fire safe plan for the shingletown community

8/3/2019 Fire Safe Plan for the Shingletown Community

1/81

Fire Safe Plan for the Shingletown Community


2/81

FIRE SAFE PLAN FOR THE SHINGLETOWN COMMUNITY

-TABLE OF CONTENTS-

Page

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

II. INTRODUCTION 3

A. Statement of Need 4i. History 4

ii. Shingletown Ridge 5

iii. Potential Losses to Wildfire 6iv. Climate 7

v. Wildlife and Plants 8

B. Goals and Objectives of the Plan 8

C. Methodology 9III. SUPPORTING PLANS, ORGANIZATIONS, AND AGENCIES 10

A. Shingletown Wildfire Defense Plan 1995 10

B. National Fire Plan 12C. California Fire Plan 13

D. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 14


3/81

VI. FUEL REDUCTION METHODS AND MAINTENANCE 28

Introduction 28

A. Prescribed Burning 28B. Mechanical Treatment 29

C. Shaded Fuel Breaks 30

D. Maintenance Treatment 31i. Herbicides 32

ii. Manual Treatment 32

iii. Herbivores 32

VII. SOILS 33

VIII. ROADS FOR ACCESS 34IX. BIOMASS 34

X. POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES 37

XI. FUEL BREAK MAINTENANCE FUNDING 38

XII. RECOMMENDATIONS 38

A. Introduction 39

B. Construct Shaded Fuel Breaks 39

i. Fire Safe Areas 39

ii. Prioritized Individual Locations 45C. Community Evacuation Plan 47

D. Fire Safety 47

E. Funding 48F. Other Action Items 48

XIII REFERENCES 49


4/81

TABLES PAGE

1. FEDERALLY LISTED AND THREATENED SPECIES

FOUND WITHIN THE PLANNING AREA 8

2. INCIDENCE OF FIRES IN THE SHINGLETOWN AREA 1910-2000 18

3. FUEL MODELS FOR ESTIMATING FIRE BEHAVIOR 20

4. FUEL MODEL 1 RESULTS 23



7. FUEL MODEL 8 RESULTS 248. FUEL MODEL 9 RESULTS 24


10. FEDERAL CANDIDTATE SPECIES FOR LISTING AS

ENDANGERED OR THREATENED FOUND WITHIN

THE PLANNING AREA 27

11. FUNDING SOURCES AND COST SHARE PROGRAMS 37

12. FIRE SAFE AREA PRIORITY PROJECTS 40

13. INDIVIDUAL ROADS IN NEED OF FUEL REDUCTION

WORK PRIORITY PROJECTS 45

FIGURES PAGE


5/81

FIRE SAFE PLAN FOR THE SHINGLETOWN

COMMUNITY

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Wildfire has played a natural part in the evolution of vegetation within the 112,100 acre planning area of the Fire Safe Plan for the Shingletown Community, locatedapproximately 25 miles east of Redding, California. Fuels in the planning area arecharacterized by grass and understory vegetation, forest and hardwood litter, dormant

brush, slash, and chaparral brush. Much of the vegetation has evolved and co-existedwith fire for many years and is either dependent on fire or has adapted to the fire regimenow associated with the area.

Successful fire suppression activities for the past eighty years in the western UnitedStates in general, and in the planning area in particular, have significantly increased thevolume and type of fuels across the landscape, resulting in High to Very High FireHazard Ratings throughout the planning area, according to the California Department ofForestry & Fire Protection (CDF). The number and size of devastating wildfiresimpacting the western United States over the past ten years resulted in the creation of a National Fire Plan for the U.S. Departments of Interior and Agriculture. Funding wasmade available through the National Fire Plan, California Fire Plan and other agencies toassist local communities and watershed groups in identifying/planning and implementingf l d ti j t


6/81

develop the current recommended fuel break system. The recommendations include placing shaded fuel breaks along key roadways and ridges, making the community

evacuation plan more publicized and accessible through posting on the WSRCD website,continuing annual, neighborhood-based fuel reduction work, and establishing a locally-based Fire Safe Council to participate in the Shasta County Fire Safe Council.


7/81

II. INTRODUCTION

In 2001 the USDA Forest Service-National Fire Plan Community and Private Land FireAssistance Program awarded funding to the Western Shasta Resource ConservationDistrict (WSRCD) to prepare a Fire Safe Plan for the Shingletown Community as anupdate to the 1995 Shingletown Wildfire Defense Plan. WSRCD has completed otherstrategic fuels reduction plans in the district for the Lower Clear Creek Watershed, thecommunity of French Gulch, the Shasta West Watershed, the Cottonwood CreekWatershed, the Cow Creek Watershed, and the northern boundary of the Cow CreekWatershed known as Backbone Ridge.

The boundary of theFire Safe Plan for the Shingletown Community (Plan) encompasses112,100 acres and includes the community of Shingletown, located approximately 25miles east of Redding, California. Shingletown lies within the Bear Creek and BattleCreek Watersheds, important tributaries to the Sacramento River. Both of thesewatersheds are part of the Sacramento River Basin in the Upper Cow-Battle watershed(Hydrologic Unit Code 18020118). Other communities that lie within the Plansboundary include Viola on the eastern end, and Manton, which is just outside the Plansboundary on the south. There are approximately 2,600 residents living within the Plans boundary, but the area is used heavily for recreation during the summer months substantially increasing the number of people using the land during the most dangerousperiod of the fire season. Land ownership is approximately 4% public including Bureauof Land Management and USDA Forest Service, and 96% private, including SierraP ifi I d t i (SPI) l d d b W M B t d A i t I (W M


8/81

The Technical Advisory Committee formed for collaborative implementation of thisPlan, which included staff members of state and federal agencies, private timber

companies, local landowners/members of the Bear Creek Watershed Group, and publicutility companies, felt that creating a boundary that stressed maximum synergy with othergroups performing similar work in the area would foster further collaboration and overallproject effectiveness. This was the impetus in creating an area of fire protection that notonly is inclusive of the land found within the boundary, but of the surrounding areas aswell (Map 1). The organizations and agencies affected by the Plans boundarydelineation are described below. The USDA Forest Service ownership is in LassenNational Forest, located on the eastern end of the Plans boundary. To the north of the

boundary is the Cow Creek Watershed, represented by the Cow Creek WatershedManagement Group, an incorporated 501(c)(3) non-profit formed to protect and restorethe natural resources of this watershed; this group recently completed the Cow CreekStrategic Fuel Reduction Plan and Backbone Ridge Defensible Fuel Profile Zone Plan.The southern end of the boundary includes the Battle Creek Watershed, represented bythe Battle Creek Watershed Conservancy, includes land owned by the NatureConservancy, which perform fuel reduction work on their land, and is adjacent to thecommunity of Manton.

The goals and objectives of this FireSafe Plan for the Shingletown Community are asfollows.

Identify assets at risk, including streams, timber, wildlife, and structures. Foster and maintain multi agency and landowner roles and responsibilities in


9/81

open stands of trees and diversity of ecosystems encountered by the first Europeans werelargely the result of human resource management through the use of fire and frequent

accidental and lightning fires. The forest ecosystems and the chaparral on the canyonslopes within the planning area evolved with frequent, low intensity fire over thousandsof years. The Native Americans were apparently the most important influence on thetiming and location of fires, and therefore contributed to the maintenance of the firedependent ecosystem.

Prior to land management by these various methods, the forests in the Shingletownappear to have evolved in conjunction with fire. The area probably had frequent, low

intensity burns varying from 2 to 100 years based on such factors as fuel type, slope,aspect, elevation, local weather patterns and other factors.

Fire suppression and early logging practices over the past 50 to 100 years has led tochanges in the successional pattern of forest development in the area. Prior to loggingand fire exclusion, the forest was more open, with a mosaic of species and age classes.Low intensity fires reduced fuel loads, thinned dense pockets of young trees and createdsmall openings in the forest to allow species with less tolerance for shade, such as

Douglas-fir, sugar pine and ponderosa pine, to dominate the forested landscape.

Fire, both natural and human caused, accidental and purposeful, governed the evolutionof the mixed conifer forest of the Shingletown Ridge at least since the end of the last iceage. It is as natural a part of the forest as sunshine and water and, perhaps, as essential toforest health However the uses human beings make of the forest today differ immensely


10/81

those directions; prevailing south winds supported by up slope winds on hot days and theconcentrating influences of canyons add to the threat. Summers are hot with many days

above 100 degrees Fahrenheit in the valleys below the Ridge and above 90 on the Ridgeitself. In the fall, hot, dry north to east winds are common and usually continue for 3 to 5days on at least 3 separate occurrences. The potential for severe fire activity is onlyreduced with significant precipitation.

