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:
University of Oregon, Office of Research Services
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
346-5131
346-5138
Karen_Findtner@ORSA.uoregon.edu
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
5219 University of Oregon 97403-5219
of Oregon
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
1. Dr. Bart Johnson (Associate Professor L..A.) & 2. Dr. Barbara ("Bitty") Roy (Associate Professor Biology)
Organization/Jurisdiction:
University of Oregon
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
346-3688, 346-4520
346-3626
bartj@darkwing.uoregon.edu
Project Information
Project Title:
Buford savanna
Proposed Project Start Date:
Proposed Project End Date:
May 15, 2003
June 30, 2006
Federal Funding Request:
Total Project Funding:
$38137
$54578
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
Brief Project Description:
The foundation of this project is to examine the utility of fire as a means to reduce hazardous fuel loads and
to restore valuable native ecosystems. There is great concern within the Eugene-Springfield metro area about
high fuels loading in successional oak woodlands, such as much of Buford Park where this project will be
located. Many local agencies are struggling to determine appropriate strategies for fuel management.
Moreover, the city and county are requiring more and more natural areas as parks. These parks often have
high fuels loading. In addition, invasive species are rampant and fire has been raised as a potential tool for
increasing the frequency of native plant species.
In this proposal we request funds for a scientific study of the effects of burning in an upland prairie/oak
savanna that is part of a County Park (Buford), which is near the city of Eugene. The data collected will
inform fire planning efforts throughout the Willamette Valley and Puget Trough.
Project Location (latitude/longitude if applicable):
County:
Congressional District:
Buford Park (Mt. Pisgah), Oregon
Lane
4
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:
Lane County Parks and Oregon Department of Forestry and Friends of Buford Park (a local non-profit) have
been collaborating on an approximately 30 acre prescribed burn project within the Howard Buford Recreation
Area, a 2,300 acre county park on the fringes of Eugene Oregon, population 137,000. The goals of the burn
are both fuels reduction and ecological restoration. As part of this effort, we have been conducting pre-burn
monitoring of fuels and plant communities. We are seeking funds to continue scientifically sound monitoring
of pre- and post-burn conditions to determine prescribed fire's effects on fuels reduction and on the plant
communities.
The park contains some of the highest quality native habitats in the area, including wetland and upland
prairie, oak woodlands and savanna, riparian bottomland forest and Douglas Fir forest. For any hazardous
fuels reduction or ecological restoration project on the site to succeed, it must be clearly demonstrated that
management activities at a minimum are not degrading the quality of valuable native plant communities, and,
in the best case, are improving them. A key concern is whether burning will increase or decrease native
grasses and forbs relative to invasive exotics or not. There is little to no relevant research available to inform
management practices.
We have completed two year's of pre-burn monitoring to date on volunteer efforts and are requesting funds to
continue monitoring and analysis for another three years. To detect vegetation changes that occur with
burning, we have four treatment areas (two burn and two controls). We have two sampling strategies that we
have applied in alternate years. In year one, we sampled 25 stratified random 1 m x 1 m quadrats within each
treatment area to detect overall changes in plant frequencies and cover. In year two, we located four 5 m x 9
m permanent macroplots in each area to more precisely detect change in space over time. Each macroplot is
subsampled with five randomly placed1 m x 1 m quadrats, and one plot that is monitored yearly to precisely
detect changes in the same exact location. This design allows us to measure changes in exotic and native
plant frequencies and cover between treatments and years, as well as to estimate changes over the treatment
areas. It also allows precise estimates of change to specific plant patches. To better evaluate the effects of
prescribed fire on woody fuels we have measured the area and extent of all trees and shrubs in the treatment
areas.
Our long-term goal is to develop a larger proposal for NFP FY 2004 funding with the other agencies and
groups described above to begin a broader effort at fuels management and ecological restoration within the
park. These monitoring efforts are a critical part of any such broader scale project, contributing needed
analysis of the effects of prescribed burning on the valuable ecological communities of the park.
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:
The proposed burn promotes the reduction of fire risk in two ways. It will reduce the amount of woody fuels
in the burn area. Second, we expect the burn will reduce the dominance of non-native grasses, which in some
circumstances are more flammable than the native grasses and forbs. The proposed burn and monitoring will
benefit Buford Park as it will reduce fuels and will provide valuable information on the effects of fire on
exotic plant species. This information will made available via a website and by written reports (upon request)
to other agencies within the Willamette Valley with similar management issues (e.g., US-BLM, USFS,
Oregon Department of Forestry, The Nature Conservancy). Thus, the burn and assessment effort will inform
the much larger movement within the Willamette Valley and Puget Trough to work with fire as a land
management tool. Planning efforts are ongoing, and we expect that a larger, more comprehensive proposal
through Lane County will be forthcoming for the 2004- 2005 season. In the current proposal we are
requesting funds for monitoring and assessment for the next three years while these larger plans are being
developed. We are committed to maintaining the data collection and treatments for at least a three to five
year period. Several years of assessment are necessary as many of the native species are perennials, and we
do not know how long it will take the plants to respond to the fire.
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.
How would the proposal improve the local economy? Data collection requires considerable
time and effort by qualified botanists. Furthermore, data entry and professional statistical analysis also need
to be done. Our experience to date shows that 4-5 people will work full time on this project for a two week
period during data collection, then one person will enter data for a week, and analysis and report writing will
take another 1-2 weeks. If our efforts to combine fuels reduction and ecological restoration are successful, it
will open the way for much broader-scale use of fire as a management tool in local and regional parks and
other ecologically significant habitats, offering significant local employment.
B. How will this project serve as a model for other communities or natural landscapes?
This project has considerable potential to inform management of native ecosystems throughout the
Willamette Valley and Puget Trough areas. We have a sound experimental design and considerable statistical
expertise and are committed to sharing this information with all interested parties via a website and with
written reports. We further expect to publish the research in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
C. Will biomass or forest fuels be utilized? No.
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. This fire effects assessment project is a critical component of current and projected efforts to employ
prescribed fire in the Howard Buford Recreation Area. The initial prescribed fire plan was developed by
Lane County Parks and the Oregon Department of Forestry with the assistance of the Friends of Buford Park
and ecologists at the University of Oregon
3B. The Friends of Buford Park Stewardship and Technical Assistance Committee has participated fully in
the development of the monitoring and assessment protocols, with the collaboration and input of statisticians
and biologists from The Nature Conservancy, U.S. BLM, and the Oregon Natural Heritage Program. Broader
discussions have begun among individuals from U.S.-BLM, U.S.F.S, TNC, the City of Eugene, among others
to develop coordinated strategic planning in local urban-wildland interface fuels and habitat management. We
intend to be active participants in this planning effort and to use our results to inform planning and decisionmaking. This assessment project will offer much needed baseline information on the effects of fire on upland
prairie and oak habitats.
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: 4A.
The monitoring has been conducted in cooperation with Friends of Buford Park, a local nonprofit and the University of Oregon.
4B. There has been no opposition to the project. Community support has been expressed through the high
level of volunteer participation, including in 2002, more than 200 hours of time by trained botanists, an
estimated value of nearly $10,000. These professionals cannot be expected to maintain such high levels of
involvement without pay.
4C. The monitoring and evaluation program will be linked to community education and outreach by
involving community members in the monitoring. We will pair each trained botanist with a community
member who will serve as a data recorder in the field. Through this involvement, community members will
receive first-hand education in the issues of fuel management and ecological restoration, and training in
botanical field work. In the first two years of monitoring we have involved over 20 community members in
intensive experiences in ecological assessment and education.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Organizational
(setting up workers, data sheet
preparation, field site preparation,
quadrat building, reference collection)
per year: 1 day X 2 people
Johnson & Roy
Botanical Assessment
(plant identification & frequency
counts)
per year:
4 days X 2 botanistis + volunteers
Johnson & Roy
+ 5 days each Johnson and Roy
Data Entry
per year:
3 days hourly wage X 1 person
Johnson & Roy
+ one person day Roy & Johnson
Data Analysis
per year: four person days
Johnson & Roy
Report Writing
per year:
three person days
Johnson & Roy
+ six additinoal days the final year
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Top of Form
Enclosure
Cost Category
Description
Personnel
2.2 wks salary Johnson X 3yr
2.2 wks salary Roy X 3 yr.
Subtotal
Fringe Benefits
51% OPE
41% OPE
Subtotal
Travel
to and from the field site
Subtotal
Equipment
$0.00
Supplies
quadrats, flagging, etc.
Subtotal
$0.00
Contractual
botanists=64hrs@$50 X3yr
data entry 24hr@$10 X3yr
Subtotal
Other
Indirect (F&A costs)=26%
Volunteers 128hr@$10 X3yr
Subtotal
Total Costs
Project (Program) Income1
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.
Subtotal
$0.00