and vol. 38, no. 3 • fremontia · volume 38:2/38:3, april 2010/july 2010 fremontia journal of the...

F R E M O N T I AV O L U M E 3 8 : 2 / 3 8 : 3 , A P R I L 2 0 1 0 / J U L Y 2 0 1 0

JOURNAL OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

$10.00 (Free to Members)

VOL. 38, NO. 2 AND VOL. 38, NO. 3 • APRIL 2010 AND JULY 2010

FREMONTIA

SPECIAL ISSUE:NATIVE PLANTS AND FIRE SAFETYSPECIAL ISSUE:NATIVE PLANTS AND FIRE SAFETY

F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 8 : 2 / 3 8 : 3 , A P R I L 2 0 1 0 / J U L Y 2 0 1 0

STAFF (SACRAMENTO)Executive Director . . . . . Tara HansenFinance & Administration Manager .

Cari PorterMembership & Development Coor-

dinator . . . . . . Stacey FlowerdewConservation Program Director . . . . .

Greg SubaRare Plant Botanist . . . . Aaron SimsVegetation Program Director . . . Julie

EvensVegetation Ecologists . Jennifer Buck,

Kendra SikesEducation Program Director . . . Josie

CrawfordAdministrative Assistant . . . . . Marcy

Millett

STAFF (AT LARGE)Fremontia Editor . . . . . . . Bob HassCNPS Bulletin Editor . . . . . Bob HassLegislative Consultant .Vern GoehringEast Bay Conservation Analyst . . . . .

Lech NaumovichWebsite Coordinator . . Mark Naftzger

PROGRAM ADVISORSRare Plant Program Senior Advisor . . .

Jim AndreVegetation Program Senior Advisor . .

Todd Keeler-WolfHorticulture Committee Chair . . . . . .

Laura CampCNPS Press Co-Directors . . . . . Holly

Forbes, Dore BrownPoster Program . . . Bertha McKinley,

Wilma Follette

BOARD OF DIRECTORSBrett Hall (President); Lauren Brown(Vice President); Carol Witham (Trea-surer); Sarah Jayne (Secretary); AtLarge: Laura Camp, Ellen Dean, ArvindKumar, Nancy Morin, Vince Scheidt,Alison Shilling

MATERIALS FOR PUBLICATIONCNPS members and others are wel-come to contribute materials for publi-cation in Fremontia. See the inside backcover for submission instructions.

CHAPTER COUNCILDavid Magney (Chair); Larry Levine(Vice Chair); Marty Foltyn (Secretary);Board of Directors Representatives:Brian LeNeve, Orchid Black

Alta Peak (Tulare) . . . . Joan StewartBristlecone (Inyo-Mono) . . . . . . . . .

Steve McLaughlinChannel Islands . . . . David MagneyDorothy King Young (Mendocino/

Sonoma Coast) . . . . . Nancy MorinEast Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . Bill J. HuntEl Dorado . . . . . . . . . Susan BrittingKern County . . . . . Dorie GiragosianLos Angeles/Santa Monica Mtns . . . .

Betsey LandisMarin County . . Carolyn LongstrethMilo Baker (Sonoma County) . . . . .

Liz ParsonsMojave Desert . . . . . . Tim ThomasMonterey Bay . . . . Rosemary FosterMount Lassen . . . . . . . Catie BishopNapa Valley . . . . . . Gerald TombocNorth Coast . . . . . . . Larry LevineNorth San Joaquin . . . . Alan MillerOrange County . . . . . Nancy HeulerRedbud (Grass Valley/Auburn) . . . .

Joan A. JerneganRiverside/San Bernardino counties . .

Katie BarrowsSacramento Valley . . . Glen HolsteinSan Diego . . . . . . . . David VarnerSan Gabriel Mtns . . . . Orchid BlackSan Luis Obispo . . . . Lauren BrownSanhedrin (Ukiah) . . . . . . . . . Geri

Hulse-StephensSanta Clara Valley . . . Judy FenertySanta Cruz County . Deanna GiulianoSequoia (Fresno) . . . . Paul MitchellShasta . . . . . . . . . . Ken S. KilbornSierra Foothills (Tuolumne, Cala- veras, Mariposa) . . Robert W. BrownSouth Coast (Palos Verdes) . . . . . .

David BermanTahoe . . . . . . . . . . Michael HoganWillis L. Jepson (Solano) . . . . . . . .

Mary Frances Kelly PohYerba Buena (San Francisco) . . . . .

Ellen Edelson

Staff and board listings are as of June 2011.Printed by Premier Graphics: www.premiergraphics.biz

The California Native Plant Society(CNPS) is a statewide nonprofit organi-zation dedicated to increasing theunderstanding and appreciation ofCalifornia’s native plants, and to pre-serving them and their natural habitatsfor future generations.

CNPS carries out its mission throughscience, conservation advocacy, educa-tion, and horticulture at the local, state,and federal levels. It monitors rare andendangered plants and habitats; acts tosave endangered areas through public-ity, persuasion, and on occasion, legalaction; provides expert testimony togovernment bodies; supports the estab-lishment of native plant preserves; spon-sors workdays to remove invasive plants;and offers a range of educational activi-ties including speaker programs, fieldtrips, native plant sales, horticulturalworkshops, and demonstration gardens.

Since its founding in 1965, the tradi-tional strength of CNPS has been itsdedicated volunteers. CNPS activitiesare organized at the local chapter levelwhere members’ varied interests influ-ence what is done. Volunteers from the33 CNPS chapters annually contributein excess of 97,000 hours (equivalentto 46.5 full-time employees).

CNPS membership is open to all.Members receive the quarterly journal,Fremontia, the quarterly statewide Bul-letin, and newsletters from their localCNPS chapter.

VOL. 38, NO. 2, APRIL 2010 ANDVOL 38, NO. 3, JULY 2010

F R E M O N T I A

Copyright © 2010California Native Plant Society

Disclaimer:

The views expressed by authors publishedin this journal do not necessarily reflectestablished policy or procedure of CNPS,and their publication in this journal shouldnot be interpreted as an organizationalendorsement—in part or in whole—of theirideas, statements, or opinions.

CALIFORNIA NATIVEPLANT SOCIETY

Dedicated to the Preservation ofthe California Native Flora

Bob Hass, EditorBetsey Landis, Advisor

Beth Hansen-Winter, DesignerBrad Jenkins, Jake Sigg, andCarol Witham, Proofreaders

CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

MEMBERSHIPMembership form located on inside back cover;

dues include subscriptions to Fremontia and the CNPS Bulletin

Mariposa Lily . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,500Benefactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $600Patron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $300Plant Lover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100

Family or Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . $75International or Library . . . . . . . $75Individual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45Student/Retired/Limited Income . $25

CNPS, 2707 K Street, Suite 1; Sacramento, CA 95816-5113Phone: (916) 447-CNPS (2677) Fax: (916) 447-2727

Web site: www.cnps.org Email: [email protected]

10+ Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,5007-10 Employees . . . . . . . . . . . $1,000

4-6 Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5001-3 Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . $150

CORPORATE/ORGANIZATIONAL

ISSUE DATE : A P R I L AND JU L Y 2010. PUBL ICAT ION DATE : J U L Y 2011

F R E M O N T I A 1V O L U M E 3 8 : 2 / 3 8 : 3 , A P R I L 2 0 1 0 / J U L Y 2 0 1 0

CONTENTS

THE COVER: Burning chaparral in Southern California. Photograph courtesy of the U.S. Forest Service.

FIRE ON CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPES by Jon E. Keeley ........................................................................ 2The California wildfire problem involves wildfire hazards to the urban environment and protection ofnatural resources. Managing this risk involves fire suppression, changing home construction standards,reducing landscaping fuels, and more serious attention to zoning decisions.

HOW CNPS DEVELOPED A POLICY ON NATIVE PLANTS AND FIRE SAFETY by Betsey Landis ... 7Extensive inquiry and discussion has resulted in a CNPS policy for the state of California that protects nativeplants, ensures fire safety, and suggests ways to implement it.

THE WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE FIRE PROBLEM by Jack Cohen ............................................... 16Homes can survive wildfires without the necessity of wildfire control. But this will require changing ourmindset from wildfire exclusion to wildfire compatibility.

INTERPRETING FIRE AND LIFE HISTORY INFORMATION IN THE MANUAL OF CALIFORNIAVEGETATION by Todd Keeler-Wolf, Julie M. Evens, and John O. Sawyer .............................................. 23The natural history and fire information in the new edition of A Manual of California Vegetation providesland managers and others with better ways to preserve the state’s natural heritage.

INVASIVE SPECIES AND FIRE IN CALIFORNIA ECOSYSTEMS by Adam M. Lambert, Carla M.D’Antonio, and Tom L. Dudley .................................................................................................................... 29Although fire is a natural disturbance in many California plant communities, invasive species can alter firedynamics in ways that are transforming some of these communities.

SUSTAINABLE AND FIRE-SAFE LANDSCAPES: ACHIEVING WILDFIRE RESISTANCE ANDENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH IN THE WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE by Sabrina L. Drill .......... 37UC Cooperative Extension, Los Angeles, has developed an educational program to help homeowners createand maintain fire-safe landscaping, while also being good stewards of the land and avoiding the use ofinvasive plants.

THE ROLE OF FIRE SAFE COUNCILS IN CALIFORNIA by Yvonne Everett ...................................... 42All over California, where communities meet wildlands, citizen groups are working together to help protecttheir neighborhoods from wildfire. They call themselves Fire Safe Councils.

FIRE-RESISTANT LANDSCAPING: A GENERAL APPROACH AND CENTRAL COASTPERSPECTIVE by Suzanne Schettler .......................................................................................................... 46Wildfires are capricious and yet there are steps we can take to reduce the risk to a home when designing orretrofitting a landscape setting.

WILDFIRE SAFETY: LESSONS LEARNED FROM SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA by Greg Rubin ......... 51It is possible to create defensible space around your home while still embracing the natural ecology thatsurrounds it. Some pragmatic tips for enhancing fire safety without wholesale environmental destruction.

THE MENDOCINO COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL by Julie Rogers ................................................ 56From humble beginnings, Fire Safe Councils such as this one in Mendocino County are helping communi-ties “survive and thrive” in wildfire-prone environments.

NEW CNPS FELLOW—TERESA SHOLARS by Lori Hubbart .............................................................. 60

DR. REID MORAN: 1916 –2010 by Thomas Oberbauer ....................................................................... 62

BETH HANSEN-WINTER: CNPS DESIGNER EXTRAORDINAIRE by Phyllis M. Faber .................... 65Meet Beth Hansen-Winter, who is celebrating 25 years as the designer of Fremontia.

BOOK REVIEW: The Nature of This Place: Investigations and Adventures in the Yuba Watershedby Bruce Boyd and Liese Greensfelder, editors. Reviewed by Julie Carville. ................................................... 66

2 F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 8 : 2 / 3 8 : 3 , A P R I L 2 0 1 0 / J U L Y 2 0 1 0

FIRE ON CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPESby Jon E. Keeley

his volume comprises a finecollection of papers that in-troduces a diversity of issuespertaining to wildfires. They

illustrate well the difficulty of bal-ancing protection of natural re-sources with threats to urban envi-ronments. Critical to understand-ing these issues is the recognitionthat there are distinct ecoregionaldifferences in the natural role of fireand consequently in appropriatemanagement practices, and nowhereis this more evident than in the verydiverse state of California with itssharp contrasts between forested andnon-forested ecosystems.

The California flora is well knownfor its resilience to periodic fires, andmany species are characterized asbeing “fire-adapted” or having “fire-adaptive traits,” which means theyhave characteristics that are deemedcritical to success in fire-prone envi-ronments. However, in recent de-cades we have come to recognize thatno species is adapted to fire per se,but rather is adapted to particularfire regimes. For example, fire-adap-tive traits are very different betweenforest species and shrubland species,and historical impacts on fire regimesand contemporary fire managementneeds are very different between these

biomes (Keeley et al. 2009). In thisissue the novel approach of Keeler-Wolf, Evens, and Sawyer in applyingfire responses to community associa-tions is a first attempt at providing aframework for understanding fire re-gime differences that may prove use-ful to fire managers.

A state as diverse as Californiahas many fire regimes, but the con-cept can be illustrated by contrast-ing surface fire regimes in forestswith crown fire regimes in shrub-lands. Forests with historical fire re-gimes of surface fires that largelyburned understory litter, or in moreopen forest savannah sites burned

Postfire regeneration of chaparral in the first spring after the 2007 Witch Fire in northern San Diego County. In addition to shrubresprouts, it is remarkable how many annual species with seed banks that have been dormant for decades are stimulated to germinateby smoke and heat. All photographs by J. Keeley.

T


understory grasses, generally leftmost mature trees alive. The life his-tory traits of the dominant mixedconifer trees reflect a strategy of out-growing the surface fuels, maintain-ing the canopy well above the sur-face fuels, and evolving traits suchas thick bark and self-pruning ofdead branches as a means of provid-ing separation between the fire andthe live canopy. The trees in theseforests depend on surviving, as theyare the parent seed trees for subse-quent recovery. Key to survival isthe fuel load, and historically thiswas kept at a low level by frequentlightning-ignited fires. In these for-est types, the landscape patterns ofburning are critical to the speed ofrecovery, as seed dispersal is rela-tively localized and dependent onpatches of seed trees surviving, in-terspersed with areas of high inten-sity burning that open gaps in theforest canopy.

Non-forested vegetation such aschaparral shrublands persist on moreextreme sites where plant produc-tivity is lower and the vegetationsimply lacks the capacity to outgrowfire impacts. In these systems, crownfires periodically burn through en-

tire canopies and leave very littleabove-ground living plants. On theselandscapes lightning-ignited firesare far less frequent than in forestedenvironments. Historically theseshrublands burned perhaps once ortwice a century, and fires profitedfrom the massive landscape expansesof fuels. Most chaparral species re-cover endogenously (growing fromwithin the site) by dormant seedbanks and resprouting from basalburls or other below-ground vegeta-tive structures. As a consequence ofthis endogenous regeneration sys-tem, fire size is seldom critical tovegetation recovery, although this isless true for the fauna.

This dichotomy of forest surfacefire regimes and shrubland crownfire regimes of course only capturessome extremes. In this issue, Lam-bert, D’Antonio, and Dudley describeGreat Basin sage scrub, which expe-riences very frequent lightning-ignited fires, but due to the discon-tinuities in surface fuels, yields verypatchy burn patterns. This is re-flected in lack of resprouting andlack of dormant seed banks in manydominant shrubs (Keeley et al. 2009).The gaps are dependent on meta-

population dynamics, an ecologicalterm that describes how landscapesrecover by surviving populations re-colonizing localized burned sites.

Disturbance of course is a con-cern to all botanists who appreciatenatural landscapes and conservationof the native flora. Disturbance froma human perspective is not the sameas disturbance from a plant’s per-spective. On fire-prone landscapeswhere fire is considered a naturalecosystem process, humans disturbecosystems by altering fire regimes,usually by either reducing fire fre-quency through fire suppression, orincreasing fire frequency by increas-ing fire ignitions as well as by chang-ing the seasonal distribution of igni-tions. These alterations in the natu-ral fire regime represent the real dis-turbances in these ecosystems andcan have negative impacts on plantsurvival.

The introduction in Jack Cohen’sarticle describes well the impact ofhumans on forested ecosystems. Itis the long-standing story of fire sup-pression allowing unnatural fuelloads to accumulate, thus changingfire regimes from frequent low in-tensity surface fires to infrequenthigh intensity crown fires. Thesehigh intensity fires can result in largeportions of the forest landscape be-ing type converted to early seralstages of native chaparral that maypersist for many decades, if notlonger. These shrubs develop fromdormant seed banks that were pro-duced following similar high inten-sity crown fires sometime in the past,but in some cases there is no nativeshrub seed bank and, as discussedin Lambert, D’Antonio, and Dudley’sarticle, these are likely to be invadedby non-native grasses.

This however, represents onlypart of the California story. The ma-jority of our landscape is not for-ested and humans have not reducedfire frequency, but rather have radi-cally increased burning (Halsey2004). In many places this has hadthe unfortunate impact of type con-

This community of chamise chaparral burned twice in three years and is now dominatedby non-native species such as red brome (Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens).


verting native shrublands to non-native grass and forb lands as out-lined by Lambert, D’Antonio, andDudley in this issue. As a memberof the California Native Plant Soci-ety, this type conversion concernsme because of the loss of both na-tive flora and fauna. As an ecologistthis concerns me because of thechange in functional types fromdeep-rooted shrubs that can holdsoils on steep slopes, to shallow-rooted herbs. As a fire scientist thisconcerns me because of the changein fire season from about 6 monthsin shrublands to 12 months in an-nual grasslands, and lastly as a sci-entist this is of concern due to theloss in the capacity for carbon stor-age and potential impacts on cli-mate.

These two fire regimes have dif-ferent implications for how we man-age these landscapes. Most forestsin our region have evolved alongwith frequent low intensity surfacefires. As a consequence, the use offrequent prescription burning to re-duce hazardous fuels is compatiblewith much of the flora and fauna. In

short, fire-hazard reduction and re-source protection are compatible. Incontrast, chaparral shrublands haveevolved with infrequent high inten-sity burning and many of the spe-cies are at risk when fire frequencyincreases. Consequently, fire-hazardreduction and resource protectionare oftentimes at odds with one an-other.

No one concerned with our na-tive flora can ignore the demandshumans place on ecosystems, mostdirectly by habitat destruction. Look-ing down the road this is even moreimportant, as there is currently noeffort to curb population growth inCalifornia. According to the Cali-fornia Department of Finance, by2050 the population is projected toreach almost 60 million—about a41% increase. This will place de-mands not only on habitat availabil-ity, but also on wildland fire activi-ties that will undoubtedly impactnative plants and urban environ-ments. Of all the potential globalchanges threatening our state, popu-lation growth has to rank at the topof our list.

Historically, communities haveviewed fire as something that stateand federal fire agencies will controland prevent from impacting the ur-ban environment. This may be ac-complished through a combinationof fire suppression tactics and con-certed efforts at reducing wildlandfuels. On non-forested landscapesthis latter approach has often beenvery controversial because, depend-ing on the methods used, it may in-volve the sacrifice of native flora, theintroduction of non-native species,and the disruption of natural ecosys-tem processes. These are problemsCNPS has been keenly aware of asdocumented in the article by BetseyLandis in this issue. These costs inand of themselves do not constitutereasons for avoiding such treatments,but they do put an added burden ofproof on the managers for demon-strating a positive benefit. Over thepast 100 years, wildland fire-fightingagencies have made great progress inmanaging the fire risk, but it seemsunlikely they will ever be able toeliminate the threat of fires crossingthe wildland-urban interface.

Dense urban fuels create hazardous conditions when wildfires burn across the wildland-urban interface.


Jack Cohen’s article provides uswith a new frontier for dealing withthe fire problem. In short, divert at-tention away from trying to preventfires from reaching the urban envi-ronment and instead focus on mak-ing homes fire-proof and thus im-mune to fire. His call for better homeconstruction is one very importantpart of the solution to the wildland-urban interface problem. In his viewwe could reach a point where un-controlled wildfires were of minimalthreat to urban environments be-cause of fire-proof construction.

However, home construction isonly one of the ways to make theurban environment fire-safe. Land-scaping around homes often deter-mines which homes burn and whichsurvive. The U.S. Geological Surveyhas been studying this problem and

found that landscaping decisionsfrequently are critical to home sur-vival in wildfires, particularly forthose homes at the immediate wild-land-urban interface (Fotheringham2010). This work should ultimatelycontribute to the SAFE Landscapesprogram outlined by Sabrina Drillin her article. Suzanne Schettler’sfire-resistant landscaping paper pro-vides further insights into this issue.

“Clearance” is an issue of criti-cal importance, not just for solvingwildland-urban impacts, but also ofimportance to botanists like myselfand other CNPS members who areconcerned about the impacts onnatural resources. The term refersto the fuel management zone aroundhomes, and unfortunately the word“clearance” has been institutional-ized in statutes. There is plenty of

evidence to show that actual clear-ance of all vegetation is not theproper approach to fuel manage-ment, as outlined by Greg Rubin’sarticle. What is needed is breakingup the continuity of fuels, both ver-tically and spatially, and reducingthe proportion of dead to live wood.In other words—thinning the veg-etation. Complete clearance can ac-tually enhance fire spread by bothincreasing alien weeds that compriseflashy fuels, and by eliminating im-portant “ember catchers” such asoak trees that can dampen the firethreat around homes.

As Jack Cohen has shown, 100feet of fuel modification surround-ing a home seems to be sufficientto prevent homes from being de-stroyed during wildfires, especiallyin forested areas. However, as Cohen

Excessive clearance of chaparral around new home (top center) in San Diego County. A growing body of evidence indicates vegetationthinning rather than denuding the site is sufficient to provide defensible space for fire protection.


points out, most homes are not de-stroyed by the radiant heat from thefire front. Rather it is common forhomes to burn from embers enter-ing vents or igniting piles of deadleaves on roofs or gutters. Since em-bers can travel a mile or more, clear-ance zones are not likely to be highlyeffective in altering housing lossesin many instances.

In recent years we have seen ademand by insurance companies andlegislators for increasing the clear-ance zone to 300 feet or more. In arecent analysis for San Diego Countyit was found that if all homes at thewildland-urban interface that couldclear this distance did so, it wouldrepresent a clearance of one-thirdof the natural areas of the county(Keeley and Syphard, in press). Tothose concerned with resource pro-tection, this looms as an ominousthreat to future sustainability of ournative flora and fauna.

Current conversation wouldmake it seem as if there are twoapproaches to solving the wildland-urban interface fire problem: 1) stopfires from encroaching the urbanenvironment, or 2) prevent firesfrom destroying homes. What has

been missing from thedebate is a third op-tion: why not alterwhere we put homes?

Changes in plan-ning decisions mayhave some of the great-est potential for reduc-ing home losses inthe future. By analogywith other hazardssuch as flooding—where development isrestricted to sites out-side flood plains—firehazard planning needsa much more thor-ough examinationthan it has tradition-ally received. RogerKennedy, historianand former NationalPark Service Director,

has coined the concept of “Fire ZonePlanning.” This approach has notbeen ignored by fire agencies; forexample, it is part of the reason forCal Fire’s intensive effort at fire haz-ard mapping in the state. The guid-ance this provides to planners, how-ever, is largely a function of scale.The California Department of For-estry and Fire Protection maps arebased in part on assumptions aboutthe importance of natural wildlandfuel loads, and in this respect theydo appear to point out the most haz-ardous regions in the state. How-ever, at community scales they maynot be adequate. In a recent empiri-cal study of home losses over thepast 10 years in Los Angeles, Ventura,and San Diego counties, fire hazardmaps did not predict actual propertyloss. Rather, location of homes rela-tive to historical fires was of fargreater predictive value (Syphard etal. in review).

Of course future changes in landplanning will not necessarily solvethe wildfire problem for many exist-ing communities, although keepingnew development from extendinginto currently rural areas may pre-vent further increases in human-

caused ignitions and thus, future firelosses in general. To this end com-munities currently at the wildland-urban interface will need to deal withthe problems they face being posi-tioned near watersheds of highlyflammable fuels. The federally sup-ported Fire Safe Councils have animportant role to play in these casesas described by two articles, one byYvonne Everett and one by JulieRogers.

REFERENCES

California Department of Finance.2007. New state projections show 25million more Californians by 2050.Press release. http://www.dof.ca.gov/html/demograp/reportspapers/pro-jections/p1/documents/p1_press_release_7-07.pdf (accessed June 2,2011).

Fotheringham, C.J. 2010. Landscapefuels and the management of natu-ral systems. Station Fire Symposium,Altadena, CA, December 16, 2010.Los Angeles Watershed Council.

Halsey, R.H. 2004. Fire, chaparral, andsurvival in southern California. Sun-belt Publications, San Diego, CA.

Keeley, J.E., et al. 2009. Ecologicalfoundations for fire management inNorth American forest and shrub-land ecosystems. USDA Forest Ser-vice, Pacific Northwest ResearchStation, General Technical Report,PNW-GTR-779.

Keeley, J.E. and A.D. Syphard. The 2003and 2007 wildfires in southern Cali-fornia. In Natural Disasters and Ad-aptation to Climate Change, ed. J.Palutikof and D.J. Karoly. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, UK. Inpress.

Syphard, A.D, J.E. Keeley, A. BarMassada, T.J. Brennan, and V.C.Radeloff. Housing location and ar-rangement increase wildfire risk insouthern California. Science. In review.

Jon E. Keeley, Research Scientist, U.S.Geological Survey, Western EcologicalResearch Center and Adjunct Professor,Department of Ecology and EvolutionaryBiology, University of California, LosAngeles; 47050 Generals Hwy, Three Riv-ers, CA 93271, [email protected]

Most fires ignite in grasses and other herbaceous materialand spread to shrublands, as illustrated by this fire spreadinginto chamise chaparral. Photograph courtesy of the NationalPark Service.


HOW CNPS DEVELOPED A POLICY ON NATIVE PLANTSAND FIRE SAFETY

by Betsey Landis

he CNPS policy on NativePlants and Fire Safety,adopted March 13, 2010, isthe culmination of years of

discussions among CNPS membersabout reports of increasing wildfirefrequency, extensive urban encroach-ment into native plant habitat, fla-grant clearing of native vegetation,including into public parklands, andthe consequent invasion of thesebare, eroded areas by highly flam-mable weeds.

The policy process began Septem-ber 8, 2007 at the annual CNPS Con-servation Conference. Sue Brittinghad organized a session on chaparralmanagement issues. Max Moritz, as-sistant cooperative extension special-ist in wildland fire and adjunct assis-tant professor at UC Berkeley, spokeabout his research in chaparral ecol-ogy and fire. Ernylee Chamlee, chief

of wildland fire prevention engineer-ing for the California Department ofForestry and Fire Protection, pre-sented the State regulatory aspectson fuel management in chaparral.The last speaker, Betsey Landis, LosAngeles/Santa Monica MountainsChapter of CNPS, discussed thechapter perspective on the impactsof current fuel reduction practiceson maintenance of healthy chapar-ral habitat.

In her presentation, ErnyleeChamlee reported that about fivemillion people live in a wildland-urban interface (WUI) in Califor-nia. She indicated that the manage-ment of these lands for fuels, plants,vegetation types, and safety will bean enormous issue for our state.Notably, all general plans (specifi-cally those sections addressing fireissues) needed to be updated by

2010, and it was emphasized thatthis process allows organizationsand individuals to get involved. Thequestion was then posed as towhether we, CNPS, should have apolicy statement regarding fuelsmanagement and “living with fire.”The discussion that ensued involvedwhat that policy might include, howspecific it should be, how it wouldbe disseminated, and who wouldbe responsible for bringing it tofruition.1

In 2008 a fire policy subcom-mittee of the Chapter Council PolicyCommittee was formally constitutedwith Celia Kutcher (Orange County)as chair, Betsey Landis (Los Angeles/Santa Monica Mountains) as vicechair, Jim Bishop (Mt. Lassen) asChapter Council Policy Committeeadvisor, and Chuck Williams (San-hedrin). Frank Landis (San Diego)

and Kevin Bryant(Santa Clara) joinedthe committee in 2009.

