ID Number 2007-22
Fuels Treatment Projects Application
NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE AND WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE PROJECTS
Applicant
Applicant/Organization:
State of Oregon Department of Forestry/SWO/Grants Pass
Type of Applicant:
A (State)
Email:
msmith@odf.state.or.us
Phone:
503-945-7341
FAX:
503-945-7416
Please Call Ahead for FAX:
Off
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
2600 State Street Salem, OR 97310
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Ms. MaryHelen Smith, Grant Coordinator/Teresa Vonn, Field Coordinator
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Oregon Department of Forestry/SWO District/Grants Pass Unit
Email:
msmith@odf.state.or.us/tvonn@odf.state.or.us
Phone:
503-945-7341
FAX:
503-945-7416
Please Call Ahead for FAX:
Off
Project Information
Project Title:
Quartz Crow Community Fuels Reduction Project
Project Location:
Josephine County
County:
Josephine
Congressional District:
4
Latitude:
42.392483
Longitude:
123.51386
State the desired outcome in relation to NFP Goals and the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). Project Objectives:
This project exists in a high priority Strategic Planning Unit and has been proposed to the Josephine Fuels Committee by the neighborhood who is keenly
interested in fuels reduction. There are over 150 homes and 5 miles of roads that are currently in a highly hazardous condition and poorly accessible due to
dense fuels. Josephine County Interagency Fire Plan risk assessment rated this as a high priority project area. The project would provide cost-share
incentives and technical assistance to landowners to create defensible space around homesites and encourage roadside fuel reduction to provide for fire
fighter safety in the event of a wildland fire. The project lies interspersed with BLM lots. BLM has completed over 1,000 acres of fuels reduction treatment
in the vicinity, Shiny Queen and Berlin Mummer project areas, in order to cumulatively treat a significant portion of the landscape.
Name of CWPP:
Josephine County Interagency Fire Plan
Name of Communit(y/ies) at Risk:
Merlin
Proposed Project Start Date:
05/01/2007
Proposed Project End Date:
12/31/2009
Federal Funding Request:
$200,000.00
Total Project Cost:
$361,900.00
Are you submitting multiple projects?
Yes
If YES indicate the relationship of the projects to one another: A (Stand Alone)
If YES, please list the titles of projects by priority and briefly explain their relationship.
The State of Oregon will submit multiple applications.
Name of Federal, State or Tribal contact with whom you coordinated this
proposal:
Organization/Jurisdiction:
1) Tim Gonzales
Bureau Of Land Management-Grant Pass Interagency
Phone
541-471-6643
2) Teresa Vonn
Phone
Oregon Department of Forestry
541-664-3328
3) Joe Hyatt
Phone
Email tim_gonzales@blm.gov
Email tvonn@odf.state.or.us
Rural Metro Fire Service
541-218-7587
Email Joeh@rmfire-or.com
Project Planning Information
Name of Local Coordinating Group:
Jackson, Josephine Local Coordinating Group
For this project, explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning, through a "Local Coordination Group." If you have not worked with a
local coordination group, why not?
We are active participants with the JJLCG and this project has been coordinated through them.
List federal lands that are adjacent to the project and proximity.
1,000 acres of BLM within 1 mile of the project have been treated
A) Is there a current hazardous fuels treatment or one that is planned in the next three years on federal land that is adjacent to this project?
Yes
B) Specifically is this project adjacent to a current prescribed burn project or one that is planned in the next three years on Forest Service lands?
Yes
Please indicate planned treatments and associated acres:
Treatment
Thinning
Acres
322
Treatment
Acres
Treatment
Hand Pile Burn
Acres
322
Treatment
Acres
Treatment
Acres
0
If you have a treatment type other than standard types above:
Acres
0
Treatment
Project Evaluation Criteria
Applications for funding must include narrative responses that address the following criteria. Be sure you address every one briefly, yet thoroughly.
1. Reducing Hazardous Fuels (40 points)
A. Describe the community infrastructure that will be protected. This should include how this project implements all or part of the CWPP strategy. (15
points)
Response:
The community includes over 150 homes along 2 miles of East Crow Road and 3 miles of Crow Road. The area hosts
the site of a historic stage line. Access into the homes is limited largely by poor road conditions and dense fuels on
the roadside. In addition to dwellings and residential out buildings, infrastructure protected will be primarily power
line and road systems that will be protected from fire and fire-related erosions. At- high risk residences and access
routes are the primary type of infrastructure targeted for protection.
B. Explain how the proposal reduces fire behavior in high hazard areas by describing the fuels to be disposed or removed, the techniques and timing of the
treatments, and the treatment location relative to the values to be protected. (15 points)
Response:
Fuels to be treated include manzanita, wedge-leaf ceanothus, madrone, tan oak, fir, and pine; as well as treatment of
non-native, flammable vegetation such as scotch broom. Ladder and hazardous fuel continuity will be treated through
the processes of removal and reduction. Fuel reduction will be accomplished on residential defensible space, driveway
access improvement, and landscape by thinning to reduce the fuel load. Hand treatment, including thinning and
pruning to remove brush, ladder fuels, and standing dead trees, or mechanical treatment will occur fall through spring.
C. Explain how the project is designed to reduce smoke production impacts that affect public health. (10 points)
Response:
The project is designed to minimize smoke production and impacts to public health by educating the landowner on air
quality regulations and guidelines. Burning when the ventilation index is over 400 in the Rogue Valley air shed allows
smoke to be carried aloft minimizing impacts to public health. Encouraging landowners to buy chippers though the
Department of Environmental Quality tax credit program or renting chippers will reduce the amount of material
burned; as will making landowners aware of contractors interested in utilizing small diameter material for furniture
and building materials.
