Enclosure 3A - Project Summary Form
Draft
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: REACH, Inc. Ecosystem Workforce Training Program (EWT)
Phone: (541) 882-8803 FAX: (541) 883-5265
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip) :
P. O. Box 1089 Klamath Falls, Oregon 97601
Project Coordinator
Email: toreachewt@aol.com
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Bjorn Everson, Director of Ecosystem Workforce Training
Organization/Jurisdiction:
REACH WEST-REACH, Inc. EWT Kelly Droege, ARWC
Phone:
(541) 899-9982
FAX:
(541) 899-1256
Email:
Project Information
Project Title: HUKILL HOLLOW HELPING HAND
Proposed Project Start Date:
Spring 2004
Proposed Project End Date:
Fall-Winter 2004
Federal Funding Request:
$49,777
Total Project Funding:
$49,777
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
Resubmitting awarded NFP FY2003 projects (Bly Neighbors, Gilson Gulch) as per directions. Hukil Hollow priority #3.
Brief Project Description:
HUKILL HOLLOW is the final step in a three-part sequence for fuels reduction at the southern-most tip of the
Squire’s Peak 2003 fire. In 2002 the Sterling Landowners Consortium completed NFP treatments, and
REACH was awarded NFP-2003 for adjacent Gilson Gulch. The HUKILL HOLLOW project completes treatments begun by partner ARWC, concentrating on “tie-in” treatments & prescriptions for many additional properties. Least active of these 3 groups, outreach and prescription design are expected take longer.
ARWC & REACH will hold landowner meetings and meet individually to fine tune prescriptions. REACH
EWT workforce crews will work with local reforestation contractors who will provide a lead worker on Project
Training day. 22 acres of machine thinning will be contracted. Restoration includes Eco- blankets, fence removal, hand thinning of 20 acres around homesites, and 3 culverts replaced. Native grasses, tree seedlings, and shrubs will be used throughout. A complete monitoring component including landowners participation is included. Specially noted is the total acreage protected by carefully siting these mosaic treatments to take advantage of burns & other adjacent prescriptions.
Project Location (latitude/longitude if applicable): County:
T 39S 2W Sec8 Sterling Ck. Rd. Jackson
Congressional District:
2 nd Congressional District
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) X Wildland Urban Interface Education & Prevention Project
(3) X Community Planning for Fire Protection Project
(4) Fuels Utilization and Marketing Project
If the applicant is an unincorporated area, define the geographic area being represented:
9500 ‘block’ of Sterling Creek Road, to top of draw to intersection with Gilson Gulch Road.