In addition to these threats, the Ridge is densely settled with homes and businesses, andsettlement patterns are becoming more and more widespread throughout the community.Most of the buildings are clustered in subdivisions and other neighborhoods, and are

concentrated within an area of about 5,000 acres principally along major roads. Betweenthese settlements lie expanses of undeveloped and commercial forest lands, whichtypically are adjacent to and intermixed within residential areas.

Removal of fuels and excess vegetation and improving defensible space was initiated byCDF in the Shingletown community in 1993. In collaboration with Chico StateUniversity, Shasta Forest Village was the area chosen for a demonstration project. Insubsequent years, a total of 11 neighborhoods and numerous other residents have

participated in the annual spring cleanup. Removal of excess fuels, combined withtimber harvesting, has occurred on commercial timberlands with the added benefit ofsignificantly improving the health of retained trees. However, smaller timberlandholdings have received minimal cleanup. Concentrations of slash, crowded growingconditions and excessive fuel accumulations pose a significant threat for increasedintensity and fire spread should a fire occur (Personal communication with Ralph


11/81

Economic losses of the Fountain Fire are estimated to exceed $110 million. Of that, $8million was due to the destruction of and damage to structures; $16 million in damage to

utilities such as roads and powerlines; and $86 million was lost in commercial timbervalues. Commercial timber losses equaled $1,343 per acre burned. The timber resourcein the area burned by the Fountain Fire is similar to that in the current planning area.

In addition to property losses, people experience important social and psychologicallosses in disasters. In the 1970s the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers attempted to quantifythe human non-property losses associated with flooding. Those losses included thedistress on economic productivity and social services. When the results of the study were

applied to the Fountain Fire, the losses attributable to distress alone exceeded $30 millionfor two years following the fire. Additional losses would result from stress-relateddisruptions of work and added costs in social services over at least two years followingthe disaster.

Because the number of people living within the current planning area is much higher thanin the Fountain Fire area and because the value of structures and other property is muchhigher, both the property and community losses could be much greater.

The denser settlement also means that firefighters would have to focus much of theirattention on evacuation of people at the expense of suppressing the wildland fire.Structural protection would also take resources away from direct attack on the fire itself,especially during the critical first hours when resources are being assembled. Thepotential for a fire within the current planning area to threaten lives destroy property and


12/81

v. Wildlife and Plants

The following table displays federally listed endangered (E) and threatened (T) speciesthat may be affected by work performed within the study area. Some species listed here,however, may not actually occur inside of the boundary of the plan, but may livedownstream of, fly over, or migrate through and are therefore included. The data iscurrent through June 2003, and was obtained through entering the names of all the 7.5minute topographic quadrangle (quad) maps that are included in the Plans boundaryinto the following US Fish and Wildlife website:http://sacramento.fws.gov/es/spp_list.htm.

Table 1. Federally Listed Endangered (E) and Threatened (T) Species Found within thePlan Area.

Invertebrates

Pacifastacus fortis - Shasta crayfish (E)

Branchinecta lynchi - Vernal pool fairy shrimp (T)Desmocerus californicus dimorphus - Valley elderberry longhorn beetle (T)

Lepidurus packardi - Vernal pool tadpole shrimp (E)

Fish

Hypomesus transpacificus - Delta smelt (T)


13/81

Wildfire Defense Plan to determine what actions identified in that plan have beencompleted and which ones still need to be addressed.

Goals and Objectives include:

Identify assets at risk, including streams, timber, wildlife, and structures. Foster and maintain multi-agency and landowner roles and responsibilities in

the implementation and maintenance of the Shingletown Fire Safe Plan. Define the boundary of the planning area in order to maximize coordination

with other groups performing similar work in the area.

Encourage effective, community-based fire safe practices around structures. Identify, prioritize and map potential fuel reduction projects that will provide

for human safety, minimize private property loss and minimize the potentialof a wildfire burning into the community.

Develop maps of the features important to fire prevention and control,including soils, fire history, vegetation, land ownership, topography, roads,and the locations of residential areas.

Enter the completed plan on the Western Shasta Resource Conservation

Districts website.

C. METHODOLOGY

The activities necessary for the development of theFire Safe Plan for the ShingletownCommunity (Plan) include:


14/81

III. SUPPORTING PLANS, ORGANIZATIONS AND AGENCIES

A. 1995 SHINGLETOWN WILDFIRE DEFENSE PLAN

The Shingletown Wildfire Defense Plan was completed in 1995 and was authored byRalph Minnich, CDF Battalion Chief, Mark Lancaster, Registered Professional Forester,and Ron Hodgson, a professor from the California State University, Chico.

The 1995 plan was intended to be a general organizing effort, and covered an area ofapproximately 40,000 acres. It contained seven chapters discussing the goals and values

relating to the forest; a physical description of the forest on Shingletown Ridge; theresource management history and present land uses; forest health; a description of thewildfire threat to human life, property, and forest values; the predicted behavior ofwildfires under typical extreme fire danger experienced in the summer months; andincluded recommendations to improve wildfire defenses for Shingletown Ridge throughhazard and risk management.

The following list is taken from the 1995 plan, and describes (in italics) the Actions

Needed in the Shingletown area in order to reduce the threat of catastrophic wildfire. Itincludes a brief discussion of the follow up actions already taken, or those that will betaken as a result of the current Plan.

Identify and develop funding sources to support cooperative hazard reduction bybli d i l d A li f f di i h i T bl 11


15/81

emergency water supply, choose building and roofing materials that increase ahomes resistance to fire, plan evacuation routes, and follow a course of action to

protect themselves when a wildfire threatens. In addition, handouts have beencreated and distributed to the community that show landowners the meaning offire safe, and the Community Fire Safe program in Shingletown is getting largerevery year with the help of Neighborhood Coordinators and CDF, who preparelandowners each year for excess vegetation removal, chipping of downed brushand tree limbs, and hauling material off-site.

Find and test equipment appropriate for vegetation management in the wildland-urban interface. Landowners who participate in the Community Fire Safe

Program use handsaws, chainsaws, and pruning shears for their work, and thenpile debris near their driveways so staff from CDF can use a front-end loader toplace material in a chipper. This method has been working well for the last fewyears, and will most likely remain the way in which vegetation is removed nearhomes in the Shingletown area.

Develop recommendations for specific fuel modification projects, particularly thelocation of and vegetation management prescriptions for fuel breaks. Throughthe TAC process used for this Plan, a list of prioritized fuel breaks for the

Shingletown area and the community of Viola has been prepared and is includedin Section XII of this Plan. Prescriptions for each fuel break will be done on a project-specific basis and will depend on funding, terrain, availability of CDFconservation crews, availability of WSRCD crews and equipment, time of year,and environmental permitting restrictions.

E i i hi h i f li i f l d


16/81

profit organization whose amateur and professional members share a commoninterest in Californias native plants. The Society seeks to increase the

understanding of Californias native flora to preserve this resource for futuregenerations. They can be found on the internet at www.cnps.org.

Develop illustrations of fire defense landscaping zones around structures in

different kinds of vegetation and on different slopes and aspects. Illustrate the useof landscape construction and plantings to slow the fire down, cool it down, and

keep it on the ground. These topics are discussed in Appendix C and in the twoCDF videos previously mentioned.

Support programs which enhance long-term forest health, including the

reintroduction of controlled fire as a management tool. The maintenance ofcommercial forest lands after thinning and fuel breaks after completion is anessential use of prescribed fire. Funding sources for maintenance of fuel breaks ispresented in SectionXI of this plan; controlled burns are performed by CDF on acase-by-case basis.

