1

Whittington Forest Health Restoration

Project

Fire and Fuels

And

Air Quality

Report

2

Whittington Forest Health Restoration Project

Fuels, Fire and Air Quality Report

Introduction

The Hat Creek Ranger District of the Lassen National Forest is proposing the Whittington Forest Health

Restoration Project (hereafter called the Whittington Project). The purpose of the proposed project is to

improve forest health, and to retain and restore ecological resilience thereby ensuring a functioning and

sustainable ecosystem.

The Whittington project is within the perimeter of the Burney-Hat Creek Community Forestry Project, a

project conceived by the Burney-Hat Creek Community Forest and Watershed Group (the Group). The

Group is a community-based collaborative of citizens, businesses, organizations, government and

landowners who share a vision for the sustainable future of our communities and the landscape upon

which we thrive. The Burney-Hat Creek Community Forestry Project considers a landscape-scale

perspective on land use and management throughout the Burney and Hat Creek Watersheds. It involves

all lands and ownerships, including National Forest, private timberlands, and other privately owned lands.

The project area is made up of a wide variety of stands, ranging from plantations to natural mixed-conifer

stands to brush fields and meadows. This provides for multiple types of treatments to be placed on the

ground. These will range from hand thinning and piling to the commercial harvesting and mechanical

fuels treatments. But with any type of treatment there will be a needed fuels treatment to follow to restore

the fire return interval and maintain the project area.

3

Regulatory Framework

The proposed project would be managed under the following policies and regulations:

1993 Lassen National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP), as amended by:

Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group (HFQLG) Forest Recovery Act FEIS, FSEIS and RODs

(USDA FS 1999a, 1999b, 2003a, 2003b)

Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (SNFPA) FEIS, FSEIS and RODs (USDA FS 2001a,

2001b, 2004c), and

The Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA).

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 94-52 [42 U.S. C. 4321-4347]).

California Code if Regulations Title 17, Subchapter 2, Smoke Management Guidelines for

Agriculture and Prescribed Burning.

Forest Service Manual 5100 (fire, fuels and air quality),

Forest Service Manual 2400 (vegetation),

Forest Service Manual 2000 (National Forest Resource Management, Chapter 70 Vegetation

Management),

Clean Air Act of 1963 (Public Law 91-604 [42 U.S. C. 7401-7626]).

Purpose and Need for Action The purpose of the Whittington Project is to aid in the restoration of both a fire-resistant and fire- resilient

forest ecosystem. Restoration focuses on establishing the composition, structure, pattern, and ecological

processes necessary to make terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems sustainable, resilient, and healthy under

current and future conditions. (Forest Service Manual 2020.5, page 11) The Whittington project would

begin restoration of a fire-adapted, healthy, heterogenic, and sustainable forest. This would help provide a

range of ecological services that include goods (wood, fiber) and services (air and water purification,

flood and climate regulation, biodiversity, scenic landscapes, wildland habitat, and carbon sequestration

and storage) that are valued and used by people, and that directly or indirectly support human well-being.

(Region 5 Ecological Restoration, Leadership Intent).

The Whittington Project is designed to achieve the following desired conditions, which would meet the

purpose as set forth above:

Vegetation characterized by a resistance to fire induced mortality (i.e. Ponderosa/Jeffrey Pine); or

vegetation that is resilient to fire and can regenerate either through sprouting from the root crown

(manzanita) or from seed released following a fire (Baker Cypress).

Maintaining surface fuels, including forest duff, litter, and large down woody material that

provide benefits to soils, wildlife, and other resources, and supports a mosaic of fire severity and

burn patterns. (Litter includes pine needles and twigs or small woody material. Large down

woody material includes logs and snags.)

Provide areas from which wildfire could be more safely fought. Decrease the intensity of

potential wildfire and the likelihood of a surface fire developing into a damaging crown fire.

Improve firefighter and public safety.

Vegetative cover on the landscape is diverse with a range of brush and tree species in varying size

and age classes, and vertical and lateral structural diversity. Vertical and lateral structural

diversity would include small openings or “gaps” in forest cover, thickets of trees, and variable

spacing between trees and shrubs.

