|
Fire Chronicle #30
|
Laura McCarthy, Forest Guild
|
Oct 21, 2005 09:11 PDT
|
FIRE CHRONICLE: Stories of the National Fire Plan
Number 30
October 21, 2005
FIRE SAFE COUNCILS’ PROLIFERATION IN CALIFORNIA CONTRIBUTES TO
COLLABORATIVE FIRE AND FUELS PLANNING
California’s’ fire prone landscapes have witnessed the proliferation of
more than brush and small trees recently. Adoption of the National Fire
Plan policies has encouraged local multi-stakeholder collaboration
around fire and fuels planning and action. In California, a staggering
network of over 130 local Fire Safe Councils has emerged, stimulating
community collaboration on fuel reduction, fire risk reduction, and
pre-fire planning throughout the state. In the process, these local
councils and the statewide umbrella organization, the California Fire
Safe Council, have channeled millions of federal, state, local and
private dollars to high risk communities resulting in substantial
progress on acres treated, community wildfire protection plans prepared,
and residents trained in fire safety practices.
As with all collaborative processes, individual councils operate with
varying degrees of success. No comprehensive study exists about the
effectiveness and sustainability of local councils and the jury is out
as to whether the California model of collaboration is useful for other
fire prone states. However, the sheer number of new community-based
collaborations and the commitment of thousands of individual volunteers
testify to the importance of understanding the origins and
implementation of the Fire Safe Council model in the Golden State.
History of Fire Safe Councils
The California Fire Safe Council was an idea that emerged in the mid
1990s from California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF)
through the development of the California Fire Plan. Among the key
tenets of the 1996 California Fire Plan are: (1) greater attention to
pre-fire planning and risk reduction; and (2) increased focus on
community involvement in fire planning and fire safety. The California
Fire Safe Council was charged with stimulating greater community
involvement and driving home the importance of pre-fire planning in
addressing threats to communities, property, and human lives. With the
National Fire Plan, an increase in available funding for community
action programs led to the rapid proliferation of Fire Safe Councils in
California. The individual councils have organized to implement much
needed fuel reduction projects on private land in high risk communities.
Current Status and Structure
The approximately 130 Fire Safe Councils in California presently serve
territories that range in size from an individual subdivisions to entire
counties. All councils are independent entities, tied with the state
Council only by name and common mission. Many councils are
unincorporated volunteer associations, some are affiliated with Resource
Conservation Districts, and others have taken the step to incorporate as
501(c)3 nonprofit organizations. Most are staffed exclusively by
volunteers; a handful are managed by professional staff.
While the councils collectively have been successful in attracting funds
for on-the ground projects, operating funds, for expenses such as staff
and office space, have been difficult to raise. As a result, most
councils rely heavily on volunteer labor. When councils are able to
attract funds, it generally comes in small doses from sources such as
county supervisors, local businesses, and in-kind contributions from a
variety of sources. At times, councils are able to draw overhead from
some publicly funded project grants, helping them to keep the lights on.
The state Council serves as a hub for information, educates the public
and policy makers, and has recently taken a larger role in advocating
for federal appropriations. Among its most important functions is to
streamline funding from the many federal and state sources through the
administration of a grants clearinghouse
(http://grants.firesafecouncil.org/). Through this clearinghouse, local
Fire Safe Councils are able to submit a single application and then be
given consideration for grants originating from multiple funding sources
including the US Forest Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land
Management, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and other agencies. The
clearinghouse recently began to distribute Proposition 40 funds, a
multipurpose state bond measure that includes just under $2 million per
year for hazardous fuel reduction and $350,000 per year for preparation
of Community Wildfire Protection Plans. Although the state Council
received core support from CDF in the early days, it no longer benefits
from state funding and instead relies heavily on contributions from the
insurance industry.
Accomplishments
No comprehensive monitoring has occurred to judge the overall
effectiveness of California Fire Safe Councils but two examples of the
activities of local councils illustrate the challenges and
accomplishments that are increasingly common throughout the state.
