Enclosure 3A - Project Summary Form
NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE AND WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE PROJECTS
Application for Wildland Urban Interface Fuels / Education and
Prevention / Community Planning for Fire Protection Projects
Applicant
Applicant/Organization: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission
Phone: (509) 665-3329
FAX: (509) 663-9754
Email: Tom.Ernsberger@parks.wa.gov
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip): 2201 North Duncan Drive
Wenatchee WA 98801
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title): Tom Ernsberger, Assistant Region Manager, Resource Stewardship
Organization/Jurisdiction: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission
Phone: same
FAX: same
Email: same
Project Information
Project Title: Washington State Parks Wildland Urban Interface Fuel Reduction and Education Project
Proposed Project Start Date: June 2004
Proposed Project End Date: December 2005
Federal Funding Request:
Total Project Funding:
$251,260.00
$321,810.00
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
Washington State Parks has several parks located in Eastern Washington with fuel load problems listed below by project priority. This
grant would allow WSPRC to begin to address the fire risk issue.1. Riverside State Park (high urban forest interface); 2. Lake Wenatchee
State Park (Adjacent USFS fuel reduction project); and 3. Fields’ Spring State Park (high fuel loads).
Brief Project Description:
Asses fuel loads and develop landscape based fuel reduction plans for three forested parks in eastern
Washington. All project locations are described as high hazard communities by the U. S. Forest Service, and
each project has been formulated with public involvement and cooperation with other governmental agencies.
Following the development of the fuel reduction plans, implementation of pilot projects (phase 1) will occur in
at least two of the three parks, and an interpretive program will be developed describing the projects and the
need for such projects.
Project Location (latitude/longitude if applicable):
Riverside, Fields’Spring, and Lake Wenatchee State Parks
County:
Spokane, Chelan, Asotin
Congressional District:
4 and 5
Project Type: Check appropriate project type. More than one type may be checked. If only Box (4) is checked, use Enclosure 4.
(1) X Wildland Urban Interface Fuels Project
(2)
Wildland Urban Interface Education and Prevention Project
(3)
(4)
Community Planning for Fire Protection Project
Fuels Utilization and Marketing Project
If the applicant is an unincorporated area, define the geographic area being represented:
One park is located in Spokane County, within a portion of the city limits. The other parks are located near rural
developments in unincorporated areas but with high residential populations.
Enclosure 3B (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
Address these
 project implementation
items as
 anticipated outcomes
applicable:
 measures and reporting
 interagency partners





project relationship to community or natural landscape fire plans
project time frames and income
specify types of activities and equipment used
amount or extent of actions (acres, number of homes, etc)
environmental, cultural and historical resource requirements
We request funding to assess three Washington State park properties, develop fuel reduction plans
and interpretive programs, and implement pilot projects on the ground at each facility. The parks are
Riverside SP located in Spokane County, Lake Wenatchee SP located in Chelan County, and Fields’ Spring
SP located in Asotin 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. Prescriptions will be
developed and implemented in a phased manner (following permitting), beginning with pilot fuel reduction
and interpretation projects in at least two parks. Up to 250 acres at Riverside will receive a fuel reduction
pilot (building on earlier initiatives), and buffers will be created around the campgrounds at Lake Wenatchee
and Fields’ Spring State Parks.
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: Development of plans and the completion of the pilot projects. Status of each
activity to be reported by Tom Ernsberger, on a periodic basis to be determined by the grantor.
Interagency Partners: USFS, USFW, Fire-Safe Spokane, Washington State Departments 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. Lake Wenatchee’s project will complement surrounding USFS
treatments (Fishpole area) for two main reasons: the forest composition at Fishpole mirrors that of the park
and the goals of the Fishpole project are aligned with the goals of our treatment ( reduction of fuel levels,
improved forest health). Activities at Fields’ Spring Parks will be coordinated with local fire districts
Washington State DNR, and USFS.
Time frame and Income: The project will begin June 2004, with site assessments and the development of
fuel reduction plans. Simultaneous to the assessment process, anticipated permits will be procured. During
the pilot 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- 9000 acres; Lake Wenatchee- 488 acres; Fields’ Spring- 793 acres;.
Total – approximately 10,300 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 3B (Page 2 of 3) - Project Evaluation Criteria
Applications for funding must include narrative responses that address the following four criteria. Within each criterion, subcriteria are listed in descending order of importance. Limit your responses to the areas provided.
1. Reducing Fire Risk. (40 points))
A. Describe how the proposal promotes reduction of risk in high hazard areas or communities, or natural landscapes.
B. Describe how the proposed project benefits resources on federal land or adjacent non-federal land, or how it protects the safety
of communities.
C. To what extent does the project implement or create a cooperative (1) fuels treatment plan or (2) community fire strategy
(include evidence of the plan if it already exists)?
D. Explain to what extent the affected community or proponent has been involved or plans to involve the affected community in a
qualified fuels education program (e.g., FIREWISE).
E. Explain how the proposal (1) leads to, enhances or restores a local fire-adapted ecosystem, and/or (2) mitigates or leads to the
mitigation of hazardous fuel conditions.
F. How will the proposed treatments or programs be maintained in future years?
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.