4

Healthy forest conditions demonstrated by limited inter-tree competition for water and soil

nutrients, drought tolerant vegetation, disease and insect resistant trees, receptive seedbed and

viable reproduction, and the ability to adapt to changing conditions.

A diverse landscape characterized by a variety of wildlife habitats that provide hiding, foraging,

nesting, and denning benefits for multiple species.

Current ecological conditions in the Whittington Project area are inconsistent with desired conditions

described above. The need for action can be characterized by two primary concerns: the need to restore

fire-resistance/fire-resilience, and the need to restore forest health and diversity.

Affected Environment for Fire/Fuels Management: Fire history for the project area shows that the majority of the fires are under an acre in size. Table 1

shows numbers and sizes of fire in the project area since the 1940’s. Past fires in the project area has a

variety of causes including lightning, equipment, arson, smoking and campfires. Due to early record

keeping fires ended up lumped into several categories: equipment, person or lightning.

Table 1. Fire History

Fire occurrence within the project perimeter

Decade Number of Fires Size Cause

1940’s 1 large fire Approx. 800 acres Unknown

1970-1979 4 All under an acre Lightning/equipment

1980-1989 5 All under an acre Lightning/person

1987 1 Boundary Debris burning

1990-1999 5 All under 10 acres Lightning/equipment

2000-2009 1 Under an acre Lightning

2009 1 Brown Fire (not within

the Project Area) Lightning

There is a fire history study that was conducted in the 1,000 Lakes Wilderness and completed in 1996

describing the fire regimes of the wilderness. The 1,000 Lakes Wilderness is directly to the south of the

Whittington project area. The fire history study of 1,000 Lakes determined fire frequency and regimes by

vegetation type. Due to low severity fires not always leaving a fire scar and three high severity events in

1,000 Lakes wilderness in the 19th century the frequency of fires in 1,000 lakes are underestimates.

In the mixed conifer stands of 1,000 Lakes wilderness the fire return intervals from 1730-1849 was a

range of 1-11 years and from 1850-1904 was 1-9 years. Four large fires occurred in the wilderness in

1864, 1883, 1889 and 1918.

The mixed conifer stands of the Thousand Lakes wilderness have evidence of high severity fire (i.e. large

stands of even-aged trees) occurring in the past. This is not the typical fire regime of mixed conifer

forests of the Sierra Nevada or southern cascades. Due to the close location of the project area to

Thousand Lakes Wilderness and the presence of species requiring high severity fire (Baker cypress,

manzanita brush fields) it can be expected that parts of the project area have a natural high severity fire

regime.

The surface fuels in the mixed conifer have been altered over time by timber management, fire

suppression and livestock grazing. The suppression of fire has allowed the surface fuels to increase

5

because fire in the past used to consume the surface fuels. Drought and insect activity over time has also

increased the surface fuels by trees dying and falling over. The past timber management practices of seed

step shelterwood, overstory removal and insect salvage removal have affected the surface fuels. For some

of the past timber sales, the slash was treated by machine piling, but the majority of the salvage sales, due

to the widespread nature of those projects, the slash from the trees were left on the forest floor.

Sometimes the slash was lopped and scattered, but the project area due to a Mediterranean climate has a

slow decay rate. See table 2 for fuel models currently found in the project area.

The plantations in the project area were brush fields. These brush fields in the project area were

identified in the GLO notes from 1881-1883. This brush was probably the result of a high severity fire.

In the 1930’s-1960 the brush fields were converted to plantations. These plantations have brush

(manzanita) growing in them, creating a continuous fuel ladder from the ground to the crowns of the

trees.