As many as 100people contributedcomments and infor-mation as the policyevolved into a docu-ment applicable tothe whole state. Everychapter was sent draftsfor review, and revi-sions were discussed atChapter Council meet-ings. A special sessionon fire-managementtopics was held at theJanuary 2009 CNPSConference.

Jim Bishop thensent out a survey to allchapters asking threequestions: 1) What arethe fire risk reductionpractices in your area

As a fire precaution, native vegetation was cleared to bare dirt and sparse annual grass cover out to 100feet from this house. The result? Serious erosion, including slumping, soil liquefaction, and sliding duringthe rainy season. Photograph by M. Witter.

T


that are most detrimental to nativeplants and habitats? 2) What arebetter approaches, ones that will re-duce fire risk without hurting na-tive plants? 3) What agencies arethe key to getting practices imple-mented?

The answers revealed layers ofinconsistent, often contradictory,

regulations about fire and fuel man-agement practices, as well as a lot ofconfusion around the state aboutwhich level of regulatory authoritywas responsible for which regula-tion.

Finally in February 2009, thedraft policy was submitted to theChapter Council Policy Committee,

which made a few editorial changes.The fire policy subcommittee andthe Chapter Council Policy Com-mittee then approved the final draft.The Native Plants and Fire SafetyPolicy was presented to the ChapterCouncil March 13, 2010 and wasadopted by unanimous vote.

NEGATIVE IMPACTS ANDPOSSIBLE SOLUTIONS:

FEDERAL LEVEL

At the federal level, southernCalifornia Chapters reported prob-lems with the prescribed burns thatare an integral part of fuel manage-ment in the Healthy Forests Resto-ration Act of 2003 (HFRA). Fuelmanagement plans utilizing pre-scribed burns in the southern Cali-fornia National Forests, which havelarge areas of chaparral, have re-sulted in uncontrolled wildfires,too frequent burning, and conver-sion to weedy, flammable, erodableslopes. The HFRA allows fuel re-duction in the WUI (wildlands/ur-ban interface) of up to 1 1/2 milesfrom structures. Other fuel manage-ment methods include mastication,crushing, and building fuel breaks,all of which destroy the intricateroot matrix native plant communi-ties create to knit the fragile water-sheds together. In heavy rainfalls,mudslides are inevitable. Loss ofhealthy topsoil leads to non-nativeshallow-rooted grasslands, which inturn lead to more frequent early sea-son wildfires.

Suggestions for preventing fur-ther damage to these chaparralforests ranged from rewriting theHealthy Forests Restoration Act toexcluding its application to south-ern California National Forests.

STATE LEVEL

At the state level, there were nogeneral complaints about the StateFire Code (PRC 4291, CCR 1299,General Guidelines, or Chapter 7

SOME PLANTS TO AVOID WHEN LANDSCAPING INFIRE-PRONE AREAS

he following plants are either flammable, invasive, or both, andshould not be used in areas of high fire danger.

Scientific Name Common Name

Acacia species acacia (trees and shrubs)Ageratina adenophora eupatoryAilanthus altissima tree of heavenBougainvillea bougainvilleaCedrus species cedarCortaderia selloana, Cortaderia jubata pampas grassCupressus species cypressDelairea odorata cape ivy, German ivyDimorphotheca sinuata African daisyDodonea viscosa hopseed bushEucalyptus species eucalyptus, gum treeFraxinus uhdei Shamel ashGelsemium sempervirens Carolina jessamineHakea suaveolens hakeaHedera species ivyJuniperus species juniperLobularia maritima sweet alyssumMyoporum laetum myoporumPennisetum species fountain grassPhoenix canariensis Canary Island date palmPicea species sprucePinus species pineRicinus communis castor beanSchinus molle Peruvian pepper tree (or

“California” pepper tree)Schinus terebinthifolius Brazilian pepper treeSpartium junceum Spanish broomTaxus species yewThuja species arborvitaeTropaeolum majus nasturtiumVinca major, Vinca minor periwinkleWashingtonia spp. Californian and Mexican fan

palms

Sources: Santa Monica Mountains Community Wildfire Protection Plan, ForEverGreenForestry. Recommended List of Native Plants for Landscaping in the Santa MonicaMountains, Los Angeles/Santa Monica Mountains Chapter, CNPS.

T


Building Code for Wildfire Areas,except that the definition of “BrushClearance” needs to be removed andreplaced with a new term, perhaps“Fuel Management.” Currently StateCal Fire rarely uses the term “BrushClearance,” although fire authoritiesat the county or city level still do.The Code requires 100 feet of fuelreduction around structures, with themost rigorous fuel reduction andvegetation control occurring in thefirst 30 feet from the structures.

California FAIR Plan (CFP) is astate-mandated pool of private in-surance companies. All insurancecompanies insuring properties inCalifornia in high-risk (high firehazard) areas must belong to thispool. Chapters have received com-plaints from members and othersowning homes in fire areas aboutthe unreasonable requirementsplaced on them for clearing vegeta-tion around their homes. CFP re-quires 200 feet minimum of clear-ance and may require more (3,000feet clearance was reported in oneinstance in Riverside County!). If

TOP: A former fuel break has turned into a major weed-infested area that is now moresusceptible to wildfire than it was before the native vegetation was removed. Photographby R.S. Taylor. • BOTTOM: An example of excessive vegetation clearance around a house inthe wildland-urban interface near San Diego. Photograph by R. Halsey.

the property owner cannot clear thatfar due to property lines, CFP willinsist that the property owner some-how compel the adjacent owner toclear the land.

The penalty for not clearing landto CFP’s satisfaction is a large sur-charge on the first property owner.CFP does not show as much con-cern about proper fuel clearance of

1 0 F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 8 : 2 / 3 8 : 3 , A P R I L 2 0 1 0 / J U L Y 2 0 1 0

ornamental trees, shrubs, and vinesin the first 30 feet from the home,which is considered by experts tobe the more important defensiblearea. Since the adjacent propertyowner is often the public (i.e., parksand preserves), political pressure byproperty owners and homeownerassociations results in park authori-ties clearing protected natural re-sources on a yearly basis, resultingin losses of native habitat and majorerosion in natural watershed areas.The suggested recourse is to workwith the State Insurance Commis-sioner and the State Legislature torequire the insurance pool to ad-

here to the State Fire Code, and tosupply mudslide insurance alongwith the fire insurance.

CalTrans has its own fuel modi-fication regulations that seem towork better in some counties thanothers. Problems are in protectingrare native plants that may growalong roads, especially in areas wherefarmlands have removed much ofthe usual habitat for these nativeplants. It needs better managementoversight, as does the Transporta-tion Corridor Authority.

Each California state park hasits own management plan, whichmay or may not consider protection

of native habitat as a major concern.Their maintenance plans for trailsand recreation areas should containlocation data of any rare native plantsand how to avoid damaging theirhabitats or causing weed invasionsat those locations. All parks shouldhave regulations promoting fire-safeconstruction of all structures andadjacent landscapes.

The building of fire/fuel breaks,at whatever level of government, is astatewide problem. Some are neces-sary, having been built during a wild-fire, but others are not. In state parks,biologists may be present at the firecommand post during a wildfire. Abiologist will go out with the bull-dozer operator if a fuel break is re-quired in an area known to have rareplants. The biologist will direct thebulldozer operator around largerplants or will request that the opera-tor lift the blade as the machine movesover smaller plants. Often the bull-dozers are sent out to carve a fuelbreak straight up and down slopes.This usually results in heavy infesta-tions of weeds after the fire is over.Recovery of the area may take years.

Some developments on flat landuse large, bulldozed fuel breaks toprotect structures from fire. Ques-tions were posed by CNPS membersabout the wisdom and value of suchfuel breaks.

COUNTY LEVEL

At the county level, fire authori-ties may be County Fire Departmentsor Fire Districts, and may includepaid staff, volunteers, or a combina-tion of both. Many of these fire au-thorities require more than 100 feetclearance of all native vegetationfrom the structures in fire areas whileallowing non-native, ornamental,often highly flammable plants toremain around the houses. Manycounty codes do not require fire-safe construction for fire areas. Dueto water restrictions, irrigation maybe allowed in the first 30 feet fromthe house, but prohibited beyond

TOP: The downslope area adjacent to this residence has been denuded of all vegetation andis eroding. Meanwhile, fire hazards including a wooden fence and pine trees remain nextto the house. • BOTTOM: Typical of many new developments in wild areas of SouthernCalifornia, these houses were built too close to each other, and are surrounded by flammabletrees. Their risk for damage from a wildfire is high. Photographs by R. Halsey.

F R E M O N T I A 1 1V O L U M E 3 8 : 2 / 3 8 : 3 , A P R I L 2 0 1 0 / J U L Y 2 0 1 0

that point, even in times of drought.The cost of wildfires is greater thanthe cost to the homeowner for fire-safe construction and the cost tomaintain a healthy landscape to theproperty line, even if occasional wa-tering beyond the first 30 feet isnecessitated by dry winters.

A continuing problem—espe-cially when volunteer fire depart-ments are involved—is the lack ofcoordination between rural fire dis-tricts, or between adjacent cities,

LAYERS OF AUTHORITY FOR FIRE AND FUELMANAGEMENT REGULATIONS

LEVEL OF JURISDICTION RESPONSIBLE ENTITYFederal Congress (Acts)

Federal Dept. of Interior: Natl. Parks, BLM, Natl.Cooperative Land & Wildlife Area

USDA: Natl. ForestsIndian Reservations Dept. of Indian Affairs, Tribal CouncilsState of California Legislature (Codes)State of California CalFire, State Fire Marshal’s OfficeState of California State Insurance CommissionerState of California State Parks & Wilderness AreasState of California Dept. of Fish and Game, DFG PreservesState of California CaltransState of California UC ReservesCounties Boards of Supervisors, Planning Depts.,

CommissionsCounties County Fire Departments or Fire

DistrictsCounties County Water DistrictsCounties NCCP, HCP, MCPCounties Transportation Corridors, Road Depts.Counties Weed Management AreasCounties County Parks and Recreation AreasCities City Councils, Planning Depts.,

Building & Safety Depts., CommissionsCities City Parks and Recreation AreasCities Municipal Water and Power Depts.Private Lumber Companies, Mining CompaniesPrivate Land TrustsPrivate Utilities (Water, Power, Gas,

Communications)Private Homeowner Associations

Source: CNPS Chapter Council Fire Policy Subcommittee, CNPS conservationchairs, other CNPS members, and Web searches.

counties, and perhaps other land-owners—when fighting a large wild-fire covering several jurisdictions.The people concerned with good fireresponse need to step forward andorganize communications and re-sources in these jurisdictions.

Many of the same concerns ap-ply at both the county and city level,where CNPS members comment inpublic hearings on General Plansabout environmental issues involv-ing native plants and invasive weeds,

and in CEQA processes that involveimpacts on native vegetation. Withhuman activity in natural areascomes a greater chance of wildfireignition. General Plans should re-flect the increased hazards of increas-ing populations living in fire areas:to the residents and rate payers, inthe economic costs of fighting fires,in the resulting losses in natural re-sources (especially in watershed andpercolation areas), and in damagecaused by erosion. Local jurisdic-tions should require fire-safe build-ing codes for homes, power networksand grids, transmission towers, andfor fire-safe landscaping, and requireenforcement of those codes.

WHAT CNPS CHAPTERSCAN DO

Below are some suggestions ofthings CNPS chapters and memberscan do to protect both native habitatand homes.• Join the local County Weed Man-

agement Area to assist in identify-ing best management practicesfor protecting native plant re-sources, by removing invasive non-native plants from native habitatareas or in the vicinity of rare plantpopulations.

• If the CNPS chapter has membersliving in wildfire areas, those mem-bers may be involved in a localFire Safe Council. If not, encour-age members to explore the con-cept of Fire Safe Councils. Eitherassist a Fire Safe Council to designa plan that protects native plantresources and properly managesthose resources, or organize a newFire Safe Council, utilizing chap-ter native plant expertise to createa plan that protects both humanresidents and native habitats.

1 Conference proceedings link: http://www.cnps.org/cnps/conservation/conference/2007/index.php

Betsey Landis, 3908 Mandeville CanyonRd., Los Angeles, CA 90049, [email protected]


NATIVE PLANTS AND FIRE SAFETY POLICYAdopted by CNPS Chapter Council March 13, 2010

THE POLICYStatement:

The California Native Plant Society opposes the unnecessary destruction of California’s native plantheritage for the purpose of wildfire fuel management. The California Native Plant Society supports protectinghuman lives, property, and California’s native plants from poor fuel management practices. California’ssuperbly diverse native plants are its most valuable resource for erosion control and water conservation, andare vital to the long-term health of California.

Intent:

To provide an authoritative policy that California Native Plant Society and others can use to persuadelegislators and regulators to approve fire-safe practices that maximize conservation of native plants and nativeplant ecosystems, while protecting citizens, firefighters, and property.

SUPPORTING MATERIALSRationale:

Siting development in or adjacent to native plant communities increases the risk to structures fromwildfire, the potential for additional human-caused ignitions, and the need for more fuel management. Thebest land-use planning practices minimize placing development in locations that increase the risk of propertyexposure or of ignitions. The best fire-safe building codes reduce the risk of the structure being ignited, orspreading fire, during a wildfire.

Fuel management practices to protect urban development generally have been ineffective and/or counter-productive, severely impacting that native vegetation. Public ordinances and bureaucratic regulations oftenrequire fuel-removal practices in excess of 2006 California Public Resource Code 4291, causing severedamage to native plant ecosystems without reducing wildfire risk. These requirements should be replacedwith proven fuel-management practices that minimize the wildfire threat and do not devastate native plantecosystems.

California is large and diverse, and different fuel systems require different solutions for minimizing theimpacts of fuel management and fire control practices on native vegetation. That diversity, as exemplified intwo cases noted here, requires the development of implementation guidelines that fit the affected area.

Examples:

•In some areas, especially shrublands, shortened fire-return cycles have converted native plant communitiesinto non-native grasslands. These faster-burning invasive non-native plant species in turn fuel early-seasonwildfires, preventing regrowth of native vegetation and diminishing resource value.

•In certain forested areas, wildfire suppression has caused a lengthened fire-return cycle, which can allow anaccumulation of dead material and an increased likelihood of high-intensity wildfires. This modification ofnatural cycles has led to losses in native forest species diversity, erosion, increased wildfire managementcosts, and greater risks to property and people.

Implementation:The California Native Plant Society supports:

•Fuel management plans that minimize the risk to human life and property while maximizing protection ofnative plants and their habitats. These plans should be locally adapted and account for all combustiblematerials, including building materials, ornamental vegetation, other landscaping materials, and adjacentnative plant ecosystems.

•Building codes and ordinances that require structures and landscaping in high-fire-risk areas to be situated,constructed, retrofitted, and maintained using materials and practices that minimize the ignition and spreadof wildfires.


•The creation of laws, regulations, and land-use policies that discourage new development in areas of high-fire danger.

There are many different fire environments and property-development settings throughout the state. TheCalifornia Native Plant Society will develop specific guidelines for implementation, supported by currentapplicable fire science and botanical knowledge, to fit the particular wildfire environment and property-development patterns of a given area. These detailed guidelines will be supplemental to this policy, and can becreated, modified, or removed by approval of the California Native Plant Society Chapter Council.

DEFINITIONS CODIFIED IN STATE LAW OR LOCAL ORDINANCESBrush—All native vegetation (especially shrubs), all vegetation in undeveloped lands. Sources: California

FAIR Plan 2010; Los Angeles City Fire Department 2010.Brush areas—Wildlands, undeveloped lands. Synonyms: Brush hazard areas, brush/wildfire areas. Source:

California FAIR Plan 2010.Brush clearance—Treatments or thinning of vegetation to reduce fire hazards. Synonyms: Fire clearance, fuel

clearance. Source: Los Angeles City Fire Department 2000.California FAIR Plan—“The California Fair Access to Insurance Requirements (FAIR) Plan was created by

state legislation in July 1968 following the 1960s brush fires and riots. It is an insurance pool establishedto assure the availability of basic property insurance to people who own insurable property in the State ofCalifornia and who, beyond their control, have been unable to obtain insurance in the voluntary insurancemarket. The FAIR Plan is a private association based in Los Angeles comprised of all insurers licensed towrite property insurance in California. The FAIR Plan is not a state agency.” Source: California FAIR Plan2010.

Defensible space—An area extending 100 feet from a structure in which “Fuels shall be maintained in acondition so that a wildfire burning under average weather conditions would be unlikely to ignite thestructure” (PRC 4291). The defensible space zone consists of an innermost 30 feet in which the fuels aremaintained as “lean and green,” and an outermost 70 feet as the “reduced fuel zone” in which fuels arereduced, limbed up, and thinned. Source: Cal Fire 2010a.

GENERAL GUIDELINESPublic Resource Code 4291, Excerpt from General Guidelines (pages 5-6):

C. Fuel Treatment Guidelines

The following fuel treatment guidelines comply with the requirements of 14 CCR 1299 and PRC 4291. Allpersons using these guidelines to comply with CCR 1299 and PRC 4291 shall implement General Guidelines1, 2, 3, and either 4a or 4b, as described below.1. Maintain a firebreak by removing and clearing away all flammable vegetation and other combustible

growth within 30 feet of each building or structure, with certain exceptions pursuant to PRC 4291(a).Single specimens of trees or other vegetation may be retained provided they are well spaced, well pruned,and create a condition that avoids spread of fire to other vegetation or to a building or structure.

2. Dead and dying woody surface fuels and aerial fuels within the Reduced Fuel Zone shall be removed.Loose surface litter, normally consisting of fallen leaves or needles, twigs, bark, cones, and small branches,shall be permitted to a depth of 3 inches. This guideline is primarily intended to eliminate trees, bushes,shrubs, and surface debris that are completely dead, or with substantial amounts of dead branches orleaves/needles that would readily burn.

3. Down logs or stumps anywhere within 100 feet from the building or structure, when embedded in the soil,may be retained when isolated from other vegetation. Occasional (approximately one per acre) standingdead trees (snags) that are well-spaced from other vegetation and which will not fall on buildings orstructures or on roadways/driveways may be retained.

4. Within the Reduced Fuel Zone, one of the following fuel treatments (4a or 4b) shall be implemented.Properties with greater fire hazards will require greater clearing treatments. Combinations of the methodsmay be acceptable under 1299(c) as long as the intent of these guidelines is met.

4a. Reduced Fuel Zone: Fuel Separation


In conjunction with General Guidelines 1, 2, and 3, above, minimum clearance between fuels surroundingeach building or structure will range from 4 feet to 40 feet in all directions, both horizontally and vertically.Clearance distances between vegetation will depend on the slope, vegetation size, vegetation type (brush, grass,trees), and other fuel characteristics (fuel compaction, chemical content, etc.). Properties with greater firehazards will require greater separation between fuels. For example, properties on steep slopes having large-sizedvegetation will require greater spacing between individual trees and bushes. Groups of vegetation (numerousplants growing together less than 10 feet in total foliage width) may be treated as a single plant. For example,three individual manzanita plants growing together with a total foliage width of 8 feet can be “grouped” andconsidered as one plant, and spaced according to the Plant Spacing Guidelines in this document.4b. Reduced Fuel Zone: Defensible Space with Continuous Tree Canopy

To achieve defensible space while retaining a stand of larger trees with a continuous tree canopy, apply thefollowing treatments: • Generally, remove all surface fuels greater than 4 inches in height. Single specimens of trees or other

vegetation may be retained, provided they are well-spaced, well-pruned, and create a condition that avoidsspread of fire to other vegetation or to a building or structure.

• Remove lower limbs of trees (prune) to at least 6 feet up to 15 feet (or the lower 1/3 branches for smalltrees). Properties with greater fire hazards, such as steeper slopes or more severe fire danger, will requirepruning heights in the upper end of this range.

Source: Cal Fire. 2006

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Community—Any ecologically integrated group of species of microorganisms, plants, and animals inhabitinga given area. Source: Purves, Orians, Heller, Sadava (1998).

Ecosystem—The organisms of a particular habitat, together with the physical environment in which they live.Source: Purves, Orians, Heller, Sadava (1998).

Environment—An organism’s surroundings, both living and nonliving; includes temperature, light intensity,and all other species that influence the focal organism. Source: Purves, Orians, Heller, Sadava (1998).

Fire management—Strategies for controlling and extinguishing fires/wildfires. Source: Carle (2008).Fire-safe landscaping—Designing a defensible space by using well-spaced fire-resistant plants and hardscape

elements such as brick or stone walls to prevent heat and flames from reaching the structure. Source:SAFE Landscapes (2009).

Fuel—Any combustible material, both man-made—such as wood fences, lumber, furniture, plastic, awnings,and cloth—and vegetative—such as grass, leaves, ground litter, plants, shrubs, and trees—that feeds afire. Sources: For vegetation: Carle (2008); for man-made materials as fuel: Los Angeles City FireDepartment (2000).

Fuel management—Manipulating fuels to reduce the likelihood of ignition, reduce fire behavior, and/orlessen potential damage and resistance to control. Synonyms: fuel modification, fuel reduction, wildfirefuel management. Source: Carle (2008).

Habitat—The environment in which an organism lives. Source: Purves, Orians, Heller, Sadava (1998).Native—Occurring naturally in an area, not as either a direct or indirect consequence of human activity;

indigenous; not alien. Source: Hickman (1993). Note: Plants documented or assumed to have been inCalifornia at the advent of European exploration of the west coast of North America—around 1500A.D.—are generally considered to be “native plants.”

Plant community—An assemblage of individuals of one to many plant species distinct in structure andcomposition from other adjacent such groupings. Source: Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf, and Evens (2009).

Vegetation—All the plant species in a region and the way they are arranged. Source: Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf, andEvens (2009).

Vegetation management—Manipulation of plant species by humans to attain a goal or goals such as esthetics,economics, maintenance, restoration, pest/weed eradication, and/or fuel modification. Sources: Carle(2008); Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf, and Evens (2009).

Wildland-urban interface (WUI)—The area where structures and other human development meet undevel-oped wildlands and their fuels.


Source: Carle (2008). Note: WUI is easy to define qualitatively but it is so site-specific that WUI cannot beused to create quantitative regulations defining the width of fuel clearance zones in general.

SOURCE REFERENCES FOR LEGAL DEFINITIONS AND GLOSSARY OF TERMSCal Fire 2010a. Why 100 Feet? http://www.fire.ca.gov/communications/communications_firesafety_100feet.php

(accessed January, 2010)California FAIR Plan. 2010. California FAIR plan website. http://www.cfpnet.com/

(accessed January, 2010)Carle, David 2008. An Introduction to Fire in California. University of California Press, Berkeley.Hickman, James C. (ed.). 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berke-

ley.Los Angeles City Fire Department, 2000. Los Angeles Fire Department Fire Hazard Reduction and Safety Guidelines.

LAFD Bureau of Fire Prevention and Public Safety, Brush Clearance Unit. Van Nuys, CA.Purves, W.K., G.H. Orians, H.C. Heller, and D. Sadava. 1998. Life: The Science of Biology, 5th ed. Sinauer Associates,

Inc. 23 Plumtree Road, Sunderland, MA. W.H. Freeman and Company, Salt Lake City, UT.SAFE Landscapes. 2010. SAFE Landscapes, Sustainable and Fire Safe Website. http://groups.ucanr.org/SAFE/ (ac-

cessed February, 2010).Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, 2d ed. California Native Plant

Society, Sacramento CA.Cal Fire 2006. Cal Fire Clearance Code: General Guidelines for Creating Defensible Space, February 8, 2006. http:/

/www.fire.ca.gov/cdfbofdb/PDFS/4291 guidelines2_23_06.pdf (accessed January, 2010)Cal Fire 2010a. Why 100 Feet? http://www.fire.ca.gov/communications/communications_firesafety_100feet.php

(accessed January, 2010)

GENERAL REFERENCESCal Fire 2010b. The Wildland Urban Interface Building Code Information. http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/

fire_prevention_wildland_codes.php(accessed February, 2010).

California Codes, Public Resources Code (PRC) section 4291.http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section+prc&group+04001-05000&file4291-4299(accessed March, 2010)

California Fire Safe Council. 2010 Homeowner’s Guide to Firewise Landscaping. http://www.firesafecouncil.org/homeowner/index.cfm (accessed February, 2010)

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Office of the State Fire Marshal. 2010. Wildland UrbanInterface Products. http://www.osfm.fire.ca.gov/strucfireengineer/pdf/bml/wuiproducts.pdf(accessed February, 2010)

Halsey, Richard W. 2008. Fire, Chaparral, and Survival in Southern California, 2d ed. Sunbelt Publications, Inc., SanDiego, CA.

Keeley, J.E. 1981. Reproductive cycles and fire regimes. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fire Regimes and EcosystemProperties, ed. H.A. Mooney, T.M. Bonnicksen, N.L. Christensen, J.E. Lotan, and W.A. Reiners, pp. 231-277. USDAForest Service, General Technical Report WO-26.

Keeley, J.E. 1991. Resilience to fire does not imply adaptation to fire: an example from the California chaparral.Proceedings of the Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference 17:113-120.

Keeley, J.E., P.H. Zedler, C.A. Zammit, and T.J. Stohlgren. 1989. Fire and demography. In The California Chaparral:Paradigms Re-Examined, ed. S.C. Keeley, pp. 151-153. Science Series No. 34. Natural History Museum of LosAngeles County, Los Angeles, CA.

Los Angeles City Fire Department, 2000. Los Angeles Fire Department Fire Hazard Reduction and Safety Guidelines.LAFD Bureau of Fire Prevention and Public Safety, Brush Clearance Unit, Van Nuys, CA.

SAFE Landscapes. 2010. SAFE Landscapes, Sustainable, and Fire Safe Website. http://groups.ucanr.org/SAFE/ (ac-cessed February, 2010).

Taylor, Alan H., and C.N. Skinner. 1995. Fire regimes and management of old-growth Douglas fir forests in theKlamath Mountains of northwestern California. In Proceedings: Fire Effects on Rare and Endangered Species andHabitats Conference, Nov. 13-16, 1995, ed. J.M. Greenlee, pp. 203-208. International Association of Wildland Fire,Fairfield, WA.


THE WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE FIRE PROBLEMby Jack Cohen

he fire destruction of hun-dreds of homes associatedwith wildfires has occurredin the United States for more

than a century. From 1870 to 1920,massive wildfires occurred princi-pally in the Lake States but alsoelsewhere. Wildfires such as Pesh-tigo (Wisconsin, 1871), Michigan(1881), Hinckley (Minnesota, 1894),Adirondack (New York, 1903), theBig Blowup (Idaho-Montana, 1910),and Cloquet (Minnesota, 1918) ex-tended across millions of acres, de-stroying towns and causing severalthousand civilian fatalities (Pyne1982). This period produced sig-nificantly greater destruction ofproperty and lives than has occurredin the past 50 years.

