 |
|
2008 Wildland Urban Interface and Fire Costs Position TO: FIRE SUPPRESSION INTERIM COMMITTEE
FROM: MONTANA FOREST OWNERS ASSOCIATION
DATE: January 31, 2008
RE: WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE (WUI) POSITION AND
************************************************************************************************************************
MFOA hereby submits its statement in response to the Committee’s request for recommendations regarding wildland fire-related issues in Montana:
The Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) consists of high density housing, low density housing and dispersed housing that is adjacent to fuel conditions that can burn with high intensity during wildfire season. Low density and dispersed density housing applies to many family forestland owners, which across the nation is defined as ownership of at least 10 forested acres and as the possession of a written and certified forest management plan. Lumping all of these different ownerships into a generic “WUI” is incorrect and highly misleading. It would be analogous to lump automobile drivers with good records together with intoxicated or reckless drivers with the statement that “all automobile drivers” are responsible for the majority of traffic deaths.
The terms “wildfire” and “wildfire hazard” define a very broad spectrum of situations that should not be applied equally. The most hazardous* fuel conditions (* those that cause the most property damage and injury to human and animal health) consist of large amounts of fine fuels such as cured tall grasses, brush and fine woody debris. Wildfire statistics show that range and brush fires have caused the most damage and injury to human health, not forest fires. Grass and brush fires can burn with high intensity and travel at great speeds, making fire suppression very difficult and dangerous. Forest fires can burn with great intensity in dense forests and/or with high surface fuel loading conditions, but do not typically travel with great speed. Most forest fires are contained in areas where fuel treatments have occurred that prevent active crown fires and thinned trees suppress understory fuels such as grasses and brush.
1. Non-Industrial Private Forest Owner (NIPF) Lands Enhance Suppressing wildfires usually results in two major costs: initial attack and large project fires. DNRC fire fighting numbers for 2006 show that initial attack has proven 94% effective for containing and suppressing fires (DNRC Fire & Aviation Management Reports). If initial attack was 100% effective, there would be no cost associated with large project fires. Wildfires start through a variety of causes. According to statistics that span decades, on average, human causes account for 50% of wildfires. The remaining 50% are lightning caused. The success of initial attack depends on three things: fuel loading, weather and speed of initial attack. Initial attack was successful on most of human caused fires. This is significant because human caused fires tend to occur where human activity is prevalent, and thus where access is available. Lightning caused fires can occur anywhere on the landscape, and those that occur in areas with difficult access invariably develop into project fires. Therefore, access is one of the key features for the success of initial attack---most NIPF lands have good access as opposed to public lands.
2. NIPF Lands Have a High Percentage of Forest Treated for Fuels---
Initial attack success also depends on the fuel loading in the ignition zone. Surface fuels and fuel ladders have been listed as the two most manageable factors that allow an ignition to develop into a non-suppressible crown fire. Tree canopy density is listed as a third significant factor. Recent proceedings in fire behavior and experimental analysis of different treatment effects on wildfire behavior, presented at the 3rd International Fire Congress, indicate that commercial thinning of trees coupled with surface fuels reduction is the most effective preventative for ignitions developing into crown fires. NIPF lands account for approximately 19% of the forested land base in Montana, and have provided an average of 30% of the logs harvested over the past 15 years. Public lands account for approximately 70% of the land base, yet have only provided 19% of the logs harvested (Bureau of Business and Economic Research, Univ. of Montana). Therefore, NIPF lands have been managed for lower density trees more than public ownerships. Also, since NIPF lands that are harvested commercially are held to the standards of the Hazardous Fuels Reduction Act, one could also conclude that harvested lands have had surface fuels reduced to appropriate levels. Take into additional account that a recent survey conducted by the Montana Forest Owners Association indicates that the average NIPF with a forest management plan has spent thousands of their own dollars to conduct fuel reduction treatments (EQC 2007 HJR10 Committee Minutes). Because of new and necessary fire fighter safety standards, direct attack on active large fires is not possible until weather or fuel conditions suppress extreme fire behavior. Back-burning has become the preferred containment method, which requires larger acreages, and is more difficult to conduct in areas with high fuel loading. Additionally, weather has become more extreme. Leading scientists and climatologists presenting at the above-mentioned Fire Congress all indicated that there is a high probability that extreme fire weather will become more prevalent over the next decades. 