Table 2. Surface fuel loads (measured in tons per acre) and fuel models in the project area

Vegetation

Type

Fuel

Model

0-.25

inch

material

.26-1

inch plus

material

1.01-3

inch

material

3+ inch

and

greater*

Woody

material Total

Mixed

Conifer FM 10 3.01-3.91 2.0-2.60 5.01-6.51 5.0-49.0 2.0-2.6 17.02-64.0

Lodgepole FM 10 3.91 2.60 6.51 4.0-18.0 2.6 19.6-33.6

Brush Fields FM 6 1.5-2.0 2.5-3.2 2.0-2.6 1-4 0 7.0-11.8

Plantations FM4 5-6.5 4-5.2 2-2.6 1-4 5.0-6.5 17-24.8

All data taken from FMA (Fuels Management Analysis) and photo series.

All material is weighed in tons/acre.

*Surface fuels greater than 3 inches contribute towards intensity and spotting but are not part of the fire behavior model.

Desired Fuels Conditions/Fire Behavior

According to the fire behavior characteristics modeled in General Technical Report INT-143, 1983,

(Rothermel 1983) flame lengths four feet and under can be safely fought with engines and hand crews.

Fuels greater than three inches in diameter create resistance to control by slowing down fire line

construction rates. The standards and guidelines in the Sierra Nevada Framework ROD (2004) for fuels

and fire management are:

An average of 4-foot flame lengths under 90th percentile fire weather conditions.

Surface and ladder fuels removed as needed to meet design criteria of less than 20 percent mortality

in dominant and co-dominant trees under 90th percentile weather and fire behavior conditions.

Tree crowns thinned to meet design criteria of less than 20 percent probability of initiation of crown

fire under 90th percentile weather conditions.

Brush field standard and guidelines:

Design mechanical treatments in brush and shrub patches to remove the material necessary to achieve

the following outcomes from wildland fire under 90th percentile fire weather conditions:

Wildland fires would burn with an average flame length of 4 feet or less.

Fire line production rates would be doubled.

Treatments would be effective for more than 5 to 10 years.

6

Plantation standards and guidelines:

Less than 5 tons per acre of surface fuels 3 inches and smaller.

Less than 0.5-foot fuel bed.

Stocking levels that provide a well-spaced tree crown.

Less than 50 percent of the surface area with live fuels (brush).

See table 3 for desired fuel loadings to meet standard and guideline for fire behavior by fuel model in the

project area.

Table 3. Desired surface fuel loads (measured in tons per acre) and fuel models in the project area

Vegetation

Type

Fuel

Model

0-.25

inch

material

.26-1

inch plus

material

1.01-3

inch

material

3+ inch

and

greater*

Woody

material Total

Mixed

Conifer FM 10 1.5 1.0 2.5 1.0-10.0 1.4 7.4-17.4

Lodgepole FM 10 1.5 1.0 2.5 1.0-10.0 1.4 9.4-19.4

Brush Fields FM 6 1.05 1.74 1.40 1-2 0 5.1-6.1

Plantations FM9 2.04 .29 .11 1-2 0 3.4-4.4

Environmental Effects:

Analysis Tools Used

Brush fields and plantations were modeled using the Behave fire program. Behave assumes the following

information:

1. surface and vertical fuels are homogenous across the landscape,

2. topography is homogenous across the landscape,

3. weather is homogenous across the landscape,

4. the fire is a single point source (it does not take into account spotting), and

5. Fire spreads in an elliptical shape.

To model fire behavior at the stand level Crown Mass was used. Crown Mass is one of the tools inside

Fuels Management Analyst Suite (2005). Crown Mass uses tree stand data and fire environment inputs to

predict the following: 1. surface fire rate of spread, 2. surface fireline intensity, 3. surface flame length, 4.

crown fire initiation potential, 5. crown fire type, 6. crown bulk density, and 7. crown to base height.

Crown Mass uses the work of Alexander (1988), Ryan and Reinhardt (1988) Beukema et al. (1999),

Rothermel (1972), Andrews (1989) and Finney (1998) to display the following fire behavior outputs of

flame length, rates of spread, crown to base height, and fire type (surface, passive crown, or active crown

fire).

Crown Mass also has some assumptions built into the program. Crown Mass assumes that the crown

loading is evenly distributed vertically within the canopy. Crown Mass also assumes that fire would

spread vertically through the densest portion of the canopy, that surface fuels are homogenous across the

landscape, topography is homogenous, weather is homogenous, and the fire is a single point source (it

does not take into account spotting).