Stimulate an understanding and appreciation for the interaction of a vigorousforest environment, wildlife, recreation, water, and aesthetics.A healthy forest isessential to a prosperous local economy. The formation of the Shingletown Fire

Safe Council will enable the community to benefit from the recently fundedmobile educational display that the Shasta County Fire Safe Council is creating.This educational unit will help to stimulate the understanding and appreciation ofthe forest, including fire, which is necessary in order for a community to makechoices regarding fire safety that will lead to a healthy forest environment.R tl l t h ti l t d th d t di f th l f


17/81

The objective of the National Fire Plan is to describe actions that could restore healthy,diverse, and resilient ecological systems to minimize the potential for uncharacteristically

intense fires on a priority basis. Methods include removal of excessive vegetation anddead fuels through thinning, prescribed fire and other treatment methods. The focus ofthe strategy is on restoring ecosystems that evolved with frequently occurring, lowintensity fires. These fires typically occurred at intervals of between 1-35 years andserved to reduce the growth of brush and other understory vegetation while generallyleaving larger, older trees intact. The report is based on the premise that sustainableresources depend on healthy, properly functioning, resilient ecosystems. The first priorityfor restoration is the millions of acres of already roaded and managed landscapes that are

in close proximity to communities. More information about the National Fire Plan isavailable on the Internet at www.fireplan.gov.

C. CALIFORNIA FIRE PLAN

The California Fire Plan has five strategic objectives:

Create wildfire protection zones that reduce risks to citizens and firefighters.

Assess all wildlands (not just the state responsibility areas) to identify highrisk, high-value areas and develop information and determine who isresponsible, who is responding, and who is paying for wildland fireemergencies.

Identify and analyze key policy issues and develop recommendations forchanges in public policy


18/81

D. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE

PROTECTION (CDF)

CDF is responsible for fire suppression and prevention on non-federal lands identified asState Responsibility Areas (SRAs) and on lands where a contract has been signed forCDF protection, known as Direct Protection Areas (DPAs). CDF may also provide andmanage emergency services through cooperative agreements with counties and firedistricts.

In 2000, the State Board of Forestry and CDF completed a comprehensive update of the

state fire plan for wildland fire protection in California. The overall goal of the plan is toreduce total costs and losses from wildland fire by protecting assets at risk throughfocused prefire management prescriptions and increasing initial attack success. CDFsstatewide Initial Attack Fire Policy is to aggressively attack all wildfires, with the goal ofcontaining 95% of all fire starts to 10 acres or less.

In summary, CDF believes that cooperative fire protection, fuels reduction, and fire prevention must be linked in order to have future success in dealing with the wildfire

problems on lands for which they are responsible.

E. SHASTA COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL

The Shasta County Fire Safe Council was formed in May 2002 as part of a statewideeffort that began in 1993 to form area Fire Safe Councils to educate and encourage


19/81

they began attempts to disseminate information on fire safety and gain widespreadcommunity support.

F. LASSEN NATIONAL FOREST

The Forest Service administers about 2,375 acres or 2% of the land on the easternboundary of the planning area. These lands are managed as part of the Hat Creek RangerDistrict of the Lassen National Forest. Responsibility for fire incidents is dependent uponwhere the fire is located, and can include CDF, the Hat Creek Ranger District, theShingletown Volunteer Fire Department, the National Park Service or the Lassen

National Forest.The total area of the Lassen National Forest is 1.2 million acres or 1,875 square miles. Itlies within seven counties; Lassen, Shasta, Tehama, Butte, Plumas, Siskiyou, and Modoc.The forest lies at the heart of one of the most fascinating areas of California that has beennamed The Crossroads. Here the granite of the Sierra Nevada, the lava of the Cascadesand the Modoc Plateau, and the sagebrush of the Great Basin meet and blend. The area isknown for its variety, greeting visitors as well as residents with a wide array ofrecreational opportunities. Fishing, hunting, camping, hiking, bicycling, boating,snowmobiling, cross-country skiing, and just exploring and learning about nature areamong the many popular pastimes (www.fs.fed.us/r5/lassen/about/).

During TAC meetings held as part of the collaborative process used to create this Plan, itwas determined that there was an opportunity to pursue funding for fuel reduction workthro gh the Shasta Co nt Reso rce Ad isor Committee (RAC) before the Plan had


20/81

priority for fuel reduction work, W.M. Beaty work, SPIs fuel reduction efforts, and theLassen National Forests planned fuel reduction work as match for this one grant.

This grant application was funded in September of 2003 by the Shasta County ResourceAdvisory Committee (RAC). Once completed, this project will serve to protect theresources of the Lassen National Forest as well as those of the community ofShingletown. See Map 2 for an overview of this project.

G. BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) administers about 3,225 acres or 3% of the landin the planning area. All BLM lands with burnable vegetation must have an approvedFire Management Plan (FMP), a strategic plan that defines a program to manage thewildland and prescribed fires based on the areas approved land management plan (U. S.Department of Interior, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2002). The FMP provides forfirefighter and public safety, includes fire management strategies, tactics and alternatives,addresses values to be protected and public health issues, and is consistent with resourcemanagement objectives, activities of the area and environmental laws and regulations.

Until an FMP is approved, BLM units must take aggressive suppression action on allwildland fires consistent with firefighter safety and public safety and the resources to be protected. The BLM Fire Management Officer is responsible and accountable for providing leadership for the BLM fire and aviation management program at the locallevel.


21/81

Propane and above-ground fuel tanks with nearby vegetation or woodenimprovements.

Local citizens attempting suppression actions. Level of coordination with multiple agencies.

H. PRIVATE TIMBERLAND W.M. BEATY AND SIERRA PACIFIC

INDUSTRIES

About 49,100 acres (44%) of the planning area are privately owned timberlands, most ofwhich are zoned as Timber Production Zones (TPZs) that are restricted to timber

production and certain compatible uses. Sierra Pacific Industries (SPI) is the largestcommercial forest landowner in the planning area, managing 27,500 acres; W.M. Beatyand Associates, Inc. manage approximately 21,560 acres within the planning area.

Typically, all contractors and employees authorized on private forest land are required tomake every effort and take all precautions necessary to prevent fires. A sufficient supplyof hand tools are maintained on a job site at all times for firefighting purposes. Toolsinclude shovels, axes, saws, backpack pumps, and scraping tools. Each forest worker,

employee, or person authorized on private forest land is required to take immediate actionto suppress and report any fire on or near the property.

On all fires, a sufficient number of people stay on a fire until it is known that adequateaction has been taken by CDF or the agency taking primary responsibility for putting outthe fire All people and equipment remain until released by the agency in charge or for a


22/81

I. PRIVATE LAND OTHER

Other private land totals about 57,500 acres, or 51% of the total planning area, andincludes a mixture of residential parcels, farms, and ranches. Of historical interest is theAldridge Ranch, the second longest continually owned ranch in Shasta County. It waspurchased in 1862, and contains approximately 5,000 acres of ranchland. This area hasbeen subjected to a CDF Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) which used prescribedburning (Section VI) to reduce the fuel load on the ranch. Residential parcels are foundin scattered clusters throughout the Plan area, and have been prioritized for fuel reductionwork (Section XII, Map 7).

IV. ANALYSIS OF FUEL MODELING AND FIRE CONDITIONS

A. FIRE HISTORY

CDF maintains databases on large fires within and around their State ResponsibilityAreas (SRAs) and Direct Protection Areas (DPAs), and has recorded 32 large fires within

and around the planning area between 1900 and 2000, including prescribed burns (Table2, Map 3). The CDF database also includes fires recorded within the National ParkService Federal Responsibility Areas (FRAs). Both databases include the year of firestart and the number of large fires, but cause of fire is included only on CDF fire startdata and Forest Service large fire data. The CDF database is also historically incompleteb it d t d fi l th 250 d d i l d th f fi


23/81

local weather conditions are important in predicting how a fire will behave. Within the planning area, the wind generally blows from the southwest throughout the summer,although periodic winds out of the north during summer and fall are common as well.From a strategic (yet hypothetical) standpoint, a fire start can most likely be attacked byan east-west fuel break or area to set up control lines. If a community had an east-westfuel break on the north and south boundary, it would have a level of protectionperpendicular to either dominant wind situation, from the north or south.

Topography can affect the direction and the rate of fire spread. Topographic factorsimportant to fire behavior are elevation, aspect, steepness and shape of the slope. When

fire crews are considering fire suppression methods, the topography is always critical indetermining the safest and most effective plan of attack. When accessible, ridge lines arevery important features from which to conduct fire suppression activities and can be astrategic area to conduct fuels management activities.

Fuel factors that influence fire behavior are: fuel moisture, fuel loading, size,compactness, horizontal continuity, vertical continuity, and chemical content (NationalWildfire Coordinating Group 1994).

