Skip to main content

One-Hundred Years of Wildfire Research: A Legacy of the Priest River, Deception Creek, and Boise Basin Experimental Forests of Idaho

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
USDA Forest Service Experimental Forests and Ranges

Abstract

The 1910 fires, which burned more than 1.3 million ha of northern Rocky Mountain forests, provided a mission and management objectives for the newly created Forest Service. By 1911, the Priest River Experimental Station (Forest-PREF) was established in northern Idaho to help meet the needs of the Forest Service. Harry T. Gisborne, whose work was centered at PREF, proved to be one, if not the most influential and far-seeing fire researcher in the history of the Forest Service. Examples of his contributions include the fire danger rating system, fuel moisture sticks, short- and long-term specialized fire-weather forecasting, and the beginnings of predicting fire behavior. After Gisborne’s death in 1949, Jack Barrows, one of Gisborne’s assistants, led the fire program and introduced high-tech approaches to fire research. Barrows was instrumental in creating the state-of-the-art Fire Sciences Laboratory in Missoula, Montana. The McSweeney–McNary Act (1928) laid the groundwork for a nationwide system of forest experiment stations and experimental forests, and in 1933 Deception Creek (DCEF) and Boise Basin Experimental Forests (BBEF) were established. DCEF was located in a productive mixed conifer forest in northern Idaho. Fire was integral to studies conducted at DCEF on harvesting, regenerating, and tending western white pine stands. Research at BBEF in southern Idaho emphasized timber production within interior ponderosa pine forests and prescribed fire was studied as a means of preparing seedbeds and minimizing grass and shrub competition to trees. Similar to other dry forests of the West, wildfires were aggressively controlled at BBEF, causing portions of it to be overrun with seedlings and saplings, which created dense forests. As such, BBEF was well suited for investigating ways of restoring ponderosa pine forests. After nearly 100 years of fire research, we still strive to effectively manage forests in the face of ever-growing threats of urbanization and unwanted wildfires. Building on the legacy of research accomplished on the Idaho experimental forests and the basic understanding of fire and its effects the early researchers developed, these forests are now more valuable than ever.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In 1911, District One of the Forest Service included Montana, northeastern Washington, northern Idaho, northwestern South Dakota, northern Michigan, northern Minnesota, and southwestern North Dakota. The District office was located at the Hammond Block, Missoula, MT.

  2. 2.

    In 1912, J. A. Larsen and some 218 of the first 300 graduates (holding M.F. degrees or certificates) of Yale were employed or had been employed by the Forest Service (Hoar et al. 1981).

  3. 3.

    During WW I, Kelley went overseas with the 10th Forestry Engineers where he commanded all sawmilling, logging, and road construction operations in France. He retained his military rank after the war, hence the title of Major.

  4. 4.

    In 1922, the headquarters of the Priest River Experiment Station was moved to Missoula, MT, and in 1925 the Station was renamed the Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station with Robert H. Weidman as Director. In 1930, the Priest River Experimental Forest was recognized and continued to be the center of research for Gisborne and many others.

  5. 5.

    Lyle Watts became director of the Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station in 1931 and left in 1936 to become Regional Forester in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and later Chief of the Forest Service.

  6. 6.

    In 1937, Ken Davis became chief of the Silvics Division of the Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station until 1940 when he became an assistant to I. T. Haig in Washington, D.C. In the late 1930s, he took educational leave to work on a Ph.D. at the University of Michigan. Davis later became Dean of the Forestry School at the University of Montana, then a professor of forestry first at the University of Michigan and later at Yale University.

  7. 7.

    On January 1, 1954, the Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station merged with the Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station with its headquarters in Ogden, UT.

