1 / 25

Prescription Burning: the Recipe, and Post-fire Treatments

Prescription Burning: the Recipe, and Post-fire Treatments. ESPM 181 Spring 2006. Where we’re going:. The how & why’s of setting up a prescribed fire in California Why, and hows, of post-fire treatments Expected take-homes: Questions for your final No lab write up. Prescription fire.

loc
Download Presentation

Prescription Burning: the Recipe, and Post-fire Treatments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Prescription Burning: the Recipe, andPost-fire Treatments ESPM 181 Spring 2006

  2. Where we’re going: • The how & why’s of setting up a prescribed fire in California • Why, and hows, of post-fire treatments • Expected take-homes: • Questions for your final • No lab write up.

  3. Prescription fire • The Background (what the man behind the curtain has been doing)

  4. Reasoning • Effective fuels reduction in plantations of the Russell Experimental Station (RES) • Fire-Safe University Property • Those little 8000 sq ft ‘starter castles’ in the LaMorinda metropolitan area…staring at the Oakland fire scenario • Training • ESPM 181

  5. Land Management Descision • Center for Forestry (C4F) needed to acknowledge the need for management, after that: • Designate Forest officer for oversight • Designate IC – Site representative

  6. Permitting • In our case, controlled by: • BAAQMD: • Bay Area Air Quality Management District • Contra Costa County • Contra Costa Fire & Cooperating Fire districts, structure protection • 911: need to be informed of burn ops. • Agriculture Permit Division: Burn Permits • California Division of Forestry • Wildland Fire Unit Standby, Structure Protection • BAAQMD controlling agency variable: • Boils down to size, and what’s burning: • <10 acres • >10 acres • Native or Non-native vegetation

  7. BAAQMD • Regulates all burning; • Major limitation to all operations in California • Regulations vary by air basin; San Joaquin Valley is strictest re: forest Rx fire (most Sierra Nevada forests, YNP, SNP all have to deal with these guys) • Smoke Management Plan • Requires Environmental Impact Statement • Required on: • Any burn from May 1 to October 31 • Any burn over 10 acres • Any burn in native vegetation, including WFU

  8. BAAQMD: • November 1 to April 30: • Burning in less than 10 acres of non-native vegetation can occur without Smoke Plan • RES: • Regulation 5 exemptions used: • < 10 acres • Plantation, non-native vegetation suite • Training

  9. RES Calendar: • Convincing C4F that prescribed fires can be included in management: May to December 2005 • Actual decision to proceed with burn permitting: December 2005 • Contact (Everett) of regulating agencies: January 2006 • Fuels Vegetation Workup start • Final C4F ‘nod’ for equipment, manning: February 2006 • ICS • Equipment Committal • Manning Committal • Fuels (181) • March 2006: • Felling • Line construction • Equipment relocation (PPE, hose, handtools)

  10. What really happens: • March 2006: record month with most days with measurable precipitation in East Bay records (not total amount record, though) • April 2006: • -Standby • Rotate to stand down if conditions don’t improve by 15 April • Gear up for November application: • Add 2-3 acres in the target • Not too unusual: • PW03: Western Yosemite National Park burns: • Planned since mid-1990s • Permitted 1998, pending limits by SJAQMD • Partially ignited 2001, 2003, shut down by SJAQMD • Partially ignited 2005, seasonal shutdown

  11. Why mitigate post fire effects? • Waterman Canyon, Christmas Eve 2003 • Two months after ‘Old’ Fire, October 2003 • 34 Years, 1 month after Panorama Fire • Ryegrassed by CDF & USFS • Waterman Canyon has a slide, in one form or another, within a year of every fire since 1932 • Other Hillslope scenarios very similar throughout the western US

  12. Most of southern California (and huge portions of Bay Area flatlands) are built on alluvium from surrounding hills • Large % derived during post-fire storm events Harrison Canyon Catchment Basin (1983) & Spring Creek Debris Flow (1999). Both San Bernardino County, both are from USGS SCAMP director Doug Morton.