Fuel moisture in this case is the amount of water in a fuel sample, expressedas a percentage of the green weight of that fuel. A fuel with less than 30%moisture content is considered a dead fuel, while live fuels will rangefrom 30 to 60 percent moisture content, depending on the plant's stage ofgrowth in a season


24/81

Fuel models represent what type of fuel will most likely support fire. Fuel models 1-3are grass or grass dominated, 4-7 are shrub dominated, 8-10 are timber litter, and 11-13are slash dominated. The fuel models were identified based on the publication Aids toDetermining Fuel Models for Estimating Fire Behavior by Anderson, 1982.

Table 3. Fuel Models for Estimating Fire Behavior.

Fuel Model Fuel Complex Found in Shasta County?

Grass and Grass-Dominated

1 Short Grass (1 foot) Yes

2 Timber (grass and understory) Yes3 Tall Grass (2.5 feet) No

Chaparral and shrub fields

4 Mature brush with considerableamounts of dead fuel

Yes

5 Young brush with very little deadfuel

Yes

6 Dormant brush Yes

7 Southern rough NoTimber litter

8 Short needle conifer and hardwoodlitter

Yes


25/81

fuel, the reduction in numbers of tree stems (increased spacing) and the general decreasein flammable vegetation. Areas modeled in 1995 included the Shingletown Ridge andthe slopes below the Ridge to the south and west, leaving the eastern part of the current planning area to be modeled. However, the vast majority of the land east of theShingletown Ridge is in private timber ownership (Map 5), and as a result will mostly fallunder Fuel Models 9 and 10; the former was not modeled in 1995, while the latter was (itshould be noted that Sierra Pacific Industries and W.M. Beaty have been using biomassoperations to convert the predominant Fuel Model 9 and 10 conditions to Fuel Model 8 inorder to change the fuel model from characteristically fast moving fire with long flamelengths to a slow, ground burning fire with short flame lengths). Consultation with staff

from CDF has revealed that the modeling done in 1995 can still be applied to the currentsituation, as no large fire event has occurred in the area since that time. Therefore, anear-complete modeling of the current planning area is possible with a new iteration ofFuel Model 9, which was completed for this Plan. Results of Fuel Model 9, using thesame parameters used for fuel modeling in the 1995 plan, are shown in Table 8.

D. RESULTS OF FUEL MODELING

Personal communication with CDF staff familiar with the planning area, and review ofthe 1995 Shingletown Wildfire Defense Plan (Plan) revealed 6 different fuel modelsoccurring in the planning area. These include Fuel Model 1 (grass), Fuel Models 4 and 5(shrub), and 8, 9, and 10 (timber litter). Fuel Model 9 was not discussed in the 1995Shingletown Wildfire Defense Plan;therefore this Fuel Model will be used, with the sameassumptions used for the 1995 Plan in running the BEHAVE computer fire model A


26/81

short and almost totally cover the area. Young, green stands with no deadwood would qualify, and for the planning area, include manzanita andchamise. Most of the brush in the planning area is in Fuel Model 4, but thisFuel Model can be found mixed with Fuel Models 8 and 4 between 1,000 and1,500 feet of elevation.

Fuel Model 8 (short needle conifer and hardwood litter) describes slow-burning ground fires with low flame lengths. However, a fire moving throughthis model may encounter a jackpot, or heavy fuel concentration, that cancause a flare up, but only under severe weather conditions involving hightemperatures, low humidity, and high winds do the fuels pose fire hazards.

Closed canopy stands of short-needle conifers or hardwoods that have leafedout support fire in the compact litter layer. Representative conifer typesinclude white pine, lodgepole pine, spruce, fir, and larch. This Fuel Model isfound in areas where fuel reduction work has been done, includingcommercial forest lands where thinning and biomass removal has beencompleted and residential lands where hazard reduction takes placecontinually. This Fuel Model can be found mixed in with Fuel Models 4 and 5between one thousand and fifteen hundred feet on the Shingletown Ridge.

Fuel Model 9 (long needle conifer and black oak litter) can be found between2,000 and 4,000 feet in the planning area, where ground fuels of mostly needlelitter and downed wood less than three inches in diameter is interspersedbetween fairly young stands of pine and a closed canopy. It is characterizedby both faster moving fires and longer flame heights than Fuel Model 8. Longneedle conifer stands and hardwood stands are typical Fall fires in


27/81

Table 4. Fuel Model 1. (from 1995 Plan) Western edge of planning area.

1 Hour Fuel Moisture 2%

Mid Flame Wind Speed 4 mph

Slope 10%

Wind Direction to Slope Upslope

Rate of Spread (un-mowed grass) 93 feet per minute

Fire Intensity (per square foot) 116 BTU

Fire Intensity (at the flaming front, persquare foot per second)

198 BTU

Flame Length Over 5 feet

Table 5. Fuel Model 4. (from 1995 Plan) Current conditions.

1 Hour Fuel Moisture (July) 4%


Slope 10%


Rate of Spread 70 feet per minute



3669 BTU


28/81

Table 7. Fuel Model 8. (from 1995 Plan) Current conditions.

Table 8. Fuel Model 9 (from BEHAVE model ran for this Plan)

1 Hour Fuel Moisture 2%Mid Flame Wind Speed 3 mph

Slope 10%


Rate of Spread 2 feet per minute



7 BTU

Flame Length 2 feet

1 Hour Fuel Moisture 2%


Slope 10%


Rate of Spread 6.5 feet per minute



59 BTU


29/81

V. VALUES AT RISK

A. CURRENT LAND USES

About 2,600 people live within the Shingletown community and surrounding areas.Major structures include homes, stores, the post office, a medical center, the library,hotels, schools, restaurants, and the historical society. Commercial timber land makes up44% of the Plan area with high value for wood-based products. The forests of theShingletown area and Lassen National Forest also support many types of recreation andtourism including fishing, horseback riding, hunting, wildlife viewing, hiking, scenic

driving, water-based recreation, mountain climbing, camping, mountain and road bikeriding, and picnicking. In addition, a large number of residents walk for pleasure bothwithin the settlements and along the roads. The ditch right-of-ways are particularlyimportant walking and hiking routes.

i. Fishing

Both cold and warm water fishing are available on Shingletown Ridge and in the Battle

Creek and Bear Creek drainages. Small mouth bass and blue gill are caught in BearCreek up to 1,000 feet elevation, while rainbow trout are supported in Bear Creek andBattle Creek. Grace, Nora, and McCumber Lakes support rainbow trout and brown trout,and brown trout, rainbow trout, and bullhead are found in Lake McCumber. WoodridgeLake also supports an excellent trout fishery but is not open to the public. The pond atB C k T di P t h i b t t th t b fi h d f f B il C k


30/81

iv. Highway 44 Corridor

Highway 44 is the route between Interstate 5 and Lassen Volcanic National Park and theyear-round complex of outdoor recreation resources north of the park, and has beendesignated as a gateway to the Lassen Crossroads National Scenic Byway by the USForest Service. Because of the aesthetic forest setting and attractive views, the highwayis a major recreation resource. As Highway 44 merges with Highway 89 at LassenVolcanic National Park, it becomes part of the Volcanic Legacy Scenic Byway, a 500mile route that begins as a loop around Lassen Volcanic National Park, and ends just

north of Crater Lake National Park near Mount Thielsen in Oregon. Driving thevolcano to volcano route for pleasure attracts tourism in both summer and winter.

v. Scenic Views

Long vistas of Mount Shasta, including forest in the foreground or near background, are possible from Shasta Forest Village, some locations along Highway 44, WestmooreRoad, and in the Midway area. Lassen Peak vistas are seen from locations on the west

side of meadows and Lake McCumber in the eastern third of the planning area. Canyonviews can be observed from the roads leading north and south off the ridge and intoBattle Creek south of the Site Road/Pegnon Acres settlements. The Ash Creek drainageprovides middle foreground to the views from the east side of Shingletown Ridge Roadand the Weston House Bed & Breakfast. Canyon views are also visible to the northwestfrom Ponderosa Way and Westmoore


31/81

forested landscape is essential to the quality of life they experience as part of living in theShingletown community (Hodgson, 1993).

During hazard reduction work in the past, the importance of the landscape arose manytimes. Saving the landscape was an often stated motivation of those strongly supportingthe hazard reduction efforts, while at the same time, some residents objected to the ideaof removing the understory for fear that it would open the forest too much, losing desiredscreening from the neighbors and privacy. They particularly wanted to keep thelandscape in what they perceived to be a natural state.

