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 University
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
509/335-9661
509/335-1676
ogrd@mail.wsu.edu
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
PO Box 643140 Pullman WA 99164-3140
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Ole T. Helgerson, Chair and Area Forestry Agent
Organization/Jurisdiction:
WSU Cooperative Extension (forestry in Clark, Skamania, Klickitat, Hood River and Wasco
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
509/427.9427
509/427.7365
helgerso@wsu.edu
Project Information
Project Title:
Columbia Gorge Wildfire Preparedness Project Supplement
Project Start:
Project End:
October 1, 2003
September 30, 2004
Federal Funding Request:
Total Project Funding:
$155,057
$181,957
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
No
Brief Project Description:
Skamania, Klickitat, Hood River and Wasco Counties are at high wildfire risk. A WSU Extension Wildfire
Coordinator position (0.75 fte) and funding for four summer help (1.0) fte for mapping has been obtained for
2003 and a bi-state advisory council representing the four project counties is in place. This one-year grant
proposal will facilitate the existing grant by 1) continuing the 0.75 fte Extension Coordinator position
assisting rural fire departments and four summer mapping crew members through 2004, 2) adding crew
hours to assist the Coordinator in post-field season data management and other program activities and 3)
identify fuels mitigation demonstration areas in each of the four project counties for 2005 treatment. As with
the 2003 grant, work will be guided by the bi-state advisory council (state and federal wildfire managers and
county representatives). Expected outcomes are greater completion of data bases describing fire risk areas;
increased access to grant funding by rural volunteer fire districts, and increased fire-wise management of
interface dwellings. Impacts would be assessed by comparing pre- and post-activity results using standard
methods such as focus groups and surveys. The GPS survey methods used are similar to those in use by
Oregon Department of Forestry in central Oregon (Larry Hoffman, Stu Otto, ODF).
Project Location:
County:
Congressional District:
Skamania County (office)
Skam., Klick.,H.R., Wasco
WA: 3,4 OR: 2
Project Type: Check appropriate project type. More than one type may be checked. If only Box (4) is checked, use Enclosure 4.
(1)
(2)
Wildland Urban Interface Fuels Project
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:
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
 partners





project income
project time frames
specify types of activities and equipment used
amount or extent of actions (acres, number of homes, etc)
environmental, cultural and historical resource requirements
Location: This project extends an existing project targeting rural portions of Skamania, Klickitat,
Hood River and Wasco Counties in or near the Columbia River Gorge. These lands are located within or
downwind of high wildfire potential risk areas and rural dwellings have not been fully mapped as to wildfire
risk. Included or adjoining at-risk areas also include scattered BLM holdings, two Indian reservations, two
National Forests, the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area, USFWS and other wildlife refuges.
Response:
Implementation: In 2004, the 0.75 fte WSU Cooperative Extension Coordinator position would be assisted by
four part-time summer helpers with two extended into the fall (1.50 fte) in identifying and surveying high risk
areas using 2003 protocol, managing data, educating rural dwellers and identifying a fuels treatment
demonstration area in each of the four counties. It is anticipated that as before, these individuals would be
housed in Skamania County (Partner 1) offices in Stabler, WA (ex Wind River Nursery) supported by
continued Title III support from Skamania County per discussion with the Board of Commisioners, 11FEB03.
covering rent, utilities and other support. As with the main grant, work priorities would be set by an existing
advisory council (USDA Forest Service, Oregon Department of Forestry, Washington Department of Natural
Resources, county representatives or forest industry foresters). In cooperation with other regional groups, this
council could likely evolve into the local geographic advisory committee reviewing future WUI projects.
Anticipated Outcomes: These include more complete data base development identifying high fire risk
dwellings within selected geographic areas; more thorough identification and grant funded remediation of
volunteer fire district equipment and training deficiencies; improved interface dweller education and
selection and initial planning for one fuels treatment demonstration area in each of the four counties for 2005.
Measures and reporting: Impacts would be assessed by comparing pre- and post-activity results using
standard methods such as focus groups and surveys. Reports would be made twice annually to the advisory
group and as-needed to county commissioners and local fire fighting groups.
