The Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan

Home , Klamath Tribes, Link River, Modoc Point, Winema (sternwheeler)

2017

Bridgeview Consulting, LLC 915 No. Laurel Lane | Tacoma, WA 98406 | 253.380.5736 5/1/2017

The Klamath Tribes’ HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN

DRAFT 1 – MAY 2017

Prepared for: The Klamath Tribes P.O. Box 436 501 Chiloquin Blvd. Chiloquin, OR 97624

Prepared by:

Bridgeview Consulting, LLC Bridging the Gap in Emergency Management Services 915 No. Laurel Lane Tacoma, WA 98406 Tel 253.301.1330 Fax 253.460.8220

Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgments ...... xii Executive Summary ...... 1 Plan Development Methodology ...... 2 Phase 1—Organize and Review ...... 2 Phase 2—Risk Assessment ...... 3 Phase 3—Engage the Public ...... 3 Phase 4—Assemble the Plan ...... 3 Phase 5—Plan Adoption and Maintenance ...... 4

PART 1 — THE PLANNING PROCESS ...... 1 Chapter 1. General Information ...... 1-1 1.1 Purpose and Authority ...... 1-1 1.1.1 The Klamath Tribes’ Response to DMA...... 1-1 1.1.2 Progress Report of 2007 Hazard Mitigation Plan ...... 1-2 1.1.3 Funding Sources ...... 1-3 1.2 Implementation and Assurances ...... 1-4 1.3 Who Will Benefit From This Plan? ...... 1-5 1.4 How to Use This Plan ...... 1-5 1.5 Changes Between the 2007 and 2017 Plan Update ...... 1-5 Chapter 2. Planning Process ...... 2-1 2.1 Planning Resource Organization ...... 2-1 2.1.1 Funding of the 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan ...... 2-1 2.1.2 Defining the Planning Area ...... 2-1 2.1.3 Formation of the Tribal Hazard Mitigation Planning Team ...... 2-3 2.1.4 Planning Team Meetings...... 2-3 2.1.5 Coordination with Other Agencies ...... 2-4 2.1.6 Review of Existing Information ...... 2-5 2.1.7 Public Involvement ...... 2-6 2.1.8 Plan Development Chronology/Milestones ...... 2-10 2.2 Risk Assessment Overview ...... 2-12 2.2.1 Identification of Hazards of Concern ...... 2-13

PART 2 — COMMUNITY PROFILE ...... 1 Chapter 3. Klamath Tribes Profile ...... 3-1 3.1 Mission ...... 3-1 3.2 History and Location...... 3-1 3.3 Health and Social Service Programs ...... 3-2 3.4 Tribal Governance ...... 3-2 3.5 Tribal Departments ...... 3-3 3.6 Land and Infrastructure ...... 3-3 3.7 Cultural Heritage ...... 3-4 3.8 Demographics ...... 3-4 3.8.1 Tribal Membership and Population ...... 3-5

i Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation Plan

3.8.2 Population Change ...... 3-6 3.8.3 Social Vulnerability ...... 3-7 3.8.4 Age Distribution ...... 3-7 3.8.5 Income ...... 3-8 3.8.6 Race, Ethnicity and Language ...... 3-9 3.8.7 Disabled Populations ...... 3-9 3.8.8 Economy ...... 3-9 3.8.9 Tourism ...... 3-10 Chapter 4. Planning Area Characteristics ...... 4-1 4.1 Location ...... 4-1 4.2 Geography ...... 4-1 4.3 Natural Resources ...... 4-5 4.4 Climate ...... 4-6 4.5 Major Past Hazard Events ...... 4-6 Chapter 5. Integration of Planning Efforts ...... 5-1 5.1 Land Use Development Profile ...... 5-1 5.1.1 Current Land Use and Development Trends ...... 5-1 5.1.2 Age of Building Stock ...... 5-4 5.1.3 Residential Development ...... 5-4 5.1.4 Non-Residential Development ...... 5-5 5.1.5 Critical Facilities ...... 5-5 5.1.6 Tribal Infrastructure ...... 5-8 5.1.7 Roadways ...... 5-8 5.1.8 Public Transportation ...... 5-8 5.1.9 Bridges ...... 5-8 5.1.10 Rail ...... 5-9 5.1.11 General Public Safety Information ...... 5-9 Chapter 6. Capability Assessment ...... 6-1 6.1 Existing Regulations ...... 6-5 6.1.1 Federal ...... 6-5 6.1.2 State-Level Planning Initiatives ...... 6-7 6.1.3 Tribal ...... 6-7

PART 3 — RISK ASSESSMENT ...... 1 Chapter 7. Hazard Identification and RISK ASSESSMENT Methodology ...... 7-1 7.1 Overiew ...... 7-1 7.2 Hazard Identification and Profiles ...... 7-2 7.3 Risk Assessment Process and Tools ...... 7-3 7.3.1 Hazus and GIS Applications ...... 7-6 7.4 Probability of Occurrence and Return Intervals ...... 7-8 7.5 Limitations ...... 7-8 Chapter 8. Climate Change Considerations ...... 8-1 8.1 What is Climate Change? ...... 8-1 8.2 How Climate Change Affects Hazard Mitigation ...... 8-1 8.3 Current indications of Climate Change ...... 8-2 8.3.1 Global Indicators ...... 8-2 8.4 Projected Future Impacts ...... 8-2 8.4.1 Global Projections ...... 8-2

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

8.5 Responses to Climate Change ...... 8-3 8.5.1 Mitigation and Adaptation ...... 8-3 8.5.2 Data Limitations ...... 8-4 8.6 Potential Climate Change Impact on Hazards ...... 8-4 8.6.1 Dam Failure ...... 8-4 8.6.2 Drought ...... 8-4 8.6.3 Earthquake ...... 8-5 8.6.4 Flood ...... 8-5 8.6.5 Landslide ...... 8-6 8.6.6 Severe Weather ...... 8-6 8.6.7 Severe Winter Weather ...... 8-7 8.6.8 Volcano ...... 8-8 8.6.9 Wildfire ...... 8-9 Chapter 9. Dam Failure ...... 9-1 9.1 General Background ...... 9-1 9.1.1 Types of Dams ...... 9-1 9.1.2 Causes of Dam Inundation or Dam Failure ...... 9-1 9.1.3 Dam Removal ...... 9-2 9.1.4 Regulatory Oversight ...... 9-3 9.2 Hazard Profile ...... 9-4 9.2.1 Extent and Location ...... 9-4 9.2.2 Previous Occurrences ...... 9-7 9.2.3 Severity ...... 9-7 9.2.4 Frequency ...... 9-8 9.3 Vulnerability Assessment ...... 9-8 9.3.1 Overview ...... 9-8 9.3.2 Impact on Life, Health and Safety ...... 9-9 9.3.3 Impact on Property ...... 9-9 9.3.4 Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ...... 9-10 9.3.5 Impact on the Economy ...... 9-10 9.3.6 Impact on the Environment ...... 9-11 9.4 Results ...... 9-11 9.5 Future Development Trends ...... 9-11 9.6 Issues ...... 9-12 Chapter 10. Drought ...... 10-1 10.1 General Background ...... 10-1 10.2 Hazard Profile ...... 10-1 10.2.1 Extent and Location ...... 10-1 10.2.2 Previous Occurrences ...... 10-2 10.2.3 Severity ...... 10-3 10.2.4 Frequency ...... 10-7 10.3 Vulnerability Assessment ...... 10-7 10.3.1 Overview ...... 10-7 10.3.2 Impact on Life, Health and Safety ...... 10-8 10.3.3 Impact on Property ...... 10-9 10.3.4 Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ...... 10-9 10.3.5 Impact on Economy ...... 10-9 10.3.6 Impact on Environment ...... 10-9 10.4 Results ...... 10-10 10.5 Future Development Trends ...... 10-10

iii Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation Plan

10.6 Issues ...... 10-10 Chapter 11. Earthquake ...... 11-1 11.1 General Background ...... 11-1 11.1.1 Earthquake Classifications ...... 11-2 11.2 Hazard Profile ...... 11-6 11.2.1 Hazard Mapping ...... 11-6 11.2.2 Effect of Soil Types ...... 11-6 11.2.3 Extent and Location ...... 11-9 11.2.4 Previous Occurrences ...... 11-16 11.2.5 Severity ...... 11-19 11.2.6 Frequency ...... 11-20 11.3 Vulnerability Assessment ...... 11-22 11.3.1 Overview ...... 11-22 11.3.2 Impact on Life, Health and Safety ...... 11-22 11.3.3 Impact on Property ...... 11-23 11.3.4 Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ...... 11-24 11.3.5 Impact on Economy ...... 11-31 11.3.6 Impact on Environment ...... 11-33 11.4 Results ...... 11-33 11.5 Future Development Trends ...... 11-33 11.6 Issues ...... 11-33 Chapter 12. Flood ...... 12-1 12.1 General Background ...... 12-1 12.1.1 Flooding Types ...... 12-2 12.1.2 Measuring Floods and Floodplains ...... 12-3 12.1.3 Flood Insurance Rate Maps ...... 12-3 12.1.4 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) ...... 12-5 12.2 Hazard Profile ...... 12-9 12.2.1 Extent and Location ...... 12-9 12.2.2 Previous Occurrences ...... 12-10 12.2.3 Severity ...... 12-11 12.2.4 Frequency ...... 12-11 12.3 Vulnerability Assessment ...... 12-11 12.3.1 Overview ...... 12-11 12.3.2 Impact on Life, Health and Safety ...... 12-12 12.3.3 Impact on Property ...... 12-13 12.3.4 Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ...... 12-13 12.3.5 Impact on Economy ...... 12-14 12.3.6 Impact on Environment ...... 12-14 12.4 Results ...... 12-15 12.5 Future Development Trends ...... 12-15 12.6 Issues ...... 12-15 Chapter 13. Landslide ...... 13-1 13.1 General Background ...... 13-1 13.2 Hazard Profile ...... 13-3 13.2.1 Extent and Location ...... 13-3 13.2.2 Previous Occurrences ...... 13-4 13.2.3 Severity ...... 13-9 13.2.4 Frequency ...... 13-9

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

13.3 Vulnerability Assessment ...... 13-11 13.3.1 Overview ...... 13-11 13.3.2 Impact on Life, Health and Safety ...... 13-12 13.3.3 Impact on Property ...... 13-12 13.3.4 Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ...... 13-14 13.3.5 Impact on Economy ...... 13-14 13.3.6 Impact on Environment ...... 13-16 13.4 Results ...... 13-16 13.5 Future Development Trends ...... 13-16 13.6 Issues ...... 13-17 Chapter 14. Severe Weather ...... 14-1 14.1 General Background ...... 14-1 14.1.1 Rain Shadow Effect...... 14-1 14.2 Hazard Profile ...... 14-12 14.2.1 Extent and Location ...... 14-12 14.2.2 Previous Occurrences ...... 14-17 14.2.3 Severity ...... 14-20 14.2.4 Frequency ...... 14-22 14.3 Vulnerability Assessment ...... 14-23 14.3.1 Overview ...... 14-23 14.3.2 Impact on Life, Health and Safety ...... 14-23 14.3.3 Impact on Property ...... 14-24 14.3.4 Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ...... 14-25 14.3.5 Impact on Economy ...... 14-25 14.3.6 Impact on Environment ...... 14-26 14.4 Results ...... 14-26 14.5 Future Development Trends ...... 14-26 14.6 Issues ...... 14-27 Chapter 15. Volcano ...... 15-1 15.1 General Background ...... 15-1 15.2 Hazard Profile ...... 15-1 15.2.1 Extent and Location ...... 15-1 15.2.2 Previous Occurrences ...... 15-4 15.2.3 Severity ...... 15-4 15.2.4 Frequency ...... 15-7 15.3 Vulnerability Assessment ...... 15-7 15.3.1 Overview ...... 15-7 15.3.2 Impact on Life, Health and Safety ...... 15-8 15.3.3 Impact on Property ...... 15-9 15.3.4 Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ...... 15-9 15.3.5 Impact on Economy ...... 15-10 15.3.6 Impact on Environment ...... 15-10 15.4 Results ...... 15-10 15.5 Future Development Trends ...... 15-10 15.6 Issues ...... 15-10 Chapter 16. Wildfire ...... 16-1 16.1 General Background ...... 16-1 16.1.1 Wildland-Urban Interface Areas ...... 16-2 16.1.2 Wildfire Behavior...... 16-5

v Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation Plan

16.1.3 Wildfire Impact ...... 16-6 16.1.4 Identifying Wildfire Risk ...... 16-6 16.1.5 Secondary Hazards ...... 16-7 16.2 Hazard Profile ...... 16-7 16.2.1 Extent and Location ...... 16-7 16.2.2 Previous Occurrences ...... 16-7 16.2.3 Severity ...... 16-11 16.2.4 Frequency ...... 16-12 16.3 Vulnerability Assessment ...... 16-14 16.3.1 Overview ...... 16-14 16.3.2 Impact on Life Health & Safety ...... 16-14 16.3.3 Impact on Property ...... 16-15 16.3.4 Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ...... 16-18 16.3.5 Impact on Economy ...... 16-18 16.3.6 Impact on Environment ...... 16-19 16.4 Results ...... 16-19 16.5 Future Development Trends ...... 16-19 16.6 Issues ...... 16-20 Chapter 17. Other Hazards of Concern ...... 17-1 17.1 General Background ...... 17-1 17.2 Health Hazards ...... 17-1 17.2.1 Epidemic or Pandemic ...... 17-1 17.3 Terrorism ...... 17-2 17.3.1 Types of Terrorists ...... 17-3 17.3.2 Terrorism-Related Threats ...... 17-4 17.3.3 Bioterrorism ...... 17-9 17.3.4 Incendiary Devices ...... 17-9 17.3.5 Potential Threat Elements ...... 17-9 17.4 Cybersecurity ...... 17-11 17.5 Hazardous Materials Incidents ...... 17-12 17.6 Infrastructure and Utility Failure ...... 17-13 17.7 Hazard Profile ...... 17-14 17.7.1 Extent and Location ...... 17-14 17.7.2 Previous Occurrences ...... 17-15 17.7.3 Severity ...... 17-20 17.7.4 Frequency ...... 17-23 17.8 Vulnerability Assessment ...... 17-25 17.8.1 Overview ...... 17-25 17.8.2 Impact on Life, Health and Safety ...... 17-25 17.8.3 Impact on Property ...... 17-26 17.8.4 Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ...... 17-26 17.8.5 Impact on Economy ...... 17-27 17.8.6 Impact on Environment ...... 17-27 Chapter 18. Hazard Ranking ...... 18-1

PART 4 — MITIGATION STRATEGY ...... 1 Chapter 19. Mitigation Strategy...... 19-1 19.1 Goals and Objectives ...... 19-1 19.1.1 Goals ...... 19-1

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS

19.1.2 Objectives ...... 19-1 19.2 Mitigation Action Item Identification and Analysis ...... 19-2 19.3 Benefit/Cost review ...... 19-12 19.4 Action Plan Prioritization ...... 19-13 19.5 2007 Action Plan Status ...... 19-15 19.6 Additional Hazard Mitigation Projects ...... 19-27 Chapter 20. Implementation ...... 20-1 20.1 Plan Adoption ...... 20-1 20.2 Plan Maintenance Strategy ...... 20-3 20.2.1 Plan Implementation ...... 20-3 20.2.2 Planning Team ...... 20-3 20.2.3 Annual Progress Report ...... 20-4 20.2.4 Plan Update ...... 20-4 20.2.5 Continuing Public Involvement ...... 20-5 20.2.6 Incorporation into Other Planning Mechanisms ...... 20-5 References ...... 1 Appendix A. Acronyms and Definitions ...... 1 Acronyms ...... 1 Definitions...... 2 Appendix B. Public Outreach Survey ...... 1 Appendix C. Example Progress Report ...... 1

vii Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation Plan

LIST OF TABLES No. Title Page No. Table 1-1 Grant Opportunities ...... 1-4 Table 2-1 Planning Membership and Attendance ...... 2-3 Table 2-2 Plan Development Milestones ...... 2-11 Table 3-1 US Census Data for All Klamath Tribes ...... 3-5 Table 3-2 US Census Data for Klamath Tribe (Only) ...... 3-5 Table 3-3 US Census Data for Modoc Tribe (Only) ...... 3-6 Table 3-4 Population Change 2010-2015 ...... 3-6 Table 3-5 Projected Population Growth ...... 3-6 Table 3-6 Annual Vistor Estimates in Person Per Nights ...... 3-11 Table 4-1 Presidential Disaster Declarations for Klamath Tribes...... 4-7 Table 5-1 Critical Facilities ...... 5-6 Table 6-1 Legal and Regulatory Capability ...... 6-1 Table 6-2 Administrative and Technical Capability ...... 6-3 Table 6-3 Fiscal Capabilities ...... 6-4 Table 6-4 On-Going Mitigation Efforts ...... 6-5 Table 9-1 Dams within the Klamath Tribal Planning Area ...... 9-4 Table 9-2 Corps of Engineers Hazard Potential Classification ...... 9-8 Table 9-3 Structures Potentially Exposed to Link River Dam Inundation ...... 9-10 Table 10-1 Drought Occurrences ...... 10-3 Table 11-1 Comparison of Mercalli Scale and Peak Ground Acceleration ...... 11-5 Table 11-2 Historical Earthquakes Impacting the Planning area ...... 11-18 Table 11-3 Age of Structures Within Planning Area ...... 11-24 Table 11-4 Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities From 100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake Event .. 11-26 Table 11-5 Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities From 500-Year Probabilistic Earthquake Event .. 11-27 Table 11-6 Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities From Klamath falls M6.5 Earthquake Event ...... 11-28 Table 11-7 Functionality of Critical Facilities for 100-Year Probabilistic Event ...... 11-29 Table 11-8 Functionality of Critical Facilities for 500-Year Probabilistic Event ...... 11-30 Table 11-9 Functionality of Critical Facilities for Klamath falls M6.5 Earthquake Event ...... 11-31 Table 11-10 Earthquake Economic Loss Potential ...... 11-32 Table 12-1 NFIP Policy Statistics ...... 12-7 Table 12-2 NFIP Losses Paid Out...... 12-7 Table 12-3 Flood Events Impacting Planning Area Since 1956 ...... 12-10 Table 12-4 Area and Structures in the 100-Year Floodplain ...... 12-13 Table 13-1 Landslide Events Since 1965 ...... 13-4 Table 13-2 Population and Residential Impact in Moderate Landslide Risk Area ...... 13-12 Table 13-3 Percent of Land Area in Landslide Risk Areas ...... 13-13 Table 13-4 Structures by Building Type Exposed to Moderate Landslide Hazards ...... 13-13 Table 13-5 Potential Building Losses in Landslide Risk Area ...... 13-13 Table 14-1 Severe Weather Declarations Impacting the Tribal Planning Area Since 1964 ...... 14-17 Table 14-2 Probability of Severe Wind Event ...... 14-22 Table 14-3 Potential Building Losses Due to Severe Weather Hazard...... 14-25 Table 15-1 Potential Structure Impact From Ash Accumulation ...... 15-9 Table 16-1 Wildland Urban Interface Communities ...... 16-4 Table 16-2 Historic WildFires in Klamath and Lake Counties ...... 16-9 Table 16-3 1967 – 2015 WildFires in Klamath and Lake Counties by Cause ...... 16-11 Table 16-4 Population Within Fire Regime Areas ...... 16-15 Table 16-5 Planning Area Structures Exposed to LANDFIRE Fire Regime 1 ...... 16-16 Table 16-6 Planning Area Structures Exposed to LANDFIRE Fire Regime 2 ...... 16-16

viii TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table 16-7 Planning Area Structures Exposed to LANDFIRE Fire Regime 3 ...... 16-16 Table 16-8 Planning Area Structures Exposed to LANDFIRE Fire Regime 4 ...... 16-16 Table 16-9 Estimated Loss Potential for LANDFIRE Fire Regime 1 ...... 16-17 Table 16-10 Estimated Loss Potential for LANDFIRE Fire Regime 2 ...... 16-17 Table 16-11 Estimated Loss Potential for LANDFIRE Fire Regime 3 ...... 16-17 Table 16-12 Estimated Loss Potential for LANDFIRE Fire Regime 4 ...... 16-17 Table 16-13 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Exposed to Fire Regime Areas ...... 16-18 Table 17-1 Event Profiles for Terrorism ...... 17-4 Table 17-2 Potential Threat Elements ...... 17-10 Table 18-1 Calculated Priority Risk Index Description ...... 18-2 Table 18-2 Klamath Tribes Calculated Priority Ranking Scores ...... 18-3 Table 18-3 Hazard Score and Rank ...... 18-3 Table 18-4 Vulnerability Level of Impact ...... 18-4 Table 19-1 Objectives ...... 19-2 Table 19-2 Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix ...... 19-5 Table 19-3 Prioritization of Mitigation Initiatives ...... 19-14 Table 19-4 2007 Mitigation Action Plan Status ...... 19-16

LIST OF FIGURES No. Title Page No. Figure 2-1 Planning Area ...... 2-2 Figure 2-2 Survey Announcement in 4th Quarter 2016 Newsletter...... 2-7 Figure 2-3 Klamath Tribes’ Risk Assessment Open House ...... 2-9 Figure 2-4 Tribal Website - Initial News Release ...... 2-10 Figure 3-1 Klamath Tribes 2013 Restoration PowWow ...... 3-2 Figure 3-2 Tribal Community Center Elder's Program (Chiloquin) ...... 3-3 Figure 3-3 Statewide Social Vulnerability Index ...... 3-7 Figure 4-1 Geography of Klamath Tribal Planning Area ...... 4-2 Figure 4-2 Geography of Analysis Area with Topography ...... 4-3 Figure 4-3 Central Oregon Region as Defined by EPA and Oregon State HMP ...... 4-4 Figure 4-4 Major Geographic Features of EPA Region 6...... 4-4 Figure 4-5 Klamath River Basins...... 4-5 Figure 4-6 Average Annual Precipitation Amounts...... 4-6 Figure 5-1 Major Public Land Distribution in Tribal Planning Area ...... 5-3 Figure 5-2 Child/Day Care Facility in Chiloquin ...... 5-4 Figure 5-3 Tribal Critical Facilities ...... 5-7 Figure 8-1. Global Carbon Dioxide Concentrations Over Time ...... 8-1 Figure 8-2 Severe Weather Probabilities in Warmer Climates ...... 8-7 Figure 8-3. Change in Snowfall, 1930-2007 ...... 8-8 Figure 9-1 Historical Causes of Dam Failure ...... 9-2 Figure 9-2 Dams Along the Klamath River ...... 9-3 Figure 9-3 Dam Locations – Klamath Tribal Planning Area ...... 9-5 Figure 9-4 Link River (Upper Klamath Lake) Dam ...... 9-6 Figure 10-1 Palmer Z Index Short-Term Drought Conditions (June 2016) ...... 10-4 Figure 10-2 Palmer Drought Severity Index (July 2016)...... 10-5 Figure 10-3 Percent Area Experiencing Drought Conditions ...... 10-5 Figure 10-4 Nationwide Precipitation Rankings ...... 10-6 Figure 10-5 Palmer Hydrological Drought Index May 2016 ...... 10-6

ix Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation Plan

Figure 11-1 Source Areas for Subduction Zone, Crustal and Intraplate Earthquakes ...... 11-2 Figure 11-2 Statewide NEHRP Soils Classifications...... 11-7 Figure 11-3 Liquefaction Susceptibility Map ...... 11-7 Figure 11-4 Liquefaction Susceptibility in Tribal Planning Area ...... 11-8 Figure 11-5 Oregon State Active Faults ...... 11-9 Figure 11-6 USGS Known Faults and Earthquake Events in the Klamath Tribal Planning Area ...... 11-9 Figure 11-7 Quaternary Faults in Tribal Planning Area ...... 11-10 Figure 11-8 100 Year Probabilistic Earthquake ...... 11-12 Figure 11-9 500 Year Probabilistic Earthquake ...... 11-13 Figure 11-10 Klamath Falls 6.5M Scenario ...... 11-14 Figure 11-11 Cascadia 9.0M Scenario ...... 11-15 Figure 11-12 Location of Earthquake Swarms ...... 11-16 Figure 11-13 1993 Rockslide in US Highway 97 ...... 11-17 Figure 11-14 Damages Sustained During 1993 Klamath Falls Earthquake ...... 11-17 Figure 11-15 PGA with 2-Percent Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years, Northwest Region ...... 11-19 Figure 11-16 Probabilistic Earthquake Hazard - 2% Chance of Occurrence in Next 50 Years ...... 11-21 Figure 11-17 Annual Rate of Earthquake Occurrence in Oregon - 5-Year Increments ...... 11-21 Figure 12-1 Example of an Alluvial Fan ...... 12-2 Figure 12-2 Flood Hazard Area Referred to as Floodplain ...... 12-3 Figure 12-3 Special Flood Hazard Area ...... 12-4 Figure 12-4 Klamath County Special Flood Hazard Areas ...... 12-6 Figure 12-5 December 1964 Flood Event ...... 12-10 Figure 13-1 Deep Seated Slide...... 13-3 Figure 13-2 Shallow Colluvial Slide ...... 13-3 Figure 13-3 Bench Slide ...... 13-3 Figure 13-4 Large Slide ...... 13-3 Figure 13-5 Historic Landslide Points in Oregon ...... 13-5 Figure 13-6 DOGAMI Historic Landslide Data within the Tribal Planning Area ...... 13-6 Figure 13-7 DOGAMI Historically Active Landslides - Chiloquin and Klamath Falls Area ...... 13-7 Figure 13-8 Mapped Landslide Characteristics in Klamath County ...... 13-8 Figure 13-9 DOGAMI Landslide Susceptibility Map ...... 13-10 Figure 13-10 Landslide Risk to Critical Facilities ...... 13-15 Figure 14-1 Rain Shadow Effect ...... 14-2 Figure 14-2 The Thunderstorm Life Cycle ...... 14-2 Figure 14-3 Lightning Fatalities by State, 1959-2013 ...... 14-4 Figure 14-4 State Ranking of Lightning Fatalities by Population 2005-2014 ...... 14-4 Figure 14-5 Annual Average Wind Speed ...... 14-6 Figure 14-6 Windstorm Tracks Impacting the Pacific Northwest ...... 14-7 Figure 14-7 Peak Wind Gusts for October 1962 Windstorm ...... 14-8 Figure 14-8 Hanukkah Eve Windstorm of December 13, 2006 ...... 14-8 Figure 14-9 Types of Precipitation ...... 14-9 Figure 14-10 NWS Wind Chill Index ...... 14-10 Figure 14-11 Average Number of Weather Related Fatalities in the U.S. (2015) ...... 14-12 Figure 14-12 Average Annual Precipitation ...... 14-13 Figure 14-13 Average Maximum Temperature ...... 14-14 Figure 14-14 Average Minimum Temperature ...... 14-15 Figure 14-15 Wind Power Resource ...... 14-16 Figure 14-16 Klamath County Monthly Average Wind Speed ...... 14-17 Figure 14-17 Peak Gust Comparison- 2007 Great Coastal Gale and 1962 Columbus Day Storm ...... 14-20 Figure 14-18 Heat Index Chart ...... 14-21 Figure 14-19 Adverse Effects of Prolonged Exposures to Heat on Individuals ...... 14-22

x TABLE OF CONTENTS

Figure 14-20 Severe Weather Probabilities in Warmer Climates ...... 14-23 Figure 14-21 December 14, 2016 Snow Event - Klamath Tribes Administration Building ...... 14-23 Figure 15-1 Volcano Hazard ...... 15-2 Figure 15-2 Past Eruptions of Cascade Volcanoes ...... 15-2 Figure 15-3 Historic Volcanoes in Proximity to Tribal Planning Area ...... 15-3 Figure 15-4 One-year probability of Tephra Accumulation - Cascade Range...... 15-5 Figure 15-5 Defined Tephra Layers Associated with Historical Eruptions ...... 15-5 Figure 15-6 Volcano Hazard Zones from Three Sisters ...... 15-6 Figure 15-7 Volcano Hazard Zones from Crater Lake ...... 15-6 Figure 15-8 Monitoring Equipment ...... 15-8 Figure 16-1 Wildfire Threat in Oregon ...... 16-2 Figure 16-2 Wildland Urban-Interface Areas in Klamath and Lake Counties ...... 16-3 Figure 16-3 Wildfire Behavior Triangle ...... 16-5 Figure 16-4 Location of Historical Fires in Planning Area ...... 16-8 Figure 16-5 Moccasin Hills Fire, July 2014 ...... 16-10 Figure 16-6 LANDFIRE Fire Regimes in the Tribal Planning Area ...... 16-13 Figure 16-7 Measures to Protect Homes from Wildfire ...... 16-20 Figure 17-1 June 2016 Mosier, Oregon Union Pacific Train Derailment ...... 17-13 Figure 17-2 Number of Terrorist Plots against United States 1983-2015...... 17-16 Figure 17-3 Accounting of Active Shooter Incidents Throughout the United States 2000-2013 ...... 17-17 Figure 17-4 FBI Location Categories of Active Shooter Incidents 2000-2013 ...... 17-18 Figure 17-5 Bomb Threat Stand-Off Distance Data - TSWG ...... 17-21 Figure 17-6 FBI Bomb Threat Standoff Distance ...... 17-22 Figure 17-7 Explosive Impact ...... 17-23 Figure 20-1 Resolution Adopting Hazard Mitigation Plan ...... 20-2

xi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Project Manager Shayleen T. Allen, Planning Director The Klamath Tribes 501 Chiloquin Blvd Chiloquin, OR 97624 Office: (541) 783-2219 x166

Consultants Bev O’Dea, Project Manager and Lead Planner, Bridgeview Consulting, LLC Ed Whitford, GIS Analyst, Bridgeview Consulting, LLC. Adam Palmer, Research Analyst, Bridgeview Consulting, LLC.

xii

Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA; Public Law 106-390) is the latest federal legislation enacted to encourage and promote proactive, pre-disaster planning as a condition of receiving financial assistance under the Robert T. Stafford Act. The DMA emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur. Under the DMA, a pre-disaster hazard mitigation program and requirements for the national post-disaster hazard mitigation grant program were established.

In recognition of tribal sovereignty and the government-to-government relationship that currently exists between FEMA and Indian Tribal governments, FEMA amended 44 CFR 201 at 72 Fed. Reg. 61720 on October 31, 2007, and provided further amendments on September 16, 2009, amending 74 Fed. Reg. 47471 to consolidate and clarify the requirements for Indian Tribal governments. These amendments established protocol for Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plans to be separate from State and Local Mitigation Plans. It also finalized the Mitigation Planning Guidelines, which became effective March 2010. It is under those guidelines which this Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plan was developed. At the time the previous Hazard Mitigation Plan was developed in 2007, Tribal standards were based to a great extent to those requirements of a State-level plan as there was no other guidance in place specific to tribes. To the greatest extent possible, information from the 2007 plan has been incorporated into this document; however, given the difference in guidance used for the two plans and the age of the existing plan, this document should, for all intents and purposes, be considered a new plan, meeting the 2010 guidance criteria.

For consistency, 44 CFR 201.2 defines Indian Tribal Government as any Federally recognized governing body of an Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian Tribe under the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a.

The DMA encourages tribes, states, and local authorities to work together on pre-disaster planning, and it promotes sustainability as a strategy for disaster resistance. “Sustainable hazard mitigation” includes ●●● the sound management of natural resources, local economic and social resiliency, and the recognition “Whole Community is an approach to emergency that hazards and mitigation must be understood in the management that reinforces the fact that FEMA is largest possible social and economic context. The only one part of our nation’s emergency enhanced planning network called for by the DMA management team; that we must leverage all of the helps local governments articulate accurate needs for resources of our collective team in preparing for, protecting against, responding to, recovering from mitigation, resulting in faster allocation of funding and mitigating against all hazards; and that and more cost-effective risk reduction projects. collectively we must meet the needs of the entire community in each of these areas. This larger Embracing this initiative as a foundation for proactive collective emergency management team includes, planning as well as FEMA’s “whole community not only FEMA and its partners at the federal level, approach,” the Klamath Tribes have developed this but also local, tribal, state and territorial partners; Update to the Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation non-governmental organizations like faith-based Plan in an effort to reduce loss of life and property and non-profit groups and private sector industry; resulting from disasters. While it is impossible to to individuals, families and communities, who predict exactly when and where disasters will occur, continue to be the nation’s most important assets as first responders during a disaster.” or the extent to which they will impact the Tribes, with careful planning and collaboration among the –FEMA relevant parties, it is possible to minimize losses that can occur from disasters. This has been and will http://www.fema.gov/whole-community continue to be the driving force behind this plan ●●● development. Utilizing the three primary

ES-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

characteristics of mitigation efforts to retreat, accommodate, or protect, the Klamath Tribes will develop techniques and practices that will contribute to the environment by developing non-regret actions which create multiple positive outcomes.

For planning purposes, Hazard Mitigation is defined as a way to reduce or alleviate the loss of life, personal injury, and property damage that can result from a disaster through long-term strategies. It involves strategies such as planning, policy changes, programs, projects, and other activities that can mitigate the impacts of hazards on the Klamath Tribes. It recognizes that the responsibility for hazard mitigation lies with many, including private property owners; business and industry; and Tribal, local, state, and federal governments.

Many elements went into making this Tribal Mitigation plan a success. The Tribes’ Planning Team was instrumental in providing ideas, concepts, historical data and information, discussions, and support needed to develop this plan. Development of the update was completed in coordination with the Planning Team members and the Tribes’ consultants, Bridgeview Consulting, LLC.

PLAN DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY Development of the hazard mitigation plan included five phases: • Phase 1—Organize and review • Phase 2—Risk assessment • Phase 3—Engage the public • Phase 4—Assemble the plan • Phase 5—Plan adoption

Phase 1—Organize and Review Under this phase, the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team (hereinafter Planning Team) was assembled to oversee the development of the plan update. The Planning Team consisted of Tribal staff and Tribal members, other stakeholders in the planning area, and a consultant who provided technical support to the Planning Team. Coordination with other tribal, county, state, and federal agencies involved in hazard mitigation occurred from the onset of this plan’s development through its completion. A multi-media public involvement strategy which centered on a hazard preparedness questionnaire/survey was developed during Phase 1, as well as identification of public presentations at various events which were scheduled to occur during the plan’s development. Also occurring during Phase 1 was a comprehensive review of the Tribes’2007 Hazard Mitigation Plan, Klamath County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan (2010), Oregon State’s Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan (2015), and a comprehensive review of existing programs within the planning area that may support or enhance hazard mitigation actions. A key function of the Planning Team was to review and update existing goals as appropriate, and to develop measurable objectives for the 2017 update.

For future planning purposes, the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team adopted December 31, 2016 as the end date for incidents, information, and data incorporated in this plan. Future planning efforts shall commence with incidents and information beginning January 1, 2017 forward.

ES-2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Phase 2—Risk Assessment Risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential loss of life, personal injury, economic injury, and property damage resulting from natural hazards. This process assesses the vulnerability of people, buildings, cultural resources, and infrastructure to natural hazards. It focuses on the following parameters: • Hazard identification and profiling • Identification of Cultural resources • The impact of hazards on physical, cultural, social and economic assets • Vulnerability identification • Estimates of the cost of damage or costs that can be avoided through mitigation.

The risk assessment for this hazard mitigation plan meets the requirements outlined in Chapter 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR). Phase 2 occurred simultaneously with Phase 1, with the two efforts using information generated by one another to generate valid data, supported by sound analysis.

Phase 3—Engage the Public Specific to Tribal plans, 44 CFR 201.7 states that Tribal governments may define who they feel constitute “public” within the planning realm, as many Tribal members have difficulty or apprehension about how to honor traditional beliefs and cultural attributes while still fully participating in the mitigation planning process.

Under this phase, a public involvement strategy was developed by the Planning Team that maximized the capabilities of the Tribes, while still maintaining their cultural beliefs and responsibilities to the Elements. The Planning Team provided information necessary for inclusion within the document. One of the first steps taken was the development of a contact list which included individuals whose input was needed to complete this plan to its fullest capacity. Additionally, the strategy also included: Tribal Council Government updates; public meetings to review the draft plan; distribution of the draft plan to planning committee members; utilization of a hazard mitigation survey; use of the Tribes’ existing website dedicated to the plan, and media releases throughout various stages in the process. Public engagement also included information from the counties within the geographic boundary of the Tribes - Klamath and Lake Counties. Throughout the course of this project, numerous meetings were held, in addition to briefings provided to various stakeholders involved in this effort. This strategy was deemed by the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team as a key function in the success of this planning effort.

Phase 4—Assemble the Plan The Planning Team assembled key information from Phases 1 and 2 into a document to meet the DMA requirements. Under 44 CFR 201.7, a Tribal Hazards Mitigation Plan must include the following: • A description of the Planning process • Risk assessment • Mitigation Strategy – Goals – Review of alternatives – Prioritized “action plan” • Plan Maintenance section

ES-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

• Documentation of Adoption

Phase 5—Plan Adoption and Maintenance The Tribes elected to adopt the plan prior to submission to FEMA Region X in an effort to expedite FEMA’s approval process. Within the adoption Resolution, the Tribal Council authorized any potential revisions which were deemed necessary by FEMA to correct any errors or deficiencies within the document as written. The Planning Director was tasked with briefing the Council on any such required changes. A copy of the Resolution is included in Chapter 20.

This document, as written, includes a plan implementation and maintenance section that details the formal process for ensuring that the plan remains an active and relevant document. The plan maintenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating the plan’s progress annually and producing a plan revision every 5 years. This process seeks to keep a steering body that meets the criteria of the original Hazard Mitigation Planning Team intact to perform this annual review, albeit it will be referred to as a planning team. This phase includes strategies for continued public involvement and incorporation of the recommendations of this plan into other planning mechanisms of the Tribes, such as the comprehensive plan, capital improvement plan, building code, and development design guidelines.

Each Phase of development is further described within the following chapters.

ES-4

Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation Plan

PART 1 — THE PLANNING PROCESS

CHAPTER 1. GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY The federal Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) emphasizes the importance of planning for disasters before they occur by requiring tribes, states, and local governments to develop hazard mitigation plans as a condition for federal grant assistance. The DMA (Public Law 106-390; approved by Congress October 10, 2000), amended the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by repealing its previous mitigation planning provisions and replacing them with a new set of requirements that emphasize the need to closely coordinate mitigation planning and implementation.

Hazard Mitigation Plan Requirements for Indian Tribal Governments Requirements for Indian Tribal governments were consolidated and clarified when the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) amended Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR; Section 201) on October 31, 2007 (72 Fed. Reg. 61720) and again on September 16, 2009 (74 Fed. Reg. 47471). These amendments were made in recognition of the status of tribal sovereignty and the government- to-government relationship between FEMA and Indian Tribal governments. They established a protocol for Tribal hazard mitigation plans to be separate from state and local mitigation plans. Final mitigation planning guidelines became effective March 2010. Tribal hazard mitigation plan requirements differ from local hazard mitigation plan requirements, and are more like the requirements for a state-level type plan. This Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) for the Klamath Tribes was developed under those guidelines. The federal statutes define Indian Tribal Government as “any Federally recognized governing body of an Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian Tribe under the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479(a)” (44 CFR 201.2).

The Klamath Tribes’ Response to DMA

Underlying Principles of the DMA The intent behind hazard mitigation is to reduce or alleviate loss of life, personal injury, property, and environmental damage that can result from a disaster through long- and short-term strategies. It involves planning, policy changes, programs, projects, and other activities that can mitigate the impacts of hazards. The responsibility for hazard mitigation lies with many, including private property owners; business, industry, and local, state, and federal government. The DMA encourages tribes, states, and local authorities to work together on pre-disaster planning, promoting sustainability for disaster resistance. Sustainable hazard mitigation includes the sound management of cultural and natural resources, local economic and social resiliency, and the recognition that hazards and mitigation must be understood in the largest possible social and economic context. The enhanced planning network called for by the DMA helps tribes and governments articulate accurate needs for mitigation, resulting in faster allocation of funding, and more cost-effective risk reduction projects.

In an effort to support the underlying principles of the DMA, with technical assistance provided to the Klamath Tribes by FEMA in 2007, the Klamath Tribes developed their first Hazard Mitigation Plan. This 2017 Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation Plan Update demonstrates the Tribes’ continued efforts to ensure the safety of their Tribal members, staff, and visitors to the Tribal Planning Area, while continuing to be a good stewards to the environment by practicing sound and sensible mitigation efforts.

1-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

This 2017 update has been developed in accordance with requirements of the DMA, including criteria addressing the planning process, risk assessment, mitigation strategy, plan maintenance, and the adoption process. To the greatest extent possible, data from the 2007 plan has been incorporated into this updated document; however, as planning requirements and guidance have changed significantly, there are new additions to this document which were previously not addressed. Likewise, some materials from the 2007 plan were considered no longer relevant, accurate, or applicable, and were therefore removed. Throughout this document, reflection to the 2007 plan is made when data was incorporated. The 2007 plan was utilized as a starting point and was fully reviewed during this update process by all Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Members.

Progress Report of 2007 Hazard Mitigation Plan

Since the 2007 HMP was approved, the Klamath Tribes focused many of its resources on other planning efforts (identified throughout this document) in an attempt to better serve the population and increase economic growth throughout the Tribal Planning Area. As such, the initial plan maintenance strategy detailed within the 2007 plan was not followed as closely as the Tribes would have liked as there were limited resources to dedicate to this effort. In addition, the Tribes are also required to adhere to many additional planning requirements than those of a local government, further taxing limited resources and personnel. The plan maintenance strategy as written within the 2017 HMP Update requires an annual review, which the hazard mitigation planning team determined to be more in line with their existing capabilities. Appendix C of this document provides a reporting tool which the Tribes will utilize to conduct this annual review. While the intentions for the 2007 plan were to conduct regular reviews, including the actual projects, the tracking and reporting of those efforts did not occur as outlined in the original plan.

The initial hazard mitigation planning effort produced a partnership that embraced the concept of risk reduction through proactive mitigation. The Tribes were able to complete or initiate actions on some of the mitigation initiatives which were developed in the 2007 plan; however, not all of the previously identified action items were completed. In addition, due to the age of the previous plan, some of the action items are no longer viable. A detailed accounting of the 2007 strategies are presented in Chapter 19 of this document.

In addition to implementation of some of the 2007 mitigation strategies, the Tribes have developed a number of different plans and completed several studies, all of which have enhanced the Tribes’ ability to support mitigation-friendly infrastructure development. During development of these various planning efforts, data from the 2007 Hazard Mitigation Plan was integrated to the greatest extent possible, with the HMP data serving as a starting point. A detailed list of the various efforts which support mitigation is contained within the Capability Matrix (Chapter 6).

Integrating mitigation efforts into the daily practices the Tribes has become common-place to a large extent. A number of Tribal Departments’ daily practices support mitigation, including: the Planning Department, Natural Resources Department, Culture & Heritage Department, watershed restoration efforts, and the Tribal Fisheries Program. These departments, as well as others, have continued to incorporate mitigation activities into various day-to-day functions. A few examples of those efforts include: land use development projects emphasizing smart planning by utilizing the risk data to assist in selecting site locations; building materials and standards based on recommended codes, and overall assessment of the communities’ usage of new construction to determine if multiple purposes exist, such as a community center which can also be used as a shelter.

During planning stages, project development includes prioritizing mitigation impacts, such as the project’s proximity to 100-year flood levels; its landslide risk; fire suppression efforts; and assessing the impact of climate change. An excellent example of assessing the impact of climate change occurred during the Tribes’ water system planning. The Tribes considered year-round flow levels, which have been, and will

1-2 GENERAL INFORMATION continue to be, impacted by climate change and potential drought conditions which have persisted throughout the entire planning area. This assessment was completed to limit negative impact to aquatic habitats in the area. This also happened to be a mitigation action item identified in the 2007 plan.

The updated version of the hazard mitigation action plan is a key element of this plan. For the purpose of this document, mitigation action items are defined as: activities designed to reduce or eliminate losses resulting from the impacts of natural hazards of concern. It is through the implementation of the action plan that the Klamath Tribes can strive to become disaster-resilient through sustainable hazard mitigation.

Although one of the driving influences for preparing this plan was grant funding eligibility, that is not the focus of this plan, but rather, an added benefit. It was important to the Tribes that they examine initiatives that would work through all phases of emergency management and that contribute to, rather than remove from, the environment. It was significant to the Tribal Members that the mitigation efforts include mainstreaming adaptive, ‘no-regrets’ strategies which improved their abilities to live with the Elements, while not adversely impacting their beliefs and culture. They have adopted a philosophy of accommodate, retreat, or protect when developing their mitigation strategies. As such, some of the initiatives outlined in this plan are not grant-eligible, and grant eligibility was not the focus of the selection. Rather, the focus was on the initiatives’ effectiveness in achieving the goals of the plan, and whether or not they are within the Tribes’ capabilities. Detailed descriptions for these actions can be found in Chapter 19.

Funding Sources

Once the 2017 Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plan is approved by FEMA, the Tribes will again be eligible for funding under the Stafford Act. FEMA grant programs provide various funding opportunities to support mitigation planning and projects to reduce potential disaster damages. It is the intent of the Tribes to pursue grant opportunities in the future to assist in mitigating against the Tribes’ hazards of concern. Some of those current grant opportunities available which support mitigation efforts are delineated in Table 1-1. Additional funding sources are identified within the Strategy section of this document (Chapter 19).

1-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 1-1 GRANT OPPORTUNITIES

Hazard Mitigation Enabling Plan Requirement Program Legislation Funding Authorization Grantee Sub-Grantee Public Assistance, Categories A-B (e.g., debris Stafford Act Presidential Disaster   removal, emergency protective measures) Declaration Public Assistance, Categories C-G (e.g., repair Stafford Act Presidential Disaster   of damaged infrastructure, publicly owned Declaration buildings) Individual Assistance (IA) Stafford Act Presidential Disaster   Declaration Fire Management Assistance Grants Stafford Act Fire Management  □ Assistance Declaration Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) Stafford Act Presidential Disaster □ □ Planning Grant Declaration HMGP Project Grant Stafford Act Presidential Disaster   Declaration Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Planning Grant Stafford Act Annual Appropriation   PDM Project Grant Stafford Act Annual Appropriation   Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) National Flood Annual Appropriation   Insurance Act Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) National Flood Annual Appropriation  □ Insurance Act Repetitive Flood Claims (RFC) National Flood Annual Appropriation  □ Insurance Act Tribal Homeland Security Dept. of Homeland Annual Appropriation  □ Security

 = Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plan Required □ = No Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plan Required

1.2 IMPLEMENTATION AND ASSURANCES Full implementation of the recommendations of this plan will require time and resources. This plan reflects an adaptive management approach in that specific recommendations and plan review protocols are provided to evaluate changes in vulnerability and action plan prioritization after the plan is adopted. The true measure of the plan’s success will be its ability to adapt to the ever-changing climate of hazard mitigation. Funding resources are always evolving, as are programmatic changes based on new mandates. The Klamath Tribes have a long-standing tradition of proactive response to issues that may impact its members. The Tribes are forward thinking, and strive whenever possible to improve the lives of its members, and the residents living in the Tribal Planning Area. This tradition is reflected in the development of this plan, as it is not an easy task to accomplish. The Tribal Council will assume responsibility for adopting the recommendations of this plan and committing Tribal resources towards its implementation. The framework established by this plan

1-4 GENERAL INFORMATION will help identify a strategy that maximizes the potential for implementation based on available and potential resources. It commits the Tribes to pursue initiatives when the benefits of a project exceed its costs and adequate resources are available. Most important, the Tribes developed this plan with community input. These techniques will set the stage for successful implementation of the recommendations in this plan.