1) Orleans/Somes Bar Fire Safe Council
The towns of Orleans and Somes Bar are tucked away in the middle Klamath
River Valley along State Route 96 in California’s northwest corner.
Contrary to popular belief, many north coast forests are fire prone and
fire dependant. The cool, moist redwood forests of the immediate coastal
zone give way to mixed conifer and hardwood forests that harbor an
abundance of biological diversity and ecological complexity. As in many
California communities, local residents have memories of recent fires
deeply embedded in their psyche. Large fires in 1977 and 1987 fed on
forests subject to decades of fire suppression and choked with ground
and ladder fuels.
The local Fire Safe Council organized in 2001 to address immediate
threats and to capitalize on funding available through the National Fire
Plan. The Orleans/Somes Bar Council has benefited from the participation
of stakeholders with a tremendous knowledge base about forest and fire
ecology including members of the Karuk tribe which make up nearly half
of the local population and who have a deep history and abundant recent
experience in utilizing prescribed fire. From the beginning, this
Council distinguished itself by declaring as their goal the restoration
of a natural fire regime for their entire watershed. Community wildfire
safety, the highest order goal for most Fire Safe Councils, is currently
the number one priority of the Orleans/Somes Bar Council but the members
view this as a means towards and larger end -- the restoration of the
historic fire regime. Given that the vast majority of the land in the
watershed is in national forest, the Council has placed a priority on
coordinating closely with local Forest Service staff. The majority of
fuel reduction work and prescribed burning has occurred on private land
but the Council’s ambitions are greater. They are looking to the
surrounding national forest, seeking to encourage management on public
land that is compatible with their restoration vision.
Since its inception, the Orleans/Somes Bar Council has conducted fuel
reduction on nearly 100 properties and launched an incipient prescribed
burn program. According to Will Harling, a native of the watershed and
one of the Fire Safe Council’s coordinators, the main barrier to
increasing the number of acres treated is funding. The Council has been
successful in attracting grant funding during its first few years but
after an initial flush from National Fire plan, levels have leveled off
or dropped. The Council has responded by expediting the development of
their community wildfire protection plan in hopes that it will provide
the momentum needed to stimulate action on high priority projects.
2) Laguna Mountain Fire Safe Council
Laguna Mountain, located in the uplands of San Diego County, was spared
from the 2002 and 2003 fire storms that struck nearby areas, but local
residents and their partners in the Forest Service are not resting on
their laurels. Southern California forests have been slammed with a
combination of a multiyear drought, decades of fire suppression, and
overcrowded vegetation. These factors have resulted in large scale bug
kills, high volumes of standing dead trees, and critically severe fire
danger. The land on the mountain is primarily national forest, with a
few scattered parcels of private land. The Fire Safe Council has been
working closely with federal partners to implement a series of fuel
treatments and fire breaks. The Forest Service, utilizing new
categorical exclusions embedded in the Bush Administration’s Healthy
Forest Initiative, was able to expedite the NEPA process and conduct
numerous hazardous fuels reduction projects in the last two years.
Several years of intensive community outreach and education among local
residents, lead by the local Fire Safe Council and its hardy band of
volunteers, laid the groundwork for quick implement fuels reduction
projects. This highly effective Council has been lead for the last
several years by Pat Spinetta, a retired San Diego school psychologist
with no previous fire experience. But Spinetta understands human nature
and has been successful in stimulating commitment on the part of
community members to invest hundreds of hours of volunteer time. The key
to this wave of volunteerism, according to Spinetta, has been to engage
people in their areas of expertise and to freely delegate.
The Council’s first priority has been to help residents clear vegetation
and dead wood around homes and to cooperate with the Forest Service in
installing fire breaks around the populated core on top of the mountain.
Next steps include installing strategic water supply sources and
acquiring emergency power generators. At each steps of this process, the
Fire Safe Council has worked closely with Forest Service personnel and
both parties credit strong communication and shared values for the
success of their collaboration.