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:
Address these
 project location items as applicable:
 project implementation
 anticipated outcomes
 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 third part of a 3-part landowner-based fuels reduction project at the tip of the Squire’s Peak 2002 fire,
HUKILL HOLLOW completes and is contiguous with both the Sterling Landowners and Gilson Gulch projects.
 PROJECT LOCATION HUKILL HOLLOW (HH) is north and west of both SLC & GG. Primary stream flow is down Hukill Hollow, with two small ponds, before junction with Sterling Creek.
 INTERAGENCY PARTNERS Applegate River Watershed Council (ARWC) of the Applegate Partnership
(AP) is a primary partner with REACH in this project; primary responsibility: Landowner Outreach, Monitoring, &
Prescription. Landowner-based partner Sterling Creek Landowners Consortium (SLC) responsibility: Landowner
Outreach & Demo. REACH EWT: Prescription/GPS, Labor, Training.
 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION EWT, ARWC, and AP shall assemble an outreach & prescription team, create a complete landowner base. EWT shall fine tune prescriptions with landowners, flag treatment areas, and perform restoration/reduction work under supervision and training; as grant administrator EWT shall contract for any machine/local labor. SLC shall make available within reason, sites for Hukill Hollow landowners to view typical completed treatments. No capital purchases made.
 PROJECT RELATIONSHIP TO FIRE PLANS Hukill Hollow fire risk and phone tree data bases begun by
AP/AFP will be completed; at least one central landowner meeting will assist HH landowners to see how SLC landowners participate in the Applegate Fire Plan. Mapping, GPS, and treatment prescriptions have direct connection to local fire district parameters.
 ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES 1) Approximately 10-15 landowners will form a neighborhood association based upon fire protection; 2) Each landowner will have an individually designed treatment prescription ; 3)
Total protected acres of 280 add to SLC (260) and Gilson Gulch (230); BLM Buncom Bowl adds about 560 acres for a total of 1330 protected acres. Corollary BLM treatments could easily triple this protected acreage. 4) 6 EWT and 2 local restoration crew members will be trained, perform hand labor, GPS, & layout project sites. Each crew team will assume responsibility for separate landowner treatment prescriptions; 5) A community-wide Training day will include foremen or crew leaders from two large local reforestation-restoration companies, local landowners, EWT crew including small contractor crew component, ARWC, AFP, and agency trainers. All data bases will b e augmented. (AFP, ARWC, Hukill Hollow). 6) The ARWC, EWT, and HH landowners will monitor treatment results for 2 years; 7) 25-30 acres of low impact machine treatment completes the fire protection.
 ACTIVITY TYPE AND EQUIPMENT USED Machine work is expected to be done by a low impact
“Lightfoot” slasher contracted through Integrated Resource Management. Handheld GPS will map all treatment areas for exact acreage. Chain saws will be used by hand crews, slash to be piled where possible for later slashing rather than burning. Landowner outreach based upon landowner meetings and considerable one-on-one to be performed by ARWC-EWT team. Micro-site by hand planting/seeding.
 PROJECT TIMEFRAMES & INCOME No commercial product is available. All outreach work is anticipated to be completed between Spring & Fall 2004; all treatments are Fall-Winter scheduled.
 REPORTING Grant reports will be the responsibility of REACH, Inc.; monitoring data collection is overseen by ARWC, part of any Final Report. ARWC will determine an appropriate monitoring program aimed at landowner participation, and REACH EWT will copy Treatment Prescriptions for partners.
 ENVIRONMENTAL, CULTURAL, & HISTORICAL Nearly the entire project area was surveyed by BLM
Ashland Resource Area for other National Fire Plan projects contiguous to Hukil Hollow properties. Treatments will either be placed within these previously inventoried areas or extension of survey areas will be sought through partner BLM.

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 : (C, D) The HUKILL HOLLOW Fuels Reduction proposal is an outgrowth of previous and formal efforts to organize the local community through the Applegate Fire Plan to address treatments across boundaries. (B) BLM lands are adjacent to Hukill Hollow, and will be protected by treatments on private land. REACH has developed Landowner Prescriptions that include fuels treatments with one landowner group 2001-2, (SLC); pending is restoration and fuels reduction in adjacent Gilson Gulch in 2003. (A, B)
Hukill Hollow is the final part of the 3-part treatments for properties lying against BLM at this point. (D, E)
The south-slope ecology for this entire area is scattered oak-pine savannah with considerable ceonothus and manzanita fields. Native American and early miner practices burnt hillside at regular intervals for different reasons. A fire-ecology system was nevertheless maintained. (A) The Squire’s Peak Fire initiated brush removal, providing an opportunity to complete most of the treatments around homes at low cost. This fire has also motivated landowner interest in fuels treatments and restoration prescriptions generally. (F) Strong landowner motivation has been demonstrated by model Sterling Landowners Consortium; all but one landowner of 14 actively participate on an annual basis in the continued “pruning and maintaining” of their lands. Some members work on adjacent public lands in conjunction with private treatments. Hukil Hollow residents will be encouraged to participate in the annual SLC Work Day & view ongoing treatments. (F)
Monitoring by ARWC and landowners will maintain interest and responsibility for at least two years.
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. Most innovative is using a public training day to train two large & 2 small contractor crew leaders, landowners, and the EWT crew in fuels reduction & restoration, GPS, and prescription writing.
REACH EWT crews train with private contractors when possible, jumpstarting awareness at both levels.
Small company crew members will complete the project with EWT. Thus contractors are better prepared for
“higher notch” restoration work, and obtain professional contacts for future work. EWT will employ the 6 crew members year ‘round, full time. This proposal underwrites that training for four weeks, and is part of an overarching REACH effort at year-round training & employment. This training increases and certifies local contractor capacity, extends work period.
B. Hukil Hollow completes the circle on the ground. High visibility for partners. Local landowners including BLM joined together to initiate treatments across boundaries public and private, and this is the completion of that 3-year process. Considerable data will be made available by partners ARWC and EWT for replication. Forms and methods for outreach will be refined. The natural landscape restored by landowner efforts and fire is available for demonstration of the process.
C. Only firewood for landowners is expected. No biomass is available from this project.

