Situational Influences of Acceptable Wildland Fire Management Actions

Abstract

This article examines the effect of fire-specific situational factors on forest users’ normative beliefs about wildland fire management. The acceptability of three fire management actions for eight scenarios was examined. The scenarios varied five factors: (1) fire origin, (2) air quality impact, (3) risk of private property damage, (4) forest recovery, and (5) outdoor recreation impact. Data were obtained from a mail survey of visitors to three national forests: (1) Arapaho–Roosevelt, Colorado (n = 469), (2) Mt. Baker–Snoqualmie, Washington (n = 498), and (3) San Bernardino, California (n = 321). Conjoint analyses indicated varying levels of the five factors (e.g., fire started by humans or lightning) differentially affected acceptability ratings of management actions. Similar percentages of importance were attributed to four of the factors for decisions regarding “put the fire out” and “contain the fire.” There was more dispersion in the relative importance of factors for “letting the fire burn.”