7

Direct and Indirect Effects of Alternative 1 –The Proposed Action.

2540 acres of DFPZ will be created along the following forest service system roads:

FS road 34N19 (26 road) from the Twin Buttes west to the Forest boundary

FS road 34N60 from the junction with FS road 34N19 southwest approximately 0.7 miles.

FS roads 34N23/34N74 from the junction with FS road 34N19 west to the Forest boundary.

Boundary between private and National Forest lands along the western edge of the project area.

1395 acres would be thinned to a basal area ranging from 120 to 180 sq. feet with 10-20% left as

retention islands.

80 acres of ground selection openings of .5 to 2.5 acres would be used to create structural and

age class diversity.

30 acres of grass land and wetland treatments would be implemented at Burney Springs.

88 acres of baker Cypress restoration would occur in the plantation.

3275 acres of the plantation would be thinned to a100-120 feet square feet of basal area per acre.

132 acres of brush field would be treated by either mastication or mechanical piling.

Surface fuels in all treatment areas will be treated to meet desired surface fuel loadings. Surface fuel

treatments could consist of a variety of treatments: mechanical piling, hand piling, mastication, burning

of piles and underburning.

Direct Effects Common to both Alternatives 1 and 3

The two things contributing to the existing fire situation in the project area are fire risk and fire hazard.

The project area is subject to fires caused by people and lightning. The risk of fire from lightning cannot

be changed and prevention efforts already exist in the project area to reduce the number of human caused

fires. The fire hazard to the project area is topography, slope, fuel loading, vegetation structure and

vegetation composition. Slope and topography cannot be changed, the fuel loading, and vegetation

structure can be changed to reduce the fire hazard. Both Alternative 1 and 3 reduce the fire hazard in the

project area by thinning (reducing ladder fuels) and treating surface fuels in the plantations, mixed conifer

stands and brush fields.

The direct effects for fire behavior are common to both alternative 1 and 3 for the plantations, brush fields

and mixed conifer stands. Fire behavior is modeled using the surface fuels and environmental conditions

(fuel moisture, wind speed, slope). The most effective strategy for reducing crown fire occurrence and

severity is to (1) reduce the surface fuels, (2) increase height to live crown, (3) reduce canopy bulk

density and (4) reduce the continuity of the forest canopy (Graham et al. 2004). Both alternative one and

three treat the surface fuels, reduce the ladder fuels and reduce the crown bulk density.

The brush fields and plantation was modeled using the Behave Plus fire behavior program. Brush fields

were modeled as a fuel model 6 because they are not as dense as the plantations nor do they have fuel

loads as heavy as the plantations. Plantations untreated were modeled as a fuel model 4 (chaparral) due to

the continuous vertical fuel created by the brush and tree mix. Post treatment the plantations were

modeled as a fuel model 9 (timber model-long needled) if the brush was piled and burned and as a fuel 11

if the treatment of the brush is mastication. Fuel model 9 was chosen due to the fact the brush has been

8

reduced and removed through piling and burning. Fuel model 11 was chosen for the mastication

treatment because mastication does not remove the brush it changes it from a ladder fuel to a surface fuel.

Mechanical piling of the brush is the preferred treatment because it disturbs and removes the root burls of

the brush (reducing the density of the brush when it comes back), were mastication just cuts the brush

down and does not disturb the root burl. Behave Plus was used to model these areas using 90th percentile

weather data from the Manzanita Lake RAWS station (see Table 4). Sierra Nevada Framework standards

and guidelines use 90th percentile weather conditions for desired fire behavior after treatment. The 90

th

percentile weather represents the “average worst” weather conditions for days when fires occur during

fire season. Fire season on the Lassen National Forest on average starts around the middle of May and

ends around the middle to end of October. These conditions would be in effect on 10 percent of all the

days that large fires occur on the Hat Creek Ranger District.