As established within 44 CFR 13.11(c), the Tribal Government will continue to comply with all applicable federal statutes and regulations in effect, including those periods during which the Tribes receive grant funding. In compliance with 44 CFR 13.11(d), the Tribes, whenever necessary, will reflect new or revised federal statutes or regulations, or any material changes in Tribal policy or operation. It is understood that the Tribes will submit those amendments for review and approval in coordination with FEMA Region X.

1.3 WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM THIS PLAN? All tribal members and businesses of the Klamath Tribes are the ultimate beneficiaries of this hazard mitigation plan. The plan reduces risk for those who live in, work in, and visit the Klamath Tribes’ Planning Area. It provides a viable planning framework for all foreseeable natural hazards. Participation in development of the plan by Tribal Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Members (and outside stakeholders as requested by the Tribes) helped ensure that outcomes will be mutually beneficial. The plan’s goals and recommendations can lay groundwork for the development and implementation of local mitigation activities and partnerships.

1.4 HOW TO USE THIS PLAN This hazard mitigation plan is organized into four primary parts, each of which includes elements required under federal guidelines to attain plan approval: • Part 1— Introduction • Part 2— The Planning Process • Part 3— Community Profile • Part 4— Risk Assessment • Part 5—Mitigation Strategy.

The following appendices provided at the end of the plan include information or explanations to support the main content of the plan: • Appendix A—A glossary of acronyms and definitions. • Appendix B—Public outreach information, including the hazard mitigation questionnaire and summary and documentation of public meetings. • Appendix C—An example template for progress reports to be completed as this plan is implemented.

1.5 CHANGES BETWEEN THE 2007 AND 2017 PLAN UPDATE Significant differences exist between the 2007 and 2017 Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plan. Most significant is the development by FEMA in 2010 of standards and requirements which must be met by the Tribes in order to obtained an approved plan status. The previous plan was based on state-level standards, some of which were impossible for the Tribes to achieve. This plan, in its entirety, meets the requirements of 44 CFR 201.7. This document is also intended to meet the mitigation plan requirements for the 2017 Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance (final guidance pending Congressional approval).

1-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

For planning purposes, all incidents occurring since completion of the 2007 plan through December 31, 2016 have been recorded and included in this plan. The Tribes’ next update should commence with incidents and information occurring January 1, 2017 forward.

The plan itself is a comprehensive update of all data, and includes best available science which has been enhanced since completion of the 2007 plan. New studies, reports and scientific data has been reviewed, and all risk data has been updated to the greatest extent possible with that new data (discussed in detail in the profiles).

Hazards previously identified in the 2007 plan were reviewed and carried over as determined appropriate by the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team. Some of the weather events were re-grouped into a “Severe Weather” chapter, and Climate Change was added as a stand-alone issue; however, no risk assessment was completed with respect to climate impacts due to limited data and unknown specific impacts. A new profile was added for “Other Hazards,” which includes both human caused and technological hazards of concern.

Based on the risk assessment, all maps, charts, graphics, and associated data has been updated to reflect current findings. Specific methodology for how each assessment was completed is included in the hazard profile information, and in Chapter 7, Section 7.1.1.

There were some limitations to the updated risk assessment, addressed in Chapter 7, Section 7.1.2. Limited data was available for the Flood profile, and therefore, FEMA’s 1984 Flood Study is the same as utilized for the 2007 plan; however, new structure data was utilized to conduct the risk assessment, which provides a more accurate and valid loss estimation. Likewise, there are no dam inundation studies available for use in the assessment.

A different method was utilized for the risk ranking of the hazards of concern, discussed in Chapter 18. The approach utilized is simplistic in nature, and will make future updates less difficult.

Social Vulnerability is also addressed in greater detail in this plan, as well as information concerning programs and efforts in place to help address issues associated with social vulnerability.

Structure data was modified to include only tribal structures, adding new structures and land mass acquired by the Tribes since 2007, and removing other structures which were utilized in the 2007 plan, but which were not owned by the Tribes. This will more accurately reflect the actual losses which the Tribes can potentially experience as a result of hazard impact. In addition, it was discovered during the 2007 process, some structures identified were misplaced when geocoding occurred; those errors have been corrected as best possible.

Census data was updated with the most current data available; however, there are limitations with respect to US Census data, as only very limited information was available specific to the Klamath Tribes and its Tribal Planning Area.

The Capabilities Assessment was greatly enhanced to include a clearer perspective as to the capabilities of the Tribes, while also demonstrating areas on which focus must be given with respect to deficiencies which exist. In many instances, those deficiencies were identified as potential action items/strategies within Chapter 19. The 2007 Goals were reviewed and updated; objectives were also developed for the 2017 edition.

The plan maintenance strategy which was identified in 2007 has been modified, with a template provided which can be utilized for future planning updates. Specific strategies and action items identified in the 2007 plan have been discussed in detail in Section 19.5, the 2007 Action Plan Status Table. Those strategies

1-6 GENERAL INFORMATION carried over to the 2017 plan are identified, and new strategies and action items are identified, also within Chapter 19.

A different form of strategy prioritization was utilized for this planning process, the previous plan utilizing STAPLEE. This effort utilized a High/Medium/Low rating (defined in Chapter 19), which allows for the inclusion of new projects at regular intervals without necessitating the requirement for re-prioritization of all strategies identified.

Additional items which reflect differences between the 2007 and 2017 plan update are referenced throughout the plan itself where appropriate and significant.

1-7

CHAPTER 2. PLANNING PROCESS

2.1 PLANNING RESOURCE ORGANIZATION The process followed to develop the Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation Plan had the following primary objectives, which are discussed in detail in the following sections: • Secure grant funding • Define the planning area • Establish a planning team • Coordinate with other agencies • Review existing programs • Engage the public (as defined by the Tribes)

Funding of the 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan

This planning effort was supplemented by a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The Klamath Tribes applied for a grant in 2015, and funding was appropriated in 2016. The Klamath Tribes qualified as a small impoverished community as described in FEMA’s FY 2015 PDM requirements. The grant provided funding for 90 percent of the cost associated with development of the Hazard Mitigation Plan, with the Klamath Tribes providing 10 percent through in-kind contributions.

Defining the Planning Area

This document constitutes a Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plan for the Klamath Tribes. The Plan covers the lands within boundaries of the 1954 Klamath Indian Reservation, in both Klamath and Lake Counties, as well as an additional analysis area that includes Reservation trust lands located outside of the 1954 boundary. Although the Klamath Tribes do not own all of the land within the 1954 Reservation boundary, the Tribes maintain treaty-reserved property rights on the Reservation lands, including, but not limited to, hunting, fishing, trapping, and gathering rights. Collectively, these areas are referred to throughout this plan as the Tribal Planning Area.

The Klamath Tribes’ Congressionally-established Service Area is Klamath County. Primary tribal member population centers within Klamath County are in the Klamath Falls, Chiloquin, and Sprague River/Beatty areas. These population centers are located some distance from one another, but tribal members travel between the areas frequently. The Tribes’ 1954 Reservation boundary also crosses over to Lake County; however, no structures are situated within Lake County, and therefore, no loss data is available. In some instances, such as when identifying previous disaster events, Lake County data is included for future plan updates and land use development should the Tribes elect to develop any of this land.

While no specific locations or items of cultural significance have been identified within this document in an effort to protect the areas and items, they have been considered within this planning process and risk assessment analysis, as well as strategy development. The entire Reservation is considered to be of cultural significance, as are additional areas within the Tribal Planning Area. As such, this process includes all of the people, property, infrastructure, and natural environment within the entire Tribal Planning Area. The Planning Area and identified study region for this plan update is shown in Figure 2-1. The solid boundary

2-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

line depicts the 1954 Reservation boundary. The dash boundary line depicts the additional planning area that includes additional Reservation trust parcels.

Figure 2-1 Planning Area

2-2 PLANNING PROCESS

Formation of the Tribal Hazard Mitigation Planning Team

Hazard mitigation planning enhances collaboration and support among diverse parties whose interests can be affected by hazard losses. A Tribal Hazard Mitigation Planning Team (hereinafter may be referred to as Planning Team) made up of various Tribal staff was formed to help provide information and input into the plan development and lead the effort with respect to the actual drafting of the plan. The members of this team included key Klamath Tribal staff, planners, and tribal members. Other stakeholders from within the planning area were also identified by Tribal Staff to provide relevant information. The Klamath Tribes also retained Bridgeview Consulting, LLC., to assist with development and implementation of the plan. The Bridgeview Consulting project manager, Beverly O’Dea, assumed the role of the lead planner, reporting directly to the Klamath Tribes’ Project Manager and Planning Director, Shayleen Allen. Table 2-1 lists the members of the team.

Planning Team Meetings

The Planning Team agreed to meet as needed throughout the course of the plan’s development in workshop type settings. These meetings occurred in person, via emails, webinar meetings, and conference calls. The Planning Team addressed a set of objectives based on the work plan established for the plan. Various members met beginning August 2016 through the plan’s completion, soliciting subject matter expertise from team members as needed depending on the issue being addressed. Meeting agendas, notes and attendance logs are available for review upon request to the Klamath Tribes’ Planning Director, Shayleen Allen.

TABLE 2-1 PLANNING MEMBERSHIP AND ATTENDANCE

Name AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE Shayleen Allen ✓ X✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ Klamath Tribes Planning Director and Project Manager (541) 783-2219 Anna Bennett ✓ X ✓ ✓ X ✓ X ✓ ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X Roads Program Manager Klamath Tribes George Lopez ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X Tribal Administrator Klamath Tribes Carl White ✓ X ✓ ✓ X ✓ X ✓ ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X GIS Analyst Natural Resources Dept. Klamath Tribes [email protected] Betty Case, Office Manager ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Klamath Tribes Natural Resources Dept. Perry Chocktoot, Director ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Klamath Tribes Culture and Heritage

2-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 2-1 PLANNING MEMBERSHIP AND ATTENDANCE

Name AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE Marvin Garcia, Director ✓ X ✓ ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓ Social Services Dept. Klamath Tribes [email protected] Taylor Tupper ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X✓ ✓ Public Information Officer Klamath Tribes Roberta Sexton, Manager ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ Klamath Tribes Housing Dept. Kathy Rich, Administrative Officer ✓ ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X Klamath Tribes Lenni Kaler ✓ X ✓ ✓ X ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓ Land Use Department Klamath Tribes Brett Holt, FEMA Region X ✓ X ✓ X ✓ X Braden Allen, FEMA Region X ✓ X Beverly O’Dea, Bridgeview ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Consulting, LLC Project Manager and Lead Planner (253) 301-1330 [email protected] Ed Whitford, Bridgeview ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Consulting, LLC Senior GIS Analyst Adam Palmer, Bridgeview ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Consulting, LLC Tribal Liaison, Finance & Research

Coordination with Other Agencies

Opportunities for involvement in the planning process must be provided to neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation, agencies with authority to regulate development, businesses, academia, and other private and nonprofit interests (44 CFR, Section 201.7(b)). This task was accomplished by the planning team as follows: • Planning Team Involvement—Tribal department and various agency representatives were invited to participate on the Planning Team. • Agency Notification and/or Use of Information—The following agencies were notified of the planning effort, provided relevant data, invited to participate in the plan development process, or were kept apprised of plan development milestones: – U.S. Dept. of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs – U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Services – FEMA Region X – Oregon Office of Emergency Management – Oregon Department of Transportation

2-4 PLANNING PROCESS

– U.S. Dept. of Interior, Bureau of Land Management – Oregon Department of Forestry, Fire Protection Division These agencies received meeting announcements, meeting agendas, and meeting minutes by e- mail throughout the plan development process. These agencies supported the effort by attending meetings or providing feedback on issues. • Pre-Adoption Review— Agencies listed above were provided an opportunity to review and comment on this plan, primarily through the Tribe’s website, which was utilized for the hazard mitigation plan update. E-mails were distributed containing informing concerning draft review, as well as a link to download the plan if desired. • Newsletters—In addition to the above, the Tribes distribute a regular newsletter, which announced plan development and milestones. The newsletter also directed Tribal members to the newly developed website, and the on-line survey. • Press Release – The Tribes also distributed a press release which announced the planning effort, and provided the address to the Hazard Mitigation Survey, asking citizens to complete the document.

Review of Existing Information

Chapter 6 of this plan provides a detailed overview of existing information, laws, and ordinances in effect within the planning area that can affect hazard mitigation initiatives. As a whole, hazard mitigation planning must include review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information (44 CFR, Section 201.7(c)(1)(iii)), such as those identified below, many of which can affect mitigation within the planning area: • Klamath Tribes Constitution • Klamath Tribes 2007 Hazard Mitigation Plan • Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (2007) • Klamath Tribes Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (draft format) • Klamath County Hazard Mitigation Plan • Klamath County Comprehensive Plan (draft version). • Klamath County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (Multi-Jurisdictional, 2007) • Klamath Reservation Forest Management Plan – “A Plan for the Klamath Tribes’” (2008) • Klamath County Comprehensive Economic Development — Emerged from a planning process developed with broad-based community participation to address the economic problems and potential of the planning area. • State of Oregon Enhanced Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (2015) • Various watershed restoration project reports • Various papers and studies concerning the impacts of climate change in the Klamath Tribal Planning Area • Interpretive Map Series (IMS)-20: Earthquake Hazard Maps and Seismic Risk Assessment for Klamath County, Oregon (2002). • Various FEMA damage assessment documents and reports concerning damages from 1993 earthquake impact.

2-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

• Various studies, reports and data from Oregon’s Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) • West Wide Wildfire Risk Assessment Final Report (2013)

An assessment of all Klamath Tribes regulatory, technical, and financial capabilities to implement hazard mitigation initiatives is presented in Chapter 5. Many of these relevant plans, studies and regulations are cited in the capability assessment.

Public Involvement

Broad public participation in the planning process helps ensure that diverse points of view about the planning area’s needs are considered and addressed. The public must have opportunities to comment on disaster mitigation plans during the drafting stages and prior to plan approval (44 CFR Section 201.7(b), 201.7(c)(1)(i) and 201.7(c)(1)(ii)). For this planning effort, “public” is defined as tribal members, tribal employees, the contractor, and some members of surrounding jurisdictions. While surrounding jurisdictions and governmental agencies had some involvement in the planning effort, the Planning Team was limited to Tribal members, Tribal employees, and the contractor. Part of the reason for this decision was to preserve information concerning the Tribes’ cultural resources.

The Tribes did extensive outreach and used different methods to increase involvement, such as pairing meetings with existing Tribal Council meetings, providing Web-based data, and scheduling conference calls that allowed participation by agencies and individuals. Interviews were also conducted with individuals and specialists from outside organizations. Those interviews identified common concerns related to natural and manmade hazards, and key long- and short-term activities to reduce risk.

The Planning Team developed a comprehensive public involvement strategy using websites, media sources, and utilized existing meetings to gain input on the process. The Tribes utilized their website to post announcements and draft plan materials wherein notices and survey links were posted. During meetings (both Tribal and non-tribal meetings) Planning Team Members discussed the planning effort, and directed interested parties to the website to gain better insight of the Tribes’ endeavors, and to solicit input. Planning Team Members also identified non-tribal stakeholders who possessed relevant information, which were queried for specific data for inclusion in the plan update.

Strategy The strategy for involving the public in this plan emphasized the following elements: • Include Tribal Members and Tribal Staff on the planning team. Including Tribal Staff would include members who are not Tribal. • Use a questionnaire/survey to determine general perceptions of risk and support for hazard mitigation and to solicit direction on alternatives. This outreach was not limited to tribal members, but was to all planning participants. The questionnaire was available to anyone wishing to respond via the website, as well as distributed by hand during Tribal survey team deployments. The Tribes also posted a news release in the Tribal Newsletter, seeking response and input. • Utilize the Tribes’ Public Information Officer to serve as lead public outreach facilitator to distribute mitigation-related information and efforts. • Utilize existing distribution lists to disseminate and capture relevant information. These lists historically have reached thousands of individuals, both tribal and non-tribal.

2-6 PLANNING PROCESS

• Identify and involve planning area stakeholders (non-tribal).

Planning Team Input The majority of the members of the Planning Team live or work in the Klamath Tribal Planning Area. The make-up of the Planning Team proved to be integral in the success of this planning effort. This helped to add a historical perspective to this committee that proved to be valuable in identifying direction for the plan development process. Members of the existing team were also on the original team, which provided additional historic knowledge which supported the update process as review and intent of the old plan was discussed, and update options applied.

Survey A Hazard Mitigation Survey was developed by the Planning Team Members. The survey, distributed throughout the planning area, was designed to help identify vulnerable areas; to gauge household preparedness, and to identify the level of knowledge of tools and techniques that assist in reducing risk and loss from hazards. The answers helped guide the Planning Team in selecting goals, objectives, and mitigation strategies. The survey was disseminated throughout the planning area by multiple means, including hardcopy distribution of the surveys at council meetings. Additionally, a web- based version of the survey was made available on the hazard mitigation plan website. Surveys were also made available at Tribal office locations in hardcopy format. Figure 2-2 announces the survey in the Klamath News 4th Quarter Newsletter, which is distributed electronically and hardcopy to tribal members. The Tribes utilized the Newsletters regularly to announce ongoing efforts with respect to the survey, and on-going planning effort. Appendix B presents the Hazard Figure 2-2 Survey Announcement in 4th Quarter 2016 Newsletter Mitigation Survey and its findings. By engaging the public through the public involvement strategy, the concept of mitigation was introduced to the public, and the Planning Team received feedback that was used in developing the components of the plan.

Response to the survey indicates that ~52 percent of the respondents have never been impacted by a natural hazard disaster incident. The majority of respondents indicated that the result of the disaster incident did not impact their ability to work or utilize their residence (76.6 percent); ~14 percent of the respondents were impacted while living on the Reservation, with 4.21 percent impacted while working for the Tribes.

2-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

When reviewing the hazard-specific data, approximately 75 percent of the respondents (68 total) have been impacted by a severe weather incident; ~66 percent (60 total) indicate that they have experienced an earthquake. Approximately 44 percent of the respondents have also been impacted by drought situations, with 37 percent (34 total) impacted by wildland fire. When compared to the risk ranking of the hazards of concern, this closely mirrors the hazards as ranked, with wildfire ranked as number one (1) (CPRI Score of 3.65); earthquake as number two (2), (CPRI Score 3.60); and severe weather as number three (CPR Score of 3.5). Drought and Climate Change. Approximately 20 percent of the respondents have been impacted by five (5) or more disaster incidents.

Public Information Officer The Tribes’ Public Information Officer served as one of the lead public outreach facilitators, using existing email lists (E-Blast lists) which reached an estimated 3,000 tribal members nationwide, and local community residents.

Public Meetings The public outreach events which occurred allowed attendees to examine maps and handouts, and have direct conversations with project staff. Reasons for planning and information generated for the risk assessment were shared with attendees, who provided handouts on tips on self-preparedness and mitigation activities homeowners can do to help reduce their risk (such as landscaping, flood insurance, etc.). Maps and hazard boards were set up for the primary hazards to which the planning area is most vulnerable. Planning Team Members were present to answer questions. Each citizen attending the meetings was asked to complete the survey if they had not yet done so, and each was given an opportunity to provide written comments to the Planning Team. The Planning Team also erected the posters along the public hallway in the Tribes’ Planning Department. Specific details of outreach events are identified in Table 2-2.

In addition, during the March 22, 2017 Tribal Council Session, Shayleen Allen, the Tribal Planning Director and Project Manager for this effort discussed the various steps taken throughout the process, identified the risk, and further discussed the strategies which were developed. Tribal leaders, directors, and citizens attended the meeting, which was a regularly scheduled meeting, open to the public.

Comments received were reviewed and vetted through the Planning Team Members, and data incorporated as appropriate. During March and April 2017, the initial draft plan was reviewed by the Planning Team Members. After comments and information gathered during the review process were incorporated, the final plan was again distributed for review by tribal members in April, concurrent with the public review period. Copies of the plan were made available via the Tribe’s Mitigation webpage. A hard copy was also available for review and comment. The draft plan was available from May 5, 2017 – May 26, 2017.

The final public meeting was held on May ___, 2017, during which time the plan was presented to the Council, and at which time the Council approved and adopted the plan, pending FEMA approval. Figure 2- 3 illustrates poster displays at various public outreach sessions.

2-8 PLANNING PROCESS

Figure 2-3 Klamath Tribes’ Risk Assessment Open House

2-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

News Releases and Newsletters A news release was also published to draw attention to the Tribes’ planning effort and survey (Figure 2-4). The Tribes also have a regularly distributed newsletter, the Klamath News, which was used to disseminate information through the planning process, including regular updates and notice of the draft review period. Notices were distributed in September, October, and December 2016, as well as March 2017 (Tribal Planning Director maintains the original Press Releases and newsletters that were distributed).

Figure 2-4 Tribal Website - Initial News Release

Internet At the beginning of the plan development process, information was added to the Tribes’ website to inform and keep the public advised on plan development milestones and to solicit relevant input. Notices of the planning process were distributed on September 30, 2016, with regular updates provided as relevant data was developed or milestones achieved.

During March 2017, the risk assessment maps were made available for review and comment on the Tribes’ website. In addition, an E-Blast was sent out using the Tribes’ existing distribution lists.

At the completion of the initial draft plan, the plan was provided via a file-transfer site, which allowed for the download of the plan for review.

The Tribes’ website address was publicized in all press releases, mailings, questionnaires, and public meetings. Information on the plan development process, the planning team, the questionnaire, and phased drafts of the plan were made available to the public on the site. The Tribes intend to keep their website active after the plan’s completion to keep the public informed about successful mitigation projects and future plan updates.

Plan Development Chronology/Milestones

Table 2-2 summarizes important milestones in the development of the plan, including public outreach events.

2-10 PLANNING PROCESS

TABLE 2-2 PLAN DEVELOPMENT MILESTONES

Date Event Description Attendance 2015 – 2016 2015 Submit grant application Seek funding for plan development process N/A 2016 Receive notice of grant Funding secured. N/A award 2016 06/02 Initiate consultant Seek a planning expert to facilitate the process N/A procurement 07/13 Select Bridgeview Facilitation contractor secured N/A Consulting, LLC to facilitate plan development 8/5 Identify planning team Formation of the planning team and core project management team. N/A Began review of existing plan and existing documentation supporting effort (e.g., studies, other planning documents, etc.) 8/22 Planning Meeting/ General information gathering meeting concerning previous plan 5 Information gathering documentation; GIS data; general Tribal information to identify data session gaps. 9/30 Planning Team formed Committee members identified. General plan information was N/A distributed to team in preparation of initial planning team/kick-off meeting. Identified potential public outreach strategy for presentation at kick-off meeting. Will use existing Facebook, Twitter, and email distribution lists, which reach ~3,000 tribal and non-tribal members. 9/30 Public Outreach Press release distributed; notice posted on website of planning process kick-off; Klamath News newsletter published with notice of process – public comment period open.. 10/11 Initial Planning Meeting The planning team met to review the HMP update process; review with entire Team/ Kick- existing plan; confirm hazards of concern; review and update goals; Off Meeting identify objectives; define critical facilities; identify public outreach strategy 10/15 Public Outreach Klamath News newsletter published data concerning hazard mitigation planning effort, requesting information and participation (Vol. 32 Issue 4). 11/30 Planning Meeting Maps and structure data distributed for review and comment 7 12/19 Planning Meeting Updated data provided concerning structure data; maps refined for internal planning team review; Dec. Public Outreach Deployed Survey both via web and Newsletter (Vol. 43 Issue 5). 2017 1/20 Planning Meeting Risk assessment data, CPRI and building impact data provided to 10 planning team for review and comment.

2-11 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 2-2 PLAN DEVELOPMENT MILESTONES

Date Event Description Attendance Jan Public Outreach During a regional emergency management meeting attended by HMP 15 Planning Team Members, the hazard mitigation planning process was discussed, and potential grant opportunities to support emergency management and mitigation planning were identified, which the Tribes will pursue during the next open grant cycle. 1/27 HMP Training Various Planning Team Members attended FEMA Region X’s webinar 2 training on Hazard Mitigation Planning to support plan maintenance and develop skills and knowledge to maintain the HMP plan for future updates. 2/2 Planning Meeting Review of risk assessment and methodology used to conduct the 7 analysis; confirmation of risk analysis and ranking; strategy development; identified method for prioritization; review of grant opportunities for funding; confirm public outreach for presentation of risk. 2/7 Strategy Develop Planning Team Members and Tribal Staff provide strategies for 10 inclusion in the HMP update. Feb/ Draft Plan Maps and Internal review of plan by planning team members commenced. All March Data March Public Outreach Presentation of hazard information, maps, survey questions; 20 22 announcement of upcoming open review process for HMP

March Draft Plan Draft provided to Planning Team for review and comment until April All 30 28, 2017. May 5 Public Comment Initial public comment period of draft plan opens. Draft plan N/A Period provided electronically to all planning members, both tribal and non-tribal, as well as the plan being made available at the Administrative Office for Review. XXX Public Outreach – Final public meeting on Plan presented at Tribal Council Meeting. XX Presentation at Tribal Tribal Council adopted plan, allowing for modifications as required Council, Adoption by FEMA/State after adoption is completed without the need for re- adoption.

X/X Plan Approval Final plan approved by FEMA N/A

2.2 RISK ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW Risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential loss of life, personal injury, economic injury, and property damage resulting from natural hazards. It focuses on the following elements: • Hazard identification—The systematic use of all available information to determine the types of disasters likely to affect a jurisdiction (“hazards of concern”), how often these events can occur, and their potential severity. • Vulnerability identification—The process of determining the impact of these events on the people, property, environment, economy and lands of a region • Estimation of the cost of damage or cost that can be avoided through mitigation.

2-12 PLANNING PROCESS

Mitigation planning provides risk assessment information that allows emergency management personnel to establish early response priorities by identifying potential hazards and vulnerable assets. The risk assessment for the Klamath Tribes evaluates the risk of natural hazards prevalent on the reservation, establishes a specified study region, and includes its cultural resources locations, meeting the requirements of 44 CFR Section 201.7(c)(2).

Additional information on the risk assessment process and introduction to the risk profile sections is included in Chapter 7. Chapters 8-17 contain the hazard profiles and results of the risk analysis performed.

Once the risk assessment portion of the process was completed, a risk ranking exercise utilizing a Calculated Priority Risk Index (CPRI) was conducted. Chapter 18 identifies each risk and its associated index value. It also provides an overview of the vulnerability, including social vulnerability, for each hazard.

Identification of Hazards of Concern

For this plan, the Planning Team considered the full range of natural hazards that could impact the planning area and then listed hazards that present the greatest concern. The process incorporated review of state and local hazard planning documents, including the 2007 Klamath Tribes’ HMP, as well as information on the frequency, magnitude and costs associated with hazards that have impacted or could impact the planning area. Anecdotal information regarding natural hazards and the perceived vulnerability of the planning area’s assets to them was also used. The 2007 Hazard Mitigation Plan addressed the following hazards: • Dam Failure • Thunderstorms • Drought • Windstorms • Earthquake • Winter Storms (Snow/Ice) • Flood • Volcanoes • Hazardous Materials • Wildland Fires • Landslide

After review of the hazards of concern by the Planning Team, it was determined the same hazards as addressed in the 2007 mitigation plan would be identified; however, some of the hazards will be grouped together for ease in maintaining the plan, for tracking impacts of like-hazards, and for the risk assessment element, as appropriate. In addition, several new hazards were also added for this update. The following hazards of concern will be addressed in this plan: • Climate Change • Dam/Levee Failure • Drought • Earthquake • Flood • Landslide • Severe weather (including Winter Storms and Windstorm) • Volcano • Wildfire • Other Hazards of Concern (Human-Caused and Technological Hazards)

2-13 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

This page intentionally left blank.

2-14

Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan

PART 2 — COMMUNITY PROFILE

CHAPTER 3. KLAMATH TRIBES PROFILE

3.1 MISSION The mission of the Klamath Tribes is to protect, preserve and enhance the spiritual, cultural, and physical values and resources of the Klamath, Modoc, and Yahooskin Peoples by maintaining the customs and heritage of our ancestors. To establish comprehensive unity by fostering the enhancement of spiritual and cultural values through a government whose function is to protect the human and cultural resources, treaty rights, and to provide for the development and delivery of social and economic opportunities for our People through effective leadership.

3.2 HISTORY AND LOCATION The Klamath Tribes are made up of three Native American tribes who traditionally inhabited Southern Oregon and Northern California: the Klamath and Modoc Tribes, and Yahooskin Paiute. The Klamath Tribes have lived in the Klamath Basin of Oregon from time beyond memory.

The Treaty of 1864 was signed by the Klamath Tribes and the United States, and was ratified in 1870. In it, the tribes ceded approximately 22 million acres of land and reserved approximately 2 million acres of land exclusively for the Klamath Tribes as their Reservation. Due to erroneous land surveys, and land lost to the allotment process, the Tribes’ Reservation was later reduced to approximately 1.1 million acres. Up until 1954, the Klamath Tribes were deemed to be the most economically successful and self-sufficient tribe in the United States. In 1954, Congress passed legislation terminating the Klamath Tribes’ federal recognition and disposing of Reservation land. Termination was approved by the U.S. Senate without the advice, consent, or approval of the Klamath Tribes. The Termination Act removed the land and its resources from the Klamath’s economic, cultural, and social stewardship. The loss of these lands was devastating to the Klamath’s economic, social, and spiritual culture. During the period between 1954 and 2000, the former Klamath Tribes’ Reservation land earned over 500 million dollars in federal and local government revenue.

Notwithstanding termination of federal recognition, the Tribes maintain their Treaty Rights on the Reservation lands, including, but not limited water rights and the rights to hunt, fish and gather.

On August 27, 1986, President Regan signed the Klamath Indian Tribe Restoration Act, Public Law 99- 398. This bill restored the Tribes’ federal recognition after 32 years of psychological trauma and economic decline due to the Termination Act. In 1997, the doors were opened to the first enterprise in 45 years since enactment of the Termination Act, the Kla-Mo-Ya Casino, which is now the second largest tourist attraction in Klamath County, with approximately 300,000 visitors each year- second only to Crater Lake National Park. Restoration is celebrated each August with a Restoration Celebration, held in Chiloquin (see Figure 3-1 below1).

Today, the Klamath Tribes continue to work to recover from the devastating effects of the Termination, including working with the federal, state, and local governments.

1 http://chiloquin.com/chiloquin-home/klamath-tribes/

3-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 3-1 Klamath Tribes 2013 Restoration PowWow

3.3 HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICE PROGRAMS The Klamath Tribes provide health services through their Klamath Tribal Health and Family Services Department, which provides medical, dental, pharmaceutical, and behavioral health services to the Tribal Members and other eligible persons. There are currently two health clinics on the Tribal Planning Area, the Wellness Center in Chiloquin, and the Youth & Family Guidance Center in Klamath Falls.

Beyond the general medical care, the Tribes have also been proactive in supporting the community on different fronts. The Community Services Department programs include: a Transportation program, Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, Child Care Development Fund Program, Senior Nutrition Program, a Senior Outreach Program, and a Commodities Program, which assists low income families with supplemental food and nutritional education. There is also a program in place to provide senior lunches at the Community Center in Chiloquin.

The Klamath Tribes Social Services Department provides services for the health, safety and welfare of the families and children of the Klamath Tribes. Indian Child Welfare Act issues, family violence issues and the Temporary assistance for needy families are programs managed by this department.

3.4 TRIBAL GOVERNANCE The Klamath Tribes are governed by the Constitution of the Klamath Tribes, most recently adopted by the General Council on September 26, 2013. The Constitution defines the territory, jurisdiction, and authority of its Tribal Government.

The General Council elects a ten-member Tribal Council every three years to act on behalf of the General Council regarding day to day business of the Tribes. These elected positions are Tribal Chairman, Vice Chairman, Secretary, Treasurer, and six at-large Tribal Council members. The Tribes’ main government offices are in Chiloquin, Oregon.

The Klamath Tribes Judiciary is constitutionally established and is of general jurisdiction.

In their effort to promote resiliency, the Tribes are in the early stages of developing some land use regulation through comprehensive planning processes. Once adopted, the new codes will enhance the viability of the Tribes by providing guidance which will directly mitigate the impacts of the hazards of concern upon the Tribes and its members.

3-2 PLANNING PROCESS

3.5 TRIBAL DEPARTMENTS The Klamath Tribes maintain over 15 departments within its structure of government, all of which have been established to serve Tribal needs within the Tribal Planning Area and its Tribal Members. Many of these departments also work to reduce the social vulnerability of its Tribal members, which are many times the hidden victims of disaster incidents. Several of the various departments are identified within this document as having a significant role in mitigating the impact of hazards of concern, while enhancing the resilience and sustainability of the Tribes and their People. A few examples of the various departments and programs administered by the Klamath Tribes are as follows (this list is not all-inclusive): – The Klamath Tribes Community Services Department administers a broad variety of services including: Food Distribution, General Assistance, Indian Child Welfare Program, Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, Social Work, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and the Domestic Violence/Sexual Assault Project. The mission of the Department is Figure 3-2 Tribal Community Center Elder's Program to help tribal members and families (Chiloquin) achieve independence, self-sufficiency, and healthy, productive communities. – The Klamath Tribes Fisheries Program is dedicated to understanding, managing, conserving, and restoring fish populations for the benefit of present and future generations of the Klamath People. The emphasis is on watershed management, with a focus on informing water management policies. – The Klamath Tribes Natural Resources Department’s purpose is to protect the lands, air, and water resources of the Tribes for the benefit of current and future generations of tribal members. Tribal staff utilize science, traditional knowledge, and environmental regulation for the purposes of enhancing tribal sovereignty and expanding environmental regulatory authority of the Tribes to promote and protect these resources within the Tribal Planning Area. – The Culture and Heritage Departments’ programs are designed to protect, preserve, and enhance Klamath, Modoc, and Yahooskin traditional cultural values. Programs and projects are developed to meet the social, spiritual, and cultural needs of the Tribes, and includes language instruction, Tribal ceremonies, Culture Camp for Tribal youth and gathering excursions for all Tribal members. – The mission of the Klamath Tribes Housing Department is to achieve program and individual self- sufficiency through providing decent, safe, and sanitary housing for eligible low income Native American families residing in Klamath County, with preference given to Tribal members, elders, and families with children. The Department also strives to eradicate substandard housing, eliminate homelessness, provide housing assistance for foster care, and increase affordable rental housing and homeownership opportunities for low and very low income Native Americans.

3.6 LAND AND INFRASTRUCTURE The Tribal Planning Area consists land within the Klamath Tribes’ 1954 Reservation boundary and an additional strip of land in Klamath Falls, Oregon. Most of the planning area is located in Klamath County, with a smaller portion in Lake County. The primary trust land is located in Klamath County, located in and

3-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

near the communities of Chiloquin, Klamath Falls, and Beatty, as well as others. A very large portion of the land mass within the planning area is owned by the US Forest Service, which includes over 690,000 acres, followed by private fee land, and more than 1,000 acres of trust lands.

The Klamath Tribes have a long-standing history of responsible land use development. As was the case when the original HMP was developed in 2007, the Tribes are looking to continue to develop primarily in Beatty, Chiloquin, and the Klamath Falls areas. The Tribes currently have several tribal member homeownership homes with remaining Tribal residences used for low-income or emergency housing. The Tribes plan to continue to develop and acquire additional residences as funding allows.

The Tribes have prepared and maintain a Forest Management Plan, an Economic Self Sufficiency Plan, a Land Restoration Plan, and several Watershed Restoration Plans. The Tribes are also working toward future economic development within the Planning Area in areas that may include timber, gaming, traditional-use, and recreation industries, as well as traditional subsistence uses. It is hoped that with the removal of the dams on the Klamath River, that increased fish runs will also enhance tribal member subsistence, tourism, and recreational activities with respect to the fishing, as well as increased commercial productivity.

3.7 CULTURAL HERITAGE The Klamath Tribes have lived in the Klamath Basin of Oregon from time beyond memory. The Klamath Tribes consist of the Klamath, the Modoc, and the Yahooskin Band of Snake Indians, who are bound together by their ties of loyalty, family, and industriousness.

The Klamath Tribes maintains records for countless cultural resource sites, including cemeteries, villages, and lithic scatters (surface-visible concentrations of stone chips, flakes, and tools). Many of these resources are located along rivers and major tributaries. High-density sites (villages, cemeteries, and ceremonial and gathering areas) are distributed throughout the Tribes’ ancestral lands.

The Klamath Tribes’ Culture and Heritage Departments’ programs are designed to protect, preserve, and enhance Klamath, Modoc, and Yahooskin traditional cultural values. Programs and projects are developed to meet the social, spiritual, and cultural needs of the Tribes, and includes language instruction, Tribal ceremonies, and Culture Camp for Tribal youth. The site protection program component provides protection to ancestral and sacred sites and landscapes in cooperation with federal, state and local land management agencies, private developers, and land owners.

The Klamath Tribes have vigorously pursued prosecution whenever possible of anyone desecrating an object or thing of archeological or historical value. Protection of the cultural resources and ancestral heritage of the Tribes are of paramount importance, and disturbing burial sites is considered one of the most offensive crimes committed.

3.8 DEMOGRAPHICS Knowledge of the composition of the population and how it has changed in the past and how it may change in the future is needed for making informed decisions about the future. Information about population is a critical part of planning because it directly relates to land needs such as housing, industry, stores, public facilities and services, and transportation. Population changes are useful socio-economic indicators. A growing population generally indicates a growing economy, while a decreasing population signifies economic decline.

3-4 PLANNING PROCESS

Tribal Membership and Population Current Tribal Membership has been recorded by the Klamath Tribes in August 2016 is 5,074 enrolled members. Of those, less than half live in the Tribal Planning Area. According to U.S. Census data (2000)2 identified in Table 3-1 to Table 3-3 below, the population of the Klamath Tribes (inclusive of the Klamath, Modoc and Yahooskin) was 4,163 in 2000. The US Census data (2010) also provides a breakdown of the tribal population as 2,734 Klamath Tribal Members and 534 Modoc Tribal Members living in the Tribal Planning Area. Specific numbers for the Yahooskin are not provided by the U.S. Census data and cannot be assumed, as there may be other Tribal members living in the general planning area who are not Klamath, Modoc or Yahooskin members.

TABLE 3-1 US CENSUS DATA FOR ALL KLAMATH TRIBES3

United States

Subject Number Percent

Total population 4,163 100.0 Under 5 years 453 10.9 65 and over 129 3.1 Average household size 3.07 (X) Average family size 3.54 (X) Occupied housing units 1,233 100.0 Owner-occupied housing units 435 35.3 Renter-occupied housing units 798 64.7 Average household size of owner-occupied unit 3.24 (X) Average household size of renter-occupied unit 3.10 (X)

TABLE 3-2 US CENSUS DATA FOR KLAMATH TRIBE (ONLY)4

United States

Subject Number Percent

Total population 2,734 100.0 Under 5 years 267 9.8 65 to 74 years 73 2.7 Average household size 3.08 (X) Average family size 3.47 (X) Occupied housing units 853 100.0 Owner-occupied housing units 296 34.7 Renter-occupied housing units 557 65.3 Average household size of owner-occupied unit 3.03 (X) Average household size of renter-occupied unit 3.17 (X)

2 2000 US Census Data was the most current data available which identified population on the Reservation. Alternatively, Klamath County Data would have been used, which is more current, but does not focus specifically on the Reservations. 3 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 American Indian and Alaska Native Summary File. 4 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 American Indian and Alaska Native Summary File.

3-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 3-3 US CENSUS DATA FOR MODOC TRIBE (ONLY)5

United States

Subject Number Percent

Total population 573 100.0 Under 5 years 34 5.9 65 and over 29 5.0 No other data provided Population Change

Based on review of data for Klamath County, the City of Klamath Falls, and for the City of Chiloquin, population trends dropped from the original 2010 population counts to the 2015 estimated county as illustrated in Table 3-4. However, long-range population growth as illustrated in analysis completed by Portland State University in Figure 3-5 projects an increase in the population for the planning area.

No specific data for projection is available for the Klamath Tribal Planning Area. However, population on Reservation trust lands has remained fairly consistent since the completion of the last Hazard Mitigation Plan. With the exception of the four new residences, which for planning purposes are averaged to include ~3 people per household, there has been an estimated increase of 12 individuals. No additional housing units have been constructed, and the remaining houses have maintained occupancy at the same levels. With completion or acquisition of additional housing units, it is anticipated that the population on Tribal Lands will increase accordingly.

TABLE 3-4 POPULATION CHANGE 2010-2015

Geographic April 1, 2010 Population Estimate (as of July 1) Location Census Estimate Base 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Chiloquin City 734 734 733 730 723 720 716 721 Klamath Falls City 20,840 20,991 21,031 21,154 21,313 21,277 21,200 21,399 Klamath County 66,380 66,380 66,332 66,345 66,090 65,887 65,520 66,016 Source: http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/community_facts.xhtml?src=bkmk

TABLE 3-5 PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH Identified 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 Urban Growth Boundary Bonzanza 441 453 473 493 513 533 554 575 597 619 641 Town Chiloquin 768 779 787 795 803 811 819 827 834 842 849 Klamath Falls 43093 43685 44298 44917 45363 45732 45871 45982 46063 46035 45907

5 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 American Indian and Alaska Native Summary File.

3-6 PLANNING PROCESS

TABLE 3-5 PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH Identified 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 Urban Growth Boundary Malin 833 870 892 909 926 943 961 979 997 1016 1035 Merrill 942 961 981 1003 1026 1049 1074 1099 1126 1153 1182 Outside UGBs 20966 22013 22964 23585 23534 23094 22416 21763 21168 20582 19977 Population Forecasts prepared by: Population Research Center, Portland State University, June 30, 2015. Available at: http://www.pdx.edu/prc/region-1-documents Social Vulnerability

Some populations are at greater risk from hazard events because of decreased resources or physical abilities. Elderly people, for example, may be more likely to require additional assistance. Research has shown that people living near or below the poverty line, the elderly, the disabled, women, children, ethnic minorities, and renters all experience, to some degree, more severe effects from disasters than the general population. These vulnerable populations may vary from the general population in risk perception, living conditions, access to information before, during and after a hazard event, capabilities during an event, and access to resources for post-disaster recovery. Indicators of vulnerability—such as disability, age, poverty, and minority race and ethnicity—often overlap spatially and often in the geographically most vulnerable locations. Detailed spatial analysis to locate areas where there are higher concentrations of vulnerable community members specifically associated with the Klamath Tribes would help to extend focused public outreach and education to these most vulnerable citizens. However, at present, no such study exists. At a state level, the Oregon Health Authority has established a composite vulnerability index which incorporates measures of demographics, socioeconomic status, and health. Figure 3-3 illustrates the results of that study, indicating that Klamath County as a whole has a high level of social vulnerability.

Figure 3-3 Statewide Social Vulnerability Index

Age Distribution

Age distribution for the Tribes are identified in the tables above, and are based on US Census data. As a group, the elderly (65 and over) are more apt to lack the physical and economic resources necessary for response to hazard events and are more likely to suffer health-related consequences making recovery

3-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

slower. They are more likely to be vision, hearing, and/or mobility impaired, and more likely to experience mental impairment or dementia. Additionally, the elderly are more likely to live in assisted-living facilities where emergency preparedness occurs at the discretion of facility operators. These facilities are typically identified as “critical facilities” by emergency managers because they require extra notice to implement evacuation. Elderly residents living in their own homes may have more difficulty evacuating their homes and could be stranded in dangerous situations. This population group is more likely to need special medical attention, which may not be readily available during natural disasters due to isolation caused by the event. Specific planning attention for the elderly is an important consideration given the current aging of the American population. At present, indicators from the Oregon Health Authority establishes that between 17.2 and 46 percent of the population within Klamath County is aged 65 years or older (Oregon Health Authority, 2014, p. 9). Children under 5 are also particularly vulnerable to disaster events because of their young age and dependence on others for basic necessities. Very young children may additionally be vulnerable to injury or sickness; this vulnerability can be worsened during a natural disaster because they may not understand the measures that need to be taken to protect themselves from hazards.

Income

In the United States, individual households are expected to use private resources to prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters to some extent. This means that households living in poverty are automatically disadvantaged when confronting hazards. Additionally, the poor typically occupy more poorly built and inadequately maintained housing. Mobile or modular homes, for example, are more susceptible to damage in earthquakes and floods than other types of housing. In urban areas, the poor often live in older houses and apartment complexes, which are more likely to be made of un-reinforced masonry, a building type that is particularly susceptible to damage during earthquakes. Furthermore, residents below the poverty level are less likely to have insurance to compensate for losses incurred from natural disasters. This means that residents below the poverty level have a great deal to lose during an event and are the least prepared to deal with potential losses. Personal household economics significantly impact people’s decisions on evacuation: those who cannot afford gas for their cars will likely decide not to evacuate.

U.S. Census Bureau estimates for income levels for the Klamath Tribes is extremely dated, with the most current data available from 1999. Therefore, the Bureau of Economic Analysis was utilized in its stead. The Tribes are considered a small impoverished community. Review of 2009-2013 Bureau of Economic Analysis for per capita personal income for the Chiloquin area estimate that 40.75 percent of the City’s population was below poverty level, and 47.5 percent of the American Indian and Alaska Native population of the City of Chiloquin was below the poverty level6. Per capita personal income for the Klamath Tribes’ Service Area of Klamath County was 72 percent of the national average based on the last published list dated November 20, 2014 (most current data available for 2016 update).7 The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in June 2015 that the unemployment rate for the Klamath Tribes’ Service Area of Klamath County was 7.5 percent, which was 2.2 percent higher than the National unemployment rate of 5.3 percent for the same period. American Community Survey 5-year estimates report that Chiloquin’s estimated unemployment rate for residents 16 years old and older is 22.9 percent, and 32.6 percent for American Indian and Alaska Native populations in Chiloquin.

6 http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF 7 http://www.bea.gov/regional/ bearfacts/action.cfm?geoType=4&fips=41035&areatype=41035

3-8 PLANNING PROCESS

Race, Ethnicity and Language Research shows that minorities are less likely to be involved in pre-disaster planning and experience higher mortality rates during a disaster event. Post-disaster recovery can be ineffective and is often characterized by cultural insensitivity. Since higher proportions of ethnic minorities live below the poverty line than the majority white population, poverty can compound vulnerability. The primary ethic race living in the Tribal Planning Area is American Indian.

Disabled Populations The 2010 U.S. Census Bureau estimates 54 million (non-institutionalized) Americans with disabilities in the U.S. This equates to about one-in-five persons. People with disabilities are more likely to have difficulty responding to a hazard event than the general population. Knowing that local government is the first level of response to assist individuals, coordination of efforts to meet the access and functional needs of individuals with disabilities is paramount to life safety efforts. In this respect, it is important for emergency managers to distinguish the differences between functional and medical needs to allow them to plan accordingly for incidents which require evacuations and sheltering needs. Pre-determining the percentage of population impacted with a disability will provide emergency management personnel and first responders the information necessary to pre-plan by having individuals available who can provide those services necessary to meet the requirements of those with access and functional needs. The 2010 Census does not provide data on individuals with disabilities specific to the Klamath Tribal Planning Area.

Economy Industry, Businesses, and Institutions The planning area’s economy is strongly based in the tourism and social service industry. The Tribes are one of the largest employers within the Klamath County area, and one of the primary employers of Tribal Members. The majority of the Tribes’ land mass was taken from them when the Tribes’ federal recognition was terminated in 1954, including their forest lands, which was historically the largest portion of its economic base. Prior to termination, the Klamath Tribes historically were considered one of the richest tribes in the United States. Since restoration of federal recognition, the Tribes are working towards regaining economic self-sufficiency. However, at present, the Tribes’ economy is somewhat stifled by the lack of necessary land mass to support economic growth and development.

As indicated, unemployment in the Tribal Planning Area is higher than the National Average, with approximately 47.5 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native population being unemployed within Chiloquin alone. Currently, the Klamath Tribes employ in excess of 390 individuals within their various departments, the majority being full-time employees.

