Enclosure 3A - Project Summary Form
5
NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE AND WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE PROJECTS
Application for Fuels Treatment Projects
Applicant
Applicant/Organization: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission
Phone:
Type of Applicant: (enter appropriate letter in box)
A
509 665-3329
FAX:
A. State
B. County
C. Municipal
D. Township
E. Interstate
F. Intermunicipal
G. Special District
509 663-9754
Email:
Tom.ernsberger@parks.wa.gov
H. Independent School District
I. State-Controlled Institution of Higher Learning
J. Private University
K. Indian Tribe
L. Nonprofit Organization
M. Other (Specify) _______________________
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip): 2201 N. Duncan Dr. Wenatchee WA 98801
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title): Tom Ernsberger Manager, Resource Stewardship Eastern Region
Organization/Jurisdiction: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission
Phone: 509 665-3329
FAX: 509 663-9754
Email: tom.ernsberger@parks.wa.gov
Project Information
Project Title: Riverside State Park Wildland Urban Interface Fuel Reduction
Proposed Project Start Date: October 2004
Proposed Project End Date: June 2006
Federal Funding Request:
$183,260.00
Total Project Cost:
$253,810.00
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please prioritize, and explain if the projects are stand alone, sequential or other:
Yes, we have submitted two other applications priority #2 Squilchuck State Park, and priority #3 Fields’ Spring State Park.
Brief Project Summary: Who, What, Where, Desired Outcomes in relation to NFP Goals and Community Risk Assessment and
Mitigation Plans (This should summarize page 2).
Asses fuel loads and develop landscape based fuel reduction plans for Riverside State Park’s forested land in
eastern Washington. This project area is a high hazard community as designated by the U. S. Forest Service,
and has been formulated with public involvement and the cooperation of other governmental agencies.
Following the development of the fuel reduction plan, implementation of the plan will occur and an interpretive
program will be developed describing the projects and the need for such projects.
Project Location:
Riverside State Park
County:
Spokane
Federal Congressional District:
5
Name of Federal, State or Tribal contact with whom you coordinated this proposal:
Telephone number of Contact:
Chuck Johnson, Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources
509 684-7474
Enclosure 3A (Page 1 of 3) - Project Narrative Description
Applications for funding must include a narrative response that describes the proposal. Please do not submit responses longer than one page,
single space, 12-pitch font.
Describe project including, but not limited to:
 project location (e.g., Watershed,
Address
neighboring community)
these items
as applicable:  anticipated outcomes

project relationship to the community risk assessment and
mitigation plan
 amount or extent of actions (acres, number of homes, etc.)
 community partners and their
 project timeline and matching or contributed funds
role(s)
 proponent’s ability to complete project
For this project, explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning, through a “Local Coordination
Group.” If you haven’t worked with a local coordination group, why not?
We request funding to implement a fuel reduction project at Riverside State Park in Spokane
County.
Project Implementation: The park landscapes will be assessed for the structure and composition of their
stands, fuel loads, species of concern, priority habitats, and cultural resources. Up to 250 acres at Riverside
will receive a fuel reduction project (building on earlier initiatives).
Anticipated Outcomes: Development of a plan that through implementation, reduces the risk of wildfire by
breaking up horizontal and vertical fuel loading, improves overall forest health, educates the public to the
necessity of fuel load reduction projects, and provides a preliminary assessment of impacts to select wildlife.
Project measurements: Completion of the fuel reduction project on 250 acres. Status of each activity to be
reported by Tom Ernsberger, on a periodic basis to be determined by the grantor.
Interagency Partners: Fire-Safe Spokane, Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, local Fire Districts, and park neighbors.
Relationship to community fire plans: These projects will incorporate current plans developed for
neighboring properties. Riverside will use Fire-Safe Spokane’s plan that was developed in conjunction with
several local fire districts and the County.
Time frame and Income: The project will begin October 2004, with site assessments and permitting.