Are Fire Safe Councils Coming to a Town Near You?
The proliferation of fire safe councils has begun to creep outside of
California, raising the question of whether the model might be
appropriate for other western states. Nevada is the state that has most
aggressively adopted the fires safe model, with the recent creation of
the state-wide Nevada Fire Safe Council and several local councils.
Yet in many ways, the community collaboration evidenced through
California Fire Safe Councils is no different from that in other places.
The California Councils have not found a silver bullet for addressing
the barriers to community fire planning faced by folks in all western
states: inadequate funding; bureaucratic tangles; reticence to
collaborate on the part of agencies; difficulty in sustaining community
participation; and more.
The chief advantage of creating an association of Fire Safe Councils
would appear to be in the collective clout that might be exerted in
advocating for supportive policies and associated funding. The
California Fire Safe Council and its local partners have only begun to
flex these muscles by more actively reaching out to California’s
powerful congressional delegation and to the state legislature. Time
will tell if the Councils can achieve the kind of political influence
and on-the-ground effectiveness to create a truly fire safe state.
THIS ISSUE OF THE FIRE CHRONICLE was written by Eric Holst, Regional
Director for the Forest Guild in California and the Pacific Coast.
Funding to research the Fire Safe Councils was provided through a grant
from the Ford Foundation. The Forest Guild welcomes your comments,
stories, and observations about how the national fire plan is being
implemented (just send a reply message and it will go to the list
moderator). To subscribe to FIRE CHRONICLE go to
http://www.topica.com/lists/firechronicles/ or send an email message to
lau-@forestguild.org.
PAST ISSUES OF FIRE CHRONICLE can be downloaded from
http://www.forestguild.org/publiclands.html#fire
1.2002 Fire Plan Appropriations will Benefit from 2001 Experience
2.Wildland-Urban Interface Definition a Barrier to Accountability
3.Stewardship Blocks: Innovative Tool Brings Fire Plan Benefits into
Community
4.Youth Training Needed for Fire Plan to Benefit Local Workforce
5.Grants Get National Fire Plan Money into Communities
6.Collaborative Forest Restoration Program Creates New Solution to
Gridlock
7.Permits Regulate Prescribed Burning on Private Land
8.Accountability Remains a Key Issue for National Fire Plan
9.National Partnership Advances Landscape-Scale Forest Restoration
10.Poor Communities Most Threatened By Wildfire
11.A New Model to Fire-Proof Forest Homes
12.Consensus Over Fuel Reduction Treatment Dissolves
13.Wildland Urban Interface Definition Needed for Effective Policy
14.Funding Gaps Prevent Completion of Hazardous Fuel Reduction
15.Agencies Propose to Streamline Environmental Review for Hazardous
Fuel Reduction Treatments
16.National Fire Plan Provides Economic Opportunity for Rural Residents
17.Bark Beetles Heighten Wildfire Concerns
18.Small And Local Businesses Cite Barriers To Reaching National Fire
Plan Goals
19.Federal Report Fuels Public Debate Over Healthy Forests Act
20.New Report Evaluates Efficacy Of Fuel Reduction Treatments
21.Slow Progress to Set Treatment Priorities for National Fire Plan
22.Better Accounting of Fuels Reduction is Needed
23.Scientists Tell Agencies: “Salvage of Dead Pinyon Pine may be
Counterproductive”
24.Policy Evaluation: The State of the National Fire Plan
25.Agencies Implement Promising New Science-Based Accounting System
26.Report Describes Fuel Treatments For Southwestern Ponderosa Pine
Forests
27.Forest Restoration Theory Tested in the Field
28.Blue Ribbon Panel Offers Bold Strategies to Reduce Fire Suppression
Costs
29.Workers’ Compensation Insurance Accounts for Much of Fuel Reduction
Treatment Costs
|
|
 |
|