Partners: Skamania County provides direct support in computer expert access, surplus office furniture, and
other minor office assistance. Other support and cooperation is provided by the Columbia Gorge National
Scenic Area, Wasco, Hood River and Klickitat Counties, Oregon Department of Forestry and Washington
Department of Natural Resources.
Time Frames: 2003-- initiate funded project work with Wildfire Prevention Coordinator and summer help;
write and submit this grant proposal for 2004 continuation; 2004-- under advisory council guidance Wildfire
Prevention Coordinator and summer help continue survey and data base expansion, assist rural fire districts,
assist firewise education; select and plan fuels treatment demonstration areas.
Activities and Equipment: Continue rural fire hazard surveys, fire hazard and fire district data bases
develeopment; with wildfire managers identify demonstration areas; assist as available with firewise displays
at selected county fairs and other events; equipment consists of personal vehicles or potentially state vehicles
if available (grant funded mileage) and grant funded GPS and data recorder units, computers and peripheral
equipment and supplies.
Amount/Extent of Action: Four county program continuation requires 0.75 coordinator fte and 1.50 hourly
help fte and supporting budget; eliminating fuels mitigation demonstration areas would reduce hourly help by
0.25 fte ($8352 including benefits) and travel by $1000. As with 2003, the advisory council will establish
work direction and prioirities.
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.
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 fuels treatment plan or 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 (a) leads to, enhances or restores a local fire-adapted ecosystem, and/or (b) mitigates or leads to the
mitigation of hazardous fuel conditions.
F. How will the proposed treatments be maintained over time?
Response: A)
Wildfire risk is reduced by ensuring: more complete mapping of high risk areas for fuels
mitigation; increased capacity of rural fire districts, and interface dweller education in fuels reduction and
structure protection using demonstration areas and other education delivery.
B) The Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area, the Gifford Pinchot and Mt Hood National Forests, Bureau of
Land Management, Indian Nation, USFWS and state and industrial forest lands are within or immediately
adjoin the four-county project area. The National Forests hold excessive fuel loads in their eastern portions;
excessive wildfire ecosystem damage is highly likely. A fire storm like the Yacolt Burn that started 100 years
ago in Skamania County could exceed the resources necessary to stop it resulting in lost property and lives.
C) This proposal helps ensure completion of an on-going USFWS and Skamania County Title III funded
project designed to survey high risk rural areas; closer coordination between rural fire districts should result
from this project.
D) Local decision makers (Skamania County Commissioners, county planners in the four county area) and
state and federal land management agencies support this project; it also lays the foundation for fuels reduction
programs such as “FIREWISE”
E) Mapping of high hazard areas is essential to guide mitigation projects
F) Implementation and maintenance is the landowner’s responsibility.
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)?
B. To what extent will this project be offered to serve as a model for other communities?
C. Will biomass or forest fuels be utilized; if so, in what manner and how much?
Response: A)
This proposal would an additional 2.25 fte (0.75 fte coordinator, 1.50 fte hourly help) for one
year to the Columbia Gorge economy. Summer jobs for qualified local college age youth and local adults are
difficult to find in this region. Indirectly, private timber saved from wildfire or made available from thinning
could benefit timber supply to local sawmills facing supply shortfalls due to lack of harvest on Federal lands.
B) The success of this model will be shared with Forestry and other Extension colleagues in Washington,
Oregon, Idaho and California. The proposal concept has already been shared.with Washington and Oregon
Extension staff.
C) This project does not directly entail harvesting fuels.
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 plan, or creates such a plan. Describe the plan if it
already exists.
B. Explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning among federal, state, tribal, local government and
community organizations. List the cooperators.
Response: A.
Karl Tesch, FEMA coordinator for the Columbia River Gorge region regards the work to be
produced by this proposal as extremely useful. Results from this proposal help set the foundation for
establishing and implementing strategic activities such as fuels reduction programs, RAMS (Risk
Assessment Mitigation System) or region-wide training. This second year of the project would continue to be
coordinated by an advisory council composed of members of existing Gorge-area fire-fighting associations to
ensure that highest priority areas receive first attention and to complement instead of duplicating on-going
work.