During the project implementation, staff will develop interpretative displays outlining the fuel reduction
projects.
Activities and Equipment: Vegetation and fauna sampling, data analysis and map / prescription
development (contracted field surveys, Park GPS/GIS). Implementation of pilot projects (fuel reduction and
interpretation) using contracted services. Permitting requirements and reporting.
Extent of the Projects: Riverside- 250-400 acres
Environmental, Cultural, Historical Resource Requirements: The following permitting will be done as
necessary: SEPA, NEPA, Section 7 consultation under ESA, Section 106 consultation under NHPA, State
Priority Habitats, State Natural Heritage, State Endangered Species, State FPA, County Forestry Ordinances,
City Ordinances, Washington State Shoreline Mgmt., and Air Quality.
Response:
Enclosure 3A (Page 2 of 3) - Project Evaluation Criteria
Applications for funding must include narrative responses that address the following three criteria. Be sure you address every one
briefly, yet thoroughly. Limit your responses to the area provided.
1. Reducing Hazardous Fuels (50 points)
A. Describe the community infrastructure that will be protected.
B. Explain how the proposal reduces fire behavior in high hazard areas by describing the fuels to be disposed or
removed, and the techniques and timing of the treatments.
C. How will the proposed treatments be maintained in future years?
D. How will you use multi-party monitoring to improve this and future projects?
Response:
A. Fire risk is reduced in high-hazard communities and natural landscapes by significantly reducing ladder
and ground fuels, thus helping to reduce the risk of wildfire impacting park facilities/visitors and
surrounding properties. In addition, wildlife habitat is improved / restored, along with park aesthetics.
B. Adjacent homes and forest lands are protected from catastrophic wildfire originating on parklands. Forest
health is improved through reduced competition between residual trees. Habitat for invasive insects is
diminished, reducing infestation threat to surrounding timberlands. Wildlife and flora diversity are likely to
increase as structural diversity is increased (gaps). Protects a recreational and aesthetic resource enjoyed by
over a million visitors annually resulting in a cash infusion to the parks’ local economies. This project will
be accomplished by DNR/ Correction crews and commercial companies as needed. Work will be by hand in
all possible locations utilizing mechanical means in areas of commercial value. Hand work will be
accomplished throughout the years except during extreme fire months. The mechanical work will be
accomplished only during winter months to minimize ground impacts.
C. Each of the treated areas will be maintained through mechanical processes with a potential for prescribed
fires in select locations. To extent possible, felled materials will be sold to support silvicultural activities.
D. The project located in Spokane County will incorporate components of plans developed by local Fire
Districts and adopted by Fire-Safe Spokane. Spokane County has implemented Fire-Safe Spokane (a
program that adopts Firewise ideas). With their assistance, park staff will monitor the results and evaluate
them against this standard.
Enclosure 3A (Page 3 of 3) - Project Evaluation Criteria
2.
Increasing Local Capacity (25 points)
A. How would the proposal improve or lead to the improvement of the local economy in terms of jobs and
sustainable economic activity?
B. How many jobs are expected to be created or retained and for how long? (Please distinguish between
essentially year-round and seasonal jobs).
C. What tools and skills will be gained or utilized as a result of this project?
D. Will biomass be utilized; if so, in what manner and how much?
Response:
A. Bids will be solicited from local natural resource consultants for the assessment of fuel loads and possible
impacts of a fuel reduction program on sensitive species and cultural sites. Consultants will also be asked to
develop prescriptions and plans in conjunction with park staff. Timber contractors will be sought to
implement fuel reduction pilots, with efforts to sell harvested materials. An estimate of job creation / support
is unknown at this time, given limited knowledge of the natural resource condition.
B. It is anticipated that this project will create 10-20 seasonal jobs.
C. Projects will serve as a model in the agency for proactive fuels reduction (this work represents a new
approach to managing state parks forest lands). Interpretive displays will describe how the project benefits
public safety, forest health and long term forest stewardship. Public education is envisioned to translate into
the public sector undertaking similar projects on lands adjacent to the parks.
