Blue Rock Roada123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · Live or dead conifers

Fire and Fuels Report

Blue Rock Road

Fuel Reduction Project

Shasta-Trinity National Forest Trinity River Management Unit

Existing roadside fuel break along “Blue Rock” road

Prepared by Pat Butler Fuels Planner May 4, 2012

Name and date: __________________________________________________________

Blue Rock Road Fuels Project Fire and Fuels Report – 05-04-2012

Shasta-Trinity National Forest, Trinity River Management Unit

Contents BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 1

PURPOSE AND NEED .................................................................................................................. 1

PROPOSED ACTION .................................................................................................................... 2

Existing Condition ...................................................................................................................... 3

Desired Condition ....................................................................................................................... 4

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ..................................................................................... 5

No Action .................................................................................................................................... 5

Proposed Action .......................................................................................................................... 5

1. Direct and Indirect Effects ................................................................................................. 5

3. Cumulative effects ............................................................................................................. 6

ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................... 7

Historic Reference Conditions .................................................................................................... 7

Recent Fire History in the Project Area ...................................................................................... 7

Fuel Models ................................................................................................................................ 7

Fuel Loading ............................................................................................................................... 8

Weather ....................................................................................................................................... 8

Fire Behavior .............................................................................................................................. 9

AIR QUALITY ............................................................................................................................... 9

ATTACHMENTS ......................................................................................................................... 16

BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................... 21

Non Discrimination Statement The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.


Shasta-Trinity National Forest, Trinity River Management Unit - 1

BACKGROUND The legal description for the project area is T34N R9W Sec 33 & 34, MDBM. The project is located on approximately 230 acres of Forest Service land east of CA State Highway 3 and approximately 3 miles northeast of Weaverville, CA. Land allocations for the proposed project area are identified as Matrix, Roaded Recreation1 and Riparian Reserve2 under the Shasta-Trinity Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP)3. The project area is also part of the Hayfork Adaptive Management Area4, where the specific emphasis is to develop and test the application of a range of forest management practices. Due to fire suppression and exclusion and other management activities in the last roughly 100 years, major changes have occurred in California’s ecosystems5. In this project area, surface and understory fuels have accumulated to undesirable levels for fire resilience6. Dense areas of small diameter conifers create ladder fuels which can provide an avenue for surface fire to move into the canopy. During fire season, low fuel moisture and hot, dry weather conditions combined with heavy fuel loads can result in high intensity, high severity fire, with high potential for resource damage, increased resistance to control, and higher risk to firefighters and the public. According to the 2011 STNF GIS layer on Fire Return Interval Departure (FRID)7 the historic mean fire return interval for the project area is 15 years (Attachment A, Current and Mean Fire Return Interval); however Forest GIS data confirms that the last documented fire occurred in the project area in 1931 (Attachment B: Fire History). This departure from the historic mean fire return interval has allowed a buildup of fuels that normally would have been consumed by frequent, low intensity fires8. The entire treatment area falls entirely within the designation of Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) as identified in the Trinity County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update 2010. Approximately 43 acres of the project area fall inside the “Defense Zone” (within ¼ mile) of four structures on adjacent private land and borders the defense zone of multiple structures (Attachment C: WUI). The project is also located entirely within the Weaverville Community Forest. This project is being developed collaboratively between the U.S. Forest Service, the Trinity County Resource Conservation District (TCRCD) and the Weaverville Community Forest steering committee.