More recently, the home destruc-tion problem related to wildfires be-came nationally recognized in 1985

and has become known as the wild-land-urban interface (WUI) fireproblem. The initial fire managementresponse to the WUI fire problem,principally organized by the U.S.Forest Service and the National FireProtection Association, resulted inthe 1986 Wildfire Strikes Home con-ference (Laughlin and Page 1986).The current national Firewise pro-gram developed out of that initiative(www.firewise.org). Since 2000, fed-eral and state wildland fire manage-ment policy has recognized the WUIfire problem as a principal issue in anumber of documents including theNational Fire Plan (2000), FederalWildland Fire Management Policy(2001), 10-Year ComprehensiveStrategy (2001), and the Healthy For-ests Restoration Act (2003).

Wildfire exclusion started as aprime directive in the early years of

the U.S. Forest Service and becamea broad national perspective. ChiefForester Henry Graves stated in 1913that “the necessity of preventinglosses from forest fires requires nodiscussion. It is the fundamentalobligation of the Forest Service andtakes precedence over all other du-ties and activities” (Pyne 1982). Al-though several prominent forestersand researchers, like Coert DuBoisof the Forest Service and H.H.Chapman of Yale University, pro-moted the benefits of wildland burn-ing in the 1920s and 1930s, the ques-tioning of fire control policies wasconsidered a threat to nationally or-ganized forestry programs (Pyne1982). For the next four decadesthe federal public land managementpolicy largely addressed wildfires asunwanted—to be prevented, and ifnot prevented, to be suppressed atthe smallest area possible (the fireexclusion paradigm).

Federal policy began to recog-nize wildland fire as a historical,ecological factor in the late 1960sand early 1970s (Pyne 1982). Cur-rent policy recognizes that wildlandfire can be an important ecologicalprocess and provides latitude forplanned burning (prescribed fire)and designating unplanned fires asdesirable. In practice, however, thenationwide total number of wild-land fires suppressed as wildfiresoverwhelmingly dominates the fireoccurrence statistics. For example,on federal lands the ten-year (1998–2007) average number of total wild-land fires per year designated forsuppression is approximately 80,000occurrences, compared with 327designated as desirable (NationalInteragency Fire Center).

Although some agencies havemore management latitude in prin-ciple, the proportion of fires sup-pressed suggests that an exclusion

T

TABLE 1. WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE DISASTERSDURING EXTREME WILDFIRES (1990–2007)

HomesYear Incident Location destroyed

(approx.)

1990 Painted Cave Santa Barbara, CA 479

1991 Spokane “Firestorm” Spokane, WA 108

Tunnel/Oakland Oakland, CA 2900

1993 Laguna Hills Laguna and Malibu, 634Old Topanga CA

1996 Millers Reach Big Lake, AK 344

1998 Florida Fires Flagler and Volusia 300Counties, FL

2000 Cerro Grande Los Alamos, NM 235

2002 Hayman Lake George, CO 132

Rodeo-Chediski Heber-Overgaard, AZ 426

2003 Aspen Summerhaven, AZ 340

Old, Cedar, etc. Southern CA 3640

2006 Texas-Oklahoma Fires Texas and Oklahoma 723

2007 Angora Lake Tahoe, CA 245

Witch, Slide, Grass Southern CA 2180Valley, etc.


approach largely continues. Theterm “fire exclusion paradigm” re-fers to this organizational cultureand operational practice of prevent-ing and suppressing nearly all wild-land fires.

As a consequence of these prac-tices, fire suppression has signifi-cantly contributed to the reductionof fire occurrence in most areas ofthe United States. The National FirePlan report states, “As a result of theall-out effort to suppress fires, theannual acreage consumed by wild-fires in the lower 48 states droppedfrom 40 to 50 million acres (16 to 20million hectares) a year in the early1930s to about 5 million acres (2million hectares) in the 1970s”(USDA and USDI 2000). In someecosystems, such as the ponderosapine (Pinus ponderosa) forests in thewestern U.S., the reduction of fireoccurrence has resulted in signifi-cant changes to the species composi-tion and increases in the amount oflive and dead vegetation (Arno andBrown 1991; Finney and Cohen2003). Furthermore, it has beenshown that in many areas aggressive

fire suppression over many years hascontributed to reduced fire occur-rence that has led to increased fuelsand changed fuel composition andarrangements. In turn, that has con-tributed to the extensive areas of highintensity wildfires experienced in re-cent years (USDA and USDI 2000).

DEFINING DISASTER

One might assume there is anunbreakable link between increas-ing wildfire extent and intensityand increasing WUI residential firedestruction. However, we cannotassume extreme wildfires directlycause WUI fire disasters; these di-sasters depend on homes ignitingduring wildfires. Certainly extremewildfires initiate ignitions withinresidential areas, but if homes donot ignite and burn during wild-fires, then the WUI fire problemlargely does not exist.

Widespread WUI home destruc-tion during wildfires does not occurwhen normal wildfire control andstructure protection capabilities limitthe fire spread. Wildland fire sup-

pression operations successfullycontrol 97–99% of all wildfires withthe initial response (Stephens andRuth 2005), and firefighters typi-cally limit a fire to a single structureor prevent the fire from spreadingbeyond that structure. However, bigflames and extensive showers ofburning embers (firebrands) result-ing from high intensity fires overbroad areas (referred to as “extremewildfire conditions”) is not a typicalsituation. When residential devel-opment is exposed to extreme wild-fire conditions numerous houses canignite and burn simultaneously,overwhelming firefighters and re-ducing fire protection effectiveness.WUI fire disasters principally occurduring these extreme wildfire con-ditions that account for the one tothree percent of wildfires that es-cape control (Menakis et al. 2003).Table 1 lists WUI fire disasters be-tween 1990 and 2007. Every one ofthese disasters occurred because ex-treme wildfire conditions over-whelmed firefighters attemptingwildfire control and firefighters at-tempting to protect structures.

FIGURE 1. WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE FIRE SEQUENCE.

WUI fire disasters depend on the exposure of ignitable homes to the flames and firebrands of uncontrollable, extreme wildfires. Manyburning and highly ignitable homes overwhelm firefighters, resulting in many homes without protection. If homes exposed to wildfireare ignition-resistant, then an extreme wildfire can occur without a WUI fire disaster.

Fuel, weatherand topography

Severe WildfireConditions

ResidentialFires

High ignitability producesmany home ignitions

ExtremeFire Behavior

High fire intensitiesand growth rates

▼▼ ▼

Burning homesoverwhelming

Fire ProtectionResources

WUIFire Disaster

Potentially hundreds ofdestroyed homes

Fire ProtectionEffectiveness

Reducedor nonexistent

▼▼

Givenignition

Givenhomes


The WUI fire disaster contextcan be generally described as a set ofcontingencies (Figure 1). The disas-ter sequence starts when a wildfireor multiple wildfires burn during ex-treme fire conditions. The combina-tion of extreme vegetation, weather,and topographic conditions given afire start produces fast-spreading,intensely burning fires that over-

whelm wildfire suppression efforts.If extreme wildfire spreads closeenough to residential developmentwith its flames and firebrands, hun-dreds of ignitable homes can be si-multaneously exposed.

Although protection may be ef-fective for some homes, an extremewildfire’s high intensities and rapidspread combine to produce broad

residential fire exposures that po-tentially ignite many houses andjeopardize firefighters’ safety. Thisprevents fire protection for manystructures. With homeowners likelyevacuated and firefighters unable toprotect every house, small, easy-to-extinguish ignitions can result intotal home destruction.

If homes are sufficiently resis-tant to ignition and do not ignitewhen exposed to extreme wildfire,the homes survive with little to nofirefighter protection; we have anextreme wildfire but not a WUI firedisaster. Thus, the occurrence ofWUI fire disasters principally de-pends on home ignition potential.

Homes ignite and burn by meet-ing and sustaining the requirementsfor combustion. Fire is a process thatrequires a sufficiency of fuel, heat,and oxygen to continue. The fireprocess is graphically represented bythe “fire triangle” (Figure 2). For theWUI fire context, the house is the“fuel” and all burning objects sur-rounding the house (vegetation andother structures) are the “heat.” Inthis context oxygen will always besufficient. During extreme WUI firesthe requirements for combustion canbe met, resulting in home (fuel) ig-nitions in two principal ways: 1) di-rect flame heating—radiation and

This historical photo series from western Montana (Smith and Arno 1999) shows how an initially open forest (with management activity)dominated by ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) became increasingly vegetated by predominantly Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), a

FIGURE 2. THE FIRE TRIANGLE

Home ignitions depend on a sufficiency of FUEL, the flammable parts of a home, andHEAT, the flames and firebrands of all objects burning around a home. OXYGEN willalways be sufficient for home ignitions.


convection (flame contact), and 2)firebrands collecting on flammablehouse surfaces (burning ember spotignitions) (Cohen and Wilson 1995;Cohen 2000a).

Research indicates that WUI firedestruction occurs principally dueto conditions local to destroyedhomes. Computational modelingand laboratory and field experimentsthat describe the heat transfer re-quired for ignition have shown thatthe large flames of burning shrubsand tree canopies (crown fires) mustbe within 100 feet to ignite a home’swood exterior (Cohen and Wilson1995; Cohen 2000a; Cohen 2004).Actual case examinations find thatextreme wildfire behavior does notoccur within most residential areas(Cohen 2000b; Cohen and Stratton2003; Cohen and Stratton 2008).Unconsumed vegetation surround-ing most destroyed homes and gen-erally throughout burned residen-tial areas indicates home ignitionsoccur from lower intensity surfacefires spreading to contact a homeand from firebrands contacting theflammable surfaces of a house.

Computations, experiments, anddisaster examinations show that ahome’s ignition potential during ex-treme wildfire is principally deter-mined by the characteristics of a

change in forest type and density. Historically, such a site had frequent fire occurrence every decade or so that maintained ponderosapine in a more open condition. All photographs courtesy of U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

home’s exterior materials, design, andassociated flammable debris relatedto surrounding burning objects with-in 100 feet (30 meters) and firebrands(lofted burning embers). I call thisarea—a home and its immediate sur-roundings—the home ignition zone(HIZ). Thus, given an extreme wild-fire, the HIZ principally determinesthe potential for home ignition andthis reveals opportunities for prevent-ing WUI fire disasters.

PREVENTING DISASTER

The above research suggests analternative for preventing disastroushome destruction without the ne-cessity of controlling wildfires un-der extreme conditions. Addressingconditions within the HIZ can sig-nificantly reduce the home ignitionpotential. Thus, given ignition-re-sistant homes, extreme wildfires canspread to residential areas withoutincurring WUI fire disasters. To date,however, WUI ignition resistancehas not been the primary approachused by most federal, state, and lo-cal fire agencies to prevent disas-trous WUI fire destruction. Althoughthe HIZ approach for preventingWUI fire disasters has been adoptedby the national Firewise program(www.firewise.org), fire suppression

with a focus on the wildfire and fueltreatment outside the home ignitionzone still remains the principal ap-proach.

For example, the U.S. Depart-ments of Agriculture and Interiorproduced a report in response to thehome destruction (principally at LosAlamos, NM) and wildfires of 2000that became known as the NationalFire Plan (USDA and USDI 2000).This report designated fire suppres-sion at the federal, state, and locallevels as the first priority. Severalyears later a multiagency plan wasdeveloped called the 10-Year Com-prehensive Strategy (Western Gov-ernors Association 2006). This planis currently in effect and promotesmulti-agency collaboration for re-ducing wildfire risks, including therisk of WUI fire disasters. The firstgoal of the strategy directs the im-provement of wildfire preventionand suppression. In general, the 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy pro-motes a fire suppression approachfor preventing WUI fire disasterswithout consideration for home ig-nition potential and the HIZ as a keycomponent (Western Governors As-sociation 2006).

Vegetation fuel reduction treat-ments, as reported in the HealthyForests Report of May 2007, also


point to the widespread use of awildfire modification and control ap-proach that does not address ahome’s ignition potential, but ratherfocuses on areas outside the HIZ(USDA and USDI 2008). Fuel treat-ments in the vicinity are expected toprotect homes by creating conditionsthat enable successful fire suppres-sion. Wildfire operations appear tobe consistent with the above policyas indicated by the significant U.S.Forest Service expenditure of sup-pression resources for WUI protec-tion. A November 2006 Office ofInspector General report (USDA2006) on large wildfire suppressioncosts documents this practice:

FS managers and staff stated thatWUI protection was the major driverof FS suppression costs, with somestaff estimating that between 50 to

95 percent of large wildfire sup-pression expenditures were directlyrelated to protecting private prop-erty and homes in the WUI….WhenFS protection responsibilities are di-rectly adjacent to WUI development,FS line officers feel compelled toaggressively suppress wildfires be-cause the fires threaten privately-owned structures, even if the firespose no threat to FS resources.

These findings are consistent withForest Service Manual directives re-garding WUI fire protection. Section5137 of the manual defines ForestService structure protection measuresin terms of wildfire control (USFS2004). “The Forest Service’s primaryresponsibility and objective for struc-ture fire protection is to suppresswildfire before it reaches structures.”The evidence from policy documents,

fire management operations, andmanual directives indicates that wild-fire suppression and activities in sup-port of suppression constitute theprincipal approach for preventingdisastrous residential fire destruction.Yet the evidence of disastrous WUIfire occurrence suggests that reason-able levels of fire suppression cannotprevent these disasters.

The inevitability of wildfires—including the extreme wildfires thataccount for the one to three percentof the fires that escape control—isaxiomatic. But WUI fire disastersoccur during this one to three per-cent of uncontrollable wildfires. Thismight suggest the inevitability ofWUI fire disasters; however, researchshows it is the HIZ that principallydetermines the potential for WUIfire disasters. The continued focuson fire suppression largely to the

ABOVE: Unconsumed vegetation adjacent to four destroyed homes in this view indicates ignitions from lower intensity surfaces fires and/or firebrands directly igniting homes. • TOP RIGHT: This condition typically prevails across entire residential areas of WUI fire destruction.The areas of consumed canopy vegetation in this scene are related to homes burning. • BOTTOM RIGHT: High intensity fire spread in thetree canopy (crown fire) stopped at this residential street and did not continue as crown fire. However, all of the structures for severalmore blocks burned.


exclusion of alternatives that addresshome ignition potential suggests apersistent inappropriate framing of

the WUI fire problem in terms ofthe fire exclusion paradigm.

Preventing WUI fire disasters re-

quires that the problem be framedin terms of home ignition potentialand not fire exclusion. Because this


The home ignition zone (HIZ) is the area that principally determines a home’s ignitionpotential during extreme wildfires when active fire protection is unlikely. It is the firebehavior within the HIZ, about 100 feet or less in relation to a home’s ignition vulnerability,that principally determines ignition potential. Firebrands, regardless of travel distance,are a significant ignition factor, but only based on the HIZ characteristics. The firebrandignition threat depends on spot ignitions within the HIZ that can burn to contact a houseor collect on a home’s flammable surfaces, all HIZ conditions.

principally involves the HIZ, andthe HIZ primarily falls within pri-vate ownership, the responsibilityfor preventing home ignitions largelyfalls within the authority of the prop-erty owner. If we are to prevent ex-tensive home destruction within theWUI, property owners must becomeengaged, matching their authorityover the HIZ with the responsibilityto create ignition resistant homes.Fire agencies can reinforce the ne-cessity of property owner engage-ment as well as facilitate propertyowners in reducing the ignition vul-nerability of their homes.

REFERENCES

Arno S.F., and J.K. Brown. 1991. Over-coming the paradox in managingwildland fire. Western Wildlands17(1): 40-46.

Cohen J.D., and P. Wilson. 1995. Cur-rent results from structure ignitionassessment model (SIAM) research.In Proc. of the Fire Management inthe Wildland/Urban Interface: Shar-ing solutions Symposium, Oct. 2-5,

1994, Kananaskis, AB, ed. C. TymstraC. Partners in Protection, Edmonton,AB.

Cohen J.D. 2000a. Preventing disaster:Home ignitability in the wildland-urban interface. Journal of Forestry98(3): 15-21.

——. 2000b. A brief summary of myLos Alamos fire destruction exami-nation. Wildfire 9(4): 16-18.

Cohen J.D., and R.D. Stratton. 2003.Home destruction. In Hayman FireCase Study. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114, ed. R.T. Graham. USDAForest Service, Rocky Mountain Re-search Station, Ogden, UT.

Cohen J.D. 2004. Relating flame radia-tion to home ignition using model-ing and experimental crown fires.Canadian Journal of Forest Research34: 1616-1626.

Cohen J.D., and R.D. Stratton. 2008.Home destruction examination:Grass Valley Fire. Technical Paper,R5-TP-026b. USDA Forest Service,Region 5, Vallejo, CA.

Finney M.A., and J.D. Cohen. 2003.Expectation and evaluation of fuelmanagement objectives. RMRS-P-29, USDA Forest Service.

Laughlin J., and C. Page, eds. 1987.

Wildfire strikes home! Report of thenational wildfire/urban fire protec-tion conference. NFPA SPP-86. Na-tional Fire Protection Association,Quincy, MA.

Menakis J.P., J.D. Cohen, and L. Brad-shaw. 2003. Mapping wildland firerisk to flammable structures for theconterminous United States. In Proc.of fire conference 2000: The firstnational congress on fire ecology, pre-vention, and management, ed. K.E.MGalley, R.C. Klinger, and N.G. Sugi-hara. Misc. pub. 13. Tall Timbers Re-search Station, Tallahassee, FL.

National Interagency Fire Center. Wild-land fire statistics. http://www.nifc.gov/fire_info.

Pyne, S.J. 1982. Fire in America. Uni-versity of Washington Press, Seattle,WA.

Smith H.Y., and S.F. Arno, eds. 1999.Eighty-eight years of change in amanaged ponderosa pine forest. Gen.Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-23. USDAForest Service, Rocky Mountain Re-search Station, Ogden, UT.

Stephens S.L., and L.W. Ruth. 2005.Federal forest fire policy in theUnited States. Ecological Applications15(2): 532-542.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2006.Office of Inspector General audit re-port: Forest Service large fire suppres-sion costs. Report no. 08601-44-SF.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S.Department of Interior. 2000. Man-aging impact of wildfires on commu-nities and the environment: A reportto the president in response to thewildfires of 2000.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S.Department of Interior. 2008. Healthyforests and rangelands, Healthy For-ests Report.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2004.Forest Service Manual, Title 5100,Fire Management, Sections 5137 and5137.02. Western Governors Asso-ciation. 2006. A collaborative ap-proach for reducing wildland firerisks to communities and the envi-ronment: 10-year comprehensivestrategy implementation plan. West-ern Governors Association.

Jack Cohen, Fire Sciences Laboratory,5575 W. US Highway 10, Missoula, MT59808, [email protected]


INTERPRETING FIRE AND LIFE HISTORY INFORMATION INTHE MANUAL OF CALIFORNIA VEGETATION

by Todd Keeler-Wolf, Julie M. Evens, and John O. Sawyer

ire is a pervasive force impact-ing the composition and struc-ture of vegetation throughoutmost of California. As discussed

throughout this issue of Fremontia,fire has shaped our state’s flora andis one of the major natural processesregularly affecting our ability to co-

exist with nature. Here we considerchanges in The Manual of CaliforniaVegetation (MCV2) as they relate tofire.F

Two contrasting vegetation alliances with chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum) and whiteleaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos viscida). Chamisewill both resprout from the base and germinate from seeds while this manzanita only germinates from seeds following fires. Photographby T. Keeler-Wolf.


A major reason for preparing asecond edition was to provide moreuseful descriptions of the state’s natu-ral vegetation so that we can betterpreserve it. Principally, we thoughtto improve the book’s utility by in-cluding life history and fire behaviorcharacteristics for each of the more

than 380 main California vegetationtypes, which are known formally as“alliances.” The life history of themain distinguishing plant species(bolded in the first line of analliance’s description), coupled witha summary of the natural processesaffecting it, explain the conditions

that enable the allianceto exist. In a sense, it isakin to having a general“recipe” for sustainingeach alliance listed inthe book, although this“recipe” must be thoughtof as broadly defined andnot subject to precisemeasurements.

In each full alliancedescription there are twoseparate tables with ac-companying text—onefor the life history traitsof the distinguishingplant species and anotherfor the associated fire re-gime for that alliance.The logic behind the twotables addresses the ten-dency of distinguishingplant species of an alli-ance to have specificabilities that are adaptedto a set of specific envi-ronmental and ecologi-cal conditions. For ex-ample, a desert scrubtype defined by creosotebush (Larrea tridentata)will respond very differ-ently to fire than a chap-arral type defined bychamise (Adenostomafasciculatum), eventhough both shrubs aresimilar in size and havesmall evergreen leaves.

The conditions un-der which an alliance canpersist depend, to a greatdegree, on adaptations ofthe distinguishing spe-cies (its longevity, ger-mination requirements,general morphology, and

other genetically controlled traits)plus the type, frequency, and inten-sity of the natural processes associ-ated with that vegetation over time.If conditions change sufficiently be-yond the distinguishing species’ gen-eral range of tolerance, then the veg-etation will also change as a reaction

Life History Traits of Principle Species

Life forms Shrub; evergreenSeed storage SoilSeed longevity LongMode of dispersal AnimalGermination agents Chemical; heat; scarification;

stratification—winterMode of sprouting NoneSurvivability after Fire-sensitive; thin

fire/disturbance epidermis; high flammability;no/low sprouting; canopyarchitecture susceptible

Disturbance-stimulated Noflowering

Reproductive range 10–100+ yearsRecruitment EpisodicRegional variation High

How big? What climate?

Reproductive strategy

Constraints to regeneration

How well it can colonize

Particular adaptations forsexual regeneration

Adaptation to asexualregeneration

Individual adaptedto fire/disturbance?

Does disturbance enhancesexual regeneration?

What this table can tell you:

Does its life history vary geographically?

Do regeneration opportunities happen often?

How many years does it have to replace itself?

How often fires occur overseveral fire cycles

When fires occur during the year

The characteristicdistribution of area withinthe fire perimeter

Complexity, or patchiness, isthe spatial variability of differentfire severity levels within thefire perimeter

Intensity is a measure ofenergy release per unit lengthof fire line

A description of fire effects applied toa variety of landscape components,including vegetation, soil,geomorphology, watersheds, wildlifehabitat, and human life and property

Fire Characteristics

Fire return interval Medium (20–70+ years)Seasonality Late summer–fallSize/extent Medium to large—up to and beyond

standComplexity Low to moderateIntensity HighSeverity Medium to very highType Active-independent crown fireRegional knowledge Cascades, North Coast, and Sierra

Nevada

Describes from where the collective firebehavior in the range of the alliance isknown

Fire type describes the combination offlaming fronts that are characteristic in thelandscape for this vegetation type

•••••••

•

•

•

•

•

•

• •

•

••••

•••

•

•

•

•

••

•

•

•

••

•••

•

FIGURE 2. FIRE REGIME FOR THE ARCTOSTAPHYLOS VISCIDAALLIANCE.

FIGURE 1. LIFE HISTORY FOR THE ARCTOSTAPHYLOS VISCIDAALLIANCE.


to the new processes. Taken morebroadly, by comparing characteris-tics of multiple vegetation typeswithin a large parcel of land or wa-tershed, we can begin to understandhow its diversity has changed, or hasnot, under current conditions. In ad-dition, we can better understand howto conserve its diversity by graspingthe role of fire and other naturalprocesses at the landscape level.

HOW WE PRESENT THEINFORMATION

With help from members ofthe U.S. Forest Service’s Joint FireSciences Program, we held a seriesof five regional workshops aroundthe state between 2000 and 2003. Atthese meetings, we collectively con-sidered the longevity, germination

requirements, general morphology,and other genetically controlledtraits for each distinguishing plantspecies and the type, frequency, andintensity of fire or other natural pro-cesses associated with a set of alli-ances in that region. We used thisinformation, together with literaturesurveys and detailed interviews withother fire ecologists, in developingthe two tables for each alliance. Alltold, over 50 professional ecologists,land managers, and other scientistscontributed to the information inthese tables, in addition to informa-tion derived from scores of publica-tions.

The categories in the Life HistoryTable (Figure 1) summarize essen-tial traits for distinguishing speciesthat define an alliance. These traitscomprise the “code” or the basic setof advantages and constraints of

plants that allow them to interactwith their current environment. Someof these traits are evolutionarily con-servative and unvarying, while oth-ers are more pliable and may varythroughout the range of the species.This last notion is captured in thecategory “regional variation.”

The concept behind the Fire Re-gime Table (Figure 2) is to describethe fire characteristics for each alli-ance with respect to temporal (firereturn, seasonality), spatial (fire size,complexity), and magnitude (fire in-tensity, severity, type) attributes us-ing the currently authoritative bookon California fire ecology (Sugiharaet al. 2006). The resulting fire re-gime information describes fire con-ditions favorable to the plant spe-cies that define the alliance.

It is important to note that wild-fires can burn across whole land-

Open stand of Creosote Bush (Larrea tridentata) Alliance with an understory including red brome (Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens) andMediterranean grass (Schismus spp.). Recent invasion by non-native grasses increase the risk of this vegetation burning. Photograph byT. Keeler-Wolf.


LEFT: Fires significantly reduce the shrub cover, and species such as thematchweed (Gutierrezia spp.) and non-native grasses that thrive followingdisturbances dominate for many years afterwards before creosote canrecover. • BELOW: Bigpod ceanothus (Ceanothus megacarpus) occurs in apatchwork with other chaparral in the Santa Monica Mountains in Ven-tura County, where fire and other disturbance modify the nature ofstands. Photographs by J. Evens.

scapes. Fires are often impartial tobiologically defined boundaries; onefire often impacts several adjacentstands of many other alliances inthe burned areas. However, the bio-logical and physical characteristicsof each stand of vegetation can also

affect how the fire burns; in somecases a fire may burn only portionsof a single stand or lots of stands ofmany alliances. Fire is also not acompletely regular and predictableevent, and it may occur at differenttimes of the year, and at different

frequencies, affectedby seasonal weather,topography, geogra-phy, yearly variancesin plant productivity,and human influ-ences.

However, we can-not determine exactfire return intervals(e.g., how frequently

fire affects a particular stand of veg-etation) for each alliance for twomain reasons. We often do not haveenough data on plant responses tofire to arrive at precise fire returnintervals. More importantly, naturalprocesses such as fire influence thecharacter of the vegetation depend-ing on the time between events(whether a relatively short or longinterval), and the pattern of theevents (whether a mild understorysurface or an intense crown fire).These two variables, in turn, affectthe composition and structure of theresulting vegetation. So, we assigngeneral terms (e.g., short, medium,long) in the tables. These are often


supplemented by a range of yearsfor the shorter and the longer aver-ages of time between fires, whenthis information is known from ob-servations. The fire types listed (de-fined in Appendix 2 of MCV2) alsomay vary depending on the charac-ter of the vegetation and its geo-graphic location.