2. Increasing Local Capacity (20 points)
A. How would the implementation of the proposed project improve or lead to the improvement of the local economy in terms of jobs and sustainable
economic activity assuming that these grant funds would be used as "seed monies" for future projects. i.e. How many community supported jobs would be
created and for how long would they expect to last? (10 points)
Response:
There are numerous independent contractors in the area that are currently actively seeking fuels reduction work. The
fuel reduction industry in Southern Oregon has developed into a competitive venue for those willing to invest in
equipment to mulch or shred smaller diameter brush, hard and softwoods up to 6-8” DBH. Forest Officers will be
retained (local employment)in the winter to meet with landowners to provide education and award cost-share approval
and finalize the treatment when completed.
B. Will biomass that is produced by the project be utilized; if so, in what manner and how much? (10 points)
Response:
Biomass utilization has historically been in the form of firewood and pole production. Landowners are using the
firewood for heating fuel or selling or using the product for barter. Poles are being used for furniture, fencing and
building materials primarily by landowners. However, some pole companies will perform the fuel reduction if the
number and quality of poles is of particular abundance and quality. ODF maintains a list of pole companies/ buyers
available for landowners.
3. Demonstrating Community and Intergovernmental Collaboration (20 Points)
A. Describe how this project has been collaborated and coordinated with adjacent landowners, local/state/Tribal/federal agencies, and community groups
such as neighborhood associations. (10 points)
Response:
The project was envisioned by community members and refined by participants on the JCIFP Fuels Reduction
Committee, composed of representatives from the Forest Service, BLM, ODF, Josephine County Forestry, 5 fire dept
service areas, and 6 community organizations. This has ensured a comprehensive analysis of existing and proposed
projects in the county. One high risk criterion is that they be contiguous to past, current, or planned fuels reduction
activities on federal lands.
B. Describe the communities/partners contributions to this project such as: cash or in-kind contributions, cost share agreements, equipment, or labor
(including volunteer work). (10 points)
Response:
Partners in this project include:JCIFP Fuels Reduction Committee, Rural Metro Fire Service, BLM and community
members. Landowner participation and interest exceeds the demand for the current funding for previous grants. This
grant would continue an already successful landowner cost-share program. BLM is a partner providing the location of
completed and proposed projects. The Rural Metro proposes to contribute $500 for outreach and education.
4. Managing Cost Efficiency (20 points)
Discuss the process you used to arrive at your cost structure for the main Project Budget areas such as personnel, equipment, supplies and other (i.e.
overhead). In your response please justify: cost per acre, purchase of equipment, percent of overhead, percent of partner or matching funds, and portion of
administration cost. (20 points)
Response:
ODF has a high success rate in implementing a rebate style cost-share with landowner and have treated 3000 homes in
the last 6 years. Funding for technical assistance is essential to ensure that residents participating in the cost-share
program understand the principles behind fuels reduction and can maintain the fuels reduction work for many years to
come, as much as $63,000 is necessary to maintain 2 forest officers for seven months. Forest Officers will be retained
in the winter to meet with landowners to provide education and award cost-share approval and finalize the treatment
when completed so that payment can be made. These forest officers work in the same areas during fire season where
they administer the grant programs and therefore provide continuity to the landowner in service and commitment.
These FOs may be fighting fire on the land that is proposed for cost-share treatment. Ensuring that a quality job is
attained not only benefits the landowner but the firefighter as well. ODF cost-shares will be a $400 per acre
landowner’s rebate. This cost-share may cover 1/4to 1/2 of the actual cost of treatment resulting in considerable
landowner commitment both for treatment and maintenance. BLM will provide $500 in technical assistance in fire
planning. Rural Metro will provide $500 in Education and Outreach. Administrative costs include 3% of the grant for
overhead and grant administration.
Project Work Form
Tasks
On-site resident assistance - development of
individual hazard reduction plans
Time Frame
Spring, 2007
Responsible Party
Oregon Department of Forestry
Community planning meetings
Ongoing
Oregon Department of Forestry, Rural Metro Fire
Service, Landowners, and BLM
Monitoring / Evaluation
Ongoing
Oregon Department of Forestry, Rural Metro Fire
Service, and BLM
Promote expansion of affected areas &
recruiting additional resident participants
Ongoing
Community Fire Planning Leaders,
Landowners/Oregon Department of Forestry, Rural
Metro Fire Service
Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Applicant
BLM
Rural Metro
Landowner
Partner 1
Partner 2
Partner 3
Total
Personnel
2-ODF Forest Officers
for 7 months
Subtotal
$40,290.00
$0.00
$500.00
$500.00
$0.00
$41,290.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$40,290.00
$0.00
$500.00
$500.00
$0.00
$41,290.00
$22,710.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$22,710.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$22,710.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$22,710.00
$2,100.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$2,100.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$2,100.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$2,100.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$128,900.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$160,900.00
$289,800.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$128,900.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$160,900.00
$289,800.00
$6,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$6,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$6,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$6,000.00
$200,000.00
$0.00
$500.00
$500.00
$160,900.00
$361,900.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Fringe Benefits
OPE
Subtotal
Travel
vehicle use
Subtotal
Equipment
Subtotal
Supplies
Subtotal
Contractual
Landowner Cost-shares
Subtotal
Other
Salem 3% Admin
Subtotal
Total Costs
Project (Program) Income 1
(using deductive alternative)
1 Program income is the gross revenue generated by a grant or cooperative agreement supported activity during the life of the grant. Program income can be
made by recipients from fees charged for conference or workshop attendance, from rental fees earned from renting out real property or equipment acquired
with grant or cooperative agreement funds, or from the sale of commodities or items developed under the grant or cooperative agreement. The use of Program
Income during the project period may require prior approval by the granting agency.