PURPOSE AND NEED The need for specific actions was determined by comparing existing conditions with the desired future conditions as described in the Shasta-Trinity LRMP. Desired future conditions applicable to the project area are described in the LRMP in the following locations:

1 Shasta-Trinity LRMP, pages 4-64 – 4-66. 2 Shasta-Trinity LRMP, pages 4-59 -4-60. 3 Shasta-Trinity Land and Resource Management Plan, 1995. Pages 4-64 – 4-66 and 4-53 – 4-60. 4 Hayfork Adaptive Management Guide, 2004. 5 Sugihara et. al. Fire in California’s Ecosystems. 2006 6 The ability of a vegetation type, ecosystem, or community to respond positively to or recover quickly from the effects of a wildfire burning within, across or adjacent to them. 7 GIS Clearinghouse USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region Remote Sensing Lab geodatabase. Shasta-Trinity Fire Return Interval Departure (FRID) (2010). 8 Sugihara et. al. Fire in California’s Ecosystems. 2006


2 - Shasta-Trinity National Forest, Trinity River Management Unit

Forest Goals and Objectives (pages 4-4 to 4-6) Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines (pages 4-11 to 4-30) Management Prescription Standards and Guidelines (pages 4-64 to 4-66 and 4-53

– 4-60) Desired Future Condition for Management Area 7 (pages 4- 107 to 4- 109)

Table 1 below compares the existing and desired future condition for the project area.

Existing Condition

Surface fuel load of approximately10-30+ tons/acre Stands of dense ladder fuels. A significant departure from historic mean fire return

interval

Desired Condition

Forest Goals and Objectives: Restore fire to its natural role in the ecosystem when

establishing the Desired Future Condition of the landscape (pg . 4-4).

Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines: Plan and implement fuel treatments emphasizing those

treatments that will replicate fire's natural role in the ecosystems (pg. 4- 18).

Consider fuel break construction investments when they complement Forest health/biomass reduction needs, very high and expensive resource values are at risk and to protect Forest communities (pg. 4- 18).

Management Prescription Standards and Guidelines:

Maintain an average of 10 tons of unburned dead/down material per acre on slopes less than 40 percent. Where feasible, maintain the same amount on slopes over 40 percent. (pg. 4-65).

Design prescribed burn projects and prescriptions to contribute to the attainment of Aquatic Conservations Strategy objectives. (pg. 4-57).

Table l. Existing vs. Desired Condition for the Blue Rock Road Fuel Reduction Project This plan also conforms to guidelines and strategies in the Shasta-Trinity National Forest Fire Management Plan (FMP) – Appendix G: Fuels Management, Strategy, and Treatment Prioritization.

PROPOSED ACTION The Shasta-Trinity National Forest, Trinity River Management Unit proposes to manually thin approximately 50 acres of forested stands, hand pile the slash, including dead fuel on the ground,



and burn the hand piles to reduce high fuel loading in the understory. On the remaining approximately 180 acres in the project area, we propose to, where necessary, prune lower limbs and thin isolated pockets of sapling-sized trees (reduce any “fuel ladders”), and scatter the material. Treatment prescriptions would leave the healthiest trees in every diameter and height class to retain diversity in the understory. Areas of concentrated heavy dead and down fuels would be manually re-arranged to reduce fire intensity. Following the understory treatments, prescribed fire would be implemented to further reduce surface fuel loading.

Understory thin to reduce understory fuel loading Live or dead conifers <6” dbh class would be manually thinned to a 20’ X 20’

spacing. Conifers would be pruned to a height of 6-8’, or to a height that leaves at least 1/2

live crown. Hardwood snags or dead and down hardwoods <6”dbh class would be manually

cut and hand piled. Natural and activity created surface fuels <6”dbh class would be hand piled and

burned or, in areas of light fuels where there is insufficient slash to hand pile, lopped and scattered.

Where necessary and possible, manual re-arrangement of fuels (such as scattering natural, pruned or thinned material, cutting through downed logs to lay them flat, cutting and moving larger logs to use for erosion mitigation, or pulling fuel concentrations away from snags or live trees )would occur prior to underburning.

Underburning to reduce surface fuel loading Where appropriate based on fuel loading, implement underburning to reduce

accumulated natural and activity created surface fuels. The project area could be divided into smaller “sub-units” for prescribed fire. Fire control line would be constructed by hand where natural or man-made

barriers to fire do not already exist. Handline would average three feet in width and would be dug down to mineral soil.