It is important to note that thestatements on fire return intervalsshould not be taken out of context,particularly since they may be usedto make decisions about land man-agement. For example, when inter-preting these parenthetical ranges ina fire return interval, one should notstrictly select an upper or lower valueor the calculated mean between theextremes. We present these rangesas broad guides, not as stringent andliteral rules. A good case in point canbe illustrated by chaparral stands con-taining species with different adap-tive strategies, such as white leaf man-zanita (Arctostaphylos viscida), an ob-ligate seeding shrub, and birch leafmountain mahogany (Cercocarpusmontanus), a resprouting shrub.Keeley et al. (2005) have found thatstands of these species are tolerant oflong fire-free periods, and even 100+year-old stands show no perceptiblereduction in their ability to recoverfollowing fire.

With the standardized attributespresented in the life history and fireregime tables, users may apply theinformation in the book to a givenpatch or stand of vegetation to helpanswer a series of questions. Forexample, are the factors that influ-ence its effective reproduction, re-cruitment, and regeneration beingmet in this stand, so there is a highlikelihood of the vegetation’s per-sistence (Figure 1)? Such questionsare relative to the recent history ofthe particular stand. Since fire his-tory is a principal influential natu-ral process that impacts the viabil-ity of vegetation stands in Califor-nia, the fire regime table (Figure 2)is also helpful in answering thesequestions.

FIGURE 3. THE LIFE HISTORY AND FIRE REGIME TABLES OFLARREA TRIDENTATA–AMBROSIA DUMOSA ALLIANCE.

Life History Traits of Principle Species

Larrea tridentata Ambrosia dumosa

Life forms Shrub; drought Shrub; droughtdeciduous deciduous; clonal

Seed storage Soil Soil

Seed longevity Medium Medium

Mode of dispersal Animal; gravity Animal; tumblingwind

Germination agents Chemical; heat None

Mode of sprouting Underground Undergroundstructures structures

Survivability after Fire-sensitive; Fire-sensitive; fire/disturbance no/low sprouter no/low sprouter

Fire Characteristics

Fire return interval Truncated long

Seasonality Spring–summer–fall

Size/extent Small to moderate

Complexity Low

Intensity High

Severity Moderate

Type Passive-active crown fire

Note: Additional information in these tables can be found in the MCV2

For example, the life form (tree,shrub, herbaceous plant) and theparticular genetic traits of the spe-cies (e.g., seed storage, mode ofsprouting, and survivability afterfire) clearly influence the species’perseverance under certain fire char-acteristics. Fire type, the interval be-tween fires, fire intensity, and theother characteristics synthesized ineach fire regime table expresses thephysical, temporal, and spatial ef-fects of fire on the vegetation of eachalliance. Taken together, these tablescan be used to interpret the ecologi-cal status of any stand of vegetationand understand how it has been im-pacted by fire.

It is also important to rememberthat many stands in California havepersisted for thousands of years with-out regular influence by fire. Onlyrelatively recently has fire becomefrequent in some areas with the in-troduction of nonnative weedy plantsalong with human-instigated fires.For example, increased fire frequen-cies have altered much of the vegeta-tion in California’s warm deserts. Aclassic example involves a wide-spread alliance, the Larrea tridentata–Ambrosia dumosa Alliance. A quicklook at the life history and fire re-gime tables for this alliance will tellyou how troublesome frequent firecan be (Figure 3).


The fire characteristics found inFigure 3 are from page 567 in theManual. Both Ambrosia dumosa andLarrea tridentata exhibit limitedsprouting ability after fire, and L.tridentata has resinous foliage thatis highly flammable (Vasek 1979,1983, Marshall 1995b). Low-inten-sity fires can cause up to 100% mor-tality in both L. tridentata and A.dumosa, but some shrubs can sur-vive if crowns are only partially con-sumed. Mortality rates are probablyrelated to rainfall conditions duringthe immediate post-fire years, andboth species may colonize success-fully by seed from offsite sources inhigh rainfall years following a fire(Brooks and Minnich 2006). How-ever, A. dumosa can colonize morerapidly after fire and may dominatealone for a number of years beforeboth L. tridentata and A. dumosa re-gain similar pre-fire dominance.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE

Big pod ceanothus (Ceanothusmegacarpus) is a classic obligate seed-ing chaparral shrub of southern Cali-fornia. It typically dies after the nor-mally intense fires of the region. Yetas with Arctostaphylos viscida (Fig-ure 1), seeds of the ceanothus arestored in the soil. Seedlings germi-nate within a few years after fireunder natural fire regimes, and growquickly to replace previously burnedstands, sometimes preceded by short-lived stands of disturbance followerslike deer weed (Lotus scoparius).

Large acreages of big pod ceano-thus (pp. 452-543 in MCV2) havecovered the Santa Ynez, Santa Moni-ca, and other coastal mountains inthe past, yet stands are less exten-sive today, even in areas that stillare covered with natural vegeta-tion. Why? A likely reason is thathuman-initiated fires are occurringmore frequently than C. megacarpusstands can build up the necessarybanks of soil-stored seeds for standsto regenerate. As with other chapar-ral shrubs, larger ceanothus plants

can produce many seeds. Whileceanothus may start producing someseeds from small young shrubs, iffires occur when the shrubs are rela-tively young, fewer seeds are likelyto be stored in the soil. If fires occurevery few years, just after youngceanothus are first producing seeds,it may only take a few successiveclose-interval fires to deplete the seedbank.

By properly interpreting theMCV2, readers will notice that whilethis ceanothus’ fire return interval isestimated to average between 25 and55 years, the plant is reproductivelyviable from 10 to 100+ years. Thus,a fluctuating fire return interval be-tween the youngest reproductive age(about 10 yrs.) and oldest age (100+yrs.) is reasonable. Repeat fires atthe short end of the reported range(ex., between 10 and 25 yrs.) aremuch less likely to ensure stand re-generation than longer intervals (>25 yrs.). Thus, understanding thenatural history of diagnostic vegeta-tion species and the effects of un-natural fire regimes on native veg-etation is extremely important tolong-term ecosystem viability.

SUMMARY ANDCONCLUSIONS

We include the new tables andtext in the Manual as guides for con-servationists, natural historians, andland managers, so that mosaics ofnatural vegetation can be interpretedand information can be used appro-priately within an ecological con-text. This information, in manycases, has been summarized for thefirst time in our book, and was as-sembled from a wide variety ofsources including published andpeer-reviewed literature and inter-views with knowledgeable experts.Fire ecology is a rapidly expandingfield and much new information iscoming to light even since the pub-lication of the MCV2.

Sometimes older assertions in the

literature are in direct conflict withrecent findings. For example, chemi-cals that accumulate in the soil fromchamise chaparral (Adenostoma fasci-culatum Alliance) do not appear tonegatively impact the communityof plants as once thought. Further-more, these chemicals do not causestand stagnation, but rather can in-crease after fire (Keeley et al. 1985,Halsey 2004, and summarized inMcMurray 1990). As research of lifehistory and fire regime characteris-tics continues to expand, our tablesand descriptions must be updated.We seek any information that willimprove our descriptions, and areplanning to produce an online ver-sion of the Manual so it can be up-dated periodically.

SELECTED REFERENCES

Keeley, J.E., B.A. Morton, A. Pedrosa,and P. Trotter. 1985. Role of allelopa-thy, heat, and charred wood in thegermination of chaparral herbs andsuffrutescents. Journal of Ecology 73:445-458.

Halsey, R.W. 2004. In search of allelopa-thy: An eco-historical view of the in-vestigation of chemical inhibition inCalifornia coastal sage scrub and cha-mise chaparral. Journal of the TorreyBotanical Society 131: 343-367.

Keeley, J.E., A.H. Pfaff, and H.D.Safford. 2005. Fire suppression im-pacts on postfire recovery of SierraNevada chaparral shrublands. Inter-national Journal of Wildland Fire 14:255-265.

McMurray, N. 1990. Adenostoma fasci-culatum. In Fire Effects InformationSystem. USDA, Forest Service, RockyMountain Research Station. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/

Todd Keeler-Wolf, Biogeographic DataBranch, California Department of Fishand Game, 1807 13th Street, Room 202,Sacramento, CA 95811, [email protected]; Julie Evens, California Native PlantSociety, 2707 K Street, Suite 1, Sacra-mento, CA 95816, [email protected]; JohnO. Sawyer, Department of Biological Sci-ences, Humboldt State University, Arcata,CA 95521, [email protected]


INVASIVE SPECIES AND FIRE IN CALIFORNIAECOSYSTEMS

by Adam M. Lambert, Carla M. D’Antonio, and Tom L. Dudley

nvasive plant species occur through-out all floristic regions of Cali-fornia, but their spatial extent, di-versity, and impacts within these

regions vary considerably. Alter-ations of natural disturbance regimeshave made communities more sus-ceptible to these invasions (Brookset al. 2004). Fire is a natural andchronic disturbance in many Cali-fornia plant communities and hasbeen observed to promote and bepromoted by invasive species in sev-eral of the communities.

Fire regimes—the type, fre-quency, intensity and timing of

fire—have played an important rolein the evolution of California plantcommunities, but human influenceshave changed fire regimes, some-times in ways that shift the relativedominance of native and non-nativespecies. Invasive plants may be di-rectly responsible for changes in fireregimes through increased biomass,changes in the distribution of flam-mable biomass, increased flamma-bility, and altered timing of fuel dry-ing, while others may be “fire fol-lowers” whose abundances increaseas a result of shortening of fire re-turn intervals.

California’s shrublands, wood-lands, grasslands, wetlands, and for-ests occupy different elevation andmoisture zones, creating unique fireregimes that have benefitted particu-lar invasive species. Plant associa-tions that differ in physiognomy, fireregimes, and fuel types may vary intheir resistance and resilience to fire.Fire regimes have been best studiedin conifer forests and shrublands,but are poorly understood in Cali-fornia’s grasslands. The role of firein riparian or other wetland systemsis particularly poorly known, pre-sumably because these habitats have

Invasive grasses and forbs have invaded this fuel break in the Santa Ynez Mountains above Santa Barbara. Photograph by C. D’Antonio.

I


long been considered barriers to firedue to the high moisture content ofsoil and vegetation.

Most evidence indicates that thestrongest impacts of invasive plantson fire regimes in California occurin coastal sage scrub, deserts, andriparian areas. The subject of howfire regimes are being changed inthese systems will be addressed lateron. In general, one of the least re-versible and most significant impactson native species occurs when in-troduced plant species alter the fre-quency of fire. In the intermountainwest, cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum)has affected more areas than anyother invasive plant. Plant ecolo-gists observed in the mid-1900s thatinvasion by cheatgrass increased firefrequencies by creating continuousstanding fuel between shrubs inthese lightning-prone habitats. This,in turn, has led to a decline in nativespecies and increased invasion by

cheatgrass, setting in motion a cyclethat is difficult to break.

For example, work by SteveWhisenant, now at Texas A&M Uni-versity, quantified alterations in firefrequency and the dramatic loss ofnative species in Idaho’s Snake RiverPlains as a result of lightning-causedsummer fires fueled by dead cheat-grass. Could this happen in Califor-nia? Red brome (Bromus madritensisssp. rubens) and other invasive an-nual grasses increase fire frequen-cies in the western Mojave Desert inCalifornia, and cheatgrass has beenpart of the fuel in sagebrush firesin the Owens Valley. But so far, fewsites have burned multiple times andit is not yet clear if a grass/fire cycleas has developed in the central GreatBasin will develop in the Californiadeserts.

The California Invasive PlantCouncil plant inventory lists 104species that have the potential to

alter fire dynamics or whose abun-dance is increased following fire.However, for many of these species,there is little published evidence tocorroborate these accounts. Someof these species most likely influ-

Abundant invasive, nonnative annual grasses growing between and within a stand of native species at a recently burned chaparral sitein Ronald W. Caspers Wilderness Park, Orange County. Photograph by C. D’Antonio.

Purple veldtgrass (Ehrharta calycina) inburned coastal sage scrub site at Vanden-berg Air Force Base, approximately 15years after fire. Fire is a natural disturbancein these ecosystems, but Ehrharta regen-erates very rapidly after fire and appearsto suppress the recovery of native species.Photograph by C. D’Antonio.


ence some aspect of fire regimes,but many may not. Here, we focuson the invasive plants that are wellknown for their interaction with fire,and provide case histories of inva-sion by the most problematic ofthese plants in the major uplandand wetland ecosystems of Califor-nia. We primarily address those in-vasive species that appear to alterfire regimes, rather than focusingon the many more non-native spe-cies that appear to opportunisticallybenefit from the presence of fire inour landscapes.

SHRUBLANDS

When one thinks of fire in Cali-fornia, one immediately thinks ofthe massive conflagrations that oc-cur in central and southern Califor-nia chaparral and sage-scrub eco-systems, particularly because of theirclose proximity to dense populationcenters. These closed-canopy shrub-lands—particularly intact chapar-ral—are in fact relatively resistantto invasion by non-native species.However, non-native plants are in-creasingly closely tied to fire dy-namics and to ecosystem responsesto fire in some regions.

Under natural conditions, chap-arral communities retain most fuelsin the canopy layer and have rela-tively long fire intervals (greater than20 years). Contrary to common per-ception, foliar tissue does not easilyignite except under super-heatedconditions or when leaf tissue mois-ture is low. However, several weedyforbs and grasses tend to thrive atthe disturbed edges of these shrub-lands along roads, power lines, andfuel breaks where shrubs are re-moved. The invasive, annual grassesthat often colonize these areas dryout much earlier in the spring thanthe native shrubs, and with theirhigh surface area to volume ratio,are more prone to ignition than thenative vegetation. Mediterraneangrasses such as Bromus species andslender oats (Avena barbata) are par-

ticularly implicated since they act aswicks, spreading fast-moving fireinto the canopies of larger shrubvegetation.

Human activity also tends to befocused on these edges, making ig-nition far more likely to occur.(Lightning is uncommon in thesesystems and is rarely implicated inignitions except at high elevations.)Jon Keeley and others have notedthat the frequency of ignition hasdramatically increased as a conse-quence of human activity, and thepresence of these weedy plants ex-acerbates this interaction. In essence,the widespread presence of annualgrasses—both because of their ear-lier seasonal drying compared toshrubs and their high surface areato volume ratio—has enhanced thevolume of readily ignitable fuel andincreased the seasonal durationwhen fuels are readily susceptible toignition.

At historic fire frequencies,shrublands are generally resilientto fire. Chaparral species are well-known to regenerate from bothresprouting of perennial root crowns

and germination of seeds in the soilwhen heated and/or exposed tosmoke. But increasing fire frequen-cies in these systems, especially nearurban centers, has led to a loss innative species that rely on seed re-generation due to insufficient recov-ery time between fires for shrubs toreach reproductive age. For example,researcher Anna Jacobsen, who stud-ied repeated short-interval fire inthe Santa Monica Mountains, hasfound that return intervals of lessthan 12 years cause substantial re-ductions in shrub densities, includ-ing loss of obligate seeding shrubsand a decline in some of the re-sprouter species. The eventual re-sult is a habitat that contains anopen mosaic of exotic annual grassesand a few resprouting shrubs. Thus,increased fire frequency results in aconversion of native shrublands to amore open, grass-invaded systemwith scattered woody plants. Theapplication of prescribed fire for“brush removal” in wildlands simi-larly contributes to counterproduc-tive vegetation type conversion.

Shrublands along California’s

Monotypic giant reed stand (Arundo donax) in the Santa Clara River, Ventura County.A human-initiated fire burned through several kilometers of the riparian zone, fueledprimarily by giant reed. The dead trees remaining are cottonwoods and willows. Photographby A. Lambert.


foggy central coast are also affectedby an increase in the abundance ofthe fire-responsive African peren-nial veldtgrass (Ehrharta calycina).This species was introduced at least40 years ago for erosion control insandy soils. It produces relativelycontinuous fuel that promotes thespread of fire through coastal chap-arral and sage scrub, but it also re-sponds rapidly to fire. This speciesalso promotes fire and it increasesin density following fire in similarMediterranean climate areas ofSouthwest Australia. The result inCalifornia is that many habitatswhich burned either in accidentalor prescribed fires are becomingheavily dominated by low diversitystands of veldtgrass. This conver-sion is most apparent on VandenbergAir Force base where Ehrharta waswidely planted in the 1900s and hasspread widely. Such coastal chapar-ral and shrublands on unique ma-rine terrace soils (in this case, sands)are well known for their high ende-mism (being unique to a particulargeographic region). So an increase

in fire occurrence and an increase inthe growth of highly competitivegrasses after fire could lead to thedecline of endemic species.

DESERTS

Invasive grasses have played aneven more fundamental role in al-tering fire dynamics and causingnative plant declines in desert eco-systems. In general, deserts areamong the least invaded ecosystemsin North America, in terms of thenumber of non-native species thathave become established and theproportion of the flora they repre-sent (Rejmanek and Richardson1994). Roughly 5% of the flora iscomprised of exotic species, presum-ably owing to physiological stressescaused by the harsh climate andmoisture conditions. However, a fewecosystem-changing grass species areincreasing the frequency of fires inCalifornia deserts. The exact spe-cies differ in each desert, but allthreaten the future sustainability ofthese fragile ecosystems.

In the Great Basin systems eastof the Sierra Nevada, cheatgrass(Bromus tectorum) is the primaryspecies of concern, thriving wheresoil disturbance from historic live-stock grazing has promoted its es-tablishment in the interspaces be-tween shrubs like sagebrush (Arte-misia tridentata), bitter brush (Pur-shia tridentata), and rabbit brush(Chrysothamnus spp.). Lightningstrikes often ignite fires in the re-gion, but whereas historically thesewould have burned short distancesand then died out because of thediscontinuous fuels, cheatgrass nowprovides a continuous fuelbed be-tween senescent (end of aging pro-cess when plant tissues become dor-mant, dry, or are dropped) sage-brush, resulting in very large fires.

In the Mojave Desert, the sameimpact is caused by low-growingMediterranean grasses (Schismusbarbatus and S. arabicus), as well asby red brome. All are annual grassesthat fill in the space between shrubs.In the Sonora/Colorado Desert,senesced red brome is implicated in

Tamarisk resprouting following a fire at the Cibola National Wildlife along the lower Colorado River. Photograph by A. Lambert.


supporting fast moving surface firesand shortening fire intervals (Rogersand Steele 1980, Phillips 1992).Many desert plant species are notadapted to fire, so are gradually be-ing replaced by monotypic stands ofannual grasses. Large-scale type con-version of endemic desert plant com-munities is more prevalent in Ari-zona and Nevada to-date, but recentfires in the Owens Valley and areasof the Mojave show that our desertecosystems are not immune to suchirreversible impacts.

Sahara mustard (Brassica tourne-fortii) is a short-lived forb that posesa serious threat to desert ecosys-tems. While it has not yet causedserious fire events in sand-domi-nated sections of the Mojave, thislarge, multi-branched plant is form-ing nearly continuous stands and isalready crowding out annual wild-flowers. It will almost certainly be-come fuel for destructive wildfire inthe future.

GRASSLANDS

California’s grasslands have a his-tory of human management that hasimpeded accurate documentation offire cycles. Early human inhabitantsused fire to reduce woody plant coverand maintain grassland habitats forhunting, and to promote growth ofparticular species. After Euro-Ameri-can colonization, grasslands weremaintained by intensive livestockgrazing, and fire was used to convertshrublands to grasslands. Today firefrequencies are low in these eco-systems, likely lower than prior toEuropean settlement.

California grasslands are domi-nated by European annual grasses,even in regions that have not burnedfor decades. Prescribed fire has beenused as a tool in some invaded grass-lands to try to manage against non-native grasses, but results have beenmixed as demonstrated in a meta-analysis conducted by D’Antonioand Bainbridge (Corbin et al. 2004).While it appears that a single fire

can reduce non-native grasses, thiseffect is short-lived, and only recur-rent fire or fire combined with graz-ing can keep down non-nativegrasses. At the same time, some non-native forbs such as species in thegenus Erodium and black mustard(Brassica nigra) are promoted by fire.Thus, the use of fire in grasslands toenhance native species must be care-fully done, and consideration of whatnon-native species are in the localseedbank is a key element. But over-all, fire is not considered a key fac-tor in the maintenance of invasiveplant dominance, nor an appropri-ate management tool for eliminat-ing non-native species in most Cali-fornia grasslands.

FORESTS

In California, there is a generalpattern of decreasing numbers ofnon-native plant species with increas-ing elevation (Keeley et al. 2011).Fuel management practices in conif-erous forest ecosystems have gener-ally decreased fire frequency, but atthe same time have increased the se-verity of wildfires compared withother fire-prone systems. Woody fuelaccumulation (of native species), live-stock grazing, and logging—whichcreates even-aged stands replete withladder fuels—have altered fire re-gimes from historical low- or mixed-severity understory fires to larger,more intense crown fires. These high-intensity fires create crown gaps andappear to occur more frequently thanin the past. Montane coniferous for-ests in California generally have alower diversity of invasive speciesand a different composition of inva-sive species than lower elevationwoodlands and grasslands. Many ofthe invasive species problems in for-est ecosystems have been attributedto management practices that reducefire frequency.

Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum)appears to be one invasive plant thatis an increasingly common invaderof some of the drier coniferous for-

est ecosystems in California such asPonderosa pine woodlands. Keeleyhas documented its occurrence inthe understory of Ponderosa-domi-nated sites where it becomes abun-dant after fire. However, it is notclear that cheatgrass has any long-term impact on these ecosystems.Abundant cheatgrass growth duringthe early years after fire when treeseedlings are small could result inan increased probability of fire oc-currence, to the detriment of theyoung woody plants, but data tosupport this is lacking.

RIPARIAN SYSTEMS

Riparian ecosystems encompassa wide variety of habitats, from smallsprings and vernal pools to largerivers, coastal marshlands, and natu-ral and man-made lakes, and sup-port much of the biodiversity foundin California. Riparian vegetation isdefined by plants with regular ac-cess to groundwater or soil mois-ture, so typically, riparian plantshave higher foliar moisture thanupland plants. Higher moisturecontent imparts greater resistanceto and reduced damage from fire, soriparian areas are often consideredto be functional barriers to the spreadof wildfire (Pettit and Naiman 2007).However, several invasive plantsin California riparian systems arechanging these dynamics. For ex-ample, giant reed (Arundo donax)and tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) are wellknown to be highly flammable, yetboth species recover rapidly fromfire by regrowth from below-groundplant parts. By contrast, cotton-woods, willows, and other nativewoody plants are much less tolerantof direct exposure to fire. Recentstudies suggest that the invasiveplants mentioned above are makingriparian systems fire-prone.

Giant reed is a large, bamboo-like grass from southern Eurasia thatis altering the diversity and func-tion of riparian corridors through-out coastal California. In Southern


TABLE 1. NON-NATIVE, INVASIVE PLANTS POTENTIALLY ASSOCIATED WITHCHANGE IN FIRE REGIME OR FUEL CONDITIONS IN CALIFORNIA

Common Name Scientific Name Habitat* Habitats of Concern and Comments

ANNUAL GRASSES

barbed goatgrass Aegilops triuncialis G, C, W Spreading into serpentine grasslandswhere it could promote fire in other-wise sparse vegetation

wild oats Avena fatua, A. barbata G Ignition on trails, roads, disturbancecorridors

ripgut brome Bromus diandrus G, C, W Widespread and abundant, particularly innitrogen-rich soils

red brome Bromus madritensis ssp. G, D Desert and desert washes in Mojave rubens

cheat grass, downy brome Bromus tectorum D Primarily high desert, but also in parts oflower Mojave and Sierra Nevada

foxtail barley Hordeum murinum ssp. G Widespread, could change fuel continuity leporinum in some sites

Mediterranean grass Schismus arabicus, S. barbatus D Produces continuous fine fuels in aridshrublands, esp. Mojave desert

medusahead Taeniatherum caput-medusae G, D Common in grasslands of North Coastranges and north Central Valley,spreading into high desert

PERENNIAL GRASSES

beach grass Ammophila arenaria, 1 Creates dense fine fuels in coastal dunes, A. breviligulata where fire typically would not burn

giant reed Arundo donax R Low gradient floodplains; droughttolerant, highly fire-promoting

jubata grass, pampas grass Cortaderia jubata, C. selloana G, C Primarily coastal habitats; could influencefuel continuity

veldt grass Ehrharta calycina G Sandy soils, especially dune shrublandson central coast

smilo grass Piptatherum miliaceum G, C, W, Expanding range; can invade intoR disturbed chaparral. Future signifi-

cance unclear, but could changechaparral fire regime.

ravenna grass Saccharum ravennae D, R Emerging concern in North Coastriparian scrub; considered fire hazardin Arizona

fountain grass Pennisetum setaceum G, C Roadsides, also coastal dunes. Somehorticultural cultivars sterile. Highlyinvasive and fire promoting in Hawaii.

FORBS

fivehook bassia, forage Bassia hyssopifolia, B. scoparia D, R Alkaline habitats and disturbed areaskochia (formerly Kochia) where it forms continuous stands

black mustard Brassica nigra G, C, R Widespread in disturbed sites and coastalshrublands; high standing biomass.Flammability poorly known.


Sahara mustard Brassica tournefortii D Favors sandy substrates and dunesthistles Carduus spp., Cirsium spp., G, C, W, Could be ladder fuels in open woodlands;

Cynara cardunculus, R disturbed soils Silybum marianum

yellow starthistle Centaurea solstitialis G, R Large stands provide continuous fuel, butflammability poorly known

tumble or tansy mustard Descurainia sophia D, R Impacts appear to be minor, but locallymore invasive in northeast CA

perennial pepperweed, Lepidium latifolium R Dense stands of standing biomass intall whitetop wetland margins; range expanding

Russian thistle Salsola tragus D, R Forms dense stands in disturbed alkalinesites; tumbleweeds can accumulatealong fence lines and structures,causing a build-up of fuels

SHRUBS

Scotch broom Cytisus scoparius C Coastal scrub, oak woodland, perennialgrasslands; could enhance fuelaccumulation

French broom Genista monspessulana C, R Coastal scrub, oak woodlands, grasslands,particularly in understory, creatingadditional dry biomass

Spanish broom Spartium junceum C, R Coastal scrub, grasslands, wetlands, oakwoodland, forests; mostly found inopen canopy

gorse Ulex europaeus G, C Coastal bluffs and grasslands; may not behighly flammable but adds substantialbiomass to grasslands

TREES

tree-of-heaven Ailanthus altissima C, W, R Fire tolerant, litter burnsTasmanian blue gum Eucalyptus globulus W, R Coastal habitats; spreads from plantations

and can enhance fire intensity; sourceof firebrands near urban areas

Peruvian peppertree Schinus molle C Southern CA coastal hillsides; promotedby fire

athel Tamarix aphylla D, R Limited distribution; evergreen species;lower fire risk than deciduous congeners

tamarisk, saltcedar Tamarix ramosissima, T. D, R Major fire hazard throughout western chinensis, T. parviflora, etc. states; replaces less flammable riparian

vegetationfan palms Washingtonia robusta, R Native to isolated desert springs;

W. filifera spreads from ornamental plantings;source of firebrands near urban areas

VINE

cape ivy Delairea odorata R Coastal, both riparian and fog-affectedchaparral; hanging dry biomass couldbe fuel, esp. when killed back by frost

The plants listed above have known impacts or greatest potential to influence fire regimes, or to become fire hazards as theirpopulations increase. Other invasive plants with little or no available fire-related information were not included.*G = grassland, C = chaparral, W = woodlands, D = desert, R = riparian1 Occurs only in coastal beach dunes


California, giant reed has fueled firesaround urban areas and facilitatedfire spread to natural areas, and isalleged to reduce the ability of rivercourses to act as natural barriers tofire. Coffman and her collaboratorsat UCLA examined the regrowthrates of giant reed and nearby na-tive woody vegetation following a300-hectare fire in the Santa ClaraRiver (Ventura and Los AngelesCounties) in 2005. Giant reed grewthree to four times faster followingfire, and within one year its densitywas 20 times greater than nativespecies. This suggests that rapid re-growth of the highly flammable bio-mass creates an invasive plant-firecycle that ultimately leads to a de-cline in native species in these eco-systems.

