Part 3: Socio/Political Concerns

Figure 1: Figure 1: Socio/Political Concerns Image

sociopoliticalconcerns oa

See the Socio/Political Concerns Guidance for variable descriptions.

This bar chart summarizes inputs for the Relative Risk and Organization Assessments. Use it to inform decisions made regarding incident complexity and organization type.

Socio/Political Concerns Guidance:

The Socio/Political Concerns are an indicator of how difficult and involved the decision is for the specific situation that may be associated with a particular fire. Key areas that influence and affect an Agency Administrator’s decision space and range of options include: the type of objectives to be implemented on the fire; the particular ownership situation; and any external influences that may exert strong influences on the Agency Administrator and his/her decision. This assessment area also allows the Agency Administrator to identify local information with attention to fire activity, local public and political opinions, and local knowledge.

Objectives Concerns

Evaluate the complexity of the incident objectives and rank this element as N/A (very low), low, moderate, or high. Considerations include: clarity; ability of current organization to accomplish; disagreement among cooperators; tactical/operational restrictions; complex objectives involving multiple focuses; and objectives influenced by serious accidents or fatalities.

The following guidelines can help you determine an appropriate selection for objective concerns:

Table 1: Determining Selection Values for Objective Concerns

N/A (Very Low)

Low

Moderate

High

  • Single objective that is easily achievable, with little or no potential to shift.
  • Objectives are simple and easily implementable with no expected change.
  • Course of action is meeting incident objectives.
  • Incident objectives and requirements clear and easily derived from strategic objectives and management requirements.
  • Multiple objectives being implemented simultaneously and are moderately hard to achieve.
  • WFDSS decision(s) have been published and course of action is meeting objectives.
  • Incident objectives and requirements clear.
  • Objectives may compete among cooperators and are difficult to achieve.
  • Objectives are complex requiring multiple tactics on various parts of the fire.
  • Multiple objectives with high likelihood of shifting emphasis between resource benefits and protection.
  • WFDSS decisions and course of action may be in need of or may be in process of being revised.

Ownership Concerns

Evaluate the effect ownership/jurisdiction will have on how the fire is managed and rank this element N/A (Very Low), Low, Moderate, or High. Considerations include disagreements over policy, responsibility, and/or management response; fire burning or threatening more than one jurisdiction; potential for unified command; different or conflicting management objectives; potential for claims (damages); and disputes over suppression responsibility.

Use the following table to help guide your selection for Ownership Concerns:

Table 1: Determining Selection Values for Ownership Concerns

N/A (Very Low)

Low

Moderate

High

  • Fire is burning on a single unit and is not expected to leave that jurisdiction.
  • Fire burning on a single unit in one jurisdiction.
  • Cooperators not involved in operations.
  • Risk to neighboring values is low and/or can be easily addressed.
  • Simple joint-unit fire.
  • Concerns over responsibility may exist.
  • Moderate concerns with conflicting incident objectives and course of action supporting across the units involved.
  • Multi-jurisdictional fire burning or has potential to burn onto multiple units of different jurisdiction and/or private lands.
  • Potential for unified command.
  • Potential disagreement over responsibility.
  • Differing fire policies across jurisdictional boundaries and cooperators.
  • High concerns over protection of values and jurisdictional responsibility for the values.
  • Diverse objectives/requirements, and course of action across the jurisdictions.

 

External Influences

Evaluate the effect external influence will have on how the fire is managed and rank this element as N/A (very low), low, moderate, or high.

Considerations include increasing media involvement, social/print/television media interest; threat to safety of visitors from fire and related operations; restrictions and/or closures in effect or being considered; preexisting controversies/relationships; smoke management problems; and sensitive political concerns/interests.

Use the following table to help guide your selection for External Influences:

Table 1: Determining Selection Values for External Influences

N/A (Very Low)

Low

Moderate

High

  • No impact on neighbors or visitors.
  • No controversy.
  • No media interest, no sensitive media relationships.
  • No smoke management concerns.
  • Few impacts on neighbors or visitors.
  • No controversy.
  • Little media interest or sensitive media relationships.
  • Few, if any smoke management concerns.
  • External attention focused at the local level only.
  • Some impact on neighbors or visitors
  • Some relationships/closures/political controversy, but mitigated.
  • Press release issued, but minimal media activity during operations.
  • Potential for smoke management concerns, but smoke impact mitigated.
  • External attention focus may elevate to state, regional, or area level and Agency leaders at these levels.
  • High impact on neighbors or visitors
  • High internal or external interest and concern.
  • Pre-existing controversy/local or regional relationships.
  • Media present during operations.
  • High likelihood of smoke impacts to multiple smoke sensitive areas with complex mitigation actions required
  • Visibility complaints likely.
  • Attention focus may elevate to national levels and Agency leaders.
  • Highly sensitive political interests.