Initial entry underburning could be completed within 3 years after thinning treatments. Maintenance underburning would then be considered every 3-15 years following initial entry based on fuel accumulation over time.

Effectiveness Monitoring Permanent FIREMON9 monitoring plots would be established in the project area

to provide data on pre-and-post treatment visual quality, stand structure, fuel loading, fire behavior, and treatment effectiveness over time.

Existing Condition Two main types of forest structure and fuel beds are present in the project area. The first (for the purposes of this document, Structure A) is composed of a heavy load of dead and downed surface fuels in all particle sizes but averaging approximately 10-12” in diameter. Duff depth varies. Heavy dead/down fuel accumulation is mainly a result of

9 http://www.frames.gov/. “Partner sites” “Firemon”

http://www.frames.gov/



natural selection in the stand due to intense competition for resources and resultant overall low stand health. The mean surface fuel load is approximately 17-21tons/acre. The overstory is composed of dense stands of suppressed conifers, primarily Douglas fir, with an average diameter class of 10-12”. Canopy closure averages 90%, and crown ratio averages 30%. There is a very limited hardwood component, consisting primarily of suppressed black oak. Very little species diversity is present in the form of grasses, forbs, shrubs, or trees. This type of structure makes up approximately 50 acres of the project area. The fuel model10 most representative of this type of stand structure is 184 (TL4).

Example: Stand Structure A Example: Stand Structure B

The second (Structure B) is composed of a moderate to heavy load of surface fuels that include logs, branches, long needle conifer litter, and twigs of every size class arranged in frequent clumps or “jackpots” throughout the stands, and a moderate to heavy duff layer. The surface fuel load is estimated to be approximately 33 tons/acre. Trees in the stand are generally larger, older, and more widely spaced than in stand structure A, with an average diameter of approximately 16-18”. Tree heights average from 80-100+’ with an average canopy base height of approximately 6”, although many of the taller trees have a canopy base height of 20’+. Average canopy closure is approximately 60-70 %. Crown ratios run from approximately 40-80%. There is a larger hardwood, pine, and cedar, and seeding/sapling component than in structure A and these trees are generally not suppressed and healthier. There is a mixed shrub component and a greater diversity of grasses and forbs than is present in stand structure A. This type of structure makes up approximately 180 acres of the project area. The fuel model most representative of this type of stand structure is 188 (TL8).

Desired Condition All current fuel models, with the exception of a small number of acres in grass or shrub models, would exhibit characteristics similar to those in a TL1 (181), which may be used to represent a recently burned forest. Fire rate of spread and flame lengths would be very low. An average of 10 tons/acre of dead/down material would be maintained per acre where a larger fuel load is currently present11. Stand resilience to fire would be improved

10 Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Models: A Comprehensive Set for Use with Rothermel’s Surface Fire Spread Model. Scott and Bergan, 2005 11 Shasta-Trinity National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan p4-65, 66



by a reduction in surface fuel loading and/or an increase in canopy base height, reducing risk to resources from future wildfires. Using prescribed fire as a management tool when needed would permit fire return intervals to run closer to the mean historic interval of 15 years. Firefighters would be more effective as fire intensity is lowered in concurrence with reduction in fuel load. Firefighter and public safety would be improved.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

No Action With no action, the project area would continue in an extreme departure from the historic mean fire return interval. Surface fuel loads would increase as trees continue to naturally select and fall, and natural litter and duff levels accumulate. Fire behavior would be expected to remain fairly constant with the present (Appendix B: BehavePlus runs). While flame length and rate of spread in heavy surface fuels such as those found throughout the project area is not extreme, growing residence time in the flaming front and extensive residual combustion time in even heavier fuels would further increase resistance to control, limit firefighter effectiveness, and put private property and resources at greater risk for damage and loss.