Table 4. 90th

Percentile Weather

Temperature 85

Relative Humidity 12%

1 hour fuels 3.0

10 hour fuels 4.0

100 hour fuels 7.0

Live Herbaceous 100

20 Wind Speed 11 mph

Weather data is from Manzanita Raws Station from 1972 to 2005

Table 5

Vegetation Type

Fuel Loading

(0-3 inch

material)*

Flame Length

(ft.)

Rate of Spread

(chains/hour)

Before treatment Brush Fields 6.0 tons per acre 8.1 feet 52.1 chs/hr

Plantations 16.0 tons per acre 23 feet 101.2 chs/hr

After treatment Brush Fields 3 tons per acre 3.8 feet 25.8 chs/hr

Plantations (piled) 3.5 tons per acre 2.8 feet 6.6 chs/hr

Plantations

(Masticated) 11.5 tons/acre 3.3 feet 4.8chs/hr

As table 5 shows, by reducing the fuel loading in the brush fields the flame length is reduced from 8 feet

to 4 feet. According to the hauling chart with eight foot flame lengths fires are too intense for direct attack

and would require the fire to be fought using indirect fire line tactics of constructing fireline a distance

from the fire. Bull dozers and aircraft will be necessary to fight the fire. After treatment the expected

flame lengths in the brush field will be between 3-4 feet which can be fought using direct fireline tactics

of constructing fireline directly on the edge of the fire. With three to four foot flame lengths engines and

hand crews can fight the fire.

In the plantations (see table 5) expected fire behavior in the current condition if a fire started is 23 foot

flame lengths. According to the hauling charts this kind of fire behavior leads to crowning, spotting and

possible major fire runs. In the event of this type of fire behavior the fire will have to fought constructing

9

fire line away from the main fire using bull dozers, air tankers, crews and engines. The expected fire

behavior post treatment for the plantations will be 2-3 foot flame lengths is the brush treatment is machine

piled and burned. Machine piling pushed the brush into piles were it can be disposed of. In the skips

(areas where the brush is left standing) the fire behavior in that area would be of a higher intensity and

longer flame lengths. This could create some short term spotting and high intensity fire behavior in the

area that has been skipped, but one the fire moved to a treated area it would become a low intensity fire.

In the areas of the skip there could be increased tree mortality where the skip due to the high intensity of

the fire in the untreated area. If the plantations are treated with mastication, mastication does not remove

the brush it changes it from a ladder fuel to a surface fuel. The expected flame lengths from this

treatment are below 4 feet but experience in masticated fuels when burning is that they produce a high

intensity surface fire. Crews will not be able to construct direct fireline and it will require the hauling of

water to suppress the fire.

The mixed conifer stands were modeled using Crown mass modeling system which is part of Fuels

Management analysis plus (FMAplus). The two stands that were modeled were stand 150010 (outside

the DFPZ) and stand 150039 inside the DFPZ. Stand 150010 is a stand that is heavy to white fir and stand

150039 is a mixed conifer stand. These two stands were selected because they represent the timber stands

in the project area. See Table 6 and Table 7 for results.

Table 6

Fire Behavior 150010-Current 150010-Proposed 150010 –Alternative 3

Flame Length 4.7 feet 2.5 feet 1-2 feet

Crown base height 1.0 feet 6.0 feet 14 feet

Rate of Spread 6.1 chs/hr 2.1 chs/hr 1.7 chains/hr

Type of fire Passive crown fire Surface Fire Surface

Table 7

Fire Behavior 150039-Current 150039-Proposed 150039 –Alternative 3

Flame Length 6.0 feet 1-2 feet 1-2 feet

Rate of Spread 8.0 chs/hr 2.1 chs/hr 2.1 chs/hr

Crown base height 20 feet 42 feet 39 feet

Type of fire Surface Surface Surface

Under the current condition in Stand 150010 with flame lengths of 6 feet and the ability of the fire to

passively crown hand crews and engines could not directly attack this fire. This would mean indirect line

tactics, bull dozers and air tankers to assist with the fire which will increase costs and the size of the fire.