Many of the residential areas have CC&Rs restricting logging and tree removal in orderto protect the aesthetics of the landscape in which the homes are placed. The energy withwhich these restrictions have been enforced recently testifies to the importance of thelandscape as an aesthetic resource. Residential area landscapes and the views fromneighborhoods have very high recreation and aesthetic values as well. This landscape isthe main attraction for living in the Shingletown area and contributes significantly toresidential land values.

B. FOREST LAND

Private timberland managed by SPI and W.M. Beaty and Associates, Inc. occupy about49,100 acres in the planning area. These lands are managed primarily for commercialforest products, and the timber harvests conducted on these lands are regulated by theForest Practice Act (as are all commercial timber harvests regardless of ownership) The


32/81

VI. FUEL REDUCTION METHODS AND MAINTENANCE

INTRODUCTION

Reducing fuel loads is one of the most effective elements of any fire prevention and protection program. Managing fuel loading is critical to maintaining communities,ranches, grazing lands, forest lands, riparian areas, and the overall health and function ofthe watershed. The ability to implement fuels reduction projects typically comes down tothe source of funds available, the cost of labor, and the ability to implement the project.

A. PRESCRIBED BURNING

Advantages of prescribed fire include the low cost of implementation and the large areathat can be treated at one time. Some of the negative aspects of prescribed fire are apotential for erosion, the smoke created, the limited time frame to implement, the risk ofescape, non-feasibility in small areas, and that it is not a stand-alone tool.

Prescribed fire is used to approximate the natural vegetative disturbance of periodic

wildfire occurrence. This vegetative management tool is used to maintain fire dependentecosystems and restore those outside their natural balance. Generally, low intensityprescribed fire is applied by trained experts to clear ground of dangerous fuels like deadwood and brush. This low-intensity fire is vital to the life cycles of fire-dependent rangeand forest lands.


33/81

Percentage of volatile extractives in the fuel Wind speed and direction Relative humidity

Air temperature and topography

A successful prescribed burn must account for all these factors to prevent the fire fromgoing out of control. Guidelines for measuring the data and selecting the levels necessaryto manage the prescribed fire are available from a variety of sources. One excellentreference for wildland-urban zones is the USDA Forest Service publication, Burning byPrescription in Chaparral (USDA Forest Service 1981).

Air quality is another consideration when considering the use of prescribed burning.Communities in the Urban-Wildland Interface are very sensitive to the presence ofsmoke. Burn days approved by state and local authorities take into consideration themeteorological effects on both fire severity and smoke dispersion. In the case ofchaparral, prescribed burning for range improvement has been practiced by Californialandowners under permit from CDF since 1945 (Green 1981). Currently, procedures forprescribed burning require a written plan for each burn. A plan includes such items as an

objective, an area map, a description of the burn unit and surrounding areas, a smokemanagement plan, and the burn prescription (USDA Forest Service 1981).

Prescribed fire is the primary treatment method for all public lands, ranging from USDAForest Service land to state parks; most of the land in the planning area is in privateownership however According to FRAP the Forest and Rangeland Resources


34/81

Or, mechanically removed brush may also be fed into a grinder for biomass production.A technique called crush and burn combines mechanical fuels treatment with burning.As the name implies, the brush is mechanically crushed and then burned. Due to the

higher intensity heat created in burn piles, it is more effective at eliminating brush then alow-intensity prescribed burn, which has difficulty overcoming the high moisture contentof live chaparral. In addition, it is a good technique for areas adjacent to communities, because fire agencies only burn when fire danger conditions are decreased during therainy winter months. Mechanical treatments are also utilized on industrial and non-industrial timberlands in which trees are thinned by mechanized tree cutting or fallingmachines. In most cases, stands of trees are thinned from below as a means to eliminatefuels that can take a fire higher in the forest into the tree canopy (ladder fuels). However,stands of trees may also be thinned from above to eliminate crown continuity.

Mechanical treatments can be used successfully on stable ground up to 50% slope, butshould only be conducted during dry periods when soils are not saturated so as tominimize erosion and compaction. The drastic visual impacts should be considered whenplanning projects so that all parties are aware of how the area will look when the projectis completed. Initial planning should address mitigation for erosion potential, using

measures such as waterbars, ditching, and mulching in critical areas. Furthermore, theimpacts on wildlife and archaeological resources must be addressed.

Due to air quality concerns, the mechanical treatment method is fast becoming theacceptable method of fuel reduction in urban interface areas. Compared to prescribedfire mechanical treatment involves less risk produces less air pollutants is more


35/81

The WSRCD has developed the following fuel break standards:

The typical minimum width of a shaded fuel break is 100 feet, but can be up to

300 wide. The appropriate width is highly dependent on the slope, fuel density,fuel type, fuel arrangement, and landowner cooperation.

Fuel breaks should be easily accessible by fire crews and equipment at several points. Rapid response and the ability to staff a fire line is very important forquick containment of a wildfire.

The edges of a fuel break are varied to create a mosaic or natural look. Where possible, fuel breaks should compliment natural or man-made barriers such asmeadows, rock outcroppings, and roadways.

A maintenance plan should be developed before construction of a fuel break.Although a fuel break can be constructed in a matter of a few weeks, maintenancemust be conducted periodically to keep the fuel break functioning.

The establishment of a shaded fuel break can lead to erosion if not properlyconstructed. Short ground cover, such as grass or leaf/needle litter, should bemaintained throughout the fuel break to protect the soil from erosion.

A properly treated area should consist of well-spaced vegetation with little or no

ground fuels and no understory brush. Tree crowns should be approximately 10-15 apart. The area should be characterized by an abundance of open space andhave a park like look after treatment.

The pile and burn method is most commonly utilized when constructing fuel breaks.Material is cut and piled in open areas to be burned Burning takes place under permit on


36/81

i. Herbicides

The use of herbicides is a very effective and inexpensive method of eliminating unwanted

vegetation, but should be used only as specified by the manufacturer. Some herbicidesare species specific, which means they can be used to eliminate brush species and will notharm grass species.

ii. Manual Treatment

Manual treatment is a very effective means to eliminate invading vegetation, but is laborintensive. A rule of thumb is an experienced, 4 person crew can manually completemaintenance at a rate of 0.5 to 1 acre per 8 hour day, depending on density of resprouts,slope, terrain, and weather.

iii. Herbivores

Herbivore (goat) grazing may be used as a means of maintaining fuel breaks, since goatswould rather eat brush and weeds than grass. Browse makes up about 60% of a goats

diet, but only about 10-15% of a cows diet.

Goats used for fuel load reduction are managed to remove dense understory, includingbrush, forbs, and lower branches to remove ladder fuels. However, browsing on this typeof low-nutrition feed may require giving goats supplements of protein or energy,depending on the breed of goats used time of year soil type and vegetation analysis


37/81

over flat, smooth land, graze along fence lines before grazing the center of a pasture, andgraze the top of the pasture canopy fairly uniformly before grazing close to the soil level.

Herbivore grazing has been done in the Sierra Foothills by Goats Unlimited of Rackerby,California. They report the vegetation in the Sierra Foothills grazing area consists ofwoody plants, shrubs, forbs and grasses. Before entering a new area, they develop alandscape goal, complete a vegetative survey and identify toxic plants. They identify thegrowth habit and adaptation of each plant species, especially those that are toxic. Theobjective is to control the invasion of unwanted species and encourage perennial grassesto return. In a report published by Langston University (2001), goats improve the cyclingof plant nutrients sequestered in brush and weeds, enabling the reestablishment of grassyspecies.

VII. SOILS

Fuels management activities located on unstable soils or on slopes in excess of 40% canstimulate erosion processes or exacerbate existing erosion problems; therefore, prior toany fuels management activities, all soil types within any future project area will be

identified and evaluated to determine the erosion hazard. Projects will be designed toprevent or minimize erosion by reducing soil disturbance, maintaining vegetation whereappropriate, avoiding steep and unstable slopes if possible, and incorporating the use offire resistant vegetation as a means to provide soil stabilization. The locations of majorsoil types have been illustrated in Map 6; however, more detailed soils mappingi f ti h ld b i d ifi j t b d i h b t bli h d


38/81

VIII. ROADS FOR ACCESS

Roads are an essential part of any fire and fuels management plan, providing the principalaccess to the communities, homes and wild places in the watershed. Additionally, roadsmay offer a defensible space from which firefighters can conduct direct attack onwildfires and also provide strategic locations for roadside fuel breaks. Roadside fuelbreaks not only provide defensible space for firefighters, but also a safe escape route forresidents in the event of a wildfire.

