~oo. . :NNo. — zo..zw>wan “
. . .
. . . .
. . . .
. ».m.. n . n.oo. . meoo. powo. . sowo. . oono. . ~m~o. oo.o. o.oo. . nm.o. . uuz.ca:ooo .
u _ u .o.. .
. . . .
. . . . . . . . vozpu..
. . .>..u..m. . xwoz.o . a.u> . on». . ut34o> >..m 1.07u4 . o.wmam . ozuywc.z.x
_ Joke» _ a.r»o _ uxoxm .a.. . .0 wt.» . 4.3. o 4.3. .zwpz. .1... u .o ...: u .a...

mac»... oo.>.zum ua..
.o. a z . xuo. ...»oa n zoo. c2.wo . aucxoz 1.4ucan

do. w4a<> buDocca vmoac Gag—tum no wc<aw>¢

o— zc—Oua «Ck culpazoc (baa J_(

«to musmflm

241

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . . .
. . . .
“ oooo... " oooo. . oono. . soo.. . mo... . no... . so... . oo... . .nom. . ...o» n
.

. . . .
. . . . .
. 9.4.2.. I . o . o . oooo. . mwoo. . mwoo. . omoo. . .ooo. . .ooo. . .>..uuam. _
— . . zwzpo .
. . . .
. . . .
. oqmo. . . ~ooo. . mooo. . oaoo. . oooo. . o..o. . onoo. . oooo. . oo.o. . u... .
. . — auscuwua. .
. . . .
. . . .
. oom.. . . n.oo. . .noo. . .m~o. . ..no. . eroo. . on~o. . ~o.o. . o..o. . muo.»u.a. .
. . — pzuzuogoz .
. . o .
. _ o —
w s-.. n . o~oo. . .~oo. . oo.o. . .~.o. . oo.o. . m.~o. . oo~o. . oo.o. . mu.zozouw “

. u
_ . o .
. . . mwuao. .
. m.m.. a . n~oo. . .ooo. . oo.o. . .ouo. . o.~o. . ~ono. . o.~o. . onno. . ...uom oz. .
. . . ..u.»..o. .
. . — .
o . u u
" sooo. . . o . o~oo. . mo.o. . c..o. . oo.o. . o~.o. . ..oo. . ...o. . un..o..z “

. .
. . . .
. . . um.um.o .
. a.mo. . . o . oooo. . mooo. . cooo. . oooo. . hooo. . oooo. . o.~o. . oz. .
. . . wouUmz. .
. . . .
. . . .
. ~oso. . . ..oo. . mooo. . oooo. . oo.o. . omoo. . mooo. . o..o. . .n.o. . zo.woau .
. o . _
. . . .
. . . .22.. .
. mon.. u . o . n~oo. . oo.o. . oo.o. . omoo. . oooo. . on~o. . so~o. . oz. .
. . . .co.. .
. u . .
— . o 36... .
. nmm.. - . oooo. . mooo. . so~o. . .o~o. . oo.o. . oo~o. . op.o. . oooo. . ucc.m>zo .
. . . oz. >oo4ouo .
. . . .
_ — . . — . — a . . mwuao.
. . ....uu... . mmuz . . . . 2o... . . . oz. moo.u..
. ...o» . a.z.o . uuuo..z . oo.ouz.mu . au».z . o...o..z . -uauuc . .02.. . ouoz.» . ...m

...pz..o.-uua:omuc .muao.
.o. a 2 ~ zoo. u...o¢ . zoo. oz.mo ~ «mozoz zuocoma

30.; UJCCh husooaa mwccu Gdduxum to Sth)‘
o— 20:33. «on Ouzpalou dbco .51

muO wusmwm

 

 

242

 

 

machuck cou>¢xw¢ wank

O tack whcboa 6 lack ez—m: N aumxaz indcoaa

do. ward» pUDooaa mmoau adJ—xum to wetaw>¢
o. zc—Dmu mom out—maou ¢»(O 44‘

.-o ......

. . . .
. . . .
” oooo..- . mo.o. m.co. . 0.0.. 0.0.. . .oo.. . oo~.. . oo~o. . .on.. " .<.o» “
.
. . . .
. . . .
. o u . o o . o o . o . o . o . o . .>..uu.m. .
. . . awz.o .
. . . .
. . . .
. onmo. n . o oooo. . m~oo. oo.o. . -.o. . -~o. . mcoo. . o~.o. . 20...». .
. . . o..c¢xua .
. . . .
. . . .
. s~n.. . . o oooo. . -.o. mono. . oo.o. . o.no. . oooo. . .o.o. . whom... .
. . . u... .
. . . .
. . . .
. oeno. u . oooo. omoo. . mooo. .m.o. . cm.o. . hcoo. . .noo. . .o.o. . wu.zozouw .
. . . .... .
. . . .
. . . .
u no... a . o n..o. . o~.o. oo~o. . o-o. . mm.o. . mooo. . ...o. “ av: u... u
.
. . . .
. . . .
" on~.. . . ~.oo. ~noo. . ..~o. oo.o. . ~..o. . ~..o. . -oo. . o.no. “ zo..uu»uo “
.
. . . .
. . . .
. oo... . . ~.oo. m~oo. . oono. oc~o. . .o~o. . oo.o. . ..oo. . m.~o. . 4u>u4 .
. . . zo.»ou»ou. .
. . . .
. . . .
. noo.. . . nroo. o~oo. . nomo. .nno. . .m~o. . pooo. . o.oo. . om.o. . zo.»zu>ua. “
. . .
. . . .
. . . .
. m-.. u . o~oo. m.oo. . o..o. .mwo. . mm.o. . whoo. . o~oo. . oo.o. . uuzuuoouuo .
. . . un.. .
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . macpo..
. .>..uu.m. . cuoz.o . u.>» . wz24o> . >..m . zpozu. . a.m..m . .zuzuo.z.z
. ...c» zwzpo wzozm . wa.. . 4.3. . .uo. . czwpz. . uz... . .o w».a . w...