Since Restoration, the Klamath Tribes have actively sought new industries to contribute to the economic vitality of Klamath County and the State of Oregon, and to provide much-needed social services and revenue to Tribal members. Major occupations within the Klamath Tribes’ members continue to be management, service occupations, and sales/office occupations. The Klamath Tribes have adapted from earlier occupations such as farming, fishing, and forestry due to changing federal and state legislation. Today, these occupations only account for a much smaller percent of the total number of jobs.

Though a smaller percentage of the Klamath Tribes are self-employed or own businesses as in the past, a majority of the workers are private company salaried workers or government workers. The Tribes do have programs in place to enhance business development for Tribal members – the Small Business Development Program, and have supported a number of businesses within the planning area for its tribal members.

3-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

The Klamath Tribes have been successful in planning, building, and operating the Kla-Mo-Ya Casino. This enterprise was officially opened in 1997 and provides revenue to the Klamath Tribes and its Tribal members. Through employment of non-tribal members and revenue sharing, it also provides support to local governments.

At present, the Tribes are in the process of project development for a new hotel in the area of the Casino. This project, once completed, will enhance the economic outlook for the Tribes and their members, not only by creating a source of revenue for the Tribes, but also by providing additional jobs for tribal members once completed. The Klamath government also relies heavily on grants, which are earmarked for specific purposes, such as FEMA for this mitigation plan and HUD for housing, among others.

Tourism

Difficulty locating or accounting for travelers increases their vulnerability in the event of a natural disaster. Furthermore, tourists are often unfamiliar with evacuation routes, communication outlets, or even the type of hazard that may occur. Targeting natural hazard mitigation outreach efforts to places where tourists lodge can help increase awareness and minimize the vulnerability of this population.

With the Casino being a major draw to the Klamath Tribes, there is a significant increase in the number of tourists that visit the Klamath County area. Current estimations equate to approximately 400,000 visitors annually at the Casino. Based on the State’s Hazard Mitigation Plan, over 13% (3.6 million) of all overnight trips to Oregon included time within the area which includes Klamath and Lake Counties. Three fourths of all trips to the region occur between April and September, and the average travel party contains 3.7 persons. The average trip length is over 4.4 nights (Longwoods Travel USA, 2011f). Visitors to the region are just as likely to lodge in hotels/motels as in private homes and other accommodations (State EHMP, 2015).

3-10 PLANNING PROCESS

TABLE 3-6 ANNUAL VISTOR ESTIMATES IN PERSON PER NIGHTS

2011 2012 2013

Jurisdiction Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Klamath 2,071 100% 2,020 100% 2,014 100%

Hotel/Motel 685 33.1% 646 32.0% 626 31.1%

Private Home 847 40.9% 831 41.1% 835 41.5%

Other 539 26.0% 543 26.9% 553 27.5%

Lake 262 100% 252 100% 248 100%

Hotel/Motel 65 25% 58 23% 53 21%

Private Home 78 30% 76 30% 76 31%

Other 119 45% 118 47% 119 48%

Source: Oregon Travel Impacts: 1991–2013. April 2014. Dean Runyan Associates, http://www.deanrunyan.com/doc_library/ORImp.pdf

3-11

CHAPTER 4. PLANNING AREA CHARACTERISTICS

4.1 LOCATION The Klamath Tribes are located in Southern Oregon, primarily within Klamath County, although a small area of the 1954 Reservation land does fall within Lake County. The Tribal Planning Area is bound in the west by the Cascade Mountains, to the south by the Oregon-California border, and to the north and east by high plateau.

4.2 GEOGRAPHY The geographic diversity of Klamath County as a whole is an important factor when determining the natural hazards which may impact the Tribal Planning Area. Figure 4-1 and Figure 4-2 identify the geography of the planning area. As the North American Plate moved slowly southwestward over the past 10 million years, successive oceanic terrains dating from the Cambrian to the late Jurassic were added to the bulk of the North American continent. There are at least five geologic provinces in the area forming the Pacific Northwest from West to East: The Cascade Volcanoes, the Columbia Plateau, the North Cascades, the Coast Mountains, and the Insular Mountains. Most of the region was formed about 200 million years ago as the North American Plate started to drift westward during the rupture of Pangea. While the coastal mountains date to less than 3 million years ago, the farther inland High Cascades are as old as 7.5 million years. Granite batholiths, overlying sedimentary rock, and volcanic rock were crumpled into the massif of southwestern Oregon and northwestern California. Today, much of the planning area is a forested landscape, extending from the crest of the Cascades to the eastern desert lands. A significant portion of the planning area (>50%) is public land administered by the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Oregon Department of Forestry. Private timberland holdings represent a significant remainder of Klamath County as a whole. The planning area is home to both the deepest lake in America, and largest lake in Oregon. Crater Lake is the deepest lake at 1,932 feet, while Klamath Lake covers 64 square miles.

One of the main features within Klamath County and the Tribal Planning Area is the Klamath River, which flows from the Upper Klamath Lake west through a water gap in the Cascade lavas, entering the Klamath Mountains, continuing its journey into California, and ultimately into the Pacific Ocean. Both the Sprague and Williamson Watersheds flow into the Upper Klamath Lake.

The area is largely rural, with urban development focused significantly along US-97. Population centers are focused in the Klamath Falls and Chiloquin areas, the two approximately thirty (30) minutes driving time apart. The majority of housing in the area was built before 1970. A more detailed analysis of the age of building stock is contained in Chapter 5.

4-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 4-1 Geography of Klamath Tribal Planning Area

4-2 PLANNING AREA NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Figure 4-2 Geography of Analysis Area with Topography

4-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

The U.S. EPA’s ecoregions describe areas of ecosystem similarity falling within Klamath County. The EPA ecoregions are the geographic demarcations used in the Oregon State Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan when identifying the hazards and risks within each area (EPA ecoregion) of the state. The Klamath Tribal Planning Area is situated in the EPA’s Eastern Cascades Slope and Foothills, which is an “ecological mosaic” (Oregon State HMP, Chapter 2, p. 752), and is referenced as Region 6 in both the State’s Plan, and when data utilized to support this plan, may also be referenced as Region 6 in this HMP update (see Figure 4-3).

Within the planning region, wooded areas are dominated by ponderosa Figure 4-3 Central Oregon Region as Defined by EPA and Oregon State HMP pines or mixed fir canopies while rangelands are dominated by sagebrush, bitterbrush, and bunchgrasses. Historically within the planning area, wet meadows have been drained to accommodate agricultural uses; however, marshland wildlife refuges have been established to preserve biodiversity, particularly for avian populations. Much of this ecoregion is underlain by highly permeable volcanic pumice soils, which contribute to the effects of drought in the ecoregion (Thorson et al., 2003). Figure 4-4 identifies some of the geographic features of the EPA’s ecoregion encompassing the planning area, as identified in the State of Oregon’s 2015 Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan (original source of map was the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development).

Figure 4-4 Major Geographic Features of EPA Region 6

The area is home to many watersheds and sub-basins, all of which maintain cultural significance to Tribal members. These include: the Williamson Watershed, which encompasses Chiloquin, the location of the Tribes’ Administrative Offices; the Upper Klamath Lake Watersheds, which includes Klamath Falls where much of the Tribes’ housing is located; the Sprague Watershed, which is home to Crater Lake near the crest of the Cascade Mountain Range, stretching eastward into the Klamath River Basin. Several of these watersheds, such as the Klamath, fall within both Oregon and California, with the Klamath Watershed being the biggest within the planning area. Figure 4-5 identifies the area and features encompassing the Klamath River Basin, and the various basins within the Upper Klamath River Watershed.

4-4 PLANNING AREA NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Figure 4-5 Klamath River Basins

The Klamath River system drains an area of 5,560 square miles of diverse landscapes in Oregon (three different counties) and 10,039 square miles in California (five counties). The northernmost part of the watershed is drained by the Williamson River and the Sprague River, both which flow generally southwest into Upper Klamath Lake. The middle basin is characterized by extensive wetland, grassland, and agricultural areas, and is partially filled by two major bodies of water: Upper and Lower Klamath Lake. Finally, steep canyons and high ridges typify the extensive lower basin, which encompasses over one half of the 15,751-square-mile (40,790 km2) watershed.

4.3 NATURAL RESOURCES In an effort to protect the natural resources of the Tribal Planning Area, several initiatives have been undertaken which are hoped to revitalize the vitality of the environment to what it once was. Many of those programs are referenced in different areas throughout this planning document. It should be understood that preservation of natural resources is of the utmost importance to the Klamath Tribes.

The declining health and productivity of the river’s fisheries is of great cultural and economic concern to the Klamath Tribes. To proactively address this decline, the Tribes have initiated various coordinated watershed restoration efforts, including efforts for removal of the five dams currently situated on the Klamath River. The intent of the restoration is to return the natural habitat to one which previously existed, increasing fish populations in presently unoccupied habitats, increasing the number of types in areas where fish counts had previously been depleted, and increasing the water quality of the watershed.

Although many factors have contributed to these declines in native fish runs, degradation of freshwater habitat has been pervasive in the Klamath River Basin. Kier and Associates (1991) note that “the fish habitats of the basin have been greatly diminished in extent and value in the past century by the construction of impassable dams and by stream diversions and sand and silt from mining, logging, grazing, road development, and floods.” The Tribes continue to focus on restoration of the area in hopes to restore the area to its one previous state.

4-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

4.4 CLIMATE The Klamath Tribal Planning Area is inclusive of Klamath County, and the ecoregion of the Eastern Cascade Slopes and Foothills. As a result of its location in the rain shadow of the Cascades, the region can often experience dramatic temperature and precipitation extremes. The planning area is subject to drought, floods, snowfall, ice, extreme heat/cold, and wind events. Flooding can be a direct result of rain-on-snow events, with snowpack also impacting the Tribes’ abilities to cope with drought.

The climate ranges from mild to cold, with wet winters and hot, dry summers. Annual precipitation amounts range from approximately 13” in the Klamath Basin to over 60” along the Cascade crest, depending on the sub-ecoregions making up the planning area.. Figure 4-6 identifies precipitation levels for the planning area.

Figure 4-6 Average Annual Precipitation Amounts

Mean temperature ranges from 12 degrees Fahrenheit in January, to a maximum of 41 degrees Fahrenheit. Mean temperature ranges in July vary from 38 degrees Fahrenheit to 85 degrees Fahrenheit.

4.5 MAJOR PAST HAZARD EVENTS Presidential disaster declarations are typically issued for hazard events that cause more damage than tribal governments can handle without assistance from the federal government, although no specific dollar loss threshold has been established for these declarations. A presidential disaster declaration puts federal recovery programs into motion to help disaster victims, businesses, tribal and public entities. In some instances, grant funding from disaster declarations are also matched by state programs and funds, for which the Tribes may be eligible. Table 4-1 lists disaster events which have occurred in Klamath County since 1964 for which presidential disaster declarations were issued, or in the case of fire, where the fire management was issued. Review of these events helps identify targets for risk reduction and ways to increase a community’s capability to avoid large-scale events in the future. Unfortunately, many natural hazard events do not trigger or rise to the level of a federal disaster declaration, but nonetheless have significant impacts on their communities. These events are also important to consider in establishing recurrence intervals for hazards of concern. Federal Disaster Declarations impacting Klamath and Lake Counties, and the Klamath Tribes are referenced in Table 4-1. Limited dollar loss data is available to identify impact to the Klamath Tribes. As a result of this missing data, Countywide data is referenced, if available from FEMA or other open sources. The Tribes have identified the capture of such loss data as a strategy for future planning efforts, as well as to support grant opportunities.

4-6 PLANNING AREA NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

TABLE 4-1 PRESIDENTIAL DISASTER DECLARATIONS FOR KLAMATH TRIBES

Dollar Losses (No loss Disaster Incident Start Declaration data specific to Tribes Type of Incident Declaration # Date Date available)

KLAMATH COUNTY

Royce Butte Fire 2787 9/16/2008 9/17/2008 ~$555,000 Countywide

Hurricane Katrina Evacuation 3228 8/29/2005 9/7/2005 Unknown

Severe Storm(s) 1160 12/25/1996 1/23/1997 No FEMA data available.

Earthquake 1004 9/20/1993 10/15/1993 Tribal impact ~$85,000; including Admin Building, Beatty Community Center, and old hatchery facilities.

Drought 3039 4/29/1977 4/29/1977 PA only, no IA.

Flood 184 12/24/1964 12/24/1964 IA and PA available; no dollar loss data available.

FIRE MANAGEMENT GRANTS KLAMATH COUNTY

Moccasin Hills Fire 5060 7/13/2014 7/14/2014 $1,833,016.88 (Obligated PA Funds as of 8/10/16)

Oregon Gulch Fire 5066 7/31/2014 8/1/2014 $7,751,419.65 (Obligated PA Funds as of 8/10/16)

LAKE COUNTY

Severe Winter Storms, Land and 1160 12/25/1996 1/23/97 No impact to Klamath Mudslides, Flooding Tribes

Severe Winter Storms 1510 12/26/2003 2/19/2004 No impact to Klamath Tribes

4-7

CHAPTER 5. INTEGRATION OF PLANNING EFFORTS

5.1 LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PROFILE As a sovereign nation, decisions on land use are governed by Tribal Government, who maintain legislative and policy-making authority. The Tribes are currently in the process of developing land use rules, and have developed a draft plan; however, it will take considerable effort to complete the plan, and the Tribes have limited staffing to dedicate solely to this project. Once complete, this Hazard Mitigation Plan, along with the draft Klamath Tribes Land Use Plan will be utilized to support land use in the future by providing vital information on the risk associated with natural hazards in the planning area. The Klamath Tribes will incorporate by reference the Hazard Mitigation Plan in its comprehensive plan once the Tribes complete the document. This will assure that all future trends in development can be established with the benefits of the information on risk and vulnerability to natural hazards identified in this plan.

Current Land Use and Development Trends

At present, new buildings funded with Federal dollars are required to be built to minimum International Building Code (IBC) standards. The Tribes are not required to obtain building permits for construction on Tribal Land, although they do have an existing contract with Klamath County engineers for inspection purposes for construction projects. There are no land-use or zoning designations for specific areas of the Tribal Planning Area, although there currently is a 55-acre track which has been designated primarily for housing. This is the area where four new structures were completed in 2012, as well as the location of the Community Center. The site also has an above-ground water storage tank.

Currently, residential, logging (timber companies), livestock grazing, agriculture and recreation are common land uses throughout Klamath County and the Tribal Planning Area. The Tribes also own a Casino, which serves as one of its primary businesses. While individuals own businesses in the Tribal Planning Area (self-employed), the physical locations are not zoned as commercial or industrial.

In October 2016, the General Council elected to construct a hotel in the vicinity of the Casino. While specifics beyond location are not yet determined, given the location in proximity to other structures, the risk assessment portion of this update will be considered as actual development occurs. The Tribes do utilize specific building code standards identified within the Capabilities section of this plan. The hotel, when constructed, will meet the standards identified.

In addition to the hotel, current planned development in the Tribal Planning Area may include Living Cultural Center. This structure was identified within the 2007 plan, but work has been on hold to date. The site selected for development of the Museum and Interpretive Center has been included within the risk assessment completed for this effort.

The 2007 HMP also identified development of a 25-unit housing project in the Chiloquin area; however, to date, only four homes have been constructed. Additional housing units are being planned, but are dependent on available funding.

The Tribes do not administer user fees, and are without a tax base. Gaming and tourism provide business revenue; however, the Klamath Tribes do not have the resources to construct a significant amount of community facilities at one time. Since Restoration, the Klamath Tribes have developed an Economic Self

5-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Sufficiency Plan and have actively sought new industries and commercial ventures to provide much-needed social services and revenue to the Tribal members. As that land use development occurs, this mitigation plan will be utilized to help identify potential areas of risk to ensure construction in those areas are limited, or developed in such a way as to reduce the impact of the hazards on the Tribal members and visitors to the planning area.

All Tribal Lands are considered culturally sacred; however, there are specific areas which are particularly more significant, such as burial grounds and areas designated for archaeological preservation. These factors reduce the amount of land available for economic development and community facilities, and are areas in which any type of is either totally restricted, or highly monitored. In addition, the Klamath Tribes’ site protection program component provides protection to ancestral and sacred sites and landscapes in cooperation with federal, state and local land management agencies, private developers, and land owners.

Current land use in Klamath and Lake Counties have included land converted to urban uses, which will increase the potential for the Tribes to acquire additional land for continued growth. Major public lands are identified in Figure 5-1.

5-2 PLANNING AREA NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Figure 5-1 Major Public Land Distribution in Tribal Planning Area

5-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Age of Building Stock

The year of construction is significant in determining the potential impact from various hazards due to construction standards in place at the time. A breakdown of construction in the Tribal Planning Area is generalized as follows; however, specific dates were utilized within the Hazus and GIS assessment to determine vulnerability of the structures. Exact date of construction for each structure can be obtained from the Planning or Housing Departments. Within the Klamath County planning area, roughly half of the homes were built before 1970, reducing the level of seismic building code standards and floodplain management associated with the construction (State HMP, 2015). Tribally owned data is as follows. – Residential structures range in year built from 1970 to 2012. Several structures were built in 1970, 1990, 2000, 2006, and 2012. Four are joisted masonry with metal roofs, the majority being wood frame with composition roofs. Nine are modular frame structures, with four manufactured homes, all three-bedroom homes built in 1990. – There is one 16-unit apartment complex, the Hilyard Apartments in Klamath Falls, built in 1978, and one 14-unit congregate housing complex in Chiloquin built in 2003. – The Tribal Court was built in 1950, with a combination masonry/wood construction, with a metal roof. – The medical/dental clinic was built in 2002 of masonry frame; the Health Administration and Office Building were built in 1978 and 1985, respectively, with wood frame and composition roof, and masonry with wood roof. The maintenance facility for the clinic was built in 2010 – a steel structure. – Tribal Administration Building was constructed in 2001, with wood frame and a metal roof. – Community Gathering Facilities such as the Beatty Church, the Beatty Community Center, and the community center constructed in the 55-acre site in the new housing complex area were built in 1992, 2003, and 2014. The Beatty facilities are both wood frame construction. – The Child Day Care facility is the newest construction, built in 2015, opened November 2016 (see Figure 5-2). – The Kla-Mo-Ya Casino was constructed in 1996; the Gaming Regulatory Department was built in 2002; the casino surveillance office was built in 1992. Figure 5-2 Child/Day Care Facility in Chiloquin – The Wastewater Treatment Facility and Pump House were built in 2006 and 1996, respectively.

Residential Development

Residential land use generally consists of single-family and multi-family dwellings, including manufactured housing, foster care facilities, group quarters, senior housing, assisted housing, and cooperative housing. According to Tribal data, there are 68 single- and multi-residential buildings in the planning area. There is one hotel (business), the Hilyard Apartment Complex, which contains 16 2- and 3- bedroom units. There is also one Congregate Housing Complex in Chiloquin, which consists of 14 2- bedroom units. The Tribes do intend to continue construction of the planned 25-unit housing development in the Chiloquin area once funding becomes available.

5-4 PLANNING AREA NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Non-Residential Development

As indicated, the Tribal Planning Area falls primarily within Klamath County; however, a small portion of tribal lands fall within Lake County. At present, little construction is occurring on Tribal lands; however, the Tribes are diligently pursuing every avenue possible to obtain new and modify existing infrastructure to allow for expansion of the Klamath Tribes, utilizing sound and effective building standards.

Critical Facilities

Critical facilities and infrastructure are those that are essential to the health and welfare of the population. These become especially important after a hazard event. Critical facilities typically include police and fire stations, schools, and emergency operations centers. Critical infrastructure can include the roads and bridges that provide ingress and egress and allow emergency vehicles access to those in need, and the utilities that provide water, electricity, and communication services to the community. Also included are “Tier II” facilities and railroads, which hold or carry significant amounts of hazardous materials with a potential to impact public health and welfare in a hazard event. As defined for this hazard mitigation plan, critical facilities are focused on tribal-owned facilities. The Tribes will continue to rely on the Klamath County Hazard Mitigation Plan and the State of Oregon’s Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan to identify critical or essential facilities which are not owned or managed by the Tribes which are at risk to the hazards of concern.

As the Tribes are relatively limited in their structure base, loss of any structure would significantly impact the Tribes, especially if such a structure fell within FEMA/DHS’ customary definition of critical facility. Losing any structure could result in a severe economic or catastrophic impact, or force a tribal member to leave the area if a housing structure was involved. As such, the planning team determined that critical facilities for the purposes of this planning effort include, but are not limited to the following: • Tribal owned facilities such as department, agency, council facilities, and administrative offices that provide essential services to the Klamath People. • Emergency response facilities needed for disaster response and recovery, including, but not limited to: public safety buildings; emergency services buildings; emergency operations centers; emergency supply storage facilities, and low income, emergency shelter(s), and tribally owned residential structures. • Medical and health facilities used during both emergency response or in the normal course of business. • Facilities that may be used to house or shelter disaster victims, such as: schools, gymnasiums, churches, senior, or community centers. • Public and private utilities and infrastructure vital to maintaining or restoring normal services to the areas damaged by the disaster such as power lines, roads and highways, public works facilities, water and wastewater facilities, etc. • Community gathering places, including culturally significant areas, parks, community centers, gymnasiums, and meeting halls. • Structures or facilities that produce, use, or store highly volatile, flammable, explosive, toxic, and/or water-reactive materials.

5-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

• Cultural sites or facilities that are vitally important to maintaining the Tribes’ cultural history, language, and traditions, such as burial grounds, archaeological sites, and artifact storage facilities.

A database of all (~112) owned Tribal facilities was created to identify vulnerabilities to each hazard addressed by this plan. The risk assessment for each hazard discusses facilities with regard to each specific hazard. Table 5-1 identifies the type of critical facilities (as defined by the Tribes) which are within the Tribal Planning Area. Figure 5-3 identifies the location of Tribal facilities assessed by this plan located throughout the Tribal Planning Area.

TABLE 5-1 CRITICAL FACILITIES

Critical Facilities Count Building Content Total Types

Administration 4 $3,842,426 $676,282 $4,518,708

Casino 13 $4,735,165 $7,013,212 $11,748,377

Gathering Place 4 $3,380,526 $206,610 $3,587,136

HazMat 1 $0 $369,987 $369,987

Health 5 $8,237,285 $3,933,284 $12,170,569

Industry 4 $5,572,589 $1,684,748 $7,257,337

Residential 60 $11,265,442 $5,430,126 $16,695,568

Residential Multi-Family 8 $4,241,741 $1,108,919 $5,350,660

School 1 $2,480,000 $50,000 $2,530,000

Storage 10 $1,958,051 $785,292 $2,743,343

Water/Wastewater 2 $2,103,564 $60,196 $2,163,760

Totals 112 $47,816,789 $21,318,655 $69,135,444

5-6 PLANNING AREA NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Figure 5-3 Tribal Critical Facilities

5-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Tribal Infrastructure The Klamath Tribes own limited utility infrastructure, most being provided by the various service providers in the area, such as local water suppliers (City of Chiloquin and Klamath Falls), and PacifiCorp Power & Light for electricity. Power outages, when they occur, are not excessively long, most lasting only a few hours, and rarely beyond one day. Natural gas is not available within Chiloquin, but is available within Klamath Falls, where the majority of tribal housing is located. In general, energy facilities and infrastructure in Central Oregon support the regional economy and are vulnerable to damage and service disruptions due to natural hazard events. Liquid natural gas pipelines run through Klamath County (as well as Deschutes, Crook, and Jefferson Counties). The region’s diverse energy portfolio — including hydroelectric, natural gas, biomass, and solar voltaic systems —does help boost the general planning area’s ability to withstand system disruptions. The Redmond Regional Airport is of significance to the planning region, as it serves as a primary airport for the State of Oregon should a Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake occur. The Tribes do own a water storage tank at the 55-acre site in Beatty, Oregon, which is currently scheduled for development of 55 residential structures, four of which were completed in 2012. It is unclear when the remaining structures will be completed. There are some wells which provide water to residences, although the specific locations of those wells and ownership information was not readily available to the planning team during development of this update. There is also a Wastewater Treatment Facility associated with the Casino, as well as a pump house. Generator backup does not exist for the wells which provide water to the area, nor tribal facilities. The Planning Team has identified that as a mitigation strategy, especially for the Community Center in Chiloquin, which has a kitchen facility for feeding, and the Administration Building in Klamath Falls, to help ensure continuity of tribal government. Cellular service and communications are standard for the area, with certain areas, especially in densely wooded areas, dropping calls occasionally. However, services are sufficient to support normal usage.

Roadways The majority of major roadways in the region are owned and maintained either by local, state or federal agencies. Within the Tribal Planning Area, there are more than 4,200 miles of roadway in Klamath County, and more than 360 miles within Lake County. Review of Tribal data and information from the National Tribal Transportation Facility Inventory database also identify an extensive number of roadways in the Tribal Planning Area for which the Tribes maintain some level of responsibility or ownership.

Public Transportation The Klamath Tribal Administration’s transportation service, Quail Trail Public Transit, provides free public transportation five days a week, Monday through Friday, with five routes per day between Chiloquin and Klamath Falls. Service is provided year-round, which is particularly necessary for many users during the winter months. Many employees of the Klamath Tribal Administration rely on Quail Trail Public Transit to get them the nearly 30 miles between Chiloquin and Klamath Falls for work.

Bridges The Tribes also have a significant number of bridges (>60) within, or providing ingress and egress to the planning area, although none are owned by the Tribes. Several of the local bridges have recently been updated, including the I-97 bridge updated in early 2000, which is used as a primary route into the area. In addition, the Williamson River Bridges #1 and 2, the Sprague River Bridge #2, the bridges on Pine Ridge and Modoc Point Roads, and the bridge on I-97 in Klamath Falls have all recently been upgraded.

5-8 PLANNING AREA NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Rail Railroads running through the area support cargo and trade flows. Major (Class I) freight rail providers are the Union Pacific (UP) and the Burlington Northern-Santa Fe (BNSF) railroads. There is one major rail yard in Klamath Falls operated by BNSF and UP (Cambridge Systematics, 2014). The Klamath Falls Yard has two adjacent yards, which are is used for switching, storing rail cars, and for locomotive repair (Cambridge Systematics, 2014). A significant amount of rail lines do run through the planning area (over 460 miles worth of track). The hazardous materials carried on those lines are of significant concern to the Tribes. Commodity flow would be significantly impact should a disaster incident occur which impacts the rail lines, as the lines service as a primary source of transportation along the entire West Coast. Amtrak also provides passenger rail service from the Willamette Valley to Los Angeles, California, with stops in Chemult and Klamath Falls via the Coast Starlight line.

General Public Safety Information Emergency Management: Emergency management functions are the responsibility of Tribal Administration. The General Manager is currently the designated Emergency Manager, but duties for emergency management planning are shared throughout several departments. Currently, the Planning Director assists with hazards planning, grant writing, and public outreach efforts. The various Tribal departments have taken proactive steps to enhance the Tribes’ capabilities with respect to emergency response and recovery efforts for both pre-and post- disaster efforts as discussed throughout this plan. While many of these activities (such as this mitigation plan) have been grant funded through various federal programs, policy development to enhance resilience of the Tribes has been funded through other Tribal Funds. Given the current economic condition of the Tribes (impoverished community), this demonstrates the Tribes’ commitment to developing a robust and applicable all hazards emergency management program. During the life cycle of this plan, the Tribes will continue to seek funds to assist in the development of various response plans, including a: Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan; Continuity of Operation’s Plan, and a Recovery Plan, which will further enhance the Tribes’ resiliency to disasters. National Incident Management System (NIMS): The Tribes have adopted the National Incident Management System (NIMS) as its operating structure for emergency events. The Tribes do not own any designated Red Cross Shelters. Once the Hazard Mitigation Plan has been completed, the Tribes will utilize the data in the future for potential evacuation planning, although currently, it does rely on the Klamath County to provide emergency response and damage assessment functions. Disaster Declaration Policy: The Tribes are working towards establishing a program which will support the Klamath Tribes’ capabilities and capacities to go directly to FEMA for Disaster Declarations for future incidents which may occur in the Klamath Tribes’ Planning Area. Completion of this mitigation is a required step in meeting the requirements for that effort. Law and Gaming Enforcement: Pursuant to Public Law 280, police services are provided through Klamath County Sheriff’s Department and Oregon State Police; the Tribes have no police or jail facilities. Forest Service lands, which encompass a large part of the planning area, are patrolled by Forest Service Law Enforcement. Klamath Indian Game Commission has jurisdiction over Tribal Members violating fishing and hunting regulations.

5-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Tribal Court: There is a Court facility housing a Court of General Jurisdiction, dealing with child welfare, delinquency, housing and some domestic issues; it is currently a non-criminal court, with a part-time, contracted judge providing services. Schools, Community Centers, and Shelters: There are no schools owned or operated by the Tribes, although there is one newly constructed child care facility which became operational in September 2016. There are two Community Centers (Beatty and Chiloquin), one of which (Chiloquin) provides daily meals for seniors; that center does have kitchen facilities. If needed, those facilities could provide emergency shelters for cooling, warming or feeding purposes, although they have not yet been designated in that capacity, nor ever used in that manner to date. Neither of the facilities currently have generators, but this gap has been identified within the strategies. Other than emergency housing, there are no designated shelters. The Tribes do own one church, which could be utilized to help shelter (very short term) Tribal Members should an incident occur in the Tribal Planning Area, although the Church does not have large restroom facilities, nor a kitchen or sleeping quarters. The facility would also require a generator (noted as a potential strategy in this update). Hospital, Medical, Ambulance, and Assisted Living Capabilities: Sky Lakes Medical Center is the closest hospital in the area, approximately 30 minutes from the City of Chiloquin in Klamath Falls. There are no assisted living facilities in the Tribal Planning Area owned by the Tribes, although it does have a Congregate Housing Unit containing 14 apartments in Chiloquin in which several Elders reside. Medical staff is available in the Chiloquin area during normal business hours, but are not provided on a 24/7 operation. Ambulance services are provided as needed. Fire Services: Fire services are contracted in parts of Chiloquin; no contract for services exist within Klamath Falls, but local fire agencies respond as needed from various districts and stations, none of which are owned by the Tribes. The Tribes do have staff and tribal members trained in firefighting techniques.

5-10 PLANNING AREA NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

This page intentionally left blank.

5-11

CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER 6. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT

The planning team performed an inventory and analysis of existing authorities and capabilities called a “capability assessment.” A capability assessment creates an inventory of the Tribes’ mission, programs and policies, and evaluates its capacity to carry them out. Table 6-1 summarizes the legal and regulatory capability of the Klamath Tribes. Table 6-2 summarizes the administrative and technical capability. Table 6-3 summarizes fiscal capability. Table 6-4 identifies mitigation efforts which are on-going in the Klamath Tribes’ Planning Area.

TABLE 6-1 LEGAL AND REGULATORY CAPABILITY

Tribal Authority Other or Program in Jurisdictional State Place Authority Mandated Comments Codes, Ordinances & Requirements Building Code Y Klamath Yes Seismic Standards D1; Wind Design County OSSC Section 1609.1 – Exposure IBC 2012 Standards Category C; Soil bearing pressure 1500 Adopted July 1, 2014 pounds/sq. ft.; Snow load minimum 20 pounds/sq. ft. (http://www.klamathcounty.org/depts/cdd/ building/code-design-criteria.asp)

Zoning Ordinance N Y Y The Tribes have not established an ordinance yet. Subdivision Ordinance N Y Y Floodplain Ordinance N Y Y The Tribes do not have land use regulations in place yet; however, when constructing property, they do adhere to federal standards, which require adherence to floodplain regulations. Stormwater Management N Post Disaster Recovery N Real Estate Disclosure N N Y Oregon’s seller disclosure law requires a statement concerning hazard exposure, e.g., whether a property is classified as a forestland-urban interface, whether it is in a floodplain, etc. Growth Management N Y Y Site Plan Review N Public Health and Safety Y Climate Change Adaptation N Natural Hazard Specific N Y Y Ordinance (stormwater, steep slope, wildfire, etc.)

6-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 6-1 LEGAL AND REGULATORY CAPABILITY

Tribal Authority Other or Program in Jurisdictional State Place Authority Mandated Comments Oregon Emergency Conflagration N Y Y Helps protect WUI communities that Act have depleted their local resources when threatened by an advancing fire. Environmental Protection N Dam Safety N Y Y Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 690 (2015) Oregon Forestland-Urban Y State/County Yes Senate Bill 360: enlists aid of property Interface Fire Protection Act owners toward the goal of turning (2013) properties into less volatile zones, enhancing firefighter safety and effectiveness. While not mandated by the Bill, the Tribes are actively involved in forestland protection activities, being part of various committees involving local, state and federal partners. Planning Documents General or Comprehensive Plan In-Process Yes Is the plan equipped to provide linkage to this mitigation plan? When completed, yes. Floodplain or Basin Plan N Stormwater Plan N Capital Improvement Plan Y Habitat Conservation Plan N Economic Self-Sufficiency Plan Y Shoreline Management Plan N/A N/A Yes Community Wildfire Protection N Y Y Some jurisdictions within the planning Plan region are part of the Firewise program, Klamath County has a 2007 CWPP (most recent found). The Tribes do not have a CWPP in place; however, they were part of the planning process. Transportation Plan N Response/Recovery Planning Comprehensive Emergency Draft Y Y Management Plan Threat and Hazard Identification N Unknown Y and Risk Assessment Terrorism Plan N Unknown Y Law enforcement services are contracted; it is unknown whether existing providers have a completed Terrorism Plan in place.

6-2 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT

TABLE 6-1 LEGAL AND REGULATORY CAPABILITY

Tribal Authority Other or Program in Jurisdictional State Place Authority Mandated Comments Post-Disaster Recovery Plan N Continuity of Operations Plan N Public Health Plans Y

Administration, Boards, and Commission Planning Commission N

Mitigation Planning Committee Y See Chapter 2 which identifies plans; some members were also members of the previous HMP effort. Fire Defense Board Unknown Yes Unknown Klamath County

Maintenance programs to reduce Y risk (e.g., tree trimming, clearing drainage systems, chipping, etc.)

Mutual Aid Agreements / Y With County N The Tribes have MOUs and MAAs Memorandums of Understanding and others with various entities to provide fire services. Other

TABLE 6-2 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

Staff/Personnel Resources Available? Department/Agency/Position Planners or engineers with knowledge of land development and Yes Planning Department Staff land management practices Professionals trained in building or infrastructure construction Yes Contracted services through County practices (building officials, fire inspectors, etc.) Engineers specializing in construction practices? Yes Contracted services through County Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Several in various Tribal Departments. Staff with training in benefit/cost analysis Yes Tribes have performed BCAs. Surveyors Yes Contracted services as needed. Personnel skilled or trained in GIS applications Yes Natural Resources has GIS. Personnel skilled or trained in Hazus use No Scientist familiar with natural hazards in local area Yes Foresters Emergency Manager Yes Tribal Administration General Manager is the designated EM

6-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 6-2 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

Grant writers Yes Various tribal staff write grant applications, as well as contractors.

Warning Systems/Services Yes Through County services

Hazard data and information available to public Yes Risk assessment maps are available for review in person and on website.

Maintain Elevation Certificates No

TABLE 6-3 FISCAL CAPABILITIES

Financial Resources Accessible or Eligible to Use?

1. Community Development Block Grants Yes, utilized recently to construct Community Center, which serves as Elders’ feeding center. 2. Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes 3. Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Authority, but never executed. 4. User Fees For Water, Sewer, Gas or Electric Service No 5. Impact Fees for Buyers or Developers of New Development/Homes (Not No at present, but potentially may occur during life-cycle of HMP) 6. Incur Debt through General Obligation Bonds Yes 7. Incur Debt through Special Tax Bonds Yes 8. Incur Debt through Private Activity Bonds No 9. Could Withhold Public Expenditures in Hazard-Prone Areas Yes 10. State-Sponsored Grant Programs Yes. 11. Bureau of Indian Affairs Sponsored Grant Yes 12. Indian Health Services Grant Yes 13. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Rural Development Agency Yes 14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Yes 15. U.S. Fire Administration Yes 16. Tribal Homeland Security Grants Yes 17. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers No 18. Stafford Act Grants Yes 19. Healthy Forest Restoration Act Provides funding to reduce or eliminate hazardous fuels; aims to create fuel breaks by reducing density of vegetation and trees; improve forest fighting capabilities, and research new methods to reduce the impact of invasive insets.

6-4 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT

TABLE 6-4 ON-GOING MITIGATION EFFORTS

Available? Mitigation Effort Yes/No Department/Agency/Position Hazardous Vegetation Abatement Program Y Through various partnerships with the Forest Service, Fremont-Winema National Forest, Chiloquin Ranger District, and the Klamath Tribes Noxious Weed Eradication Program or other N vegetation management Fire Safe Councils or Fire Wise Community Y While the Tribes themselves are not a Fire Wise Community, surrounding jurisdictions are and the Tribes actively participate in CWPP development Chipper program N Defensible space inspections program N Creek, stream, culvert or storm drain maintenance or N cleaning program Stream restoration program Y Various on-going efforts as well as several completed efforts (discussed in Chapter 19-Mitigation Strategy). Erosion or sediment control program N Address signage for property addresses Y Other 6.1 EXISTING REGULATIONS Pertinent federal laws are described below. It should be noted that as a sovereign nation, the Tribes are not required to adhere to any local or state planning regulations; however, in an effort to be a good steward and neighbor, the Tribes do strive to plan in consideration of state and local requirements. The Tribes must comply with applicable federal regulations for construction and maintenance of facilities, such as those administered by HUD and EPA, as well as other federal agencies. This places a significant burden upon the Tribes as they are doubly impacted in their efforts when developing land use authority and other regulatory statutes. Federal

Disaster Mitigation Act The DMA is the current federal legislation addressing hazard mitigation planning. It emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur. It specifically addresses planning at the local level, requiring plans to be in place before Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds are available to communities. This plan is designed to meet the requirements of DMA, improving eligibility for future hazard mitigation funds.

Endangered Species Act The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) was enacted in 1973 to conserve species facing depletion or extinction and the ecosystems that support them. The act sets forth a process for determining which species are threatened and endangered and requires the conservation of the critical habitat in which those species

6-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

live. The ESA provides broad protection for species of fish, wildlife and plants that are listed as threatened or endangered. Provisions are made for listing species, as well as for recovery plans and the designation of critical habitat for listed species. The ESA outlines procedures for federal agencies to follow when taking actions that may jeopardize listed species and contains exceptions and exemptions. Criminal and civil penalties are provided for violations of the ESA.

Federal agencies must seek to conserve endangered and threatened species and use their authorities in furtherance of the ESA’s purposes. The ESA defines three fundamental terms: • Endangered means that a species of fish, animal or plant is “in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” (For salmon and other vertebrate species, this may include subspecies and distinct population segments.) • Threatened means that a species “is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future.” Regulations may be less restrictive for threatened species than for endangered species. • Critical habitat means “specific geographical areas that are…essential for the conservation and management of a listed species, whether occupied by the species or not.”

Clean Water Act

The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) employs regulatory and non-regulatory tools to reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. These tools are employed to achieve the broader goal of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s surface waters so that they can support “the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.”

Evolution of CWA programs over the last decade has included a shift from a program-by-program, source- by-source, pollutant-by-pollutant approach to more holistic watershed-based strategies. Under the watershed approach, equal emphasis is placed on protecting healthy waters and restoring impaired ones. A full array of issues are addressed, not just those subject to CWA regulatory authority. Involvement of stakeholder groups in the development and implementation of strategies for achieving and maintaining water quality and other environmental goals is a hallmark of this approach.

The EPA recognizes that Indian Tribes face serious human health and environmental problems, and are working with the Indian Tribes to protect the health and environment of waters in Indian Country. Presently, the Klamath Tribes have partnered with other entities to assist with several watershed restoration projects in its efforts to return the watersheds to a healthy state. Those include riparian projects on the Klamath, Lost and Sprague Rivers; the Upper Klamath Lake; Upper Klamath River, and the Williamson River.

Presidential Disaster Declarations Presidentially declared disasters are disaster events that cause more damage than state and local governments/resources can handle without federal assistance. There is not generally a specific dollar threshold that must be met. A Presidential Major Disaster Declaration puts into motion long-term federal recovery programs, some of which are matched by state programs, and designed to help disaster victims, businesses, and public entities. A Presidential Emergency Declaration can also be declared, but assistance is limited to specific emergency needs.

6-6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT

Non-FEMA Disaster Declarations Unique to Tribes is the fact that disaster declarations can also be granted by other federal agencies other than FEMA, such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. In such cases, similar to a Presidentially Declared event, funds are designated to help the Tribes recover from the impact of disaster events, and customarily carry a match requirement. Those funds are limited to specific needs, and are limited in nature.

State-Level Planning Initiatives

The Klamath Tribes must comply with all applicable Federal regulations, which many times are much more stringent than those regulations which state or local jurisdictions must address. This places a much heavier burden on the Tribes as they continue to grow and develop tribal lands. As a sovereign nation, the Tribes are not subject to state or local requirements; however, in the spirit of being a good neighbor and in partnership with the surrounding jurisdictions, the Tribes do consider its local communities in all of its planning initiatives. Some Tribal planning initiatives which the Tribes are undertaking also coincide with the following state planning initiatives:

– Oregon General Planning – Oregon Environmental Quality Act (Similar to NEPA) – Senate Bill 97: Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Oregon State Building Code – Oregon State Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Planning Oregon Senate Bill (SB) 360 (Forestland / Urban Interface Protection Act, 1997): (1) establishes legislative policy for fire protection, (2) defines urban/wildland interface areas for regulatory purposes, (3) establishes standards for locating homes in the urban/wildland interface, and (4) provides a means for establishing an integrated fire protection system.

Tribal

Comprehensive Plan The Tribes are currently in the process of developing its strategic plan, which is anticipated to be in force potentially during the life cycle of this mitigation plan, or five years. Information contained within this document will be utilized in helping to determine zoning and regulatory authority to reduce the impacts of disasters on Tribal members, while still taking into consideration the Tribes’ ultimate goal of protecting its members, its cultural heritage, and the environment. Additionally, information from this plan will also be utilized with respect to funding opportunities as the Tribes continue to expand its land mass and tribal membership living in the Tribal Planning Area.

Tribal Code The Tribes do have a Tribal Code in place, the majority of which are civil related issues. At present, the Tribes do not have law enforcement, and therefore either state or county codes are utilized for enforcement of criminal activities. However, they do maintain hunting and fishing licensing and enforcement activities. The Tribes are in the process of developing land use authority, which when completed will be adopted by Tribal Council.

6-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

This page intentionally left blank.

6-8

Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan

PART 3 — RISK ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER 7. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

7.1 OVERIEW The DMA requires measuring potential losses to critical facilities and property resulting from natural hazards. A hazard is an act or phenomenon that has the potential to produce harm or other undesirable consequences to a person or thing. Natural hazards can exist with or without the presence of people and land development. However, hazards can be exacerbated by societal behavior and practice, such as building in a floodplain, along a sea cliff, or on an earthquake fault. Natural disasters are inevitable, but the impacts of natural hazards can, at a minimum, be mitigated or, in some instances, prevented entirely.

The goal of the risk assessment is to determine which hazards present the greatest risk and what areas are the most vulnerable to hazards. The Klamath Tribes are exposed to many natural and other hazards. The risk assessment and vulnerability analysis helps identify where mitigation measures could reduce loss of life or damage to property in the planning region. Each hazard-specific risk assessment provides risk-based information to assist the Klamath Tribes in determining priorities for implementing mitigation measures.

The risk assessment approach used for this plan entailed using geographic information system (GIS), Hazus hazard-modeling software, and hazard-impact data to develop vulnerability models for people, structures and critical facilities, and evaluating those vulnerabilities in relation to hazard profiles that model where hazards exist. This approach is dependent on the detail and accuracy of the data used. In all instances, this assessment used Best Available Science and data to ensure the highest level of accuracy possible.

This risk assessment is broken down into three phases, as follows:

The first phase, hazard identification, involves the identification of the geographic extent of a hazard, its intensity, and its probability of occurrence (discussed below). This level of assessment typically involves producing a map. The outputs from this phase can be used for land use planning, management, and development of regulatory authority; public awareness and education; identifying areas which require further study; and identifying properties or structures appropriate for mitigation efforts, such as acquisition or relocation.

The second phase, the vulnerability assessment, combines the information from the hazard identification with an inventory of the existing (or planned) property and population exposed to the hazard. It then attempts to predict how different types of property and population groups will be impacted or affected by the hazard of concern. This step assists in justifying changes to building codes or regulatory authority, property acquisition programs, such as those available through various granting opportunities; developing or modifying policies concerning critical or essential facilities, and public awareness and education.

The third phase, the risk analysis, involves estimating the damage, injuries, and costs likely to be incurred in the geographic area of concern over a period of time. Risk has two measurable components:

7-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

1. The magnitude of the harm that may result, defined through the vulnerability assessment; and 2. The likelihood or probability of harm occurring.

Utilizing those three phases of assessment, information was developed which identifies the hazards that affect the planning area, the likely location of natural hazard impact, the severity of the impact, previous occurrences, and the probability of future hazard events. That data, once complete, is utilized to complete the Risk Ranking process described in Chapter 18, which applies all of the data capture to the Calculated Priority Risk Index (CPRI).

The following is provided as the foundation for the standardized risk terminology utilized in this effort: • Hazard: Natural, human caused or technological source or cause of harm or damage, demonstrated as actual (deterministic/historical events) or potential (probabilistic) events. • Risk: The potential for an unwanted outcome resulting from a hazard event, as determined by its likelihood and associated consequences. For this plan, when possible, risk includes potential future losses based on probability, severity and vulnerability, expressed in dollar losses. In some instances, dollar losses are based on actual demonstrated impact, such as through the use of the Hazus model. In other cases, losses are demonstrated through exposure analysis due to the inability to determine the extent to which a structure is impacted. • Extent and Location: The area of potential or demonstrated impact within the area in which the analysis is being conducted. In some instances, the area of impact is within a geographically defined area, such as a floodplain. In other instances, such as for severe weather, there is no established geographic boundary associated with the hazard, as it can impact the entire area. • Severity/Magnitude: The extent or magnitude on which a hazard is ranked, demonstrated in various means, e.g., Richter Scale. • Vulnerability: The degree of damage, e.g., building damage or the number of people injured. • Probability of Occurrence and Return Intervals: These terms are used as a synonym for likelihood, or the estimation of the potential of an incident to occur.

7.2 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND PROFILES For this plan, the planning partners and stakeholders considered the full range of natural hazards that could impact the planning area and then listed hazards that present the greatest concern. The process incorporated review of state and local hazard planning documents, as well as information on the frequency, magnitude and costs associated with hazards that have impacted or could impact the planning area. Anecdotal information regarding natural hazards and the perceived vulnerability of the planning area’s assets to them was also used. Based on the review, the planning team, at its kick-off meeting, identified the following natural hazards that this plan addresses as the hazards of concern: • Climate Change • Dam Failure • Drought • Earthquake • Flood • Landslide

7-2 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

• Severe Weather • Volcano • Wildfire • Other Hazards of Concern (Human-caused and Technological hazards) This is a change from the previous plan editions. Two new hazards are included—Climate Change and a category of “Other Hazards of Concern” which combines human caused and technological hazards. In addition, the Severe Weather chapter is inclusive of all hazards previously addressed into one chapter, rather than each type of severe weather event identified independently. Based on the full spectrum of hazards addressed, it is the intent of the Tribes to use this risk assessment in lieu of preparing a separate hazard identification and vulnerability assessment for other planning efforts which may require same.