C. The project located in Spokane County will incorporate components of plans developed by local Fire
Districts and adopted by Fire-Safe Spokane. The Lake Wenatchee project will exploit prescriptions
developed by the USFS for their adjacent properties. Fields’ Spring will follow the Blue Mountain forest
management plan.
D. Spokane County has implemented Fire-Safe Spokane (a program that adopts Firewise ideas), and Lake
Wenatchee will adopt USFS prescriptions developed through the EA process (including public comment).
E. Reduced fuel loading seeks to mimic the natural fire ecology of each area without the use of fire as a tool.
F. 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.
2. Increasing local capacity. (30 points)
A. How would the proposal improve or lead to the improvement of the local economy in terms of jobs and sustainable economic
activity? How many jobs are expected to be created or retained and for how long (please distinguish between essentially yearround and seasonal jobs)? How will this proposal link to other projects (or proposed projects) to create year-round jobs?
B. To what extent will this project be offered to serve as a model for other communities or natural landscapes?
C. Will biomass or forest fuels 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. 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.
C. 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.
Enclosure 3B (Page 3 of 3) - Project Evaluation Criteria
3. Increasing interagency and intergovernmental coordination. (15 Points)
A. Describe how this project implements a local intergovernmental strategy or plan, or creates such a plan. Describe the plan if it
already exists.
B. Explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning through a “Local Coordination Group” for wildland fire
activities, or among federal, state, tribal, local government and community organizations. List the cooperators (a detailed list
of cooperators will be required for projects that are funded).
Response:
A. The USFS and DNR are involved in landscape scale fuel reduction / forest health projects in eastern
Washington. State Parks, DNR, and the USFS are communicating to assure that our project mesh seamlessly
with one anothers projects (where applicable) in an effort to create a unified regional fuel reduction strategy.
B. 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 urbanpark 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: Bob Stihl (Fisheries); Elizabeth Roderick (Habitat Conservation); Habitat and
Species Mapping program; Howard Furgeson, (Biologist).
- - USFS: Bob Stoehr (Acting District Ranger); Steve Willet, Paul Schelke, Glenn Ferrier (silviculturists),
Richy Harrod (Fire Ecologist); Dick Schelhaus (Historical Stand Structure); Denny McMillan (Recreation
Specialist): Keith Herfield
- - Colville and/or Yakama Indian Nations (Historical use of property and archeological sites)
- - WA State Historic Preservation Office: Rob Whitlam (Archaeologist)
4. Expanding Community Participation. (15 Points)
A. To what extent have interested individuals, groups, and communities been provided an opportunity to become informed and
involved in this proposal?
B. Describe the extent of local support or opposition for the project, including any cost-sharing arrangements.
C. What are the environmental, social and educational benefits or concerns of the project?
A. Historically the public has been involved through public management planning meetings at Riverside
State Park, and via the EA process undertaken by the USFS adjacent to Lake Wenatchee 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)
B. 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.
C. Benefits:
- - Environmental: Reduced risk of catastrophic wildfire, improved forest health and re-establishment of
fire-adapted forest / habitat.
- - Social: Decreased threat to public safety and property loss. Protection of public recreational,
educational and aesthetic resources. Stimulation of local economy and employment opportunities.
- - Educational: Public education about forest health issues and the effects of long-term fire suppression.
Concerns: Implementation must be carefully monitored to assure minimal damage to soils and vegetation.
Prescription must allow for appropriate degree of habitat diversity as well as site aesthetics.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Park Plans
Riverside
Lake Wenatchee
Fields’ Spring
June 2004 through December 2004
Tom Ernsberger
Jack Hartt
Rick Halstead
Shaun Bristol
Permitting
July 2004 through January 2005
Bill Jolly
Phase one implementation
Riverside
Lake Wenatchee
Fields’ Spring
November 2004 through May 2005
Riverside has most of the permitting done
and will begin soonest.
Tom Ernsberger
Jack Hartt
Rick Halstead
Shaun Bristol
Interpretation
Design
Production
Installation
June 2004 through December 2004
June- August 2004
August – December 2004
January 2004 temporary
March 2004 permanent
Tom Ernsberger
Steve Wang
Steve Wang
Park managers
Note: Individuals noted above are
all State Park staff.
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Applicant
Partner 1
Partner 2
Total
Personnel
State Park Staff
34,500
35000
69,500
Subtotal
34,500
35,000
69,500
Fringe Benefits
28% of above
9,660
9,800
19460
Subtotal
9,660
9,800
19460
Travel
35 days@$150 per day
2,500
2,750
5,250
Subtotal
2,500
2,750
5,250
18,000
15,000
15,000
18,000
15,000
33,000
1,500
100
1,600
1,500
5,500
7,000
3,000
5,600
8,600
Equipment
Rental
State Owned
Subtotal
Supplies
Fuel
Misc.
Subtotal
18,000
Contractual
DNR Correctional Crews
Prescription/ Cruising
110,000
18,000
Permitting
20,000
1,000
21,000
Subtotal
148,000
1,000
149,000
Other
Contingency 10%
Interpretation
Subtotal
25,000
12,000
37,000
Total Costs
251,260
110,000
18,000
25,000
12,000
37,000
70,550
Project (Program) Income1
(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.
C:\Documents and Settings\TWE601\My Documents\Fire grant 2002-03\Washington State Parks 02-03 grant request draft.rtf
321,810