References

  • Baker RD, Burt L, Maxwell RS, Treat VH, Dethloff HC (1993) National Forests of the northern region: living legacy. Intaglio, College Station

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrows JS et al (1957) Project skyfire. In: Final report of the advisory committee on weather control, vol 2. Unnumbered reprint. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT, pp 105–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingham RT (1983) Blister rust resistant western white pine for the inland empire: the story of the first 25 years of the research and development program. General Technical Report INT-GTR-146, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JK (1974) Handbook for inventorying downed woody material. General Technical Report INT-GTR-16, United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JK, Reinhardt ED, Kramer KA (2003) Coarse woody debris: managing benefits and fire hazard in the recovering forest. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-105, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen S (1978) The Big Burn: the Northwest’s forest fire of 1910. Pictorial Histories Publ Co, Missoula

    Google Scholar 

  • Deeming JE, Lancaster JW, Fosberg MA, Furman WR, Schroeder MJT (1972) Fire-danger rating system. Research Paper RM-RP-84, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliot WJ, Miller IS, Glaza BD (2006) Using WEPP technology to predict erosion and runoff following wildfire. 2006 ASABE annual international meeting, Portland, OR. ASABE Paper No. 068011, Sponsored by ASABE, Portland Convention Center: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahnestock GR (1953) Inflammability of the current year’s logging slash. Research Note INT-RN-120, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahnestock GR (1960) Logging slash flammability. Research Paper INT-RP-58, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Finney MA (2006) An overview of FlamMap fire modeling capabilities. In: Andrews PL, Butler BW (comps) Fuels management-how to measure success: conference proceedings; Portland, OR. General Technical Report INT-GTR-213WWW. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, pp 213–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Finney MA, Andrews PL (1998) FARSITE: fire area simulator—a model for fire growth simulation. Fire Manage Note 59(2):13–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer WC, Hardy CE (1976) Fire-weather observer’s handbook. Agriculture handbook 494, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Foiles MW (1950) Recommendations for poisoning western hemlock. Research Note NRM-RN-77, Northern Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Missoula, MT

    Google Scholar 

  • Geils BW, Hummer K, Hunt RS (2010) White pines, Ribes, and blister rust: a review and synthesis. For Pathol 40:147–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gisborne HT (1931) Lightning on the lookouts. Am For 37(9):515–518, 574–575

    Google Scholar 

  • Gisborne HT (1933) Lightning and forest fires. Pulp Pap Can 34(6):327–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Gisborne HT (1939) Hornby’s principles of fire control planning. J For 4(1):292–296

    Google Scholar 

  • Gisborne HT (1948) Fundamentals of fire behavior. Fire Control Note 9:13–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham KL (2004) History of the Priest River Experiment Station. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-129, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham RT, Tonn JR, Jain TB (1994) Managing western white pine plantations for multiple resource objectives. In: Baumgartner DM, Lotan JE, Tonn JR (eds) Proceedings interior cedar-hemlock-white pine forests: ecology and management; Spokane, WA. Department of Natural Resource Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, pp 357–362

