Bulletin E-Edition:
Cutting down the risk of fire
Most wildfire reduction programs aren’t close enough to at-risk communities, a new study found. But officials say Central Oregon is better than average
By Kate Ramsayer / The Bulletin
Published: June 18. 2009 4:00AM PST
more photos | order photo
Chris Sampas, 34, of Bend, fells a juniper tree Wednesday in the Sisters Ranger District as part of a GFP Enterprises project to create a defensible space around private property.
Pete Erickson / The Bulletin
advertisement:
Only about 10 percent of the forestry projects designed to tame wildfires in the West are located near communities in fire-prone areas, according to new research. But in Central Oregon, where developments edge up against national forests, that’s not the case, forestry officials said.
In the study, scientists from Colorado and Montana plotted the locations of more than 44,000 National Fire Plan projects across 11 states to see how they met a key goal of the plan — reducing fire risk to communities, said Tania Schoennagel with the University of Colorado, an author of the study published last week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The researchers found only 11 percent of the fire-reduction projects were within a 1.5-mile buffer around cities and developments. “We need to better target this important zone, where we have an opportunity to reduce risk,” Schoennagel said.
One problem is that much of the wildland-urban interface is on private land, while the projects are funded by federal dollars.
The study doesn’t reflect the situation in Central Oregon, according to officials with the U.S. Forest Service and Project Wildfire, a Bend-based organization.
“The treatment of the (wildland-urban interface) is the top priority of the Forest Service when it comes to our fuels treatment program,” said Bill Aney, a fuels specialist for the Forest Service’s Pacific Northwest region. “We’re putting at least half of our effort into those areas.”
Programs around the region
And even more efforts to thin trees, mow brush and conduct prescribed burns are directed toward the wildland-urban interface in the 1.6 million-acre Deschutes National Forest, which surrounds many of Central Oregon’s populated areas.
During the past five years, the Deschutes National Forest has treated twice as many acres near communities as acres in remote areas — with 83,833 acres in the wildland-urban interface and 35,929 acres outside it, according to Forest Service figures.
The Ochoco National Forest treats fewer wildland-urban interface acres because there are fewer populated areas, Aney said.
In the Sisters Ranger District, however, which surrounds communities like Camp Sherman, Tollgate and Black Butte Ranch, fuel-reducing efforts have been focused around populated areas for the past 10 years, said Jinny Pitman, assistant fire manager officer for fuels with the Central Oregon Fire Management Service.
The Sisters district instead needs money for wildfire-fuel projects in areas away from cities, where the fires actually start, she said.
“It’s a little frustrating that we aren’t able to treat more of the uplands,” Pitman said.
The Bend-Fort Rock Ranger District has ongoing projects near La Pine, Sunriver and Deschutes River Woods, said Shane Jeffries, Bend-Fort Rock district ranger.
“Any time we have a situation where we have a wildland-urban interface, where a national forest comes up against communities, it’s a high priority for us — particularly where we have high fuels accumulations,” he said.
The Forest Service works with the counties and communities, and incorporates priorities from the Community Wildfire Protection plans the regions have developed.
Landowners are key
Katie Lighthall, program coordinator with Project Wildfire, said she was shocked to hear the 10 percent figure.
“We know for a fact we’ve done way more than that, in how many acres we’ve treated,” she said. “It’s not true in our area.”
The study’s authors, however, said when they looked at sites across the West, more than 70 percent of the wildland-urban interface areas were on private property — only about 20 percent were on federal land, Schoennagel said.
To the authors, that suggests a need to focus more attention — and perhaps policies — on private lands and what can be done to help landowners reduce the fire risk on their properties.
“It seems like we’re trying to solve this problem from a federal land management agency angle, and private landowners actually hold the key to protecting their homes,” Schoennagel said. “Maybe we need to see a shift from more of a federal approach to a private approach to protecting homes.”
The most effective way to protect homes, she said, is to focus on areas 100 to 200 feet around structures and do things like install a metal roof or replace a wooden deck.
Efforts are costly
The United States spent about $2.7 billion between 2001 and 2006 on fuels treatments, according to the study, and about $1 billion a year on fire suppression.
“If we’re expending that money, we really should be targeting ways to reduce fire risk,” Schoennagel said.
Private landowners are getting help in Central Oregon, though, Lighthall said. The Community Wildfire Protection Plans for areas not only allow the federal government to identify areas to focus on, but also help communities get grants for projects on private lands.
“We’ve seen tons of treatments,” she said, citing a project around Newberry Estates in La Pine, where work was done on both public and private land.
“By maintaining funding levels on both sides of that issue, both private and public, that’s where we get the best results,” Lighthall said.
Kate Ramsayer can be reached at 541-617-7811 or at kramsayer@bendbulletin.com.
ARTICLE ACCESS: This article is among those available to all readers. Many more articles are available only to E-Edition members. Sign up today!
blog comments powered by Disqus
