HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a...

11
HFQLG Project Evaluation Form Project Name: The Rich Fire and the Effectiveness of the Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ Project Project Type: Kingsbury-Rush Defensible Fuel Profile Zone (DFPZ) implemented biomass removal, chainsaw thinning with follow-up pile burning, underburning and mastication service contracts. Forest: Plumas Ranger District: Mt Hough Field Trip Date: June 1, 2009 Attendance : 16 people Agency - Dan Martynn, Natural Resources Conservation Service Public – Sharon Taschenberg, Rich Gulch landowner; Bill Davies, local landowner; Jim Moffat, Canyon Dam land owner; George Terhune, Quincy Library Group; Mike Yost, Quincy Library Group; Frank Stewart, Quincy Library Group and Counties Forester. USFS- Mike Donald, District Ranger; Rich Bednarski, Ecosystem Manager; Ryan Bauer, District Fuels Officer; Dave Wood, HFQLG Team Leader; Colin Dillingham, HFQLG Monitoring Team Leader; John Yembu, HFQLG GIS Volunteer; Alex Yiu, Assistant District Silviculturist; Joe Smailes, Supervisory Forester; Jose Reynoso, Fuels Technician. Type of treatment and acres: The Kingsbury-Rush Defensible Fuel Profile Zone treated a total of 3838 acres including: 1736 acres of chainsaw thin and burn piles; 1657 acres of biomass removal; 317 acres of mastication and 128 acres of underburn only. DFPZ construction involved follow-up treatments to an area that had previously been commercially thinned to approximately 30-40% canopy cover in the late 1990’s. Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ activities thinned the remaining stand from below by retaining the largest trees. The smaller material (limbs, tops, small diameter understory trees) was removed as biomass wood product (chips). Wood chips were delivered to cogeneration plant to create electricity. Discussions: Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the treatments would tell a compelling story that the treatments are working to help fight fires. There were questions about salvaging the fire-killed timber. The district indicated that they were planning on salvaging 3.5 million board feet of the approximately 70 million board feet killed in the fire. They planned to harvest in the flattest terrain to prevent impacts to soils and to provide for a viable timber sale. Much of the steeper ground would require helicopter harvest methods and the timber is not high enough quality to justify a helicopter sale. Successes and Shortcomings: A safe and effective Defensible Fuel Profile Zone was constructed with this project. The fuel break slowed the fire so much that fire fighters were able to concentrate efforts on higher priority areas closer to communities and deferred treatment at the head of the fire until structure protection activities were complete. Consider treating both sides of the roads when possible to allow fire fighters a safe escape route in the event of a flare-up. Treating only one side of the road limits the usefulness of a DFPZ. The Kingsbury Rush DFPZ treated both sides of the roads in some areas, but only one side of the road in others. There were some issues with ability to treat steeper slopes.

Transcript of HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a...

Page 1: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

HFQLG Project Evaluation Form

Project Name: The Rich Fire and the Effectiveness of the Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ Project Project Type: Kingsbury-Rush Defensible Fuel Profile Zone (DFPZ) implemented biomass removal, chainsaw thinning with follow-up pile burning, underburning and mastication service contracts.