Proposed Action

1. Direct and Indirect Effects Small-diameter thinning in combination with understory burning will reduce rate of spread, surface flame lengths, and potential fireline intensity, creating safer conditions and increasing firefighter effectiveness during response to wildland fires in the future. Fire resilience under future wildland fires would be improved12. Following completion of fuels reduction treatments, an average of 10 tons/acre of dead/down material would be maintained per acre where a larger fuel load is currently present. Minor impacts to resources from prescribed fire may be anticipated under low-to-moderate weather conditions. A mosaic of fire effects resulting from varying fire intensity would be created over the landscape as fuel loading and arrangement change across the project area. Average canopy base height (Appendix A, Terminology) would be increased by pruning and prescribed fire. Visual effects such as bole and needle scorch and ground char would be temporary as new growth occurs in live trees and decomposition occurs in surface fuels. Potential impacts on air quality are described on page 11. Fire-induced mortality in isolated pockets of small-diameter, weak or unhealthy trees may be noticed immediately, or may not be apparent for several months following prescribed fire. These areas would contribute to the desired fire mosaic and potentially recruit new snags. Heavy dead and down fuels and excessive surface litter and duff would be reduced by prescribed fire to a degree dependent on fuel moisture and weather conditions during implementation.

12 Appendix B: BehavePlus runs



Prescribed fire, which generally occurs under lower air temperature, higher relative humidity, and higher soil moisture burning conditions than wildland fire, produces lower fire intensities and fire severity and reduced potential for subsequent damage to resources13. Reintroducing fire to this system in a controlled manner, using low to moderate intensity fire prescriptions, would help reduce impacts to soil, water, and plants that would likely be the result of an uncontrolled, high severity wildland fire due in part to the long fire residence and smoldering time that may be expected in heavy, large particle fuel loads.

Continued prescribed burning at intervals of 3-15 years would approximate the historic fire return interval, help maintain the desired condition, and continue to support the requirements for Management Prescriptions and Guidelines in the RMP and the FMP (additional NEPA documentation may be required for future prescribed fire actions). FIREMON plots in the project area would allow fire managers to monitor fuel loading and determine appropriate timing for future prescribed burning. After prescribed burning, all current fuel models, with the exception of a small number of acres in grass or shrub models, would exhibit characteristics similar to those in a TL1 (181), which may be used to represent a recently burned forest.

3. Cumulative effects a. Bounding the Effects 1. Geographic Bounding

The analysis area for this project encompasses the Little Browns Creek 7th field watershed.

2. Time Bounding

The period used to analyze cumulative effects for prescribed fire is approximately 15 years. This is the approximate time frame identified for the historic fire return interval in the project area. It is anticipated that the area will continue to be managed with prescribed fire in approximately 3-15 year intervals, depending on interim fuel accumulations. b. Past, Present and Foreseeable Actions See the cumulative effects table in the project record for a list of all past, present and future foreseeable actions considered in the cumulative effects analysis for fire and fuels.

Past, present and foreseeable actions would add to the total amount of acres being treated for the purposes of reducing hazardous fuels within the cumulative effects area. These projects incrementally add to the overall goal of protecting the community of Weaverville from the effects of wildfire.

13 Neary et.al. Wildland Fire in Ecosystems, September 2005



ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

Historic Reference Conditions The Fire Return Interval Departure (FRID) GIS layer for the Shasta-Trinity National Forest was updated on 5/18/2011. When the project area is overlaid with the FRID layer, the entire project area is identified as having a 15 year mean reference fire return interval14. The majority of the project area is shown to have a current fire return interval of 100+ years. Comparisons are made between pre-Euroamerican settlement and contemporary fire return intervals. More information on how the mean reference and current fire return intervals were determined for the FRID database found at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/rsl/clearinghouse/r5gis/frid/.

Recent Fire History in the Project Area While wildland fire has not been recorded directly over the project area since 1931, the Forest GIS library, identifies over 70 fire starts within a five mile radius of the project area since 197015. Two of those fires, the Oregon fire (2001; 1680 acres) and the Junction fire (2006; 3150 acres) were fires that caused significant resource damage on Forest system and private lands.

