← All case studies
Case study 05 · Wildfire · 2025 season05 / 05

Manitoba's 2025 fire season, re-solved week by week.

In 2025, 354 wildfires burned 1.93 million hectares of Manitoba and drove more than 31,000 people from their homes. We rebuilt the season from public satellite and fire-perimeter data, then asked one question: if the same initial-attack crews had been re-positioned every week by an optimization model, using only information available at the time, how much closer would help have been?

71.5%
of ignitions within 100 km of a crew, weekly re-optimized staging
38.4%
within 100 km, same crews fixed at established bases
70 vs 119 km
median distance from ignition to the nearest crew
+31 pts
minimum coverage advantage across 500 stress-test scenarios
01 · The season

Two waves, a thousand kilometres apart.

The fires came in two acts: a May wave in the west and centre, around Lac du Bonnet, Flin Flon, Lynn Lake, then a second, larger July wave in the far north and east, around Island Lake and Thompson. A fixed footprint can be right for one act. It cannot be right for both.

02 · The loop, running

Watch the crews move before the fires do.

Each Monday the model re-solves: where should 20 crews stand this week, given only the trailing two weeks of satellite hotspots and ignitions? Bronze rings are optimized crew positions; blue rings are the fixed footprint; embers are the fires that actually came. Press play above to run the season.

03 · The result

Same crews. Same fires. A third more of them reachable.

Every decision was made with data a duty officer could have had that Monday morning. No hindsight, no foresight, just a weekly re-solve. The gap compounds all season.

The honest wrinkles.On brand-new starts, ignitions with no satellite hotspot within 20 km in the prior two weeks, the optimized plan still reached 66% within 100 km against 44% for the fixed footprint. And it wasn't right every time: the single largest fire of the season ignited 17 km from a fixed base while the optimized plan stood 86 km away. Optimization improves the odds. It doesn't grant prophecy, which is exactly why the plan is re-solved every week.

04 · How it works

Optimized by math. Pressure-tested by simulation.

S1 · Discover
Find the decision in the data

487,769 satellite hotspot detections and 354 fire records become one weekly question: where should scarce crews stand?

S2 · Optimize
Solve it properly

A mixed-integer program allocates 20 crews across 27 candidate communities, maximizing risk-weighted coverage under real capacity limits. Solved to optimality, every week.

S3 · Simulate
Pressure-test the plan

500 alternate seasons, with fires resampled and locations perturbed, attack each week's plan. The advantage never fell below 31 points. A plan that only works in one version of reality isn't a plan.

S4 · Re-solve
Close the loop

Monday arrives, the world has moved, the model re-solves. 30 consecutive weekly decisions, the same loop Ourus runs on fleets, plants, and grids.

05 · Method & sources

Built to be checked.

Everything here comes from public data, and every assumption is on the table. If you'd like the model pointed at your operation's version of this problem, the loop is the same.

Fire records

National Burned Area Composite 2025 (Natural Resources Canada): 354 fires under Manitoba jurisdiction, 1.93M ha adjusted burned area.

Signal

CWFIS satellite hotspots (487,769 Manitoba detections, 2025). The model at week t sees only data before week t; cold-start weeks default to the fixed footprint.

Counterfactual

20 crews. The fixed footprint spreads them across 8 established attack bases; optimized staging may use 27 candidate communities with airstrips or existing infrastructure.

Coverage

A crew stationed within 100 km of the ignition point, a proxy for initial-attack reach, not a claim any given fire would have been contained.

Model

Mixed-integer linear program (facility location with capacities), HiGHS solver. Roughly 7 crew moves per week; a relocation-budget constraint is one line, not a rewrite.

Ourus

Your operation has a version of this problem.

Somewhere in your data there's a decision being made on habit that math could make on evidence, and simulation could make robust. The loop is the same.

Reconstruction on public data. NRCAN National Burned Area Composite & CWFIS hotspots, 2025. A counterfactual model, not a critique of the crews who fought this season.

Have a decision like this?

We take on a small number of design partners. Bring the plan you are afraid to run.

© 2026 OurusOurus.aiOptimize → Simulate → Re-solve