  13. Sources • Robichaud, Beyers & Neary, 2000. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Postfire Rehabilitation Techniques. RMRS-GTR-63 • Web Reading # 6 • Biscuit Fire, 2002: • http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/rogue-siskiyou/biscuit-fire/index.shtml

  14. B.A.E.R.:Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation • Formal Authority: 1974 • Originally for • 1) Threat Reduction, • 2) Soil & Water Loss, • 3) Water Control & • 4) Water Quality • Reassessed 1998: • Addition assessment for needs concerning: • Evaluation of Run-off control • Minimization of Downstream post-fire effects • Assess impacts on ecosystems’s ability to recovery • Compare Hillslope v. Channel mitigation effects • Assess economic, social and environmental costs & benefits (including no treatment) • Treatment Transfer: How can one successful treatment be employed elswhere • Identification of information gaps

  15. Process: • BAER initiates during Type 1 project fire events • Requested by Type 1 Overhead • Own Authority • On request by Area-of-concern managers (usually Forest level) • Team is in-place well before ‘containment & control’; begins immediately on soil & water rehabilitation, usually during suppression activities

  16. Staff • Team Leader (just like a Type 1 Incident Commander) • Disciplines: • Hydrology • Soils • Timber Management • Wildlife • Engineering • Range Management • Archaeology • Fire Management • Geology

  17. BAER • Primary Objectives: • Health & Human Safety • Watershed Stabilization • Both fire-affected area & downstream • Should address both alluvial & colluvial mass movement • Secondary ‘Big’ question: • Is there any treatment that could be performed which will significantly increase the ecosytem recovery?

  18. BAER • Limited to rehab work and ‘significant improvement over natural recovery’ • For instance: • Cannot build new facilities with BAER $ (but you can repair old ones) • Cannot alter long-term silvicultural goals (but can provide for some seeding, if ‘significant improvement’ is indicated) • Can’t set up tasked, event-specific research

  19. BAER • GTR-63 provides: • Fire effects review • How to acquire & analyze data • How to describe results of assessment & monitoring • Discusses BAER assessments & treatment effectiveness • Makes conclusions regarding BAER process • Makes recommendations about BAER process

  20. Hillslope Treatments (“First line of defense”): • Broadcast seeding, including grasses • Exotics: cheap, fast growth • Natives: Expensive (20x to 50x), slow growth • Most BAER treatments are shying away from inexpensive seeding, but Private, County & State agencies (except CDF) not. • Mulching • Contour trenching • Contour felling • Fencing & contour check-dams • Lopping & scattering of slash • Hay, straw wattles, Jute meshing, etc

  21. Channel Treatments • Within any ‘order’ stream • Check dams: • Logs • Hay Bales • Rock Dams, Rock Cages, Weirs • Tend to fill w/ debris

  22. Road Treatments • Target: increase the water and sediment ‘capabilities’ of roads & road structures • Culverts • Outsloping • Overflows • Crossings • Bridges

  23. BAER • Biscuit Fire, 2002: • Provides a real-life example of the BAER process • Records of Decision • Final E.I.S.’s: • Environmental Impact Statements • The alternatives, including the ‘no treatment’ alternative

  24. Willow Fire (SBNF 1999) • BAER Team identified, addressed: • Slope erosion problems • Meadows • Streams With Chubb, Trout populations • North Face (Steep Terrain) Check Dams & Trenching • Some Reseeding • Atriplex & Artemesia populations • NO GRASSES (Even the haybales were suspect…T&E species problems)

  25. Hmmmm: Interesting questions: • Be able to briefly discuss the Fire Impacts that GTR-63 is concerned with. • What are the three primary types of erosion control treatment categories? • Why isn’t broadcast seeding such a good idea anymore, and what vegetation community is most affected by this treatment? • Are ‘no treatment’ costs more or less than specific treatment alternatives? Why or why not?

More Related