Fuel Models Several fuel models (FM’s) are found inside the project area16. Approximately 40% of the area is identified as fuel model 188 (TL8). Approximately 20% of the area, each, is identified as FM 184 and 161. Approximately 10% is identified as FM 165, and the remaining roughly 10% is a combination of FM’s 183, 147, and 104. Table 3 below provides a more complete description of each fuel model. Attachment D, Fuel Models provides a mapped illustration of the locations of these fuel models throughout the project area. Table 3. Standard fuel model descriptions Fuel Model Description Primary Fire Carrier Typical Fire Behavior 188 (TL8) Long-Needle Litter Moderate load of long-

needle pine litter Spread rate moderate; flame length low

184 (TL4) Small Downed Logs Moderate load of fine

litter and coarse fuels Spread rate low; flame length low

161 (TU1)

Low-Load Dry Climate Timber-Grass-Shrub (Dynamic)

Low load of grass and/or shrub with litter

Spread rate low; flame length low

165 (TU5)

Very High Load, Dry Climate Timber-Shrub

Heavy forest litter with a shrub or small tree understory

Spread rate moderate; flame length moderate

183 (TL3)

Moderate Load Conifer Litter

Moderate load conifer litter, light load of coarse fuels

Spread rate very low; flame length low

14 Attachment A: Current and Mean Reference Fire Return Interval Maps 15 Attachment B: Fire History 16 Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Models: A Comprehensive Set for Use with Rothermel’s Surface Fire Spread Model. Scott and Bergan, 2005



Fuel Model Description Primary Fire Carrier Typical Fire Behavior 147 (SH7)

Very High Load, Dry Climate Shrub

Woody shrubs and shrub litter

Spread rate high; flame length very high

104 (GR4)

Moderate Load, Dry Climate Grass (Dynamic)

Continuous, dry-climate grass

Dependent on live herbaceous moisture

181 (TL1)

Low Load Compact Conifer Litter Compact forest litter Spread rate very low; flame

length very low

Fuel Loading Current fuel loading specific to the project area was determined using the FIREMON protocol where data was available, and by using USDA GTR PNW-10517 where FIREMON data was not available. Based on the photo series and extensive on-the-ground observations, the Douglas-fir-hardwood series size class 3 was used, and two main residue descriptive codes were selected as being the most representative on the two primary stand structures in the project area: 3-DFHD-3 at 21.5 tons/acre (Structure A), and 5-DFHD-4 at 33.2 tons per acre (Structure B).

Weather Weather and fuel moisture data was obtained from the Five Cent Remote Access Weather Station (RAWS) which is located approximately 2 miles west of the project area at comparable elevation, and provides the most representative historical weather data available. KCFAST Weather Information Retrieval System was used to retrieve the raw historical weather data file or station catalog. Data was retrieved for a 12 year time frame between 1998- 2011 for typical fire season months May-October. Wind data from the station indicated an average 20’ wind speed of 7 miles per hour with wind direction in that time frame varying from west to south, with strong averages out of the southwest. FireFamilyPlus (FFP) was then used to import the station catalog. Data was checked for errors, and selected for the multiple variables of fuel moisture and weather. The data was imported into an EXCEL spreadsheet and a percentile weather report was generated based on a National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS) index. Table 4 below shows the 97th and 50th percentile breakpoints using Five Cent RAWS data in FFP18.

17 Photo series for quantifying natural forest residues in common vegetation types of the Pacific Northwest. Maxwell and Ward, May 1980 18 Weather data and analysis provided by L. Shoemaker, STNF fire ecologist



Table 4. 97th and 50th percentile fuel moistures: Five Cent RAWS

Fire Behavior BehavePlus 5.0.3 was used to model potential fire behavior in the three most common fuel models found in the treatment area: 188 (TL8), 184 (TL4) and 161 (TU1) (Appendix B: Behave runs) and to model potential fire behavior under the desired future condition. Using 30% slope as an average, flame lengths currently range from 1.2’ in TL4 to 2.9’ in TL8. Rate of spread varied from 1.4 chains/hour in TL4 and TU1 to 3.5 chains/hour in TL8. These relatively low flame lengths and rates of spread are typical in fuel models with a larger proportion of coarse fuels carrying the fire. Rate of spread, flame length, and fireline intensity are all significantly lower than the existing condition under the desired future condition.