Forest: Plumas Ranger District: Mt Hough Field Trip Date: June 1, 2009 Attendance: 16 people Agency- Dan Martynn, Natural Resources Conservation Service Public – Sharon Taschenberg, Rich Gulch landowner; Bill Davies, local landowner; Jim Moffat, Canyon Dam land owner; George Terhune, Quincy Library Group; Mike Yost, Quincy Library Group; Frank Stewart, Quincy Library Group and Counties Forester. USFS- Mike Donald, District Ranger; Rich Bednarski, Ecosystem Manager; Ryan Bauer, District Fuels Officer; Dave Wood, HFQLG Team Leader; Colin Dillingham, HFQLG Monitoring Team Leader; John Yembu, HFQLG GIS Volunteer; Alex Yiu, Assistant District Silviculturist; Joe Smailes, Supervisory Forester; Jose Reynoso, Fuels Technician. Type of treatment and acres: The Kingsbury-Rush Defensible Fuel Profile Zone treated a total of 3838 acres including: 1736 acres of chainsaw thin and burn piles; 1657 acres of biomass removal; 317 acres of mastication and 128 acres of underburn only. DFPZ construction involved follow-up treatments to an area that had previously been commercially thinned to approximately 30-40% canopy cover in the late 1990’s. Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ activities thinned the remaining stand from below by retaining the largest trees. The smaller material (limbs, tops, small diameter understory trees) was removed as biomass wood product (chips). Wood chips were delivered to cogeneration plant to create electricity. Discussions: Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the treatments would tell a compelling story that the treatments are working to help fight fires. There were questions about salvaging the fire-killed timber. The district indicated that they were planning on salvaging 3.5 million board feet of the approximately 70 million board feet killed in the fire. They planned to harvest in the flattest terrain to prevent impacts to soils and to provide for a viable timber sale. Much of the steeper ground would require helicopter harvest methods and the timber is not high enough quality to justify a helicopter sale. Successes and Shortcomings: A safe and effective Defensible Fuel Profile Zone was constructed with this project. The fuel break slowed the fire so much that fire fighters were able to concentrate efforts on higher priority areas closer to communities and deferred treatment at the head of the fire until structure protection activities were complete. Consider treating both sides of the roads when possible to allow fire fighters a safe escape route in the event of a flare-up. Treating only one side of the road limits the usefulness of a DFPZ. The Kingsbury Rush DFPZ treated both sides of the roads in some areas, but only one side of the road in others. There were some issues with ability to treat steeper slopes.

Page 2: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

Resource Area

Attribute Objective Source of Objective

Objectives Met?

Comments

Silviculture Stand Health Increase vigor of residual stand

EA

Yes

Reduced competition in residual stand helps tree vigor and ability to fight off insects and disease and survive wildfire

events.

Fuels DFPZ Create a safe and effective DFPZ

HFQLG Appendix J

Yes

Project very effective, caused crown fire to drop to ground and prevented fire from expanding to Lake

Almanor and community of Seneca

Fuels Rate of Spread

Reduce rate of fire spread to aid fire suppression

HFQLG Appendix J

Yes

Surface fire two orders of magnitude slower

than crown fire running into DFPZ.

Fuels Mastication Rearrange fuels to reduce fuel ladder

HFQLG Appendix J

Yes

Mastication reduced flame length and caused crown fire to drop to

ground.

Wildlife Spotted Owl Prevent loss of Spotted Owl

Activity Centers EA

Yes

Although Rich Gulch PAC was lost before fire hit DFPZ, the PAC to

NW was saved.

Hydrology Sediment Delivery

Do not exceed threshold of concern

Plumas Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP)

Fire caused watershed to exceed threshold of concern

Number of acres burned in a small watershed pushed the affected watersheds over

threshold of concern.

Soils Soil

displacement Prevent excessive soil displacement

Plumas LRMP Yes

Mastication and other heavy equipment was excluded from slopes greater than 35%

Page 3: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

Follow up actions: Connect DFPZ to other areas. Work with Fire Safe Council to develop community protection maps for this and other areas. Link Keddie project to East of Kingsbury-Rush. Add units along 26N22 to link Belden Project with Kingsbury Rush DFPZ. Notes prepared by: /s/ Colin Dillingham Date: 1 June 2009 Monitoring Team Leader, HFQLG Implementation Team District Ranger: _/s/ Michael Donald__________ Date: 12 June 2009 Mt Hough District Ranger

Page 4: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

Appendix 1. Rich Fire Fuel Treatment Effectiveness Report handed out during project field trip. This appendix

includes photographs of DFPZ treatment.

January 2009

Rich Wildfire Fuel Treatment Effectiveness

Location Information

Region: 05 Forest: Plumas District: Mount Hough

Wildfire Information (consistent with 5100-29)

Fire Number: CA-PNF-000784 Fire Name: Rich Fire

Date of fire start mm/dd/yr: 07/29/2008 Final fire size (ac): 6,112

Date when fire entered treatment (if different from start date): 07/30/2008

Treated Area Burned: 342 Acres Date Fire Contained: 08/09/2008

Fuel Treatment Information:

Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ (Defense Fuel Profile Zone) was approved in June 2001 under the HFQLG Framework as amended by the January 2001 ROD. There were 5 prescriptions in the DFPZ boundary, all were service contracts. No timber sales were used to implement this project.