D. Merchantable logs will be milled for park structures or sold to local vendors. Small diameter materials
will be chipped for commercial and park uses, with some chips scattered on the forest floor or trails to
improve soil surface conditions
3.
Demonstrating Community and Intergovernmental Collaboration (25 Points)
A. How will this project implement a community risk assessment and mitigation plan? Include name of plan, date
it was prepared, and local contact to get a copy of the plan if requested.
B. How has this treatment been coordinated with adjacent landowners and local/State/Tribal/Federal agencies?
C. Identify the cooperators/partners involved in implementation of this project.
D. Describe the extent of current local support for the project, including any cost-sharing agreements.
Response: A. DNR is involved in landscape scale fuel reduction / forest health projects in eastern Washington. State Parks and
DNR are communicating to assure that our project mesh seamlessly with one another’s projects (where applicable) in an effort to
create a unified regional fuel reduction strategy. We have also partnered with Fire Safe Spokane and are attempting to adopt and/
or augment their efforts in the area.
B. . Historically the public has been involved through public management planning meetings at Riverside State Park.
Opportunities will be developed for the public to comment on the plans and to assess the pilot projects upon completion (via
meetings, newspapers, websites, and / or notices posted in the parks)
C. State Parks has formed alliances with local forest experts in both the public and private sector, in an effort to gain insights into
forest health issues on our properties. Several parks have been toured and conceptual fuel reduction prescriptions discussed. These
meetings have provided the impetus for this proposal, and a desire to affect fuel reduction / forest health improvement activities in
our parks (especially along the urban-park interface). Select partners in this effort include:
- - WA Dept. of Natural Resources: Penny Speaks (Assistant Division Manager overseeing Natural Areas); Rex Crawford
(Heritage Ecologist); Guy Gifford (Forest Harvesting); John Stuchal (Inmate Crew Supervisor)
- - WA Fish and Wildlife: Howard Furgeson, (Biologist).
- - Colville and Spokane Nations (Historical use of property and archeological sites)
- - WA State Historic Preservation Office: Rob Whitlam (Archaeologist)
D. Local landowners and interest groups have expressed strong support for fuel reduction programs in these parks. Stakeholders
will be invited to comment on the plans prior to their implementation.
Enclosure 3A - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Park Plans
Riverside
October 2004 through December 2004
Tom Ernsberger
Riverside Manager
Permitting
December 2005 through March 2005
Bill Jolly
Implementation
April 2004 through June 2006
Riverside has most of the permitting done
and will begin soonest.
Tom Ernsberger
Riverside Manager
Interpretation
Design
Production
Installation
June 2005 through December 2005
June- August 2005
August – December 2005
March 2006 permanent
Tom Ernsberger
Park manager
Note: Individuals noted above are
all State Park staff.
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Personnel
State Park Staff
Subtotal
Fringe Benefits
28% of above
Subtotal
Travel
35 days@$150 per day
Subtotal
Equipment
Rental
State Owned
Applicant
Partner 1
Partner 2
34,500
35000
69,500
34,500
35,000
69,500
9,660
9,800
19460
9,660
9,800
19460
2,500
2,750
5,250
2,500
2,750
5,250
18,000
15,000
33,000
3,000
5,600
8,600
18,000
Subtotal
18,000
15,000
15,000
Subtotal
1,500
100
1,600
1,500
5,500
7,000
Supplies
Fuel
Misc.
Contractual
DNR Correctional Crews
Total
70,000
70,000
Permitting
20,000
1,000
21,000
Subtotal
Other
Contingency 10%
Interpretation
90,000
1,000
91,000
15,000
12,000
15,000
12,000
Subtotal
27,000
27,000
Total Costs
183,260
70,550
Project (Program) Income1
(using deductive alternative)
___________________________
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.
253,810