Roads in the planning area typically intersect State Highway 44. The planning area can

be reached from both the east and west along this route, which is the major two-lanehighway connecting Redding and Lassen National Park. All roads are important forproviding fire protection access. This plan will not attempt to identify and map all pavedor improved roads. Roads that are vital to future projects will be included in treatmentoptions.

SHINGLETOWN AREAROADS

MAIN NORTH-SOUTH ROADS

Black Butte RoadPonderosa WayWilson Hill RoadL k M C b R d


39/81

When used for generating electricity, biomass is typically burned to transform water intosteam, which is used to a drive a turbine and attached generator (www.epa.gov, 2002).Although a majority of the biomass market is associated with energy production, biomass

offers a wide verity of uses such as fiber-reinforced composites, fiber-filledthermoplastics, high performance fiberboard, cement board, mulch for landscaping andsoil amenities, smoke chips for curing and flavoring meat and bio-oils which are used asasphalt additives or adhesives. Potential markets continue to be explored and developedby the private sector, and the federal government has also demonstrated interested in the biomass industry by the release of Executive Order 13134. On August 12, 1999,President Clinton released Executive Order 13134, designed to stimulate the creation andearly adoption of technologies needed to make biobased products and bioenergy cost-competitive in the large national and international markets (www.bioproducts-bioenergy.gov, 1999).

The utilization and development of biomass technology offers many economic andsocioeconomic benefits. However, one of the most widely acknowledged benefits is thedevelopment and utilization of biofuels as a means to reduce the worlds dependency onnon-renewable fossil fuels. Presently, a majority of the electricity in the U.S. is generated

by burning fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and oil. On the local level, thedevelopment of biotechnology also offers both economic and socioeconomic benefits.

The planning area of the Fire Safe Plan for the Shingletown Community contains about49,100 acres of private timberland and thousands of acres of chaparral, which produce asubstantial amount of renewable biomass each year The biomass market associated with


40/81

Harvesting can be accomplished with an excavator, a bulldozer tractor or afeller/buncher, which are utilized to remove and pile the brush. Processing can beaccomplished with a hammer hog, tub grinder, drum chipper or some other type of

industrial type chipper fed by the excavator or other mechanical means.

Biomass Collection in Action. Tub grinder onright, conveyor takes biomass into the van.

A Registered Professional Forester shouldbe involved prior to commencement of any biomass operation on timberlands in order todetermine what permits might be required and to estimate the cost and timing ofobtaining permits. Pursuant to the California Forest Practice Rules, if biomass operationsinvolve the harvest of commercial timber species, the project requires a Timber HarvestPlan or exemption depending upon the nature of the operation. Biomass operations notinvolving the harvest of commercial species are not subject to the California ForestPractice Rules but may require county permits or other agency review depending on the


41/81

X. POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES

The following table of cost share programs was provided by the University of California,Cooperative Extension Service (UCCE).

TABLE 11 Funding Sources and Cost Share Programs.Program Goals Services Will Fund Agency Who Limitations

EmergencyWatershedProtection

Helpssafeguard

people andpropertyfollowing

naturaldisasters.

Technical andfinancialassistance

Up to 75% NRCS Publicagencies, non-

profits,communitygroups

25% cost share.Must obtainnecessary permits

EnvironmentalQualityIncentivesProgram

To addresssignificantnaturalresourceneeds andobjectives

Cost sharing,technical andeducationalassistance

Up to 75% set by localworkinggroup

NRCS,FSA

Agriculturalproducershavingsignificantnaturalresource needs

Approved practicesup to $10,000 per

producer per year.Must haveConservation Planapproved by RCD.

ForestStewardship

Program

AssistCalifornia

communitiesto moreactivelymanage theirwatershedresources, tokeep forests

Technical,educational

and financialassistance

Cost share upto $50,000.

100% matchis required.

CDF RCDs,RC&Ds,

specialdistricts, Indiantribes, andcommunitynon-profitorganizations.

Projects thatinvolves activities

that may lead tochanges in theenvironment arerequired to complywith CEQA.Projects must be on

NIPF land &


42/81

Additional funding sources include:

California Department of Conservation, RCD Grant Assistance Program U. S. Forest Service, Forest Service Community and Private Land Fire

Assistance Grant Program Tehama/Shasta County Resource Advisory Committee, Title II Funds,Secure

Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 Sacramento Regional Foundation (for the Bureau of Land Management),

Community-Based Wildfire Prevention Program US Fish and Wildlife Service, Jobs in the Woods Program, provides funding

for erosion reduction/mitigation and fuel reduction to benefit anadromousfisheries.

XI. FUEL BREAK MAINTENANCE FUNDING

Since grant funds are often obtained just to construct the fuel break, maintenance efforts

are often left to the landowner. Unfortunately, some landowners do not have the physicalor financial means to do maintenance. If a fuel break is not properly maintained in itsentirety, it will not provide adequate fire protection in the long run. Therefore, in somesituations it is often best for watershed groups and other conservation organizations toseek funding for maintenance as a means to better ensure fire protection for a given area.Th C it P t ti Pl d l d lt f th USDA F t S i


43/81

This item was accomplished; it is discussed in the introduction to thisPlan and is shown in Map 1.

2. Publicizing the community evacuation plan and making it accessible through

posting on the WSRCDs website. The evacuation plan is incorporated in Appendix D, and the Plan in its

entirety will be posted on the WSRCD website.3. Continuing annual neighborhood-based fuel reduction work (Community Fire

Safe project). This work is getting larger every year as a result of the Community

Fire Safe project organized by Neighborhood Coordinators, and withthe technical/mechanical assistance of CDF. Landowners removeexcess vegetation from their property, and with CDF crews andequipment, it is removed off-site.

4. Establishing a locally-based Fire Safe Council to participate in the county-wide Fire Safe Council.

As a result of WSRCD and CDF staff collaboration and local support,the Shingletown Fire Safe Council was formed in May of 2003 as anextension of the non-profit Shingletown Volunteer Fire Company.

5. Placing shaded fuel breaks along key roadways and ridges. The priorities for these fuel breaks were discussed in TAC meetings,

and are presented below.

A. INTRODUCTION


44/81

any fuel reduction project is to protect lives and property, these Fire Safe Areas werelogical areas to start planning since they center on highly populated areas alreadyinvolved in fuel reduction work. Some areas have had fuel breaks constructed in the past,

but in those cases, all are currently in need of maintenance.

Each location was given a ranking of High (H), Medium (M), or Low (L) by theTAC. Fuel breaks should be constructed for the High priorities on the list, movingthrough the list to the Low priority projects as funding becomes available. Since Table12 discusses the areas in need of work, no mileages or exact locations of fuel break projects are given. This was done in order to leave the detailed planning to the BearCreek Watershed Group, the Shingletown Fire Safe Council, and/or the ShingletownVolunteer Fire Department as funding opportunities arise. Each location includescomments from the TAC and/or the 1995 Plan where available:

Table 12. Fire Safe Areas - Priority Projects

Priority Location also see Map 7 TAC Comments/1995 Plan

Comments where available

H Shasta Forest Village (Sections 31 and

32, Township 31 North (T31N) Range1 East (R1E)

The 1995 Plan advocated work on the

escarpment on the west and northsides of the sub-division includingthinning the understory, removingseriously damaged or diseased trees,and selecting species for removal toincrease the disease drought and fire


45/81

Priority Location also see Map 7 TAC Comments/1995 Plan

Comments where available

H Northwest of Airport Landing Strip

(Section 23, T31N, R1E)

The northern section of this area

contains large amounts of Manzanita,and this area was planned for fuelreduction work previously. The brush fields in this area should bethinned; [they] appear to be the resultof frequent, intense burning in the past that converted vegetation coverfrom timber to brush (1995 Plan).This area will work in conjunctionwith the above priority, as they arespatially connected.

M Starlight Pines Sub-division (Section19, T31N, R2E)

Previous planning showed the needfor a fuel break along Starlight PinesRoad off Highway 44, and around thewest, north and east boundaries of the

sub-division.M Midway Pines Sub-division (Sections33 and 34, T31N, R1W)

The biggest threat is from the northside. Although the south side is fairlyclear to Safari Ranch according to theTAC, this area only a few miles northf th Shi l t Rid


46/81

rather than remove it from planningefforts altogether, it was given thelast priority.


