Project no. Fp6-018505 Project Acronym fire paradox

4.3Poland Case Study

4.3.1Legal framework

In Poland, the matter of forest areas surveillance for fire detection is regulated by the decree of the Environment Minister of 22^nd March, 2006 on special forest fire protection principles (Journal of Laws, issue 58, item 405). According to this decree, in forests whose area exceeds 300 ha, characterised by high or medium fire hazard (I or II forest fire hazard category), at 1, 2 or 3 fire hazard degree (determined on the basis of a daily forecast for these areas), it is necessary to conduct observation in order to detect the fire early, inform about it, and start firefighting actions.

In Poland, the forest areas observation system is composed of:

• 
  Network of fire lookout towers (traditional or equipped with a TV system),
  
• 
  Ground patrols,
  
• 
  Aerial patrolling.
  

4.3.2Fire detection systems

a) National Network of Lookout Towers (NNLT)

Fire observation towers are facilities that differ as regards their construction, permitting a direct or indirect observation of the forests and give the alarm when detecting a fire. From time to time, other substitute facilities are used for observation, such as triangulation towers, water towers or church towers.

All fire observation posts should be located in places that would ensure optimum capability of observation of an area as large as possible; the observed area is determined by so-called observation (visibility) radius. It is assumed that in a flat area, it amounts from 10 to 15 km; it is a very important factor, which must be taken into account during the design of the tower network. In industrial areas, air transparency should be taken into account and observation radius should be decreased. This also applies to areas with varied relief.

Figure 12 - lookout tower with tv camera

Observation posts should be higher than treetops by a few meters and located, if possible, on natural hills or ridges. The height of observation posts can vary between 20 and 30 meters with a maximum of 50 m. At the design phase of a ground observation network (determination of the number of observation posts), the following criteria are taken into account:

• 
  in forest divisions and national parks of the first fire hazard category, each forest stand should be observed from 2 observation posts,
  
• 
  in forest divisions and national parks of the second fire hazard category, each forest stand should be observed from at least 1 observation post,
  
• 
  in forest divisions and national parks of the third fire hazard category, the forest may be observed as necessary,
  
• 
  minimum size of the protected complex or area, for which permanent observation posts should be designed, for the first fire hazard category amounts to 1000 ha, whereas for the second fire hazard category it is 2000 ha.
  

Location of observation posts is specified by the Regional Directorate of the State Forests (RDSF), in its territory, in obligatory consultation with the adjacent regional directorates of the State Forests. Forest divisions and national parks that can observe forest areas of the adjacent forest divisions from their observation posts are obliged to cooperate closely with them.

Observation posts are equipped with:

• 
  equipment permitting fire detection and identification of the place and time of fire,
  
• 
  communications equipment,
  
• 
  report book about detected fires and their notification,
  
• 
  procedure for observers, describing what to do if a fire is detected and describing obligations during observation.
  

The network of fire observation posts in the State Forests² as of 31^st December, 2006 consisted of 637 observation posts (OPs), constructed with the following materials: 479 Metal OPs; 112 Brick OPs; 38 Wooden OPs; 8 Other types of OPs.

In Figure 13, the location of observation posts in the Polish territory is depicted. Table 5 presents the number of observation posts in individual regional directorates of the State Forests per 10,000 ha of forests. The highest number of observation posts is in the RDSF in Zielona Góra (67), Katowice (65) and Szczecin (56), classified to the highest, first forest fire hazard category and the lowest number is in the RDSF in Kraków (5) and Krosno (14), consisting, in a significant part, of upland areas and highlands, which are classified as the lowest, third fire hazard category.

Figure 13 - Distribution of fire observations points in Poland

Table 5- The number of fire observation posts by RDSF and density of their location
(as of 31st December, 2007)

No.	RDSF	FFHC^*	Forest area [ha]	Total	Number of towers per 10000 ha of forest area
1.	Białystok	2	569 300	37	0,65
2.	Gdańsk	2	283 100	30	1,06
3.	Katowice	1	592 600	65	1,10
4.	Kraków	3	167 500	5	0,30
5.	Krosno	3	398 000	14	0,35
6.	Lublin	2	391 400	33	0,84
7.	Łódź	2	282 000	22	0,78
8.	Olsztyn	2	563 000	29	0,52
9.	Piła	1	337 200	27	0,80
10.	Poznań	1	406 400	32	0,79
11.	Radom	2	308 300	43	1,39
12.	Szczecin	1	634 000	56	0,88
13.	Szczecinek	2	563 800	50	0,89
14.	Toruń	1	420 600	52	1,24
15.	Warszawa	1	180 900	38	2,10
16.	Wrocław	1	522 000	37	0,71
17.	Zielona Góra	1	422 600	67	1,59
Average in Poland			7 042 700	637	0,90

^*Forest fire hazard category

The average density of the number of observation posts per 10,000 ha of forest area in Poland is 0.9. The highest density of observation posts is in the RDSF in Warszawa (2.1), Zielona Góra (1.59), Radom (1.39) and Toruń (1.24). OP density coefficient is significantly below the national average in the RDSFs in Kraków (0.30), Krosno (0.35), Olsztyn (0.52) and Białystok (0.65).

b) Ground fire detection

The observation system consisting of fire observation posts and air patrols is supplemented by ground patrols equipped with means of transport. Patrolling should be organised by forest divisions and national parks. They decide when to act, routes and areas to patrol. It particularly applies to areas of high fire hazard, where tourist traffic is concentrated, along busy transport routes and in places where no other types of observation are provided. Ground patrols are introduced at the third forest fire hazard degree. The patrols should include, if possible, uniformed forest and park guards. Each team should be equipped with:

• 
  portable fire-fighting equipment,
  
• 
  report book,
  
• 
  communications equipment,
  
• 
  alerting system specification,
  
• 
  map of the patrolled area.
  