The hazard profiles describe the risks associated with identified hazards of concern. Each chapter describes the hazard, the planning area’s vulnerabilities, and, when possible, probable event scenarios. The following steps were used to define the risk of each hazard:

Identify and profile the following information for each hazard: – General overview and description of hazard; – Identification of previous occurrences; – Geographic areas most affected by the hazard; – Event frequency estimates; – Severity estimates; – Warning time likely to be available for response; – Risk and vulnerability assessment, which includes identification of impact on people, property, economy and the environment.

7.3 RISK ASSESSMENT PROCESS AND TOOLS The hazard profiles and risk assessments contained in Chapter 8 through Chapter 17 describe the risks associated with each identified hazard of concern. Each chapter describes the hazard, the planning area’s vulnerabilities, and probable event scenarios. Chapter 18 summarizes all of the analysis completed by way of completion of the Calculated Priority Risk Index (CPRI) for hazard ranking.

Once the profiles identified in Section 7.2 were completed, the following steps were used to define the risk of each hazard: • Determine exposure to each hazard—Exposure was determined by overlaying hazard maps with an inventory of structures, facilities, and systems to determine which of them would be exposed to each hazard. • Assess the vulnerability of exposed facilities—Vulnerability of exposed structures and infrastructure was determined by interpreting the probability of occurrence of each event and assessing structures, facilities, and systems that are exposed to each hazard. Tools such as GIS and Hazus (discussed below) were used in this assessment. • Where specific quantitative assessments could not be completed, vulnerability was measured in general, qualitative term, summarizing the potential impact based on past occurrences,

7-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

spatial extent, and subjective damage and casualty potential. Those items were categorized utilizing the criteria established in the CPRI (see below). • The final step in the process was to determine the cumulative results of vulnerability based on the risk assessment/CPRI schedule, assigning a final qualitative assessment based on the following classifications: □ Extremely Low—The occurrence and potential cost of damage to life and property is very minimal to nonexistent. □ Low—Minimal potential impact. The occurrence and potential cost of damage to life and property is minimal. □ Medium—Moderate potential impact. This ranking carries a moderate threat level to the general population and/or built environment. Here the potential damage is more isolated and less costly than a more widespread disaster. □ High—Widespread potential impact. This ranking carries a high threat to the general population and/or built environment. The potential for damage is widespread. Hazards in this category may have occurred in the past. □ Extremely High—Very widespread with catastrophic impact. Calculated Priority Risk Index Scoring Criteria: For identification purposes, the six criteria on which the CPRI is based are as follows:

Vulnerability and Area of Impact Vulnerabilities are described in terms of critical facilities, structures, population, and socioeconomic values that can be affected by the hazard event. Hazard impact areas describe the geographic extent a hazard can impact a jurisdiction and are uniquely defined on a hazard-by- hazard basis. Mapping of the hazards, where spatial differences exist, allows for hazard analysis by geographic location. Some hazards can have varying levels of risk based on location. Other hazards cover larger geographic areas and affect the area uniformly.

Probability Probability of a hazard event occurring in the future was assessed based on hazard frequency over a 100- year period (where available). Hazard frequency was based on the number of times the hazard event occurred divided by the period of record. If the hazard lacked a definitive historical record, the probability was assessed qualitatively based on regional history and other contributing factors.

Probability of occurrence was assigned a 40% weighting factor. Probability was broken down as follows:

➢ Highly Likely – greater than 1 event per year (frequency greater than 1). ➢ Likely – less than 1 event per year but greater than 1 event every 10 years (frequency greater than 0.1 but less than 1). ➢ Possible – less than 1 event every 10 years but greater than 1 event every 100 years (frequency greater than 0. 01 but less than 0.1). ➢ Unlikely – less than 1 event every 500 years (frequency less than 0.002)

Magnitude The magnitude of potential hazard events was evaluated for each hazard. Magnitude is a measure of the strength of a hazard event and is usually determined using technical measures specific to the

7-4 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

hazard. Magnitude was calculated for each hazard where property damage data was available, and was assigned a 25% weighting factor.

Magnitude was broken down as follows: ➢ Negligible – Very minor impact to people, property, economy, and continuity of government ➢ Limited – Injuries or illnesses minor in nature, with only slight property damage and minimal loss associated with economic impact; continuity of government only slightly impacted, with 80% functionality. ➢ Critical – Injuries result in some permanent disability; 15-29% of population on Reservation impacted; moderate property damage (greater than 20%); moderate impact to economy, with loss of revenue and facility impact; tribal government at 50% operational capacity with service disruption more than one week, but less than a month. ➢ Catastrophic – Injuries and illness resulting in permanent disability and death to more than 30% of the population; severe property damage greater than 50%; economy significantly impacted as a result of loss of buildings, content, inventory; tribal government significantly impacted; limited services provided, with disruption anticipated to last beyond one month.

Extent and Location The area within the planning area impacted by the event, and the extent (degree) to which they are impacted. Extent and location was assigned a weighting factor of 20%.

Warning Time/Speed of Onset The rate at which a hazard occurs, or the time provided in advance of a situation occurring (e.g., notice of a cold front approaching or a potential hurricane, etc.) provides the time necessary to prepare for such an event. Sudden-impact hazards with no advanced warning are of greater concern. Warning Time/Speed of onset was assigned a 10% weighting factor.

Warning Time / Speed of Onset was broken down as follows: ➢ <6 hours ➢ 6 – 12 hours ➢ 12 – 24 hours ➢ >24 hours

Duration The time span associated with an event was also considered, the concept being the longer an event occurs, the greater the threat or potential for injuries and damages. Duration was assigned a weighting factor of 5%, and was broken down as follows: ➢ <6 hours ➢ <24 hours ➢ <1 week ➢ >1 week

Utilizing the below elements, the risk assessment for this hazard mitigation plan evaluates the risk of natural hazards prevalent in the Klamath Tribes Planning Area as defined, and meets requirements of the DMA (44 CFR Section 201.7(c)(2)).

7-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Hazus and GIS Applications Earthquake and Flood Modeling Overview In 1997, FEMA developed the standardized Hazards U.S., or Hazus, model to estimate losses caused by earthquakes and identify areas that face the highest risk and potential for loss. Hazus was later expanded into a multi-hazard methodology, with new models for estimating potential losses from hurricanes and floods.

Hazus is a GIS-based software program used to support risk assessments, mitigation planning, and emergency planning and response. It provides a wide range of inventory data, such as demographics, building stock, critical facility, transportation and utility lifeline, and multiple models to estimate potential losses from natural disasters. The program maps and displays hazard data and the results of damage and economic loss estimates for buildings and infrastructure. Its advantages include the following: • Provides a consistent methodology for assessing risk across geographic and political entities. • Provides a way to save data so that it can readily be updated as population, inventory, and other factors change and as mitigation planning efforts evolve. • Facilitates the review of mitigation plans because it helps to ensure that FEMA methodologies are incorporated. • Supports grant applications by calculating benefits using FEMA definitions and terminology. • Produces hazard data and loss estimates that can be used in communication with local stakeholders. • Is administered by the tribal or local government and can be used to manage and update a hazard mitigation plan throughout its implementation. Levels of Detail for Evaluation HAZUS provides default data for inventory, vulnerability, and hazards; this default data can be supplemented with local data to provide a more refined analysis. The model can carry out three levels of analysis, depending on the format and level of detail of information about the planning area: • Level 1—All of the information needed to produce an estimate of losses is included in the software’s default data. This data is derived from national databases and describes in general terms the characteristic parameters of the planning area. • Level 2—More accurate estimates of losses require more detailed information about the planning area. To produce Level 2 estimates of losses, detailed information is required about local geology, hydrology, hydraulics and building inventory, as well as data about utilities and critical facilities. This information is needed in a GIS format. • Level 3—This level of analysis generates the most accurate estimate of losses. It requires detailed engineering and geotechnical information to customize it for the planning area. Building Inventory A User Defined Facility approach was used to model exposure and vulnerability. GIS building data utilizing detailed structure information for tribal facilities was loaded into the GIS and Hazus model. Building information was developed using best available Tribal data, including building address points, aerial imagery, and Tribal staff resources. Building and content replacement values were estimated using values from the Tribes’ 2007 Hazard Mitigation Plan, insurance policy data, and national replacement cost

7-6 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY estimating guides as appropriate. Emphasis was put on developing the most accurate representation of buildings using best available resources. Tribal building inventory included in excess of 110 Tribal facilities identified in Chapter 5.

Hazus Application for This Plan The following methods were used to assess specific hazards for this plan: • Flood—A Hazus Level 2 analysis was performed. Analysis was based on current FEMA regulatory 100-year flood hazard data (no 500-year data was contained within the flood study). Data was digitized from the original 1984 FIRM. As of the 2017 update, there were no Tribal buildings exposed to the flood hazard as identified in the FIRM. • Earthquake—A Hazus Level 2 Hazus 3.2 analysis was performed to assess earthquake risk and exposure. Earthquake shake maps and probabilistic data prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) were used for the analysis of this hazard. A modified version of the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) soils inventory was used. One scenario event was modeled: – The scenario event was the 1993 Magnitude-6.5 event which occurred in Klamath Falls developed by USGS in 2009. This is the most current ShakeMap available for the area. – The standard HAZUS analysis for the 100- and 500-year probabilistic events was run.

Drought, Dam, Landslide, Severe Weather, and Wildfire For drought, dam, landslide, severe weather and wildfire, historical data is not adequate to model future losses as no specific damage functions have been developed. However, GIS is able to map hazard areas and calculate exposure if geographic information is available with respect to the location of the hazard and inventory data. Areas and inventory susceptible to some of the hazards of concern were mapped and exposure was evaluated. For other hazards, a qualitative analysis was conducted using the best available data and professional judgment. Locally relevant information was gathered from a variety of sources. Frequency and severity indicators include past events and the expert opinions of geologists, tribal staff, emergency management personnel and others. The primary data source was the Klamath Tribes’ GIS database, augmented with county, state, and federal data sets. Additional data sources for specific hazards were as follows: Drought—The risk assessment methodologies used for this plan focus on damage to structures. Because drought does not impact structures, the risk assessment for drought was more limited and qualitative than the assessment for the other hazards of concern. The impact from drought also references fish loss associated with the negative impact of climate change on water levels, and sedimentation issues resulting from drought situations. Dam Failure—Inundation data was unavailable for either the Link River or the Chiloquin Dams. Oregon Water Resources Department data was used to identify location and hazard classification of dams located within the planning area. Landslide—Historic landslide hazard data was used to assess exposure to landslides using Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) 2016 Landslide Susceptibility data. This data depicts landslide susceptibility at a 10-meter resolution, across the state of Oregon. The data was created using Oregon Lidar Consortium (OLC) data, and USGS NED data where OLC data was not present. This elevation data was converted into

7-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

slopes, and a multi-pronged analysis process used these slopes, geology and mapped existing landslides to create this 10-meter raster. Once completed, four (4) classes of landslide susceptibility were developed: Low, Moderate, High, and Very High. Severe Weather—Severe weather data was downloaded from the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the National Climatic Data Center, as well as PRISM 1981-2010 Precipitation, Average Low, and Average High data. Wind Power Resource data was also utilized. Wildfire—Information on wildfire analysis was captured from various sources, including Oregon Department of Forestry Wildfire History (1967-2015), Wildfire Protection data, LIDAR data (where available), US Forest Service data, LAND FIRE data, and Wildland Urban Interface Zone data, among other sources. Probability of Occurrence and Return Intervals Natural hazard events with relatively long return periods, such as a 100-year flood or a 500-year earthquake, are often thought to be very unlikely. In reality, the probability that such events occur over the next 30 or 50 years is relatively high.

Natural hazard events with very long return periods, such as 100 or 500 or 1,000 years, have significant probabilities of occurring during the lifetime of a building: • Hazard events with return periods of 100 years have probabilities of occurring in the next 30 or 50 years of about 26 percent and about 40 percent, respectively. • Hazard events with return periods of 500 years have about a 6 percent and about a 10 percent chance of occurring over the next 30 or 50 years, respectively. • Hazard events with return periods of 1,000 years have about a 3 percent chance and about a 5 percent chance of occurring over the next 30 or 50 years, respectively.

For life safety considerations, even natural hazard events with return periods of more than 1,000 years are often deemed significant if the consequences of the event happening are very severe (extremely high damage and/or substantial loss of life). For example, the seismic design requirements for new construction are based on the level of ground shaking with a return period of 2,475 years (2 percent probability in 50 years). Providing life safety for this level of ground shaking is deemed necessary for seismic design of new buildings to minimize life safety risk. Of course, a hazard event with a relatively long return period may occur tomorrow, next year, or within a few years. Return periods of 100 years, 500 years or 1,000 years mean that such events have a 1 percent, a 0.2 percent or a 0.1 percent chance of occurring in any given year.

7.4 LIMITATIONS Loss estimates, exposure assessments and hazard-specific vulnerability evaluations rely on the best available data and methodologies. Uncertainties are inherent in any loss estimation methodology and arise in part from incomplete scientific knowledge concerning natural hazards and their effects on the built environment. Uncertainties also result from the following: • Approximations and simplifications necessary to conduct a study; • Incomplete or outdated inventory, demographic or economic parameter data; • The unique nature, geographic extent and severity of each hazard;

7-8 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

• Mitigation measures already employed; and • The amount of advance notice residents have to prepare for a specific hazard event.

These factors can affect loss estimates by a factor of two or more. Therefore, potential exposure and loss estimates are approximate. The results do not predict precise results and should be used only to understand relative risk for planning purposes.

7-9

CHAPTER 8. CLIMATE CHANGE CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 WHAT IS CLIMATE CHANGE? Climate, consisting of patterns of temperature, precipitation, humidity, wind, and seasons, plays a fundamental role in shaping natural ecosystems and the human economies and cultures that depend on them. “Climate change” refers to changes over a long period of time. Worldwide, average temperatures have increased more than 1.4ºF over the last 100 years (NRC, 2010). Although this change may seem small, it can lead to large changes in climate and weather.

The warming trend and its related impacts are caused by increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the earth’s atmosphere. Greenhouse gases are gases that trap heat in the atmosphere, resulting in a warming effect. Carbon dioxide is the most commonly known greenhouse gas; however, methane, nitrous oxide and fluorinated gases also contribute to warming. Emissions of these gases come from a variety of sources, such as the combustion of fossil fuels, agricultural production, and changes in land use. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), carbon dioxide concentrations measured about 280 parts per million (ppm) before the industrial era began in the late 1700s and have risen 41 percent since then, reaching 394 ppm in 2012 (see Figure 8-1). The EPA attributes almost all of this increase to human activities (U.S. EPA, 2013f).

Figure 8-1. Global Carbon Dioxide Concentrations Over Time

Climate change will affect the people, property, economy, and ecosystems of the Klamath Tribal Planning Areas in a variety of ways. Some impacts will have negative consequences for the region, while others may present opportunities. The most important effect for the development of this plan is that climate change may have a measurable impact on the occurrence and severity of natural hazards.

8.2 HOW CLIMATE CHANGE AFFECTS HAZARD MITIGATION An essential aspect of hazard mitigation is predicting the likelihood of hazard events in a planning area. Typically, predictions are based on statistical projections from records of past events. This approach

8-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

assumes that the likelihood of hazard events remains essentially unchanged over time. Thus, averages based on the past frequencies of, for example, floods are used to estimate future frequencies: if a river has flooded an average of once every five years for the past 100 years, then it can be expected to continue to flood an average of once every five years.

For hazards that are affected by climate conditions, the assumption that future behavior will be equivalent to past behavior is not valid if climate conditions are changing. As flooding is generally associated with precipitation frequency and quantity, for example, the frequency of flooding will not remain constant if broad precipitation patterns change over time. The risks of landslide, severe weather, severe winter weather and wildfire are all affected by climate patterns as well.

For this reason, an understanding of climate change is pertinent to efforts to mitigate natural hazards. Information about how climate patterns are changing provides insight on the reliability of future hazard projections used in mitigation analysis. This chapter summarizes current understandings about climate change in order to provide a context for the recommendation and implementation of hazard mitigation measures in Klamath County.

8.3 CURRENT INDICATIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE Global Indicators

The major scientific agencies of the United States—including the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)—agree that climate change is occurring (U.S. EPA, 2013). Multiple temperature records from all over the world have shown a warming trend (U.S. EPA, 2011). According to NOAA, the decade from 2000 to 2010 was the warmest on record, and 2010 was tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record (NOAA, 2011). Worldwide, average temperatures have increased more than 1.4ºF over the last 100 years (NRC, 2010). Many of the extreme precipitation and heat events of recent years are consistent with projections based on that amount of warming (USGCRP, 2009).

Rising global temperatures have been accompanied by other changes in weather and climate. Many places have experienced changes in rainfall resulting in more intense rain, as well as more frequent and severe heat waves. The planet’s oceans and glaciers have also experienced changes: oceans are warming and becoming more acidic, ice caps are melting, and sea levels are rising (U.S. EPA, 2010). Global sea level has risen approximately 9 inches, on average, in the last 140 years (U.S. EPA, 2010). This has already put some coastal homes, beaches, roads, bridges, and wildlife at risk (USGCRP, 2009). 8.4 PROJECTED FUTURE IMPACTS Global Projections

Scientists project that Earth’s average temperatures will rise between 2ºF and 12ºF by 2100 (NRC, 2011a). Some research has concluded that every increase of 2ºF in average global average temperature can have the following impacts (NRC, 2011b): • 3 to 10 percent increases in the amount of rain falling during the heaviest precipitation events, which can increase flooding risks • 200 to 400 percent increases in the area burned by wildfire in parts of the western United States

8-2 CLIMATE CHANGE

• 5 to 10 percent decreases in stream flow in some river basins • 5 to 15 percent reductions in the yields of crops as currently grown.

The amount of sea level rise expected to occur as a result of climate change will increase the risk of coastal flooding for millions to hundreds of millions of people around the world, many of whom would have to permanently leave their homes (IPCC, 2007). By 2100, sea level is expected to rise another 1.5 to 3 feet (NRC, 2011b). Rising seas will make coastal storms and the associated storm surges more frequent and destructive. What is currently termed a once-in-a-century coastal flooding event could occur as frequently as once per decade (USGCRP, 2009).

8.5 RESPONSES TO CLIMATE CHANGE Mitigation and Adaptation

Communities and governments worldwide are working to address, evaluate, and prepare for climate changes that are likely to impact communities in coming decades. Generally, climate change discussions encompass two separate but inter-related considerations: mitigation and adaptation. The term “mitigation” can be confusing, because its meaning changes across disciplines: • Mitigation in restoration ecology and related fields generally refers to policies, programs or actions that are intended to reduce or to offset the negative impacts of human activities on natural systems. Generally, mitigation can be understood as avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing or eliminating, or compensating for known impacts. • Mitigation in climate change discussions is defined as “a human intervention to reduce the impact on the climate system.” It includes strategies to reduce greenhouse gas sources and emissions and enhance greenhouse gas sinks (U.S. EPA, 2013g). • Mitigation in emergency management is typically defined as the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters (FEMA, 2013).

Adaptation refers to adjustments in natural or human systems in response to the actual or anticipated effects of climate change and associated impacts. These adjustments may moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities (U.S. EPA, 2013g).

Mitigation and adaptation are related, as the world’s ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will affect the degree of adaptation that will be necessary. Some initiatives and actions can both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support adaptation to likely future conditions.

Societies across the world are facing the need to adapt to changing conditions associated with natural disasters and climate change. Farmers are altering crops and agricultural methods to deal with changing rainfall and rising temperature; architects and engineers are redesigning buildings; planners are looking at managing water supplies to deal with droughts or flooding.

Most ecosystems show a remarkable ability to adapt to change and to buffer surrounding areas from the impacts of change. Forests can bind soils and hold large volumes of water during times of plenty, releasing it through the year; floodplains can absorb vast volumes of water during peak flows; coastal ecosystems can hold out against storms, attenuating waves and reducing erosion. Other ecosystem services—such as

8-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

food provision, timber, materials, medicines, and recreation—can provide a buffer to societies in the face of changing conditions.

Ecosystem-based adaptation is the use of biodiversity and ecosystem services as part of an overall strategy to help people adapt to the adverse effects of climate change. This includes the sustainable management, conservation and restoration of specific ecosystems that provide key services.

Data Limitations

Current modeling efforts are unable to assess climate change at a resolution small enough to determine specific impacts for the individual communities, or to support hazard mitigation planning. However, generalized assessments of larger climatic regions can be used to determine impacts that are most likely to affect these communities. As these models are developed in the future, the risk assessment presented in this plan may be enhanced to better measure these impacts. The most reliable information current available to date is at the state level.

8.6 POTENTIAL CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACT ON HAZARDS Although no modeling is currently available to develop quantitative estimates of the effect of climate change on natural hazard risks, an understanding of the basic features of climate change allows for the following qualitative assessments of impacts on hazards of concern addressed in this hazard mitigation plan. This information identifies how risk may change as a result of future climate change impacts.

At present, state-level data indicates that climate models project warmer dryer summers and a decline in mean summer precipitation for Oregon. Coupled with projected decreases in mountain snowpack due to warmer winter temperatures, the entire state is expected to be affected by an increased incidence of drought and wildfire (Oregon State HMP, 2015, p. 751).

Dam Failure

Dams are designed partly based on assumptions about a river’s flow behavior, expressed as hydrographs. Changes in weather patterns can have significant effects on the hydrograph used for the design of a dam. If the hygrograph changes, it is conceivable that the dam can lose some or all of its designed margin of safety, also known as freeboard. If freeboard is reduced, dam operators may be forced to release increased volumes earlier in a storm cycle in order to maintain the required margins of safety. Such early releases of increased volumes can increase flood potential downstream. Throughout the west, communities downstream of dams are already experiencing increases in stream flows from earlier releases from dams.

Dams are constructed with safety features known as “spillways.” Spillways are put in place on dams as a safety measure in the event of the reservoir filling too quickly. Spillway overflow events, often referred to as “design failures,” result in increased discharges downstream and increased flooding potential. Although climate change will not increase the probability of catastrophic dam failure, it may increase the probability of design failures.

Drought

Research indicates that temperatures are increasing (Climate Impacts Group, 2014). As temperatures increase, there will be less water stored as ice and snow. This may not result in a net change in annual

8-4 CLIMATE CHANGE precipitation, but it will result in lower late spring and summer river flows. Accordingly, there will be increased competition between power generators, sport fishing and environmentalists, and farmers dependent on irrigation. The long-term effects of climate change on regional water resources are unknown, but global water resources are already experiencing the following stresses: • Growing populations • Impact on fish habitat and water quality impacting fish spawning. • Increased competition for available water • Poor water quality • Environmental claims • Uncertain reserved water rights • Groundwater overdraft • Aging urban water infrastructure

With a warmer climate, droughts could become more frequent, more severe, and longer lasting. Many water resource managers have started addressing current stresses on water supplies to build flexibility and robustness into any system. Flexibility helps to ensure a quick response to changing conditions, and robustness helps people prepare for and survive the worst conditions. With this approach to planning, water system managers will be better able to adapt to the impacts of climate change.

Earthquake

The impacts of global climate change on earthquake probability are unknown. Some experts believe that melting glaciers could induce tectonic activity. As ice melts and water runs off, tremendous amounts of weight are shifted on the earth’s crust. As newly freed crust returns to its original, pre-glacier shape, it could cause seismic plates to slip and stimulate volcanic activity, according to research into prehistoric earthquakes and volcanic activity. NASA and USGS scientists found that retreating glaciers in southern Alaska may be opening the way for future earthquakes (NASA, 2004).

Secondary impacts of earthquakes could be magnified by climate change. Soils saturated by repetitive storms could experience liquefaction or an increased propensity for slides during seismic activity due to the increased saturation. Dams storing increased volumes of water due to changes in the hydrograph could fail during seismic events. There are currently no models available to estimate these impacts.

Flood

According to scientists worldwide, global climate changes resulting in warmer, wetter winters are projected to increase flooding frequency. Future floods are expected to exceed the capacity and protective abilities of existing flood protection facilities, threatening lives, property, major transportation corridors, communities, and regional economic centers.

Changes in Hydrology Use of historical hydrologic data has long been the standard of practice for designing and operating water supply and flood protection projects. For example, historical data are used for flood forecasting models and

8-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

to forecast snowmelt runoff for water supply. This method of forecasting assumes that the climate of the future will be similar to that of the period of historical record. However, the hydrologic record cannot be used to predict changes in frequency and severity of extreme climate events such as floods. Climate change is already impacting water resources, and resource managers have observed the following: • Historical hydrologic patterns can no longer be solely relied upon to forecast the water future. • Precipitation and runoff patterns are changing, increasing the uncertainty for water supply and quality, flood management and ecosystem functions. • Extreme climatic events will become more frequent, necessitating improvement in flood protection, drought preparedness and emergency response.

The amount of snow is critical for water supply and environmental needs, but so is the timing of snowmelt runoff into rivers and streams. Rising snowlines caused by climate change will allow more mountain area to contribute to peak storm runoff. High frequency flood events (e.g. 10-year floods) in particular will likely increase with a changing climate. Along with reductions in the amount of the snowpack and accelerated snowmelt, scientists project greater storm intensity, resulting in more direct runoff and flooding. Changes in watershed vegetation and soil moisture conditions will likewise change runoff and recharge patterns. As stream flows and velocities change, erosion patterns will also change, altering channel shapes and depths, possibly increasing sedimentation behind dams, and affecting habitat and water quality. With potential increases in the frequency and intensity of wildfires due to climate change, there is potential for more floods following fire, which increase sediment loads and water quality impacts.

As hydrology changes, what is currently considered a 100-year flood may strike more often, leaving many communities at greater risk. Planners will need to factor a new level of safety into the design, operation, and regulation of flood protection facilities such as dams, bypass channels and levees, as well as the design of local sewers and storm drains.

Landslide

Climate change may impact storm patterns, increasing the probability of more frequent, intense storms with varying duration which can saturate soils beyond capacity. Increase in global temperature could affect the snowpack and its ability to hold and store water. Warming temperatures also could increase the occurrence and duration of droughts, which would increase the probability of wildfire, reducing the vegetation that helps to support steep slopes. As a large portion of the Klamath Tribal Planning Area is densely forested, such occurrences would be significant. All of these factors would increase the probability for landslide occurrences.

Severe Weather

Climate change presents a challenge for risk management associated with severe weather. The frequency of severe weather events has increased steadily over the last century. The number of weather-related disasters during the 1990s was four times that of the 1950s, and cost 14 times as much in economic losses. Historical data shows that the probability for severe weather events increases in a warmer climate (see Figure 8-2). According to the EPA, “Since 1901, the average surface temperature across the contiguous 48 states has risen at an average rate of 0.14°F per decade. Average temperatures have risen more quickly since the late 1970s (0.36 to 0.55°F per decade). Seven of the top 10 warmest years on record for the contiguous 48 states have occurred since 1998, and 2012 was the warmest year on record (U.S. EPA,

8-6 CLIMATE CHANGE

2013b).” This increase in average surface temperatures can also lead to more intense heat waves that can be exacerbated in urbanized areas by what is known as urban heat island effect. Additionally, the changing hydrograph caused by climate change could have a significant impact on the intensity, duration, and frequency of storm events. All of these impacts could have significant economic consequences.

Figure 8-2 Severe Weather Probabilities in Warmer Climates

Severe Winter Weather

One impact of climate change is an increase in average ambient temperatures. Since the 1980s, unusually cold temperatures have become less common in the contiguous 48 states (U.S. EPA, 2013c). This trend is expected to continue and the frequency of winter cold spells will likely decrease.

As ambient temperatures increase, more water evaporates from land and water sources. The timing, frequency, duration, and type of precipitation events will be affected by these changes. In general, more precipitation will fall as rain rather than snow; however, the amount of snowfall may increase where temperatures remain below freezing (U.S. EPA, 2013d). Snowfall may also change if typical storm track patterns are altered. Snowfall is already changing in the United States. According to the EPA (see Figure 8-3; U.S. EPA, 2013d): • Total snowfall has decreased in most parts of the country since widespread observations became available in 1930, with 57 percent of stations showing a decline. • More than three-fourths of the stations across the contiguous 48 states have experienced a decrease in the proportion of precipitation falling as snow. • Snowfall trends vary by region. The Pacific Northwest has seen a decline in both total snowfall and the proportion of precipitation falling as snow.

8-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 8-3. Change in Snowfall, 1930-2007

From 1950 to 2000, snowpack has declined in most of the western United States, compared to historical averages. Western Oregon, western Washington and northern California have seen the greatest declines (U.S. EPA, 2013d). One reason for this decline is that nearly 80 percent of the locations studied have seen more winter precipitation fall in the form of rain instead of snow. Models project the snow season will continue to shorten, with snow accumulation beginning later and melting starting earlier.8 The depth of snow on the ground (snowpack) in early spring decreased at more than 90 percent of measurement sites in the western United States between 1955 and 2016. Across all sites, snowpack depth declined by an average of 23 percent during this time.9

These changes will impact ecosystems, recreation opportunities, the hydroelectric power supply, and drinking water systems. The timing and magnitude of flooding may also be impacted by changes in the region’s hydrograph, due to a greater percentage of precipitation falling as rain and earlier spring melt times.

Volcano

Climate change is not likely to affect the risk associated with volcanoes; however, volcanic activity can affect climate change. Volcanic clouds absorb terrestrial radiation and scatter a significant amount of incoming solar radiation. By reducing the amount of solar radiation reaching the Earth’s surface, large- scale volcanic eruptions can lower temperatures in the lower atmosphere and change atmospheric circulation patterns. The massive outpouring of gases and ash can influence climate patterns for years following a volcanic eruption.

8 EPA (2015). Future Climate Change. Accessed 6 Sept. 2016. Available online at: https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/science/future.html#ref3 9 EPA (2016) Climate Change Indicators: Snow and Ice. Accessed 6 Sept 2016. Available online at: https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/snow-ice

8-8 CLIMATE CHANGE

Wildfire

Climate change has the potential to affect multiple elements of the wildfire system: fire behavior, ignitions, fire management, and vegetation fuels. Hot dry spells create the highest fire risk. Increased temperatures may intensify wildfire danger by warming and drying out vegetation. Climate change also may increase winds that spread fires. Forest response to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide could contribute to more tree growth and thus more fuel for fires, although the effects of carbon dioxide on mature forests are still largely unknown. In turn, increased high-elevation wildfires could release stores of carbon and further contribute to the buildup of greenhouse gases.

Wildfire in western ecosystems is determined by climate variability, local topography, and human intervention. Climate change has the potential to affect multiple elements of the wildfire system: fire behavior, ignitions, fire management, and vegetation fuels. Hot dry spells create the highest fire risk. Increased temperatures may intensify wildfire danger by warming and drying out vegetation. When climate alters fuel loads and fuel moisture, forest susceptibility to wildfires changes. Climate change also may increase winds that spread fires. Faster fires are harder to contain, and thus are more likely to expand into residential neighborhoods.

Historically, drought patterns in the West are related to large-scale climate patterns in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. The El Niño–Southern Oscillation in the Pacific varies on a 5- to 7-year cycle, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation varies on a 20- to 30-year cycle, and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation varies on a 65- to 80-year cycle. As these large-scale ocean climate patterns vary in relation to each other, drought conditions in the U.S. shift from region to region. El Niño years bring drier conditions to the Pacific Northwest and more fires.

Climate scenarios project summer temperature increases between 2ºC and 5°C and precipitation decreases of up to 15 percent. Such conditions would exacerbate summer drought and further promote high-elevation wildfires, releasing stores of carbon, and further contributing to the buildup of greenhouse gases. Forest response to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide could also contribute to more tree growth and thus more fuel for fires, but the effects of carbon dioxide on mature forests are still largely unknown. High carbon dioxide levels should enhance tree recovery after fire and young forest regrowth, as long as sufficient nutrients and soil moisture are available, although the latter is in question for many parts of the western United States because of climate change. A 2012 study completed by Headwaters Economics found that just a 1 degree increase in the average summer temperature is associated with an increase of 420 wildfires a year in Oregon, adding to the average total of 1,800 wildfires reported each year.10

10. https://headwaterseconomics.org/wildfire/homes-risk/oregon-homes-and-cost-of-wildfires/

8-9

CHAPTER 9. DAM FAILURE 9.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND DEFINITIONS A dam is defined as any artificial barrier and/or any controlling works, together with appurtenant works, that can or does Dam— Any artificial barrier and/or any controlling works, together with appurtenant impound or divert water. A Dam Failure is any uncontrolled works, that can or does impound or divert water. release of impounded water due to structural deficiencies in Dam Failure— An uncontrolled release of dam. impounded water due to structural deficiencies in dam. Types of Dams Emergency Action Plan— A document Dams can be embankment dams constructed with excavated identifying emergency conditions and specifies actions to be followed to minimize property natural materials, or masonry dams constructed with stone, brick damage and loss of life. The plan specifies or concrete blocks pointed with mortar. Most dams are built at actions the dam owner should take to alleviate the narrowest part of a river on a stable foundation made of problems at a dam. It contains procedures and concrete, rock, or compacted soil. The abutments of a dam can information to assist the dam owner in issuing early warning and notification messages to be the natural valley walls, or constructed of artificial materials responsible downstream emergency when a natural abutment is not suitable. There are several types management authorities of the emergency of dams named for the primary material used in the construction; situation. It also contains inundation maps to the primary purpose of the dam, and/or, the way they are show emergency management authorities the engineered to function. Common types of dams include: critical areas for action in case of an emergency. High Hazard Dam—Dams where failure or • Diversion Dam: diverts water from one waterway to operational error will probably cause loss of another waterway; human life. • Arch Dam: alignment of the dam is curved upstream, Significant Hazard Dam—Dams where failure allowing the majority of water load to shift to the or operational error will result in no probable loss of human life but can cause economic loss, abutments; environmental damage or disruption of lifeline • Overflow Dam: designed to be overtopped; facilities, or can impact other concerns. • Regulating Dam: designed to regulate water flow Significant hazard dams are often located in rural or agricultural areas but could be located in downstream; areas with population and significant • Gravity Dam: constructed of masonry materials and infrastructure (FEMA 333). the weight and internal strength provides stability.

Causes of Dam Inundation or Dam Failure

Dam inundation is the flooding that occurs resulting from the structural failure of a dam (breach) or operational errors (unscheduled release). Outlet works and spillways allow dam managers to make scheduled releases when necessary, e.g., to prevent damaging flooding. Dam failures can create flash floods that are catastrophic to life and property. Although seismic activity can create dam failure, it can also generate a wave capable of overtopping a dam, which may inundate the surrounding area but not cause dam failure. Two factors that influence the potential severity of a full or partial dam failure include: (1) the amount of water impounded, and (2) the density, type, and value of development and infrastructure located downstream. Dam failures in the United States typically occur in one of four ways (see Figure 9-1): • Overtopping of the primary dam structure, which accounts for 34 percent of all dam failures, can occur due to inadequate spillway design, settlement of the dam crest, blockage of spillways, and other factors.

9-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

• Foundation defects due to differential settlement, slides, slope instability, uplift pressures, and foundation seepage can also cause dam failure. These account for 30 percent of all dam failures. • Failure due to piping and seepage accounts for 20 percent of all failures. These are caused by internal erosion due to piping and seepage, erosion along hydraulic structures such as spillways, erosion due to animal burrows, and cracks in the dam structure. • Failure due to problems with conduits and valves, typically caused by the piping of embankment material into conduits through joints or cracks, constitutes 10 percent of all failures. The remaining 6 percent of U.S. dam failures are due to miscellaneous causes. Many dam failures in the United States have been secondary results of other disasters. The prominent causes of the dam failures are earthquakes, landslides, extreme storms, massive snowmelt, equipment malfunction, structural damage, foundation failures, and sabotage. Poor construction, lack of maintenance and repair, and deficient operational procedures are preventable or correctable by a program of regular inspections. Terrorism and vandalism are serious concerns that all operators of public facilities must plan for; these threats are under continuous review by public safety agencies. Beyond impact to the natural environment, the most likely disaster related cause of dam failure in the Klamath Tribes planning region are earthquake, soil failure, and the actual age of the dams themselves.

Figure 9-1 Historical Causes of Dam Failure

Dam Removal The Klamath Tribes have been working for many years to have various dams removed within the planning region due, in part, to the negligible power benefit but significant negative impact on water quality and fish passage. The Tribes maintain a number of programs to both enhance water quality and restore fish passage to its previous higher levels. Fish runs have been significantly disrupted as a result of dams, and the negative impact will continue for many years after the dams have been removed. The Tribes will continue to work with dam owners in this regard, and have already been successful in gaining the removal of the Chiloquin Dam, and are a signatory on the agreement for removal of dams along the Klamath River falling between Oregon and California (see Figure 9-2).11

11 Klamath Basin Decision Support System (DSS). Klamath County (2009). 1971 Klamath Drainage Basin Map (Oregon). Accessed 10 Aug 2016. Available at: http://klamathdss.org/about.php

9-2 Klamath Tribes 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update DAM FAILURE

Figure 9-2 Dams Along the Klamath River

Regulatory Oversight

Federal Dam Safety Program The potential for catastrophic flooding due to dam failures led to passage of the National Dam Safety Act (Public Law 92-367). The National Dam Safety Program requires a periodic engineering analysis of every major dam in the country. The goal of this effort is to identify and mitigate the risk of dam failure so as to protect the lives and property of the public.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for safety inspections of some federal and non-federal dams in the United States that meet the size and storage limitations specified in the National Dam Safety Act. The Corps has inventoried dams; surveyed each state and federal agency’s capabilities, practices and regulations regarding design, construction, operation and maintenance of the dams; and developed guidelines for inspection and evaluation of dam safety (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1997).

Oregon Dam Safety Program – Water Resources Department Oregon’s Dam Safety Program (a division of the Department of Water Resources) monitors the dam safety program at the state level. When a new dam is proposed, Program staff inspect the site. When an application is received, the staff review the plans to ensure that the dam is designed to meet minimum requirements and that the design is appropriate for known geologic conditions. After approval of the application, program personnel inspect the construction to ensure that the work is done in accordance with the approved plans. After construction, routine inspections of dams occur (Oregon Dam Safety Program Website, 2016). The Water Resource Department also periodically reviews the stability of dams and their major appurtenances in light of improved design approaches and requirements, as well as new findings regarding earthquake hazards and hydrologic estimates in Oregon. The department also determines hazard rating and condition; encourages emergency action plans for high-hazard dams, and takes enforcement on unsafe dams. The dam safety program also coordinates with federal agencies that are responsible for their dams, and is the Oregon Emergency Response System contact in the event of a major emergency for any dam in the State.

9-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

9.2 HAZARD PROFILE Extent and Location Table 5-1 and Figure 9-3 identify the dams within the planning area. The Tribes own no dams, nor maintain responsibility for any reservoirs, drainage systems, etc. Two dams were identified within the 2007 HMP as being at risk to the Tribal Planning Area, the Chiloquin, and the Link River Dam. The Chiloquin Dam was removed in 2008. As a result of the population and the number of critical facilities in the area, the Link River Dam, a diversion dam located north of Klamath Falls at the mouth of the Upper Klamath Lake, is most concerning of all dams in the area. Designated as a high hazard dam (discussed below), it is owned by the Bureau of Reclamation, and is operated by PacificCorp.

TABLE 9-1 DAMS WITHIN THE KLAMATH TRIBAL PLANNING AREA

Storage Dam Water Owner or Year Hazard Height Capacity Name County Course Operator Built Level (feet) (acre-feet) Usea Upper Klamath Link River U.S. Bureau 1928 High 22.00 873,500 DIV Klamath of Lake Reclamation/ PacificCorp Whiteline Klamath Tributary to Private 1943 Low 21.0 2,962.0 STO Reservoir Swan Lake Chiloquin Klamath (Dam was removed 2008 after completion of 2007 HMP) Horton Klamath Unknown Private Unkno Low 6 268 STO Jack wn Reservoir Wilson Klamath Tributary to Private ~1964 Low 15.0 620.0 STO Lake Dam Miller Creek JC Boyle Klamath Klamath PacifiCorp 1958 High 68.0 3,370 POW River Source: http://apps.wrd.state.or.us/apps/misc/dam_inventory/ a. Use codes: DIV = Diversion; IRR = Irrigation; MULTI = Multi-purpose; POW = Power Generation; REC = Recreation; REG = Regulation; STO = Storage

Figure 9-4 shows the location of the Link River Dam (Upper Klamath Lake) in relationship to Tribal Facilities located in the Klamath Falls area. The link River Dam has a storage capacity of 873,500 acre- feet, and is in close proximity to Klamath Falls. As no inundation maps are available, it is unknown if critical facilities are located directly in the inundation hazard area; however, three tribal structures are located within Klamath Falls which may be within the inundation hazard area.

9-4 Klamath Tribes 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update DAM FAILURE

Figure 9-3 Dam Locations – Klamath Tribal Planning Area

9-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 9-4 Link River (Upper Klamath Lake) Dam

9-6 Klamath Tribes 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update DAM FAILURE

Previous Occurrences According to the Oregon State Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan, there approximately 900 dams in the State of Oregon. Of those 900 dams, there have been approximately 55 recorded dam failures occurring before 1987 in the State, with approximately one third of those failures resulting in significant property damage. Much of Oregon’s dam infrastructure is aging, and many dams were designed prior to the current understanding of earthquake hazard and especially the risk associated with the Cascadia subduction zone. Primary dam safety program goals are: conducting timely inspections; reducing the number of dams in poor or unsatisfactory condition; having emergency action plans for most high-hazard dams; and responding to events that might trigger dam failures.

According to the National Performance of Dam Programs, there have been no dam failures recorded for the dams located in or near the planning area which have impacted the Tribal Planning Area. However, there have been two reports of dikes leaking.

In June 2006, a dike on the Upper Klamath Lake failed, creating a flash flood which inundated agricultural fields, the Running Y Golf Resort, and portions of State Highway 140. Approximately three years later, in 2009, a dike on Upper Klamath Lake along Lakeshore Drive started leaking and flooding fields. The leaks were caused by burrowing animals. Klamath County spent approximately $40,000 to strengthen the dike (Klamath County HMP, 2010). It is unclear if the two incidents occurred on the same dike.

Severity The Oregon Dam Safety Program classifies dams and reservoirs in a three-tier hazard rating system based solely on the potential consequences to downstream life and property that would result from a failure of the dam and sudden release of water (Oregon Water Resources Department). All statutory dams in Oregon are classified by hazard. Dam hazard is based on what could happen if the dam fails, not on the condition of a dam. As of August 2011, there were 129 Oregon dams classified as high hazard, 196 classified as significant hazard, and 1242 classified as low hazard. Dam hazard ratings are defined in OAR 690-020-0100 and are described below:

High Hazard: This rating indicates that if the dam fails there is a strong plausibility for loss of life. The plausibility is established because of inhabited infrastructure (such as homes and business) downstream that would be inundated to such a degree that it would put the person who inhabits the structure in jeopardy. Any factor that puts a strong probability of people being downstream in an inundation area of a dam failure shall be considered. The department shall endeavor to inspect this class of dams on an annual basis.

Significant Hazard: This rating indicates that if a dam fails, infrastructure (such as roads, power lines or other largely uninhabited buildings) would be damaged or destroyed due to inundation and flooding. The department shall endeavor to inspect this class of dams at least once every three years.

Low Hazard: This rating indicates that if the dam fails there is little plausibility for loss of life, and human infrastructure that could be affected by inundation downstream is minor or non-existent. The department shall endeavor to inspect this class of dams at least once every six years.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers classifies potential hazards of dam failure as summarized in Table 9-2, with two factors that influence the potential severity of dam failure: the amount of water impounded, and the density, type and value of development and infrastructure downstream.

9-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 9-2 CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAZARD POTENTIAL CLASSIFICATION

Hazard Environmental Category (*a) Direct Loss of Life (*b) Lifeline Losses (*c) Property Losses (*d) Losses (*e)

Low – 3 None (rural location, no No disruption of services Private agricultural Minimal incremental permanent structures for (cosmetic or rapidly lands, equipment, and damage human habitation) repairable damage) isolated buildings Significant - 2 Rural location, only transient Disruption of essential Major public and Major mitigation or day-use facilities facilities and access private facilities required High – 1 A, Certain (one or more) Disruption of essential Extensive public and Extensive mitigation B, C extensive residential, facilities and access private facilities cost or impossible to commercial, or industrial mitigate development

a. Categories are assigned to overall projects, not individual structures at a project. b. Loss of life potential based on inundation mapping of area downstream of the project. Analyses of loss of life potential should take into account the population at risk, time of flood wave travel, and warning time. c. Indirect threats to life caused by the interruption of lifeline services due to project failure or operational disruption; for example, loss of critical medical facilities or access to them. d. Damage to project facilities and downstream property and indirect impact due to loss of project services, such as impact due to loss of a dam and navigation pool, or impact due to loss of water or power supply. e. Environmental impact downstream caused by the incremental flood wave produced by the project failure, beyond what would normally be expected for the magnitude flood event under which the failure occurs. Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1995

Frequency Dam failure events are infrequent and usually coincide with events that cause them, such as earthquakes, landslides and excessive rainfall and snowmelt. There is a “residual risk” associated with dams, which is the risk that remains after safeguards have been implemented. For dams, the residual risk is associated with events beyond those that the facility was designed to withstand. However, the probability of any type of dam failure is low in today’s regulatory environment.

9.3 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Overview The owner of a dam is responsible for developing an inundation map, which is used in determining exposure to a potential dam failure or breech during development of dam response plans. Presently, no such information is available for any of the dams in Klamath County which have the potential to impact the Klamath Tribes directly. Methodology The Hazus model can estimate the number and value of structures in a mapped dam failure inundation zone. However, no inundations maps are available for any of the dams. As a result, such analysis is not possible for this plan. Future mapping, if performed, will be used to enhance this portion of the risk assessment during the next update of the plan. For purposes of this assessment, an estimated exposure analysis based on dam location and topographic data was conducted to determine potential dollar losses.

9-8 Klamath Tribes 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update DAM FAILURE

Warning Time Warning time for dam failure varies depending on the cause of the failure. In events of extreme precipitation or massive snowmelt, evacuations can be planned with sufficient time. In the event of a structural failure due to earthquake, there may be no warning time. A dam’s structural type also affects warning time. Earthen dams do not tend to fail completely or instantaneously. Once a breach is initiated, discharging water erodes the breach until either the reservoir water is depleted or the breach resists further erosion. Concrete dams also tend to have a partial breach as one or more monolith sections are forced apart by escaping water. The time of breach formation ranges from a few minutes to a few hours (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1997).

At present, the Klamath Tribes have no established protocols for flood warning and response to imminent dam failure as these types of protocols are tied to the emergency action plans (EAPs) created by the dam owners. As of the writing of this plan, no inundation studies were available to the Tribes from the dam owners. More stringent requirements should be in place by the over-sight authority which requires the release of such information to the Tribes.

Impact on Life, Health and Safety All populations in a dam failure inundation zone would be exposed to the risk of a dam failure. The potential for loss of life is affected by the capacity and number of evacuation routes available to populations living in areas of potential inundation. No maps from dam owners are available for public dissemination. Therefore, it is not possible to estimate the population living within the inundation zone beyond the information designated in the dam classification analysis described in Sections 9.2.1 and 9.2.3. Of significant concern is the potential for a scenario requiring evacuation of an impacted area. However, for much of the Klamath Tribal Planning Area, there are multiple route options for evacuation purposes.

Vulnerable populations are all populations downstream from dam failures that are incapable of escaping the area within an allowable time frame. This population includes the elderly and young who may be unable to get themselves out of the inundation area.

The vulnerable population also includes those who would not have adequate warning from a television or radio emergency warning system. A significant amount of the population in the planning area consists of elders over 65 years. In addition, the region has a relatively large transient population, especially in the area of the Casino, increasing significantly the population vulnerable to hazard impact. Those unfamiliar with the area would have difficulty evacuating if such a need arose, taxing local response capabilities. This is especially true if roadways were impassable, requiring much longer travel times.