In more arid regions, tamariskor saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) is con-sidered to be one of the most de-structive invaders of the southwest-ern U.S. This shrubby tree was in-troduced from Eurasia in the 1800sfor erosion control, windbreaks, andother horticultural uses. It nowdominates desert riparian corridorssuch as the lower Colorado Riverand parts of the Owens River wherewater and land management havedegraded conditions for native cot-tonwood, willow, and/or mesquitevegetation. Tamarisk has also dis-placed some native riparian wood-lands in relatively healthy water-sheds such as Coyote Creek in Anza-Borrego State Park. The relativelylong intervals between flood eventsallow tamarisk seedlings to reachmaturity, and subsequently to in-hibit establishment of native plants.

In these locations, wildfires havebecome frequent. For example, onthe Colorado River bordering Cali-fornia and Arizona, Bureau of Rec-lamation researcher David Busch hasshown that over a third (approxi-mately 37%) of riparian vegetationburned during a 12-year period.Such fires occur in the fall/winterperiod when the deciduous plantsdrop foliage which builds up into a

flammable litter layer. They also oc-cur during the growing season whentamarisk is also susceptible to igni-tion and may burn with greater in-tensity owing to volatile compoundsin live, green foliage. In a coopera-tive study of tamarisk-fueled firesby the University of California andthe U.S. Geological Survey, Gail Drusfound that across the desert regionsthere is a correlation between therelative abundance of tamarisk andextent of native plant mortality. Inother words, as tamarisk becomesmore abundant, there is a greaterloss of native vegetation during fireand acceleration toward eventualmonocultures of this widespread in-vader. Interestingly, the introduc-tion of the tamarisk leaf beetle(Diorhabda spp.) for biological con-trol of tamarisk may protect nativeplants because, even in the absenceof tamarisk mortality, by reducingtamarisk canopy density, the threatof fire to native plants is reduced(Brooks et al. 2008).

Comparatively little is knownabout most invasive plants in Cali-fornia and their relationship to wild-fire. The above examples are thebest observed cases of invasiveplants changing the dynamics offire in California ecosystems, al-though some are still anecdotal.Further scientific evaluation is nec-essary to accurately identify themechanisms that lead to thesechanges or to determine whetherchanges are reversible. Current evi-dence suggests that annual andsome perennial grasses have thestrongest effects on fire regimes andact as ecosystem transformers. Inmany ecosystems, the dense growthhabit and flammable tissue of inva-sive grasses create continuous drierfuels that are lacking in uninvadedcommunities. Further researchshould evaluate the effect of theseand other invasive life forms (forbs,shrubs, trees, etc.) on fire regimesto guide management efforts to con-serve and restore California nativeplant communities.

REFERENCES

Brooks, M., T. Dudley, G. Drus, and J.Matchett. 2008. Reducing wildfire riskby integration of prescribed burningand biological control of invasivetamarisk (Tamarix spp.). USGS Ad-ministrative Report, Project 05-2-1-18, El Portal, CA.

Brooks, M.L., et al. 2004. Effects of in-vasive alien plants on fire regimes.BioScience 54:677-688.

Corbin, J.C., C.M. D’Antonio, and S.J.Bainbridge. 2004. Tipping the balancein the restoration of native plants:Experimental approaches to chang-ing the exotic:native ratio in Califor-nia grassland. In Experimental Ap-proaches To Conservation Biology, ed.M. Gordon and L. Bartol. Universityof California Press, Los Angeles.

Keeley, J.E., J. Franklin, and C.M.D’Antonio. 2011. Fire and invasiveplants on California landscapes. InThe Landscape Ecology of Fire, ed. D.McKenzie, C. Miller, and D.A. Falk.Springer, NY.

Pettit, N. and R. Naiman. 2007. Fire inthe riparian zone: Characteristicsand ecological consequences. Eco-systems 10:673-687.

Phillips, B.G. 1992. Status of non-na-tive plant species, Tonto NationalMonument, Arizona. The Universityof Arizona, School of RenewableNatural Resources, Cooperative Na-tional Park Resources Study Unit,Tucson, AZ.

Rejmanek, M. and D.M. Richardson.1994. Invasive alien plants in Cali-fornia: 1993 summary and compari-son with other areas in North Ameri-ca. Madroño 41:161-177.

Rogers, G.F. and J. Steele. 1980. SonoranDesert fire ecology. In Proceedings ofthe Fire History Workshop. Depart-ment of Agriculture, Forest Service,Rocky Mountain Forest and RangeExperiment Station, Tucson, AZ.

Adam M. Lambert, Marine Science Insti-tute, University of California, Santa Bar-bara, CA 93106, [email protected];Carla M. D’Antonio, Ecology, Evolution,and Marine Biology, University of Cali-fornia, Santa Barbara 93106, [email protected]; Tom L. Dudley, Marine Sci-ence Institute, University of California,Santa Barbara, CA 93106, [email protected]


SUSTAINABLE AND FIRE-SAFE LANDSCAPES: ACHIEVINGWILDFIRE RESISTANCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH

IN THE WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACEby Sabrina L. Drill

nvasive plants, those non-nativespecies that cause ecological oreconomic harm, are one of thegreat threats to the health of

Southern California’s wildland-urban interface (WUI) areas. Fire isone of the greatest threats to thehomeowners living in those areas.Unfortunately, for many years a falseconflict was created between thesetwo issues, when fire departments,nurseries, and others recommendedinvasive plants to homeowners aspart of a fire-safe landscape.

The Natural Resources team atUC-Cooperative Extension (UCCE)in Los Angeles County created theSustainable and Fire-Safe (SAFE)Landscapes program to increase firesafety and wildland health by show-ing homeowners how to create andmaintain fire-safe landscapes with-out introducing invasive species.

Limiting the use of invasive spe-cies in highly fire-prone areas is par-ticularly important for a number ofreasons. First, both the fire risk andthe risk of plant invasion are height-ened by the geography. Homeownersin the WUI who use invasive plantsare exacerbating both problems, of-ten unwittingly, since their proper-ties border our few remaining areasof natural habitat. In addition, sev-eral of the invasive species com-monly planted in these areas pos-sess weedy characteristics that makethem highly flammable.

MYTHS ABOUT FIRE, RISK,AND SAFETY

There are several myths aboutfire and risk in Southern Californiaareas. The first is that fire-safe land-

scapes require a lot of water andmust be wet or damp throughoutfire season, or that a landscaped areacannot be both fire-safe and droughttolerant. In fact, one of the featuresthat can decrease the risk posed by aplant species is its ability to retainhigh moisture content in leaves andother tissues with very little water.From an invasive plant perspective,however, this means that the plantsmost likely to invade chaparral andcoastal sage-dominated areas suc-cessfully may also be those exoticsrecommended as drought-tolerant.

Another myth is that most Cali-fornia native plants are intrinsicallyhighly flammable, and that chapar-ral and coastal sage systems requirefrequent fire to be healthy. Whileseveral Southern California nativesdo possess characteristics that make

them fire-prone, many are actuallyhighly resistant and tolerant of fireand recover quickly after a wildfire,making them excellent choices for afire-safe landscape.

A final myth is that a greengroundcover is intrinsically fire-resistant. While a low, prostrategrowth form and high moisture con-tent are fire-resistant traits, plantssuch as iceplant, ivy, and periwinkle(often referred to as vinca) can posea fire risk. This is because underthat deceptively healthy-lookinggreen surface is often hiding a layerof dead, dry, entangled thatch. Thehealthy looking top layer tends todiscourage proper landscaping main-tenance, thereby contributing to itsfire hazard.

Contrary to what many peoplethink, it is not possible to make

In October 2003, numerous wildfires (indicated by red outlines) burned simultaneouslythroughout Southern California and northern Baja California, Mexico. Image captured bythe Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectro-Radiometer (MODIS) on the Terra satellite onOctober 26, 2003.

I


broad statements about fire-risk andinvasive plants, just as you cannotfor native plants. Each species mustbe evaluated separately. Finally, it isimpossible to discuss the fire riskpotential of any plant without alsotaking into account its health at anygiven time. Any plant will burn un-der the right conditions, and themost “fire-resistant species” can be-come great fuel for a wildfire if itcontains a lot of dead tissue due to alack of proper maintenance.

FIRE AND INVASIVEPLANTS

Fire and plant invasions are re-lated in several ways. In natural plantcommunities, the presence of inva-sive plants can increase the risk ofwildfire. For example, in sparsely

vegetated areas, such as desert com-munities, invasive plants often oc-cupy the space between the nativedesert scrub, thereby creating a con-tinuous fuel load that more easilyignites and transmits fire (Klinger etal. 2006). In riparian areas, invasiveplants like giant reed (Arundo donax),which produce a great deal of biom-ass and then become dormant anddry, can increase the intensity andseverity of fire. Native riparian spe-cies generally do not burn easily,and fires in riparian areas are natu-rally rare and of low intensity. Butwith the introduction of invasivespecies like arundo, fire in riparianareas can occur in a wider range ofclimatic conditions, and easilyspread from surface to crown fires(Bell et al., 2006). It can also inhibitfire recovery, and post-burn, arundocan resprout from rhizomes andcolonize new downstream areas, in-hibiting native regrowth.

After a fire, disturbed areas arehighly prone to invasion by weedypioneers such as annual grasses.Vegetation types that may have beenfire tolerant and recovered well un-der natural conditions may now besubject to type conversion. Type con-version is a process by which afterdisturbance, one type of plant com-munity replaces the one that hadoriginally been there. Frequent firesmay cause replacement of chapar-ral by non-native grasslands. Thereis a feedback loop—exotic grassesinvade a natural area, leaving thearea more fire prone, then they re-cover faster than the native plants.Hence, the progression is from anative community, to a native com-munity with some invasive plants,to a community dominated by in-vasive plants.

This can occur even faster whenareas are not only more fire prone,but when frequent fires are also pro-moted by fire starts due to humanactivities (campfires, disposal offlaming trash (e.g., cigarette butts),sparks from cars and other motors,downed power lines, etc.) (Keeley

et al. 2006a). This process may havebeen exacerbated even further byhuman activities such as post-fireseeding, which in the past activelyintroduced invasive species such aswild oat (Avena spp.) and rye (Loliumspp.). Previously, this was thoughtto be a useful tool for erosion pre-vention. Several studies, however,have found it to be of very limitedutility (Keeley, et al. 2006b).

THE SAFE LANDSCAPESPROGRAM

As described above, the SAFELandscapes program was designedto deal with a specific issue involv-ing invasive plants and fire, namelythe fact that certain invasive specieshave been recommended for plant-ing in the wildland/urban interface.To develop the program, we firstconvened a steering committee thatincluded fire agencies, public andprivate land managers, environmen-tal groups, and representatives fromthe nursery and landscape industry.Steering committee meetings werethemselves educational forums, asthey were an opportunity for mem-bers to learn from each other.

Our first step was to collect andreview the recommendations for firesafe landscaping being promoted anddisseminated by various groups inSouthern California. We reviewedover 100 planting guides to identifythose that recommended the use ofinvasive plants in fire-safe or water-conserving gardens. We used thecurrent list of invasive plant speciesof Southern California developed bythe California Invasive Plant Coun-cil as a reference. We found 34 liststhat included invasive plants amongtheir recommendations, and theagencies and organizations sponsor-ing those lists were sent letters iden-tifying the invasive plants they rec-ommended and asking them to re-move those species. Some of theselarger organizations that have re-vised or are in the process of revis-

Invasive plants including castor bean (Ri-cinus communis, foreground) and blackmustard (Brassica nigra) invade a canyonin Griffith Park, Los Angeles, 10 monthsfollowing the May 2007 fire that burned800 acres. Photograph by the author.


ing their planting guides includeLowe’s, Monrovia Nursery, the Natu-ral Resources Conservation Service,Los Angeles County Fire Depart-ment, Beverly Hills Fire Department,the City of Santa Clarita, and Cuya-maca College.

PRINCIPLES OF FIRE-SAFELANDSCAPING

While we identified, reviewed,and made recommendations to im-prove existing plant lists, for ourown program we have avoided dis-tributing a list. This is because wefeel that plant lists can be mislead-ing, giving the homeowner or land-scape designer the impression thatfire-safe landscaping is just aboutchoosing the right species and avoid-ing the wrong ones. Because anyplant species can burn, we focusinstead on the underlying principlesbehind designing a fire-safe homeand landscape, and on maintainingstructures and plants properly.

First, we begin by working fromthe structure out, rather than fromthe wildlands in. Homeowners of-ten spend far more effort “clearingbrush”—removing native vegeta-tion that is 100 or more feet from

around their homes—rather thanon changes they can make to thestructure itself or within the first 30feet. In ember-driven wildfires, itcan be far more effective to protectproperty by making sure that em-bers cannot enter the home throughdoors, windows, vents, or other gaps,than on any actions focused on thesurrounding plants. We advise thehomeowner to make sure that flam-

mable materials such as firewood,fuel canisters, and even fences andtrellises can’t provide a conduit forfire to reach the house, and thatembers cannot collect under decksor eaves.

Of course we also recommendchoosing burn-resistant buildingmaterials for roofs, siding, and decks.UCCE research on fire-resistantmaterials and construction methods

QUALITIES OF FIRE-RESISTANT VS. HIGHLYFLAMMABLE PLANTS

While we avoid recommending particular plant species, we do focuson characteristics that make plants more or less fire-resistant.

Fire-resistant plants:• store water in leaves or stems• produce very little dead or fine material• possess extensive, deep root systems for controlling erosion• maintain high moisture content with limited watering• grow slowly and need little maintenance• are low-growing in form• contain low levels of volatile oils or resins• have an open, loose branching habit with a low volume of total

vegetation

Highly flammable plants:• Retain large amounts of dead material within the plant• Produce a large volume of litter• Contain volatile substances such as oils, resins, wax, or pitch

A landscape in the Altadena area after appropriate fire hazard reduction. Vertical and horizontal space was created by pruning andselectively removing vegetation between native shrubs, reducing the continuity of fuel without removing more vegetation than necessary.Photograph by J. Lopez, Los Angeles County Fire Department.


INFORMATION DELIVERY

One of the difficulties in educat-ing the public about fire safety isthat people generally disregard theissue until a large fire occurs. Thenthere is a sudden surge of interest inthe topic that wanes rapidly oncethe emergency has passed. However,another good time to target home-owners is in the spring when theyreceive fuel management notifica-tions from local fire agencies. AtUCCE we wanted to reinforce theidea that fire preparedness and land-scape maintenance were year-roundtasks, so we decided to deliver thatinformation in a calendar.

Each month’s page includes abrief discussion of relevant issuesregarding fire ecology and landscapepreparedness, and highlights two ormore invasive plant species to avoid.We also took advantage of the cal-endar format to include the startdates for major Southern Californiawildfires along with the number ofstructures lost and acres burned. Inaddition to highlighting the year-

round nature of the issue, by utiliz-ing a calendar format we sought toget the information off the pile of“should-read” desk material, andonto the kitchen wall where it couldbe absorbed slowly.

With support from the NationalFish and Wildlife Foundation, theRenewable Resources Extension Act,the California Community Founda-tion, the Los Angeles and San GabrielRivers Watershed Council, the Na-tional Park Service, and the LosAngeles and Ventura County FireDepartments, in 2007 and 2008SAFE Landscapes Calendars weredistributed to over 49,000 residentsin the wildland/urban interfaceareas of Los Angeles and Venturacounties through direct mail and atevents and workshops. Mail-in sur-veys were included.

Of 241 survey respondents, 80%found the calendar useful and 73%said the information was new tothem. Also, 73% planned to save thecalendar for future reference. Mostimportantly, 76% reported beingmore concerned about invasive

Pages from the SAFE Landscapes Southern California Guidebook to Sustainable and Fire-Safe Landscapes in the Urban WildlandInterface. Graphic design by V. Borel, UC Cooperative Extension.

helped drive the creation of newbuilding codes for WUI areas. Thesewere adopted by the State of Cali-fornia in 2007 and apply to any newconstruction. For more informationabout making structures more resis-tant to wildfire, see the fire resistantbuilding page of our website, http://ucanr.org/safelandscapes.

Beyond the building, the majorprinciples to follow include think-ing about the defensibility of thelandscape—creating a space wherefirefighters can safely defend thestructure from wildfire. This in-volves making sure to achieve a ver-tical and/or horizontal separationamong plants so that a ground firecannot move upward into treecrowns, becoming a high ember-producing fire. We advise home-owners to remove any dead plantmaterial from roofs and anywhere itcan collect, including keeping plantspruned and trimmed to removethatch build-up. We also advise theuse of proper irrigation to keepplants healthy. A healthy plant isusually a fire-resistant plant.


plants after reading the calendar,81% said they had avoided buyinginvasive plants, 55% said they wouldchange their landscape because ofthe calendar, and 51% specificallysaid they were removing these inva-sive species from their landscapes.

In addition to the calendar,UCCE created the SAFE Landscapeswebsite, http://ucanr.org/safelandscapes, and a SAFE Guidebook thatcontains similar information to thecalendar, but in a non-dated, non-year-specific format (so it can be usedas an educational document for sev-eral years). We also held workshopsin both 2007 and 2008 to providemore comprehensive information tohomeowners as well as to landscapedesigners and architects.

In addition, we participated innumerous workshops and symposiaof a more technical nature on fireecology, fire preparation, and post-fire recovery in wildlands. We alsoprovided extensive support to theCity of Los Angeles following theGriffith Park fire, an 800-acre blazethat affected a large portion of thatcity park in May 2007. UCCE helpedto develop the post-fire recovery

strategy, whichhighlighted theneed to controlinvasive plantsand providedtraining to parkmain tenancestaff to recog-nize and treatinfestations.

THE FUTURE

Our work sofar has focusedon the land-scaped areawithin the first100 feet of ahome. Beyondthat, home-owners oftenlook at the natu-rally vegetated

area as a source of risk, rather thansee the benefits of natural plant com-munities. To solve it they maychoose a “scorched earth” approach,meaning that they remove every bitof vegetation, leaving just dirt. Asmore properties are developed at theedge of wildlands, individual effortsto manage fuels can result in signifi-cant loss of native habitat. The re-moval of most or all of the vegeta-tion in these areas can leave dis-turbed soils ripe for invasion byweedy species. Hence, the commonpractice of clearing all vegetation inearly spring can lead to a build-upof invasive plants and fine fuels bythe time fire season arrives. The re-placement of deep-rooted nativeperennial vegetation by shallow-rooted weedy annuals can also cre-ate an erosion hazard, with or with-out a wildfire occurring.

The next step we hope to take inexpanding our program will be totrain homeowners as well as vege-tation management contractors inmethods for a “light-touch” approachto fuel reduction. This will focuson creating vertical and horizontalspace, while retaining as much na-

tive vegetation as possible to pro-vide habitat and protect slopes. Cre-ating this space—by selectively re-moving and pruning vegetation sothat there is space between indi-vidual plants, rather than a con-tinuous, connected mass of vegeta-tion—means that fire cannot spreadas easily.

The SAFE Landscapes programis only one of several statewideprojects led by the University of Cali-fornia Cooperative Extension andthe Division of Agriculture and Natu-ral Resources. Similar projects thatfocus on different plant communi-ties are taking place on the coastand mountains of Northern Califor-nia, around Lake Tahoe, in San Di-ego, and in other areas. I encourageyou to contact your local Coopera-tive Extension office to find outmore.

REFERENCES

Bell, C.E., J. DiTomaso, and M. Brooks.2006. Invasive Plants and Wildfiresin Southern California. Brochure.University of California CooperativeExtension, http://ucce.ucdavis.edu/files/filelibrary/1359/39103.pdf.

Keeley J.E., C.J. Fotheringham, and M.Baer-Keeley. 2006a. Demographicpatterns of post-fire regeneration inMediterranean-climate shrublandsof California. Ecological Monographs76:235-255.

Keeley J.E., et al., 2006b. A 21st cen-tury perspective on post-fire seeding.Journal of Forestry 104:103-104.Klinger, R.C., M.L. Brooks, and J.M.Randall. 2006. Fire and invasiveplant species. In Fire in California’sEcosystems, ed. Neil G. Sugihara etal., pp. 499-516. University of Cali-fornia Press, Berkeley, CA.

Klinger, R.C., M.L. Brooks, and J.M.Randall. 2006. Fire and invasiveplant species. In Fire in California’sEcosystems, ed. Neil G. Sugihara etal., pp. 499-516. University of Cali-fornia Press, Berkeley, CA.

Sabrina L. Drill, UC Cooperative Exten-sion, Los Angeles County, 4800 E. CesarChavez Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90022,[email protected]


THE ROLE OF FIRE SAFE COUNCILS IN CALIFORNIAby Yvonne Everett

n many wildland ecosystems, fireis a natural phenomenon thatbrings a redistribution of resourcesand renewal. Species such as

Coulter pine (Pinus coulteri) dependupon fire for their survival (Stuartand Sawyer 2001). Yet fire is poten-tially hazardous and destroys valu-able resources. For many years theresponse was clear. Any wildland firethat could be put out was put out.Now, after over a century of oftensuccessful fire suppression, over-whelming scientific evidence that firehelps to sustain ecosystem functionand biological diversity, as well asskyrocketing suppression costs, areconvincing arguments for “let burn”policies in wilderness areas.

However, the wilderness is nolonger so far away. As the fingers ofour housing developments extendinto ever more ridges surroundingexpanding communities, we arereaching deeper into wildfire terri-tory. In 19 states, over 50% of homesare now in this wildland-urban in-terface (WUI), led by California with5,087,909 houses counted in theWUI in 2000 (Stewart et al. 2006).While some of us bemoan the lackof local government planning that

allows this expansion to continue,most of us still expect fire servicesto fight fires in the WUI to protectlives and homes.

But fighting wildland fire in theWUI is complicated. Structures andunknown caches of explosive ortoxic household materials make firefighting very dangerous. When resi-dents evacuate their homes in theface of wildfires, they block roadaccess for emergency response per-sonnel. And despite their training,skills, and resources, fire servicesare often overwhelmed by the scaleof wildfires in the WUI. For all thesereasons, the single solution approachof relying entirely on suppressionfor fire management needs to be re-visited.

One response to the increasedthreat of wildfire in the WUI hasbeen the emergence of Fire SafeCouncils. These are locally-basedgroups of volunteers whose goal isto reduce wildfire hazards to com-munities. Today, there are over 150Councils in California. Some areneighborhood homeowner groups;others are county level associationsof fire service professionals. Thereare rural councils focused on fuel

treatments and ur-ban groups special-izing in public edu-cation. While somehave paid staff, mostare volunteer-led.Councils carry out awide range of criti-cal fire preparednessactivities that are be-yond the capacity offire services.

A recent surveyof Fire Safe Councilsin California focusedon where Councilsare located, whattypes of activities

they carry out, and what Councilssee as their greatest challenges(Everett and Fuller 2010). The studyindicated that Councils are verywidespread, that they carry out arange of critical activities, and thatthey face similar challenges.

The responding Councils werelocated in 19 California counties,from San Bernardino in the south toDel Norte in the north. Most coun-ties have one county-level Fire SafeCouncil and often numerous com-munity-level Councils. San DiegoCounty, for example, with nearlythree million people, includes acounty-wide Fire Safe Council thatserves as an umbrella for over 50community Councils (Fire SafeCouncil of San Diego 2010). Oftenlocal representatives of state or fed-eral agencies have assisted in localCouncil formation.

Council membership is diverseand often includes members withsignificant skills and experience. Themajority of community-level Coun-cils indicated having 8-20 regularactive members. Almost all indicatedthat most or all of their members areprivate landowners. Over half re-ported volunteer fire departmentmembers and or professional fireservice staff among their regulars.Over half of the Councils reportedhaving active or retired federal, state,and local government representa-tives as council members. Half ofthe Councils include members fromcommunity based non-governmen-tal organizations. Most of the Coun-cils reported that they commonlycollaborate with other organizations.

Fire Safe Councils reported ac-tivities in three general categories:public education and outreach; plan-ning for wildfire; and implementingrisk reduction activities.

Councils reach many thousandsof people with fire preparedness and

Members of the Trinity Fire Safe Council meet to work ondefining the wildland urban interface for their wildfireprotection plan. All photographs courtesy of the Trinity FireSafe Council unless otherwise noted.

I


safety brochures and newspaper in-serts, booths at county fairs, andprograms for local schools andneighborhood and community meet-ings. Workshops and training dayson creating defensible space andchipping fuels are common, oftenorganized with agency partners suchas CalFire. Some Councils also reachout to other Councils. For example,since 2003 the Northern CaliforniaCouncils have held four well-at-tended gatherings for regional net-working and peer training.

Planning and finding supportfor their activities are major Coun-cil activities. The 23 Councils whoreported on funding had raised$12,919,066 for their work over thelast decade. The majority of funds(63%) came from federal sources

and from state government (20%).Federal monies came largely throughthe California Fire Safe Council, anincorporated nonprofit organiza-tion that helps to distribute federalagency grants (Fire Safe Council2010). Additional federal dollarswere distributed in counties withlarge proportions of federally man-aged lands by Resource AdvisoryCommittees, with funding providedby Congress under the Secure RuralSchools and Community Self-Deter-mination Act of 2000. Most of thismoney, $9,956,050, was used totreat fuels, while $666,100 was usedfor public outreach. The remaining$2,324,700 went to CommunityWildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)preparation and other planning.