Figure 14 - patrolling motor-cycle from 1965

Patrol’s responsibility includes careful watching over fire safety, especially:

• 
  controlling the condition of all firefighting equipment, information boards, etc.,
  
• 
  paying attention to adherence to fire-protection regulations by visitors in the forest,
  
• 
  control of observance of fire safety rules in all cases involving the use of fire,
  
• 
  suppressing detected forest fires,
  
• 
  Immediate information about forest fires, report all observations connected with fire protection.
  

Figure 15 - patrolling vehicle with extinguish set

If a fire is detected, the fire patrol is obliged to start suppressing it immediately. If they are not able to suppress the fire, the patrol must notify the alarm post.

People visiting the forest know that it is controlled by its administrator, which results in higher discipline and necessity to adhere to regulations governing use of forests.

Table 6 presents the number of patrols conducted in the territory of the State Forests in the period 2002-2006. In total, the forests were patrolled 14,049 times in that period. The forest areas patrolled more often were the RDSF in Gdańsk (2812), Lublin (2441) and Olsztyn (2199). Poznań was the area where the patrol was least often (57 times).

Table 6 - Number of ground patrols by RDSF in the period 2002-2006

No.	RDSF	FFHC	Year
			2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
1.	Białystok	2	81	53	53	6	44
2.	Gdańsk	2	517	491	466	760	578
3.	Katowice	1	70	61	62	19	171
4.	Kraków	3	113	129	104	121	18
5.	Krosno	3	182	141	119	249	354
6.	Lublin	2	161	176	148	213	1743
7.	Łódź	2	134	112	114	107	94
8.	Olsztyn	2	775	467	266	197	494
9.	Piła	1	22	43	62	28	50
10.	Poznań	1	9	21	14	5	8
11.	Radom	2	101	64	52	50	13
12.	Szczecin	1	71	73	56	17	24
13.	Szczecinek	2	39	164	36	25	46
14.	Toruń	1	93	95	104	66	128
15.	Warszawa	1	4	8	16	11	4
16.	Wrocław	1	305	121	136	634	427
17.	Zielona Góra	1	48	92	85	12	17
Average in Poland			2725	2311	1893	2520	4213

c) Aerial patrolling and detection

In Poland, patrolling of forests by planes to detect fires dates back to the seventies, but practical use of this method for the economic scale was employed by the end of the eighties. However, for this effectiveness to be ensured, route patrolling time should not exceed 45 minutes. In such situations, it is possible for the plane, even if its location is very unfavorable, to double back and detect fire in the initial phase of its propagation.

The number of aircraft used for patrolling in the State Forests in the period 2002-2006 is described in Table 7 and location of forest air bases is depicted in Figure 16.

Table 7 - Number of patrol aircrafts by RDSF in the period 2002-2006

No.	RDSF	FFHC	Year
			2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
1.	Białystok	2	1	0	0	0	0
2.	Gdańsk	2	0	0	0	0	0
3.	Katowice	1	1	1	0	0	0
4.	Krosno	3	1	1	0	1	1
5.	Kraków	3	0	0	0	0	0
6.	Lublin	2	0	0	0	0	0
7.	Łódź	2	0	0	0	0	0
8.	Olsztyn	2	1	1	1	1	1
9.	Piła	1	1	1	1	1	1
10.	Poznań	1	0	1	1	0	0
11.	Radom	2	1	0	0	0	0
12.	Szczecin	1	2	2	2	2	2
13.	Szczecinek	2	0	0	0	0	0
14.	Toruń	1	0	1	1	1	1
15.	Warszawa	1	2	2	2	2	2
16.	Wrocław	1	1	1	1	1	1
17.	Zielona Góra	1	1	0	1	1	1
Average in Poland			12	11	10	10	10

Figure 16 - Distribution of forest airplane bases in Poland

Ten planes (12 at most) carried out the aerial patrol. There are 31 permanent routes; the average route patrolling time was 2.5 hours. There was no aerial observation in five RDSFs (Gdańsk, Kraków, Lublin, Łódź and Szczecinek).

Figure 17 - Field forest air base

Due to the high cost for aerial observation, only light aircrafts are used, but in spite of that, aerial patrolling has been used less and less often during the last few years. The use of this detection method occurs only when fire hazard is high and over areas where other types of observation are not used. Aerial patrolling should be treated as a supplement of the ground observation system.