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 Applegate Fire Plan (AFP) is augmented by bringing another landowner base into the fold. This plan models perimeter thinning around homes, mosaic restoration prescriptions encouraging habitat and clearings, and participation in local phone trees, work parties, and outreach to other landowners. A
Regional Fuels Reduction Strategy protocol is expected to be available from Klamath Basin-OIT for Fire
Risk Assessment. This is consistent with goals of those participants. (Klamath-Lake ODF, Fire Districts 1, 4,
& 5, Winema-Fremont NF, Running Y, Applegate Fire Plan, & REACH).
B) Local Fire District #9, Applegate Partnership/ARWC, Sterling Landowners Consortium, Gilson Gulch
Group, have cooperated with REACH, Inc. EWT in designing projects achieving multiple goals of workforce training, broad contiguous areas of fuels reduction, and increased awareness and participation by landowners.
Four forestry contractors and partner BLM are cooperating in this project too.
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) Initial outreach in Hukill Hollow has been provided by ARWC; some HH landowners were assessed as part of the REACH-SLC NFP grant, and expressed high interest in participating in a similar subwatershed level prescription. All partners have committed to these specific levels of participation.
B) Applegate landowners have reacted to initial inquiries with typical interest, no opposition, and a waitand-see approach. ARWC experienced cooperation & good partnership with Hukill Hollow landowners.
Multiple landowner agreements are beyond the scope of individuals, but they are interested.
C) The environment is served, landowners are empowered as individuals and as a group by being educated about their options. They have consistently shown good judgment when presented with informed choices. Of limited concern is interest outside the scope of this project, as more and more landowners want to join in, and there is only so much ‘project room’. References to other options available to landowners will be given.

Tasks
Outreach: develop landowner base, schedule project demonstrations, assemble prescription teams, maps, etc.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Time Frame
Spring – Summer 2004
Responsible Party
REACH EWT
ARWC
SLC
Treatment Prescription Design Summer 2004 ARWC EWT
Small Contractors
Layout & GPS Summer, Fall 2004 REACH
Treatments, Machine Summer – Winter 2004 REACH, contractor
Treatments, hand
Thinning
Restoration blanket installation
Seeding & planting
Monitoring
Summer – Winter 2004
Spring 2004 - 2006
REACH, contractors
ARWC Landowners
Reports Winter 2004 – Spring 2005 REACH ARWC

Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Personnel
Federal
Agency
Applicant Partner 1 Partner 2 Total
Field Work, wages
Subtotal
Fringe Benefits
Subtotal
Travel
Subtotal
Equipment
Subtotal
Supplies
Subtotal
Contractual
Applegate R. Watershed Council
2-B Forests, Training Partner
Integrated Resource Management
Subtotal
Other
Subtotal
Total Costs
Project (Program) Income 1
(using deductive alternative)
$7,875
$4,200
$10,500
$22,575
$1,955
$1,955
$49,777
0
$18,240
$18,240
$4,560
$4,560
$2,447
$2,447
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.
$18,240
$4,560
$2,447
$1,955
$22,575
$49,777