CWPP is a federally promoted

protocol for community-based firepreparedness planning under theHealthy Forest Restoration Act(2003). Communities prepare theirplan in collaboration with agencyand local officials (CommunitiesCommittee et al. 2004; Ganz et al.2007). The plans usually identifyprojects to reduce fuels, protectstructures, develop evacuation plans,and the like. Communities with acompleted CWPP proposal en-dorsed by local government are

ABOVE: Bull Pine prescribed burn carried out by the Orleans-Somes Bar Fire Safe Councilon private land in the Six Rivers National Forest. Photograph courtesy of the Orleans-Somes Bar Fire Safe Council • RIGHT: A number of homeowners along Highway 3 in LongCanyon teamed up with the Trinity County Fire Safe Council to reduce fuels around theirhomes and along their access road. After the rest of the neighbors saw what it looked like,they requested assistance with their defensible space too.


fuels on their property—was a thirdkey issue. To many, fuel reductionis controversial. Some people sim-ply don’t want to bother to do thework. Others are concerned aboutits environmental impact, such asdestabilizing slopes by removingnative vegetation or of habitat losscaused by clearing.

It seems clear that Fire SafeCouncils in California are playing acritical role in community-based firemanagement that complements fireservice activities. It is to be hopedthat over time increased education,fire preparedness, and ecologicallyappropriate fuel reduction activitieswill enhance our ability to live withfire, even as we work to halt theexpansion of the WUI.

REFERENCES

Communities Committee, NationalAssociation of Counties, NationalAssociation of State Foresters, Soci-ety of American Foresters, and theWestern Governors’ Association.

more competitive for federal fundsadministered through the Califor-nia Fire Safe Council’s Grant Clear-inghouse. All of the ten county-levelCouncils reporting had either com-pleted CWPPs or were working tocomplete one. Half of the 18 com-munity-level Councils had also com-pleted a CWPP.

Fire Safe Councils reported di-verse fire preparedness and responseprojects, including emergency com-munications, facilitation of emer-gency response, home improvement,and fuel reduction. The specific ac-tivities carried out by a particularCouncil depend on local needs andcapacity. The most emphasized ac-tivity was fuels treatment. Eliminat-ing fuels and access points for fireon and around structures is widelyaccepted as a critical factor in re-ducing losses to wildfire (USDA2007). At the time of the survey, 23Councils reported having completedfuel reduction work on 25,647 acres.Fuel reduction was largely on pri-vate lands immediately adjacent to

structures or along access roads. TheCouncils reported that at least 3,655landowners were participants inthese fuel reduction treatments.

While Fire Safe Councils are re-sponding to the increased threat offire in the WUI, they also face sig-nificant challenges. The most widelyreported challenge was increasingand maintaining community aware-ness and participation in Councilactivities. Respondents struggledwith how to generate and maintainpublic interest in fire managementissues. In areas with many absenteelandowners, it has proven challeng-ing to reach them and gain permis-sion to treat their land. But forprojects that involve creating a fuelbreak for a neighborhood or alongan access road, contiguous proper-ties must be treated. Finding fund-ing, especially for fuel reductionprojects, operational expenses, andliability insurance, was the secondranked challenge for Fire Safe Coun-cils. Fuel reduction—and especiallyconvincing landowners to reduce

Shaded fuel break on federal land next to private parcel. This homeowner lost his fire insurance until the Fire Safe Council was able toget permission from the USFS to complete the thinning.


COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCILS IN CALIFORNIA

here are over 150 local or “community-level” Fire Safe Councils inCalifornia and most have a link to a county fire safe council. County-

level councils with websites active in 2010 are listed here.

Alameda Diablo Fire Safe, http://www.diablofiresafe.org/Alpine Fire Safe Council, http://www.alpinefiresafe.org/Amador Fire Safe Council, http://www.amadorfiresafe.org/Butte County Fire Safe Council, http://www.thenet411.net/Contra Costa Diablo Fire Safe Council, http://www.diablofiresafe.org/Fire Safe Council of El Dorado County, http://www.edcfiresafe.org/index.phpHumboldt County Fire Safe Council, http://co.humboldt.ca.us/planning/

fire_safe_council/fsc_default.aspKern River Valley Fire Safe Council, http://www.krvfiresafecouncil.org/

News.htmLake South Lake Fire Safe Council, http://www.southlakefiresafecouncil. org/

about.htmLassen County Fire Safe Council, http://www.lassenfiresafecouncil.org/Eastern Madera County Fire Safe Council, http://www.maderafsc.org/html/

contact.htm (out of date)Fire Safe Marin, http://www.firesafemarin.org/links.htmMariposa County Fire Safe Council, http://www.mariposafiresafe.org/Mendocino County Fire Safe Council, http://firesafemendocino.org/Monterey Fire Safe Council, http://firesafemonterey.org/Napa Communities Firewise Foundation, http://www.napafirewise.org/Fire Safe Council of Nevada County, http://www.firesafecouncilnevco.com/Orange County Greater Laguna Coast Fire Safe Council, http://www.

lagunacoastfiresafecouncil.org/Placer County Fire Alliance, http://www.placerfirealliance.org/Plumas County Fire Safe Council, http://plumasfiresafe.org/Riverside County—see Inland Empire Fire Alliance, http://www.

fireinformation.com/Sacramento County Folsom Fire Safe Council, http://www.folsomfsc.org/

about.us/our.mission.phpSan Benito County Fire Safe Council, http://www.sbfsc.org/San Bernardino County see Inland Empire Fire Alliance, http://

www.fireinformation.com/Fire Safe Council of San Diego County (37 councils), http://

www.firesafesdcounty.org/localfscs.htmlSan Francisco Peninsula Fire Safe Council, http://www.rlinc.org/rlinc/

firesafe.htmlSan Luis Obispo County Fire Safe Council, http://www.fscslo.org/San Mateo Fire Safe, http://www.smcfiresafe.org/Santa Clara Fire Safe Council, http://www.sccfiresafe.org/FAQs.htmSanta Cruz Soquel Fire Safe Council, http://www.soquelfiresafe.org/

aboutus.phpShasta County Fire Safe Council, http://www.westernshastarcd.org/scfsc.htmlSierra County Firesafe and Watershed Council, http://www.scfswc.com/Fire Safe Council of Siskiyou County, http://www.firesafesiskiyou.org/Public/

HomePageTrinity County Fire Safe Council, http://www.tcrcd.net/fsc/index.htmlTuolumne County Highway 108 Fire Safe Council, http://www.

tuolumnefiresafe.org/Ventura Ojai Valley Fire Safe Council, http://www.firesafeojai.org/Yuba County Watershed Protection and Fire Safe Council, http://www.

co.yuba.ca.us/firesafe/default.htm

T

2004. Preparing A Community Wild-fire Protection Plan: A Handbook forCommunities in the Wildland UrbanInterface. http://www.safnet.org/pub-lications/cwpp_oct08.pdfCaliforniaFire Safe Council Annual Report.http://www.firesafecouncil.org/about/schedminutereport.cfm.

Everett, Y. and M. Fuller. 2011. FireSafe Councils in the Interface. Soci-ety and Natural Resources. 0:1-15.http://www.informaworld.com/10.1080/08941920903313835

Fire Safe Council of San Diego. ActiveLocal Fire Safe Councils. http://www.firesafesdcounty.org/localfscs.html.

Ganz, D., A. Troy, and D. Saah. 2007.Community involvement in wildfirehazard mitigation and management:Community based fire management,fire safe councils, and communitywildfire protection plans. In Livingon the Edge: Economic, Institutional,and Management Perspectives onWildfire Hazard in the Urban Inter-face, eds. A. Troy and R. Kennedy,pp. 143-164. Elsevier Ltd., NewYork, NY.

Stewart, S.I., V.C. Radeloff, and R.B.Hammer. 2006. The wildland-urbaninterface in the United States. In ThePublic and Wildland Fire Manage-ment: Social Science Findings for Man-agers, ed. S.M. McCaffrey, pp. 197-202. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-1. U.S.Department of Agriculture, ForestService, Northern Research Station,Newtown Square, PA.

Stuart, J. and J. Sawyer. 2001. Trees andShrubs of California. University ofCalifornia Press, Berkeley, CA.

U.S. Department of Agriculture ForestService Independent Large WildfireCost Panel. 2007. Towards a collabo-rative cost management strategy:U.S. Forest Service large wildfire costreview recommendations. A Reporton 2006 Wildland Fires chartered bythe U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/publica-tions/ilwc-panel/BR6988-1.pdf

Yvonne Everett, Department of Environ-mental Science and Management,Humboldt State University, 1 HarpstStreet, Arcata, CA 95521, [email protected]


FIRE-RESISTANT LANDSCAPING: A GENERAL APPROACHAND CENTRAL COAST PERSPECTIVE

by Suzanne Schettler

hen planning a land-scape in a rural-resi-dential area, it is a natu-ral impulse to consult

a list of fire-resistant plants and se-lect only those that are deemed fire-safe. Consulting more than one listcan uncover a problem, however:lists contradict each other. For ex-ample, our native yarrow (Achilleamillefolium) shows up on some listsas fire-resistant and on others asflammable. Other species show upin contradictory fashion as well.Most lists are a compilation of opin-ions, guesses, informed guesses, andother people’s guesses.

THE WILDFIREENVIRONMENT

Some factors in the fire environ-ment are beyond human control,and are almost beyond comprehen-sion. First, wildfires are extremelyunpredictable, burning some veg-etation while adjacent sites are leftuntouched. Second, the rapidly ris-ing column of hot air from a wildfiresucks in oxygen to feed the base ofthe fire, creating winds of tornadospeeds. These high winds carry burn-ing embers (firebrands) a mile ormore, igniting spot fires in a leap-frog fashion and spreading the firefarther and faster than the actualflame front. Firebrands are not nec-essarily single burning coals; theycan be a shower of small embers,resembling Fourth of July fireworksbut not organized into pretty pat-terns. And third, because wildfiresoften occur during especially hot,dry, and windy weather conditions,the temperatures can be extremelyhigh. After the Trabing Fire nearWatsonville in 2008, investigators

determined that the temperatureshad reached 3,000 degrees Fahren-heit. I was shown a blob of meltedaluminum, small enough to hold inthe palm of a hand, that was all thatremained of an extension ladder.

Some comparative temperaturesmay be of interest. Paper ignites atabout 451 degrees F, depending onits composition. Lead melts at 400 to600 degrees F, depending on its pu-rity. Aluminum melts at about 1,600degrees F, a blast furnace for makingsteel runs at approximately 2,300degrees F, and a kiln for cement pro-duction is fired at 3,000 degrees F.

There are no plants and no struc-tures that can withstand such heat.At these temperatures, spontaneouscombustion ignites a structure from

within. As the Basin Complex Firein Big Sur approached a home in2008, the owners moved their im-portant possessions into a metal stor-age container on the property beforethey evacuated. When they returned,the house was untouched but thestorage container held only ashes.Such incidents of internal ignitionhappen more often than we think.

WHAT WE CAN DO

In spite of these formidable con-ditions, we are not helpless. Secondgraders are taught the Fire Triangle(see page 18). The three sides of thetriangle are heat, oxygen, and fuel—take away any one of them and firecannot burn. There is little that can

W

Low-growing native plants minimize potential fire hazard immediately adjacent to thishome. Native irises (Iris spp. and hybrids), sea thrift (Armeria maritima), Phlox douglasii,and low-growing manzanitas (Arctostaphylos spp.) are featured. Horizontal separationbetween plants is illustrated by the walkway at the left and center, and vertical separationis illustrated at the right. However, as the vines growing up the house increase in size theycould become a fire hazard. The homeowners might want to replace them with low-growing plantings in large ornamental pots. Photograph by landscape architect R. Lutsko,reprinted with permission of Pacific Horticulture.


be done to reduce the industrial tem-peratures described above. And oxy-gen cannot be cut off unless a fire issmall and can be smothered. Theone element we can control is fuel,and vegetation is fuel. We can con-trol the vegetative fuel when we de-sign a new landscape or retrofit anexisting one.

HOW FLAMMABLE ARENATIVE PLANTS?

Bert Wilson is a native plantnursery owner and former fire-fighter. In September of 2005, nearthe end of the dry season, he com-pared the flammability of variousplants. He placed a one-centimeterflame of a propane torch in contactwith foliage of a clipped branch andrecorded the time to ignition, re-peating several times per plant. Mostof the native plants he tested weregrowing in the ground and wereunwatered. He performed the ex-periment in a closed barn so breezeswould not influence the results.

What he found was not what heexpected. The results were not con-sistent, either within genus or spe-cies, or with the literature. The moredrought-tolerant the plant, the longerit took to ignite. And unwatered na-tives fared better than watered non-natives; a watered apple and a wa-tered common lilac burned fasterthan many manzanitas. Manzanitasas a group were quite variable, andwatered samples were not necessar-ily slower to ignite than unwateredones. Ceanothus species were rela-tively hard to burn; a light dust-offby overhead watering every twoweeks made them really hard to burn.

SOME GENERALIZATIONS

In spite of the fallibility of lists of“fire-resistant” or “fire-prone” plants,there are some general guidelinesthat do relate to species selection.Plants with fine foliage have a highsurface-to-volume ratio and there-

fore are more quickly heated throughto an ignition temperature than arelarger leaves. Conversely, plants withlarger, thicker leaves are slower toignite. Plants with resinous sap arechemically more volatile than plantswith watery sap. Conifers (exceptfor redwoods) are generally fairlyflammable. Species that accumulatedry litter are a hazard. But even theseguidelines are relatively minor fac-tors in reducing flammability.

SEPARATION IS THE KEY

The question is not “Is a particu-lar species fire-resistant?” What re-ally makes a landscape fire-resistantis not the species that are plantedbut the three-dimensional geometryof their placement and the kind ofcare they receive. The spaces betweenplants, and the space between veg-etation and a structure, are of greatimportance. There should be hori-zontal and vertical gaps in the veg-etation. The individual plants shouldhave elbow room, not just when theyare initially planted but when theyare full-grown. It may be useful toconsult a knowledgeable horticul-turist in advance to identify the ma-ture size of plants in a given soil typeand climate. And bulky vegetationshould be positioned away fromstructures. The area immediately sur-

rounding a home can function as afirebreak, comprising low vegetationor hardscape. This also becomes awork area if firefighters are defend-ing a home and are lugging heavyhoses to protect the structure.

DESIGN FACTORS

Foundation plantings evolvedwhen it was considered unsanitaryfor the first floor of a house to sitclose to the ground and plants wereneeded to camouflage a tall founda-tion. Thomas Church and other land-scape architects began moving awayfrom this approach in the mid-1900s.Rather than using plants to framethe view of the house from the street,they placed the plantings where theycan be enjoyed looking outward fromthe house and patio. This removesthe bulk of the vegetation (fuel) fromnear the house, literally turning thedesign inside-out and creating fireresistance at the same time. For fireresistance, it is important to gradu-ate the vegetation, with least volumenear the structure.

In a fire-resistant landscape, atraditional perennial border is notlocated at the foundation of thehouse, but is set at a little distancewhere it invites exploration. Thisconcept translates readily to ourMediterranean climate.

Here interest is focused away from the house, which is casting a late-afternoon shadowacross the patio and lawn. The perennial border creates a focal point viewed from thehouse, rather than framing the view toward the house. Bulky vegetation is farther back,blurring the property line. All photographs by S. Schettler unless otherwise noted.


Islands are a good way to createseparation in the vegetative fuel. Theycan either form the framework forthe layout of a new landscape or canbe retrofitted by cutting broad trailsthrough existing vegetation such aschaparral, breaking it up into dis-continuous patches. Human-scale is-lands of mounded vegetation visu-ally remind us of natural topographyin the larger landscape, so that onehas the experience of being immersedin the landscape rather than merelywalking over it.

Since fire climbs upward, it isimportant to eliminate fire ladders.A fire ladder exists when there iscontinuous or nearly continuous veg-etation extending from the groundup to the tree canopy. Care in theplacement of shrubs, and maintain-ing substantial vertical gaps betweenshrubs and trees, can prevent thedevelopment of fire ladders.

Steep slopes are particularlyvulnerable to fire, as fire low on theslope preheats vegetation higher up.Terracing a steep slope makes thesite more useable, allows rainfall tosoak in rather than run off, and re-duces the intensity of a potentialfire. A tree or shrub burning low onthe slope cannot readily ignite a planthigher up if the slope is broken bylevel areas.

Homeowners in forested settingsare being increasingly encouragedby Cal Fire and local fire agencies toreduce hazardous vegetation andcreate defensible space (see sidebar).This is accomplished through a com-bination of methods. Dense trees canbe thinned to feature the most at-tractive and well-spaced specimens.In a mixed evergreen forest, under-story shrubs and ferns that remainafter some trees are removed canprovide the basis for a new garden.Trees that are retained should havetheir lower branches removed toeliminate fire ladders; the remain-ing foliage should be at least highenough to walk under. Shrubs canlikewise be “limbed up” and selec-tively pruned to showcase beautiful

THERE IS NO SUCHTHING AS A FIRE-PROOFPLANT…Iceplant (Carpobrotus edulis) burnedin the Trabing Fire in 2008. Photographby R. Casale, NRCS.

…OR A FIRE-PROOF STRUCTURE.

(Before): Mike Evans, co-owner of Tree of Life native plant nursery in SouthernCalifornia, built this cabin over the course of three years. The cabin was carefullydesigned for fire safety, there was 100' clearance to mineral soil in all directions,and the forest understory was cleared for hundreds of yards all around. Bothphotographs by M. Evans.

(After): The Cedar Fire of 2003 burned so hot that the structure fire started onthe inside: a piece of furniture, a pillow, a towel, the tablecloth (who knows?)ignited, perhaps spontaneously.


trunks while reducing fuel and cre-ating separation from the ground-level vegetation.

HORTICULTURALPRACTICES

Aside from the three-dimen-sional geometry of the planting, thesingle most effective fire-resistantmeasure is to perform horticulturalmaintenance on a regular basis:groom, dead-head, prune, rake, tidyup. Fire ladders that have been ini-tially eliminated may need to bemaintained by periodically reopen-ing the vertical gaps as plants grow.

Mulch conserves moisture andsuppresses weeds, but wood chipsor bark should not be deeper than3-6" in order to limit flame lengths.In the event a firebrand lands on itand smolders, the mulch should bekept a few feet away from structuresso it can’t carry a creeping fire to abuilding.

Irrigation can sustain moisturecontent in the vegetation throughthe dry season, making it slower toignite. There is a delicate balance,however. The life of drought-toler-ant trees and shrubs is shortened ifirrigation stimulates year-roundgrowth and the plants do not have anatural annual dormancy during thedry season. The best basic irrigationregime is to mimic a good, long rainyseason. Watering can start aboutOctober 1, be discontinued once rainsbegin, resumed again when the rainsend, and then tapered off during May.

Most shrubs of the chaparralhave a deep taproot but also havebranch roots near the ground sur-face to collect water from showersthat wet only the upper soil layers.If supplemental watering is desiredduring summer, it should be infre-quent and light. Here again, natureis the model. In the Central Coastregion of California, natural rainfallin summer is rare and light.

Some plants can provide cues forthe timing of summer watering. Bush

monkeyflowers (the woodier Mimu-lus species) can be used as indicatorplants; when they start to look dryand wilted, other plants in similarconditions will benefit from a lightwatering. The monkeyflowers are anexception to the requirement forsummer dormancy and can even bekept in nearly continuous bloom ifthey are cut back halfway after bloomand then watered. Bush monkey-flowers are usually deer-proof andfully drought-tolerant, and are more

versatile than many natives. Theyare on some fire-resistant plant lists,but Bert Wilson’s experiment foundthat when they are dry and dormantthey ignite readily.

CONCLUSION

One way to think about fire-resistance is to landscape as if youhave a view: keep plenty of spaceopen so you don’t block the view. Ifyou don’t have a view, make one by

DEFENSIBLE SPACE

y law in California, 100 feet of defensible space is required aroundhomes and other structures. This creates a safe working area for

firefighters to protect structures.

First 30 feet: “Lean, Clean, and Green”

Vegetation must be very low in volume and density. This does nottranslate to a barren moonscape, but it does mean low groundcoversand/or hardscape are dominant.

Next 70 feet (or to the property line if closer):

“Reduced Fuel Zone”Create horizontal and vertical spacing between plants. The amount ofspace will depend on how steep the slope is and the size of the plants.

In Santa Cruz County, islands of low vegetation less than waist highmay be scattered in the Reduced Fuel Zone for aesthetic and wildlifevalues. Some examples for different areas are listed below:

For Sun

manzanitas (Arctostaphylos spp., low-growing forms)coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis)ceanothus (Ceanothus spp., low-growing forms)sedges (Carex spp.)buckwheats (Eriogonum spp., low-growing varieties)irises (Iris spp. and hybrids)sages (Salvia spp.)

For Part Shade

huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum)irises (Iris spp. and hybrids)snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus)California blackberry (Rubus ursinus)alum root (Heuchera spp.)

For Shadewestern bleeding heart (Dicentra formosa)western sword fern (Polystichum munitum)

B


placing a garden structure or fea-tured plant where it creates a focalpoint away from the house. Anotherway to think about fire-resistance itto picture a chess game after thegame is halfway played and the re-maining pieces are widely scatteredacross the board. There may be acluster or two, but there are broadopen spaces as well.

There are other considerationsthat contribute to fire-resistance in alandscape, but the two most impor-tant ones are plant geometry and hor-ticultural practices. Although therecan be no guarantees in the event ofa wildfire, effective design and horti-cultural practices can dramaticallyshift the odds in one’s favor.

There are many ways to accom-plish a balance of defensibility, aes-thetics, and ecological value. Threesimilar properties on a given hill-side may achieve all these goals inthree different ways.

REFERENCES

Cal Fire. 2009. Living with fire in SantaCruz County. Contains detailed rec-ommendations for separation dis-tances between trees and shrubs onslopes and other useful information.

Church, T. 1983. Gardens are for People,2nd ed. McGraw-Hill Book Com-pany, San Francisco, CA.

Dawson, J. and R. Lucas. 2005. TheNature of Plants: Habitats, Challenges,and Adaptations. Timber Press, Port-land, OR.

Fire Safe San Mateo County. 2010. Liv-ing With Fire in San Mateo County.Different counties have similar butnot identical guidelines.

Santa Clara County FireSafe Council.2009. Living With Fire in Santa ClaraCounty. Similar to the Santa CruzCounty version.

Wilson, B. 2005. Leaf burn times ofCalifornia native plants. http://www.laspilitas.com/classes/fire_burn_times.html (accessed November 1,2008).

Suzanne Schettler, P.O. Box 277, BenLomond, CA 95005, [email protected]

TOP: A combination of thinning and limbing up creates a shaded fuel break, reducing theintensity and speed of a potential fire. This is a sensitive way to handle rare shrubs suchas silver-leaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos silvicola). To prevent erosion, the ground hasnot been scalped (cleared to bare soil). • MIDDLE: Island plantings are a good way to createseparation in the vegetative fuel surrounding homes. Their presence reduces the spreadof wildfire, while adding focal interest to the landscape. Here, a small island planting islocated between two larger islands in the salvia garden at Cabrillo College in Santa CruzCounty. More island plantings can be seen by zooming in to the Google Earth view of theUCSC Arboretum. • BOTTOM: Where space is available, a perimeter orchard of dwarf fruittrees can create a fuel break.


WILDFIRE SAFETY:LESSONS LEARNED FROM SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

by Greg Rubin

he great San Diego wildfiresof 2003 and 2007 have taughtus a number of lessons, andsurprisingly, much of the

conventional wisdom is flying outthe window. The truth is that noneof our landscaping clients lost theirhomes despite being surrounded bynative plants, despite being in themiddle of these firestorms, and de-spite having neighbors with conven-tional landscapes whose homesburned to the ground. While thereare many who still believe that ifyou plant native shrubs near yourhome, they will spontaneously com-bust and burn down your house, thereality is quite the opposite.

SAFETY IN NATIVES

So what is it about native land-scapes that can lead to such fireresistance? One thing that contrib-utes to it is to hydrate the plantswith overhead irrigation through-out the warm months, from roughlyearly June to mid-October. Theamount of moisture delivered canbe slight—approximately a quarterinch of precipitation per watering.That equates to about 40 minuteson a rotator type system. The wa-tering interval on an establishedlandscape is once every 10-14 days,depending on location and expo-sure. Steep inland slopes may bewatered as frequently as every 7-10days, again depending on exposure.Each watering is about equivalentto a summer thunderstorm or fogdrip—well within the tolerancerange of most natives. The goal is to“dust off” the leaves (dust can actu-ally become a problem on suchdrought tolerant landscapes!), wetthe mulch, but not saturate hot soil.This helps avoid pathogen problems.

T

ABOVE: During the Witch Fire of 2007 a non-native rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis) onthe left was incinerated next to a volunteerflat-top buckwheat (Eriogonum fascicu-latum), which, though scalded, survived.Both were receiving twice monthly irriga-tion. Clearly this was enough hydration toensure low combustibility in the nativebuckwheat but inadequate for the non-native rosemary. RIGHT: Green leaves arestill evident on the Eriogonum fasciculatum(foreground) if you look closely, while allthat remains of the Rosmarinus officinalis isa black smudge (background). All photo-graphs by the author.

Native leaves are able to absorbthe overhead moisture, and it ap-pears that they hang on to that mois-ture even in the face of flames. Otherplants surely exhibit these proper-ties; however, it typically requiresmuch less water to hydrate a native


plant than an exotic.Ironically, it is often theplants that we think of ashighly combustible thatend up benefitting themost from this supple-mental watering.

In fact, it seems thatfire resistance in nativeshas less to do with plantselection than with hydra-tion. An interesting studywas conducted by BertWilson of Las Pilitas Nurs-ery (www.laspilitas.com)where he examined therelative ignition times ofvarious native and non-native plants when ex-posed to a propane torch.He also noted whether theywere hydrated or not. Al-though not a scientificallycontrolled study, it is fairlyunique and useful as a rela-tive measure. Some plantsthat would ignite in 15 sec-onds took over a minuteto do so once hydrated.Many of the ignition timesfor natives were far in ex-cess of those for non-na-

TOP: A home that survived boththe 2003 and 2007 San Diegofires. The house is surroundedcompletely by an 8-foot-widedecomposed granite apron. Theplantings immediately outsidethis zone and for the first 30feet are hydrated, low-growing,and well-spaced. BOTTOM: Thesame house, with the first 30feet of well-watered plantingshidden behind a low rock wall.Outside of that perimeter areplanted native groundcoversthat are being irrigated aboutevery 10 days in summer. Notealso that in this particular case,a road (in the foreground) wasconstructed around the houseapproximately 100 feet away.This “country lane” actuallydoubles as a fire-break, whichgives firefighters easy access.Note also the use of metal roof-ing to prevent embers fromigniting the structure.


tives. It should be noted that Bertwas also a volunteer firefighter forSan Luis Obispo County for 14 years.

CLEARING VS. THINNING

In the panic that followed ourgreat San Diego firestorm of October2003, many agencies and insurancecarriers required that surroundingproperty be cleared 100, 200, even300 feet or more. This resulted inenvironmental devastation of hugeswaths of land, horrible erosion prob-lems, and the establishment of non-native grasses and weeds that be-come flashy fuels by the followingAugust. Worse still, many homeswhose surrounding landscape hadbeen cleared to bare mineral soil forhundreds of feet still burned to theground, sometimes surrounded bygreen lawn and palm trees. This cer-tainly ran counter to the conven-tional wisdom that wholesale re-moval of vegetation (considered fuelfor any fire) would prevent this kindof thing from happening.

