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:
Rural Technology Initiative
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
206-616-3218
206-685-0790
rti@u.washington.edu
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
Box 352100, University of Washington, College of Forest Resources(CFR), Seattle, WA 98105
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Bruce Lippke, RTI Director and CFR Faculty
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Rural Technology Initiative
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
206-616-3218
206-685-0790
blippke@u.washington.edu
Project Information
Project Title:
Fire Risk Reduction Training and Public Education
Proposed Project Start Date:
Proposed Project End Date:
October 1, 2003
November 31, 2005
Federal Funding Request:
Total Project Funding:
$97,751
$126,751
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
No
Brief Project Description:
Economic and environmentally efficient thinning alternatives were developed in a just completed fire risk
reduction grant with strategic findings and innovative models now available for use as instructional materials.
Efficient treatments are sensitive to many local conditions and provide many market and non-market benefits.
Training sessions will be sponsored to involve field personnel and contract administrators from state and
federal agencies, as well as private sector harvesters, community economic development groups, public
educators and tribal representatives. Providing these decision makers and publics with better science on how
to implement fire risk reduction strategies and how selection of effective management approaches will affect
future conditions, will speed up implementation, and enhance the support for urgently needed fire risk
reduction activities that provide opportunities for rural economic development.
Project Location (latitude/longitude if applicable):
County:
Congressional District:
Washington/Oregon
Eastern WA and OR counties
2(OR), 4(WA)
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
 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
Response:
A multi-faceted analysis of fire risk reduction strategies for forests chosen to be representative of inland
conditions in Washington (Okanogan) and Oregon (Fremont) has just been completed. It provides
quantitative measures of pre-treatment fire risk in conjunction with parametric assessments of hazardous fuels
reduction strategies to reduce fire risk, their costs and economic impacts with simulations of many market and
non-market values into the future. This information can now be used to assist in the design of hazardous fuels
reduction activities that reduce economic costs and most effectively reduce fire risk. It can assist market
developers on the amount and kind of material that can be available and at what cost. It can assist public
stakeholder groups and community leaders in understanding the impact of these strategies on many market
and non-market values reducing concerns of undesirable consequences. Many values of interest to these
groups are shown to improve with these strategies, including the cost of fighting fires, the asset losses from
fires, air pollution, carbon emissions, green energy production, regeneration costs, water saved, local
economic activity and jobs, restoration of sustainable forests and historic habitats, and forest health. This
project will customize the packaging of the analytical methodologies and models assembled to complete
hazardous fuels reduction assessments for training and outreach across several different audiences. This
project will conduct regional field short courses targeted for state, tribal, and federal field personnel. Project
personnel, to include faculty, staff, and graduate students, will participate in public educational forums,
provide electronic delivery and assist community colleges and technical trainers in adopting the hazardous
fuels reduction tools and findings in their own educational programs.
The regions of primary focus will be areas of inland Washington and Oregon with forests at risk from
wildfire.
This project will be extended over two years to be supportive of the calendar activities of many different
groups. It will involve collaboration with the prior research cooperators, The Rural Technology Initiative
(RTI), UW and WSU Extension, the Fremont, Okanogan, and Wenatchee National Forests, Lake County
Resources Initiative in collaboration with Sustainable Northwest, Okanogan Communities Development
Council, and The Collins Companies. We expect to extend this project to include other groups we work with
including the Western Instructors of Natural Resource Technologies (WINRT, WA, OR, and CA community
colleges), the OR & WA dry forest Indian Nations, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, WA DNR, ODF, BLM, as
well as other community groups. For the land managers, the modeling technologies transferred through
trainings will increase efficiencies and effectiveness of hazardous fuels treatments resulting in more acres
treated at less cost with enduring risk reductions. For resource educators, the modeling technologies
transferred through trainings will better prepare the resource science professionals of the future for the
rigorous challenges of sustainable management of inland west forests. For community representatives and
members of the environmental community, the modeling technologies transferred through trainings will
increase the understanding of the relationships between hazardous fuel reductions, and many different
environmental and economic impacts, most resulting in positive benefits.
Project costs will pay for preparation and delivery of training modules and public education programs. State
budget reductions will not allow an aggressive Continuous Education training program at an appealing cost
without this support. Registration fees will be used to recoup out of pocket costs such as facility costs and
marketing.
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. The proposal will train forest managers, harvesters, policy makers, and concerned publics how to
effectively and efficiently reduce fire risks while producing many market and non-market benefits.
B. It will provide the communication framework for public support of treatment on federal land, adjacent
tribal, BLM, State and private land.
C. It will also provide the framework for cooperative fuel treatment plans and a community fire strategy
if none exists.
D. The project will enhance community understanding of the need for and benefits of fuel reduction
treatments and thereby increase the demand for local applications such as FIREWISE.
E. The training materials show how only a particular subset of thinning and control burn forest
treatments are capable of successful fire risk reduction and are therefore essential to restore
sustainable forest management not at risk of catastrophic fires.
F. With the training of federal, state, and tribal representatives and field personnel as well as the
placement of the educational materials in community colleges and Cooperative Extension networks,
positive educational benefits should be long lasting.