B. Strategic planning can be improved within in the Columbia Gorge region by having a uniform data base of
high fire risk areas and inproving consistency and compatibility within and between Washington and Oregon
rural fire districts and resource management agencies. Cooperators would include Skamania, Klickitat, Hood
River and Wasco Counties, the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area, Washington Department of Natural
Resources and Oregon Department of Forestry.
4. Expanding Community Participation. (15 Points)
A. To what extent have interested people and communities been provided an opportunity to become informed and involved in this
proposal?
B. Describe the extent of local support for the project, including any cost-sharing arrangements.
C. What are the environmental, social and educational benefits of the project?
Response: A.
This proposal has been discussed with the Skamania County Board of Commissioners,
Skamania County's Planning Department; planning departments in other counties, local forest managers from
the Washington Department of Natural Resources and Oregon Department of Forestry, USDI Fish and
Wildlife Service wildfire managers.
B. The Skamania County Board of Commissioners passed a resolution supporting the initial proposal March
4, 2002 and offered county services in mailing, photocopying and other minor clerical services. Per 11FEB03
conversation, the Skamania County Board of Commissioners indicated that they would support this project
into 2004 with another Title III Secure Rural Schools legislation grant to cover rent, utilities and other
expenses. County forest managers, wildfire managers from the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area,
Gifford Pinchot and Mt. Hood National Forests, Oregon Department of Forestry, and Washington
Department of Natural Resources and local volunteer rural fire district chiefs support the goals outlined in this
proposal.
C. Environmental benefits include lessened chances of loss of forest cover, soil, air and water quality
damage from wildfire; social benefits include lessened chances of loss of human lives and property; education
benefits include increased training in wildfire fighting among rural fire districts and improved interface
dweller knowledge of firewise landscaping and structure mainteneance.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Advertise position (if necessary for new
coordinator) or rehire existing Extension
Wildfire Coordinator
2003-2004: November-January
Ole Helgerson, Forestry Extension
Agent, WSUCE, Skamania County,
509-427-9427, helgerso@wsu.edu
Develop work plan; continues capacity
building with rural fire districts and data
management; locating demonstration areas
2004: January-February
Wildfire Coordinator , Forestry
Extension Agent
Continue capacity building with rural fire
districts and data management; initiates hiring
summer crew for survey; data collection;
locating demonstration areas
2004: March-May
Wildfire Coordinator, Forestry Agent
Summer crews conduct surveys and rural
dweller education; two hourly crew members
to continue helping coordinator with data
management after 90 day survey season;
initiate program evaluation
2004 June-November
Wildfire Coordinator, Forestry Agent
Wildfire Coordinator continues developing
and maintaining data bases, working with
rural fire districts, and preparing reports
2004 November – December (or until end
of funds)
Wildfire Coordinator, Forestry Agent
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Applicant
Partner 1
Partner 2
Total
Personnel
Forestry Agent .07 FTE
Extension Coordinator (.75 FTE)
2,880 hrs @ $15/hr (1.5 fte)
Subtotal
$ 3,685.00
$31,000.00
$43,200.00
$77,885.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$77,885.00
Fringe Benefits
Forestry Agent @ 36%
Extension Coordinator @ 36%
Hourly summer help @ 16%
Subtotal
$1,327.00
$11,160.00
$6,912.00
$19,399.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$19,399.00
Travel
For Program Assistant
For Hourly summer help (ssi)
Subtotal
$6,500.00
$10,000.00
$16,500.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$16,500.00
Equipment
GIS equip., computers, software
softsosftwareessories
$6,000.00
Subtotal
$6,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$6,000.00
Supplies
Program Supplies
Subtotal
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$4,000.00
$0.00
$5,000.00
$14,400.00
$19,400.00
$0.00
$22,400.00
Other
GIS Training
Utilities (phone, dsl, power),
Wind River office rent
Subtotal
Other
WSU F&A @ 22.3% MTDC
Advisory Council member time
Computer and misc. support
Subtotal
Total Costs
$3,000.00
$3,000.00
$28,273.00
$2,500.00
$28,273.00
$2,500.00
$5000.00
$5,000.00
$0.00
$35,773.00
$155,057.00
$2,500.00
$24,400.00
$0.00
$181,957.00
Project (Program) Income1
(using deductive alternative)
$0.00
Note: WSU F&A for Off-Campus projects is 22.3% of Modified Total Direct Costs
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.