AIR QUALITY

The Blue Rock Road Fuel Reduction Project is located in the North Coast Air Basin, managed by the North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District (NCAQMD) which consists of Del Norte, Humboldt, and Trinity counties. More information on air quality regulations may be found at their website, www.ncuaqmd.org. Prescribed fire would result in the temporary production of smoke. Smoke production from ignitions would be of short duration. The duration of significant smoke production from this project is estimated to be less than 24 hours. Burning under wind parameters outlined in a prescribed fire plan, residual smoke would not be expected to impact nearby sensitive areas. Isolated sources, such as stump holes or large downed logs, may produce variable amounts of smoke for several days following ignition. Residences closest to the project area, and drivers along Hwy. 3, may experience short-duration impacts from smoke during the burning period. These impacts are anticipated to be minor and of short duration. Mitigation actions, such as notification of local residents, placement of warning signs along the road, or the use of lead vehicles would be identified in the burn plan. Prescribed burning ahead of precipitation events would limit smoldering and residual combustion phases in the fuels.

97th percentile fuel moistures Min ERC 86 <---- Range ---->

Max ERC 90

Average of fuel moisture in the range FM1 FM10 FM100 FM1000 HERB WOODY

50th percentile fuel moistures

Min ERC 62 <---- Range ----> Max ERC 68

Average of fuel moisture in the range FM1 FM10 FM100 FM1000 HERB WOODY

3.5 4.6 8.9 10.4 3.5 74.2

http://www.ncuaqmd.org/



Smoke may be visible from State Highway 3 (immediately adjacent to the west project boundary), Weaverville, and State Highway 299 (located approximately 2 miles to the south). Restrictions on wind direction would be included in the burn plan for the project that would minimize impacts on visibility. The number of acres burned on any given day would be based on weather and fuel moisture conditions identified in the burn plan that would allow for rapid consumption of fuels. Particulate matter, also known as particle pollution or PM, is a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets. Particle pollution is made up of a number of components, including acids (such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles19. The North Coast Air Basin, including all of Trinity County, is in a non-attainment area under California State standards for PM 10 and in an unclassified area for PM 2.5. Under Federal standards, Trinity County is an attainment area for both PM 10 and 2.5. Prescribed burning would adhere to Federal, State and local air quality regulations20. A smoke management plan (SMP) would be approved the North Coast Air Quality Management District (NCAQMD). Mitigations to reduce smoke emissions would be addressed within the smoke management plan. In summary, possible smoke impacts to nearby communities and infrastructure would be mitigated by following the prescribed fire burn plan, burning under weather and fuel moisture conditions that allow smoke to move up and out of sensitive areas and result in rapid and complete combustion, and by submitting and following a smoke management plan approved by NCAQMD.

19 http://www.epa.gov/pm/ accessed February 1st, 2012 20 Including the Federal Clean Air Act (1990) and the California Clean Air Act (CCR, Title 17.3.1)

The North Coast Air District, including all of Trinity County, is identified as a non-attainment area for State standards for PM 10, and unclassified for PM-2.5. We are listed as an attainment area under Federal standards for PM 10 and 2.5 (Appendix A, Terminology).