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 toher 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. Early assessments of biomass volumes to be processed over time when combined with assurances that
removals will be implemented will spur needed investment in rural infrastructure. Successful hazardous
fuel reduction programs must be designed as sustainable activities in order to support needed
infrastructure such as cogeneration facilities capable of processing small diameter materials while
providing jobs and energy for rural communities. With millions of acres categorized as high fire risk,
thousands of rural jobs can be supported in each region.
B. Treatment strategies and educational materials can be customized for other regions in the west.
Assessment tools can be refined to evaluate targeted wildlife habitats, impacts to available surface water,
visual aesthetics, and other issues of interest to stakeholders. In some areas, critical habitat and wilderness
reserve designations may require portions of the forest to be left in high-risk conditions. Assessment tools
can help develop strategies to identify and design fuel breaks to provide protection of high-risk areas. Premanagement conditions can be better understood by both lay and professional people when assessment
tools are used with data sets known to be representative of pre-management conditions.
C. Research findings show that the best fire risk reduction treatments may require subsidies for biomass
removal for cogeneration if no higher valued market applications are available. However, findings also
show that many non-market benefits exist that if properly valued would pay for biomass removal,
justifying stewardship contracts.
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:
RTI has been involved in direct support of tribes, USFS, BLM, DNR, ODF, NIPF’s, community groups,
forest instructors in the community colleges, forestry consultants and other educational institutions, DOE, the
Industries of the Future (IOF) office and private companies. By assisting these organizations with fire risk
reduction training materials and technology, we expect to be able to provide the framework for more
intergovernmental and agency cooperation.
Target audiences for training, all providing some degree of collaborative support include National Forests
(Fremont, Okanogan, and Wenatchee), BLM regions, ODF and DNR regions, Yakama, Colville, Spokane,
Warm Springs, Umatilla, and Nez Pierce tribes, Western Instructors of Natural Resource Technologies
(community colleges), OR & WA Association of Consulting Foresters, Lake County Resources Initiative in
collaboration with Sustainable Northwest, Okanogan Communities Development Council, WA Contract
Loggers Assoc., Associated Oregon Loggers, and other interested publics including private contractors, forest
products companies, cogeneration developers and local Public Utility Districts.
State, Tribal, and federal forestry personnel would benefit from training and technology transfer of analytical
models designed to conduct spatial and temporal simulations of fuel treatments to better understand
comparative risk, cost, habitats, economic development, energy, and carbon sequestration.
Other audiences would benefit from interpretive presentations that use technology to assist common
understanding of ecological and economic complexities of hazardous fuels reductions in at-risk forests.
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?
Response:
A. RTI has worked with the Lake County Resources Initiative (OR), and the Okanogan Communities
Development Council (WA) to develop methodologies, cost information, and community connections to
assist model development and hazardous fuels reduction simulations for the Fremont and Okanogan
National Forests. The Colville Coalition has requested our support in their region.
B. RTI is uniquely qualified to undertake rural training and educational deliveries. Currently RTI, in
partnership with a network of Cooperative Extension Agents, offers 6-8 short courses/year in resource
technologies such as LMS, GPS, and GIS. These courses are educating rural forestry professionals in the
uses computer technologies for resource management. Custom training and demonstration projects
result in substantial cost sharing by cooperators.
C. Some members of the environmental community have expressed concerns about fuel reduction
activities. The training and simulation materials provide a scientifically supported evaluation of all of
the primary environmental concerns and tradeoffs. A combination of professional trainings, public
outreach, and web-based information and software deliveries will greatly expand public knowledge and
access towards creating a more inclusive and cooperative atmosphere amongst various stakeholders. A
more cooperative environment should promote the creation of better-informed publics, develop a
broader social support system, and provide an open and rigorous examination of concerns about
potential consequences associated with programs for hazardous fuel removal on public forests.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Training material packaging for field short
courses.
Oct 03-Dec 03
UW-RTI
Training material packaging for educational
institutions.
Oct 03-Dec 03
UW-RTI
Training material packaging for public groups.
Nov 03-Jan 04
UW-RTI
Schedule and market training sessions:
Oct 03-August 05
UW-CE
Teach 20 classes spread over 8 quarters
Jan 04-Oct 05
UW-RTI
Report on impact of training
Oct 05 - Nov 05
UW-RTI
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Applicant
Partner 1
Partner 2
Total
Personnel
Staff
$50,910
$50,910
Subtotal
$50,910
$50.910
Fringe Benefits
Staff
$11,671
$11,671
Subtotal
$11,671
$11,671
Travel
Twenty + destinations
$13,000
$13,000
Subtotal
$13,000
$13,000
0
0
Equipment
Subtotal
Supplies
Training supplies
supplies
Subtotal
Contractual
Facilities & marketing
catering
Subtotal
0
$2,000
$2,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$2,000
$12,000
0
0
0
$15,000
$4,000
$19,000
$15,000
$4,000
$19,000
Other
Indirect Costs @ .26 Direct$
$20,170
Subtotal
$20,170
0
$20,170
Total Costs
$97,751
$29,000
$126,751
0
$29,000
$29,000
Project (Program) Income1
(using deductive alternative)
1
$20,170
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.