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham RT, Jain TB, Sandquist J (2007) Free selection: a silvicultural option. In: Powers R (ed) Restoring fire-adapted forested ecosystems. 2005 national silviculture workshop, Lake Tahoe, CA. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-203, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Albany, CA, pp 121–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham RT, Jain TB, Mathews SJ (2010) Chapter 3: Fuel management in forests of the Inland West. In: Elliot WJ, Miller IS, Audin L (eds) Cumulative watershed effects of fuel management in the western United States. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-231, pp 19–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Haig IT (1932) Second-growth yield, stand, and volume tables for western white pine type. Technical Bulletin No. 323, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Haig IT, Davis KP, Weidman RH (1941) Natural regeneration in the western white pine type. Technical Bulletin No. 767, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardy CE (1983) The Gisborne era of forest fire research legacy of a pioneer. FS-367, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardy CC, Hardy CE (2007) Fire danger rating in the United States of America: an evolution since 1916. Int J Wildland Fire 16:217–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes GL (1942) Differences in fire danger with altitude, aspect, and time of day. J For 40(4):318–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Helfman RS, Deeming JE, Straub RJ, Furman RW (1975) User’s guide to AFFIRMS: time-share computerized processing for fire-rating. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoar CA, Noyes DK, Larsen JA, Jeffers DS, Newins HS, Watzek CH (1981) “Dear professor Chapman”: letters from Yale forestry graduates, 1910–1912. J For Hist 25(4):197–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchison SB, Winters RK (1942) Northern Idaho forest resources and industries. Miscellaneous Publication 508, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain TB, Graham RT (1996) Deception Creek Experimental Forest. In: Schmidt WC, Friede JL (comps) Experimental forests, ranges, and, watersheds in the Northern Rocky Mountains—a compendium of outdoor laboratories in Utah, Idaho, and Montana; General Technical Report INT-GTR-334, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, pp 45–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain TB, Graham RT, Morgan P (2004) Western white pine growth relative to forest openings. Can J For Res 34:2187–2197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jain TB, Graham RT, Sandquist J, Butler M, Brockus K, Frigard D, Cobb D, Han H, Halbrook J, Denner R, Evans J (2008) Restoration of Northern Rocky Mountain moist forests: integrating fuel treatments from the site to the landscape. In: Deal R (ed) Integrated restoration efforts for harvested forest ecosystems; Ketchikan, AK. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-733, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, pp 147–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Jemison G (1950) Forty years of forest research in the Northern Rocky Mountain region: fortieth annual report. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Missoula, MT

    Google Scholar 

  • Klade RJ (2006) Building a research legacy—the intermountain station 1911–1997. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-184, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen JA (1921a) Relative humidity of the atmosphere and its relation to the fire problem. Appl For Note 6, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen JA (1921b) Sunshine and air temperature in relation to forest fires. Appl For Note 9, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Missoula, MT

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen JA (1921c) Wind and its relation to forest fires. Appl For Note 7, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen JA (1922) Weather records at lookout stations in northern Idaho. J For 20(3):215–219

    Google Scholar 

  • Maclean N (1992) Young men and fire. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson DL, Agee JK, Aplet GH, Dykstra DP, Graham RT, Lehmkuhl JF, Pilloid DS, Potts DF, Powers RF, Stuart JD (2009) Effects of timber harvest following wildfire in western North America: issues and scientific evidence. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-776, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyne SJ (2001) Year of fires: the story of the great fires of 1910. Penguin Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyne SJ (2010) America’s fires: a historical context for policy and practice (Rev edn). Forest History Society, Durham

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothermel RC (1993) Mann Gulch fire: a race that couldn’t be won. General Technical Report INT-299, United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmaltz NJ (1980) Forest researcher: Raphael Zon. J For Hist 24(1):24–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwandt JW, Lockman JB, Kliejunas JT, Muir JA (2010) Current issues and management strategies for western white pines in the western United States and Canada. For Pathol 40:226–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sloan J, Steele R (1996) Boise Basin Experimental Forest. In: Schmidt WC, Friede JL (comps) Experimental forests, ranges, and, watersheds in the Northern Rocky Mountains—a compendium of outdoor laboratories in Utah, Idaho, and Montana. General Technical Report INT-GTR-334, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, pp 39–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Spaulding P (1922) Investigations of the white pine blister rust. Bulletin No. 957, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer BG (1956) The big blowup. Caxton Printers, Ltd, Caldwell

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellner CA (1976) Frontiers of forestry research—Priest River Experimental Forest 1911–1976. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all of the individuals over the years who have been diligently collecting and protecting the historical records pertaining to experimental forests. Also, we would like to thank the anonymous reviewers who added greatly and also thank Jonathan Sandquist of the Rocky Mountain Research Station for his excellent contributions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Russell T. Graham .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Graham, R., Jain, T., Graham, K., Denner, R., Hardy, C. (2014). One-Hundred Years of Wildfire Research: A Legacy of the Priest River, Deception Creek, and Boise Basin Experimental Forests of Idaho. In: Hayes, D., Stout, S., Crawford, R., Hoover, A. (eds) USDA Forest Service Experimental Forests and Ranges. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1818-4_21

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics