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:
The Forest Restoration Partnership
darin@integratedresourcemanagement.org
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
541.338.7888
509.756.1109
(see above)
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
PO Box 547 Philomath, Oregon 97370
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Darin Stringer, Director
Organization/Jurisdiction:
The Forest Restoration Partnership
darin@integratedresourcemanagement.org
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
541.338.7888
509.756.1109
(see above)
Project Information
Project Title:
Oak Woodland Fuels Reduction Demo/Study
Project Start:
Project End:
June 1, 2002
January 1, 2004
Federal Funding Request:
Total Project Funding:
$105,600.00
$136,855.00
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please explain and prioritize:
No
Brief Project Description:
The Forest Restoration Partnership (FRP), a non-profit forestry organization based in Philomath,
Oregon along with various local and state government agencies and non-profit organizations
propose a multi-site fuels reduction project in oak woodlands throughout Western Oregon and
South Central Washington. The purpose of this demonstration project is as follows:
· To demonstrate to a broad audience the range of options available to treat oak woodlands within
urban-wildland interface zones to achieve both fuels reduction and habitat improvement objectives
· To improve our understanding of the costs associated with a variety of treatments and sites
through time-motion study of treatments.
· To decrease fire risk within oak woodland types identified within high risk wildland-urban interface
communities.
Project Location:
County:
Congressional District:
Western Oregon, Washington
Multi-County
Multi-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:
Eastside of Columbia River Gorge, Mid and South Willamette Valley
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
Oak woodlands define much of the urban-rural interface in the Eastern Columbia Gorge, Rogue,
Umpqua, and Willamette Valleys of Western Oregon. This vegetation type occurs on tens of thousands of
acres and is prevalent along the fringes of the valleys where many homesites occur within forest settings. Fire
exclusion has created dense stand conditions and high levels of ground fuels from understory brush. Prewhite settlement oak habitats were maintained as open stands (savannas) from frequent underburning. Fuel
reduction and restoration of open woodland/savanna conditions are complementary objectives (note: oak
savannas are among the most endangered vegetation types in North America). However, such treatments have
been hampered by lack of understranding of methods and costs of fuels reduction treatments. Exploration of
market opportunities for small diameter oak would create additional incentives for fuels reduction projects in
dense oak stands.
The Forest Restoration Partnership, a 501 (c)(3) non-profit group proposes a multi-site fuels reduction project
in selected oak habitats throughout W. Oregon and Washington to demonstrate methods and appropriate
technologies for treating dense oak stands. FRP has experimented with tracked skid-steer tractors and various
attachments for use in thinning operations and mowing brush in Douglas-fir stands and encroached pasture.
Employing this equipment in treating oak stands will demonstrate the effectiveness of such equipment on
various sites. A broad coalition of partners have offered sites and assistance in undertaking this project. Those
partners include Oregon State University Research Forests, Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, Benton
County Parks, Willamalane Parks District, City of Springfield Fire Department, Columbia Land Trust, and
Alliance of Forest Workers and Harvesters. Site selection prioritized areas with dense oak and brush
dominated stands within the wildland-urban interface. All chosen sites receive major visitation by the public,
and therefore will allow maximum exposure to treatments through interpretive display and organized tours.
We intionally sought sites spread throughout the Willamette Valley and Columbia Gorge to allow
demonstration to a wide audience, and to test treatments over a range of site conditions.
Response:
The anticipated products of this project are as follows:
- Fuels reduction work on approximately 300 acres of oak woodlands and brushlands.
- Published study in peer reviewed journal (e.g. Western Journal of Applied Forestry) and mediums more
widely available to the public (Forest Research Laboratory Publication through OSU, and Oregon Small
Woodlands Newsletter). The study would calculate fuels treatment costs employing various methods
(mechanized, vs. manual) on different sites and document operational efficiencies of each approach.
- Public tours to each site organized through local chapters of Small Woodlands Association, NRCS and local
fire districts to educate public and land managers of tools and methods available to treat oak stands.
- Development of website to educate public and agency personel of study findings. Website would include
detailed site descriptions, maps, pre and post treatment site photographs, and information on quantity of fuels
reduction. Information would also be hosted on agency websites (e.g. Oregon Deparment of Forestry)
Sites will be treated and demonstration tours conducted during the spring and summer of 2003, completion
of fuels treatments by the end of October 2003, and submission of articles and Development of website by
January 2004.
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. Published information and demonstration of techniques and costs for reducing fuels in oak woodlands is
largely unavailable and is an impediment for more widespread application of fuels reduction projects in these
communities.
B. Fuels reduction in oak woodlands will reduce risk of high intensity fire behavior, improve fire control if
wildfire occurs and reduce loss of property within the interface.
C. Project will focus on demonstration of small scale treatments over a large geographic area to provide
exposure and education for fuels reduction in the Willamette Valley and Eastside Columbia River Gorge.
However, this project backs and implements fire plans on the chosen sites for treatment.
D. Community outreach has been conducted by representatives of partnering organization. These include
presentations to the following groups: Luckimute Watershed Council (Partner-OSU Research Forest),
Regional Oak Communities Working Group, Forestry Working Group of Lane County (Partner- Forest
Restoration Partnership). Additional presentations are planned as part of demonstration tours. Oregon Parks
and Recreation has donated $1,500 for interpretive signs at its demo site.