Kingsbury Rush DFPZ Treatment Prescriptions and Acres

Total Size

Hand thin, burn

piles and underburn

Machine harvest and underburn

Mechanical thin,

masticate, no

underburn

Mechanical thin, masticate, and underburn

Underburn only

3838 acres 1736 acres 1657 acres 272 acres 45 acres 128 acres

Additional Information Narrative: The Rich fire was a human caused fire that started at the bottom of the Feather River Canyon about 1500 on July 29, 2008. The fire was first managed by the local initial attack resources, next by the Type II Incident Management Team (IMT) working other fires in the area, and finally by a Type I IMT ordered by the Plumas National Forest. Outside the fuel treatment area the fire intensity was moderate with high scorch heights and significant tree mortality. Inside the treatment area, the fire intensity was low with low scorch heights and low tree mortality. The fire inside this treated area burned with a low spread rate due to a lack of ladder and ground fuel which had been removed by the earlier fuel treatments. One of the Division Supervisors from the Type 1 IMT reported that the fire column was reduced significantly and the spread rates slowed down when the fire hit the ridge (fuelbreak).

Page 5: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

This person noted that any and all direct suppression efforts became successful in the area of the fuelbreak. Before the fire hit this area, only indirect methods at the head of the fire were successful. The fuelbreak slowed the fire so much that incident resources were able to concentrate the suppression effort on higher priority areas closer to communities and deferred suppression efforts at the head of the fire and the fuelbreak. The ridge top fuel break, where the Rich Fire entered the Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ, had been commercially thinned, grapple piled, and burned in the late 1990s prior to Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group (HFQLG) legislation. At that time the thinning resulted in canopy closure of approximately 30%. The area was further treated as a HFQLG DFPZ with mastication, hand piling and burning completed with HFQLG funding in 2003 - 2005. The combination of treatments aided in the suppression effort and certainly allowed for the lessened tree mortality. There are continuing debates as to the appropriate canopy reduction to reduce fire behavior; however the 30% canopy cover in this study was shown to have a successful effect in decreasing the fire behavior. The Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ was used to help contain the Rich Fire. Three hundred forty two acres of the DFPZ burned in the Rich Fire. Overall, the intensity of the fire was lower in the DFPZ and preliminary reconnaissance indicates greater tree survival in the treated versus untreated area. Because of the fire’s proximity to communities, the fire was given a high priority for allocation of suppression resources. This aided in the positive fire suppression outcome. In addition, the ridge top location of the fuel break and gentler terrain beyond also aided in this outcome. However, a fire that was expected to burn long into the summer, costing additional money, tying up valuable fire fighting resources and damaging natural resources in an area that had already seen tremendous fire activity, quickly ran out of steam when it hit the DFPZ. Incident resources were able to suppress the fire before it could get into other valuable communities and watersheds.

Conditions when fire entered treatment

Date: July 30 @ 1500 – Quincy/ RAWS

ERC (value and percentile): ERC 82 87th Percentile

Windspeed and direction: SE 4-6 MPH

Temperature: 89 RH: 15

Fuel Moistures

1 hr: 3 10 hr: 5 100 hr: 9 1000 hr: 10

Live Fuel Moisture: 100

Report Completed By: John Holcomb email: [email protected] Phone: 503-667-7960

Page 6: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

Photo History

Photos 1 (untreated) and 2 (treated): Treated Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ and untreated landscape near the Rich Fire. Note the large amount of aerial fuels in the untreated stand.

Page 7: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

Photo 3: High severity fire effects in the Rich Fire, down slope from the Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ.

Photo 4: Aerial view of Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ after fire passage.

Page 8: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

Photos 5 and 6: Note the high severity in the untreated foreground and low severity in the treated ridgeline.

Page 9: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

Photo 7: Active fire in DFPZ. Photo 8: Wildfire backing through DFPZ Note the low flame lengths.

Photo 9: Smoldering fire with minimal severity fire effects in DFPZ.

Page 10: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

Photo 10: After fire passage, note the mosaic underburn of the Kingsbury Rush DFPZ.

Photo 11: Area in the Kingsbury-Rush DFPZ where the Rich Fire burned to a road and held.

Page 11: HFQLG Project Evaluation Form · Frank Stewart suggested that the Forest Service put together a compilation of all the HFQLG treatments that have been impacted by fires. All of the

Figure 1: Map - Rich Fire Perimeter HFQLG Treatments, Accomplished and Proposed