7th Workshop on Forest Fire Management - EARSeL, European ...
7th Workshop on Forest Fire Management - EARSeL, European ...
7th Workshop on Forest Fire Management - EARSeL, European ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
A forest fire hazard based <strong>on</strong> the estimati<strong>on</strong> of tourist hot spot activities in Austria 53<br />
The risk rating assumes that the fire risk is very high close to touristic<br />
infrastructure and decreases with distance from the infrastructure together<br />
with a decrease of intensity.<br />
For the estimati<strong>on</strong> of the influence of tourist activity <strong>on</strong> forest fires in a<br />
district a rating has been d<strong>on</strong>e in merging the touristic infrastructure with<br />
the tourist intensity, the percentage of the forest cover and the area of a<br />
district with the following formula:<br />
∑ζ i = (λ*ζ ic /DS + λ*ζ ihut /DS + λ*ζ ihi /DS) * Ø overnight * FC/DS<br />
where λ represents the weight for touristic infrastructure per district, ζic represents the weight rating for the cable cars per district, ζihut the weight<br />
for the huts in a district and ζihi the weight for the hiking trails in a district.<br />
Øovernight symbolizes the mean number of overnight stays per district;<br />
FC/DC indicates the percentage of <strong>Forest</strong> Cover in a district.<br />
We defined different weights for the touristic infrastructures c<strong>on</strong>sidered -<br />
namely cable cars, huts and hiking trails - and calculated four different scenarios<br />
in order to identify the relative touristic intensity in the individual<br />
districts. In scenario I we assigned an equal weight for the touristic infrastructure.<br />
In scenario II a weight of 10% was assumed for the cable cars,<br />
for the huts a weight of 40% and for the hiking trails a weight of 50%. In<br />
scenario III the weight of the cable cars was assumed to be 50%, the<br />
weight of the huts 40% and the weight of the hiking trails 10%. In scenario<br />
IV the weight assigned to the cable cars is 20%, the weight assigned<br />
to the huts is 40% and the weight assigned to the hiking trails is 40%<br />
respectively. Next we grouped the districts into five categories relative to<br />
the number of forest fires that occurred between 2002 and 2008 and<br />
opposed them to the calculated mean overall value as well as the mean<br />
minimum and maximum value of the calculated scenarios.<br />
N° forest fires Mean overall value Minimum Maximum<br />
0 6.085 2,5 91.692<br />
1 - 3 11.464 5 270.591<br />
4 - 6 17.336 21 305.961<br />
7 - 10 10.920 18 80.527<br />
11 - 15 38.904 44 252.198<br />
16 - 20 47.941 1.191 223.258<br />
21 - 30 57.018 1.108 192.332<br />
> 30 12.979 1.707 36.496<br />
Table 1 - Mean overall value, minimum and maximum for four different scenarios.