E. Density reduction and brush mowing will restore stands to fire resistent condition.
F. Several partners have such annual funding, grant writing is underway to secure follow-up treatments.
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) Treatments will employ a field crew of 15 workers for a period of 3 months. Manual workers will be
supplied by the Alliance of Forest Workers, and Harvesters, a partner that trains and employs multi-cultural
forest workers and displaced loggers. The indirect impact of this demonstation and study will be to encourage
more widespread use of fuels treatments that will create additional jobs
B. This project will reach a wide range of community interests. Information dissemenation will encourage
expanded projects throughout the region.
C. All oak logs will be utilized, except where slopes exceeding 30%, where small jackpot piling will occur
(approx. 50 acres). Log utilization on a cubic foot volume basis will include 40-90% firewood, (we are
working with contractor to develop market for "green certified" firewood, which is anticipated to cover
trucking costs), 10% sawlog (proceeds from sale will potentially offset logging costs depending on 2003
markets. A small percent of volume will be used to run trials for nurse logs for commercial muchroom
production. Entire biomass ground-based portion of Washington site may be used by Bear Mountain Forest
Products of Hood River, Oregon for oak pressed log trial.
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. Current plans do not exist for jurisdictions that encompass these sites.
B) This proposal is a broad-based governmental/non-profit effort to gain an understanding of methods and
costs of reducing fire risks in oak woodland types througout W. Oregon and the Columbia River Gorge. The
partners include the following governmental entities: (Oregon State University Research Forests, Oregon
State Parks and Recreation, Benton County Parks Department, Willamalane Park District, Springfield Fire
Department), Non-profit organizations: Forest Restoration Partnership, Columbia Land Trust, and Alliance of
Forest workers and Harvesters), and private landowners. Project support has also been committed by Yakima
Nation Fisheries, and the Luckiamute Watershed Council, Pape Group Inc. and Hyster Inc.
We are currently pursing opportunities to link this study with other planned or active fuels reductions projects
within similar vegetation types. To date potential partners include: Finley National Wildlife Refuge, Medford
and Roseburg BLM, and Gifford-Pinchot National Forest.
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. Project has been presented to all parties involved indicating a high level of support at various government
levels. Presentations have been made to Watershed Councils within treatment areas. We plan a series of
meetings within each treatment community once grant has been secured and specific treatments developed.
Meetings will foster additional public support and provide information to communities on dates of
demonstration tours.
B. Columbia Land Trust ($5000), Oregon State Parks and Recreation ($10,155), Oregon State University
Research Forests ($10,000), Hyster Inc. ($1,500), Pape' Group Inc. ($1,500), Benton County Parks ($2,000)
Springfield Fire Department ($2,000) Forest Restoration Partnership ($5,000).
C. Fuels treatments are consistent with restoration objectives; returning stands to savanna condition benefit
many species including several state listed wildlife species. Treatments reduce risk of stand replacing fire
which would eliminate oak habitats and adjacent conifer stands. Social benefits include community
involvement in restoration work and improved accesibility to park sites currently dominated by heavy brush.
Interpretive signs will be donated by Oregon State Parks to educate public on fuels reduction fire.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Organize Project Steering Committee, develop
study design (research protocols, silvicultural
prescriptions, treatment sites). Assessment of
biomass generation and utilization options,
Conduct necessary NEPA analysis.
In Progress, completion date by
September 15, 2002
Forest Restoration Partnership and
Steering Committee members
Conduct outreach at Watershed Council
meetings, informational meetings sponsored
by Natural Resource Conservation Districts,
local Small Woodlands Association chapters
to present study and opportunities for public
involvement. Organize demonstration dates.
November 2002-January 2003
Forest Restoration Partnership
Implement and complete fuels treatment
projects on all sites. Gather data to assess
treatment costs and operation efficiencies.
May-October 2003
Forest Restoration Partnership
Alliance of Forest Workers and
Harvesters
Lead tours to treatment sites demonstrating
different silvicultural methods and
harvest/mowing techniques
July-September 2003
Forest Restoration Partnership
Analyze fuels treatment data, submit paper for
publication, and to various natural resource
agency/institution websites (OSU College of
Forestry, Oregon Department of Forestry,
Natural Resource Conservation Service,
Forest Restoration Partnership)
November -January 2004
Forest Restoration Partnership
Complete trial use of small diamter oak logs
as medium for commercial production of
Shitake mushrooms
January 2004
Northwest Mycological Consultants
Presentation of Demo/Study to Oak Working
Group Regional Meeting
January 2004
Forest Restoration Partnership
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Personnel
In-Kind/ Labor
$0.00
$55,000.00
$30,655.00
Subtotal
$0.00
$85,655.00
Applicant
Partner 1
$0.00
Partner 2
Total
$0.00
$55,000.00
$30,655.00
$0.00
$85,655.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$600.00
$600.00
$0.00
$1,200.00
$0.00
$0.00
$30,500.00
$3,000.00
$33,500.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,500.00
$0.00
$1,500.00
$0.00
$0.00
$15,000.00
$0.00
$15,000.00
Fringe Benefits
Subtotal
$0.00
Travel
In-Kind/Travel
Subtotal
Equipment
Lease/Purchase
In-Kind/Skid Steer
Subtotal
$0.00
$1,200.00
$0.00
$0.00
$30,500.00
$3,000.00
$33,500.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,500.00
$0.00
Contractual
Manual Fuels Reduction
Subtotal
$0.00
$600.00
$600.00
Supplies
Layout Supplies
Subtotal
$0.00
$1,500.00
$0.00
$15,000.00
$0.00
$15,000.00
$0.00
Other
Subtotal
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Total Costs
$0.00
$136,855.00
$0.00
$0.00
$136,855.00
Project (Program) Income1
(using deductive alternative)
1
$0.00
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.