1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 10, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'DESIRE (EU-DES!RE)', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1052, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Centro de Estudos de Rescursos Naturais, Ambiente e Sociedade (CERNAS) - Portugal', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Use of prescribed fire (or ‘controlled burn’) to reduce the fuel load in the form of live and dead plant material and thus to prevent the likelihood of more damaging wildfire.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

This technique is an essential management tool that applies fire to control the quantity of forest or scrubland fuels. The type of fire depends on the specific goals and on the weather conditions. Firstly, it is important to consider slope angle and the kind of fuels to be burned. Weather conditions include temperature, wind direction and air humidity. Another important aspect is the ability to control the speed of flame spread. In order to carry out the controlled fire, a plan has to be drawn up and approved and a fully-trained, authorised technician must be present in addition to the appropriate support teams (fire fighters, forest management teams). These teams use water or other means of combating the fire in the event of it possibly getting out of control and are in charge of the burning process.

Purpose of the Technology: The main purposes are enhancement of grazing areas and the creation of the so-called primary network for wildfire defence, which is a national network to limit the spread of wildfire. It involves strategically burning key sites (e.g. mountain ridges) to restrict the spread of the wildfire.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: An analysis of weather conditions is made prior to carry out the prescribed fire. On the day of the prescribed fire itself, safety checks are made and the specific tasks of all the team members are defined. Wind direction and strength need to be minimal and are strictly controlled during burning. The size of the team depends on the specific problems of the area to be treated. Team size needed for about 10 ha is around 10 persons. The team members start along a line working from the top on the mountain along the contour and move downwards. Gentle breeze should be against the direction of the spreading of the fire. Workers use a drip-feed fuel can. There is also a strategy for prescribed fires by burning a strip along ridges of the mountains to avoid spreading of accidental wildfires and to burn in catchments the lowest point from which fire can spread to different areas and spread in different directions on the slopes.

Natural / human environment: Improved grazing management might also reduce the fuel load. Abandoning grazing in the forest can increase the fuel load and aggravate the occurrence and impact of wildfires. The creation or maintenance of grazing areas is determined by the size of the herd. Prescribed fire used as a means of improving grazing enables the local population needs to be addressed while considering environmental concerns. The prescribed fire also helps to protect the local population and their property by reducing the likelihood of devastating wildfire.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): The problem is linked to the loss of traditional natural pasture use. Since there is nowadays no grazing/pasture use of forests, the fuel load remains uncontrolled. It is also linked to minimising wildfire impacts and the creation of grazing land. As more people visit forest areas for leisure and accidentally set fire. Another problem is vandalism and arson.
Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: Yes
Other type of forest: Shrublands/pasture
Forest products and services: timber, grazing / browsing

Livestock density: < 1 LU/km2

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• natural and semi-natural forest management

• Prescribed fire

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: management measures

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Bf: detrimental effects of fires

Main causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires), other natural causes (avalanches, volcanic eruptions, mud flows, highly susceptible natural resources, extreme topography, etc.) specify (Wildfire), population pressure (An decline of population during the last decades resulting in less grazing contributes to increased wildfire risk.)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

EURO

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

136.94

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Planning and implementation	1 morning (5h)
2.	Fire control equipment
3.	Monitoring prescribed fire	1 morning (5h)

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Labour	ha	1.0	25.0	25.0
Equipment	Machine use	ha	1.0	25.0	25.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					50.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					0.37

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	No maintenance is necessary. Every 3 to 5 years, prescribed fire is carried out again, repeating the process described abovet.	On 3-4 or 4-5 years

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

Comments:

Calculation of costs has been made based on the prescribed fire conducted for the DESIRE project. They represent the costs to burn 3-4ha, during a morning and including human resources (12 people), equipment (fire torch, fuel, special fire protection clothing, scythes, and hoses) and specialized fire fighting vehicles.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Prescribed fire costs: timing, the right number in the team, fuel type and specific local conditions (slope and vegetation) are the most important determining factors affecting the costs.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: < 10 persons/km2
Annual population growth: negative
25% of the land users are average wealthy.
75% of the land users are poor.
Market orientation of production system: Mixed (for example, mechanised agroforestry) Wild fire risk reduction

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• communal/ village

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Water availability and quality

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
wheather conditions	not well

Comments:

As a result of the characteristics of the technique, it is not possible to make modifications except to select the right weather conditions and the fuel load.

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

Comments:

The major benefit it is to prevent fores fires by reducing fuel quantities. A second benefit it is the increase of pasture on the next years that will be available to animals.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Comments:

There is a strong trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: In vulnerable areas, there is a need for reduction of the fuel load, removal of the vegetative cover or promotion of new plant growth.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The vegetation is adapted to the fire – impact minimization. How can they be sustained / enhanced? ore use of controlled fires.
With prescribed burning, larger areas can be treated compared to other fire control techniques, limited to strips in strategic areas, which are so difficult and expensive, whereas with prescribed burning, there is effective control of the vegetation over a large area”. How can they be sustained / enhanced? continue the use of controlled burning.
Difficult operating conditions and high costs make the technology unsuitable for certain areas costs How can they be sustained / enhanced? continued use of the controlled fire technique instead of other techniques.
It is cheaper than other control measures, for instance mechanical ones
In comparison with other techniques that manage biomass, this technique is more conservational, and it is culturally embedded in the local population way of life. It contributes to landscape diversification and the development of the local economy. It introduces fire as an essential feature of the Mediterranean landscape in a controlled manner.

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Air pollution	ensure that the wind direction does not carry smoke over settlements. However, it is not possible to eliminate the smoke problem. In particular, a certain degree of moisture is required in the fuel load to enable the fire to be controlled, in order that the burning temperature is low and this tends to produce smoke.
Lack of knowledge of people living near the burnt areas	improved education via schools, community meetings and in pamphlets.
Possibility of the control loss of the prescribed fire	care needed to prevent this happening.
Safety of the personnel carrying out the burn	conduct risk assessment exercises, carry out detailed planning and only apply the technology under the right weather conditions

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Fernandes, P., Botelho, H., Loureiro, C. 2002. Manual de formação para a técnica do fogo controlado. CNEFF, UTAD, Maio de 2002