[Author reports on fire use research conducted at the Southern Forest Fire Laboratory, evaluating effectiveness of prescribed burning from the standpoint of hazard reduction.] From the text:.'Evidence of this nature lends support to the supposition that the use of prescribed fire in the coastal plain of the Southeast has substantially reduced and will continue to reduce the acreage burned over by wildfires. . . [Author then identifies areas in need of further research and characterization, such as weather conditions, including relative humidity, fuel moisture, wind, and temperature; a study to characterize prescribed fires is underway at the Southern Forest Laboratory. A discussion of effect of topography and seasonal timing follows, as well as consideration of soils.] . . A fire prescription is sound when it accomplishes an objective better than other methods. In the case of fuel reduction, prescribed burning costs considerably less than mechanical treatment or chemical applications. Seedbed preparation burns or those prescribed to correct a forest disease situation are no more difficult or costly; in fact, the right prescription may cure a number of ills at the same time. Understory control burns, on the other hand, generally require more exact weather conditions and a more skillful application because of the degree of fire intensity needed. These fires must be hot enough to kill the undesirables, but at the same time cool enough to leave crop trees undamaged. Prescribed burning is paying off -- there is no doubt about that. The extent that it will continue to pay off depends strongly on us -- how we use it, what we use it for, and the advancements that we make in prescribed fire technology.'