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:
Nils D. Christoffersen, Wallowa Resources
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
(541) 426-8053
(541) 426-9053
ndc-wr@oregonvos.net
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
P.O. Box 274, Enterprise, OR 97828
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Bruce Dunn, Chairman
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Wallowa County – Natural Resources Advisory Committee
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
(541) 426-6019
(541) 426-6019
bdunn@eoni.com
Project Information
Project Title:
Mount Howard WUI Fuels Reduction Project
Proposed Project Start Date:
Proposed Project End Date:
October 2003
Sept 2005 (Thinning) Sept 2009 (Prescribed Fire)
Federal Funding Request:
Total Project Funding:
$250,000
$417,240
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
Yes – acting as fiscal manager on one.
Brief Project Description:
The Mount Howard WUI Fuels Reduction Project will reduce the fire hazard to the Wallowa Lake
community, which is the mostly densely developed and highest valued private property in Wallowa
County. This community is listed in the Federal Registrar as a WUI Community at Risk.
The current situation is heavy downed fuels, dense ladder fuels in the under story and significant
insect mortality on National Forest ownership, immediately adjacent to private land. Completing
this project will reduce the risk of a large-scale fire that would have detrimental impacts to
watershed values, lynx habitat and pose a high risk to life and property in the Wallowa Lake basin
and upper Prairie Creek.
Cooperators in this project include Wallowa County Natural Resources Advisory Committee
(NRAC), Wallowa Lake Rural Fire Protection District, Oregon Department of Forestry, Wallowa
Resources, USFS, R-Y Timber, and other private landowners. The fuels treatment project will be
developed by these partners and implemented seamlessly across property boundaries.
Project Location (latitude/longitude if applicable):
County:
Congressional District:
NE Oregon: T.3.S R.45.E
Wallowa County
Oregon – 2nd District
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:
The Wallowa Lake Basin south of the city of Joseph is the number one fire risk management site for
Wallowa County, Oregon. Mount Howard sits at the northeastern flank of this basin, and is an
important visual feature of the County.
Over the past two years, a collaboration of the NRAC, USFS, Oregon Department of Forestry
(ODF), Wallowa Resources, local landowners and contractors created a 400-foot fire buffer around
the private property in the Lake Basin. This 110-acre buffer was designed to prevent the spread of
fire from human starts in the basin up the steep slopes into the Wallowa Mountains. The buffer
provides good protection against ground fires, and should help prevent the spread of ground fire
into the canopy. The buffer did not create any gaps in the overstory canopy.
During 2002, USFS regional resource specialists visited Mount Howard to determine the extent of
insect infestation. Working with the USFS Wallowa Mountain Office staff, they determined that Mt.
Howard’s higher elevation trees are dying as a result of moisture stress after successive years of
low rain fall; a high density of trees in forests; and four insects that are attacking the trees (balsam
wooly adelgid, western balsam bark beetle, mountain pine beetle and spruce beetle). This situation
is occurring across the landscape but is most threatening across a 3000 acre “face” of Mt. Howard.
Mortality induced by insect infestations in the sub-alpine fir stands on Mount Howard (80-90%
mortality) will increase the number of days in a fire season when these stands will burn with a
sustained crown fire and exhibit long range spotting. Expected mortality is 100% in the sub-alpine
fir, since there are no known control agents for balsam woody adelgid. As a result, the risk of a
large-scale stand replacement fire will be elevated for approximately a decade.
A large-scale stand replacement fire would have dramatic economic, environmental, and social
impacts to the Wallowa Lake Basin community and Wallowa County as a whole. Over 300 forest
and wood products jobs have been lost in the county over the past ten years due to significant
declines (95%) in public land timber harvest. The Wallowa Lake Basin is the number one tourism
destination in the County with over 65,000 visitor days booked each year at the State Park. The
basin has over 300 homes within the newly created Wallowa Lake Rural Fire Protection District.