APPENDIX A: TERMINOLOGY21 Air Resources Board Area Designations22 Unclassified: a pollutant is designated unclassified if the data are incomplete and do not support a designation of attainment or nonattainment. Attainment: a pollutant is designated attainment if the state standard for that pollutant was not violated at any site in the area during a three-year period. Nonattainment: a pollutant is designated nonattainment if there was at least one violation of a State standard for that pollutant in the area. Nonattainment / Transitional: is a subcategory of the nonattainment designation. An area is designated nonattainment / transitional to signify that the area is close to attaining the standard for that pollutant. Canopy Base Height A property of a plot, stand, or group of trees. For fire modeling, canopy base height is an effective value that incorporates ladder fuel, such as tall shrubs and small trees. No physical field measurement of canopy base height exists; therefore, different observers will estimate different values in the same stand. Chain Unit of measure in land survey, equal to 66 feet (20 M) (80 chains equal 1 mile). Commonly used to report fire perimeters and other fireline distances, this unit is popular in fire management because of its convenience in calculating acreage (e.g., 10 square chains equal one acre). Fire Hazard and Fire Risk23 Fire hazard is defined as fire behavior potential, which has implications for resource damage as well as suppression capability. Fire risk is the likelihood of a fire occurring based on wildfire history. Fire Interval [Fire-free interval, Fire-return interval] The amount of time between successive fire events in a given stand or landscape. Fireline Intensity24 Heat energy release per unit time from a one-foot (one-meter) wide section of the fuel bed extending from the front to the rear of the flaming zone. Fireline intensity is a function of rate of spread and heat per unit area, and is directly related to flame length. Fireline intensity and the flame length are related to the heat felt by a person standing next to the flames. Fire Resilient25 The ability of a vegetation type, ecosystem, or community to respond positively to or recover quickly from the effects of a wildfire burning within, across or adjacent to them. 21 Unless otherwise noted, definitions are from www.nwcg.gov/pms/pubs/glossary/index.htm 22 http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm accessed on 4/20/2011 23 Shasta-Trinity National Forest Integrated Vegetation Management Strategy (IVMS) 2010 24 BEHAVEPlus 5.0.3 25 The CAL FIRE 2010 Strategic Fire Plan

http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm



Fuel Model The set of fuelbed inputs needed by a fire model (Scott and Burgan 2005). Ladder Fuel Fuel that provides vertical continuity between surface fuel and canopy fuel strata, increasing the likelihood that fire will carry from surface fuel into the crowns of shrubs and trees (NWCG 2005). Prescribed Fire A wildland fire ignited by management actions under prescribed conditions to meet specific objectives. Residence Time The time, in seconds, required for the flaming front of a fire to pass a stationary point at the surface of the fuel. The total length of time that the flaming front of the fire occupies one point. Residual Combustion Stage The smoldering zone behind the zone of an advancing fire front. Resistance to Control The relative difficulty of constructing and holding a control line as affected by resistance to line construction and by fire behavior. Also called difficulty of control. Wildfire Hazard Classes26 The three wildfire hazard classes closely correlate with suppression capability as determined by flame length.

LOW: Flame lengths and fire intensity allow direct attack by hand crews or personnel directly without the aid of water or heavy equipment. Flame lengths are less than four feet.

MODERATE: Flame length and fire intensity require the use of water and/or heavy equipment in conjunction with hand crews. Fire suppression becomes more indirect or not immediate to the flaming edge. Flame lengths are four to eight feet.

HIGH: Fire behavior is becoming more erratic. Surface fires are starting to move into crowns. Spot fires are becoming more prevalent. Suppression efforts are all indirect and actions require looking at ridges or other dominant topographic features. Flame lengths are over eight feet.

26 From the 2011 Shasta-Trinity FMP – Appendix G; F. Wildfire Hazard Classes *The Shasta-Trinity NF FMP – uses the term “resistance to suppression efforts” and uses flame length and fire line intensity as analysis indicators of how close a firefighter may get to the flames in order to do suppression work.