47/81

Figure 2. High Priority listed in Tables 12 and 13. Berry Springs/PlateauPines area.


48/81

Figure 4. High Priority Lake McCumber Road, leading to BattleCreek Estates and McCumber Flat.


49/81

ii. Prioritized Individual Locations

During the TAC process, a brainstorming session was held to list roads that the group felt

would be logical locations to pursue funding for fuel reduction work. A list was createdand juxtaposed against the Fire Safe Areas prioritized in Table 12. It was found thatmany of the areas were found within the Fire Safe Areas listed above, while some areasstood alone. Therefore, the two areas were separated, but in those cases where a logicallocation lay within a Fire Safe Area, that logical location would, by default, take on thepriority of the Fire Safe Area that contained it. For example, a High priority shownbelow is Thumper Road, and as it lies within Shasta Forest Village, a High priority ofthe Fire Safe Areas shown in Table 12, it too was given a High priority. The areas that

did not fit this logic were then prioritized by the TAC.

Table 13. Individual Roads in Need of Fuel Reduction Work Priority Projects.

Priority Location Comments

H Thumper Drive Lies within Shasta Forest Village.

H Sites Road/Plateau PinesRoad

Part of Berry Springs/Plateau Pines area.

H Thatcher Mill Road Includes area north of Lake McCumber andMcCumber Flat.

H Emigrant Trail Work would be primarily on the first 2 milesoff Highway 44, as property is denser in thisstretch.

M S li h Pi R d P f S li h Pi S b di i i


50/81

Priority Location Comments

N/A Aldridge Ranch Originally purchased in 1862; second longestcontinually-owned ranch in Shasta County.

Approximately 5000 acres; area has doneVegetation Management Plans (VMPs) withCDF in the past; area is in need of anotherVMP for range management and fuelsreduction.


51/81


52/81

also have the capability of helping residents understand how to construct defensible spacearound their homes.

E. FUNDING

Funding sources are as varied as the projects listed above. WSRCD has theorganizational structure to seek funding for any projects generated through this Plan. TheShingletown Fire Safe Council is under the umbrella of a 501(c)(4) non-profitcorporation, and can apply for grant funds as well. There are several sources of fundingavailable through the agencies in the area, discussed in Sections X and XI of this plan.

F. OTHER ACTION ITEMS

Seek funding to develop a variety of typical neighborhood-scale landscapedesigns that demonstrate fire safety, increase forest health, and reduce impactsfrom a wind-driven fire while preserving or improving aesthetics and providing for security, privacy, and other values. Link these larger scale projects to individual fuel breaks (instructional videos and pamphlets havebeen created based on creating fire safe landscapes around individual homes,but not for the neighborhood scale).

Seek funding to treat the dense stands of brush along State Highway 44through crushing, piling and burning, mastication, or biomass removal. SeekCDF assistance to create a Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) for theseareas


53/81

XIII. REFERENCES

Anderson, Hal,Aids in Determining Fuel Models for Estimating Fire Behavior, 1982,

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Ogden, Utah, General Technical ReportINT-122, 1982.

Andrews, Patricia L., BEHAVE: Fire Behavior Prediction And Fuel Modeling System,May 1984.

Brian Bull, NF Ag News Views, Using Goats for Vegetation Management, , 2002.

Bureau of Land Management, Standards for Fire and Aviation Operations, 2002.

California Department of Fish and Game. 1993. Restoring Central Valley Streams: APlan for Action. Inland Fishery Division.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, California Fire Plan, May 2000.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection,Fire and Resource AssessmentProgram, (FRAP) 2002.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Shasta County Unit Fire Plan,2002.


54/81

Herzog, Walter, BLM, personal communication with Mike Rosan (WSRCD) 2002.

Hodgson, Ronald, California State University, Chico, Mark Lancaster, Consulting

Forester, and Ralph Minnich, Battalion Chief, CDF. Shingletown Wildfire Defense Plan,1995.

Jolley, Steve, Wheelabrator Shasta Energy, personal communication with Mike Rosan(WSRCD) 2002.

Lewis, H.T.,Patterns of Indian Burning in California: Ecology and Ethnohistory,Ballena Press, 1973.

Minnich, Ralph, CDF, personal communication to Gary Desselle (WSRCD), 2003.

National Wildfire Coordination Group, S-290 Intermediate Wildland Fire Behavior,National Interagency Fire Center, Boise, Idaho 1994.

Regents of the University of California, Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project (SNEP), 1996.

Richards, Roy, CCWG, additional input submitted to WSRCD. Drafted Sept, 2002.

Rothermel, Richard C.A Mathematical Model for Fire Spread Predictions in WildlandFuels, USDA Forest Service, Ogden, UT, INT-115, 1972.


55/81

U. C. Davis,Natural Diversity Database 2002, California Department of Forestry & FireProtection.

The White House, Office of the Press Secretary,Executive Order 13134, Developing andPromoting Biobased Products and Bioenergy. www.bioproducts-bioenergy.gov , 1999.


56/81

APPENDIXA. GLOSSARY

BEHAVE A computer program used for predicting fire behavior.

Chain A unit of measurement equal to 66 feet.

Fire Safe Area a community that comes together once a year as part of the CommunityFire Safe Program to remove excess vegetation to decrease the fire hazard around theirhomes. Removed vegetation is piled and collected by CDF for chipping and disposal off-site for a nominal fee.

Fuel Characteristics Factors that make up fuels such as compactness, loading,horizontal continuity, vertical arrangement, chemical content, size and shape, andmoisture content.

Fuel Chemical Content Substances in the fuels which can either retard or increase therate of combustion, such as mineral content, resins, oils, wax or pitch.

Fuel Ladder Fuels which provide vertical continuity between strata. Fire is able tocarry from ground, to surface, to crown.

Fuel Moisture Content The amount of water in a fuel, expressed as a percentage of thed i ht f th t f l


57/81

Surface Fire A fire that burns surface litter, debris and small vegetation.

Topography The configuration of the earths surface, including its relief and the

position of its natural and manmade features.


58/81

APPENDIX B. PROJECT TEAM

Name Agency Number Email

Mike Raysor PG&E 246-6547 [email protected]

Mike Mitzel Sierra Pacific 378-8130 [email protected]

Ben RoweW.M. Beatty &

Assoc. 518-4666 [email protected]

Fred Tulley CDF 472-3121 [email protected]

Kathleen Schori CDF 225-2406 [email protected]

Rick Hartley CDF 225-2422 [email protected]

Ralph Minnich CDF 224-2473 [email protected]

Jack Eastwood 472-3446 [email protected]

Cliff KinzyNeighborhood

Coordinator 474-3199

Alan Merryman CDF 474-3115 [email protected]

Duane Shintaku CDF 225-2432 [email protected]

Dusty GerbingNeighborhood

Coordinator 474-5813


59/81

Maxine Holder Landowner 474-3422 [email protected]

Stan Weidert Landowner 474-3180 [email protected]

Carl Weidert Landowner 474-4300 [email protected]

Tricia Bratcher CDFG 225-3845 [email protected]

Acronyms

WSRCD Western Shasta Resource Conservation DistrictCDFG California Department of Fish and GamePG&E Pacific Gas and Electric CompanyCDF California Department of Forestry and Fire ProtectionSPI Sierra Pacific IndustriesCALTRANS California Department of Transportation