243

 

 

 

 

. . . .
. . . ..
” oooo... . oo.o. . ..... . oooo. . o~o.. . .oc.. . nom.. . ocoo. . oo-. . ...o» u

. .
o . . .
. . . .
. .ooo. . . o . oooo. . mooo. . ..oo. . ..oo. . oooo. . p~oo. . o.oo. . .>..owom. .
. . . oyto.
. . . .
. . . .
. o~.o. . . o . ..oo. . ..oo. . m.oo. . oo.o. . onoo. . omoo. . ~ooo. . uo.. .
. . . ouo.oumuoo .
. . . .
. . . .
. .o... u . omoo. . o..o. . .o.o. . oo.o. . on~o. . ~n~o. . z..o. . ..no. . muo..u.oo .
. . . .zuzuo.z.z .
. . . .
. . . .
” ~o~.. u . .noo. . .o.o. . ..oo. . oooo. . ...o. . oo~o. . oooo. . oo.o. . wu.zozouu .

. . .
. . . .
- . . mmooo. .
. n~o.. n . sooo. . .nno. . -.o. . oo.o. . onmo. . oouo. . .n.o. . .ono. . ...uom oz. .
. . . ..o.»..oo .
. . . .
. . . .
. ammo. u . o . mmoo. . Nooo. . ~ooo. . .ooo. . osoo. . onoo. . oo.o. . uo..o4.z .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .m.um.o .
. mono. . . o . o.oo. . omoo. . oooo. . nooo. . o.oo. . ..oo. . ...o. . oz. .
. . . mpoumz. .
. . . .
. . . .
. n.so. . . n.oo. . ~.oo. . ~ooo. . mono. . sooo. . .n.o. . .ooo. . oo.o. . zo.moou .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .23.. .
. cc... u . o . oo.o. . oo.o. . ...o. . oono. . oo.o. . oo~o. . oo~o. . oz. .
. . . .ooo. .
. . . .
. . . >zoco .
. spo.. u . ..oo. . oo.o. . sooo. . oo.o. . osoo. . mono. . .m.o. . .ono. . -co.m>zo .
. . . oz. >oooouo .
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . muooo.
. . ....owov. . mmwz . . . . 2o... . . . oz. moobu..
. 4..o. . ouz.o . -o.o..a . mu..uz.mw . ou».z . u...o4.o . -wouuo . uoz.o . ouoz.» . ...m

...»zupoouuuooomuo pmwoo.
.o. u 2 ~ zoo. ...»oo . zoo. oz.m: n ouozoz zmooooo

no... macaw bunccaa mmoau «(Jul—w to wOCnu>¢
o. zc.owc no. 0.2.5.00 (..(O .....1

mno musmwm

244

 

 

 

 

. . . .
. . . .
” oooo... “ o~.o. . «coo. 0.... . noo.. . mmo.. . m.... . o»~.. .ooo. . oon.. . ...o. .
. .
. . . . .
. . . .
. o u . o . o o . o . o . o . o o . o . .>..ouom. .
. . . ouz.o .
. . . .
. . . .
. oooo. u . o . o s.oo. . ...o. . oo.o. . ~o.o. . ~..o. onoo. . nsoo. . zo...». .
. . . -..o.:uo .
. . . .
. . . .
. ..o.. u . o . ...o. oo.o. . womo. . mono. . nooo. . mono. .ooo. . oo.o. . open... .
. . . uo.. .
. . . .
. . . .
. mooo. - . o . ..oo. ...o. . o..o. . ~r.o. . om.o. . m..o. omoo. . oo.o. . mu.zozou. .
. . . . wo.. .
. . . .
. . . .
“ .o.o. . . n.oo. . ~o.o. osoo. . oooo. . oooo. . ..oo. . n~.o. omoo. . osoo. . woo uo.. .
. . .
. . . .
. . . .
” onn.. u . sooo. . onoo. o-o. . os~o. . ...o. . cooo. . oo.o. onoo. . ~o~o. . 2c..uu.uo .
. . .
. . . .
. . . .
. oom.. a . oooo. . ..oo. oo.o. . omno. . ...o. . n~.o. . oo.o. wooo. . on~o. . 4u>u4 .
. . . 2o.»uu.ooo .
. . . .
. . . .
” on~.. . . sooo. . n~oo. so~o. . no~o. . oc~o. . n..o. . nooo. n.oo. . s~.o. . zo..zu>uoo .
. . .
. . . .
. . . .
. nmo.. u . n.oo. . cooo. no~o. . oo.o. . soco. . o.~o. . oo.o. oooo. . o.~o. . uozuoooouo .
. . . .o.. .
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . moc.u..
. . .>..uuom. . ouoz.o . o.u> . on». . uz24o> . >~.m .zhozu. . o.uoom . .zuzuo.z.z
. ...o. . ouz.o . uzozm uo.. . .o oz.» . 4.2. . ouo. . azupz. uz... . .o w..o . .o..
machuo. co.>.zwo uo..
.m. u z . zoo. ...»oo o zoo. oz.m: n ouozoz zuooooo

«on U4c<h >UDOOUQ wmoau a«4~x~m no wotaw>¢

o. zo—owa can owz—ctou «#16 444

ono wusmflm

 

1" l '* In"

"IWINEITMTQ‘ME‘I‘JEETs