In stand 150010 by thinning and treating the surface fuels in both the proposed action and alternative

three we will chance the expected fire behavior from one of a passive crown fire to one of a surface fire.

The crown base height increases in the proposed action to 6 feet and in alternative three to 14 feet both

decreasing the chance of a fire moving from the surface to the crowns. Flame lengths are also reduced by

treating the surface fuels from 6 feet to under 2 feet making it possible for engines and hand crews to

successfully fight this fire.

In stand 150039 which is inside the DFPZ if a fire was to start with the current condition the expected fire

behavior is one of a high intensity surface fire. Expected flame lengths are 6 feet with a rate of spread of

8 chains per hour. There could be some individual tree torching of smaller trees. With 6 foot flame

10

lengths crews and engines would have to use indirect fire line tactics with the support of air tankers and

bull dozers. In both the proposed action and alternative three the crown to base height in increased from

20 feet to 42 feet for the proposed action and 39 feet for alternative 3. Both raise the crown base height

enough that there is little chance of a crown fire getting established in this stand. Treating the surface

fuels reduces the flame length from 6 feet down to 1-2 feet allowing hand crews or engines to directly

attack the fire.

Direct effects of Alternative 1

Group selection is not a treatment designed to meet the need of hazardous fuels reduction. The group

selection units are small enough in size (2.5 acres or less) that a high intensity wildland fire would either

burn around them or spot across them. Group selection units create an opening in the stand that results in

a microclimate change. This microclimate change (more sunlight) would encourage the growth of grasses

and forbs. Within 5 to 10 years brush could replace the grass and forbs. If the release of the brush in the

groups does not take place, the combination of brush and increased drying due to sunlight could result in

a moderate to high severity fire with the group.

The Burney Springs Enhancement is not a designed as a hazardous fuels reduction treatment. The

treatment will still benefit fuels, even though that is not primary objective. This area is used by the public

for both recreation (camping) and fire wood gathering. This treatment will help hazardous fuels reduction

by reducing the ladder fuels in the Burney springs area where the public does recreate. This area is a

favorite place of the public to cut lodgepole for firewood. In the lodgepole stands piling of the surface

fuels will reduce the fire behavior and the risk of a high severity fire occurring in this area. Most of the

slash in this area is created from the public cutting firewood. The lodgepole stands are modeled as a fuel

model 10, the fire behavior pre and post treatment would be expected to be the same as the mixed conifer

and white fir stands. See table 6 and Table 7.

The Baker Cypress restoration is also not designed as a hazardous fuels treatment. Baker Cypress needs

high severity fire to reproduce. Surface fuels would be left in this area to facilitate a high severity burn to

rejuvenate the baker cypress. Due to the fact that the surface fuels are not being treated in this area, in the

event of a wildfire, this will put this treatment at a risk of a high severity fire.

Cumulative Effects:

The area for the cumulative effects analysis is the project area. The reason for using the project area is

that fuels are the same both inside and outside the project area. The fire regime and fuels models are the

same inside and outside of the project area. The current condition of the project area is the result of the

past actions in the project area of fire suppression, timber sales, drought, and brush field conversion.

The only National Forest project currently in the area is the Whittington project. There are timber

management projects planned on the private land around the project area. There are no future projects

planned in or around the project area in the future for the forest service. In the project area once the

treatments are done, the fuels will continue to accumulate as trees shed needles, pine cones and self-

prune. There will also be an accumulation of grasses and forbs over time. Without maintenance the fuels

will continue to accumulate, the ladder fuels will return (brush, young tress) and the project area will to

the pre-treatment condition. In the plantations without maintenance the brush will return and will create a

ladder fuel that will lead to the plantation returning to the pre-treatment condition.

Air Quality

11

Affected Environment

The Whittington project area is located north of a Class One airshed, the Thousand Lakes Wilderness.

The community of Hat Creek lies on the eastern side of the project area and Burney is to the north of the

project area. The project area is located in the Shasta County Air Quality District and is part of the

Northeast Plateau Air Basin.