Impact on Property Vulnerable properties are those closest to the dam inundation area. These properties would experience the largest, most destructive surge of water. Low-lying areas are also vulnerable since they are where the dam waters would collect. Transportation routes are vulnerable to dam inundation and have the potential to be wiped out, creating isolation issues. This includes all roads, railroads, and bridges in the path of the dam inundation. Those that are most vulnerable are those that are already in poor condition and would not be able to withstand a large water surge. Utilities such as overhead power lines, cable and phone lines could also be vulnerable. Loss of these utilities could create additional isolation issues for the inundation areas.

GIS analysis can determine the amount of building stock in a mapped inundation area, but there are no inundation studies available for the dams as they are protected from public disclosure due to the potential threat associated with the dams. Without the ability to perform an inundation study, it is not possible to estimate property losses from a dam failure which could ultimately affect the planning area.

9-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

While no dam failure inundation studies are available at this time, dam inundation areas may in some instances coincide with flood hazard areas. Review of the flood profile contained in this document may provide a general concept of structures at risk, although, based on the size of the dams, damage would vary. As development occurs downstream of dams, it is necessary to review the dams’ emergency action plans and inundation maps to determine whether the dams require reclassification based on the established standards. The Tribes will continue to work with dam owners in the area to gain information for high-hazard dams over the course of the next update.

Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure For planning purposes, the Planning Team utilized flood data to identify potential dam inundation areas in order to determine critical facilities potentially at risk. Based on the size of the dam and the topography of the area, damage would vary, and inundation can only be estimated. Table 9-3 identifies Tribal Facilities that could potentially be impacted by Link River Dam Inundation based on best available topographic data.

TABLE 9-3 STRUCTURES POTENTIALLY EXPOSED TO LINK RIVER DAM INUNDATION

Beatty Chiloquin Klamath Falls Total

Administration 0 0 0 0

Casino 0 0 0 0

Gathering Place 0 0 0 0

Haz-Mat 0 0 0 0

Health 0 0 1 1

Industry 0 0 0 0

Residential 0 0 1 1

Residential Multi Family 0 0 1 1

School 0 0 0 0

Storage 0 0 2 2 Wastewater 0 0 0 0

Water 0 0 0 0

Total 0 0 5 5

The Klamath Tribes have identified working with dam owners to secure updated inundation maps as a strategy for this hazard mitigation plan. Once developed, that information can then be used to conduct analysis during the next update of the plan. As this 2017 edition of the plan update includes enhanced critical facilities data, once inundation studies are obtained from the dam owners, the assessment of critical facility vulnerability will be greatly enhanced.

Impact on the Economy Urban growth areas and employment growth are general planning elements considered when all planning occurs. The Klamath Tribes, which includes the Casino, is the largest employer for Tribal members in the

9-10 Klamath Tribes 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update DAM FAILURE planning area, and are considered one of the larger employers within the County. The Tribes are a significant contributor with respect to tax base paid to the State of Oregon in part because of its gaming enterprise, but also with respect to the fact that the Tribes’ employee base includes both tribal and non- tribal members, who live within the community and support the local economy. Any significant impact from a potential dam scenario would cause a ripple effect to tribal and community members with respect to wages earned; impact on local businesses, and impact to the tax base at both the County and State levels.

Impact on the Environment Lagoons and reservoirs held behind dams affect many ecological aspects of a river or other water body. River topography and dynamics depend on a wide range of flows, but rivers below dams often experience long periods of very stable flow conditions or saw-tooth flow patterns caused by periodic releases. Water releases from dams usually contain very little suspended sediment; this can lead to scouring of river beds and banks. Inundation in the event of dam failure could introduce foreign elements into local waterways. This could result in destruction of downstream habitat and could have detrimental effects on many species of animals, especially endangered species such as salmon. Of concern to the Klamath Tribes beyond the physical impact to its Tribal Members is the potential impact to the Tribes’ Treaty resources, including, but not limited to hunting, fishing, and gathering places. As a signing member of the Klamath Basin Settlement Agreement, impact from dams has been documented over the course of negotiation of the various dams’ removal. In addition, the USGS, Bureau of Reclamation, and USACE’s also conducted studies with respect to the Chiloquin Dam removal. Additional information is available within the Summary of the Klamath Basin Settlement Agreements (2010), as well as the USGS’s 2013 File Report on the effects of the Chiloquin Dam on spawning distribution, etc., available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1039/pdf/ofr20131039.pdf.

9.4 RESULTS The National Performance of Dam Programs and the State’s EHMP identify 900 dams statewide. Of those, there have been no dam failures recorded within the Tribal Planning Area; however, two dikes have leaked. Only two non-residential structures and three residences fall within proximity to the Link River Dam on the Upper Klamath Lake. While there is the possibility of a dam failure, the impact would be minimal in nature to Tribally owned structures, with limited geographic extent and location. The potential for impact to primary thoroughfares does increase the vulnerability to some degree. Also of concern to the Klamath Tribes is the impact of the dams on fish and other aquatic life, as well as areas of cultural significance, which increases the level of severity. Warning time for a dam failure is extremely short, and depending on the severity of the breach or leak, could last for more than 24 hours. Based on review of the data, the planning team calculated a CPRI score of 2.20, with dam hazard vulnerability determined to be medium due to the cultural and environmental impacts.

9.5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRENDS As inundation studies are not available to determine damage from dam failure, for planning purposes, the dam inundation zones can be assumed to be similar to the flood inundation zone. As such, similar land use trends can be used to mitigate the impacts from dam failure. Included in that assessment should be critical areas due to the scope of impact from potential dam failure or inundation as future development occurs in the vicinity of the existing dams. Also for consideration with respect to land use development is the continued efforts by all of the Tribes along the Klamath River for the removal of the various dams in the area, which will influence the amount of buildable land in the region, as well as change the existing land use as areas currently unflooded may become flooded when the waterways are allowed to return to their natural flow. As the Tribes continue to develop its land use authority, this plan will be utilized to identify

9-11 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

potential areas of impact, as well as identify potential strategies to help reduce the impact from a dam failure or dam inundation.

9.6 ISSUES An earthquake in the region could lead to liquefaction of soils around a dam. This could occur without warning during any time of the day. A human-caused failure such as a terrorist attack also could trigger a catastrophic failure of a dam that impacts the planning area. While the probability of dam failure is very low, the probability of flooding associated with changes to dam operational parameters in response to climate change is higher. Dam designs and operations are developed based on hydrographs with historical record. If these hydrographs experience significant changes over time due to the impacts of climate change, the design and operations may no longer be valid for the changed condition. This could have significant impacts on dams that provide flood control. Specified release rates and impound thresholds may have to be changed. This would result in increased discharges downstream of these facilities, thus increasing the probability and severity of flooding. Flooding as a result of a dam failure would significantly impact properties and populations in the inundation zone. There is often limited warning time for dam failure. These events are frequently associated with other natural hazard events such as earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides, or other severe weather, which limits their predictability and compounds the hazard. Important issues associated with dam failure hazards include the following: • Federally regulated dams have an adequate level of oversight and sophistication in the development of emergency action plans for public notification in the unlikely event of failure. However, the protocol for notifying downstream citizens of imminent failure needs to be tied to local emergency response planning. Presently, the Klamath Tribes have no dam safety plan in place, but they do recognize the need for such, and has included a mitigation strategy to begin addressing this issue over the life cycle of this hazard mitigation plan by working with the dam owners to develop such plans, if none currently exist by the dam owners. • Mapping for non-federal-regulated dams that estimates inundation depths is needed to better assess the risk associated with dam failure from these facilities. Currently, after diligent search, no maps could be found which could be utilized for mitigation planning. • Most dam failure mapping required at federal levels requires determination of the probable maximum flood. While the probable maximum flood represents a worst-case scenario, it is generally the event with the lowest probability of occurrence. For non-federal-regulated dams, mapping of dam failure scenarios that are less extreme than the probable maximum flood but have a higher probability of occurrence can be valuable to emergency managers and community officials downstream of these facilities. This type of mapping can illustrate areas potentially impacted by more frequent events to support emergency response and preparedness. • The concept of residual risk associated with structural flood control projects should be considered in the design of capital projects and the application of land use regulations. • Addressing security concerns and the need to inform the public of the risk associated with dam failure is a challenge for local officials, and some form of emergency response plan should be in place to address this issue prior to any potential occurrence.

9-12

CHAPTER 10. DROUGHT

10.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND Drought is a prolonged period of dryness severe enough to reduce soil moisture, water, and snow levels below the minimum necessary for sustaining plant, animal, and economic systems. Droughts are a natural part DEFINITIONS of the climate cycle. Drought—The cumulative impacts of several dry years Droughts originate from a deficiency of precipitation resulting from an on water users and unusual weather pattern. If the weather pattern lasts a short time (a few agricultural producers. It weeks or months), the drought is considered short-term. If the weather can include deficiencies in surface and subsurface pattern becomes entrenched and the precipitation deficits last for several water supplies and cause months or years, the drought is considered to be long-term. It is possible for impacts to health, well- a region to experience a long-term circulation pattern that produces drought, being, and quality of life. and to have short-term changes in this long-term pattern that result in short- Hydrological Drought— term wet spells. Likewise, it is possible for a long-term wet circulation Deficiencies in surface and pattern to be interrupted by short-term weather spells that result in short-term subsurface water supplies. drought. Socioeconomic Drought— Drought impacts on health, 10.2 HAZARD PROFILE well-being and quality of life. Extent and Location Drought can have a widespread impact on the environment and the economy, depending upon its severity, although it typically does not result in loss of life or damage to property, as do other natural disasters. The National Drought Mitigation Center uses three categories to describe likely drought impacts:

Agricultural—Drought threatens crops that rely on natural precipitation, while also increasing the potential for infestation. Water supply—Drought threatens supplies of water for irrigated crops, for communities and for fish, salmon, and other species of wildlife. Fire hazard—Drought increases the threat of wildfires from dry conditions in forest and rangelands. In areas where hydroelectric power plants generate a significant amount of the electricity produced, drought also threatens the supply of electricity. Unlike most disasters, droughts normally occur slowly but last a long time. On average, the nationwide annual impacts of drought are greater than the impacts of any other natural hazard. They are estimated to be between $6 billion and $8 billion annually in the United States and occur primarily in the agriculture, transportation, recreation and tourism, forestry, and energy sectors. Social and environmental impacts are also significant, although it is difficult to put a precise cost on these impacts. Drought affects groundwater sources, but generally not as quickly as surface water supplies, although groundwater supplies generally take longer to recover. Reduced precipitation during a drought means that groundwater supplies are not replenished at a normal rate. This can lead to a reduction in groundwater levels and problems such as reduced pumping capacity or wells going dry. Shallow wells are more susceptible than deep wells. Reduced replenishment of groundwater affects streams. Much of the flow in streams comes from groundwater, especially during the summer when there is less precipitation and after snowmelt ends. Reduced groundwater levels mean that even less water will enter streams when steam flows are lowest.

10-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

A drought directly or indirectly impacts all people in affected areas. A drought can result in farmers not being able to plant crops or the failure of planted crops. This results in loss of work for farm workers and those in related food processing jobs. Other water- or electricity-dependent industries are commonly forced to shut down all or a portion of their facilities, resulting in further layoffs. A drought can also harm recreational companies that use water (e.g., swimming pools, water parks, and river rafting companies) as well as landscape and nursery businesses because people will not invest in new plants if water is not available to sustain them. With much of Oregon’s energy coming from hydroelectric plants, a drought means less inexpensive electricity coming from dams and probably higher electric bills. All people would pay more for water if utilities increase their rates. As a result of Climate Change, this has become an issue as a lack of snow pack has decreased Cascade hydroelectric generating capacity, and raised the electric prices, impacting county residents. Drought occurs in all parts of Oregon, and has had profound effects in the past on the state’s economy, particularly the agricultural and hydro-power sectors. Environmental consequences have included insect infestations in forests, insufficient stream flows to support endangered fish species, and increased susceptibility to fire. As illustrated, drought is both a meteorological and institutional (policy) phenomenon. This is well illustrated by the recent history of water allocation and drought in the Planning Area, where allocation of water for irrigation and hydroelectric generation has exceeded what can reliably be removed from the Klamath River while maintaining healthy fish populations. It is a matter of debate at what balance point the situation is mainly due to meteorological drought and at what point it is a problem of human allocation or demand. In recent years, there has been both grave concern and conflict over water allocation in the Planning Area, facing off irrigation needs with the disastrous effects of low water upon salmon and other fish. Historical lawsuits by farmers suing the Federal Government for greater access to irrigation water have been rebuffed by the courts, affirming the seniority of Tribal water rights. However, these rulings have not always led to irrigation closures. Water flow in the region, including amount and geographic availability along the region’s waterways is further complicated by four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River, which have interfered with fish runs in the Klamath and its tributaries since 1911, when the first one was built. While agreements have been reached, there have also been court rulings and federal regulations which have forced dams to be removed or retrofitted with fish ladders and protective screening; however, water impoundment and dam-related effects on water supply remain the principal drought-related dam concerns. Overall water availability and allocation are vital current issues in the Planning Area; these are inextricably linked to what constitutes drought in the region, and how drought affects residents when it occurs. Presently, various indexes show the region around Klamath County and the Klamath Tribes to be experiencing an abnormally dry period, with a moderate drought. Because of the potential impacts from climate change and the relatively high areas of densely wooded terrain, drought is a significant concern to the Planning Team.

Previous Occurrences In the past century, Oregon has experienced a number of drought episodes, including several that lasted for more than a single season. Table 10-1 identifies drought occurrences statewide, including for periods prior to Tribal Restoration.

10-2 DAM FAILURE

TABLE 10-1 DROUGHT OCCURRENCES

Year(s) Description of Occurrence 1904-1905 Statewide drought lasting ~18 months. 1917-1931 A very dry period throughout Oregon, punctuated by a brief wet spell in 1920 – 21, 1927 and 1930-1931 (more extreme). 1939-1941 A 3-year intense drought throughout Oregon. 1977 Klamath County Emergency Declaration for Drought 1985-1997 A dry period, capped by statewide droughts in 1992 and 1994; 1994 included a Governor’s declaration. 1986 Klamath Tribes’ Sucker Fishery closed (endangered species); pollution and declining water supply cited as factors in stocks’ decline. 2000-2001 Record drought in Klamath County; low snow-pack in mountains worsens conditions. Governor’s declaration for 18 counties statewide. 2002 Approximately 33,000 to 70,000 adult salmon killed due to insufficient water in Klamath River. 23 counties declared by the Governor 2003 Klamath County drought order issued in 2002 extended through December 2003. 2004 Governor declared drought in Klamath County. 2005 Governor declared drought in Klamath and Lake Counties, among others. 2010 Low snow pack created lowered ground water levels caused Governor to declare drought for Klamath County and several contiguous counties. 2012 Governor declared drought emergency for Lost River Basin in Klamath and Lake Counties. 2013 Governor declared drought for Klamath County and four other counties in area. 2014 Governor declared drought in Klamath and 10 other counties.

In 2013, the Klamath Falls area experienced the second driest January through March period on record with precipitation measuring below average throughout the Klamath Basin. According to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Klamath Basin Project irrigators have not received a full supply of water in nine out of the last thirteen irrigation seasons. During dry or drought years, national wildlife refuges in the Klamath Basin received smaller water deliveries as well. These refuges are important nesting and feeding grounds for birds migrating along the Pacific Flyway. Reduced river flows, especially during the summer months, can negatively impact fisheries, recreation, and other uses as well.

Lake County could also be considered one of the communities most vulnerable to drought and its related impacts, based on Governor-declared drought declarations. Declarations have been issued in 1992, 2001 (which continued through June 2003), 2005, 2007, 2012, and in February 2014.

Severity Droughts impact individuals (Tribal members, farm owners, tenants, and farm laborers), Treaty subsistence resources, the agricultural industry, and other agriculture-related sectors. Lack of snow pack has forced ski resorts into bankruptcy. There is increased danger of forest and wildland fires. Millions of board feet of

10-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

timber have been lost. Loss of forests and trees increases erosion, causing serious damage to aquatic life, irrigation, and power development by heavy silting of streams, reservoirs, and rivers.

The severity of a drought depends on the degree of moisture deficiency, the duration, and the size and location of the affected area. The longer the duration of the drought and the larger the area impacted, the more severe the potential impacts. Drought affects groundwater sources, but generally not as quickly as surface water supplies, although groundwater supplies generally take longer to recover. Reduced precipitation during a drought means that groundwater supplies are not replenished at a normal rate. This can lead to a reduction in groundwater levels and problems such as reduced pumping capacity or wells going dry. Shallow wells are more susceptible than deep wells. Reduced replenishment of groundwater affects streams. Much of the flow in streams comes from groundwater, especially during the summer when there is less precipitation and after snowmelt ends. Reduced groundwater levels mean that even less water will enter streams when steam flows are lowest. Droughts are not usually associated with direct impacts on people or property, but they can have significant impacts on agriculture, wildlife, and fishing, which can impact people indirectly. When measuring the severity of droughts, analysts typically look at economic impacts.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has developed several indices to measure drought impacts and severity to map their extent and locations:

• The Palmer Crop Moisture Index measures short-term drought on a weekly scale and is used to quantify drought’s impacts on agriculture during the growing season. • The Palmer Z Index measures short-term drought on a monthly scale. Figure 10-1 shows this index for June 2016 (most current as of the writing of this chapter update).

Figure 10-1 Palmer Z Index Short-Term Drought Conditions (June 2016) • The Palmer Drought Severity Index measures the duration and intensity of long-term drought-inducing circulation patterns. Long-term drought is cumulative, so the intensity of drought during a given month is dependent on the current weather patterns plus the cumulative patterns of previous months. Weather patterns can change quickly

10-4 DAM FAILURE from a long-term drought pattern to a long-term wet pattern, and this index can respond rapidly. Figure 10-2 shows this index for August 9, 2016 for the State of Oregon. The USDA reported that 33 percent of Oregon's subsoil moisture was short to very short. Soil moisture and groundwater levels were also low in other parts of the West as illustrated in Figure 10-3. However, statewide, when precipitation levels are averaged, Oregon was near average (see Figure 10-4).

Figure 10-2 Palmer Drought Severity Index (July 2016)

Figure 10-3 Percent Area Experiencing Drought Conditions

10-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 10-4 Nationwide Precipitation Rankings • The hydrological impacts of drought (e.g., reservoir levels, groundwater levels, etc.) take longer to develop and it takes longer to recover from them. The Palmer Hydrological Drought Index, another long-term index, was developed to quantify hydrological effects. This index responds more slowly to changing conditions than the Palmer Drought Index. Figure 10-5 identifies this data for May 2016 (most recent available at update).

Figure 10-5 Palmer Hydrological Drought Index May 2016

10-6 DAM FAILURE

• While the Palmer indices consider precipitation, evapotranspiration and runoff, the Standardized Precipitation Index considers only precipitation. In this index, a value of zero indicates the median precipitation amount; the index is negative for drought and positive for wet conditions. The Standardized Precipitation Index is computed for time scales ranging from one month to 24 months. Based on the various indices, 1931 and 1934 were the driest years on record. The late 1920s were moderately dry, followed with many severe droughts in the 1930s. 1992 and 1994 were moderate years, followed by many moderate, nearly severe drought years in the early 2000s. Additional information and current monthly data are available from the NOAA website, located at: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/prelim/drought/palmer.html Frequency Empirical studies conducted over the past century have shown that meteorological drought is never the result of a single cause. It is the result of many causes, often synergistic in nature; these include global weather patterns that produce persistent, upper-level high-pressure systems along the West Coast with warm, dry air resulting in less precipitation.

In temperate regions such as in Oregon, long-range forecasts of drought have limited reliability. In the tropics, empirical relationships have been demonstrated between precipitation and El Niño events, but few such relationships have been demonstrated above 30º north latitude. Meteorologists do not believe that reliable forecasts are attainable at this time a season or more in advance for temperate regions.

A great deal of research has been conducted in recent years on the role of interacting systems in explaining regional and even global patterns of climatic variability. These patterns tend to recur periodically with enough frequency and with similar characteristics over a sufficient length of time that they offer opportunities to improve the ability for long-range climate prediction. However, too many variables exist in determining the frequency with which a drought will occur.

The potential for improved drought predictions in the near future differs by region, season, and climatic regime. Based on Palmer Z predictions (Figure 10-1), the planning area has most recently experienced a “moderate drought” situation within the area. However, according to the State’s HMP, the U.S. Department of Agriculture designated both Klamath and Lake Counties as “natural disaster areas” due to damages or losses caused by previous droughts. Review of the Klamath County HMP demonstrates the higher propensity for drought within Klamath County, with droughts likely every 10-35 years. Review further illustrates a lower level within the Klamath Falls area due to the higher and more stable aquifer and well systems, with one event occurring every 75-100 years.

10.3 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Overview Drought produces a complex web of impacts that spans many sectors of the economy and reaches well beyond the area experiencing physical drought. This complexity exists because water is integral to the ability to produce goods and provide services. Drought can affect a wide range of economic, environmental, and social activities. The vulnerability of an activity associated with the effects of drought usually depends on its water demand, how the demand is met, and what water supplies are available to meet the demand.

All people, property and environments in the planning area could be exposed to some degree to the impacts of moderate to extreme drought. Areas densely wooded, especially areas in parks throughout the planning area which host campers, increase the exposure to forest fires. Additional exposure comes in the form of

10-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

economic impact should a prolonged drought occur that would impact Treaty resources, including fish, wildlife, and plants, recreation, agriculture, and timber harvesting—primary sources of income and subsistence in the planning area. Prolonged drought would also decrease capacity within the watersheds, thereby reducing fish runs and, potentially, spawning areas.

Warning Time A drought is not a sudden-onset hazard. Droughts are climatic patterns that occur over long periods, providing advance notice. In many instances, annual situations of low water levels are identified months in advance (e.g., snow pack at lower levels are identified during winter months), allowing for advanced planning for water conservation.

Meteorological drought is the result of many causes, including global weather patterns that produce persistent, upper-level high-pressure systems along the West Coast resulting in less precipitation. Only general warning can take place, due to the numerous variables that scientists have not pieced together well enough to make accurate and precise predictions. It is often difficult to recognize a drought before being in the middle of it. Droughts do not occur spontaneously, but rather evolve over time as certain conditions are met.

Scientists do not know how to predict a long-range drought situation for most locations. Predicting drought depends on the ability to forecast precipitation and temperature. Weather anomalies may last from several months to several decades. How long they last depend on interactions between the atmosphere and the oceans, soil moisture and land surface processes, topography, internal dynamics, and the accumulated influence of weather systems on the global scale. In temperate regions such as Oregon, long-range forecasts of drought have limited reliability.

Impact on Life, Health and Safety Many residents rely entirely upon surface water systems for their domestic water supply. Community and individual water systems are particularly vulnerable during drought conditions, especially when additional water resources are depleted by illegal or unauthorized diversion of water systems, which further compounds the situation. Wildfires are often associated with drought. A prolonged lack of precipitation dries out vegetation, which becomes increasingly susceptible to ignition as the duration of the drought extends. This increases the risk to the health and safety of the residents within the planning area, especially those in wildland-urban interface areas. Smoke and particles embedded within the smoke are of significant concern for the elderly and very young, especially those with breathing problems. The potential for significant life or health impacts would be anticipated because of drought within the planning area, especially when considering the high fire dangers that may erupt during a drought situation. In addition, elderly and young are more susceptible to heat, which is many times associated with drought conditions. As the Tribal Planning Area has a large population of elderly and young, the impact could be significant.

The County and its jurisdictions have the ability to minimize impacts on residents and water consumers within the planning area should several consecutive dry years occur. The State of Oregon also has various drought assistance programs, as well as boards and commissions dealing with water conservation and efficiency plans. Under Executive Order No. 15-09, Governor Kate Brown directed all state agencies to plan for resiliency to drought to meet the future challenges brought on by climate change. While this manages the public water systems, the Tribes rely significantly on wells, which would not be regulated in the same manner.

10-8 DAM FAILURE

Impact on Property No structures will be directly affected by drought conditions, though some may become vulnerable to wildfires, which are more likely following years of drought. Droughts can also have significant impacts on landscapes, which could cause a financial burden to property owners. However, these impacts are not considered critical in planning for impacts from the drought hazard.

Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Critical facilities will continue to be operational during a drought unless impacted by fire. Critical facility elements such as landscaping may not be maintained due to limited resources, but the risk to the planning area’s critical facilities inventory will be largely aesthetic. For example, when water conservation measures are in place, landscaped areas will not be watered and may die. These aesthetic impacts are not considered significant.

Impact on Economy Economic impact from a drought is associated with different aspects, including potential loss of use of Treaty resources and agricultural production. The Tribes have limited agricultural production; however, the economic impact could be influenced during a drought situation as a result of tourists traveling through the planning area to other water-based recreational activities, such as those occurring on Klamath Lake. Lack of travelers to the area could also reduce the number of visitors to the Casino. Additional economic impact stems from the potential loss of critical infrastructure due to fire damage and impacts on industries that depend on water for their business, such as fishing industries, water-based recreational activities, and public facilities and recreational areas.

Problems of domestic and municipal water supplies have historically been corrected by building another reservoir, a larger pipeline, new well, or some other facility. However, water extraction drops the level of fresh groundwater, reducing its water pressure, and allowing saltwater to flow further inland. Because saltwater has a higher mineral content than freshwater, it is denser and has a higher water pressure. As a result, saltwater can push inland beneath freshwater. With drought conditions increasing pressure on aquifers and increased pumping, which can result in saltwater intrusion into fresh water aquifers, resultant reductions or restrictions on economic growth and development could occur.

Given potential political issues, a drought situation, if prolonged, could restrict building within specific areas due to lack of supporting infrastructure, thereby impacting the tax base and economy of the region by limiting growth. In addition, the lack of hydroelectric generating capacity associated with drought conditions as a result of reduced precipitation levels continues to raise electric prices throughout the nation, which ultimately would impact the planning area.

Impact on Environment Environmental losses from drought are associated with aquatic life, plants, animals, wildlife habitat, air and water quality, forest fires, landscape quality, biodiversity, and soil erosion. Some effects are short-term and conditions quickly return to normal after the drought. Other effects linger or even become permanent. Wildlife habitat, for example, may be degraded through the loss of wetlands, lakes, and vegetation, but many species will eventually recover from this effect. Degraded landscape quality, including soil erosion, may lead to a more permanent loss of biological productivity. Public awareness and concern for environmental quality has led to greater attention to these effects. Drought conditions within the planning area could increase the demand for water supplies. Water shortages would have an adverse impact on the environment, relied upon by the planning partnership, causing social and political conflicts. If such

10-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

conditions persisted for several years, the economy of the Tribal Planning Area (including Klamath and Lake Counties) could experience setbacks, especially in water dependent industries.

Of additional significance to the Klamath Tribes is the impact a drought can have on fisheries. Fish runs can be disrupted for many years following drought conditions when river flows drop to dangerous levels. Low flows also reduce the depth of the pools and cold-water refugia along the river, further reducing their ability to either migrate further upstream, or seek shelter in a cold-water, oxygenated environment. Low flows also dry up side springs, which provide additional refuge for fish. Likewise, the low flows prevent young fish from finding cover along the river’s edge, and the related high temperatures, low oxygen levels and poor water quality have been lethal to fish. Low water levels, which increase water temperatures, also increase the amount of blue/green algae, increasing health risk to individuals, fish and wildlife, and the environment in general.

10.4 RESULTS Based on review and analysis of the data, the planning team has determined that the probability for a drought situation to occur within the Tribal Planning Area or immediately surrounding areas as high, particularly when considering the potential impact from climate change. Klamath County has experienced, at a minimum, 13 drought situations since the early 1900s; nine drought incidents have occurred during the time period 2000-2014. However, limited structures are customarily associated with negative impact from drought, except as secondary hazards, such as wildfires, which increase in frequency and severity as a result of drought. Based on this, the Planning Team assigned a Risk Ranking of 2.80 to the Drought hazard, with overall vulnerability determined to be at a medium level.

10.5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRENDS The Klamath Tribes do practice sound practices with respect to policies dealing with issues of water supply, and the protection of water resources. The Tribe has also actively been working on various water restoration projects since completion of the last plan. Removal of the dams along the Klamath River will help alleviate, to some degree, the impact of drought situations by increasing the level of available water in some areas, similar to the benefits derived from the removal of the Chiloquin Dam. Deficiencies identified by this plan update can be used to identify additional mitigation actions to increase the capability to deal with future trends in development when dealing with drought conditions.

In addition, the Tribes continue to move forward in developing policies directing land use and dealing with zoning, density and permitting for any new development as it relates to water resources. This will provide the capability to protect future development from the impacts of drought and help ensure available water.

10.6 ISSUES An extreme drought could impact the region with little warning. Combinations of low precipitation and unusually high temperatures have previously occurred over several consecutive years, especially in response to climate change. Intensified by such conditions, extreme wildfires could break out throughout the area, increasing the need for water. Surrounding communities, also in drought conditions, could increase their demand for water, causing social and political conflicts. Increased temperature associated with low water flows will also impact aquatic habitat, increasing fish mortality. Low water tables could increase issues of life, safety, and health, while also impacting the economy, including as it relates to decreased ability to construct new housing due to lack of ability to provide water. If such conditions persisted for several years, the economy of the Tribal Planning Area could experience setbacks, especially in water dependent practices and industries.

The planning team has identified the following drought-related issues:

10-10 DAM FAILURE

• The potential impact on the livelihood of those who rely on Treat resources; • The need for alternative water sources should a prolonged drought occur; • Use of groundwater recharge to stabilize the groundwater supply; • The probability of increased drought frequencies and durations due to climate change; • The promotion of active water conservation even during non-drought periods; • The potential impact on businesses in the area; • The potential impact on the livelihood of those employed in industries impacted by drought, such as agriculture, fishing, forestry, and tourism.

10-11

CHAPTER 11. EARTHQUAKE

11.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND DEFINITIONS An earthquake is the vibration of the earth’s surface following a release of Earthquake—The shaking of energy in the earth’s crust. This energy can be generated by a sudden the ground caused by an abrupt shift of rock along a dislocation of the crust or by a volcanic eruption. Its epicenter is the point fracture in the earth or a on the earth’s surface directly above the hypocenter of an earthquake. The contact zone between tectonic location of an earthquake is commonly described by the geographic position plates. of its epicenter and by its focal depth. Earthquakes many times occur along Epicenter—The point on the a fault, which is a fracture in the earth’s crust. earth’s surface directly above the hypocenter of an Dislocation of the earth’s crust cause the most destructive quakes. The crust earthquake. The location of an may first bend and then, when the stress exceeds the strength of the rocks, earthquake is commonly break and snap to a new position. In the process of breaking, vibrations described by the geographic position of its epicenter and by called “seismic waves” are generated. These waves travel outward from the its focal depth. source of the earthquake at varying speeds. Fault—A fracture in the earth’s crust along which two blocks Earthquakes tend to reoccur along faults, which are zones of weakness in of the crust have slipped with the crust. Even if a fault zone has recently experienced an earthquake, there respect to each other. is no guarantee that all the stress has been relieved. Another earthquake Focal Depth—The depth from could still occur. the earth’s surface to the hypocenter. Hypocenter—The region Geologists classify faults by their relative hazards. Active faults, which underground where an represent the highest hazard, are those that have ruptured to the ground earthquake’s energy originates surface during the Holocene period (about the last 11,000 years). Potentially Liquefaction— Loosely active faults are those that displaced layers of rock from the Quaternary packed, water-logged period (the last 1,800,000 years). Determining if a fault is “active” or sediments losing their strength “potentially active” depends on geologic evidence, which may not be in response to strong shaking, causing major damage during available for every fault. earthquakes. Faults are more likely to have earthquakes on them if they have more rapid rates of movement, have had recent earthquakes along them, experience greater total displacements, and are aligned so that movement can relieve accumulating tectonic stresses. A direct relationship exists between a fault’s length and location and its ability to generate damaging ground motion at a given site. In some areas, smaller, local faults produce lower magnitude quakes, but ground shaking can be strong, and damage can be significant because of the fault’s proximity to the area. In contrast, large regional faults can generate great magnitudes but, because of their distance and depth, may result in only moderate shaking in the area.

It is generally agreed that four primary source zones exist for Pacific Northwest quakes: a shallow (crustal) zone; the Cascadia Subduction Zone; a deep, intraplate “Benioff” zone, and volcanoes, which may also produce damaging shaking. Figure 11-1 illustrates the length of the Cascadia Subduction Zone, and general source areas for the Subduction Zone, Crustal and Intraplate earthquakes. More than 90 percent of Pacific Northwest earthquakes occur along the boundary between the Juan de Fuca plate and the North American plate.

11-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 11-1 Source Areas for Subduction Zone, Crustal and Intraplate Earthquakes

An earthquake will generally produce the strongest ground motions near the epicenter (the point on the ground above where the earthquake initiated) with the intensity of ground motions diminishing with increasing distance from the epicenter. The intensity of ground shaking at a given site depends on four main factors: • Earthquake magnitude • Earthquake epicenter • Earthquake depth • Soil or rock conditions at the site, which may amplify or de-amplify earthquake ground motions.

For any given earthquake, there will be contours of varying intensity of ground shaking with distance from the epicenter. The intensity will generally decrease with distance from the epicenter, and often in an irregular pattern, not simply in concentric circles. The irregularity is caused by soil conditions, the complexity of earthquake fault rupture patterns, and directionality in the dispersion of earthquake energy.

Earthquake Classifications

Earthquakes are typically classified in one of two ways: By the amount of energy released, measured as magnitude; or by the impact on people and structures, measured as intensity. Magnitude is related to the amount of seismic energy released at the hypocenter of an earthquake. It is determined by the amplitude of the earthquake waves recorded on instruments. Magnitude is represented by a single, instrumentally determined value for each earthquake event. Intensity indicates how the earthquake is felt at various distances from the earthquake epicenter.

Magnitude

Currently the most commonly used magnitude scale is the moment magnitude (Mw) scale, with the follow classifications of magnitude: • Great—Mw > 8 • Major—Mw = 7.0—7.9

11-2 EARTHQUAKE

• Strong—Mw = 6.0—6.9 • Moderate—Mw = 5.0—5.9 • Light—Mw = 4.0—4.9 • Minor—Mw = 3.0—3.9 • Micro—Mw < 3

Estimates of moment magnitude roughly match the local magnitude scale (ML) commonly called the Richter scale. One advantage of the moment magnitude scale is that, unlike other magnitude scales, it does not saturate at the upper end. That is, there is no value beyond which all large earthquakes have about the same magnitude. For this reason, moment magnitude is now the most often used estimate of large earthquake magnitudes.

Intensity

There are many measures of the severity or intensity of earthquake ground motions. The Modified Mercalli Intensity scale (MMI) was widely used beginning in the early 1900s. MMI is a descriptive, qualitative scale that relates severity of ground motions to the types of damage experienced. MMI values range from I to XII (1-12) (USGS, 1989):

I. Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable conditions

II. Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings.

III. Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings. Many people do not recognize it is an earthquake. Standing cars may rock slightly. Vibrations similar to the passing of a truck. Duration estimated.

IV. Felt indoors by many, outdoors by few during the day. At night, some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. Sensation like a heavy truck striking building. Standing cars rocked noticeably.

V. Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken. Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop.

VI. Felt by all; many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster. Damage slight.

VII. Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight in well-built ordinary structures; considerable in poorly built or badly designed structures. Some chimneys broken.

VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in ordinary buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned.

IX. Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb. Damage great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations.

11-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations. Rails bent.

XI. Few, if any (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Rails bent greatly.

XII. Damage total. Lines of sight and level are distorted. Objects thrown into the air.

More accurate, quantitative measures of the intensity of ground shaking have largely replaced the MMI and are used in this mitigation plan. These scales use terms that can be physically measured with seismometers, such as the acceleration, velocity, or displacement (movement) of the ground. The intensity may also be measured as a function of the frequency of earthquake waves propagating through the earth. In the same way that sound waves contain a mix of low-, moderate- and high-frequency sound waves, earthquake waves contain ground motions of various frequencies. The behavior of buildings and other structures depends substantially on the vibration frequencies of the building or structure versus the frequency of earthquake waves. Earthquake ground motions also include both horizontal and vertical components.

Ground Motion

Earthquake hazard assessment is also based on expected ground motion. This involves determining the probability that certain ground motion accelerations will be exceeded over a time period of interest. A common physical measure of the intensity of earthquake ground shaking, and the one used in this mitigation plan, is peak ground acceleration (PGA). PGA is a measure of the intensity of shaking relative to the acceleration of gravity (g). For example, an acceleration of 1.0 g PGA is an extremely strong ground motion, which does occur near the epicenter of large earthquakes. With a vertical acceleration of 1.0 g, objects are thrown into the air. With a horizontal acceleration of 1.0 g, objects accelerate sideways at the same rate as if they had been dropped from the ceiling. A PGA equal to 10% g means that the ground acceleration is 10 percent that of gravity, and so on.

Damage levels experienced in an earthquake vary with the intensity of ground shaking and with the seismic capacity of structures. The following generalized observations provide qualitative statements about the likely extent of damage for earthquakes with various levels of ground shaking (PGA) at a given site: • Ground motions of only 1% g or 2% g are widely felt by people; hanging plants and lamps swing strongly, but damage levels, if any, are usually very low. • Ground motions below about 10% g usually cause only slight damage. • Ground motions between about 10% g and 30% g may cause minor to moderate damage in well- designed buildings, with higher levels of damage in more vulnerable buildings. At this level of ground shaking, some poorly built buildings may be subject to collapse. • Ground motions above about 30% g may cause significant damage in well-designed buildings and very high levels of damage (including collapse) in poorly designed buildings. • Ground motions above about 50% g may cause significant damage in most buildings, even those designed to resist seismic forces.

PGA is the basis of seismic zone maps that are included in building codes such as the International Building Code. Building codes that include seismic provisions specify the horizontal force due to lateral acceleration that a building should be able to withstand during an earthquake. PGA values are directly related to these lateral forces that could damage “short period structures” (e.g. single-family dwellings). Longer period response components determine the lateral forces that damage larger structures with longer natural periods

11-4 EARTHQUAKE

(apartment buildings, factories, high-rises, bridges). The amount of earthquake damage and the size of the geographic area affected generally increase with earthquake magnitude: • Earthquakes below M5 are not likely to cause significant damage, even near the epicenter. • Earthquakes between about M5 and M6 are likely to cause moderate damage near the epicenter. • Earthquakes of about M6.5 or greater (e.g., the 2001 Nisqually earthquake in Washington) can cause major damage, with damage usually concentrated fairly near the epicenter. • Larger earthquakes of M7+ cause damage over increasingly wider geographic areas with the potential for very high levels of damage near the epicenter. • Great earthquakes with M8+ can cause major damage over wide geographic areas. • An M9 mega-quake on the Cascadia Subduction Zone could affect the entire Pacific Northwest from British Columbia down through Oregon, and as far south as Northern California, with the highest levels of damage nearest the coast.

Table 11-1 lists damage potential and perceived shaking by PGA factors, compared to the Mercalli scale.

TABLE 11-1 COMPARISON OF MERCALLI SCALE AND PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION

Modified Potential Structure Damage Estimated PGAa

Resistant Mercalli Scale Perceived Shaking Buildings Vulnerable Buildings (%g)

I Not Felt None None <0.17%

II-III Weak None None 0.17%—1.4%

IV Light None None 1.4%—3.9%

V Moderate Very Light Light 3.9%—9.2%

VI Strong Light Moderate 9.2%—18%

VII Very Strong Moderate Moderate/Heavy 18%—34%

VIII Severe Moderate/Heavy Heavy 34%—65%

IX Violent Heavy Very Heavy 65%—124%

X—XII Extreme Very Heavy Very Heavy >124%

a. PGA measured in percent of g, where g is the acceleration of gravity

Sources: USGS, 2008; USGS, 2010

11-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

11.2 HAZARD PROFILE Seismic-related hazards include ground motion from shallow (less than 20 miles deep) or deep faults, as well as liquefaction and differential settling of soil in areas with saturated sand, silt, or gravel. Earthquakes also can cause damage by triggering landslides or bluff failure. The 1993 Klamath earthquake was a M 5.9 – 6.0 earthquake, causing two deaths and extensive damages totaling over $7.5 million.

In Oregon, earthquake history outlines two major types of earthquake hazard and two less significant sources. By far the greatest is the hazard posed by infrequent megathrust earthquakes on the Cascadia Subduction Zone. The second major hazard comes from smaller crustal earthquakes on faults in or near populated areas, which includes all of Oregon’s damaging historic earthquakes. Intraplate earthquakes, which have been historically damaging in the Puget Sound area, are possible in Oregon but no damaging prehistoric or historic events are known. Finally, earthquakes associated with Oregon’s many young volcanoes may produce damaging shaking in communities close to the volcano (Oregon State EHMP, 2015).

Hazard Mapping

Identifying the extent and location of an earthquake is not as simple as it is for other hazards such as flood, landslide, or wildfire. The impact of an earthquake is largely a function of the following factors: • Ground shaking (ground motion accelerations) • Liquefaction (soil instability) • Distance from the source (both horizontally and vertically).

Mapping that shows the impacts of these components has been used to assess the risk of earthquakes within the planning area. While the impacts from each of these components can build upon each other during an earthquake event, the mapping looks at each component individually. The following maps, figures, and graphics each illustrate the various components utilized to identify risk and vulnerability.

Effect of Soil Types

Liquefaction is a secondary effect of an earthquake in which soils lose their shear strength and flow or behave as liquid, thereby damaging structures that derive their support from the soil. Liquefaction generally occurs in soft, unconsolidated sedimentary soils. The National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) creates maps based on soil characteristics to help identify locations subject to liquefaction. NEHRP Soils B and C typically can sustain ground shaking without much effect, dependent on the earthquake magnitude. Areas that are commonly most affected by ground shaking and susceptible to liquefaction have NEHRP Soils D, E, and F, and where soils can amplify the earthquake ground shaking. NEHRP site class F soils (dark orange on map) are prone to produce the greatest amplification. Figure 11-2 illustrates the soil classification for the state. Figure 11-3 shows liquefaction susceptibility throughout the County. Figure 11-4 shows liquefaction susceptibility within the Tribal Planning Area. Review of data shows that most of the planning area falls within the B, C, a small amount of D, and a small portion of E soils.

11-6 EARTHQUAKE

Figure 11-2 Statewide NEHRP Soils Classifications

Source: Oregon State University

Figure 11-3 Liquefaction Susceptibility Map

11-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 11-4 Liquefaction Susceptibility in Tribal Planning Area

11-8 EARTHQUAKE

Extent and Location

Oregon State is one of the most seismically active states in United States.12 Figure 11-5 depicts the faults known or suspected to be active within Oregon. Figure 11-6 identifies the faults with known earthquakes to have occurred. Figure 11-7 identifies the quaternary faults in Tribal Planning Area. Geologists have not determined likely earthquake occurrence intervals for all of these faults.

Source: Oregon State University (date unknown)

Figure 11-5 Oregon State Active Faults

Figure 11-6 USGS Known Faults and Earthquake Events in the Klamath Tribal Planning Area

12 USGS (2016) http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/top_states.php

11-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 11-7 Quaternary Faults in Tribal Planning Area

11-10 EARTHQUAKE

Shake Maps

A shake map is a representation of ground shaking produced by an earthquake (Peak Ground Acceleration). The information it presents is different from the earthquake magnitude and epicenter that are released after an earthquake because shake maps focus on the ground shaking resulting from the earthquake, rather than the parameters describing the earthquake source. An earthquake has only one magnitude and one epicenter, but it produces a range of ground shaking at sites throughout the region, depending on the distance from the earthquake, the rock and soil conditions at sites, and variations in the propagation of seismic waves from the earthquake due to complexities in the structure of the earth’s crust. A shake map shows the extent and variation of ground shaking in a region immediately following significant earthquakes.

Ground motion and intensity maps are derived from peak ground motion recorded on seismic sensors, with interpolation where data are lacking and site-specific corrections. Color-coded intensity maps are derived from empirical relations between peak ground motions and Modified Mercalli intensity. Two types of shake maps are typically generated from the data:

A probabilistic seismic hazard map, which shows the hazard from earthquakes that geologists and seismologists agree could occur. The maps are expressed in terms of probability of exceeding a certain ground motion, such as the 10 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years. This level of ground shaking has been used for designing buildings in high seismic areas. Hazard maps for the 100-year and 500-year probabilistic earthquakes are shown on Figure 11-8 and Figure 11-9. It should be noted that probability estimates do not represent a single earthquake. Instead, the 500-year model includes many faults, each with a 10% chance of producing an earthquake in the next 50 years. The model assumes that each fault will produce a single “average” earthquake during this time. More and higher magnitude earthquakes than used in this model may occur.

Earthquake scenario maps, which describe the expected ground motions and effects of hypothetical large earthquakes for a region. Maps of these scenarios can be used to support all phases of emergency management. For this plan, two scenario maps were used. The Klamath Falls 6.5M Scenario Shake Map is shown on Figure 11-10, and the Cascadia 9.0M fault scenario is shown in .

Cascadia M9.0 Scenario:

During FEMA’s June 2016 Cascadia Rising Subduction Zone Earthquake Exercise, which included Washington, Oregon, and California, among others, the USGS created a new Cascadia scenario Shake Map which focused an epicenter 55 miles off of the coast of Oregon (west of Nehalem Bay), and 116 miles west of Portland (additional Shake Map information on the Cascadia exercise scenario is available at: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/shakemap/global/shake/casc9.0_expanded_peak_se/.

While the scenario was developed for exercise planning purposes, it is considered a viable, probabilistic scenario, and utilized in this document to demonstrate potential impact from such an event. It should be noted that this scenario, along with all scenario incidents throughout this document, are based on models and should be used for planning purposes only.

USGS’ 2016 Shake Map illustrates the level of ground motion which is equal to a 10 percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years. Based on the scenario as developed, the majority of the planning area would be subject to minimal impact (Little to None or Very Light) ground shaking. Portions would feel Light shaking. While minimal structural impact may be associated with a Cascadia event, evacuation from the more significantly impacted areas would affect the Tribal Planning Area. In addition, power, gas, and other commodities would be impacted as a result of the CSZ earthquake on transportation of all types, and the closure of I-5.

11-11 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 11-8 100 Year Probabilistic Earthquake

11-12 EARTHQUAKE

Figure 11-9 500 Year Probabilistic Earthquake

11-13 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 11-10 Klamath Falls 6.5M Scenario

11-14 EARTHQUAKE

Figure 11-11 Cascadia 9.0M Scenario

11-15 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Previous Occurrences

Figure 11-12 identifies three earthquake swarms which have occurred in the planning area. The most notable earthquake event in the planning area was a swarm of earthquakes occurring within the Klamath Falls area on September 20, 1993, which represents the largest earthquakes centered in Oregon in more than 50 yrs. Only the magnitude 5.75 Milton- Freewater earthquake in 1936, which was centered near the Oregon-Washington border and felt in an area of about 190,000 sq. km, compares in size with the Klamath Falls earthquakes.

Although the 1993 earthquakes surprised many local residents, geologists have long recognized that strong earthquakes may occur along potentially active faults that pass through the Klamath Falls area. These faults are geologically related to similar faults in Oregon, Idaho, and Nevada that occasionally spawn strong earthquakes (USGS, 1993). Figure 11-13 illustrates some of the damage Figure 11-12 Location of Earthquake Swarms sustained as a result of the 1993 swarm in which a large boulder hit a southbound vehicle, killing the driver.

Damages associated with the 1993 earthquake exceeded $7.5 million. Figure 11-14 is an additional photograph of the resulting rock slide caused by the 1993 Klamath Falls earthquake which occurred on U.S. Highway 97 between Modoc Point and Klamath Falls.13 The slide breached the roadside barrier.