As a former aerospace engineer,it also occurred to me that clearingall vegetation around a home actu-ally created the perfect conditionsfor the high winds that accompanylarge fires to flow unperturbed(laminar flow). There was no longerany barrier to create turbulence orinterference and slow down the 80mph bone-dry winds laden withcinders as thick as the fire falls ofYosemite. Nothing, that is, exceptthe houses. As chaparral ecologistRichard Halsey explains it, “Youhave created the perfect bowling al-ley for embers.” On the other hand,low-growing, hydrated ground-covers and shrubs can disturb andcool the otherwise uninterruptedflow of fire. Allowing thinned natu-ral vegetation to remain, in addi-tion to landscape plantings that areirrigated, may in fact help preventstructures from igniting. This bringsus to the subject of fire zones anddefensible space.

ZONING AND DEFENSIBLESPACE

It is critical that firefighters havean area or zone around a housewhere they can safely fight a fire.This is what is known as “defensiblespace.” The first 30 feet is probablythe most critical. This is where apassing fire crew quickly assesseswhether it is safe to stop and set up aperimeter or move on. This first zoneis where you want to have a consid-erable amount of hardscape—flag-stone, boulders, pavers, cement,gravel, etc. Plants should be eitherlower growing orhave an open “see-through” structureso as to limit poten-tial fuel for a fire.They should be hy-drated with once-per-week watering.Many native peren-nials and low-grow-ing shrubs wouldfit the bill here. Tryto avoid plantingdirectly under theeaves, beginningplantings three tofour feet out fromthem.

Zone 2 is thearea that is 30 to 100feet from yourhouse. (This mayextend up to 300feet if your house islocated on a ridgeor at the end of anorth- or east-facingbox canyon. If thereis existing chaparralgrowing in Zone 2,thin it by about50%, because thisactually removesabout 70% of thefuel volume. Clearcutting or bulldoz-ing only createsmore problems.Thinning implies

cutting the shrubs to the ground,but not removing by the roots. Thisprevents further erosion and soildisturbance that will bring up evenmore weeds. Chamise (Adenostomafasciculatum), laurel sumac (Malos-ma laurina) growing near the house,and maybe some buckwheat (Erio-gonum fasciculatum) and sage (Salviaspp.) are targeted first for thinning.Plants like manzanita (Arctostaphy-los spp.), California lilac (Ceanothusspp.), hollyleaf cherry (Prunus ili-cifolia), lemonadeberry (Rhus inte-grifolia), and bush rue (Cneoridiumdumosum) are usually preserved,

These two photos depict the before and after condition of astand of chaparral that has been thinned to roughly 50% canopycoverage. Debris has been chipped and replaced on site as amulch to help prevent weed germination in the open areas.This area is now much more fire-resistant without resorting toclearing it entirely of native vegetation.


although dead wood should be re-moved.

It is advisable to open up theirstructure when possible by pruninglower branches. All trimmingsshould be mulched and then placedback on the areas that have nowbeen thinned out, to help suppressweeds. This is also an opportunityto lace the area with four-to-five-foot-wide paths that double as fire-breaks and which further open upthe vegetation. One can bring inbenches, bird baths, non-woody pe-rennials, signage, and other featuresto transform once impenetrablechaparral into an inviting, maturenative landscape. The environmentdoes not have to be destroyed in thename of fire safety. There are manycreative, aesthetic landscaping “so-lutions” that lower the risk of firedanger.

MAINTENANCECONSIDERATIONS

Good site maintenance is ofparamount importance when itcomes to fire safety. Non-native

weeds are typically annuals and pe-rennials that are dead or dormantby August. They tend to be rich in“lignin” which means their dry, deadcarcasses sit on top of the soil, hav-ing robbed the system of nutrientsand moisture. Compare this to wild-flowers, which usually get reab-sorbed into the soil after they die,so that by summer there is littleevidence of the previous spring’sshow. Unlike native chaparral thattolerates intense but infrequent fires,non-native weeds welcome and pro-mote frequent burning. It is there-fore essential that they be controlledand removed.

Most native plant communities,by virtue of their specialized andfinely adapted ecology, do not sup-port the growth of non-native an-nual weeds when in a healthy andundisturbed condition. This is be-cause the litter layer (mulch) thatforms kills most weeds. In addition,most of the native plant community’snutrition is held in the mycorrhizalfungi and is not made available tothe weeds (which are usually non-mycorrhizal). Disturbing the plantcommunity opens up the canopy and

makes nutritionavailable to theinvasives. The pro-cess of removing50% of the exist-ing canopy (thin-ning the chapar-ral), although notas invasive aswholesale clear-cutting or removal,is still a type ofdisturbance thatallows for infec-tion by weeds,much like an openwound.

If left to theirown devices,weeds will severelycompromise theecology of nativeplant communitiesby robbing mois-

ture and nutrition from the system.Worse, they act as fire ladders intothe remaining native shrubs andtrees that are now weakened andeven more fire prone. This is theworst of all possible situations—anunhealthy plant community de-pleted of its moisture and full of thedriest tinder so that the vegetationcan easily combust. The fact thatannual weeds are dead and dry bythe end of summer is what leads todesertification (land degradation todesert-like conditions due to cli-matic changes and/or destructiveland-use practices). Humidity lev-els actually drop in these weedyareas because none of the moistureis being held onto in living tissue.Unfortunately, this describes muchof what is happening in California.

Controlling annual weeds can bea challenge. Certainly using mulchedtree trimmings helps. Hand pullingmay be enough when the amount ofweeds makes it practical. However,with a typical seed bank of 10,000 to100,000 seeds per cubic foot, postand/or pre-emergent chemical treat-ment may be required. Whatevermethod is chosen, it is essential that

Once impenetrable chaparral in Zone 2 (30-100 feet from this person’s home) has been transformed into a fire-resistant native “private park” through vegetation thinning, paths, a bench, a bridge, a bird bath, and theaddition of some non-woody native perennials.


the site be maintained as weed-free as possible once it has beenopened up.

Another important maintenancestep is continuing to keep the canopycoverage pruned to around 50%.Whenever possible, trees should bepruned up from their base six feet.Lower perennials and shrubs shouldbe kept pruned to a height of about18” when practical. A good rule ofthumb is to provide clearance be-tween tree limbs and groundcover(shrubs, perennials) that is a mini-mum of three times the height ofthe lower plants. All dead woodneeds to be removed. In addition,most of the plants that have beencut to the ground (like chamise)will regenerate from basal burls.While they can be allowed to growfor up to one year, they will have tobe cut to the ground again oncetheir newer green growth starts tobecome woody.

If Zone 2 (30 to 100 feet fromthe house) is devoid of naturallyoccurring vegetation and is insteadplanted in irrigated natives, themaintenance should be fairlystraightforward. The plants shouldmostly be lower-growing (under18”) and spaced for final size. Thisprevents plants growing on top ofeach other and forming a woodythatch. Shredded redwood bark (go-rilla hair) that has been matted downwith water so that it is poorly aer-ated is the mulch of choice and isusually quite effective at control-ling annual weeds, especially whencombined with hand weeding, orwith pre-emergents in large, hardto maintain areas where hand pull-ing simply isn’t practical. The nextsection details plant selection andprotocols for a firewise native land-scape.

FIREWISE PLANNING ANDPLANTING

Zone 1 must be irrigated, ideallywith overhead irrigation once a

week. This ensures that the plant-ings are always hydrated and lesslikely to burn. There should be lotsof hardscape (flagstone, interlock-ing pavers, decomposed granite,gravel, etc.), including an apron ofthese same materials that extendsbeyond the eaves line. There are anumber of native plants that willboth tolerate this frequent wateringand provide low fuel volume. Someattractive evergreen shrubs meetingthese requirements include lower-growing manzanitas like Arctosta-phylos ‘Carmel Sur,’ ‘Radiant,’ ‘Em-erald Carpet,’ and ‘Pacific Mist,’ aswell as medium-height manzanitaslike ‘Sunset’ and ‘Howard McMinn.’

Lower-growing, garden-tolerantwild lilacs would include Ceanothusthyrsiflorus repens, and Ceanothusgloriosus ‘Heart’s Desire’ and ‘An-chor Bay’. Native perennials thatcould tolerate these conditionswould include seaside daisy (Eri-geron glaucus ‘WR’), Mattole Riverfuchsia (Zauschneria [Epilobium]septentrionalis), and goldenrod (Sol-idago spp.). Monkeyflower (Mimulusaurantiacus) may be shorter-livedunder these conditions but will cer-tainly put on a show for the two tofive years it survives (just get a newone when it dies). Decorative 6-12"boulders placed on the rootballs ofthe plants surrounded by gorilla haircan be used for mulch, but the barkmust be watered down to consoli-date it immediately after planting.

Zone 2 ideally consists of eitherthinned chaparral or lightly hy-drated native plantings. Coyotebrush (Baccharis ‘Pigeon Point’),California lilac (Ceanothus ‘YankeePoint’), manzanita (Arctostaphylos‘John Dourley’), and San Diegomarsh elder (Iva hayesiana) are allexcellent choices if this area is to beplanted. A smattering of largershrubs, such as Ceanothus ‘BlueJeans’ and ‘Concha,’ coffeeberry(Rhamnus ‘Eve Case’ and ‘Mount SanBruno’), and toyon (Heteromelesarbutifolia) are all fine as long asthey are situated in groups of three

or less to prevent creating a largefuel mass. There should be about10 feet between these small groupsof larger shrubs. It is also a goodidea to create small firebreaks byincorporating lots of trails in thisarea that are at least four feet wide.Fully established Zone 2 plantingsmust be irrigated about once every8-14 days during the warm monthswith overhead irrigation in order topromote adequate hydration. Thepossibility of lightly irrigating ex-isting chaparral in Zone 2 (wettingleaves and mulch, but not to thesaturation point) is being investi-gated by the author.

CONCLUSION

Fire in Southern California is anunfortunate inevitability; however,homeowners can create defensiblespace around their homes that avoidswholesale environmental destruc-tion. Proper hydration of landscapeplants is critical. Utilizing a largeproportion of hardscape within thefirst 30 feet of structures, along withplants that are low-growing, con-tain a low fuel volume, and are regu-larly irrigated is recommended. Be-yond this first zone, lightly waterednative plantings or chaparral thin-ning is a good practice, especiallywhen considering that it typicallytakes much less water to hydratenative plants than exotics. This, incombination with good site mainte-nance, should help keep homes de-fensible during fires.

REFERENCES

Halsey, R.W. 2008. Fire, Chaparral, andSurvival in Southern California, 2d ed.Sunbelt Publications, San Diego, CA.

Wilson, B. 2011. A Manual of Cali-fornia Native Plants, http://www.laspilitas.com/cat1.htm. (accessedMarch 31, 2011).

Greg Rubin, 25950 Los Arboles RanchRoad, Escondido, CA 92026, [email protected], www.calown.com


THE MENDOCINO COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCILby Julie Rogers

t was the spring of 2003. Due tobudget constraints, the CaliforniaDepartment of Forestry and FireProtection (Cal Fire) had decided

to close the Ukiah Air Attack Base,responsible for fighting wildfires inMendocino County and beyond. Theresidents of our rural county werenot pleased, and the fight was on.

Colin Wilson was the perfect per-son to represent our county’s cause.Imposing, articulate, and persuasive,the president of our County Fire

Chiefs’ Association toldthe State Board of Forestrythat, without aircraft, hisability to fight wildfires inMendocino County wouldbe severely hampered. TheBoard listened, and soon funding forthe Base was restored.

Long a fan of our fire-fightingplanes, I joined the cause, and so wasintroduced to the wide, wide worldof wildland fire and its impacts onpeople, homes, and the environment.

Soon I learned that manyof our residents were pet-rified by fear of wildfires.Their homes were on steep,wooded hillsides far fromfire stations. They counted

on aircraft to be there quickly to pro-tect them. What would happen if theplanes were gone?

Listening to such stories, I wasstruck by the helplessness they con-veyed. Then a town dweller myself,I wondered why people moved into

ABOVE AND LEFT: Research shows that smallembers entering attic vents are the mostcommon cause of home destruction inwildfires. Above photograph by D. Koski.Left photograph by P. Armstrong. • BELOW:The widespread destruction caused by the2003 Cedar Fire in San Diego Countymotivated fire chief Colin Wilson to foundthe Mendocino County Fire Safe Council.This was the largest wildfire in Californiahistory, tragically killing 15 persons,burning 2,227 homes, and consuming280,000 acres of wildlands and suburbs inSan Diego County. Photograph by D. Koski.

I


remote areas if they weren’t preparedto face the risks. Shouldn’t they takesome responsibility for themselves?I asked Chief Wilson, “Does ourcounty have a grassroots effort toprepare for wildfires?” His response:“No, but I wish we did.” We agreedto stay in touch.

At a workshop that winter wefirst heard of “Fire Safe Councils.”These groups were accomplishinggreat things, and their model seemedright for our county. So our effortbegan. In January 2004, 90 peopleattended our first public meeting.Chief Wilson, who had just returnedfrom a deadly fire “down south,”showed slides of daylight turning todarkness as communities were en-gulfed by smoke and flames. He ex-pressed a vision of people preparedto meet all the challenges wildfiresmight bring. Attendees responded

with enthusiasm and support, andthe Mendocino County Fire SafeCouncil (MCFSC) was born (www.firesafemendocino.org).

Just what is a Fire Safe Council?It is a group of persons concernedabout wildfire safety in their localarea and working to improve it.The group can be whatever size,form, and scope the local needs re-quire. The MCFSC serves an entirecounty, but in many areas a re-gional, watershed, or communityboundary is more practical. Ours isan autonomous nonprofit corpora-tion, but in other places Fire SafeCouncils are affiliated with countygovernments, Resource Conserva-tion Districts, other nonprofits, andfire agencies, or are completely in-dependent with no affiliation or for-mal structure at all.

Some small groups have chosen

also—or instead—to become Fire-wise Communities. The Firewiseprogram, sponsored by the NationalFire Protection Association, providesincentives for communities to con-tinue improving their wildfire pre-paredness year after year (see www.firewise.org). We are now incorpo-rating this excellent program intoour outreach activities.

Our Fire Safe Council is equippedto apply for, receive, and managefunding available to groups like ours.To date we have secured nearly$800,000 for wildfire preparednessprojects. We produced our county’sCommunity Wildfire Protection Plan(CWPP) in 2005, and have createdtwo editions of a non-technical, easy-to-read publication called “Livingwith Wildfire in Mendocino County”(http://firesafemendocino.org/pdf/index.html).

A pictorial summary of key preventative measures homeowners living in the wildland-urban interface can take to minimize destructionfrom wildfires. Diagram taken from ANR publication #8392, Home Survival in Wildfire-Prone Areas; Building Materials and DesignConsiderations, http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu/Items/8393.aspx, ©2010 Regents of the University of California. Used by permission.

GUIDELINES FOR A FIRE-SAFE HOME


to make their houses resistant to air-borne burning embers produced bywildfires, as these are the top causeof home destruction from wildfires.Cohen says that “little things” likelitter on roofs or decks and in raingutters, plants in wooden planters,jute doormats, brooms, and lawn fur-niture cushions are often what ig-nite first from embers. U.C. Coop-erative Extension researcher SteveQuarles has found that burning em-bers frequently invade attics and un-der-deck spaces; he recommendscovering all such openings withmetal mesh of 1/8" or less. Both re-searchers have found that little em-bers blowing inside attics are themajor culprits in homes being lostto wildfires. They also warn home-owners to replace wood shake roofswith fire-resistant ones, as shakeroofs—and the homes they cover—almost never survive wildfires.

Armed with knowledge, peoplein our county are deciding what theywill do when a wildfire approaches.Will they be able to evacuate safely?If not, what are their alternatives?They may need to go to a safetyzone—a large outdoor area previ-ously cleared of flammable items—or to a home that has been espe-cially well prepared, as describedabove. In addition, a few able-bodied, well-trained, and properlyequipped persons may plan to stayin the area to put out little firesbefore they become big ones, know-ing that smoldering embers cancause homes to ignite up to eighthours after the fire front has passed.Overall, and most important, neigh-bors are meeting neighbors, sharingresources, and working together fortheir common safety.

What is the relationship be-tween our county-wide council andlocal ones? It is one of support. TheMCFSC does not tell local groupshow to organize or what to do. Wedo not require them to elect offic-ers or keep meeting minutes. Infact, we strive to spare them fromadministrative tasks so they can

RESOURCES FOR MORE INFORMATION

Fire Safe Councils. This article includes a section on starting a Fire

Safe Council, and an updated list of existing Fire Safe Councils.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_safe_councils

Firewise, a national program promoting homes that are not only

“defensible” but also “survivable” without firefighters’ interven-

tion, http: //www.firewise.org and http://firewise.org/usa/index.htm

U.C. Berkeley’s Center for Fire Research and Outreach, http://

firecenter.berkeley.edu

Mendocino County Fire Safe Council, includes several publications

written by the Council, as well as links to other resources, www.

firesafemendocino.org

CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection,

formerly called CDF), http://www.fire.ca.gov and http://www.fire.ca.

gov/fire_prevention/fire_prevention_wildland.php

Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology, which strives to

balance fighting fires with the environment’s needs: www.fusee.org

“How to Plant Weed Wise and Fire Safe: A Guide to Keeping Inland

Mendocino County Safe and Beautiful,” http://www.firesafe

mendocino.org/pdf/FireSafe%20Landscaping.pdf

But the rubber truly meets theroad at the local level. Seven yearsinto our work, a dozen local firesafe groups have formed. Each isaddressing situations in its own roadassociation, subdivision, ranch, or

neighborhood that hinder its safe-ty and emergency response efforts.

Exactly what are they doing?Moving flammable materials awayfrom homes, reducing brush alongnarrow roads, creating accurate

maps for firefightersand medics, posting re-flective road and ad-dress number signs,starting phone trees,and making their homewater supplies acces-sible for fire-fighting.(An excellent four-pagepamphlet, “DevelopingHome Water Suppliesfor Fire Protection” isavailable at http://firesafemendocino.org/pdf/watersupply.pdf.)

Crucially, they arealso heeding the adviceof U.S. Forest Serviceresearcher Jack Cohen

This house is burning, even though surrounding vegetationis not, suggesting that it was ignited by embers and not bynearby trees. Photograph by D. Koski.


focus on resolving their on-the-ground needs. We provide sugges-tions, education, networking, re-sources, and assistance as requested,knowing that each group has itsown values, concerns, and abilities.If a group’s needs exceed theirmeans—as, for example, if theirroads are overgrown and their resi-dents frail—we seek assistance ontheir behalf. We apply for fundingand administer the project whenfunding arrives.

How do local groups begin? Mostoften, one or two persons contactus, worried about their neigh-borhood’s overgrown brush. Weoffer to attend a road associationmeeting, social event, or informalroadside gathering to explain ourwork. Usually a few persons stepforward to lead. They want to meetagain and involve more people. An-other date is set, and a local fire safegroup is born.

Over the years, the MendocinoCounty Fire Safe Council’s perspec-tive on wildfires has dramaticallychanged. When we first began, Iviewed fire as only an enemy to befought and feared, an invader thatthreatened to destroy everything inits path. Now I know that wildlandfire is an integral natural process inthe California landscape and thatwe humans have in fact invaded itsturf! Following are some insights Ihave gained:

1) Many homes have been built inlocations where fires historicallyburned lightly and frequentlyacross the landscape, reducingflammable vegetation and bene-fiting local flora and fauna.

2) In an effort to protect those poorlyplaced homes, wildland fires havebeen so vigorously suppressed thatthe ecosystems are disturbed andthe vegetation overgrown.

3) Most fire agencies view all wild-land fires as enemies to be at-tacked rather than potential part-ners in maintaining healthy eco-systems.

4) Fear of liability hasnearly eliminatedthe beneficial prac-tice of prescribedfire (controlledburns conductedunder strictly lim-ited conditions).

5) Many wildlandresidents do notunderstand trueforest health, butconsider thick for-ests with heavyunderbrush to be“natural,” althoughhistorically theyare not.Researcher Jack

Cohen maintains thattoday’s wildfire “di-sasters”—fires inwhich many homesburn—are primarilythe result of a “fireexclusion paradigm,”the longstandingAmerican attitudethat fire is always badand must be stopped.But wildland fire canbe our friend, and thisis precisely what the MCFSC nowteaches. We explain that if we un-derstand how fire behaves, acceptthe risks of living in wildland envi-ronments (often referred to as thewildland-urban interface or WUI),and prepare ourselves and ourhomes to survive, we can truly “livewith wildfire.”

Whatever their size, form, orapproach, Fire Safe Councils, Fire-wise Communities, and similargroups are gradually improving Cali-fornians’ ability to survive and thrivein wildland areas. Is there a Fire SafeCouncil in your area? If so, join it. Ifnot, help start one, or look into be-coming a Firewise Community.

Together we can greatly reducethe damage that wildfires cause tohomes in fire-prone areas and canmove toward restoring our ecosys-tems to good health.

REFERENCES

Cohen, J. The wildland-urban interfacefire problem: A consequence of thefire exclusion paradigm. Forest His-tory Today, Fall 2008, http://www.foresthistory.org/publications/FHT/FHTFall2008/Cohen.pdf

Quarles, S.L. 2010. Home survival inwildfire-prone areas: Building mate-rials and design considerations,https://ucanr.org/freepubs/docs/8393.pdf

Stephens, S.L. et al. 2009. Urban-wildland fires: How California andother regions of the US can learnfrom Australia. Environmental Re-search Letters 4:1 014010, http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/4/1/014010/pdf /1748-9326_4_1_014010.pdf

Julie Rogers, 151 Laws Avenue #B, Ukiah,CA 95482, [email protected]

Air tankers offer invaluable assistance to firefighters on theground, but the fire retardant they carry must be deliveredcarefully due to its detrimental impacts on waterways. Photo-graph by P. Armstrong.


NEW CNPS FELLOW—TERESA SHOLARSby Lori Hubbart

s a teenager, Teresa AnnSholars fell in love withwild California, despite anurban upbringing. Her

home town, the San Joaquin Valleyburg of Fresno, was fairly close tothe mountains, where her family hada cabin. As a lanky tomboy of 14,Terry Baxter landed a summer jobthat helped set the course of her life.

Her family had friends who raisedcattle and horses, and every summerthey moved with their herds up tomountain pastures in the Sierra Ne-vada. Terry signed on as a babysitterfor their young child, but then shesaw ranch hands riding cuttinghorses, herding livestock, and track-ing strays through the wildlands. Thatwork called to her in a powerful waythat babysitting did not, and she per-suaded them to let her switch jobs.Thus began the wild career of Terrythe Teenage Summer Wrangler.

Those summers in the HighSierra nurtured her spirit and con-vinced Teresa to seek a career work-ing with nature. Her family may havebeen taken aback, but she pursuedher goal with the steely determina-tion of a wrangler going after a strayheifer. She received a B.S. in envi-ronmental planning and manage-ment from the University of Califor-nia, Davis, in 1974 and an M.S. inecology from Davis in 1975. Thosewere the days when botany studentsspent a lot of time in the field, withgracious, larger-than-life older scien-tists as their mentors.

Teresa has golden memories ofworking with some stellar botanists,such as following Jack Major andLedyard Stebbins as they clamberedup hillsides seeking interestingplants.

One special memory is of a fieldtrip with Herbert Mason for a classon aquatic ecology. She was alsointimidated, sitting next to the au-

thor of the classic Flora of theMarshes of California, and remem-bers clearly his answer to her ques-tion of how one goes about writing aflora. His answer: “Just do it!”

She also found someone whoshared her dream of combining sci-ence, learning, teaching, regionalspecialization, and homesteading.He was a fellow graduate student,the brilliant, charismatic RobertE. Sholars. They got married andheaded north to study the gnarled

and picturesque “pygmy forest” ofMendocino County.

Together they set about discov-ering and defining the relationshipsbetween the plants and the extreme,highly acidic “pygmy” soils. Theywere lucky to work with a pioneer-ing older scientist, Hans Jenny, pro-fessor of soil science at U.C. Berke-ley. Teresa and Rob often rode horsesto their pygmy forest research sites,and she remembers digging a thou-sand test holes in the soil.

Taking a break with her companion Max in the Sierra National Forest just outside ofYosemite National Park. Max travels with Teresa on all of her plant collecting trips, andis a most agreeable botanizing partner. Photograph by L. Foote.

A


Robert E. Sholars’ short but im-portant book, The Pygmy Forest andAssociated Plant Communities ofCoastal Mendocino County, came outin 1982. The couple, along with theirgood friends, Hans and Jean Jenny,were very involved in education andadvocacy on behalf of the pygmyforest. They worked for public ac-quisition of a notable pygmy sphag-num bog site, and Rob and Jean pro-vided information that helped winthe Sierra Club’s lawsuit to protectpygmy forest in the Coastal Zone.

While still graduate students,Teresa and Rob had joined the Dor-othy King Young Chapter of the Cali-fornia Native Plant Society. Theywere the “kids” of the group, sincemost of its members were translo-cated retirees. They were all thrilledto be learning about native plantstogether.

In 1986 Teresa, while on sab-batical from the College of the Red-woods, began her Ph.D. program inbotany at U.C. Berkeley, where sheworked under her major professor,Robert Ornduff. She sat at the Jepsontea times with venerable botanistslike Lincoln Constance, Laura MayDempster, Annetta Carter, and gotto know Barbara Ertter, who remainsa close friend. The huge Jepson

Manual project was underway, butseveral genera lacked authors. JimHickman, its first editor, askedTeresa to author the genus Lupinus.

It was a hard but exhilaratingtime, sharing a country homesteadwith her husband and three livelyyoung children. They had gottenthrough losing their first house in afire, but then in 1988 Rob Sholarswas killed in an auto accident. Teresathen threw herself into raising herchildren and teaching natural his-tory at the College of the Redwoodsin Fort Bragg. Her hopes of complet-ing her Ph.D. faded under the weightyresponsibilities of being a single par-ent and family breadwinner.

The work revising the taxonomyof lupines challenged her intellectand helped her stay focused onbotany. As a research associate atthe Jepson Herbarium, Teresa wasable to study lupines all over thestate, sometimes in the company ofdistinguished botanists. The cama-raderie, the mental stimulation, andthe beauty of California’s wild placeshelped her rebuild her life.

Teresa’s many friends from herCNPS home chapter, Dorothy KingYoung, were tremendously support-ive of Teresa during those hard times.Chapter members were thrilled and

proud when she began working onlupines.

In 1987 Teresa began serving asrare plant coordinator for the chap-ter, a position she still holds. Overthe years she has given many talksand field trips for the chapter, andhas inventoried and written plantlists for many important natural ar-eas within the chapter’s purview.