Air quality within the project area is within national and state standards for visibility, particulate levels

(PM10), and pollutants. The airshed is influenced by a westerly airflow from the northern Sacramento

Valley up and across the Cascade crest. The project area’s air quality is could be affected by pollutants

from downwind population centers such as the city of Redding, by agricultural, and adjacent private

forest activities producing seasonal dust and smoke as well as recreational activities using dirt roads in

and around the project area. These effects are short term (less than 24 hours) and localized.

Direct effects of Air Quality Common to Alternative 1 and 3

Under these alternatives a total of 5121 acres in the project area would be affected by fire. These acres

are a combination of areas being piled, underburned or treated with fire post thinning and mastication.

These acres would be treated as part of the District’s prescribed fire program and, as such, all burning

would be take place on permissive burn days. Depending on weather conditions and timing of other

projects, it could take between 3-5 years to treat following completion of the thinning. Underburning

would take place in the fall and spring, machine pile burning and landing pile burning would take place in

the fall. Currently, Shasta County meets National Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

Cumulative Effects Common to Both Action Alternatives for Air Quality

The area for the cumulative effects analysis discussion is the project area, Thousand Lakes Wilderness to

the south, Burney Mountain to the north, the project boundary to the west and Hat Creek valley to the

East. This cumulative effects analysis area was developed based on prevailing winds flows (from the

south west), the location of class one air sheds, and the location of population centers.

Past actions affecting air quality for the past five years in the project area include the burning of some

landing piles and miscellaneous handpiles that has occurred on both federal and private lands. This

burning occurred on permissive burn days. There has also been some dust created in the area from

hunting, fire wood gathering and other recreational uses. Due to the fact that wind events and storms take

place (that move or remove the particulates from the air) the impacts from smoke events are short term

(less than 2 weeks) and are not cumulative. There have been no large fires in the project area, but in 1999,

2000, 2002, 2008, and 2009 the air quality was impacted from large fires burning elsewhere in northern

California and Oregon. These smoke events depending on the prevailing winds and the high pressure

system aloft lasted from 2-3 days to 1-2 weeks. Again, due to the westerly flow of winds and

precipitation events dispersing the smoke, there were no cumulative impacts from smoke.

The proposed action of underburning/machine piling and burning would occur after the completion of the

thinning. It is estimated that these treatments would take 3-5 years to complete post-thinning. As long as

burning is conducted on permissive burn days and within the air quality constraints of Shasta County,

there should be no effect to the air quality of the project area. A wildfire that occurs within the project

area, or to the south and west, including wildfires on other forests within the region, could impact the air

quality of the area.

12

Alternative 2 - No Action

Fuels

The two things contributing to the existing fire situation in the project area are fire risk and fire

hazard. The project area is subject to fires caused by people and lightning. The risk of fire from

lightning cannot be changed and prevention efforts already exist in the project area to reduce the

number of human caused fires. The fire hazard to the project area is topography, slope, fuel

loading, vegetation structure and vegetation composition.

The timber stands in this project area will continue to increase in fuel loadings from needles, branches,

dead vegetation, and mortality in the timber stand. Under the existing conditions, the plantations and the

brush fields will continue to have the potential to burn as a high intensity wildfire. As the brush in both

the brush fields and plantations continues to age over the next 20 years the dead and down in the brush

would continue to increase. Due to the overstocking in the plantations, there is expected to be some

mortality that will increase the dead and down material, once the tree dies, and then over time falls down.

Trees 15 inches DBH and smaller do not last more than 2-3 years as snags, before they become a surface

fuel.

Fire Behavior

The fire behavior in the project area would be expected to increase. The fuel loadings (both surface fuel

and ladder fuels) will increase over time to change surface fires to passive crown fires and a passive

crown fire to an active crown fire. What will cause this change in fire behavior is that canopy base height

will decrease from the continued in growth of shade tolerant species. This change in vegetation will

decrease the flame length necessary to move a fire from the surface to the canopy. This decrease will

make it easier to establish a passive crown fire (torching) to active crown fire.