The Cascadia Subduction Zone runs along the west coast from northern Vancouver Island to northern California, where it meets the San Andreas Fault. It is one of the world’s most treacherous faults, capable of unleashing mega quakes and tsunamis on a par with the 2004 Sumatra disaster. Based on geologic evidence, the Cascadia Subduction Zone has ruptured and created tsunamis at least seven times in the past 3,500 years, generating an earthquake every 500 to 600 years on average, with a range in recurrence intervals from as little as 140 years between events to more than 1,000 years. The last Cascadia Subduction Zone-related earthquake is believed to have occurred on January 26, 1700, and researchers predict a 10 to 14 percent chance that another could occur in the next 50 years. Future Cascadia Subduction Zone-related earthquakes have been predicted to be Magnitude 8 or greater and could subject communities to intense ground shaking, subsidence, landslides, and liquefaction.

Intraplate earthquakes are common in the Puget Sound, where they represent most of the historical record of damaging events. In Oregon, these earthquakes occur at much lower rates, and none have ever been close to a damaging magnitude. Earthquakes of volcanic origin are possible in the region, but it is difficult to predict a probability for, and the distance of the Cascade Range’s volcanoes from population centers.

Table 11-2 lists additional past seismic events that have affected the areas in and around the Klamath Tribal Planning Area (including Klamath and Lake Counties).

13 Photos by David K. Keefer, U.S. Geological Survey

11-16 EARTHQUAKE

Figure 11-13 1993 Rockslide in US Highway 97

Figure 11-14 Damages Sustained During 1993 Klamath Falls Earthquake

11-17 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 11-2 HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKES IMPACTING THE PLANNING AREA

Disaster Type Date No. Magnitude Location Comments 1/1700 ~9.0 Cascadia Offshore Generated a tsunami that struck Oregon, Subduction Washington, and Japan; destroyed Native Zone American villages along coast 11/187 7.3 Intraplate Brookings Chimneys fell at Port Orford, Grants Pass, and 3 area Jacksonville. No aftershocks. Origin probably Gorda block of the Juan de Fuca plate. 1906 North of Lakeview 1920 Crater Lake 1923 Lakeview Area 1958 4.5 Adel 11/196 ~5.2-5.5 Crustal Portland Damage to many homes (chimneys, windows) 2 1968 4.7-5.1 Adel Swarm of earthquakes occurred in the area. 9/1993 DR-1004 ~5.9-6.0 Crustal Klamath Falls Two earthquakes causing two deaths (one crushed by falling rock, the other a heart attack); extensive damage exceeding $7.5 million. Intensity VII in downtown Klamath Falls; surrounding areas experienced intensity VI. Tribal impact was approximately $85,000 including damages to Administration building, Beatty Community Center, and old hatchery facilities.* 12/199 5.4 Crustal Klamath Falls Aftershock associated with 9/1993 quake; 3 Intensity VII, causing additional damages.* 7/2004 4.9 Newport Quake recorded southwest of Newport; no damages reported 8/2004 4.7 Newport Small quake recorded northeast of Newport; no damages 4/2008 ~5.0-5.4 Newport Swarm of earthquakes occurred off Central Oregon Coast**

Sources: PNSN, 2016; USGS Oregon Earthquake History (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/oregon/history.php) *USGS Oregon Historic Earthquakes http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/events/1993_09_21.php Accessed 22 Dec 2016 **Oregon State University: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080413184801.htm Accessed 22 Dec. 2016

11-18 EARTHQUAKE

Severity

Earthquakes can last from a few seconds to over five minutes; they may also occur as a series of tremors over several days. In the case of the 1993 Klamath Falls earthquake, the initial quake occurred in September, with a significant aftershock occurring in December 1993.

The actual movement of the ground in an earthquake is seldom the direct cause of injury or death. Casualties generally result from falling objects and debris, because the shocks shake, damage or demolish buildings and other structures. Disruption of communications, electrical power supplies and gas, sewer and water lines should be expected. Earthquakes may trigger fires, dam failures, landslides or releases of hazardous material, compounding their disastrous effects.

Small, local faults produce lower magnitude quakes, but ground shaking can be strong and damage can be significant in areas close to the fault. In contrast, large regional faults can generate earthquakes of great magnitudes but, because of their distance and depth, they may result in only light to moderate shaking in an area. This would be similar in nature of the expected impact from a Cascadia Subduction Zone event on the Klamath Reservations

USGS ground motion maps based on current information about fault zones show the PGA that has a certain probability (2 or 10 percent) of being exceeded in a 50-year period. The PGA is measured in %g. Figure 11-15 shows the PGA with a 2 percent exceedance chance in 50 years in Oregon (Pacific Northwest Region).

Figure 11-15 PGA with 2-Percent Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years, Northwest Region

Based on various studies completed by different subject matter experts in the field of earthquakes and earthquake modeling, “Klamath County is one of the top 15 counties expected to have highest loss and most damage statewide) (State EHMP, 2015). Level of Collapse Potential for all structures identifies 15

11-19 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

structures at low risk (<1%) for collapse; 10 structures at moderate (>1%) potential of collapse; 37 structures at high potential (>10%); and 18 at very high (100%) potential for collapse. Lake County is identified as having 13, 1, 4, and 10 structures, respectively, at risk (Lewis (2007).

While it is unclear how many Tribal structures were included in the State’s assessment, the potential for collapse remains fairly consistent given that the majority of structures within Klamath and Lake Counties were built prior to 1970, the time during which building code standards began to recognize the significance in reducing the vulnerability based on seismic codes to which structures were built.

Frequency

Scientists are currently developing methods to more accurately determine when an earthquake will occur. However, even the most active faults only produce damaging earthquakes at intervals of a century or more, and for many of the intervals, it is much longer. As a result, it is very difficult to forecast the likelihood of an earthquake on any particular fault because we rarely have a long enough record to statistically determine a meaningful return period (an average time between earthquakes). The USGS and others are continuing to ascertain new geologic and seismic information regarding the dates of previous events along faults becomes available (USGS, 2015a). However, they are only estimates, and definitive timelines are impossible.

The State of Oregon, in conjunction with Oregon State University, the USGS and DOGAMI have performed an extensive amount of research conducted by many subject matter experts in the field. Based on their analysis, as contained in the State’s Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan, that data consists of the best available science for this element of the Tribes’ HMP. The State’s plan indicates that for Oregon west of the crest of the Cascades, the Cascadia subduction zone is responsible for most of the hazard, as shown in Figure 11-16. The paleoseismic record includes 18 magnitude 8.8–9.1 megathrust earthquakes in the last 10,000 years that affected the entire subduction zone. The return period for the largest earthquakes is 530 years, and the probability of the next such event occurring in the next 50 years ranges from 7 to 12%.

An additional 10–20 smaller, magnitude 8.3–8.5, earthquakes affected only the southern half of Oregon and northern California. The average return period for these is about 240 years, and the probability of a small or large subduction earthquake occurring in the next 50 years is 37–43%. The colors referenced in the map co-inside with the Mercalli Intensity rating discussed previously. Figure 11-17 demonstrates the annual rate of earthquake occurrence when averaged over five year increments.

11-20 EARTHQUAKE

Source: Madin and Burns (2013)

Figure 11-16 Probabilistic Earthquake Hazard - 2% Chance of Occurrence in Next 50 Years

Figure 11-17 Annual Rate of Earthquake Occurrence in Oregon - 5-Year Increments

11-21 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

11.3 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Overview

Several faults within the planning region have the potential to cause direct impact. The area also is vulnerable to impact from an event outside the planning area and Klamath County, although the intensity of ground motions diminishes with increasing distance from the epicenter. However, as indicated, research conducted by DOGAMI during 2012 indicates that scientists believe the likelihood of a Cascadia-type earthquake is currently estimated to be 7–12% in the next 50 years (Goldfinger and others, 2012); the magnitude is essentially the same as the 2011 Tohoku event, which caused devastation for the region (see http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/poster/2011/20110311.php for additional information). “The geologic record of great subduction earthquakes in Oregon for the last 10,000 years (Goldfinger and others, 2012) suggests that this event is about average in size for the Cascadia Subduction Zone”14 (DOGAMI, 2012). As a result, the entire population of the planning area is exposed to both direct and indirect impacts from earthquakes.

In addition, as with any earthquake, the degree of direct impact (and exposure) is dependent on factors including the soil type on which homes are constructed, the proximity to fault location, the type of materials used to construct residences and facilities, the age of the structure, etc. Indirect impacts are associated with elements such as the inability to evacuate the area as a result of earthquakes occurring in other regions of the state as well as impact on commodity flow for goods and services into the area. Impact from other parts of the state could require diversion of supplies. Rockslides such as those occurring as a result of the 1993 earthquake could make roadways impassable, requiring individuals to use alternative routes for evacuation which are much longer.

Methodology

Earthquake vulnerability data was generated using a Level 2 Hazus analysis in Hazus 3.2. Once the location and size of an earthquake are identified, Hazus estimated the intensity of the ground shaking, and the number of buildings damaged.

Warning Time

Research is being conducted with warning systems that use the low energy waves that precede major earthquakes. These potential warning systems give approximately 40 seconds’ notice that a major earthquake is about to occur. The warning time is very short, but it could allow for someone to get under a desk, step away from a hazardous material they are working with, or shut down a computer system. However, while the system is currently being tested, its wide-spread use is still a long time out.

Impact on Life, Health and Safety

The entire population of the planning area is potentially exposed to direct and indirect impacts from earthquakes. Two of the most vulnerable populations to a disaster incident such as this are the young and the elderly. The Klamath Tribal Planning Area has a high population of elders. The need for increased rescue efforts and/or to provide assistance to such a population base could tax the first-responder resources

14 DOGAMI Open File Report Series O-13-06. (2012) Accessed 17 Aug 2016. Available at: http://www.oregongeology.org/pubs/ofr/p-O-13-06.htm

11-22 EARTHQUAKE in the area during an event. Although many injuries may not be life-threatening, people will require medical attention and, in many cases, hospitalization. Potential life-threatening injuries and fatalities may occur; these are likely to be at an increased level if an earthquake happens during the afternoon or early evening when more people are home.

Review of the Klamath County HMP also indicates impact to countywide transportation networks, specifically the north-south transportation route US Highway 97. Parts of the route are directly on fault lines. Impact could limit access to the area’s largest hospital, as well as north-south trunk lines for Bonneville Power Authority, and TransCanada’s natural gas line. In the areas of the City of Klamath Falls, well fields and water distribution systems that transport water and wastewater may also be impacted (Klamath County HMP, 2011).

The degree of exposure is dependent on many factors, including the soil type their homes are constructed on, quality of construction, their proximity to fault location, etc. Whether impacted directly or indirectly, the entire population will have to deal with the consequences of earthquakes to some degree. Business interruption could keep people from working, road closures could isolate populations, and loss of functions of utilities could impact populations that suffered no direct damage from an event itself.

Should a significant event occur, even in a Cascadia-type incident, the number of people without power or water will be high, especially given the number of wells on which the County relies to supply water to individuals who most likely do not have generators to run pumps on the wells. This need will increase the number of individuals seeking shelter assistance.

Impact on Property

There are 112 Tribal buildings in the Tribal Planning Area, with an estimated total replacement and content value of $69,135,445. Most of the buildings are residential, and most of the building stock is of considerable age and not supported by building codes which increase resilience to seismic events. Portions of these buildings are constructed out of unreinforced masonry; many have chimneys that may be in need of repair, and many, because of the age of the building stock, may contain some level of asbestos in building components such as the boiler room, ceiling tiles, carpeting, or glue. Since all structures in the planning area are susceptible to earthquake impacts to varying degrees (including liquefaction and landslides), these figures represent total numbers Tribal Planning Area-wide for property exposure to seismic events.

Building Age

Structures that are in compliance with the International Building Code (IBC) of 1993 or later are generally less vulnerable to seismic damage because 1993 was when the IBC started including seismic construction standards based on regional location. This stipulated that all structures be constructed to a minimum seismic risk. Currently, standards require that construction in Klamath County be built at least to seismic risk Zone D1 standards (Klamath County Building Division Design Criteria, 2016). The State of Oregon utilizes Specialty Codes, which rely on seismic design loads determined in accordance with engineering calculations factoring in peak ground acceleration of the site, use of building and soil conditions, adding additional protection for its residents. Additional data is available from the State of Oregon’s Building Code Division Website, and Klamath County’s building code division, available at: http://www.klamathcounty.org/depts/cdd/building/code-design-criteria.asp.

Klamath County regularly adopts the IBC as its building code, the latest update to the IBC occurring on July 1, 2014. The Klamath Tribes utilize those codes as their minimum building guidelines when constructing structures, unless projects funded with federal funds require higher standards.

11-23 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

For planning purposes with respect to building age, 1993 is utilized as the date when building codes for seismic standards were first adopted and in place within the state of Oregon, so it is assumed that buildings in the planning area built after 1993 were built in conformance with IBC seismic standards and have less vulnerability. Issues such as code enforcement and code compliance could impact this assumption. Construction material is also important when determining the potential risk to a structure. However, for planning purposes, establishing this line of demarcation can be an effective tool for estimating vulnerability.

Table 11-3 identifies the results of analysis conducted concerning age of structures owned by the Klamath Tribes.

TABLE 11-3 AGE OF STRUCTURES WITHIN PLANNING AREA

Number of Current Structures Building Time within Identified Period Period Code Significance for Identified Time Period

Pre-1972 12 No standardized earthquake requirements in building codes.

1972-1993 37 IBC seismic construction standards were adopted in Oregon.

1994-2006 52 Seismic Risk Zones were established within the Uniform Building Code in 1994, requiring higher standards

2007- 11 State upgraded its building codes to follow the International Building Present Code Standard. As upgrades occur, the state continues to adopt said standards. Most recent adoptions include the 2006 editions of the National Model Codes (with some amendments).

Total 112 As of 12/22/16 based on Tribal Data

Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure

All critical facilities in the Tribal Planning Area are exposed to the earthquake hazard. Additionally, hazardous materials releases can occur during an earthquake from fixed facilities or transportation-related incidents. Transportation corridors can be disrupted during an earthquake, leading to the release of materials to the surrounding environment. Facilities holding hazardous materials are of particular concern because of possible isolation of residences surrounding them. During an earthquake, structures storing these materials could rupture and leak into the surrounding area or an adjacent waterway, having a disastrous effect on the environment. This is of particular concern as spills into water bodies such as those in or near the Klamath Tribal Planning Area could have devastating impact. Additionally, the potential for landslide or rockslide- induced roadway closures are of significant concern, such as that which occurred during the 1993 earthquake. Closure of major arterials could require increased evacuation periods, in some instances increasing time by several hours.

11-24 EARTHQUAKE

The 2005 DOGAMI assessment for Klamath County and the City of Klamath Falls includes identification of energy infrastructure to include the north-south trunk lines of Bonneville Power Authority and the TransCanada’s natural gas line. Several schools are also impacted to varying degrees.

Transportation infrastructure is identified as being highly vulnerable, with the primary north-south route of US Highway 97 being significantly impacted. Portions of Highway 97 lie directly on fault lines. As such, damage to Highway 97 will limit access to local hospitals, medical facilities, etc. In addition, the Union Pacific rail line, which is the major north-south freight line in Oregon also falls within the impact area. Disruption of the freight line could impact available commodities, as well as increasing the potential exposure and risk to hazardous materials depending on what is being transported at the time of the event. Should the rail line be carrying passengers, the number of potential victims could further tax local first responders and hospitals.

Well fields that supply the City of Klamath Falls with water, or the distribution systems that transport both water and wastewater are also vulnerable. Many of the Tribal residences are within Klamath Falls, and therefore, would be impacted by such events.

Level of Damage

Hazus classifies the vulnerability of critical facilities to earthquake damage in five categories: no damage, slight damage, moderate damage, extensive damage, or complete damage. The model was used to assign a vulnerability category to each critical facility identified in the Tribal Planning Area (except hazmat facilities and “other infrastructure” facilities, for which there are no established damage functions). This analysis does not include non-tribally owned or operated facilities, such as those included in the DOGAMI analysis referenced above. Information specific to DOGAMI analysis on county and city owned facilities (not inclusive of tribal facilities) is available at: http://www.oregongeology.org/sub/projects/rvs/county/county- klamath.htm.

Utilizing Tribal data, the analysis was performed for three events: the 100- and 500-year probabilistic events, and the USGS Klamath Falls Fault Shake Map scenario. These events, respectively, have the highest probability of occurrence and the largest potential impact on the planning area. The results are summarized in Table 11-4 through Table 11-8.

11-25 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 11-4 ESTIMATED DAMAGE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM 100-YEAR PROBABILISTIC EARTHQUAKE EVENT

No Slight Moderate Extensive Complete Category Damage Damage Damage Damage Damage

Administration 4 0 0 0 0

Casino 13 0 0 0 0

Gathering Place 4 0 0 0 0

HazMat 1 0 0 0 0

Health 5 0 0 0 0

Industry 4 0 0 0 0

Residential 60 0 0 0 0

Residential Multi Family 8 0 0 0 0

School 1 0 0 0 0

Storage 10 0 0 0 0

Wastewater 1 0 0 0 0

Water 1 0 0 0 0

Total 112 0 0 0 0

11-26 EARTHQUAKE

TABLE 11-5 ESTIMATED DAMAGE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM 500-YEAR PROBABILISTIC EARTHQUAKE EVENT

No Slight Moderate Extensive Complete Category Damage Damage Damage Damage Damage

Administration 4 0 0 0 0

Casino 13 0 0 0 0

Gathering Place 4 0 0 0 0

HazMat 1 0 0 0 0

Health 5 0 0 0 0

Industry 4 0 0 0 0

Residential 60 0 0 0 0

Residential Multi Family 8 0 0 0 0

School 1 0 0 0 0

Storage 10 0 0 0 0

Wastewater 1 0 0 0 0

Water 1 0 0 0 0

Total 112 0 0 0 0

11-27 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 11-6 ESTIMATED DAMAGE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM KLAMATH FALLS M6.5 EARTHQUAKE EVENT

No Slight Moderate Extensive Complete Category Damage Damage Damage Damage Damage

Administration 4 0 0 0 0

Casino 13 0 0 0 0

Gathering Place 4 0 0 0 0

HazMat 1 0 0 0 0

Health 3 0 2 0 0

Industry 4 0 0 0 0

Residential 9 51 0 0 0

Residential Multi Family 1 7 0 0 0

School 1 0 0 0 0

Storage 7 3 0 0 0

Wastewater 1 0 0 0 0

Water 1 0 0 0 0

Total 49 61 2 0 0

Time to Return to Functionality

Hazus-MH estimates the time to restore critical facilities to fully functional use. Results are presented as probability of being functional at specified time increments: 1, 3, 7, 14, 30 and 90 days after the event. For example, Hazus-MH may estimate that a facility has 5 percent chance of being fully functional at Day 3, and a 95 percent chance of being fully functional at Day 90. The analysis of critical facilities in the planning area was performed for the 100-year, 500-year, and Klamath Falls Fault scenario earthquake events. The results are summarized in Table 11-7 through Table 11-9.

11-28 EARTHQUAKE

TABLE 11-7 FUNCTIONALITY OF CRITICAL FACILITIES FOR 100-YEAR PROBABILISTIC EVENT

# of Critical Probability of Being Fully Functional (%)

Facilities at Day 1 at Day 3 at Day 7 at Day 14 at Day 30 at Day 90

Administration 4 95.6 95.8 98.8 98.8 99.8 99.9

Casino 13 97.1 97.2 99.3 99.4 99.9 99.9

Gathering Place 4 98.6 98.7 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9

HazMat 1 98.4 98.5 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9

Health 5 95.7 95.8 98.9 98.9 99.8 99.9

Industry 4 95.9 96.1 98.8 98.9 99.9 99.9

Residential 60 97.6 97.7 99.8 99.8 99.9 99.9

Residential Multi- 8 97.6 97.7 99.8 99.8 99.9 99.9 Family

School 1 98.6 98.6 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9

Storage 10 95.6 95.7 98.8 98.8 99.8 99.9

Wastewater 1 92.9 93.1 97.6 97.6 99.7 99.9

Water 1 98.4 98.5 99.8 99.9 99.9 99.9

Total 112 96.8 96.9 99.3 99.3 99.9 99.9

11-29 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 11-8 FUNCTIONALITY OF CRITICAL FACILITIES FOR 500-YEAR PROBABILISTIC EVENT

# of Critical Probability of Being Fully Functional (%)

Facilities at Day 1 at Day 3 at Day 7 at Day 14 at Day 30 at Day 90

Administration 4 61.9 63.0 84.1 84.1 96.8 99.6

Casino 13 64.8 65.9 88.3 88.3 98.1 99.8

Gathering Place 4 78.0 78.8 96.2 96.2 99.8 99.9

HazMat 1 71.3 72.4 94.6 94.6 99.7 99.9

Health 5 57.3 58.5 80.8 80.9 96.3 99.6

Industry 4 62.2 63.3 84.7 84.7 97.4 99.9

Residential 60 66.4 67.7 92.9 93.0 99.5 99.8

Residential Multi- 8 66.4 67.6 92.7 92.8 99.5 99.8 Family

School 1 73.6 74.7 95.3 95.3 99.7 99.9

Storage 10 60.4 61.6 83.7 83.8 97.2 99.7

Wastewater 1 45.0 46.1 68.3 68.3 92.9 99.6

Water 1 71.3 72.4 94.6 94.6 99.7 99.9

Total 112 61.9 63.0 84.1 84.1 96.8 99.6

11-30 EARTHQUAKE

TABLE 11-9 FUNCTIONALITY OF CRITICAL FACILITIES FOR KLAMATH FALLS M6.5 EARTHQUAKE EVENT

# of Critical Probability of Being Fully Functional (%)

Facilities at Day 1 at Day 3 at Day 7 at Day 14 at Day 30 at Day 90

Administration 4 86.5 87.0 97.8 97.9 99.9 99.9

Casino 13 94.9 95.2 99.5 99.5 99.9 99.9

Gathering Place 4 99.0 99.0 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9

HazMat 1 97.3 97.5 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9

Health 5 51.1 51.9 69.4 69.4 94.7 99.8

Industry 4 98.2 98.3 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9

Residential 60 30.8 33.3 81.8 81.9 99.7 99.9

Residential Multi 8 28.7 31.3 81.3 81.4 99.7 99.9 Family

School 1 95.1 95.3 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9

Storage 10 68.3 69.5 92.3 92.4 99.8 99.9

Wastewater 1 87.0 87.5 97.9 97.9 99.9 99.9

Water 1 97.3 97.5 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9

Total 112 77.8 78.6 93.3 93.3 99.4 99.9

Impact on Economy

Economic losses due to earthquake damage include damage to buildings, including the cost of structural and non-structural damage, damage to contents, and loss of inventory, loss of wages and loss of income (Table 11-10). Damage to the Casino and any non-trust lands would also equate to a loss of tax base both from revenue and lack of improved land values, which will increase the economic loss to the State, County, and surrounding jurisdictions. That information is not captured in this planning effort. In addition, loss of goods and services may hamper recovery efforts, and even preclude residents from rebuilding within the area.

Damage to the Casino in lost revenue would have a significant impact on the Tribes and the Tribal Members. While damage to the Casino was included in the economic loss, no specific additional losses

11-31 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

have been included as the Tribes feel this is confidential, and not a matter of public record. Therefore, no such data is included within this portion of the assessment.

TABLE 11-10 EARTHQUAKE ECONOMIC LOSS POTENTIAL

Scenario/Jurisdiction Economic Loss

100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake

Beatty $1

Chiloquin $279

Klamath Falls $17

Total $297

500-Year Probabilistic Earthquake

Beatty $19

Chiloquin $3,403

Klamath Falls $370

Total $3,793

Klamath Falls M 6.5 Scenario

Beatty $100

Chiloquin $477,662

Klamath Falls $1,236,102

Total $1,713,864

a. Economic Loss includes Building and Content Damages, Inventory Losses, Relocation Costs, Income Losses, Rental Income Losses, and Wage Losses.

A summary of the total economic loss including these types of losses is as follows: • For a 100-year probabilistic earthquake, the estimated damage potential is $297, or less than 1 percent of the total assessed value for the planning area. • For a 500-year probabilistic earthquake, the estimated damage potential is $3,793 or less than 1 percent of the total assessed value for the planning area. • For a 6.5-magnitude Klamath Falls Fault event, the estimated damage potential is $1.7 million, or 2.5 percent of the total assessed value for the planning area.

11-32 EARTHQUAKE

These values were based on the user-defined facilities developed for this project, which utilized $69,135,445 as the total assessed value for the planning area. That data set does not provide values for all structures within the planning area.

To manage the human and economic impact of the next damaging earthquake will require thoughtful and comprehensive emergency response planning, based on realistic loss estimates driven by accurate and detailed geologic and seismologic, structural, and cultural information. To minimize the human and economic impact of the next damaging earthquake will require a sustained program of public education, forward-thinking research, and structural replacement and retrofit, based on cost-effective earthquake resistant design and a combination of public funding and private sector incentives.

Impact on Environment

Earthquake-induced landslides or rockslides can significantly impact habitat, as can hazardous materials which can seep into waterways. It is also possible for streams to be rerouted after an earthquake. This can change water quality, possibly damaging habitat and feeding areas. There is a possibility of streams fed by groundwater drying up because of changes in underlying geology.

11.4 RESULTS When utilizing the Klamath Falls 6.5M Scenario (the incident with the most significant impact on the Tribal Planning Area), review of the analysis from USGS’ Shakemaps indicate that majority of the Chiloquin Planning Area falls within the little to none and very light impact areas. Modoc Point falls within the very light to light range. However, the Klamath Falls area ranges from light, moderate, moderate-heavy, and heavy impact. Determining the level of impact will be based on the proximity to an active fault within the communities. While it is impossible to predict when an earthquake may occur, it is highly probable that a damaging earthquake affecting more than 10 percent of the Tribal Planning Area will occur. Based on review of the data, the planning team assessed a high level of vulnerability. The CPRI score for the hazard was determined by the Planning Team to be 3.60.

11.5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRENDS The Klamath Tribes continue to utilize the International Building Code, which requires structures to be built at a level which supports soil types and earthquake hazards (ground shaking). As existing buildings are renovated, provisions are in place which require reconstruction at higher standards.

11.6 ISSUES While the area has a high probability of an earthquake event occurring within its boundaries, an earthquake does not necessarily have to occur in the planning area to have a significant impact as such an event would disrupt transportation to and from the region as a whole and impact commodity flow. As such, any seismic activity of 6.0 or greater on faults in or near the planning area would have significant impact. Potential warning systems could give approximately 40 seconds’ notice that a major earthquake is about to occur; however, this would not provide adequate time for preparation. Earthquakes of this magnitude or higher would lead to massive structural failure of property on NEHRP C, D, E, and F soils. Levees and revetments built on these poor soils would likely fail, representing a loss of critical infrastructure. These events could cause secondary hazards, including landslides, rockslides and mudslides that would further damage structures. River valley hydraulic-fill sediment areas are also vulnerable to slope failure, often as a result of loss of cohesion in clay-rich soils. Soil liquefaction would occur in water-saturated sands, silts, or gravelly soils. Soil liquefaction occurs when water-saturated sands, silts or gravelly soils are shaken so violently that the individual grains lose contact with one another and float freely in the water, turning the ground into a pudding-like liquid. Building and road foundations lose load-bearing strength and may sink

11-33 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

into what was previously solid ground. Unless properly secured, hazardous materials can be released, causing significant damage to the environment and people. Earthen dams and levees are highly susceptible to seismic events and the impacts of their eventual failures can be considered secondary risks for earthquakes. Important issues associated with an earthquake include, but are not limited to the following: • More information is needed on the exposure and performance of construction within the planning area. Much information on the age, type of construction, or updated work on facilities is not readily available in a useable format for a risk assessment of this type. • It is presently unknown to what standards portions of the planning area’s building stock were constructed or renovated. • Based on the modeling of critical facility performance for this plan, a number of facilities in the planning area are expected to sustain damage from scenario events. These facilities are prime targets for structural retrofits. • The Klamath Tribes should create or enhance continuity of operations plans using the information on risk and vulnerability contained in this plan. • Geotechnical standards should be established that take into account the probable impacts from earthquakes in the design and construction of new or enhanced facilities. • Dam failure warning, evacuation plans and procedures should be updated (and maintained) to reflect dam risk potential associated with earthquake activity in the region, with said information being distributed to the Tribes to allow for appropriate planning to occur.

•

11-34

CHAPTER 12. FLOOD Floods are one of the most common natural hazards in the U.S. They DEFINITIONS can develop slowly over a period of days or develop quickly, with disastrous effects that can be local (impacting a neighborhood or Flood—The inundation of community) or regional (affecting entire river basins, coastlines, and normally dry land resulting from the rising and overflowing of a multiple counties or states) (FEMA, 2010). Most communities in the body of water. U.S. have experienced flooding, after spring rains, heavy Floodplain—The land area thunderstorms, coastal storms, or winter snow thaws. Floods are one of along the sides of a river that the most frequent and costly natural hazards in terms of human becomes inundated with water hardship and economic loss, particularly to communities that lie within during a flood. flood-prone areas or floodplains of a major water source. 100-Year Floodplain—The area flooded by a flood that has 12.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND a 1-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded each Flooding is a general and temporary condition of partial or complete year. This is a statistical inundation on normally dry land from the following: average only; a 100-year flood can occur more than once in a • Riverine flooding, including overflow from a river channel, short period of time. The 1- flash floods, alluvial fan floods, rain-on-snow events, dam- percent annual chance flood is the standard used by most break floods, and ice jam floods; federal and state agencies. • Availability of sediment for transport, and the erodibility of Floodway—The channel of a river or other watercourse and the bed and banks of the water source; the adjacent land areas that • Rainfall intensity and duration; must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood • Antecedent moisture conditions; without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation • Local drainage or high groundwater levels; more than a designated height. • Watershed conditions, including steepness of terrain, soil Return Period—The average types, amount and type of vegetation, and density of number of years between occurrences of a hazard (equal development; to the inverse of the annual • Fluctuating lake levels; likelihood of occurrence). • Increased velocity of flow; Riparian Zone—The area along the banks of a natural • Coastal flooding and/or erosion; watercourse.

• Unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source; • Mudflows (or mudslides); • Collapse or subsidence of land along the shore of a lake or similar body of water that result in a flood, caused by erosion, waves or currents of water exceeding anticipated levels (Floodsmart.gov, 2012); • Sea level rise; and • Climate Change (USEPA, 2012).

12-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Flooding Types Many floods fall into one of three categories: riverine, coastal, or shallow (FEMA, 2005). Other types of floods include alluvial fan floods Figure 12-1), dam failure floods (addressed separately in Chapter 9), rain-on-snow events, and floods associated with local drainage or high groundwater, or urban floods.

For this hazard mitigation plan and as deemed appropriate by the Tribes, riverine, urban, dam failure, and shallow flood types are the main flood Figure 12-1 Example of an types of concern for the planning area, further discussed below. Alluvial Fan

Riverine Riverine floods are the most common flood type. They occur along a channel, and include overbank and flash flooding. Channels are defined ground features that carry water through and out of a watershed. They may be called rivers, creeks, streams, or ditches. When a channel receives too much water, the excess water flows over its banks and inundates low-lying areas (FEMA, 2005).

Communities within the Tribal Planning Area are located along such water bodies which have the potential to experience this type of flooding after spring rains, heavy thunderstorms, or rapid runoff from snow melt. Riverine floods can be slow or fast-rising (such as a flash-flood), but usually develop over a period of days. Wind-driven rain along the Klamath Lake is also of concern and can increase the level of flooding in the immediate area.

The danger of riverine flooding occurs mainly during the winter months, with the onset of persistent, heavy rainfall, and during the spring, with melting of snow in the Cascade Range. The larger magnitude floods are normally the result of a storm lasting several days, reaching maximum intensity after the infiltration capacity of the soil has been decreased. Floods in the area can also occur from a series of storms culminated by a severe storm. Floods that occur in the spring are usually caused by rain augmented by rapid snowmelt (FEMA Flood Study, 1984).

Urban floods

Urban flooding occurs where land has been converted from fields or woodlands to developed areas consisting of homes, parking lots, and commercial, industrial, and public buildings and structures. In such areas, the previous ability of water to filter into the ground is often prevented by the extensive impervious surfaces associated with urban development. This in turn results in more water quickly running off into watercourses which causes water levels to rise above pre-development levels. During periods of urban flooding streets can rapidly become swift moving rivers and basements and backyards can quickly fill with water. Storm drains often may back up with yard waste or other flood debris leading to further localized flooding. Another source of urban flooding is grading associated with development. In some cases, such grading can alter changes in drainage direction of water from one property to another.

Shallow Area Floods

These floods are a special type of riverine flooding. FEMA defines a shallow area flood hazard as an area that is inundated by a 100-year flood with a flood depth between one to three feet. Such areas are generally flooded by low velocity sheet flows of water.

12-2 FLOOD

Flash Flood

A flash flood is a rapid flooding of geomorphic low-lying areas caused by heavy rain (sometimes associated with a severe thunderstorm, hurricane, tropical storm); meltwater from ice or snow flowing over ice sheets or snowfields, or by the collapse of a dam or other structure. Flash floods are distinguished from regular floods by a timescale of occurring within less than six hours of the precipitating event. Measuring Floods and Floodplains A floodplain is the area adjacent to a river, creek or lake that becomes inundated during a flood. Floodplains may be broad, as when a river crosses an extensive flat landscape, or narrow, as when a river is confined in a canyon. Connections between a river and its floodplain are most apparent during and after major flood events. These areas form a complex physical and biological system that not only supports a variety of natural resources but also provides natural flood and erosion control. When a river is separated from its floodplain with levees and other flood control facilities, natural, built-in benefits can be lost, altered, or significantly reduced.

In the case of riverine or flash flooding, once a river reaches flood stage, the flood extent or severity categories used by the NWS include minor flooding, moderate flooding, and major flooding. Each category has a definition based on property damage and public threat (NWS, 2011):

 Minor Flooding—Minimal or no property damage, but possibly some public threat or inconvenience.  Moderate Flooding—Some inundation of structures and roads near streams. Some evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations are necessary.  Major Flooding—Extensive inundation of structures and roads. Significant evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations.

Flood Insurance Rate Maps According to FEMA, flood hazard areas are defined as areas that are shown to be inundated by a flood of a given magnitude on a map (see Figure 12-2). These areas are determined using statistical analyses of records of river flow, storm tides, and rainfall; information obtained through consultation with the community; floodplain topographic surveys; and hydrologic and hydraulic analyses. Three primary areas make up the flood hazard area: the floodplains, floodways, and floodway fringes. Figure 12-3 depicts the relationship among the three designations, collectively referred to as the special flood hazard area (SFHA).

Figure 12-2 Flood Hazard Area Referred to as Floodplain

12-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 12-3 Special Flood Hazard Area

Flood hazard areas are delineated on FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), which are official maps of a community on which the Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration has indicated both the special flood hazard areas and the risk premium zones applicable to the community. These maps identify the special flood hazard areas (see Figure 12-3); the location of a specific property in relation to the special flood hazard area; the base (100-year) flood elevation at a specific site; the magnitude of a flood hazard in a specific area; and undeveloped coastal barriers where flood insurance is not available. The maps also customarily locate regulatory floodways and floodplain boundaries—the 100-year and 500-year floodplain boundaries (FEMA, 1984; FEMA, 2003; FEMA, 2005; FEMA, 2008). However, in the case of the Klamath County maps (those maps which include the Tribal Planning Area), no 500-year floodplain is identified. Therefore, this analysis can be based only on the 100-year event.

As of development of this plan’s update, the 1984 flood maps are the most current editions. FEMA has not previously completed a flood insurance study specific to the Klamath Tribal Planning Area, and no FIRM maps are available specific to their boundary. However, work has begun by FEMA with respect to updating maps for Klamath County. It is presently unknown exactly when these maps will be completed and published for initial review, although it is anticipated that they may become available late 2017. It is also unknown whether the Tribes will be in agreement with the analysis completed by FEMA, and adopt the maps as relevant.

The frequency and severity of flooding are measured using a discharge probability, which is a statistical tool used to define the probability that a certain river discharge (flow) level will be equaled or exceeded within a given year. Flood studies use historical records to determine the probability of occurrence for the different discharge levels.

The extent of flooding associated with a 1-percent annual probability of occurrence (the base flood or 100- year flood) is used as the regulatory boundary by many agencies. Also referred to as the special flood hazard area, this boundary is a convenient tool for assessing vulnerability and risk in flood-prone communities. Many communities have maps that show the extent and likely depth of flooding for the base flood. Corresponding water-surface elevations describe the elevation of water that will result from a given discharge level, which is one of the most important factors used in estimating flood damage.

A structure located within a 1 percent (100-year) floodplain has a 26 percent chance of suffering flood damage during the term of a 30-year mortgage. The 100-year flood is a regulatory standard used by federal

12-4 FLOOD agencies and most states to administer floodplain management programs. The 1 percent (100-year) annual chance flood is used by the NFIP as the basis for insurance requirements nationwide. FIRMs also depict 500-year flood designations, which is a boundary of the flood that has a 0.2-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year (FEMA, 2003; FEMA, 2005). It is important to recognize, however, that flood events and flood risk are not limited to the NFIP delineated flood hazard areas.

Figure 12-4 shows the existing special flood hazard area (100-year floodplain) based on FEMA’s existing digital flood insurance rate maps (DFIRMs).

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) The NFIP is a federal program enabling property owners in participating communities to purchase insurance as a protection against flood losses in exchange for state and community floodplain management regulations that reduce future flood damage. The U.S. Congress established the NFIP with the passage of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (FEMA’s 2002 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP): Program Description). There are three components to the NFIP: flood insurance, floodplain management and flood hazard mapping. Nearly 20,000 communities across the U.S. and its territories participate in the NFIP by adopting and enforcing floodplain management ordinances to reduce future flood damage. In exchange, the NFIP makes federally backed flood insurance available to homeowners, renters, and business owners in these communities. Community participation in the NFIP is voluntary.

For most participating communities, FEMA has prepared a detailed Flood Insurance Study. The study presents water surface elevations for floods of various magnitudes, including the 1-percent annual chance flood and the 0.2-percent annual chance flood (the 500-year flood). Base flood elevations and the boundaries of the 100- and 500-year floodplains are shown on Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), which are the principle tool for identifying the extent and location of the flood hazard. FIRMs are the most detailed and consistent data source available, and for many communities they represent the minimum area of oversight under their floodplain management program.

NFIP Participants must regulate development in floodplain areas in accordance with NFIP criteria. Before issuing a permit to build in a floodplain, participating jurisdictions must ensure that three criteria are met:

• New buildings and those undergoing substantial improvements must, at a minimum, be elevated to protect against damage by the 100-year flood. • New floodplain development must not aggravate existing flood problems or increase damage to other properties. • New floodplain development must exercise a reasonable and prudent effort to reduce its adverse impacts on threatened species.

12-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 12-4 Klamath County Special Flood Hazard Areas

12-6 FLOOD

NFIP Status and Severe Loss/Repetitive Loss Properties While both Klamath and Lake Counties are members in good standing in the NFIP, and both do incorporate regulatory authority within their land use planning, the Klamath Tribes currently are not an NFIP Tribe. Table 12-1 presents the NFIP policy status for Klamath and Lake Counties as of August 2016. Table 12-2 identifies the dollar losses paid by the NFIP for insurance claims resulting from flood losses from 1978 to June 30, 2016 – most recent available data as of August 2016 update).

TABLE 12-1 NFIP POLICY STATISTICS

Number of Policies Whole Dollar Dollar Values of Written Community Name In Force Values Insurance In Force Premiums In Force Klamath County Bonanza (City) 1 350,000 373 Chiloquin (City) 4 812,300 3,038 Klamath Falls (City) 18 4,500,600 14,127 Klamath County 107 19,222,900 98,250 (Unincorporated) Lake County Lakeview (City) 4 686,500 2,413 Paisley (City) 0 0 0 Lake County (Unincorporated) 39 4,966,900 25,183

Source: http://bsa.nfipstat.fema.gov/reports/1011.htm#ORT (August 22, 2016)

TABLE 12-2 NFIP LOSSES PAID OUT

Community Name Total Losses Total Payments in Dollars Klamath County Bonanza (City) 0 0 Chiloquin (City) 0 0 Klamath Falls (City) 1 7,069.85 Klamath County 9 204,248.12 (Unincorporated) Lake County Lakeview (City) 5 14,411.34 Paisley (City) 1 392.71 Lake County (Unincorporated) 6 128,554.54 Source: http://bsa.nfipstat.fema.gov/reports/1011.htm#ORT (as of June 30, 2016)

12-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Repetitive Flood Claims Residential or non-residential (commercial) properties that have received one or more NFIP insurance payments are identified as repetitive flood properties under the NFIP. Such properties are eligible for funding to help mitigate the impacts of flooding through various FEMA programs, subject to meeting certain criteria and based on the State’s Hazard Mitigation Plan maintaining a Repetitive Loss Strategy. Oregon State’s Hazard Mitigation Plan does contain such a strategy. Specifically, the Repetitive Loss Strategy identifies the specific actions the State has taken to reduce the number of repetitive loss properties, inclusive of severe repetitive loss properties. The strategy specifically also identifies how the State intends to reduce the number of such repetitive loss properties. In addition, the hazard mitigation plan must describe the State’s strategy to ensure that local jurisdictions with severe repetitive loss properties take actions to reduce the number of these properties, including the development of local hazard mitigation plans.

Repetitive flood claims programs provide funding to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to structures insured under the NFIP that have had one or more claim payments for flood damages. The Tribes will mirror the State’s strategy for identifying and prioritizing repetitive flood properties in an effort to not only support state efforts with respect to addressing repetitive flood loss properties, but also in helping to reduce the flood risk to properties owned by the Tribes.

Severe Repetitive Loss Program The severe repetitive loss program is authorized by Section 1361A of the National Flood Insurance Act (42 U.S.C. 4102a), with the goal of reducing flood damages to residential properties that have experienced severe repetitive losses under flood insurance coverage and that will result in the greatest savings to the NFIP in the shortest period of time. A severe repetitive loss property is a residential property that is covered under an NFIP flood insurance policy and:

a) That has at least four NFIP claim payments (including building and contents) over $5,000 each, and the cumulative amount of such claims payments exceeds $20,000; or b) For which at least two separate claims payments (building payments only) have been made with the cumulative amount of the building portion of such claims exceeding the market value of the building.

For both (a) and (b) above, at least two of the referenced claims must have occurred within any 10-year period, and must be greater than 10 days apart.

As of August 2016, the Tribes have no severe repetitive loss or Repetitive Flood Claim properties.

The Community Rating System The Community Rating System (CRS) is a voluntary program within the NFIP that encourages floodplain management activities that exceed the minimum NFIP requirements. Flood insurance premiums are discounted to reflect the reduced flood risk resulting from community actions.

As of August 2016, the Tribes are not CRS Communities, nor are Klamath or Lake Counties. At present, the Hazard Mitigation Tribal Planning Team does not feel the level of effort to become a CRS community is warranted for the Tribes, nor within the capacity of the present staffing levels to facility such an endeavor.

12-8 FLOOD

12.2 HAZARD PROFILE Extent and Location The planning area in general lies in a landscape rich with lakes, rivers, marshes, and tributaries. However, the regional geology lessens the effects of flooding. Due to the significant amount of volcanic rock underlying the area, and its tendency to store water, the amount of discharge for some streams is very low. This, in addition to manmade and natural reservoirs at higher elevations has made flood losses easier to mitigate. Principal Flooding Sources Principal flooding sources are typically caused by storms and rapid accumulation of runoff surface water, or rain-on-snow events, especially during La Niña events. The weather pattern that produces these floods occurs during the winter months, customarily during a 3- to 7-year cycle of cool, wet weather. Brief cool, moist weather conditions are followed by a system of warm, moist air from tropical latitudes. The intense warm rain associated with this system quickly melts foothill and mountain snow. Above-freezing temperatures may occur well above pass levels in the Cascade Mountains (4,000–5,000 feet). Principal sources affecting flooding in and around the Klamath Tribal Planning Area include: Klamath County: – Sprague River – Williamson River – Klamath River – Williamson River – Link River – Four Mile Creek – Varney Creek – Upper Klamath Lake Lake County: – Chewaucan River – N. Goose Lake Basin Areas around the Upper Klamath Lake are impacted due to high winds on the lake causing a storm-surge type flooding event. Spring runoff from melting snow and intense warm rain during winter months also impacts the planning area. In almost all historical cases of flooding, the cause has been associated with record-level precipitation levels. Flooding from rainfall and runoff ponding has occurred in limited areas in the past during exceptional rainstorms. Although flooding occurs throughout the area, local geology and the relatively low population in the area lessen its effects than in other more densely populated areas. Volcanic rocks, some of which have a large capacity for water storage, underlie much of the planning area. Additionally, there are some large reservoirs in the upper watersheds that can contain considerable quantities of runoff. The Upper Klamath Lake, regulated for power generation, maintains a consistently high level of water, normally within 1 foot of the computed 100-year elevation. Based on that, historic lake elevations have prevented development within the floodplain of the lake in the past, and prevented the increased vulnerability to the area. According to the FEMA 1984 Flood Study, wind has a more effect on the lake elevation than flood flows. During a 1962

12-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

storm event, the Upper Klamath Lake had an estimated 4-foot difference between water levels on the north end and the south end of the lake.

Previous Occurrences Floods in the planning area have resulted from intense rainstorms customarily between October and April, albeit both declared events occurred in December. Table 12-3 highlights typical historical flood events, including both declared and non-declared incident. It should be noted that only one incident was declared as a Flooding disaster (DR 184). Figure 12-5 is a picture of the December 1964 flood event and its impact in the Tribal Planning Area.

A second incident occurring in 1997 was classified as a Severe Storm (DR 1160), but did include flooding. The remaining items are historic events which resulted in flooding, but did not rise to the level of a federal declaration. The Tribes have no data Figure 12-5 December 1964 Flood Event specific to impacts to the Tribal Planning Area, and therefore, reliance on Klamath and Lake Counties’ data is utilized.

TABLE 12-3 FLOOD EVENTS IMPACTING PLANNING AREA SINCE 1956

Date Type Deaths or Injuries Property Damage December 1964 Flooding Unknown >$2 million (1970 prices) (Disaster 184) Description: Heavy rains lead to flooding throughout Central Oregon, including Klamath County December 1997 Severe Winter Storm, Flooding Unknown Unknown (Disaster 1160) Description: Severe winter storm including floods, land and mudslides impacted the planning area.

December 2005 Flooding. Unknown Damages estimated at $500,000 in Klamath and Lake Counties Description: Saturated ground combined with snow, freezing rain, rain, rapid warming, and high winds within a five-day period produced flooding and landslides. 37 counties were impacted, with large power outages throughout the impacted counties. June 2006 Dike Failure Unknown Unknown Description: Dike on Upper Klamath Lake failed, creating a flash flood which inundated agricultural fields, the Running Y Golf Resort, and portions of State Highway 140. 2009 Dike Failure Unknown Unknown Description: A dike on Upper Klamath Lake along Lakeshore Drive started leaking and flooding fields. The leaks were caused by burrowing animals and Klamath County had to spend $40,000 to strengthen the dike.

Source: Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS) http://www.sheldus.org; FEMA website; State EHMP (2015); Klamath County HMP (2011); FEMA Flood Study (1984).

12-10 FLOOD

Severity The severity of a flood depends not only on the amount of water that accumulates in a period of time, but also on the land’s ability to manage this water. One element is the size of rivers and streams in an area; but an equally important factor is the land’s absorbency. When it rains, soil acts as a sponge. When the land is saturated or frozen, infiltration into the ground slows and any more water that accumulates must flow as runoff (Harris, 2001). Flood severity from a dam failure is discussed in Chapter 9.