Perhaps most importantly, shehas been the linchpin of the Chap-ter’s unofficial, but vital conserva-tion committee. In that role she hasactively advocated for conservationof rare plants and plant communi-ties, written letters, testified at pub-lic meetings, and met with a varietyof stakeholder groups. She has alsoprovided critical scientific informa-tion for chapter conservation chairsand presidents.

In 36 years of teaching in theLife Science Department at the Col-lege of the Redwoods, Teresa hasintroduced countless students tonative plants and to CNPS. She hasbecome a mentor to some studentswho have gone on to careers inbotany or ecology in academics,agencies, or conservation organiza-tions. Many returning students needTeresa’s classes in order to be moreeffective in their work.

In a county with no four-yearcolleges, she has personified theprinciples behind scientific inquiry.Her educational and outreach workhas given credibility to the biolog-ical sciences, native plants, andCNPS.

Now married to Michael Lloyd,a law enforcement officer, writer,and organic gardener, Teresa findsherself in the position of mentorand elder stateswoman of botany.She is currently finishing the treat-ment of Lupinus for the Flora of NorthAmerica. We hope her life and workwill inspire younger people to de-vote themselves to the natural his-tory of particular regions.

Lori Hubbart, P.O. Box 985, Point Arena,CA 95468, [email protected]

Teresa teaching a 2007 Lupine identification workshop for the Pacific Northwest HerbariumConference in Idaho. Photograph by B. Ertter.


REID MORAN: 1916 – 2010by Thomas Oberbauer

eid Moran, a well-known ex-pert on succulents and espe-cially the genus Dudleya, theforemost authority on the

plants of Baja California and Gua-dalupe Island, and a CNPS Fellow,died on January 21, 2010 in LakeCounty, California. Reid was an ex-plorer, scholar, folksinger, and anextraordinarily dedicated scientistand botanist.

Reid was born June 30, 1916 inLos Angeles to parents who hadgrown up in San Luis Obispo. Earlyon, Reid was interested in geologylike his father, and botany, publish-

ing his first paper at the age of 17.His education at some of the mostprestigious universities took a num-ber of twists and turns. After com-

municating with a professor fromStanford University, he was acceptedthere. However, his studies weredelayed one year when he took aspring and summer off to work in aplacer (open-pit) mine in Alaska,collecting plants in his spare time.He graduated from Stanford in 1939and then attended classes at the Uni-versity of California, Berkeley.

He also conducted studies on theCalifornia Channel Islands, workedas a park naturalist in Yosemite Val-ley, and attended the Yosemite FieldSchool during the spring and sum-mer of 1941. The Field School, which

R

On a mule in the mountains of northern Baja California, holding a new subspecies of Haplopappus (the former botanical name for whatis probably Ericameria arborescens var. peninsularis). The image is characteristic of Reid’s sense of humor.

Reid Moran in his office at the San DiegoNatural History Museum in the early 1980s.All photographs courtesy of the San DiegoNatural History Museum.


embodied the principle of parks as aplace for education and study, wasthe first such school for the NationalPark Service and provided sevenweeks of intensive study for natureguides. In Yosemite, he made con-tact with a professor from CornellUniversity, which he later attended,receiving a master’s degree in 1942.At Cornell, he began a long friend-ship with Robert Thorne who laterbecame director of the Rancho SantaAna Botanic Garden.

World War II interrupted hisstudies, and he enlisted in the ArmyAir Corps. He was called up for dutyin 1942 as a navigator on a B-24bomber. His plane was shot downon its first mission and he para-chuted into Yugoslavia. He wasshipped back home, but on the waytook a very slow passage with cir-cuitous routes, including a hitch hik-ing foray through North Africa withstops in Algeria and Dakar, and acourse through Brazil, collectingplants on the way. He was awardedthe Distinguished Flying Cross andwas discharged in 1946.

For a year and a half, he workedat the Santa Barbara Botanical Gar-den, but when given the opportu-nity to be groomed as its next direc-tor, he decided the position wouldbe too confining. It was also duringthis time that he visited GuadalupeIsland for the first time, accompa-nying George Lindsay who later be-came the director of the CaliforniaAcademy of Sciences. Reid then re-turned to UC Berkeley, working asthe herbarium botanist and obtain-ing his Ph.D. in 1951. He then re-turned to Cornell and worked at theBailey Hortorium (at the time themajor U. S. center for the systemat-ics of cultivated plants) for a coupleof years. Later, he taught biology toAmerican military forces in Japanand Korea, exploring nearby coun-tries and collecting plants, particu-larly the Crassulaceae. By that time,George Lindsay was director of theSan Diego Natural History Museumand was looking for a botanist. Reid

took the job in 1957 and stayed for aquarter of a century.

Reid became very interested inBaja California. In 1963 and early1964, he participated in a rugged,three-month long expedition travel-ing by mule down the central por-tion of Baja California. The purposeof the trip was to explore areas whereno botanist had set foot before. Dur-ing the journey, one of the muleswas killed by a mountain lion andtwo others died of thirst. He tookpart in other expeditions includinghiking solo the length of Angel de laGuarda, a 45-mile-long desert islandin the Sea of Cortez. He also hikedover the top of Guadalupe Islandmore than a dozen times.

Beside his explorations of Gua-dalupe Island and the mountains ofCentral Baja California, Reid trav-eled in his boxy red and white Inter-national Harvester Scout (part Jeepand part safari vehicle) on any roadhe could find, fording floodedstreams, avoiding flooded rivers, andconducting CNPS trips for the SanDiego Chapter during the 1970s.While in his office, Reid was all busi-ness, working long hours into thenight, but always willing to answera question from a sincere botanist.On field trips, such asto the Sierra San PedroMartir in 1977, his per-sonality changed com-pletely around thecampfire. He becamethe life of the party,playing any guitar thatsomeone broughtalong and singing oldsongs such as “Bloodon the Saddle” in adeep baritone voice. Hewas a long time mem-ber of the San DiegoFolk Song Society.

Physically Reid waswhat some have calleda “specimen.” He wassix foot two, with mas-sive shoulders of solidmuscle, probably due

to carrying his food, water, and plantpresses on his back while hiking toremote areas. He often also carried asectional tree pruning pole thatcould reach several meters in orderto collect plants from steep cliffs. Hewas partial to red and usually wore ared floppy felt hat and a red T shirt.He could survive for days eating onlyunheated cans of beef stew. In con-versation, he spoke slowly and withpurpose. In his fifties he climbedPicacho del Diablo, the 10,000 foothigh rock pinnacle in the northernpart of Baja California. In his mid-sixties he led a group of botanists upthe nearly vertical slopes of North-ern Guadalupe Island to observe theendemic palms, and in his seventieshe hiked ten miles up the island toan elevation of 4,000 feet.

His publications number in thehundreds, including descriptions ofnew species of plants from the Si-erra de San Pedro Martir, the Floraof Guadalupe Island, Flora of Angelde la Guarda, and as a coauthor, theGrasses of Baja California, and theVascular Flora of Isla Socorro, Mexico.He also finished the treatment of theCrassulaceae for the Flora of NorthAmerica in 2009, and he is coauthorwith Robert Thorne of Vascular

In the field sitting on a duffel bag next to the museumtruck. He is examining a plant press drying setup, with thepress suspended over a camp stove. It’s likely he drapedthe tarp over the entire apparatus after he was satisfied thatthe stove was burning properly.


Plants of the High Sierra San PedroMártir, Baja California, Mexico: AnAnnotated Checklist that was pub-lished after his death.

Reid Moran had a dry wit andunusual sense of humor. He oncepublished a paper in Madroño com-memorating the collection of Cneori-dium dumosum (bush rue) on a dis-tant mountaintop in Central BajaCalifornia. The title was five lineslong describing exactly where andwhen he found it. The entire text ofthe paper was “I got it there then.”There were 28 more lines, all ac-knowledgments including the per-son who reviewed the text, his pro-fessors in college, and the personwho mailed the manuscript. He alsoonce named a plant with a term thattranslates into the word “silent.” Heindicated that it was not that theplant was especially quiet, but it wasquieter than the other species in thegenus.

His lectures also reflected this wit.

For example, Guadalupe Island hadan endemic form of both a palm anda caracara. In a discussion of how thepalms arrived on the island he stated,“It would have taken a caracara withgreat singularity of purpose to carrya palm fruit to the island.” He alsoshowed a blank slide to commemo-rate the extinction of Hesperelaea, atree in the olive family from Guada-lupe Island. When one visited themuseum botanical collections, thetitle on the wall was “Hisbarium”rather than the normal term. Oncewhen visiting the museum decadesafter he retired, he had cut out aheart-shaped piece of purple paperrepresenting a purple heart for beingwounded in action and presented itto Jon Rebman, the current curator,with the statement, “This is for youbecause you collect cacti.”

During his time at the San DiegoNatural History Museum, the num-ber of botanical specimens increasedfrom 44,000 to 108,000, with thevast majority being his. He made me-ticulous notes on the locations andassociated species for all of his col-lections in a series of notebooks thatare now available online at themuseum’s website. He seemed to havewritten them with the expectationthat they would be read by others.He also made beautiful photographsof many of the plants he collected.

Reid moved to Northern Cali-fornia and married the former EllenBoersma during the 1980s, but laterdivorced. He has a daughter Jennaof Washington D.C., a stepson Mat-thew Boersma of Santa Rosa, a sisterKatharine Cashman of Reno, andseveral nieces and nephews.

In a short biography when hewas made a Fellow of the CaliforniaNative Plant Society in 1983, it wasstated, “In a profession where single-minded dedication is needed, greatphysical endurance useful, and ec-centricity cherished, Reid has alwaysexceeded the requirements.” Heopened up an entire frontier formany CNPS members in SouthernCalifornia, not just those from San

Diego, but also those in the Los An-geles and Riverside areas.

In the July 1998 issue of Fremon-tia he wrote a large article aboutGuadalupe Island, its vegetation andits plight. His book on the flora ofGuadalupe—published in 1996 bythe California Academy of Sciencesafter nearly 50 years of study—waspivotal in encouraging members ofthe scientific world and politiciansto remove the feral goats from Gua-dalupe Island. Reid also described anumber of species considered rareand endangered in San Diego Countyand other parts of Southern Califor-nia. Much of the information thatwas used in the early CNPS rareplant inventory for many of the rareplants in the San Diego region camefrom collections and data that hegenerated.

While Reid did not attend everymeeting or field trip for the localCNPS chapter, he was the unofficialtaxonomic and horticultural advi-sor to the San Diego Chapter. Hisfield trips were real treats. He was agood educator, and his teaching andwork reflected his great attention todetail. Reid Moran’s passion aboutplants and botany is unparalleled.His work in the San Diego and BajaCalifornia region provides a scien-tific basis for all future studies inthis region, and his personality al-ways provided an interesting andsometimes unexpected viewpoint.

The historical and educational sec-tions of this tribute to Reid Moranare taken from “Reid Moran, theBiography of a Botanist,” written byB. Robinson, an unpublished reportfor Botany 496, San Diego State Uni-versity, Mitchel Beauchamp, Instruc-tor. Special thanks also to Judy Gibsonfrom the San Diego Natural HistoryMuseum for the photographs andinformation in an obituary on themuseum website.

Thomas Oberbauer, AECOM, 1420Kettner Boulevard # 500, San Diego, CA92101-2434, [email protected]

Reid Moran tending a plant press in North-ern Baja California in 1970, and wearinghis trademark red felt hat.

.

.


BETH HANSEN-WINTER:CNPS DESIGNER EXTRAORDINAIRE

by Phyllis M. Faber

eth Hansen-Winter becamethe designer for Fremontia forthe July 1985 issue, and hasmaintained a smart, elegant

look for the publication ever since.It’s now been 25 years since shebegan designing publications forCNPS. While she has maintained alow profile all these years, Fremontiareaders deserve to know a bit moreabout her.

Beth began her career of photog-raphy and design with a magazinein Monterey, California, and shortlythereafter as a designer and photog-rapher of elegant coffee table bookson Mexican art, culture, and historyfor a publisher in Mexico City. After

returning to California, she workedas a freelance designer with LaurenceHyman, a nationally known sportspublisher who had created the origi-nal Fremontia design and servedCNPS as its artistic director. In herrole working with him, Beth helpedcreate magazines and yearbooks forsuch baseball teams as the New YorkYankees, the Chicago Cubs, and theSan Francisco Giants. Later, she alsophotographed ball club fans and thesurrounding ambience—everythingexcept the actual games—for a se-ries of commemorative books on theWorld Series. While working withLaurence, Beth took over as designerof Fremontia and that has grown

into a 25-year association withCNPS.

In 1984 I became the editor ofFremontia and welcomed Beth to thepublication in the summer of 1985.In our early days of producing Fre-montia, much of the work was doneby hand. We sent manuscripts outto be typeset and Beth pasted upmechanicals using wax, Exactoknives, and a drafting table. In themid-1990s we became computerizedand our production methods changedcompletely. Beth did a substantialredesign of Fremontia around 2000,with a new cover look, new fonts,and a three-column format that al-lowed for more flexibility in layout

B

Long-time Fremontia designer and gardening enthusiast Beth Hansen-Winter in the stunning Oregon garden she has created. Photographby D. Foglio.

.


The Nature Of This Place: Investi-gations and Adventures in the YubaWatershed by Bruce Boyd and LieseGreensfelder, editors. 2011. ComstockBonanza Press, Grass Valley, CA. 217pages. $20.00, soft cover. ISBN# 978-0-933994-49-2.

What happens when a small groupof people comes together out of a sharedlove of the land to create a true com-munity? What if they are united by awatershed and a belief that every beingin the community—not just the people,but all the animals, the plants, the smallcreatures, the flowing waters, and thehabitat as a whole—have equal andrespected rights within the commu-nity? In a community like this, natureis no longer an “it” but a “we,” and iscared for by everyone. And if we arelucky, someone writes a book about it.

BOOK REVIEWS

The Nature Of This Place is justsuch a book. It is an inspirational modelfor those of us who cherish Califor-

nia’s wild lands and its magnificentwildflowers. It is an adventure thatchronicles, with beautiful essays andhistorical background, how a commu-nity came together in partnership witha governmental agency to manage aforest habitat in the northern SierraNevada foothills of California. And, asone resident, Gary Snyder, writes inthe introduction, “…this book is notonly to share what we’ve learned sofar, but will be for future readers aninvitation to join in, add on, and helpmake the eventual transformation to aculture of durability, conscience, andsustainability possible here at the west-ern edge of the continent and at theeastern edge of the Pacific.”

The adventure that Bruce Boyd tellsus began in 1991 when the Yuba Wa-tershed Institute was born out of “a

design, and color was added in 2006.Fremontia has been and remains adistinguished voice for the Califor-nia Native Plant Society ever sincethe journal was first published in1973.

During the 1990s Beth also wasthe designer for the books the Soci-ety published—19 in all—as well asits book catalog. Over the years, shehas designed books and covers fordiverse clients throughout the coun-try, but has always particularly en-joyed the botanical and natural his-tory books that have come her way.In 1997 she completed California’sWild Gardens for CNPS and the Cali-fornia Department of Fish and Game;in 2002 she designed The Shape ofLife for the Monterey Bay Aquarium;and in 2004 she completed Plantsand Landscapes for Summer Dry Cli-mates for the East Bay MunicipalUtility District, three books that she’sespecially proud of.

Beth has lived in four countries(Kenya, India, Japan, and Mexico),traveled to many more, and is con-versational in five languages (French,Swahili, Japanese, and Spanish, alongwith English, of course), but to me

one of the most remarkable aspectsof her life is her discovery and en-thusiastic pursuance of the joys ofthe plant world. When Beth firstbegan her association with CNPS,she was living in a warehouse studioin the Mission District of San Fran-cisco—a building with no windows,only skylights. At the time, she couldbarely distinguish the difference be-tween a rose and a daisy.

In 1994, she and artist husbandPeter moved to a rental house inPetaluma, where she bought someplants for pots to make a bleak ce-ment patio more visually bearable.There she first learned the differ-ence between shade-loving and sun-loving plants. A year later, pots werecrowded cheek-to-jowl in her gar-den; Beth was consuming catalogsand books and learning all the plantnames, common and scientific. Be-fore too long, her patio and gardenwere on the Petaluma garden tour. Iwas spellbound, to say the least.

In 2002, Beth and Peter movedto Oregon where they bought alovely wooded six-acre propertywhere Peter could build an art stu-dio and Beth could create her dream

garden. Having gone digital yearsbefore, Fremontia could be as-sembled by the use of a computer, aphone, and an occasional delightfulvisit. Three editors, Linda Vorobik,Bart O’Brien, and Bob Hass, havenow successfully worked with herin this way.

Beth has created a stunning andmagical garden in Oregon and is amainstay and avid member of herstudy group in the Hardy Plant So-ciety of Oregon, where one of herfriends now refers to her as Bethi-pedia for her broad knowledge ofplant names and horticulture. (Shecredits her aptitude for botanicalLatin to familiarity gained from hermany years working with Fremontiaand other horticultural publica-tions.)

So three cheers for Beth! Shecertainly deserves huge gratitudefrom both Fremontia’s editors andfrom its readers. We deeply appreci-ate her work, diligence, artistic cre-ativity, and dedication.

Phyllis M. Faber, 212 Del Casa Dr., MillValley, CA 94941, [email protected]


mild state of environmental militancy.”The Bureau of Land Management(BLM) and the South Yuba River StatePark were planning to erect a radiotower on Bald Mountain, which was aplace treasured by the community forits unique serpentine Macnab cypress/Garry oak/manzanita ecosystem andfor the beautiful views of the SouthYuba River canyon. The “environmen-tal militancy” grew into a cooperativeplan, as Boyd describes it, with “theenlightened BLM district manager,Deane Swickard, …to cooperate in themanagement of some 2,000 acres onsix disparate BLM parcels.”

The cooperative plan was devel-oped with the BLM and two primarygroups of residents, the newly createdYuba Watershed Institute and the lo-cal Timber Framer’s Guild. Their mis-sion was to sustainably manage thefederal lands surrounding their ownproperties. The Cooperative Manage-ment Agreement that they created hasthe long-range objective to “encour-age the recreation of an old-growthforest through management practicesconsistent with the natural process offorest succession.” The managementbecame the responsibility of the com-munity, through the Institute and theGuild, with the BLM acting as a part-ner and “coach” in the effort. The groupcalls the lands the “Inimim Forest,”after the local Maidu-Nisenan namefor the ponderosa pines that growabundantly in the area.

To educate, inspire, and get thesupport of local residents, The Yuba

Watershed Institute created a journalin 1991 called “Tree Rings,” to informpeople about their work and aboutthe rich experiences that come fromknowing and loving the place in whichthey live. From articles, sketches, pho-tography, and poetry compiled over20 years from the journals, we experi-ence their ponderings, discoveries,successes, and challenges of living onthe land. This isn’t just a story of set-ting land aside to preserve it, but onewhere people have learned to live inbalance with nature, while in somecases even depending upon it for theirlivelihoods.

There are those in the watershedwho make their living creating beauti-ful works of art, award-winning furni-ture, and other items from salvagedtimber. It is a model that, with love,could revolutionize how we interact,enjoy, and merge with the land, as wecreate our place within, not over, na-ture. And, to complete the story, theradio tower was placed out of sight ina remote part of the land, and thecommunity continues to be an’“alive”community that teaches its childrenhow to know and love the land.

To give you a sense of the qual-ity of the writing, here is an excerptfrom a poetic piece by resident TaviaCathcart:

The “backyard” holds numerousbeginnings. Radiating from thecabin is Bald Mountain, the SouthYuba River canyon, rolling hills,neighbors to meet and visit. Begin-

ning at the back door, I follow theflattened grass and deer tracks inthe mud that soon turn to rocksand exposed roots in the slight de-pression called a trail…Patches ofnarrow sword-like native irises andnewly sprouting violet leaves ap-pear in shaded, moist areas…Howwill the creek song change as itbreaks around a boulder or a log?Could I hear a deer or a mountainlion lapping at its surface? Howattuned to this unnamed Yubawatershed “porous way” can I be-come?…The wind circles, carvingspace around me as though I havebeen sitting here for hundreds ofyears.

The titles of some of the othercontributions in the book provide aflavor of what is to come, such as “Inthe Shadow of Manzanita,” “The Sagaof the Cranberry,” “Learning from theWoods,” “Meadow Restoration in theInimim Forest,” and “Winter RainChildren.”

This is a book that stimulates themind and nurtures our hearts, inspir-ing each of us to help create meaning-ful communities where we live. Ulti-mately, it will only be through win-ning the hearts and minds of peoplethat we will begin to care more deeplyabout the places where we live, andthrough this learn to treat nature withrespect and even kindness. This beau-tifully written and illustrated book caninspire us to do just that.

—Julie Carville

F R E M O N T I AV O L U M E 3 8 : 2 / 3 8 : 3 , A P R I L 2 0 1 0 / J U L Y 2 0 1 0

❏ Enclosed is a check made payable to CNPS Membership gift:

❏ Charge my gift to ❏ Mastercard ❏ Visa Added donation of:

Card Number TOTAL ENCLOSED:

Exp. date

Signature

Phone

Email

Join Today!

Please make your check payable to “CNPS” and send to: California Native Plant Society, 2707 K Street, Suite 1, Sacra-mento, CA 95816-5113. Phone: (916) 447-2677; Fax: (916) 447-2727; Web site: www.cnps.org.; Email: [email protected]

❏ Enclosed is a matching gift form provided by my employer

❏ I would like information on planned giving

CNPS member gifts allow us to promote and protect California’s native plants andtheir habitats. Gifts are tax-deductible minus the $12 of the total gift which goestoward publication of Fremontia.

NAME

ADDRESS

CITY STATE ZIP

❏ $1,500 Mariposa Lily ❏ $600 Benefactor ❏ $300 Patron ❏ $100 Plant Lover

❏ $75 Family ❏ $75 International or Library ❏ $45 Individual ❏ $25 Limited Income

CONTRIBUTORS (continued from back cover)

CORPORATE /ORGANIZATIONAL

❏ $2,500 10+ Employees ❏ $1,000 7-10 Employees ❏ $500 4-6 Employees ❏ $150 1-3 Employees

Phyllis M. Faber served as Fremontia’s editor from 1984-1999, and for many years was CNPS publications chair.

Lori Hubbart is currently conservation chair for the Dorothy King Young Chapter of CNPS, a garden writer, and landsteward on the Mendocino coast.

Todd Keeler-Wolf is the senior vegetation ecologist with the California Department of Fish and Game, and is senior programadvisor to the CNPS Vegetation Program.

Jon E. Keeley is a Department of Interior research scientist whose work has focused on ecological impacts of wildfires, andhistorical changes in fire regimes and impacts on invasive non-native plants.

Adam Lambert is a research biologist in the Marine Science Institute at UCSB. His work examines multi-trophic interactionsamong native and invasive plants and insects, biological control, and restoration ecology.

Betsey Landis is a member of the CNPS Chapter Council Policy Committee, and cochaired its fire policy subcommittee. Formany years she has studied the long-term effects of fuel management and wildfire on native flora in Southern California.

Thomas Oberbauer recently retired as chief of the Multiple Species Planning Division for the San Diego County Departmentof Planning and Land Use. He participated with Dr. Reid Moran in field trips, lectures, and explorations, and receivedbotanical advice from him for more than 30 years.

Julie Rogers is cofounder and executive director of the Mendocino County Fire Safe Council. She is also a former firefighterand pilot, and the author of two books.

Greg Rubin is founder and president of California’s Own Native Landscape Design, Inc. in Escondido, CA. His SouthernCalifornia company specializes in native landscape design and installation.

John O. Sawyer is a longtime member and Fellow (in 1995) of CNPS. A cofounder of the North Coast Chapter and pastPresident (1974-1976) of the Society, John remains an active member of the CNPS Vegetation Committee.

Suzanne Schettler is a licensed landscape contractor specializing in the restoration of native plants. She is a life member ofCNPS and a former CNPS state president.

F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 8 : 2 / 3 8 : 3 , A P R I L 2 0 1 0 / J U L Y 2 0 1 0

CONTRIBUTORS

California Native Plant Society2707 K Street, Suite 1Sacramento, CA 95816-5113

Address Service Requested

Nonprofit Org.

U.S. PostagePAID

A.M.S.

FROM THE EDITOR

(continued on inside back cover)

alifornia native flora is under stress from increasinglychaotic weather, from extreme droughts to ferociousstorms, and record high temperatures to record freezes.

When it comes to habitat destruction and loss of species,however, the more immediate causes are increasing landdevelopment in, or adjacent to, wildland areas, and increas-ing wildfire frequency often linked to human activities. Sowe need to develop better management practices that con-serve native habitats and reduce the damage wildfires cause.

These include fireproofing our homes, paying greaterattention to how we landscape around them, and adoptingland management practices that take into account differ-ences in the natural role of fire within California’s diverseecosystems. As some of the articles in this special issue ofFremontia point out, there is also the problem of where wechoose to situate our homes. Many are being built in fairlyremote wildland areas, which makes them more prone tofire events, and more difficult and costly to protect. Shouldwe discourage future development in these areas, and if so,how should we go about doing that?

This is not an issue of Fremontia that many will want toread at one sitting, since it contains a lot of information thatcan best be absorbed gradually. However it is an issue thatmay well serve as a continuing resource for all whose livesand work are impacted by fire in one way or another.Furthermore, all of the articles on fire that appear in thisissue will soon be placed in the Conservation section of theCNPS state website.

A word of thanks for this issue goes out deservedly toCNPS member Betsey Landis, who cochaired CNPS’s firepolicy subcommittee, and helped formulate the Society’snewest policy on native plants and fire safety. Her advicewas invaluable.

—Bob Hass

CJulie Carville, author of Hiking Tahoe’s Wildflower Trails, haswritten about and photographed wildflowers and naturethroughout California for over 30 years. She is a longtimemember of CNPS and the current vice-president of the Red-bud Chapter.

Jack Cohen is a research physical scientist with the U.S. For-est Service at the Forest Service Fire Sciences Laboratory inMissoula, Montana. Since 1989 his research has focused onWUI fire disasters and how homes ignite during wildfires.

Carla D’Antonio is a professor in the Environmental Stud-ies Program and Department of Ecology, Evolution, andMarine Biology at UCSB. Among other things she has stud-ied the relationship between fire and invasive species since1990.

Sabrina Drill is the natural resources advisor for Los Ange-les and Ventura Counties for the University of CaliforniaCooperative Extension. She conducts research on watershedmanagement, aquatic habitat conservation, fire preparationand recovery, and invasive species.

Tom Dudley is an aquatic ecologist in the Marine ScienceInstitute at UCSB. He studies the impacts and control of in-vasive species in riparian areas of western North America,particularly the use of biological control in ecosystem resto-ration.

Julie Evens is the vegetation program director for CNPS.

Yvonne Everett is professor of environmental planning atHumboldt State University and has worked with several FireSafe Councils in far Northern California.

and vol. 38, no. 3 • fremontia · volume 38:2/38:3, april 2010/july 2010 fremontia journal of the...

Documents