3. NIPF Landowners Are More Responsive to Managing Forest Mortality It is well established that many Montana forested landscapes have grown dense with trees over the past century due to a variety of factors: a prolonged cool wet climate cycle, fire suppression, past harvest-regeneration methods, intensive grazing, and other factors. As a result of a shift in the overall weather pattern (higher ambient temperatures, drought and wind) Montana forests are experiencing significant moisture stress, related mortality, and high fuel loading. Part of the climatic trend that has been occurring along with mild winters and hotter and longer summer drought is an increase in spring precipitation. This later phenomenon leads to greater grass, forb and shrub growth, which during the latter portion of the summer creates a heavy fine fuel bed. All of these factors result in greater fire suppression costs. 4. NIPF Lands Offer a Fire Suppression Buffer Around Towns and Cities-- When a large fire does occur, suppression teams must try and contain it if it threatens human life or investments. This along with initial attack is the DNRC wildland fire suppression mandate. The argument is often made that NIPF lands result in the increased need for suppression efforts and therefore also fire fighting expenses and risk, thus they are the greatest beneficiaries. First, NIPF landowners already pay a wildland fire suppression tax. Second, the first premise is severely flawed. Large fires must be contained at some point, (unless they are burning into wilderness in which case there is no NIPF benefit) thus containment efforts can either occur on NIPF lands, or they can occur along denser housing (community) boundaries. Both the Black Mountain (2003) and Black Cat (2007) fires on the outskirts of Missoula had the majority of the suppression activities successfully completed on NIPF lands which resulted in the protection of the City of Missoula. Fire behavior projections indicated that much of the city would have burned without these successful suppression activities. Similarly, several rural towns were threatened in the 2007 Seeley Lake fire and in the 2000 Blodgett fire, the town of Pinesdale next to Hamilton was the site of very intense fire suppression activities. 5. The Majority of Rural Landowners Are In the Middle Class or Lower Income Bracket The last part of wildland fire suppression costs addresses the issue of who is a NIPF landowner and who is not. With the increased number of houses being built into the wildland urban interface (WUI) there is a perception that NIPF landowners are primarily wealthy out-of-state “mansion” owners who want their own private playground. However, a close look at real estate values shows a slightly different picture. For a family to purchase and own a home in Missoula, for example, it is often more expensive to buy a house within the city limits than outside. While there are certain exclusive drainages (such as Pattee Canyon and Grant Creek) where homes and properties are outside the financial reach of middle class income families, the majority of rural landowners fall within the middle class or lower income bracket. Many of these homes exist because purchasing a home in town was outside of the families’ financial capability. According to state forest tax laws, a landowner must own at least 15 contiguous acres to qualify for a reduced timber tax rate. Landowners with holdings between 5 and 15 acres of forested land must pay a tract land property tax which is often 20-50 times the rate of classified forest land. However, under current tax code and for the purpose of being assessed the additional wildland fire tax, the land is still classified as “forested.” This is hypocrisy. 6. NIPF Landowners Should Be Rewarded and Not Penalized for Many other states offer forest management tax incentives to forested tracts as small as 5 acres because they realize that maintaining the productive capacity of the landscape is vital to the environment and economy. Taxing a majority of good forest land stewards because it is perceived that NIPF landowners are wealthy “mansion” owners, of which there obviously are a few, will have consequences that are the opposite of what is desired. Alternatively, offering tax incentives for NIPF landowners who productively manage their lands for reduced wildfire hazards and ecological and economic benefit will help maintain the many beneficial services these lands provide. Currently, the non-profit Montana Tree Farm System maintains a database of forest landowners with certified management plans. Additionally, the Forest Stewardship Program that is conducted jointly by the Montana DNRC and MSU Extension Forestry has helped landowners develop verified forest management plans on over 800,000 acres of NIPF lands. These landowners should be rewarded for their efforts, not penalized. It is the position of the Montana Forest Owners Association that the “Wildland Urban Interface (WUI)” is defined as dense housing developments where individual ownerships consist of less than 10 acres and adjoin unmanaged forest lands. Rural forest landowners who manage their lands for fire hazard reduction both around their homes and on the landscape, such that their forests do not promote crown fires and exhibit characteristics that aid in fire suppression should be rewarded by communities in helping provide a solution to wildfire control and communities’ wildfire risk reduction. |
|
©
2005 Montana Forest Landowners Network
|