There is only one road into the basin, so the initial emergency response to a wildfire will be directed
to evacuation and not fire suppression. A large-scale fire would threaten homes, adjacent private
timber, tourism business and associated services, wildlife habitat, and sensitive plant species. It
would also have serious hydrologic impacts that would effect water quality for people and wildlife,
and could lead to additional floods and mudslides like the one which destroyed homes in the basin
last summer.
The project would include four distinct phases. Phase I (Planning) will be completed by October
2003. Phase II (Mechanical Treatment) will focus on about 800 acres of lower elevation mixedconifer stands adjacent to private property. The treatment will use whole-tree logging to landings
outside the project area by both ground based and helicopter logging systems. Merchantable
material will be sold. Phase III (Hand Prune, Pile and Burn) will cleanse a 100 foot buffer along the
public / private land boundary, and create ground-fuel breaks in the upper elevation sub-alpine
stands. Phases II and III will be completed by September 2005. Phase IV (Prescribed Burning) will
initiate small scale stand replacement patch burning (approximately 50-80 acre patch sizes)
throughout the 1400 acres of sub-alpine stands in the project area. Burning patches will break up
the continuity of the fuel profile, reduce the risk of a large-scale stand replacement fire, and allow
for safer reintroduction of fire to the landscape. Phase IV will take place from 2005-2009.
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:
Down and standing dead fuel loads in the project area of 100-200 tons/acre are very high. Normal
forest conditions are around 20-30 tons/acre. High volatile fuel loads on steep terrain will result in
fast moving fires that “spot” ahead as far as ½ mile. Under dry windy conditions, such fires are
difficult to stop. 14 fires started over the last 30 years within the project area, which is adjacent to
the 1989 Canal Fire (22,000 acres). So far, all fires within the project area have been suppressed.
Increasing fuel loads and continued drought increases the chance of widespread wildfire.
ODF is cost-sharing private forest treatment immediately below the project area. This treatment will
continue in 2003. Action is needed on the public lands to reduce the potential for a large-scale
stand replacement fire, and the anticipated spotting such a fire would induce to private land and
property throughout the basin. Public land treatment will reduce overall fuel loads, and break the
continuity of the fuel profile.
Maintenance of the boundary line fuel breaks will take place every 10 years, through thinning,
pruning and prescribed fire. Once sufficient stands above 6,400’ have been treated, prescribed fire
or managed natural ignitions on a 20-30 year interval will maintain the patchwork mosaic.
In addition to the forest treatments, ODF is utilizing a defensible space grant for individual
homeowners to improve protection for their properties in the lake basin. ODF is also utilizing
FIREWISE and Living with Fire resources in education efforts across the community.
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:
Forest industry has always been the number one employer in Wallowa County. Shifts in National
Forest management emphasis in the 1990’s resulted in significant, sustained unemployment that
impacted schools, businesses and community health. The County was progressive in its response
– pursuing small diameter harvesting, processing and marketing options, as well as new
opportunities in forest restoration and stewardship for logging contractors. Limitations on project
work and access to by-products have constrained opportunities for economic transition.
This project would provide an important continuation of work for local contractors, and would
provide a source of small diameter logs for a variety of newly emergent wood product businesses.
Between 25-30 persons would be employed for 6-9 months in the mechanical treatment, and up to
200 persons in the hand piling, slash burning, and prescribed burning activities. The removal of 3.5
million board feet of small saw logs would support 40-50 manufacturing jobs for 2-3 months. Poles
and chips will also be manufactured and support another 10 jobs. The reduction in wildfire risk, and
potential adverse hydrological effects, will benefit over 50 tourism business jobs, and more than
100 related service business jobs.
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:
In the early 1990’s, Wallowa County formed its Natural Resources Advisory Committee to facilitate
community planning and coordination on a variety of forest, range and riparian management issues.
The committee includes membership from all state and federal resource management agencies, as
well as local non-profits and private landowners.