60/81

APPENDIX C. COMMUNITY FIRE SAFE FUEL REDUCTION

GUIDELINES


61/81


62/81


63/81


64/81


65/81

APPENDIX D. WILDLAND FIRE EVACUATION PLAN FOR THE

SHINGLETOWN RIDGE


66/81


67/81


68/81


69/81


70/81


71/81


72/81


73/81

MAPS

1. PROJECT OVERVIEW2. AREAS INCLUSIVE OF THE SHASTA COUNTY RESOURCE

ADVISORY COMMITTEE (RAC) GRANT APPLICATION

3. FIRE HISTORY

4. VEGETATION

5. LAND OWNERSHIP

6. SOILS

7. FIRE SAFE AREAS AND PRIORITY PROJECTS

8. FIRE SEVERITY

r o j e t 2 y v e r v i e w5

SISKIYOUMODOC

DEL NORTE


74/81

DerschR

d

WildcatRd

Bla

ck

Bu

tte

Rd

Shing

letown

RidgeRd

Wi

lson

HillRd

Inwood

Rd

Pon

derosa

Way

100 Rd

Emig

rantTra

il

Ritts

MillRd

DeerFlatRd

Th

atc

her

MillR

d

BrokeoffMeadows

Shasta CountyShasta County

Tehama CountyTehama County

44

ViolaViola

MantonManton

InwoodInwood

WhitmoreWhitmore

ShingletownShingletown

5

395

89

44

LASSENSHASTA

TRINITY

TEHAMA

HUMBOLDT

PLUMAS

MENDOCINO

BUTTE

GLENN

LAKEPLACER

COLUSA

SIERRA

NEVADAYUBA

SUTTER

EL DORADO

00 33 66 991.51.5

MilesMiles

1 in equals 44 mi

Legend

Town

Fire Plan Area

State Hwy 44

Other Major Road

County Line

October 16, 2003Albers, NAD27

Sources: USDA NRCS, CASIL

Fire Safe Planfor the

Shingletown Community wLegend

Fire Plan Area

Surrounding Highway

N. Calif. Counties

e r 2 s n l u i v 2 o f 2 t h 2 n t h t 2 g o u n t y 2 o u r 2 e d v i o r y 2 g o m m i t t 2 @ e g A q r n t 2 e l i t i o n wFire Safe Planfor the

Shingletown Community


75/81

Dersch

Rd

WildcatRd

Bla

ck

Bu

tte

R

d

Shing

letown

Ridg

eRd

W

ilsonHillR

d

InwoodR

d

Pond

eros

aW

ay

100 Rd

Emigra

ntTrail

Ritt

sMillR

dDeerFlatRd

ThatcherMillRd

Brokeo

ffMeadows Rd

MantonManton


h t 2 p o r t i l l

Shasta County

ViolaViola

44

44

R1ER1W

T31N

R3ER2E

T30N

T

32N

2.5 mi SPI Workwith Link to

Hat Creek Ranger DistrictProjects

2.5 mi SPI Workwith Link to

Hat Creek Ranger DistrictProjects

Legend

Completed - Maintenance R

W.M.Beaty Understory Thin

Other Major Road

State Hwy 44

Existing Harvest Area - SPI

Proposed Fire Plan Area

Watershed Boundary

Shingletown Community

p i e 2 r i s t o yFire Safe Planfor theShingletown Community

Legend

Fire Plan Area

Town

Fire H

1910


76/81

}44De

rschR

d

Pond

erosa

Wy

Ritt

sMill

Rd

BrokeoffM

eadows

DeerFlatRd

Emigr

antTrail

Shinglet

ownRid

geRd

100 Rd

Inwo

odRd

Th

atc

her

Mill

Tehama County

Shasta County

}44WildcatRd

ViolaViola

MantonManton

InwoodInwood

WhitmoreWhitmore


OctobeAlber

Sources: CDF SCASIL, USDA F

REDDING

0 3 6 91.5Miles

w Hwy 44Other Major RoadCounty LineLassen NF RegionPrescribed Fire 1980+1980s

1990s

1920

1930

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990+

Whitmore

Whitmore

e g e t t i o nFire Safe Planfor theShingletown Community

Lege

Fire Plan Are


77/81

Dersc

hRd

Shinglet

ownR

idgeR

d

Inwood

Rd

Pond

erosa

Wy

Ritt

sMill

Rd

BrokeoffMeadows

DeerFlatRd

Emigr

antT

rail100Rd

Th

atc

her

Mil

l

4444

WildcatRd

Shasta CountyShasta County

Tehama CountyTehama County

ViolaViola

MantonManton

InwoodInwood


October 16, 2003Albers, NAD27

Sources: CDF Shasta/Trinity Unit, CASIL

w

0 2.5 5 7.51.25Miles

REDDINGREDDING

Town

Hwy 44

Other Area R

County

Agriculture

Barren

Ceanothus M

Wedgeleaf C

Upper Monta

Lower Monta

Scrub Oak

Montane Mix

Pacific Doug

Eastside Pine

Annual Grass

Wet Meadow

Lodgepole P

Mixed Conife

Mountain He

Mixed Conife

Gray Pine

Ponderosa P

Canyon Live

Blue Oak

White Alder

Cottonwood/A

CA Black Oa

Valley Oak

Quaking Asp

Interior Live O

Red Fir

Subalpine Co

Urban

Water

White Fir

v n d 2 y w n e r s h i p Fire Safe Planfor theShingletown Community


78/81

Shasta County

Tehama County

DerschR

d

WildcatRd

Bla

ck

Bu

tte

Rd

Shing

letow

nRidgeRd

Wils

on

Hill

Rd

InwoodR

d

Pond

erosa

Way

100 Rd

Emigrant

TrailRitts

Mill

Rd

DeerFlatRd

Th

atch

erMillRd

BrokeoffM

eadowsRd

44

44

ViolaViola

MantonManton

InwoodInwood

WhitmoreWhitmore


0 4 82Miles

REDDINGREDDING

OctobAlbe

Sources: CDF ShCASIL, TNC, USD

Other Indus

Legend

Fire Safe Area

Town

Hwy 44

Area Road

County Line

Ownership

State Land Comm

Latour Demonstrat

CA Parks and Rec

Lassen Volcanic N

USDI Bureau of La

USDA Forest Serv

The Nature Conse

Private Industrial F

Private Industrial F

o i l sFire Safe Planfor theShingletown Community


79/81

44

44

Shinglet

ownRid

geRd

Dersc

hRd

Emigr

antT

rail100Rd

Pond

erosa

Wy

Ritt

sMillR

d

Th

atch

erMi l

l

Rd

DeerFlatRd

BrokeoffMeadows

WildcatRd

Inwood

Rd

Shasta County

Tehama County

ViolaViola

MantonManton

InwoodInwood

WhitmoreWhitmore


0 4 82Miles

w Octob

AlberSources: USDAConservation S

REDDING

Legend

Soil Map Unit Name

COHASSET-AIKEN-MCC

HOLLAND-GAVEL-HOL

JIGGS-LYONSVILLE-CH

KILARC-SITES-MYERS

MILLSHOLM-SEHORN-L

SHELD-YALLANI-INVILL

TOOMES-SUPAN-GUEN

TUSCAN-INKS-KEEFER

WACA-WINDY-JIGGS (C

Fire Plan Area

Town

Hwy 44

Area Road

County Line

p i r 2 f 2 e r sd r i o r i t y 2 r o j t sFire Safe Planfor theShingletown Community LegenFire Safe Area, bHigh


80/81

Shin

gletownRidgeRd

DerschR

d

WildcatRdBla

ck

Butt

eR

d

Wil

son

Hill

Rd

Inwood

Rd

Ponde

rosa

Way

100Rd

Emig

ra

ntTr

ail

Rit

tsM

illR

d

DeerFlatRd

Th

atcherMillRd

BrokeoffMeadowsRd

Shasta County

Tehama County

44

44

Thumper Rd

Starlight PinesRd

Sites Rd/Plateau Pines Rd

Long

HayF

latRd

R1ER1W

T31N

R3ER2E

T29N

T30N

T32N

ViolaViola

MantonManton

InwoodInwood

WhitmoreWhitmore


w

OctobUTM Z

Sources: C

Medium

Low

Prioritized Indiv

High

Medium

Low

Fire Safe Pla

Town

State Route

Other Road

County

1 " eq

p i r e 2 e v e r i t yFire Safe Planfor theShingletown Community

Legend


81/81

Dersc

hRd

Pond

erosa

Wy

Ritt

sMill

Rd

BrokeoffMeadows

DeerFlatRd

Emigran

tTrail

Shingleto

wnRid

geRd

100RdInw

oodR

d

Th

atc

her

Mil

l

44

44

Tehama County

Shasta County

WildcatRd

ViolaViola

MantonManton

InwoodInwood

WhitmoreWhitmore


0 4 82Miles

REDDING

OctobAlbe

Sources: CDFBLM, USDA F

w Fire Plan AreaFire Hazard SeverityModerate (No Applicable Areas)

Town

Hwy 44

Other Major Ro

Fire Safe Are

BLM

USDA Forest S

Tehama Co: Se

VERY High

High

Non-State Responsibility Area

fire safe plan for the shingletown community

Documents