1. The Wildfire Risk Reduction Grant Program Effectiveness Assessment and Program Overview Brett Wolk, Chad Hoffman, Claire Griebenow, and Tony Cheng January 14 th, 2015, Front Range Roundtable LR Team Meeting, Lakewood, CO Colorado Forest Restoration Institute, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 970-491-8055, brett.wolk@colostate.edubrett.wolk@colostate.edu

2. Wildfire Risk Reduction Grant Program 2013 Colorado State Assembly authorized $9.8 million from general funds for fire mitigation. Non-federal lands in Colorado 50-50 match required (25% hard match) Vegetation Management – Very Flexible – Large fuel breaks – Defensible space – Egress/Ingress – Equipment and Infrastructure

3. 26 47 28 29 & 30 36 31 32 35 38 33 & 34 45 44 43 42 41 52 51 50 49 48 27 46 39 40 Fuel Break Roadside D-space Equipment /Other All WRRG Awards Through September 2014 53 37 18 22 6 6 4 4 25 24 16 17 19 14 23 21 20 10 13 5 5 2 2 8 8 15 12 11 7 7 1 1 9 9 3 3 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89

5. Wildfire Risk Reduction Grant Program The Future of the WRRG Program – Hearing Tomorrow!!

6. Colorado Forest Restoration Institute Role in the WRRG Program Additional effectiveness assessment – more than a quick walk through and pictures. Purpose: To inform the DNR and fire/forestry practitioners about fuel hazard mitigation effectiveness and ways to improve future treatments. – Audience: State/Politicians Stakeholders and managers

7. Monitoring and Assessment Goals: Education and Outreach…

8. Effectiveness Assessment Strategy Pre and Post Treatment Fuels Measurements

9. 47 36 31 44 43 51 49 27 39 Fuel Break Roadside D-space Equipment /Other WRRG Awards With CFRI Fuels Assessment Plots as of September 2014 22 6 6 4 4 25 24 17 19 14 5 5 2 2 9 9 3 3

10. Predicts relative fire hazard from 0 (low fire hazard) to 9 (high). Peer reviewed. Free. Easy to use and interpret results. Comprehensive fuels assessment. Applicable across vegetation types and geography. Fuel Characteristic Classification System FCCS

11. Fuels Characteristic Classification System Fire Potential Ratings (0-9) PrePost Surface Fire Behavior Potential 33 Summary surface fire behavior potential, calculated as the maximum of spread potential and flame length potential scaled to an index between 0-9. Reaction potential 2. 1 Approximates the potential reaction intensity (energy released per unit area and time). Spread potential 3. 5 3.3 Proportional to the no-wind rate of spread in surface fuel (distance per unit time). Flame length potential 2. 1 2 Proportional to fireline intensity or flame length. Crown Fire Potential 31 Weighted average of crown fire subpotentials. Crown fire initiation potential 1. 7 1.6 Potential for fire to reach canopy layer. Crown-to-crown transmissivity potential 4. 5 0 Potential for fire to carry through a canopy. Crown fire spreading potential. 2. 9 1.5 Relative index of crown fire rate of spread. Available Fuel Potential 21 Sum of fuel loadings in all combustion phases scaled to an index between 0-9. Flame available fuel potential 1. 1 0.8 Sum of fuel loadings available for the flaming phase of combustion (in units of 10 tons/acre). Smoldering available fuel potential 0. 4 Sum of fuel loadings available for the smoldering phase of combustion (in units of 10 tons/acre). Residual available fuel potential 0. 3 0 Sum of fuel loadings available for the residual smoldering phase of combustion (in units of 10 tons/acre).

12. Pre vs. Post Treatment Surface Fuels Herbaceous Shrubs Trees Accomplishments to date: Round 1 and 2 funding only. 38 of 52 grants with at least 1 site visit. 21 of 52 grants with plots.  32 treatment units with plots. ~270 pre-treatment plots statewide. Developing Sampling Methods for FCCS Inputs

13. Preliminary Results

14. Pre-Treatment

15. Post-Treatment

16. Pre-Treatment

17. Post-Treatment

18. FCCS Fire Potential Ratings (0-9) PrePost Surface Fire Behavior Potential43 Reaction potential2.1 Spread potential3.63.3 Flame length potential2.12.0 Crown Fire Potential32 Crown fire initiation potential2.52.4 Crown-to-crown transmissivity potential4.30.0 Crown fire spreading potential2.82.1 Available Fuel Potential22 Flame available fuel potential0.91.5 Smoldering available fuel potential0.70.3 Residual available fuel potential0.00.2 Ponderosa Pine SURFACE FIRE BEHAVIOR PrePost Fireline reaction intensity (BTU/ft 2 /min): 708 Rate of spread (ft/min): 3.43.0 Flame Length (ft): 1.11.0

19. Overall Preliminary Conclusions For WRRG Effectiveness Assessment Clear objectives = better mitigation. Most current treatments focus on reducing crown fire hazard, and are successful at that objective when aggressive. Surface fuels and slash disposal is a barrier to fire mitigation success. – Many treatments do not change and/or increase surface fuel quantity and continuity.

20. Objective: Reduce wildfire hazard through vegetation management. Shared Treatment Goals: – Tree’s Survive Post Fire. – Reduce Post Fire Erosion. – Increase Fire Suppression Safety and Effectiveness. WRRG Program Goals

21. Are Fire Hazard Mitigation Goals Met? Mitigation Goal: Tree’s Survive Post Fire Reduce Post Fire Erosion Increase Fire Suppression Safety and Effectiveness Objective: Reduce wildfire hazard through vegetation management.

22. Are Fire Hazard Mitigation Goals Met? Mitigation Goal: Crown Fire Hazard Tree’s Survive Post Fire Maybe Reduce Post Fire Erosion Maybe Increase Fire Suppression Safety and Effectiveness Yes Objective: Reduce wildfire hazard through vegetation management.

23. Are Fire Hazard Mitigation Goals Met? Mitigation Goal: Crown Fire Hazard Surface Fire Hazard Tree’s Survive Post Fire MaybeNo Reduce Post Fire Erosion MaybeNo Increase Fire Suppression Safety and Effectiveness YesMaybe Objective: Reduce wildfire hazard through vegetation management.

24. 1. Utilization Opportunities 2. Prescribed Fire SOLUTIONS

25. Why Should Roundtable Care? Lots of work on private lands. Landscape Scale. Private Lands becoming receptive to monitoring and LEARNING. WRRG monitoring program has created hunger for information. – Efficient and effective treatment methods.

26. Opportunities for Learning Exchange Private Negotiate individual tree removal with homeowners. No NEPA – opportunity for innovative techniques, also continue to repeat failures. USFS Negotiate landscape treatments with public groups. NEPA moderates management – slows advances, but ensures minimum best practices.

27. Thanks!

28. Options for Woody Slash Disposal Mastication Chipping Slash pile burn Broadcast burn Leave branches on site (lop and scatter) Pay to have it hauled out (stewardship contract) Find a buyer Give away for free All options have ecological benefits and drawbacks