According to the Oregon’s Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan (2015), half of the homes in Klamath County and the surrounding counties were built before 1970, pre-floodplain management codes being in place. The age of Tribal owned structures are identified in Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1, and again in Table 11-3 (Earthquake profile). For older structures, the lack of adequate building codes would increase the severity of impact should a significant flood event occur. In addition, the Flood Insurance Rate Maps are outdated (1984), which is also of concern with respect to identifying areas of potential impact since a significant amount of development has occurred in the area since 1984, including roadways, which could impact flooding in the area.

The principal factors affecting flood damage are flood depth and velocity. The deeper and faster flood flows become, the more damage they can cause. Shallow flooding with high velocities can cause as much damage as deep flooding with slow velocity. This is especially true when a channel migrates over a broad floodplain, redirecting high velocity flows and transporting debris and sediment. Flood severity is often evaluated by examining peak discharges, some of which are indicated above.

Frequency The Klamath Tribal Planning Area experiences some level of flooding on a fairly regular basis, but the majority is more of a nuisance type incident from clogged storm drains, etc. Due to the topography of the land, large floods occur very infrequently, with only two disasters since 1964; 33 years elapsed between the two declared events. In addition, the two most recent flood incidents (2006 and 2009) were as a result of a dike failure, not a weather-related incident. Previous to that, eight (8) years had passed between the 1997 incident and the 2005 incident. Based on review of the 1984 flood study, the 1964 flood incident was determined to be equal to a 160-year flood for the Williamson and Sprague Rivers, and a 15-year flood for the Link and Klamath Rivers.

It should be noted that this type of analysis does not reflect the recurrence interval, as that calculation is specific on varying factors, such as the incident type, discharge rate, etc. That type of analysis was not included in this process.

12.3 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT To understand risk, a community must evaluate what assets are exposed or vulnerable in the identified hazard area. For the flood hazard, areas identified as hazard areas customarily include the 1 percent and 0.2 percent (100- and 500-year) floodplains; however, no 500-year data is provided in the 1984 Flood Study utilized for this assessment. The following text evaluates and estimates the potential impact of flooding in the Klamath Tribal Planning Area.

Overview All types of flooding can cause widespread damage throughout rural and urban areas, including, but not limited to: water-related damage to the interior and exterior of buildings; destruction of electrical and other expensive and difficult-to-replace equipment; injury and loss of life; proliferation of disease vectors;

12-11 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

disruption of utilities, including water, sewer, electricity, communications networks and facilities; loss of agricultural crops and livestock; placement of stress on emergency response and healthcare facilities and personnel; loss of productivity; and displacement of persons from homes and places of employment.

Methodology The 1 percent (100-year) annual chance flood event was examined to evaluate the Tribes’ risk and vulnerability to the flood hazard. No 500-year event was available in the flood study. Historically the 100- and 500-year events are generally those considered by planners and evaluated under federal programs such as the NFIP; however, only the 100-year event was considered in this analysis.

As indicated, the FIRMs are quite dated, 1984. While it is believed initial phases for map updates are occurring by FEMA, it is unclear when those maps will be available. It is also unclear whether the Tribes will adopt those maps when completed. Therefore, for purposes of this update, the existing FIRMs (although not adopted by the Tribes) were considered the best available data, and were used to identify exposure for this plan. A modified Level 1/Level 2 (for updated critical facilities and user defined facilities) Hazus protocol was used to assess exposure to flooding in the planning area. This type of analysis has a level of accuracy acceptable for planning purposes. Where possible, the Hazus default data was enhanced using critical infrastructure and building data provided by the Tribes, as well as data from the state and federal sources. Figure 12-4 (above) illustrates the flood boundaries used for this exposure assessment. Warning Time Due to the sequential pattern of meteorological conditions needed to cause serious flooding, it is unusual for a flood to occur without some warning. Warning times for floods can be between 24 and 48 hours. Flash flooding can be less predictable, but potential hazard areas can be warned in advanced of potential flash flooding danger. As demonstrated, the immediate impact from two dike failures can, and has, caused flash flooding in the planning area. This type of information should be considered when developing emergency response plans. As a result, when assessing warning time as it relates to flood in the CPRI, a higher value was associated when rating the category. Impact on Life, Health and Safety The impact of flooding on life, health, and safety is dependent upon several factors, including the severity of the event and whether adequate warning time is provided to residents. Exposure represents the population living in or near floodplain areas that could be impacted should a flood event occur. Additionally, exposure should not be limited to only those who reside in a defined hazard zone, but everyone who may be affected by the effects of a hazard event (e.g., people are at risk while traveling in flooded areas, or their access to emergency services is compromised during an event). The degree of that impact will vary and is not measurable.

While no structures fall within FEMA’s designated floodplain, and therefore no determination of individuals at risk can be assessed, of significant concern within the planning area is the number of tourists who can be impacted during periods of flooding. Tourism is a fairly large economy within the planning area, with many tourists traveling through the area to visit the Casino, and to view the scenic area. Tourism is increased as a result of recreational activities, especially during summer months. Additional information concerning the potential number of tourists in the area is discussed in Chapter 3.8.9.

Of the population exposed, the most vulnerable include the economically disadvantaged and the population over the age of 65 or under the age of 5. Economically disadvantaged populations are more vulnerable because they are likely to evaluate their risk and make decisions to evacuate based on the net economic impact on their family. The population over the age of 65 is also more vulnerable because they are more likely to seek or need medical attention which may not be available due to isolation during a flood event

12-12 FLOOD and they may have more difficulty evacuating. Those under five must rely on others for assistance for evacuation purposes.

The number of injuries and casualties resulting from flooding is generally limited based on advance weather forecasting, blockades, and warnings. Therefore, injuries and deaths generally are not anticipated if proper warning and precautions are in place. Ongoing mitigation efforts should help to avoid the most likely cause of injury, which results from persons trying to cross flooded roadways or channels during a flood.

Impact on Property Table 12-4 summarizes the total area, number, and type of structures in the 100-year flood boundary. As currently designated, there are no properties owned by the Tribes which fall within the 100-year flood boundary.

TABLE 12-4 AREA AND STRUCTURES IN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN

Chiloquin/ Klamath Falls Total Beatty Acres-in 109,799 2,415 112,214 Floodplain Type of Structures in Floodplain Administration 0 0 0 Casino 0 0 0

Gathering Place 0 0 0

Haz Mat 0 0 0

Health 0 0 0 Industry 0 0 0

Residential 0 0 0

Residential 0 0 0 Multi-Family School 0 0 0 Storage 0 0 0 Wastewater 0 0 0 Water 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0

Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure In addition to considering general building stock at risk, the risk of flood to critical facilities was evaluated. Hazus-MH was used to estimate critical facilities exposed to the flood risk. Again, no critical facilities were exposed.

12-13 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

While there are no tribally owned critical facilities at risk, there are approximately 7 miles of rail and over 15 miles of roadways exposed to the 100-year flood hazard. While not owned by the Tribes, these transportation corridors do provide ingress and egress to the Tribal Planning Area.

In cases where short-term functionality is impacted by a hazard, other facilities of neighboring municipalities may need to increase support response functions during a disaster event. Mitigation planning should consider means to reduce impact on critical facilities and ensure sufficient emergency and school services remain when a significant event occurs. Impact on Economy Impact on the economy related to a flood event in the Klamath Tribal Planning Area would include loss of property, and revenue from Tribally owned business, as well as the potential future loss of businesses if they are not re-built. Depending on the duration between onset of the event and recovery, businesses within the area may not be able to sustain the economic loss of their business being disrupted for an extended period of time. Historical data has demonstrated that those businesses impacted by a disaster are less likely to reopen after an event. Of particular concern are roadways leading into the Tribal Planning Area which may be impacted by flooding events, as this could cause economic impact to the Casino, convenience store, and gas station owned by the Tribes. While the Tribes do not own the roadways, they would be impacted by a flood event which shuts down transportation in the area. However, exact economic impact is not something which can be determined due to the variables associated with an incident, and the lack of data on which to make such determination. Impact on Environment Flooding is a natural event, and floodplains provide many natural and beneficial functions. Nonetheless, with human development factored in, flooding can impact the environment in negative ways. Because they border water bodies, floodplains have historically been popular sites to establish settlements. Human activities tend to concentrate in floodplains for a number of reasons: water is readily available; land is fertile and suitable for farming; transportation by water is easily accessible, and land is flatter and easier to develop. But human activity in floodplains frequently interferes with the natural function of floodplains. It can affect the distribution and timing of drainage, thereby increasing flood problems. Human development can create local flooding problems by altering or confining drainage channels. This increases flood potential in two ways: it reduces the stream’s capacity to contain flows, and it increases flow rates or velocities downstream during all stages of a flood event. Migrating fish can wash into roads or over dikes into flooded fields, with no possibility of escape. Pollution from roads, such as oil, and hazardous materials can wash into rivers and streams. During floods, these can settle onto normally dry soils, polluting them for agricultural uses. Human development such as bridge abutments and levees, and logjams from timber harvesting can increase stream bank erosion, causing rivers and streams to migrate into non-natural courses. Floodplains can support ecosystems that are rich in quantity and diversity of plant and animal species. A floodplain can contain 100 or even 1000 times as many species as a river. Wetting of the floodplain soil releases an immediate surge of nutrients: those left over from the last flood, and those that result from the rapid decomposition of organic matter that has accumulated since then. Microscopic organisms thrive and larger species enter a rapid breeding cycle. Opportunistic feeders (particularly birds) move in to take advantage. The production of nutrients peaks and falls away quickly; however, the surge of new growth endures for some time. This makes floodplains particularly valuable for agriculture. Species growing in floodplains are markedly different from those that grow outside floodplains. For instance, riparian trees (trees that grow in floodplains) tend to be very tolerant of root disturbance and very quick-growing compared to non-riparian trees.

12-14 FLOOD

12.4 RESULTS Based on review of the analysis completed, the Planning Team has determined the probability of a future flood event which impacts the Tribal Planning Area as medium. The potential impact associated with a flood event would be limited in nature; however, given the age of much of the building stock and the fact that with only 112 total structures owned by the Tribes, the loss of any facility would be significant. In addition, two flood events in the area have occurred as a result of levee failure, which reduces the amount of warning time customarily associated with a weather-related event based on advanced weather warnings. Therefore, the planning team feels the overall vulnerability is medium, with a CPRI score at 1.80.

12.5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRENDS Based on analysis performed utilizing the 1984 flood maps, the floodplain in the Tribal Planning Area equates to 112,214 acres of the total 1.3 million acres encompassing the Tribal Planning Area, allowing for tribal expansion without having to build in the frequently flooded areas. While the Tribes currently have no designated areas for structure development, they are in the initial stages of developing policies associated with land use. As the Tribes begin to expand and grow, they will continue to utilize this document to determine hazard areas, taking into consideration appropriate smart development practices to ensure continued safety of its Tribal Members and guests to the Tribal Planning Area. 12.6 ISSUES A worst-case scenario for a flood event in the Tribal Planning Area would be a series of storms that result in high accumulations of runoff surface water within a relatively short time period, along with high winds, causing Klamath Lake waters to overtop the bank. This could overwhelm response capabilities within the impacted area. Major roads could be blocked, preventing critical access for residents and critical functions in portions of the planning region. High in-channel flows from the Williamson, Sprague, or Klamath Rivers (and any other related tributaries) could cause watercourses to scour, possibly washing out roads or impacting bridges, creating isolation problems, and further exacerbating erosion and increasing landslides. In the case of multi-basin flooding, repairs could not be made quickly enough to restore critical facilities and infrastructure. While human activities influence the impact of flooding events, human activities can also interface effectively with a floodplain as long as steps are taken to mitigate the activities’ adverse impacts on floodplain functions. The following flood-related issues are relevant to the planning area: • The lack of current flood hazard mapping is a difficult obstacle to overcome when attempting to develop a strategy for hazard prone areas in land use planning and for development of this mitigation plan. This issue will be addressed when new flood maps are released and adopted by the Tribes, if they elect to do so. • The risk associated with the flood hazard overlaps the risk associated with other hazards such as severe storm events, earthquake, dam failure, hazardous materials release, and landslide. This provides an opportunity to seek mitigation goals with multiple objectives to reduce the risk of multiple hazards. • Potential climate change may impact flood conditions throughout the Tribal Planning Area and the general planning area as a whole. • More information is needed on flood risk with respect to structure type, year built, elevation, etc., to support the concept of risk-based analysis of capital projects. • There needs to be a sustained effort to gather historical damage data, such as high water marks on structures and damage reports, to measure the cost-effectiveness of future mitigation projects. • Ongoing flood hazard mitigation will require funding from multiple sources.

12-15 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

• Floodplain residents need to continue to be educated about flood preparedness and the resources available during and after floods. • The promotion of flood insurance as a means of protecting property from the economic impacts of frequent flood events should continue. • Existing floodplain-compatible uses such as responsible agricultural and open space need to be maintained.

12-16

CHAPTER 13. LANDSLIDE

13.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND A landslide, or a mass of rock, earth or debris moving down a slope, may be minor or very large, and can move at slow to very high speeds. They can be initiated by storms, earthquakes, fires, volcanic eruptions, or human modification of the land. Such failures occur when the strength of the soils forming the slope is exceeded by the pressure acting upon them, such as weight or saturation. Earthquakes provide many times more energy than needed to initiate soil liquefaction, enhancing not only the probability of a landslide, but also its magnitude. Oregon State topography, climate, and geology create a perfect setting for landslides, which occur in the state every year.

Landslides can be shallow or deep. They often form as slumps along roadways or fast-moving debris flows down valleys or concave topography. Deep-seated landslides are often slow moving, but can cover large areas and devastate infrastructure and housing developments. They are commonly called “mudslides” by the news media

Mudslides (or mudflows or debris flows) are rivers of rock, earth, organic matter, and other soil materials saturated with water. They develop in the soil overlying bedrock on sloping surfaces when water rapidly accumulates in the ground, such as during heavy rainfall or rapid snowmelt. Water pressure in the pore spaces of the material increases to the point that the internal strength of the soil is drastically weakened. The soil’s reduced resistance can then easily be overcome by gravity, changing the earth into a flowing river of mud or “slurry.” A debris flow or mudflow can move rapidly down slopes or through channels, and can strike with little or no warning at avalanche speeds. The slurry can travel miles from its source, growing as it descends, picking up trees, boulders, cars, and anything else in its path. Although these slides behave as fluids, they pack many times the hydraulic force of water, due to the mass of material included in them. Locally, they can be some of the most destructive events in nature.

A rock fall is the fall of newly detached segments of bedrock of any size from a cliff or steep slope. The rock descends by free fall, bouncing, or rolling. Movements are very rapid to extremely rapid, and may not be preceded by minor movements.

All mass movements are caused by a combination of geological and climate conditions, as well as the encroaching influence of urbanization. Vulnerable natural conditions are affected by human residential, agricultural, commercial, and industrial development and the infrastructure that supports it.

The occurrence of a landslide is dependent on a combination of site-specific conditions and influencing factors. Most commonly, the factors that contribute to landslides fall into four broad categories:

• Climatic or hydrologic (rainfall or precipitation) • Geomorphic (slope form and conditions, e.g., slope, shape, height, steepness, vegetation, and underlying geology) • Geologic/geotechnical/hydrogeological (groundwater) • Human activity.

Change in slope of the terrain, increased load on the land, shocks, and vibrations, change in water content, groundwater movement, frost action, weathering of rocks, and removing or changing the type of vegetation covering slopes are all contributing factors. In general, landslide hazard areas are where the land has characteristics that contribute to the risk of the downhill movement of material, such as the following:

13-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

• A history of landslide activity or movement during the last 10,000 years • Stream or wave activity, which has caused erosion, undercut a bank, or cut into a bank to cause the surrounding land to be unstable • The presence of an alluvial fan, indicating vulnerability to the flow of debris or sediments • The presence of impermeable soils, such as silt or clay, which are mixed with granular soils such as sand and gravel.

Flows and slides are commonly categorized by the form of initial ground failure. Common types of slides are shown on Figures 13-1 through 13-4. The most common is the shallow colluvial slide, occurring particularly in response to intense, short-duration storms, where antecedent conditions are prevalent (Baum, et. al, 2000). The largest and most destructive are deep-seated slides, although they are less common.

Slides and earth flows can pose serious hazard to property in hillside terrain. They tend to move slowly and thus rarely threaten life directly. When they move—in response to such changes as increased water content, earthquake shaking, addition of load, or removal of downslope support—they deform and tilt the ground surface. The result can be destruction of foundations, offset of roads, breaking of underground pipes, or overriding of downslope property and structures.

Erosion is the process by which material is removed from a region of the earth’s surface. It can occur by weathering and transport of solids (sediment, soil, rock, and other particles) in the natural environment. This also leads to the deposition of these materials elsewhere, which can increase the impacts from flood events. Erosion usually occurs as a result of transport of solids by wind, water, or ice and by down-slope creep of soil and other material under the force of gravity, similar to landslides. It can also be caused by animals burrowing, reducing soil stability.

Although erosion is a natural process, as with landslides, human land use policies influence erosion, especially industrial agriculture, deforestation, and urban sprawl. Land that is used for industrial agriculture generally experiences a significantly greater rate of erosion than land with natural vegetation or land used for sustainable agricultural. This is particularly true if tillage is used in farm practices, which reduces vegetation cover on the surface of the soil and disturbs both soil structure and plant roots that would otherwise hold the soil in place.

Improved land use practices can limit erosion, using techniques such as terracing or terrace-building, no or limited tilling, limited logging or replanting after logging, and the planting of vegetation to limit erosion through ground cover.

13-2 LANDSLIDE

Figure 13-1 Deep Seated Slide Figure 13-2 Shallow Colluvial Slide

Figure 13-3 Bench Slide Figure 13-4 Large Slide

While a certain amount of erosion is natural and healthy for an ecosystem—such as gravel continuously moving downstream in watercourses—excessive erosion causes serious problems, such as receiving water sedimentation, ecosystem damage and loss of soil and slop stability. Erosion can cause a loss of forests and trees, which causes serious damage to aquatic life, irrigation, and power development by heavy silting of streams, reservoirs, and rivers. Concentrated surface water runoff in drainages and swales can lead to channel-confined slope failures, involving the rapid transport of fluidized debris, known as debris flows.

13.2 HAZARD PROFILE Extent and Location The best predictor of where slides and earth flows might occur is the location of past movements. Past landslides can be recognized by their distinctive topographic shapes, which can remain in place for thousands of years. Most landslides recognizable in this fashion range from a few acres to several square miles. Most show no evidence of recent movement and are not currently active. A small portion of them may become active in any given year. The recognition of ancient dormant mass movement sites is important in the identification of areas susceptible to flows and slides because they can be reactivated by earthquakes or by exceptionally wet weather. Also, because they consist of broken materials and frequently involve disruption of groundwater flow, these dormant sites are vulnerable to construction-triggered sliding.

13-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Landslide events can occur throughout the entire region, though more tend to occur in areas with steeper slopes, weaker geology, and higher annual precipitation. Rain-induced landslides can occur during winter months. Earthquakes can trigger landslides. Most landslides within the planning area have taken place in the Klamath and Cascade Mountains, along the US-26 corridor near Prineville and Mitchell, and along US- 97 just north of Klamath Falls, where an earthquake-induced rockslide struck and killed a passing vehicle. (Oregon State EHMP, 2015).

The Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) Storm Impacts Study conducted after the 1996-97 landslide events found that the highest probability for the initiation of shallow, rapidly moving landslides was on slopes of 70 to 80 percent. A moderate hazard of shallow rapid landslide initiation can exist on slopes between 50 and 70 percent.

In general, areas at risk to landslides have steep slopes (25 percent or greater,) and/or a history of nearby landslides. In otherwise gently sloped areas, landslides can occur along steep river and creek banks, and along ocean bluff faces. At natural slopes under 30 percent, most landslide hazards are related to excavation and drainage practices, or the reactivation of preexisting landslide hazards.

Previous Occurrences Landslides within the planning area have occurred, as identified by FEMA and the Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS). Landslides have been associated with disaster declarations for severe storms and flooding events as listed in Table 13-1. There is one record of a fatality resulting from a rockslide associated with the 1993 earthquake in Klamath Falls. Historic landslide events throughout Oregon are illustrated in Figure 13-5.

TABLE 13-1 LANDSLIDE EVENTS SINCE 1965

Disaster Number Date Event Description DR-1004 10/1993 Earthquake (Associated rockslide killed 1 motorist on US-97 in Klamath Falls) DR-1160 12/1997 Severe Winter Storm, Landslide, Mudslide, Flooding

Source: SHELDUS and FEMA Websites

In 2008, the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) developed the Statewide Landslide Information Database of Oregon (SLIDO) to improve the understanding of the landslide hazard in Oregon and to create a statewide base level of landslide data. The database includes more than 15,000 landslide and landslide-related features extracted from 257 published and non-published studies. The data was again updated in 2016. Using this database, DOGAMI developed the interactive SLIDO map.

Figures 13-6 through 13-8 identify documented landslide hazards in the Tribal Planning Area, including Klamath County, and near the cities of Klamath Falls and Chiloquin. Additional information on historic landslides and additional maps are available for review at: http://www.oregongeology.org/slido/index.html (accessed Aug 2016).

13-4 LANDSLIDE

Figure 13-5 Historic Landslide Points in Oregon

13-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 13-6 DOGAMI Historic Landslide Data within the Tribal Planning Area

13-6 LANDSLIDE

Figure 13-7 DOGAMI Historically Active Landslides - Chiloquin and Klamath Falls Area

13-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 13-8 Mapped Landslide Characteristics in Klamath County

13-8 LANDSLIDE

Severity The severity or extent of landslides is typically a function of geology and the landslide triggering mechanism. Rainfall initiated landslides tend to be smaller, and earthquake induced landslides may be very large. Even small slides can cause property damage, result in injuries, or take lives.

Landslides destroy property and infrastructure, and can have a long-lasting effect on the environment and can take the lives of people. Nationally, landslides account for more than $2 billion in losses annually and result in an estimated 25 to 50 deaths a year (Spiker and Gori, 2003; Schuster and Highland, 2001; Schuster, 1996). Snohomish County in Washington State is still recovering following a mile-wide catastrophic landslide which killed over 40 people in March 2014. While the Klamath Tribes have limited incidents of landslides occurring within its planning area, given the terrain and topography of the area, the potential does exist. Figure 13-9 illustrates the landslide susceptibility within the planning region as identified by the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries.

Frequency Landslides are often triggered by other natural hazards such as earthquakes, heavy rain, floods, or wildfires. Therefore, landslide frequency is often related to the frequency of these other hazards. Landslides typically occur during and after major storms, so the potential for landslides largely coincides with the potential for sequential severe storms and flood events that saturate steep, vulnerable soils.

A specific recurrence interval has not been established by geologists; however, landslides do occur more frequently in areas which have previously been impacted by landslide events. Landslides are most likely to occur during periods of higher than average rainfall, or as a result of an earthquake or other major geologic event. In many instances, the ground is already saturated prior to the onset of a major storm, which increases the likelihood of significant landslides to occur. Historically, water is involved in most landslide instances, with human influence identified in more than 80 percent of reported slides. Until better data is generated specifically for landslide hazards, the severe storm frequency is appropriate for the purpose of ranking risk associated with the landslide hazard. Since 1960, one declared event for a severe winter storm included landslides and mudslides (1997); however, no data is available which specifically indicates how, or if, the Klamath Tribes were impacted. In addition to the severe storm incident, one rockfall occurred as a result of an earthquake (1993).

13-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 13-9 DOGAMI Landslide Susceptibility Map

13-10 LANDSLIDE

13.3 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Overview

Landslides have the potential to cause widespread damage throughout both rural and urban areas. While some landslides are more of a nuisance-type event, even the smallest of slides has the potential to injure or kill individuals and damage infrastructure.

Methodology

Historical occurrences, combined with analysis of the slope and the type of soil, are the most effective indicator of areas at risk to landslide. The State of Oregon’s Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) has developed a landslide dataset used for this assessment. The last update to the dataset was 2016, so is determined to be the best available data as of this update. Because no damage figures have been developed for the landslide hazard, loss estimates were developed representing 10 percent, 30 percent, and 50 percent of the assessed value of exposed structures.

Warning Time

Unlike flood hazards which often are predictable, mass movements or landslides are generally unpredictable, with little or no advanced warning. The speed of onset and velocity associated with a slide event can have devastating impacts. While some methods used to monitor mass movements can provide an idea of the type of movement and provide some indicators (potentially) with respect to the amount of time prior to failure, exact science is not available. Mass movements can occur suddenly or slowly. The velocity of movement may range from a slow creep of inches per year to many feet per second, depending on slope angle, material, and water content. Generally accepted warning signs for landslide activity include:

• Springs, seeps, or saturated ground in areas that have not typically been wet before • New cracks or unusual bulges in the ground, street pavements or sidewalks • Soil moving away from foundations • Ancillary structures such as decks and patios tilting and/or moving relative to the main house • Tilting or cracking of concrete floors and foundations • Broken water lines and other underground utilities • Leaning telephone poles, trees, retaining walls or fences • Offset fence lines • Sunken or down-dropped road beds • Rapid increase in creek water levels, possibly accompanied by increased turbidity (soil content) • Sudden decrease in creek water levels though rain is still falling or just recently stopped • Sticking doors and windows, and visible open spaces indicating jambs and frames out of plumb • A faint rumbling sound that increases in volume as the landslide nears • Unusual sounds, such as trees cracking or boulders knocking together.

13-11 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

It is possible, based on historical occurrences, to determine what areas are at a higher risk. Assessing the geology, vegetation, and amount of predicted precipitation for an area can help in these predictions; such an analysis is beyond the scope of this planning effort. However, there is no practical warning system for individual landslides. Historical events remain the best indicators of potential landslide activity, but it is generally impossible to determine with precision the size of a slide event or when an event will occur. Increased precipitation in the form of snow or rain increases the potential for landslide activity. Steep slopes also increase the potential for slides, especially when combined with specific types of soil.

Impact on Life, Health and Safety A geographic analysis of demographics was performed using GIS data. Population figures were based on impact to residential structures with an approximation of 2.5 individuals within each residence as census block data was not available. The number of residences and structures were cross-referenced with moderate landslide hazard areas. As identified in Table 13-2, this approach estimated that there are 4 residential structures (single and multi-family) on parcels in the moderate landslide hazard area. Using a value of 2.5 persons per household unit, it is estimated that there are 17.5 persons living in households exposed to the moderate landslide hazard. This represents 6.5 percent of the Tribal population for the planning area.

TABLE 13-2 POPULATION AND RESIDENTIAL IMPACT IN MODERATE LANDSLIDE RISK AREA

Residential Population % of Total Population % of Impacted Population Jurisdiction Building Count Exposedb in Planning Areab in Planning Area Beatty 0 0 0 0 Chiloquin 4 17.5 6.5 100 Klamath Falls 0 0 0 0 Total 4 17.5 6.5 100

a. Based on factor of 2.5 per person/household unit b. Population data provided by Klamath Tribes of Indians as of August 2016.

Also to be taken into account when determining affected population are the area-wide impact on transportation systems and the potential isolation of residents who may not be directly impacted but whose ability to ingress and egress is restricted. Likewise, a landslide could impact primary roadways and the rail system, which would affect commodity flow not only into the area, but potentially all along the West Coast depending on the destination of the rail cars.

Finally, the population of Elders or those without the ability to evacuate may increase the level of first- responder requirements for residents whose structures were not directly impacted but who were affected by power outages, lack of logistical support, etc. Landslides can also damage all types of water treatment facilities, potentially harming water quality.

Impact on Property Landslides affect private property and public infrastructure and facilities. The predominant area of impact falls within Chiloquin, with the majority of land use in that area being residential. In addition, the Williamson River Indian Mission, pump house on Highway 97, and a storage facility are in the moderate

13-12 LANDSLIDE risk areas. The area and the type and value of structures exposed to the Moderate, High, and Very High landslide hazards in the planning area is summarized in Table 13-3 through Table 13-5.

TABLE 13-3 PERCENT OF LAND AREA IN LANDSLIDE RISK AREAS

Area in Moderate Area in High Area in Very High % of Total Planning Area Landslide Risk Landslide Risk Area Landslide Risk Planning Area (acres) (acres) Area (acres) Area

Chiloquin/Beatty 323,894 100,560 354 33.70%

Klamath Falls 212,623 15,994 3,872 18.40%

Total 536,517 116,554 4,226 52.10%

TABLE 13-4 STRUCTURES BY BUILDING TYPE EXPOSED TO MODERATE LANDSLIDE HAZARDS

Beatty Chiloquin Klamath Falls Total Administration 0 0 0 0 Casino 0 0 0 0 Gathering Place 0 1 0 1 Haz Mat 0 0 0 0 Health 0 0 0 0 Industry 0 0 0 0 Residential 0 3 0 3 Residential Multi Family 0 1 0 1 School 0 0 0 0 Storage 0 1 0 1 Wastewater 0 0 0 0 Water 0 1 0 1 Total 0 7 0 7

TABLE 13-5 POTENTIAL BUILDING LOSSES IN LANDSLIDE RISK AREA

Building Estimated 10% 30% 50% Jurisdiction Count Value Content Value Damage Damage Damage Beatty 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chiloquin 7 $1,015,815 $530,983 $154,679 $464,039 $773,399 Klamath Falls 0 0 0 0 0 0

As indicated, because no damage figures have been developed for the landslide hazard, loss estimates were developed representing 10 percent, 30 percent, and 50 percent of the assessed value of exposed structures.

13-13 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

This allows planners and emergency managers to select a range of economic impact based on an estimate of the percent of damage to the general building stock. Damage in excess of 50 percent is considered to be substantial by most building codes and typically requires total reconstruction. Table 13-5 shows these estimates.

Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Several types of infrastructure are exposed to mass movements, including transportation facilities, airports, bridges, and water, sewer, and power infrastructure. Highly susceptible areas include mountain and coastal roads and transportation infrastructure. All infrastructure and transportation corridors identified as exposed to the landslide hazard are considered vulnerable until more information becomes available. Figure 13-10 shows the location of critical facilities relative to the landslide hazard. Significant infrastructure in the planning region exposed to mass movements includes the following:

– Roads—Access to major roads is crucial to life-safety after a disaster event and to response and recovery operations. Landslides can block egress and ingress on roads, causing isolation for neighborhoods, traffic problems and delays for public and private transportation. This can result in economic losses for businesses. – Bridges and Ferry Docks—Landslides can significantly impact road bridges and ferry docks. Mass movements can knock out bridge and dock abutments, causing significant misalignment and restricting access and usages, as well as significantly weaken the soil supporting the structures, making them hazardous for use. – Power Lines—Power lines are generally elevated above steep slopes, but the towers supporting them can be subject to landslides. A landslide could trigger failure of the soil beneath a tower, causing it to collapse and ripping down the lines. Power and communication failures due to landslides can create problems for vulnerable populations and businesses.

Impact on Economy A landslide can have catastrophic impact on both the private sector and governmental agencies. Economic losses include damage costs as well as lost revenue and, where applicable, taxes. Damaged bridges, roadways and rail lines can have a significant impact on the economy. Damage to the railway system and loss of connectivity would have a significant economic impact on not only the planning area, but also potentially other areas of the state, and the entire West Coast.

The impact on commodity flow from a significant landslide shutting down major access routes would not only limit the resources available for citizens’ use, but also would cause economic impact on businesses. Given the high percent of unemployment impacting the population of Native Americans living within the poverty level, the chance of having sufficient surplus food would be limited, further impacting the socially disadvantaged.

Debris from a significant slide could also impact cargo staging areas and lands needed for business operations. Transportation travel time between the areas impacted could increase due to vehicles having to travel greater distances around the landslide area.

13-14 LANDSLIDE

Figure 13-10 Landslide Risk to Critical Facilities

13-15 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Impact on Environment Environmental problems as a result of mass movements can be numerous. Landslides that fall into water bodies, wetlands or streams may significantly impact fish and wildlife habitat, as well as affecting water quality. Hillsides that provide wildlife habitat can be lost for prolonged periods of time due to landslides. Landslides into large waterbodies, such as Upper Klamath Lake, could potentially cause a seich, increasing flood potential. A landslide could also destroy or significantly impact any of the many dams in the area, causing further damage and potential flooding.

13.4 RESULTS Based on statewide standards established by DOGAMI, much of the land in the planning area has a moderate likelihood of landslides occurring, with some areas where previous slides have occurred identified as high and very high. However, the Tribes own limited structures in those areas where higher impact is likely, although they do maintain a significant amount of land mass throughout the area. Therefore, vulnerability with respect to individuals and structures in the area is determined to be low, with seven structures rated at low or moderate risk, and no structures rated as high. While there is currently limited impact associated with the areas identified as having a likelihood for landslides, development in the hazard areas would alter the level of vulnerability. Road closures associated with landslides is also of concern. Given the fatality which did occur as a result of a previous landslide, the Planning Team did elevate the severity when determining the CPRI score, which resulted in a 2.15, with an overall vulnerability of medium.

13.5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRENDS During construction of new structures and facilities, the Klamath Tribes will continue to apply sound land use and zoning applications as they address geologic hazards within the Tribal Planning Area. Continued implementation of the International Building Codes, as required for all federally funded structures, will assist in reducing the risk of impact from landslide hazards.

The Tribes are attempting to expand their business base, which will increase economic vitality by providing businesses that stimulate retail sales and services and increased tourism. As the area represents a relatively high tourist destination for Oregon, continued land use supported by regulatory authority which supports economic growth but practices smart planning will be vital. While the Klamath Tribes have limited resources available, they are committed to further assessing the landslide risk and developing mitigation efforts to reduce impact and enhance resiliency, although local partnerships with the surrounding jurisdictions and available grant funds would be beneficial in achieving these goals. There are four basic strategies to mitigate landslide risk:

– Stabilization – Protection – Avoidance – Maintenance and monitoring.

Stabilization seeks to counter one or more key failure mechanisms necessary to prevent slope failure. The other three strategies seek to avoid, protect against or limit associated impacts. Development of this mitigation plan creates an opportunity to enhance and develop wise land use decision-making policies. It also allows for the expansion of capital improvement plans to sustain future growth through the use of these four basic strategies.

13-16 LANDSLIDE

13.6 ISSUES Landslides throughout the planning region occur as a result of soil conditions that have been affected by severe storms, groundwater, or human development. The worst-case scenario for landslide hazards in the planning area would generally correspond to a severe storm that had heavy rain and caused flooding. Landslides are most likely during late fall or early spring —months when the water tables are high. After heavy rains from October to April, soils become saturated with water. As water seeps downward through upper soils that may consist of permeable sands and gravels and accumulates on impermeable silt, it will cause weakness and destabilization in the slope. A short intense storm could cause saturated soil to move, resulting in landslides. As rains continue, the groundwater table rises, adding to the weakening of the slope. Gravity, a small tremor or earthquake, poor drainage, steep bank cutting, a rising groundwater table, and poor soil exacerbate hazardous conditions.

Mass movements are becoming more of a concern as development moves outside of urban centers and into areas less developed in terms of infrastructure. While most mass movements would be isolated events affecting specific areas, the areas impacted can be very large. It is probable that private and public property, including infrastructure, will be affected. Mass movements could affect bridges that pass over landslide prone ravines and potentially knock out rail services. Road obstructions caused by mass movements could create isolation problems for residents and businesses in sparsely developed areas, and impact commodity flows. Property owners exposed to steep slopes may suffer damage to property or structures. Landslides carrying vegetation such as shrubs and trees may cause a break in utility lines, cutting off power and communication access to residents; they may block ingress and egress to areas of the Tribal Planning Area, especially for areas with limited roadways.

Important issues associated with landslides throughout planning area include the following:

• There are existing homes in landslide risk areas throughout the region. The degree of vulnerability of these structures depends on the codes and standards to which the structures were built. Information to this level of detail is not currently available. • Future development could lead to more homes in landslide risk areas. • Portions of the Tribal Planning Area are surrounded by steep banks and cliffs. • Mapping and assessment of landslide hazards are constantly evolving. As new data and science become available, assessments of landslide risk should be re-evaluated. LiDAR data would greatly enhance the ability to determine landslide hazards, as well as other hazards. • The impact of climate change on landslides in general is uncertain. However, as climate change continues to impact atmospheric conditions, the exposure to landslide risks is likely to increase. • Landslides cause many negative environmental consequences, including water quality degradation, degradation of fish spawning areas, and destruction of vegetation along waterways, ultimately impacting the flow of water bodies. • The risk associated with the landslide hazard overlaps the risk associated with other hazards such as earthquake, flood, and wildfire. This provides an opportunity to seek mitigation goals with multiple objectives that can reduce risk for multiple hazards.

13-17

CHAPTER 14. SEVERE WEATHER

14.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND DEFINITIONS Severe weather refers to any dangerous Freezing Rain—The result of rain occurring when the meteorological phenomena with the potential to cause temperature is below the freezing point. The rain freezes on impact, resulting in a layer of glaze ice up to damage, serious social disruption, or loss of human an inch thick. In a severe ice storm, an evergreen tree life. It includes thunderstorms, downbursts, wind, 60 feet high and 30 feet wide can be burdened with up tornadoes, waterspouts, snow- and ice-storms. Severe to six tons of ice, creating a threat to power and weather differs from extreme weather, which refers to telephone lines and transportation routes. unusual weather events at the extremes of the • Hail Storm—Any thunderstorm which produces historical distribution. Severe weather can cover wide hail that reaches the ground is known as a hailstorm. Hail has a diameter of 0.20 inches or geographic areas, or be more localized, affecting some more. Hail is composed of transparent ice or more limited geographic areas, such as a tornado alternating layers of transparent and translucent which touches down very briefly. The following ice at least 0.04 inches thick. Although the represent the severe weather-type events which are diameter of hail is varied, in the United States, the most typical within the Klamath Tribal Planning Area. average observation of damaging hail is between 1 inch and golf ball-sized 1.75 inches. Stones Flooding associated with severe weather is discussed larger than 0.75 inches are usually large enough in Chapter 8. Landslides are addressed in Chapter 9. to cause damage. Severe Local Storm—”Microscale” atmospheric systems, including tornadoes, thunderstorms, Rain Shadow Effect windstorms, ice storms and snowstorms. These storms may cause a great deal of destruction and even death, The planning area has a warm Summer Mediterranean but their impact is generally confined to a small area. classification, with climate ranging from a dry season Typical impacts are on transportation infrastructure in the summertime, to wintertime precipitation which and utilities. includes snowfall. The Cascade mountains block the Thunderstorm—A storm featuring heavy rains, strong passage of rain-producing weather systems and cast a winds, thunder and lightning, typically about 15 miles in "shadow" of dryness behind them (Figure 14-1). Wind diameter and lasting about 30 minutes. Hail and tornadoes are also dangers associated with and moist air is drawn by the prevailing winds towards thunderstorms. Lightning is a serious threat to human the top of the mountains, where it condenses and life. Heavy rains over a small area in a short time can precipitates before it crosses the top. The air, without lead to flash flooding. much moisture left, advances behind the mountains Tornado—. Most tornadoes have wind speeds less creating a drier side called the "rain shadow"15. than 110 miles per hour are about 250 feet across, and travel a few miles before dissipating. The most Portions of the planning area, particularly the Klamath extreme tornadoes can attain wind speeds of more Falls area, is known as Oregon’s City of Sunshine, than 300 miles per hour, stretch more than two miles because the area enjoys ~300 days of sun per year. A across, and stay on the ground for dozens of miles climate enjoying hot summer days, most of the They are measured using the Enhanced Fujita Scale, precipitation is experienced in the wintertime, much ranging from EF0 to EF5. of it falling as snow. Windstorm—A storm featuring violent winds. Southwesterly winds are associated with strong storms moving onto the coast from the Pacific Ocean. Southern winds parallel to the coastal mountains are the strongest and most destructive winds. Windstorms tend to damage ridgelines that face into the winds. Winter Storm—A storm having significant snowfall, ice, and/or freezing rain; the quantity of precipitation varies by elevation.

15 NASA Accessed 1 Sept. 2016. Available at: http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=79247

14-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 14-1 Rain Shadow Effect

Thunderstorms Thunderstorms are a natural part of the climate of central Oregon. Severe thunderstorms can create hail, wind, and ignite forest fires. A thunderstorm is a rain event that includes thunder and lightning. A thunderstorm is classified as “severe” when it contains one or more of the following: hail with a diameter of three-quarter inch or greater, winds gusting in excess of 50 knots (57.5 mph), or tornado. Thunderstorms have three stages illustrated in Figure 14-2.

Figure 14-2 The Thunderstorm Life Cycle Three factors cause thunderstorms: moisture, rising unstable air (air that keeps rising once disturbed), and a lifting mechanism to provide the disturbance. The sun heats the surface of the earth, which warms the air above it. If this warm surface air is forced to rise (hills or mountains can cause rising motion, as can the interaction of warm air and cold air or wet air and dry air) it will continue to rise as long as it weighs less and stays warmer than the air around it. As the air rises, it transfers heat from the earth surface to the upper atmosphere (the process of convection). The water vapor it contains begins to cool and it condenses into a cloud. The cloud eventually grows upward into areas where the temperature is below freezing. Some of the

14-2 SEVERE WEATHER water vapor turns to ice and some of it turns into water droplets. Both have electrical charges. Ice particles usually have positive charges, and rain droplets usually have negative charges. When the charges build up enough, they are discharged in a bolt of lightning, which causes the sound heard as thunder. There are four types of thunderstorms:

• Single-Cell Thunderstorms—Single-cell thunderstorms usually last 20 to 30 minutes. A true single-cell storm is rare, because the gust front of one cell often triggers the growth of another. Most single-cell storms are not usually severe, but a single-cell storm can produce a brief severe weather event. When this happens, it is called a pulse severe storm. • Multi-Cell Cluster Storm—A multi-cell cluster is the most common type of thunderstorm. The multi-cell cluster consists of a group of cells, moving as one unit, with each cell in a different phase of the thunderstorm life cycle. Mature cells are usually found at the center of the cluster and dissipating cells at the downwind edge. Multi-cell cluster storms can produce moderate-size hail, flash floods and weak tornadoes. Each cell in a multi-cell cluster lasts only about 20 minutes; the multi-cell cluster itself may persist for several hours. This type of storm is usually more intense than a single cell storm. • Multi-Cell Squall Line—A multi-cell line storm, or squall line, consists of a long line of storms with a continuous well-developed gust front at the leading edge. The line of storms can be solid, or there can be gaps and breaks in the line. Squall lines can produce hail up to golf- ball size, heavy rainfall, and weak tornadoes, but they are best known as the producers of strong downdrafts. Occasionally, a strong downburst will accelerate a portion of the squall line ahead of the rest of the line. This produces what is called a bow echo. Bow echoes can develop with isolated cells as well as squall lines. Bow echoes are easily detected on radar but are difficult to observe visually. • Super-Cell Storm—A super-cell is a highly-organized thunderstorm that poses a high threat to life and property. It is similar to a single-cell storm in that it has one main updraft, but the updraft is extremely strong, reaching speeds of 150 to 175 miles per hour. Super-cells are rare. The main characteristic that sets them apart from other thunderstorms is the presence of rotation. The rotating updraft of a super-cell (called a mesocyclone when visible on radar) helps the super-cell to produce extreme weather events, such as giant hail (more than 2 inches in diameter), strong downbursts of 80 miles an hour or more, and strong to violent tornadoes. In addition to wind, lightning strikes associated with thunderstorms can cause significant injury and damage. According to NOAA, Oregon ranks 42nd nationwide in deaths associated with lightning strikes, having five deaths during the time period 1959-2013 (see Figure 14-3 and Figure 14-4), but only one death between 2005-2014. Annually, 30 percent of all power outages nationwide are lightning related, with total costs approaching $1 billion dollars (CoreLogic, 2015). Lightning starts approximately 4,400 house fires each year, with estimated losses exceeding $280 million.

14-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Source: Vaisala, 2015

Figure 14-3 Lightning Fatalities by State, 1959-2013

Figure 14-4 State Ranking of Lightning Fatalities by Population 2005-2014

Damaging Winds While the planning area is subject to high winds, due to the topography of the land, they customarily do not last for great lengths of time, or impact the entire region as a whole. Isolated winds in the mountainous region have more localized effects, with winds generally being of a short duration, affecting a relatively small geographic area.

High winds are defined as those that last longer than 1 hour at greater than 39 mph, or for any length of time at greater than 57 mph. Wind speeds vary with individual storms. Figure 14-5 identifies the average annual wind speed nationwide. As illustrated, Oregon’s wind speeds are much higher at the coast than within the areas of the Klamath Tribal Planning Area.

14-4 SEVERE WEATHER

Damaging winds are classified as those exceeding 60 mph. Damage from such winds accounts for half of all severe weather reports in the lower 48 states and is more common than damage from tornadoes. Wind speeds can reach up to 100 mph and can produce a damage path extending for hundreds of miles. There are seven types of damaging winds:

Straight-line winds —Any thunderstorm wind that is not associated with rotation; this term is used mainly to differentiate from tornado winds. Most thunderstorms produce some straight- line winds as a result of outflow generated by the thunderstorm downdraft. Downdrafts —A small-scale column of air that rapidly sinks toward the ground. Downbursts—A strong downdraft with horizontal dimensions larger than 2.5 miles resulting in an outward burst or damaging winds on or near the ground. Downburst winds may begin as a microburst and spread out over a wider area, sometimes producing damage similar to a strong tornado. Although usually associated with thunderstorms, downbursts can occur with showers too weak to produce thunder. Microbursts—A small concentrated downburst that produces an outward burst of damaging winds at the surface. Microbursts are generally less than 2.5 miles across and short-lived, lasting only 5 to 10 minutes, with maximum wind speeds up to 168 mph. There are two kinds of microbursts: wet and dry. A wet microburst is accompanied by heavy precipitation at the surface. Dry microbursts, common in places like the high plains and the intermountain west, occur with little or no precipitation reaching the ground. Gust front—A gust front is the leading edge of rain-cooled air that clashes with warmer thunderstorm inflow. Gust fronts are characterized by a wind shift, temperature drop, and gusty winds out ahead of a thunderstorm. Sometimes the winds push up air above them, forming a shelf cloud or detached roll cloud. Derecho—A derecho is a widespread thunderstorm wind caused when new thunderstorms form along the leading edge of an outflow boundary (the boundary formed by horizontal spreading of thunderstorm-cooled air). The word “derecho” is of Spanish origin and means “straight ahead.” Thunderstorms feed on the boundary and continue to reproduce. Derechos typically occur in summer when complexes of thunderstorms form over plains, producing heavy rain and severe wind. The damaging winds can last a long time and cover a large area. Bow Echo—A bow echo is a linear wind front bent outward in a bow shape. Damaging straight-line winds often occur near the center of a bow echo. Bow echoes can be 200 miles long, last for several hours, and produce extensive wind damage at the ground.

14-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 14-5 Annual Average Wind Speed Source: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/wind/images/wind_speed_map_lg.jpg

There are four main types of windstorm tracks that impact the Pacific Northwest which includes the Tribal Planning Area (see Figure 14-6). These four tracks are distinguished by two basic windstorm patterns which have emerged in the Puget Sound Region: The South Wind Event and the East Wind Event. South wind events are generally large-scale events that affect large portions of Oregon and Washington, and on occasion, they have reached as far south as Northern California. In contrast, easterly wind events are more limited. High pressure on the east side of the Cascade Mountain Range creates airflow over the peaks and mountain passes, and through the funneling effect of the valleys, the wind increases dramatically in speed. As it descends into these valleys and then exits into the lowlands, the wind can pick up enough speed to damage buildings, rip down power lines, and destroy fences. Once it leaves the proximity of the Cascade foothills, the wind tends to die down rapidly.

