Station Fire 2009

               It was early September 2008 and school had just started. There’s always plenty of back to school excitement for us then-high school kids, with spirit days and the upcoming football and volleyball seasons. It was this specific year where the skies were glazed with a reddish hue that carried gray smog filled with ash. An announcement through the intercom was made across campus. The administration had cancelled the football game due to the heavy ash and horrible air conditions. These ashes were derived from wildfires that occurred over 20 miles away. The following year, another grand-scale fire lit through the Angeles National Forest also known as the Station Fire. Wildfires that arise affect not only immediate but also surrounding communities, specifically within a 10-20 mile range. An emphasis on fire containment has been intact however; the Station Fire still grew to be named the largest fire in the history of the Angeles National Forest (“Station Fire”). In this last lab of the quarter, we analyze the Station Fire spread. During my observations and secondary data collection, I have created maps that support my collected findings. The Station Fire ensued major expansion due to geological factors. The main two factors being: rough terrain as well as limited access due to few main roads and access points.

Figure 1. Shows how far the fire has progressed in a 5 day period.

              The map I have created above shows the spread of the fire over time. We can see that the fire began in La Canada just northeast of Glendale. In the matter of a few days, the fire spread out threatening the citizens of Santa Clarita and cities nearing major highways. Collectively, the Station Fire burned about 161,000 acres of land, most of which were forest lands. About 6,700 acres of private and/or residential land were affected too (Angeles National Forest). The fire was devastating and grew to a size ten times larger than where it began. Just to skim over the damage done, the fires estimated a cost of $95,300,000. This cost does not begin take into account the repercussions of the fire damage. Also, the fires resulted in the deaths of two firemen who were in the act of duty. Both men drove off the hazardous road while on duty (Garrison).

Figure 2. Map showing the terrain through a Digital Elevation Model , major roads, and the fire spread of the last recorded spread for each of the 5 days

              Many blame the lack of response to the incident as the cause of the rapid development of the fire. Above, I have created a map that shows the roughness of the terrain that surrounds the area of interest. We can see through this map that this area has very dynamic topology. The rough terrain is pictured through the high variation in black, white, and gray of the hillshade values. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) states that the jagged terrain limits the amount of safe opportunities for fire suppression ("Station Fire Initial Attack Review"). A lack of major roads and access points is another reason why access to the fire origins was limited. Three major roads run through the main areas affected by the forest: Big Tujunga Canyon Road, Angeles Forest Highway, and State Highway 2. On the other hand, having limited roads is also a reason why the forest is able to survive. Figure 1 shows areas with major roadways which are areas of high development in cities like Los Angeles. The issue of safety and preservation of forestry then comes into play when dealing with access to the forest using public roads. That debate is another topic in itself and shall be left for another day. Nonetheless, not having many access points contributes to why firefighters had difficulty in containing the fire. 

Figure 3. Google image of area before the fire (Source: USDA)

              Other factors that contributed to the fire spread are vegetation and weather conditions. Figure 3 shows the foliage before the fires hit. The dense native California chaparral vegetation is not the most forgiving on hot weather days. The plants and even soil become dry and add to the hazard of forest fires. Presence of dead vegetation sharply increases chances for fires. According to the USDA the dead vegetation percentage ranged from 50%-70%. Weather conditions were relatively warm with temperatures in the high eighties. Humidity was low, about 11%, and winds did not exceed 10 miles per hour (USDA). Conversely, these conditions are often present when wildfires occur throughout southern California and were not the main contribution factor to the spread of the fire. 

Figure 4. Pyrocumulus cloud approaching Los Angeles during the Station Fire (Source: AP Photo/Jon Vidar)

               The Station Fire devastation was the result of largely inaccessible areas and the steep, rugged terrain of the forest. Figure 3 points out the one main road that could have been used by response persons. We can also see how dangerously close they would be to the fire. Immediate areas like Glendale, Pasadena and Alta Dena areas were greatly impacted by the Station Fires. Also, the post-fire effects carried onto new dangers such as mudslides and unprotected road hazards (Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)). Still, large plumes of smoke and ash affect local urban and natural areas in the Los Angeles County and adjacent Angeles Nation Forest habitats. Geological factors will always be present and given the nature of this event, more aggressive response to these fires are needed. California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA) even reports one of their main corrective action recommendations is to improve their response management. The presence of rugged terrain will always remain and only few roadways can be added because of their negative environmental effects. Although the main cause of this fire was its geologic factors, we must find innovative ways to work with the natural habitats that occur here in California. 

Works Cited

Angeles National Forest. “Frequently Asked Questions.” Angeles NF – Station Fire. November 04 2009. 

                http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fsbdev3_020019.pdf.

California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA). “2009 Los Angeles County Wildfires                After Action / Corrective Action Report."

                http://www.calema.ca.gov/PlanningandPreparedness/Pages/After-Action-Corrective-Action-

                Reporting.aspx.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). "Homeowner’s Mitigation Projects Spared Home 

               from Mudflow Damage.” Accessed: 14 June 2012.               

               http://www.fema.gov/mitigationbp/bestPracticeDetailPDF.do?mitssId=7390.

Garrison, Jessica, Alexandra Zavis and Joe Mozingo. "Station fire claims 18 homes and two
               firefighters." Los Angeles Times. 31 August 2009. 

               http://articles.latimes.com/2009/aug/31/local/me-fire31.

"Station Fire". InciWeb. 10 November 2009. http://www.inciweb.org/incident/1856/.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). "Station Fire Initial Attack Review: Report of the 

               Review Panel." USDA Fire and Aviation Management. 13 November 2009. 

               http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/station_fire_report.pdf.

Vidar, Jon. AP Photo. 31 August 2009. 

               http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/09/wildfires_in_southern_californ.html. Photo.

Back to Basics

           For my fourth lab, I followed a 5-part tutorial given by ArcGIS. Through this single yet extensive lab, I was able to utilize one set of data and manipulate it for three different purposes. Many basic and important techniques were taught throughout the tutorial. It took me much longer than expected to complete, which Professor Sheng has repeatedly told us. This reason is probably why he emphasizes, and writes in our lab instructions, to save our work as we go along. Overall ArcGIS is a great tool to help with data analysis. However, there are still certain drawbacks to using this program.

            User-friendly is not word that I would readily use for this program. Following directions would be very difficult if someone is using this program without any prior experience. Having some previous exposure helped in managing the program. Even then, getting through the tutorial was very time consuming. Also, the program is very susceptible to accidents that may have you start from scratch. There was one point during the lab that my map would not show up in the “Layout View” or even when I tried to print preview. These mistakes are not easily undone because the “Undo” button only goes so far back.

            Once mastery of this system has been accomplished, then the true potential of this program can be revealed. ArcGIS is helpful for mass amounts of data. Data portrayal can also be strategically manipulated in order to help others learn about spatial relationships. Therefore, scientific data can be better understood by those who are not well-versed, or simply do not have the time to locate these associations. Policy makers and stakeholders are some examples of people who need to understand these correlations quickly and thoroughly.

            For a beginning tutorial, this lab was a difficult one. It was able to cover many useful features such as symbology, joining attribute tables, and basic cartography techniques. ArcGIS also allows for one to customize maps and make them aesthetically appealing to any audience. The tutorial also allowed us to apply analytic techniques to large amounts of data. For example, we calculated the population density of many areas with a simple equation and illustrated the differences through a symbolic color ramp. ArcGIS has plenty of potential and like with many other technologies, there are still obstacles the program still needs to overcome. Still, these setbacks do not fully prevent the program from being a valuable tool.