APPENDIX B: BEHAVE PLUS RUNS 97TH Percentile Weather (Wildland Fire High Intensity Fuel Moisture and Weather Conditions)

BehavePlus 5.0.3 (Build 301) Blue Rock Road 97th Percentile WX Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 10:29:46 Input Worksheet

Inputs: SURFACE, MORTALITY Input Variables Units Input Value(s) Fuel Moisture

Fuel/Vegetation, Surface/Understory

1-h Moisture % 2

Fuel Model TL8, TL4, TL1,

10-h Moisture % 2.8

Fuel/Vegetation, Overstory

100-h Moisture % 5.7

Canopy Cover %

60

Live Herbaceous Moisture

%

Canopy Height ft

70

Live Woody Moisture

%

Crown Ratio fraction 0.3 Weather

Mortality Tree Species psemen

20-ft Wind Speed (upslope)

mi/h 7

D.B.H. in 20

Air Temperature oF 95

Terrain

Results

Slope

ROS Fireline Flame

(max) Intensity Length

% ch/h Btu/ft/s ft

TL8 (188) Long-Needle Litter

0 2.1 34 2.3

10 2.3 37 2.4

20 2.7 44 2.6

30 3.5 57 2.9

40 4.6 74 3.3

50 5.9 97 3.7

TL4 (184) Small Downed Logs

0 0.9 5 0.9

10 0.9 5 1

20 1.1 6 1.1



30 1.4 8 1.2

40 1.9 11 1.3

50 2.5 14 1.5

TL1 (181) Low Load Compact Conifer Litter

0 0.3 1 0.4

10 0.4 1 0.4

20 0.4 1 0.5

30 0.6 1 0.5

40 0.7 2 0.6

50 0.9 2 0.7

End

50th Percentile Weather (Prescribed Fire Low Intensity Fuel Moisture and Weather Conditions) BehavePlus 5.0.3 (Build 301) Blue Rock Road 50th Percentile WX Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 10:31:50

Input Worksheet

Inputs: SURFACE, MORTALITY Fuel Moisture Input Variables Units Input Value(s)

1-h Moisture % 3.5 Fuel/Vegetation, Surface/Understory

10-h Moisture % 4.6

Fuel Model TL8, TL4, TL1,

100-h Moisture % 8.9

Fuel/Vegetation, Overstory

Live Herbaceous Moisture

%

Canopy Cover % 60

Live Woody Moisture

%

Canopy Height ft 70 Weather

Crown Ratio fraction 0.3

20-ft Wind Speed (upslope)

mi/h 5

Mortality Tree Species psemen

Air Temperature oF 70

D.B.H. in 20 Terrain

Slope Steepness % 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50



Results

Slope

ROS Fireline Flame

(max) Intensity Length

% ch/h Btu/ft/s ft

TL8 (188) Long-Needle Litter 0 1.5 22 1.9

10 1.6 24 1.9 20 2 30 2.1 30 2.7 39 2.4 40 3.6 53 2.8 50 4.8 70 3.2

TL4 (184) Small Downed Logs 0 0.6 3 0.7

10 0.6 3 0.8 20 0.8 4 0.8 30 1 5 1 40 1.4 7 1.1 50 1.9 9 1.3

TL1 (181) Low Load Compact Conifer Litter 0 0.2 1 0.3

10 0.3 1 0.3 20 0.3 1 0.4 30 0.4 1 0.4 40 0.6 1 0.5 50 0.7 2 0.6

End



ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Current and Mean Reference Fire Return Interval Maps



Attachment B: Fire History



Attachment C: WUI



Attachment D: Fuel Models Map



BIBLIOGRAPHY Neil G. Sugihara, et al. Fire in California’s Ecosystems. University of California Press, 2006. Scott, Joe H. and Burgan, Robert E (2005). Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Models: A

Comprehensive Set for Use with Rothermel’s Surface Fire Spread Model. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-153: United States Department of Agriculture.

Daniel G. Neary et al. 2005. Wildland Fire in Ecosystems: Effects of Fire on Soil and Water.

General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-42-volume 4: United States Department of Agriculture.

Maxwell, Wayne G. and Ward, Franklin R. (1980). Photo Series for Quantifying Natural Forest

Residues in Common Vegetation Types of the Pacific Northwest. General Technical Report PNW-105: United States Department of Agriculture.

Blue Rock Roada123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · Live or dead conifers

Documents

Transcript of Blue Rock Roada123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · Live or dead conifers