Air Quality This alternative would not create a short-term impact to the local areas from prescribed fire. The air

quality within the project area would remain within national and state levels for visibility, particulate

levels, and pollutants. The project area’s air quality is could be affected by pollutants from downwind

population centers such as the city of Redding, by agricultural, and adjacent private forest activities

producing seasonal dust and smoke, as well as recreational activities using dirt roads in and around the

project area. Instead, the risk of a major air-quality impact from a large wildfire burning in the area would

increase as the fuel loadings continue to increase.

In the event of large wildfires burning in the project area, the amount of smoke created is increased for

several reasons: more acres burned in a short period of time, burning under hotter and drier conditions so

the surface fuel consumption is increased, and green needles from the ladder fuels and canopy contribute

to smoke production. Due to summertime inversions, the smoke from wildfires gets trapped in the valleys

for periods of time (up to 2 to 3 weeks), as occurred during the summers of 1987, 1992, 1999, and 2000

(personall observations of local residents). During the summers of 1987, 1992, 1999, and 2000, large fires

burned in northern California. These fires burned to the south and the west of the project area within

several hundred miles and impacted the project area by reducing visibility. Depending on the weather

conditions and for how long the fires burn the visibility can be impacted for 2 to 3 weeks at a time. Due to

westerly winds and precipitation events the smoke is dispersed and does not have a long term cumulative

impact to the analysis area.

13

References

Anderson, Hal. E. 1982. Aids to determining fuel models for estimating fire behavior. General

Technical Report INT-122. USDA Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment

Station. Ogden, Utah.

Blonski, Kenneth S. and Schramel, John L. Oct. 1981 Photo Series for Quantifying Natural Forest

Residues: Southern Cascades, Northern Sierra Nevada

Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group (HFQLG) Forest Recovery Act FEIS, FSEIS and

RODs:(USDA FS 1999a, 1999b, 2003a, 2003b)

Maxwell, Wayne G. and Ward, Franklin R. Oct 1979 Photo Series for Quantifying Natural Forest

Residues: Sierra Mixed Conifer Type, Sierra True Fir Type

Maxwell, Wayne G. and Ward, Franklin R. 1976 Photo Series for Quantifying Natural Forest

Residues: Ponderosa Pine Type, Ponderosa Pine and Associated Species Type, Lodgepole Pine Type

R.F. Wagle, Thomas W. Eakle. 1979.”A Controlled Burn reduces the Impact of a Subsequent

Wildfire in Ponderosa Pine Vegetation Type”. Forest Science, Volume 25, No 1 1979, pages 123-

129

Reinhardt, E.D.; Keane, R.E. and Brown, J.K. 1997. First Order Fire Effects Model: FOFEM 4.0,

User’s Guide. USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station. Ogden UT.

Scott, Joe. H. and Burgan, Robert. E. 2005. Standard fire behavior fuel models: A comprehensive

set for use with Rothermel’s surface fire spread model. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-153.

USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station. Fort. Collins, CO.

Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (SNFPA) FEIS, FSEIS and RODs

(USDA FS 2001a, 2001b, 2004c)

Status of the Sierra Nevada, Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project “Final Report to Congress” Volume II,

Assessments and Scientific Basis for Management Options.

Graham R., McCaffrey S., Jain T., 2004: Science Basis for Changing Forest Structure to modify

Wildfire Behavior and Severity. Gen. Tech. Report RMRS-GTR-120 pages: 1, 12

Bekker, Matthew F. 1996, Fire History of the Thousand Lakes Wilderness, Lassen national Forest,

California, U.S.A. The Pennsylvania State University. The Graduate School Dept. of Geography

Carlton, D. 2005 Fuels Management Analyst Suite FMA Plus Users Guide to Using Fuels

Management Analyst, Fire Program Solutions.

14

Rothermel,R. 1983 How to Predict the Spread and Intensity of Forest and Range Fires. Gen. Tech.

Report INT-143.

Fuels Management Analyst Suite FMA Plus, Don Carlton, 2005. Fire Program Solutions L.L.C.

and Acacia Services.

Behave Plus, Andrews, Bevins, Seli, 2005. Rocky Mountain Research Station