This committee has been following the National Forest Plan since its inception, and contributed to
the identification of fire risk prevention priorities. The Wallowa Lake Basin, which includes Mount
Howard, is the number one priority for such work in the County, and is listed in the Federal
Registrar as a “Community at Risk” under National Fire Plan criteria.
The NRAC asked the USFS, ODF and Wallowa Resources to take the lead on education, planning
and implementation of fire risk management activities in the Lake Basin. Over the past two
seasons, a 400-foot buffer was constructed (over 110 acres) around the private homes and cabins
in the basin with cost-share from all parties. Several homeowner meetings took place, and
homeowners contributed to the design and inspection of the buffer, and to supplemental work
around their own structures.
Last year, the Wallowa Lake Rural Fire Protection District was formed and leadership from this
group is involved in project planning.
A comprehensive “Community Fire Management Map and Plan” is currently being developed.
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:
In 2002, NRAC displayed information boards at various grocery stores and public meeting places.
Written public comments were submitted in response to this information.
A public meeting took place in December 2002. Over 65 persons participated in the meeting
(including environmental interests), which reviewed conditions on Mount Howard. Treatment
options, and the justification for treatment, were discussed in three working groups. All three
groups agreed that treatment was desired to reduce the risk to private property (homes and
timbered land), tourism businesses, water and wildlife. Everyone agreed on an approach starting
with mechanical and hand treatment on the lower elevations (with protection for wildlife habitat),
followed by prescribed fire in the upper elevations. The project should generate jobs, both in the
treatment and in the utilization of by-product, and protect the broader base of tourism/service jobs.
Over 2003 there will be several meetings/opportunities for citizens to help shape the future of Mt.
Howard. As the project moves into implementation, high school and college students will
participate in field studies at the site. Public information will be updated and disseminated over the
life of the project.
ODF has $50,000 in cost-share for private land treatment below the project area in 2003.
A large-scale stand replacing fire would have detrimental impact to wildlife habitat, local hydrology,
fish, and sensitive plants within the project area. Treatment should improve wildlife habitat, protect
sensitive plants and reduce the potential air quality concerns from a wildfire.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Asessment / Planning
(Treatment Blocks, Methods and
Targets)
Mechanical Treatment (Whole
Tree Removal)
 Private Property
 National Forest
Time Frame
Responsible Party
September 2002-October 2003 USFS, with participation from
ODF, NRAC, and others.
May 2003 -September 2004
Winter 2003-04, Summer 2004
ODF / Landowners
USFS
Summer-Fall 2004
USFS / Wallowa Resources /
Youth Groups
2005-09 (Fall, Winter, Spring)
USFS
Maintenance and Monitoring and
Field Studies
 National Forest
2004 - Onwards
USFS / ODF / NRAC /
Wallowa Resources, etc.
Project Reporting
September 2004
NRAC / Wallowa Resources
September 2005
NRAC / Wallowa Resources
Hand Treatment (Prune, Pile and
Burn)
 National Forest
o Private Boundary
o Upper elevation fuel breaks
Prescribe Burn (50-80 acres
patches in upper elevation)
 National Forest
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Applicant
(WR / NRAC) USFS WWNF
ODF and Private
Landowners
Total
Personnel
$35,280
$16,055
$15,000
0
$66,335.00
$11,760
$5,685
$5,000
0
$22,445.00
Subtotal
Fringe Benefits
Subtotal
Travel
$0.00
Subtotal
Equipment
$0.00
Subtotal
Supplies
$0.00
Subtotal
Contractual
$202,960
0
0
$62,500
$265,460.00
Subtotal
Other
$0.00
Subtotal
Total Costs
Project (Program) Income1
(using deductive alternative)
1
$250,000
$21,740
$20,000
Log Receipts These funds will contribute
$63,000
to hand treatment costs
$62,500
$$354,240.00
$417,240.00
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.