14-6 SEVERE WEATHER

Source: Oregon Climate Service, 2015

Figure 14-6 Windstorm Tracks Impacting the Pacific Northwest Windstorms impact all of the planning area on a regular basis. The strongest winds are generally from the south/ southwest and occur during fall and winter. Under certain conditions, very strong east winds may occur, but these are usually limited to small areas (the majority of which occur in the mountain passes). Historic wind patterns also have shown that areas east of the Cascade experience daily wind shifts. During summertime, these wind shifts occur 80-90 percent of the time in late afternoon hours. Obviously, wind events vary in damage inflicted, and some are much more damaging than others. For events such as the October 1962 Columbus Day Storm (see Figure 14-7 ) or the Hanukkah Eve Windstorm of 2006 (see Figure 14-8), the impact on the public can be severe, and vary greatly in strength as they move inland. At certain points of impact, the 1962 Columbus Day Storm carried hurricane force winds which inflicted loss of life and damage along the coastlines of Washington, Oregon, and California, crossing the border into Canada.

14-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Source: Wolf Read, Climatologist, Oregon Climate Center, OSU.(Cited in Oregon State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2015).

Figure 14-7 Peak Wind Gusts for October 1962 Windstorm

Source: NOAA Satellite Photo

Figure 14-8 Hanukkah Eve Windstorm of December 13, 2006

14-8 SEVERE WEATHER

Hail Storms Hail occurs when updrafts in thunderstorms carry raindrops upward into extremely cold areas of the atmosphere where they freeze into ice. Recent studies suggest that super-cooled water may accumulate on frozen particles near the back side of a storm as they are pushed forward across and above the updraft by the prevailing winds near the top of the storm. Eventually, the hailstones encounter downdraft air and fall to the ground. Hailstones grow two ways: by wet growth or dry growth. In wet growth, a tiny piece of ice is in an area where the air temperature is below freezing, but not super cold. When the tiny piece of ice collides with a super-cooled drop, the water does not freeze on the ice immediately. Instead, liquid water spreads across tumbling hailstones and slowly freezes. Since the process is slow, air bubbles can escape, resulting in a layer of clear ice. Dry growth hailstones grow when the air temperature is well below freezing and the water droplet freezes immediately as it collides with the ice particle. The air bubbles are “frozen” in place, leaving cloudy ice.

Ice Storms The National Weather Service defines an ice storm as a storm that results in the accumulation of at least 0.25 inches of ice on exposed surfaces. Ice storms occur when rain falls from a warm, moist, layer of atmosphere into a below freezing, drier layer near the ground. The rain freezes on contact with the cold ground and exposed surfaces, causing damage to trees, utility wires, and structures (see Figure 14-9).

Figure 14-9 Types of Precipitation

Snow Storm Meteorologists define heavy snow as six inches or more falling in less than twelve hours, or snowfall of eight inches or more in twenty-four hours. A blizzard is a severe winter weather condition characterized by low temperatures and strong winds blowing a great deal of snow. The National Weather Service defines a blizzard as having wind speeds of 35 mph or more, with a visibility of less than a quarter mile. Sometimes a condition known as a whiteout can occur during a blizzard. This is when the visibility drops to zero because of the amount of blowing snow.

14-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Extreme Temperatures Extreme temperature includes both heat and cold events, which can have a significant impact on human health, commercial/agricultural businesses, and primary and secondary effects on infrastructure (e.g., burst pipes and power failure). What constitutes “extreme cold” or “extreme heat” can vary across different areas of the country, based on what the population is accustomed to within the region (CDC, 2014).

Extreme Cold Extreme cold events are when temperatures drop well below normal in an area. In regions relatively unaccustomed to winter weather, near-freezing temperatures are considered “extreme cold.” Extreme cold can often accompany severe winter storms, with winds exacerbating the effects of cold temperatures by carrying away body heat more quickly, making it feel colder than is indicated by the actual temperature (known as wind chill). Figure 14-10 demonstrates the value of wind chill based on the ambient temperature and wind speed. Exposure to cold temperatures, whether indoors or outside, can lead to serious or life-threatening health problems such as hypothermia, cold stress, frostbite or freezing of the exposed extremities such as fingers, toes, nose and ear lobes. Hypothermia occurs when the core body temperature is <95ºF. If persons exposed to excessive cold are unable to generate enough heat (e.g., through shivering) to maintain a normal core body temperature of 98.6ºF, their organs (e.g., brain, heart, or kidneys) can malfunction. Extreme cold also can cause emergencies in susceptible populations, such as those without shelter, those who are stranded, or those who live in a home that is poorly insulated or without heat (such as mobile homes). Infants and the elderly are particularly at risk, but anyone can be affected.

Figure 14-10 NWS Wind Chill Index Extremely cold temperatures often accompany a winter storm, so individuals may have to cope with power failures and icy roads. Although staying indoors as much as possible can help reduce the risk of car crashes and falls on the ice, individuals may also face indoor hazards. Many homes will be too cold—either due to a power failure or because the heating system is not adequate for the weather. The use of space heaters and fireplaces to keep warm increases the risk of household fires and carbon monoxide poisoning.

14-10 SEVERE WEATHER

During cold months, carbon monoxide may be high in some areas because the colder weather makes it difficult for car emission control systems to operate effectively. Carbon monoxide levels are typically higher during cold weather because the cold temperatures make combustion less complete and cause inversions that trap pollutants close to the ground (USEPA, 2009).

Extreme Heat Temperatures that hover 10 degrees or more above the average high temperature for the region and last for several weeks are defined as extreme heat (FEMA, 2006; CDC, 2006). An extended period of extreme heat of three or more consecutive days is typically called a heat wave and is often accompanied by high humidity (Ready America, Date Unknown; NWS, 2005). There is no universal definition of a heat wave because the term is relative to the usual weather in a particular area. The term heat wave is applied both to routine weather variations and to extraordinary spells of heat which may occur only once a century (Meehl and Tebaldi, 2004). A basic definition of a heat wave implies that it is an extended period of unusually high atmosphere-related heat stress, which causes temporary modifications in lifestyle and which may have adverse health consequences for the affected population (Robinson, 2000).

Depending on severity, duration, and location; extreme heat events can create or provoke secondary hazards including, but not limited to, dust storms, droughts, wildfires, water shortages and power outages (FEMA, 2006; CDC, 2006). This could result in a broad and far-reaching set of impacts throughout a local area or entire region. Impacts could include significant loss of life and illness; economic costs in transportation, agriculture, production, energy, and infrastructure; and losses of ecosystems, wildlife habitats and water resources (Adams, Date Unknown; Meehl and Tebaldi, 2004; CDC, 2006; NYSDPC, 2008).

Extreme heat is the number one weather-related cause of death in the U.S. On average, more than 1,500 people die each year from excessive heat. This number is greater than the 30-year mean annual number of deaths due to tornadoes, flooding, hurricanes, and lightning combined (NOAA, Date Unknown). Figure 14-11 shows the number of weather fatalities based on a 10-year average and 30-year average16. Nationally, heat has the second highest average of weather related fatalities (behind flood) between 2006 and 2015, and the number one cause of weather-related deaths for the 30-year average (1986-2015). During 2015, the State of Oregon experienced one heat-related fatality.

16 NOAA, 2016 (http://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/hazstats.shtml)

14-11 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 14-11 Average Number of Weather Related Fatalities in the U.S. (2015) Certain populations are considered vulnerable or at greater risk during extreme heat events. These populations include, but are not limited to the following: the elderly age 65 and older, infants and young children under five years of age, pregnant woman, the homeless or poor, the overweight, and people with mental illnesses, disabilities, and chronic diseases (NYS HMP, 2008).

14.2 HAZARD PROFILE Extent and Location The entire planning area is susceptible to the impacts of severe weather. Severe weather events (not inclusive of extreme heat) customarily occur during the months of October to April, although they have occurred year-round. The planning area has been impacted by strong winds, tornadoes, rain, snow, ice, or other precipitation, and often are accompanied by thunder or lightening. Snowfall does occur frequently throughout the planning region, with significant amounts of snowfall and cold temperatures, although they customarily do not last for long durations. Wind events are most damaging to areas of Klamath Falls, due to significant tree stands and major infrastructure, especially above-ground utility lines. For the planning region as a whole, wind events are one of the most common weather-related incidents to occur, often times leaving the area without power for extended periods.

Severe storms affect transportation and utilities. Access across certain parts of the Klamath Tribal Planning Area may be unpredictable as roads are vulnerable to damage from severe storms, storm surges from winds driving water to crest along Upper Klamath Lake, and landslide/erosion. Severe storms can also cause flooding and channel migration (discussed in Chapter 8). The distribution of average weather conditions over the planning area are shown in Figure 14-12 through Figure 14-16.

14-12 SEVERE WEATHER

Figure 14-12 Average Annual Precipitation

14-13 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 14-13 Average Maximum Temperature

14-14 SEVERE WEATHER

Figure 14-14 Average Minimum Temperature

14-15 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 14-15 Wind Power Resource

14-16 SEVERE WEATHER

Source: USA.com, 2016

Figure 14-16 Klamath County Monthly Average Wind Speed

Previous Occurrences Table 14-1 summarizes disaster-declared severe weather events in the planning region as recorded by FEMA. Review of data identifies only one declared severe weather event; however, there have been several additional instances which have not risen to the level of a declaration.

TABLE 14-1 SEVERE WEATHER DECLARATIONS IMPACTING THE TRIBAL PLANNING AREA SINCE 1964

Date Type Deaths or Injuries Property Damage Dec. 25, 1996—Jan. Severe winter storm, snow, freezing None Unknown. 6, 1997 rain; high winds; landslides. (Disaster #1160) Description: Saturated ground combined with snow, freezing rain, rain, rapid warming, and high winds within a ten-day period produced flooding and landslides. Power outages throughout the impacted counties. Eight counties statewide impacted.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS), other local area plans, and FEMA websites also provide information on non-declared events to which the Klamath Peoples are regularly impacted. These include severe wind, snow, and ice events which do not rise to the level of a declaration, but have significant impact on the region. Some of the more significant events are identified below.

– December 1861 - Storm over the entire state produced between 1 and 3 feet of snow. – January 1916 - Two storms over the state produce heavy snowfall, especially in mountainous areas. – December 1919 - One of three heaviest snowfall-producing storms to hit Oregon on record. Lowest statewide average temperature since record keeping began in 1890. The Columbia River froze over, closing the river to navigation from the confluence with the Willamette River upstream. Nearly every part of the state affected.

14-17 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

– January 1937 - Heavy snowfalls in the western slopes of the Cascades and the Willamette Valley. Deep snowdrifts blocked major highways and most minor roads in northern Oregon and passes of the Cascade Mountains for several days. – January 1950 - Record snowfalls and property damage throughout state. – November 10 and 11, 1951 - The entire state experienced widespread damage, especially to transmission and utility lines, buildings, and standing timber. Sustained southerly to southwesterly winds of 40 to 60 mph occurred over nearly the entire state, with gusts of 75 to 80 mph recorded at many locations. – December 4, 1951 - Damage to buildings and utility lines statewide; officially estimated peak wind gust values measured in Klamath Falls reached 64 mph. – December 21 and 22, 1955 - Double windstorm events occurred within 20 to 30 hours of each other. Damage to buildings and utility lines were documented statewide. – November 1958 - Statewide windstorm with sustained winds of 51 mph; fallen trees blocked every major highway. – March 1960 - Snowstorms caused several automobile accidents, and two fatalities. – May 1962 – Tornado recorded in Klamath County; registered a 1 on the Fujita Scale; no reports of injuries or fatalities; measured 20’ in width.17 – October 1962 - The Columbus Day Storm was the most destructive windstorm ever recorded in Oregon in terms of both loss of life and property. Damage from this event was the greatest in the Willamette Valley. The storm killed 38 people and left over $200 million in damage. Hundreds of thousands of homes were without power for short periods, while others were without power for two to three weeks. More than 50,000 homes suffered some damage and nearly 100 were destroyed. Entire fruit and nut orchards were destroyed and livestock killed as barns collapsed and trees blew over. – January 1969 - Heavy snow throughout state. – September 1973 – Tornado occurred in Lake County; registered 0 on Fujita Scale; no reports of injuries or fatalities; measured 10’ in width. – January 1980 - A series of winter storms across the state caused many injuries and power outages. – November 13 and 14, 1981 - Two successive storms produced the strongest wind storm since the Columbus Day storm in 1962, which produced central pressure and winds equivalent to a Category IV hurricane. Airports and bridges were severely damaged. Approximately half a million homes throughout the State were without power throughout the weekend. Klamath Falls measured peak wind gusts up to 57 mph. – February 1985 - Heavy snowfall across state led to downed power lines and two fatalities. – February 1986 - Heavy snow in and around the Deschutes Basin. Traffic accidents; broken – power lines. – March 1988 - Winter storm brought heavy snow and high winds.

17 Tornado Project http://www.tornadohistoryproject.com/tornado/Oregon/table

14-18 SEVERE WEATHER

– February 1989 – Heavy snow fell across the state. More than a foot fell over the state. Statewide, five weather-related deaths occurred (three auto accidents and two people froze to death. Damages exceeded one million dollars. – February 1990 - Winter storm affected whole state. – November 1993 - Heavy snow throughout the Cascade Mountains. – March 1994 - Heavy snow throughout the Cascade Mountains. – May 30, 1995 – Tornado occurred in Klamath County in Klamath Falls at 7:30 pm; the tornado registered 0 on Fujita Scale; no reports of injuries or fatalities; measure 10’ in width. – December 11 and 12, 1995 - This storm followed the path of the Columbus Day Storm of 1962. Record low pressures produced high winds, and there was widespread damage to homes and trees; especially the latter where saturated soil was a factor. Peak gusts at Klamath Falls were recorded at 54 mph. Electricity and telephone services were damaged. Four fatalities and many injuries occurred. An Oregon record low barometric pressure of 953 millibars was recorded off the coast. – Winter 1998-99 - One of the snowiest winters in history (Snowfall at Crater Lake: 586 inches). – December 2004 - The most significant winter storm in several y ears brought snowfall to most of Oregon. Up to 27 inches of snow fell in the Cascade Mountains. Interstate 5 shut down for nearly a day as ODOT maintenance crews and Oregon State Police troopers dug stranded motorists out of snowdrifts reaching five to six feet. President Bush issued a major disaster declaration for 30 Oregon counties affected by the winter storm (declaration did not include Klamath County). – Estimated the cost of damages to public property at $16 million. – April 17, 2004 – Two tornados occurred in Klamath County; one at 4:37 pm and one at 6:00 p.m.; both registered 0 on Fujita Scale; no reports of injuries or fatalities; no recorded width information; however, measured 0.2’ in length. – August 2005 – Tornado occurred in Lake County; registered 0 on Fujita Scale; no reports of injuries or fatalities; measured 10’ in width. – August 2005 – Hail storm in Klamath County causes $1,000 in damages. – August 2006 – Severe windstorm with winds up to 66 mph downed several trees and power lines between Klamath Falls and Chiloquin. – April 2007 – Tornado occurred in Klamath County; registered 0 on Fujita Scale; no reports of injuries or fatalities; registered 10’ in width. – July 2007 – Extensive wind, rain, and hail damage; several power lines downed due to falling trees throughout Klamath County (especially within Malin and Yonna valleys). – The Great Coastal Gale of December 1-3, 2007 impacted the entire western coastline from northern California to Canada. Over a period of three days, two separate storms lashed the area with hurricane-force gusts and heavy rain. Figure 14-17 compares the 1962 Columbus Day Storm to the 2007 event18. Wind within the Klamath area experienced sustained wind speeds of 105 mph and 87 mph, respectively.

18 http://www.climate.washington.edu/stormking/

14-19 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

– 2008 – Heavy snow in Klamath County and the City of Klamath Falls. Removal costs for Klamath Falls exceeded $200,000.

Figure 14-17 Peak Gust Comparison- 2007 Great Coastal Gale and 1962 Columbus Day Storm

Severity The most common problems associated with severe storms are immobility and loss of utilities. Fatalities are uncommon, but can occur. Roads may become impassable due to flooding, downed trees, ice or snow, or a landslide. Power lines may be downed due to high winds or ice accumulation, and services such as water or phone may not be able to operate without power. Lightning can cause severe damage and injury. Physical damage to homes and facilities caused by wind, or by accumulation of snow or ice can also occur. All critical facilities and residences within the Planning Area are highly vulnerable to the effects of a severe winter storm.

Ice storms, especially when accompanied by high winds, can have an especially destructive impact within the planning region, with both types of events being able to close major transportation corridors and bridges. Accumulation of ice on trees, power lines, communication towers and wiring, or other utility services can be crippling, and create additional hazards for residents, motorists, and pedestrians.

Average annual snowfall in Chiloquin is about 33 inches per year, and Lake County averages about 16 inches of annual snowfall precipitation. Even a small accumulation of ice or snow can, and has, caused havoc on transportation systems due to hilly terrain and the level of experience of drivers to maneuver in snow and ice conditions within the region.

Windstorms are common in the planning area and have been known to damage utilities. The predicted wind speed given in wind warnings issued by the National Weather Service is for a one-minute average; gusts may be 25 to 30 percent higher. Windstorms occur many times throughout the year within the Tribal Planning Area.

Tornadoes are potentially the most dangerous of local storms. According to the Tornado Project19, four tornadoes have occurred in the planning area (identified above), although none greater than 1 on the Fujita Scale. If a major tornado were to strike within the planning are, damage could be widespread. As a result of building stock age, fatalities could be high, with many people homeless for an extended period of time. Routine services such as telephone or power could be disrupted. As a result, businesses could be forced to

19 Tornado Project: http://www.tornadohistoryproject.com/

14-20 SEVERE WEATHER close for an extended period, impacting commodities available for citizens. As a result of the heavily forested areas, debris accumulations would be high, causing additional difficulties with access along major arterials connecting the area to other parts of the state, further impacting logistical support and commodities.

The severity or magnitude of extreme cold temperatures are generally measured through the wind chill temperature index. Wind Chill Temperature is the temperature that people and animals feel when outside and it is based on the rate of heat loss from exposed skin by the effects of wind and cold. As the wind increases, the body is cooled at a faster rate causing the skin’s temperature to drop (NWS, 2009).

On November 1, 2001, the NWS implemented a new wind chill temperature index. It was designed to more accurately calculate how cold air feels on human skin. Figure 14-10 (above) shows the new wind chill temperature index20. The Index includes a frostbite indicator, showing points where temperature, wind speed and exposure time will produce frostbite to humans. The chart shows three shaded areas of frostbite danger. Each shaded area shows how long a person can be exposed before frostbite develops (NWS, 2009).

The extent of extreme temperatures is generally measured through the heat index shown in Figure 14-18.21 Created by the NWS, the Heat Index is a chart which accurately measures apparent temperature of the air as it increases with the relative humidity. The Heat Index can be used to determine what effects the temperature and humidity can have on the population (NCDC, 2000). Figure 14-19 describes the adverse effects that prolonged exposure to heat and humidity can have on an individual.22

Figure 14-18 Heat Index Chart

20 NWS, 2008 21 NCDC, 2000 22 NYSDEC, 2008

14-21 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 14-19 Adverse Effects of Prolonged Exposures to Heat on Individuals Frequency

Although coastal areas are subject to more frequent storms, windstorms occur yearly east of the Cascade Mountains. High sustained winds of 40-60 mph can be expected to occur annually throughout the Planning Area. Table 14-2 identifies the probability of a severe event based on a one-minute average, 30 feet above the ground (State EHMP, 2015).

TABLE 14-2 PROBABILITY OF SEVERE WIND EVENT (One-Minute Average, 30 Feet above the Ground) Location 25-Year Event 50-Year Event 100-Year Event (4% annual probability) (2% annual probability) (1% annual probability) Klamath County 60 mph 65 mph 75 mph

Source: Oregon Public Utilities Commission

All buildings, utilities, and transportation systems within the planning area are vulnerable to the effects of windstorms. Future windstorms are highly probable throughout the planning area. Storms with hurricane force winds occur somewhere in Oregon early every year. More destructive storms occur once or twice per decade. Winter storms (snow or ice) occur every year in the planning area and the entire planning area is equally vulnerable to the risk of a winter storm event. Severe winter storms statewide have a recurrence interval of about every 13 years.

In the case of severe weather, climate change further presents a significant challenge for risk management associated with severe weather. The frequency of severe weather events has increased steadily over the last century. The number of weather-related disasters during the 1990s was four times that of the 1950s, and cost 14 times as much in economic losses. Historical data shows that the probability for severe weather events increases in a warmer climate (see Figure 14-20). The changing hydrograph caused by climate change could have a significant impact on the intensity, duration, and frequency of storm events. All of these impacts could have significant economic consequences.

14-22 SEVERE WEATHER

Figure 14-20 Severe Weather Probabilities in Warmer Climates

14.3 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Overview Severe weather incidents can and regularly do occur throughout the entire planning area. Similar events impact areas within the planning region differently, even though they are part of the same system. While in some instances some type of advanced warning is possible, as a result of climatic differences, topographic and relative distance to the coastline, the same system can be much more severe in certain areas of the planning area. Therefore, preparedness plays a significant contributor in the resilience of the citizens to withstand such events.

Methodology A lack of data separating severe weather damage from flooding, windstorms and landslide damage prevented a detailed analysis for exposure and vulnerability. For planning purposes, it is assumed that the entire planning area is exposed to some extent to severe weather. Certain areas are more exposed due to geographic location and local weather patterns, as well as the response capabilities of local first responders.

Warning Time Meteorologists can often predict the likelihood of some severe storms. In some cases, this can give several days of warning time. However, meteorologists cannot predict the exact time of onset or severity of the storm, and the rapid changes which can also occur significantly increasing the impact of a weather event.

Impact on Life, Health and Safety Severe winter weather can be a deceptive killer, with the entire planning area susceptible to severe weather events. Figure 14-21 illustrates the impact of the December 2016 snow event in the Tribal Planning Area.

Winter storms which bring snow, ice, and high winds can cause significant impacts on life. Many winter storm deaths occur as a result of traffic accidents on icy roads, heart attacks when shoveling snow, and hypothermia from prolonged exposure to the cold. The temporary loss of home heating can be particularly hard on the elderly, young children, and Figure 14-21 December 14, 2016 Snow Event - other vulnerable individuals. Populations living at Klamath Tribes Administration Building higher elevations with large stands of trees or above-

14-23 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

ground power lines may be more susceptible to wind damage and black out conditions, while populations in low-lying areas are at risk for possible flooding and landslides associated with the flooding as a result of heavy rains. Increased levels of precipitation in the form of snow also vary by area, with higher elevations being more susceptible to increased accumulations.

Particularly vulnerable populations are the elderly and very young, low income, linguistically isolated populations, people with life-threatening illnesses, and residents living in areas that are isolated from major roads which have been damaged or are impassable due to snow, ice, or debris. Resultant secondary impacts from power outages during cold weather event can also significantly impact response capabilities, and the risk factor associated with such weather incidents on first responders.

Within the densely-wooded areas, increased fire danger during extreme heat conditions increases the likelihood of fire, which increases fire danger.

PacifiCorp provides electricity to the planning area. Severe weather events disrupt electricity in the planning area several times each year, often for several days. The majority of all housing owned by the Klamath Tribes are utilized by low-income residents. The residences do not have generator backup for use during power loss, nor do they have air conditioners for use during extreme heat. Also a concern to the Planning Team when severe weather events occur is the lack of Tribal Members’ ability to maintain an adequate supply of medications and/or oxygen for those on oxygen tanks. Wind debris and other severe weather events can cause blockage of primary transportation corridors. Many times, icy or snow conditions will also cause drivers to stay off the roadways, even when running now on required medical supplies. Impact on Property Property is at risk due to flooding and landslides that may result if there is a heavy snowmelt. Additionally, ice, wind and snow can affect the stability of trees, power and telephone lines and TV and radio antennas. Downed trees and limbs can become major hazards for houses, cars, utilities, and other property. Such damage can become major obstacles to providing critical emergency response, police, fire, and other disaster recovery services.

All property is vulnerable during severe weather events. Currently the Klamath Tribes’ data identifies that there are a total of ~112 owned buildings in the planning area for which the Tribes maintain ownership or responsibility. Well over half of these structures are residential. Many of the residential structures were built pre-1974, and without the influence of structural building codes with provisions for wind or snow loads, or flood standards. The majority of the residential structures were built 1990 or later, after building codes became more regulated and stringent.

For planning purposes, all of the buildings within the planning area are considered to be exposed to the severe weather hazard, but structures in poor condition or in particularly vulnerable locations (hilltops or exposed open areas) may be at risk for the most damage. The frequency and degree of damage will depend on specific locations and severity of the weather pattern impacting the region. It is improbable to determine the exact number of structures susceptible to a weather event, and therefore emergency managers and public officials should establish a maximum threshold, or worst-case scenario, of susceptible structures.

Loss estimations for severe weather hazards are not based on modeling utilizing damage functions, as no such functions have been generated. Instead, loss estimates were developed representing 10 percent, 30 percent, and 50 percent of the assessed value of exposed structures. This allows planners and emergency managers to select a range of economic impact based on an estimate of the percent of damage to the general building stock. Damage in excess of 50 percent is considered to be substantial by most building codes and typically requires total reconstruction of the structure. Table 14-3 shows loss estimates for the severe

14-24 SEVERE WEATHER weather risk by jurisdiction at the identified percent damages, as well as the potential dollar losses for residential and non-residential structures.

TABLE 14-3 POTENTIAL BUILDING LOSSES DUE TO SEVERE WEATHER HAZARD

Jurisdiction Building Count Exposed Value 10% Damage 30% Damage 50% Damage Beatty 6 $1,352,407 $135,241 $405,722 $676,204 Chiloquin 93 $60,131,014 $6,013,101 $18,039,304 $30,065,507 Klamath Falls 13 $7,652,024 $765,202 $2,295,607 $3,826,012 Total 112 $69,135,445 $6,913,545 $20,740,634 $34,567,723 Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure No loss estimation of critical facilities was performed due to the lack of established damage functions for the severe weather hazard. Therefore, it should be assumed that all critical facilities are vulnerable to some degree. As many of the severe weather events include multiple hazards, information such as that identifying facilities exposed to flooding or landslides (see Flood and Landslide profiles) are also likely exposed to severe weather. Additionally, facilities on higher ground may also be exposed to wind damage or damage from falling trees. The most common problems associated with severe weather are loss of utilities. Downed power lines can cause blackouts, leaving large areas isolated. Phone, water, and sewer systems may not function. Roads may become impassable due to ice or snow or from secondary hazards such as landslides. Also of concern in the planning area is the Amtrak and other rail services, which may be shut down due to severe weather events. The rail system is considered critical infrastructure within the planning region (although not identified as such within the Klamath Tribes’ plan) due to the type of potentially hazardous materials it hauls, as well as commodities and the economic impact along the entire west coast, and riders who may be stranded in the Klamath Falls area – one of the primary stops along the Amtrak route.

Incapacity and loss of roads are the primary transportation failures, most of which are associated with secondary hazards. Landslides that block roads are customarily caused by heavy, prolonged rains. High winds can cause significant damage to trees and power lines, with obstructing debris blocking roads, incapacitating transportation, isolating population, and disrupting ingress and egress. Snowstorms at higher elevations can impact the transportation system and the availability of public safety services. Of particular concern are roads providing access to isolated areas, and to the elderly.

Severe windstorms, downed trees, and ice can create serious impacts on power and above-ground communication lines. Freezing of power and communication lines can cause them to break, disrupting both electricity and communication for households. Loss of electricity and phone connection would result in isolation because some residents will be unable to call for assistance.

Impact on Economy Prolonged obstruction of major routes due to severe weather can disrupt the shipment of goods and other commerce, including rail services. Severe windstorms, downed trees, and ice can create serious impacts on power and above-ground communication lines. Freezing rain/snow on power and communication lines can cause them to break, disrupting electricity and communication, further impacting business within the region. Prolonged outages would impact consumer revenue at the Casino; increase food spoilage (private and businesses); result in lack of production for manufacturing facilities, and impact salaries for tribal and non-tribal employees in the area. Large, prolonged storms can also have negative economic impacts for the

14-25 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

entire region due to reduced tax base for the County and State from the loss of funds associated with the Casino Compact Agreement. All severe weather events have the potential to also impact tourism, an industry on which much of the planning region is dependent. Industry and commerce can suffer losses from interruptions in electric service and from extended road closures. They can also sustain direct losses to buildings, personnel, and other vital equipment. There are direct consequences to the local economy resulting from winter storms related to both physical damages and interrupted services.

Impact on Environment The environment is highly exposed to severe weather events. Natural habitats such as streams and trees are exposed to the elements during a severe storm and risk major damage and destruction. Prolonged rains can saturate soils and lead to slope failure. Flooding events caused by severe weather or snowmelt can produce river channel migration or damage riparian habitat, also impacting spawning grounds and fish populations for many years. Storm surges or wind-driven waves such as those which occur on Upper Klamath Lake can erode bluffs or banks along waterbodies, and redistribute sediment loads. Extreme heat can raise temperatures of rivers, impacting oxygen levels in the water, threatening aquatic life.

14.4 RESULTS Based on review of the analysis completed, the Planning Team has determined that the recurrence intervals and probability of future occurrence for the various types of severe weather events is high. The potential impact associated with a severe weather event identifies that all tribal structures are susceptible due to the unknown strength or force of the storm, especially when climate change factors into the analysis, and the unknown impact which climate change will have on other hazards. Due to the age of the building stock and the application of building codes, older structures are of higher vulnerability to the effects due to wind- and snow-load capacities with respect to construction standards. The Planning Team determined that the overall vulnerability with respect to individuals and structures is high, with a CPRI score of 3.50.

14.5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRENDS All future development will be affected by severe storms. The ability to withstand impacts lies in sound land use practices and consistent enforcement of codes and regulations for new construction. The Tribes do not have land use regulations in place yet, but are in the process of developing such codes; however, they do adhere to federal standards for any structures which utilize federal funds, including the International Building Codes as well as additional land use authority. These codes are equipped to deal with the impacts of severe weather incidents by identifying construction standards which address wind speed, roof load capacity, elevation, and setback restrictions. Currently, the Oregon Building Code sets standards for structures to withstand 80 mph winds, with additional requirements addressing high exposure areas.

While under Oregon’s growth management policies public power utilities are required by law to supply safe, cost effective, and equitable service to everyone in the service area requesting service, most lines in the area are above-ground, causing them to be more susceptible to high winds or other severe weather hazards. However, growth management is also a constraint, which could possibly lead to increased outages or even potential shortages, as while most new development expects access to electricity, they do not want to be in close proximity to sub stations. The political difficulty in sighting these sub stations makes it difficult for the utility to keep up with regional growth.

Land use policies currently applied, when coupled with informative risk data such as that established within this mitigation plan will also address the severe weather hazard. With the land use tools currently in place, the Klamath Tribes will be well-equipped to deal with future growth and the associated impacts of severe weather.

14-26 SEVERE WEATHER

14.6 ISSUES Important issues associated with a severe weather in the planning area include the following:

• Older building stock in the planning area is built to low code standards or none at all. These structures could be highly vulnerable to severe weather events such as windstorms or snow loads. • Redundancy of power supply must be evaluated and increased planning-region wide in order to more fully understand the vulnerabilities in this area. • The capacity for backup power generation is limited and should be enhanced. • Climate change may increase the frequency and magnitude of winter flooding or wind- drive wave height, thus exacerbating severe winter events.

14-27

CHAPTER 15. VOLCANO

15.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND

The Cascade Mountain Range travels from British Columbia, through DEFINITIONS Washington and Oregon, into Northern California. The Range contains Ash—Ash is a harsh acidic with a more than a dozen major volcanoes, and many additional smaller sulfuric odor, consisting of small bits volcanic features. of pulverized rock and glass, less than 2 millimeters (0.1 in) in diameter. Ash Active volcanoes that pose the most threat to the Klamath Tribal may also carry a high static charge for Planning Area, the City of Chiloquin and the City of Klamath Falls are up to two days after being ejected Mt. Thielsen, Crater Lake and Mt. McLaughlin. from a volcano. When an ash cloud combines with rain, sulfur dioxide in Hazards related to volcanic eruptions are distinguished by the different the cloud combines with the rainwater ways in which volcanic materials and other debris are emitted from the to form diluted sulfuric acid that may volcano (see Figure 15-1). The molten rock that erupts from a volcano cause minor, but painful burns to the (lava) forms a hill or mountain around the vent. The lava may flow out skin, eyes, nose, and throat. as a viscous liquid, or it may explode from the vent as solid or liquid Lahar—A rapidly flowing mixture of particles. Ash and fragmented rock material can become airborne and water and rock debris that originates from a volcano. While lahars are most travel far from the erupting volcano to affect distant areas. commonly associated with eruptions, Monitored volcanoes generally give signs of reawakening (volcanic heavy rains, and debris accumulation, earthquakes may also trigger them. unrest) before an eruption because it takes time for magma to move from its storage area, several miles beneath the volcano, to the surface. As Lava Flow—The least hazardous threat posed by volcanoes. Cascades magma moves to the surface, it breaks open a pathway, which produces volcanoes are normally associated earthquakes; it goes from higher to lower pressures, resulting in the with slow moving andesite or dacite release of volcanic gases; and as the amount of magma decreases in the lava. storage area and temporarily pools at shallower levels it deforms the Stratovolcano—Typically steep- earth. All these processes can be monitored, although none can be sided, symmetrical cones of large measured directly. dimension built of alternating layers of lava flows, volcanic ash, cinders, Volcanic events often differ from other natural hazards because the blocks, and bombs, rising as much as duration of unrest and eruptive activity are generally longer. Although 8,000 feet above their bases. The volcanic unrest prior to eruptions can be only hours, these short volcanoes in the Cascade Range are timescales most frequently occur at volcanoes that have erupted in the all stratovolcanoes. recent past (years to decades). Tephra—Ash and fragmented rock material ejected by a volcanic 15.2 HAZARD PROFILE explosion Volcano—A vent in the planetary Extent and Location crust from which magma (molten or hot rock) and gas from the earth’s core erupts. The Cascade Range extends more than 1,000 miles from southern British Columbia into northern California and includes 13 potentially active volcanic peaks in the U.S. Figure 15-2 and Figure 15-3 illustrate the location of the Cascade Range volcanoes, most of which have the potential to produce a significant eruption. The existence, position and recurrent activity of Cascades volcanoes are generally thought to be related to the convergence of shifting crustal plates.

15-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

It should be noted that a volcano has the potential to exhibit various styles of eruption at different intervals, changing from one form or type to another as the eruption progresses. The volcanoes of the Cascades also differ markedly in their geological characteristics.

The largest volcanoes are generally what geologists call composite or stratovolcanoes. These volcanoes may be active for tens of thousands of years to hundreds of thousands of years. In some cases, these large volcanoes may have explosive eruptions such as that which occurred at Mount St. Helens in 1980, or such as occurred at Crater Lake approximately 7,700 years ago.

The mafic volcano is typically active for much shorter time periods, up to a few hundred years, and generally forms small craters or cones. Mafic volcanoes are not subject to large explosive events. Prominent mafic volcanoes include North Sister, Mount Bachelor, Belknap Figure 15-1 Volcano Hazard Cater, Black Butte, and Mount Washington. Mafic volcanoes often form broad fields of volcanic vents such as in the Sand Mountain Field near the Santiam Pass, north of the Three Sisters.

The Mount Bachelor volcanic chain sits within a regional lava-flow hazard zone in central Oregon. This zone is defined by the distribution of mafic volcanoes that have formed in central Oregon during roughly the past one million years. This type of area is considered a "mafic field," which poses some general hazards that are not specific to the Mount Bachelor area. Similar mafic fields are common the Cascades, and typically erupt for brief intervals (weeks to perhaps centuries), but some of the eruptive centers can grow to almost as large as composite volcano peaks, such as Three Sisters to the north.

Source: W.E. Scott et al., 199723

Figure 15-2 Past Eruptions of Cascade Volcanoes

23. Available at: http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/Cascades/EruptiveHistory/cascades_eruptions_4000yrs.html

15-2 VOLCANO

Figure 15-3 Historic Volcanoes in Proximity to Tribal Planning Area

15-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Mafic volcanoes typically erupt less explosively than do composite volcanoes, so their eruption impacts are less widespread. Eruptions from mafic fields produce limited tephra and lava flows that typically travel 5 to 15 km (3 to 9 mi) and rarely 15 to 20 km (9 to 12 mi) from vents. Tephra deposits may produce deposits up to several meters (about 10 ft.) thick within 2 km (1.2 mi) of the vent, but seldom exceed 10 cm (4 in) at distances 10 km (6 mi) away from vents. Therefore, tephra may disrupt recreation activities around the vent, but especially in the case of Mount Bachelor it is unlikely to heavily impact existing residential areas. Lava flows from mafic fields can occur, but are slow moving and can be outrun. They may dam or divert streams and rivers, which can generate flooding hazards.

Major volcanic hazards include: lava flows, blast effects, pyroclastic flows, ash flows, lahars, and landslides or debris flows. Some of these hazards (e.g., lava flows) only affect areas very near the volcano. Other hazards may affect areas 10 or 20 miles away from the volcano, while ash falls may affect areas many miles downwind of the eruption site. In some instances, ash may be carried across continents.

Previous Occurrences

Active Cascade Volcanoes which have erupted in the past 200 years include: Mount Baker, Glacier Peak, Mt. Rainier, Mount Saint Helens, Mt. Hood, Mt. Shasta, and Mt. Lassen. Over the past 4000 years in Oregon there have been three eruptions of Mt. Hood, four eruptions in the Three Sisters area, and two eruptions in the Newberry Volcano area and minor eruptions near Mt. Jefferson, at Blue Lake Crater in the Sand Mountain Field (Santiam Pass), near Mt. Washington and near Belknap Crater. During this time period, the most active volcano in the Cascades has been Mount St. Helens with about 14 eruptions.

The most active volcano in the Cascade Range is Mount St. Helens, which last erupted in 1980. Identified as a Plinian eruption, it was the most violent of type of eruption, which included ejection of very large columns of ash, followed by a collapse of the central portion of the volcano. In the 1980 Mount St. Helens eruption, 23 square miles of volcanic material buried the North Fork of the Toutle River and there were 57 human fatalities. Due to the fairly close proximity to the Oregon border, eruptions from volcanoes in Washington, like Mount St. Helen’s eruption in 1980, can significantly impact Oregon.

Severity

Eruption durations are quite variable, ranging from hours to decades. At present, when an eruption begins scientists cannot foretell when it will end or whether the activity will be intermittent or continuous. Worldwide, the average eruption duration is about two months, although the most recent eruptions in the Cascades have been of greater duration (Mount St. Helens, Washington: intermittent activity from 1980 to 1986 and continuous activity from late 2004 to early 2008; Lassen Peak, California: intermittent activity from 1914 to 1917).

The explosive disintegration of Mount St. Helens’ north flank in 1980 vividly demonstrated the power that Cascade volcanoes can unleash. The thickness of tephra sufficient to collapse buildings depends on construction practices and on weight of the tephra (tephra is much heavier wet than dry). Past experience in several countries shows that tephra accumulation near 10 cm is a threshold above which collapses tend to escalate. A 1-inch deep layer of ash weighs an average of 10 pounds per square foot, causing danger of structural collapse.

Ash is harsh, acidic, and gritty, and it has a sulfuric odor. Ash may also carry a high static charge for up to two days after being ejected from a volcano. When an ash cloud combines with rain, sulfur dioxide in the cloud combines with the rainwater to form diluted sulfuric acid that may cause minor, but painful burns to the skin, eyes, nose, and throat. Westerly winds dominate in the Pacific Northwest sending volcanic ash east and north–eastward about 80–percent of the time, though ash can blow in any direction. Even a

15-4 VOLCANO relatively small amount of ash could have a significant impact with respect to fish and other natural wildlife, as well as the forest and plant life. Figure 15-4 shows probabilities of tephra accumulation from Cascade volcanoes in the Pacific Northwest (tephra is fragmented rock material ejected by a volcanic explosion). Figure 15-5 shows areas of the U.S. that have been covered by volcanic ash. Figure 15-6 identifies the volcano hazard zones from Three Sisters as identified by the USGS; Figure 15-7 depicts Crater Lake.

Figure 15-4 One-year probability of Tephra Accumulation - Cascade Range.

Figure 15-5 Defined Tephra Layers Associated with Historical Eruptions

15-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 15-6 Volcano Hazard Zones from Three Sisters Source: USGS https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/volcanoes/three_sisters/three_sisters_hazard_98.html

Figure 15-7 Volcano Hazard Zones from Crater Lake Source: USGS https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/volcanoes/crater_lake/crater_lake_hazard_105.html

15-6 VOLCANO

Frequency

Many Cascade volcanoes have erupted in the recent past and will be active again in the foreseeable future. Given an average rate of one or two eruptions per century during the past 12,000 years, these disasters are not part of everyday experience; however, in the past hundred years, California’s Lassen Peak and Washington’s Mount St. Helens have erupted with terrifying results.

The USGS Open File Report 97-513 (p.9) indicates that there is a 1 in 5,000 annual probability that 1cm or more of Tephra will accumulate from eruptions throughout the Cascade Range. While the likelihood is low, lahar, lava, debris, and pyroclastic flows are possible from Crater Lake and Newberry Crater (pyroclastic only). (USGS Open File Reports 99-24, 99-437, 97-513.)

15.3 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT

Overview Active volcanoes that pose the most threat to the Klamath Tribal Planning Area, the City of Chiloquin and the City of Klamath Falls are Mt. Thielsen, Crater Lake and Mt. McLaughlin. A lahar is possible from Crater Lake. Secondary impacts from ash and commodity flow could cause low to moderate issues.

According to the USGS analysis, westerly winds dominate in the Pacific Northwest sending volcanic ash east and north–eastward about 80–percent of the time, though ash can blow in any direction. However, even 10 percent of ash reaching the area of the Klamath Tribal Planning Area could have a negative impact on the natural resources and the agricultural economy. The potential for fire danger also increases as a result of static charge contained within the ash.

Ash and chemical products in the waterways could contaminate water supplies. Transportation for rail and vehicles traveling into the area could carry additional ash into the region, washing off during rains and contaminating the ground and water bodies, or potentially being impacted by ash with respect to visibility, and mechanically if large amounts of ash accumulate in engines’ air intake systems. In addition, transportation interruptions as a consequence of eruption and impact on surrounding counties could cause moderate impact on the region, as commodity flows would decrease, as well as interruptions to power transmission, telecommunications outages, and potentially medical services.

Methodology

There are currently no generally accepted damage functions for volcanic hazards in risk assessment platforms such as Hazus or any GIS system for the ash fall associated with the hazard. There would also be too many variables to associate with any type of plume modeling for ash. Therefore, for planning purposes, it is assumed that the entire planning area is exposed to some extent to ash accumulations, and those structures could collapse under excessive weight of tephra and rainfall. Certain areas are more exposed due to geographic location and local weather patterns, as well as the response capabilities of local first responders. The question of impact by a Lahar from Crater Lake provides minimal exposure data.

Warning Time

Constant monitoring by the USGS and the Pacific Northwest Seismograph Network (PNSN) of all active volcanoes means that there will be more than adequate warning time before an event. Newly standardized Alert Levels issued by USGS volcano observatories are based on a volcano’s level of activity. These levels are intended to inform people on the ground and are issued in conjunction with the Aviation Color Code. The highest two alert levels (Watch and Warning) are National Weather Service terms for notification of

15-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

hazardous meteorological events, terms already familiar to emergency managers that are becoming increasingly more familiar to the public.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) volcanic alert-level system provides the framework for the preparedness activities of local jurisdictions, tribal governments and state and federal agencies. The USGS ranks the level of activity at a U.S. volcano using the terms “Normal”, for typical volcanic activity in a non- eruptive phase; “Advisory”, for elevated unrest; “Watch”, for escalating unrest or a minor eruption underway that poses limited hazards; and, “Warning”, if a highly hazardous eruption is underway or imminent. These levels reflect conditions at a volcano and the expected or ongoing hazardous volcanic phenomena. When an alert level is assigned by an observatory, accompanying text will give a fuller explanation of the observed phenomena and clarify hazard implications to affected groups24.

The USGS Cascade Volcano Observatory works in conjunction with PNSN to provide constant monitoring and notification when activities increase. Figure 15-8 are photographs of USGS and PNSN monitoring devices available.

Figure 15-8 Monitoring Equipment

Impact on Life, Health and Safety

The distance is significant enough that the populated areas of the Tribal Planning Area are unlikely to experience lava flow, pyroclastic flows, or debris flows/avalanches from an eruption involving any one of the three volcanoes in the immediate area. However, the USGS has identified Crater Lake as a source of impact for the non/less-populated Klamath County area with respect to a lava flow. Ash fall could extend to impact Klamath County and the City of Klamath Falls, if not directly, through transportation of ash into the area by transportation on vehicles traveling into the area. Volcanic events in the area could also temporarily close some highways as a result of falling ash and sight restrictions, among other causes, thus affecting transportation to/from the area. Review of the Oregon State Hazard Mitigation Plan also identifies

24 Mt. Baker and Glacier Peak Coordination Plan (2012). Accessed October 29, 2014. Available on-line at: http://www.emd.wa.gov/plans/documents/PromulgatedVersionMtBakerGlacierPeakCoordinationPlanAugust2012- Expanded.pdf

15-8 VOLCANO

Klamath County as one of the areas expected to be impacted by volcanic eruption, although no degree of certainty can determine to what extent (Oregon State EHMP, 2015).

The entire population of the planning area, as well as any tourists traveling through to the various attractions could be exposed to ash and its side effects. When an ash cloud combines with rain, sulfur dioxide in the cloud combines with the rainwater to form diluted sulfuric acid that may cause minor, but painful burns to the skin, eyes, nose, and throat. Given the high amount of annual rainfall, this increases the potential impact on the population. The elderly, very young and those who experience ear, nose and throat problems are especially vulnerable to the tephra hazard, as well as the ash itself causing respiratory issues.

Impact on Property

All of the planning area to some degree would be exposed to ash fall and tephra accumulation in the event of a volcanic eruption. The age of some of the current building stock does not lend itself to be able to withstand large amounts of accumulation of ash on rooftops, as a one-inch deep layer of ash weighs an average of 10 pounds per square foot (similar type impact as one would experience from a snow load). This added weight to the aged buildings would increase the danger of structural collapse. Additionally, ash is harsh, acidic, and gritty, and may carry a high static charge for up to two days after being ejected from a volcano. This static charge has the potential for igniting forest fires in the densely-forested areas. There is also a possibility that a major eruption in the Cascades could affect public water supplies via heavy ash falls or lahars into streams/rivers upstream from irrigation supply intakes. The distribution of ash from a violent eruption is a function of wind direction and speed, atmospheric stability, and the duration of the eruption. As the prevailing wind in this region is generally from the west, ash is usually spread eastward from the volcano, although exceptions to this rule do occur.

As indicated, loss estimations for the volcano hazard could not be based on modeling utilizing damage functions, as no such functions have been generated. Instead, loss estimates were developed representing 10 percent, 30 percent, and 50 percent of the assessed value of all structures. This allows emergency managers to select a range of economic impact based on an estimate of the percent of damage to the building stock. Damage in excess of 50 percent is considered to be substantial by most building codes and typically requires total reconstruction of the structure. Table 15-1 identifies the structural loss by count and assessed value (including content), at the identified percentages.

TABLE 15-1 POTENTIAL STRUCTURE IMPACT FROM ASH ACCUMULATION

Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure

From review of the Crater Lake Lahar zone data, none of the critical facilities within the planning region would be exposed to lahar inundation, but all would be exposed to the weight of ash, and, because of the

15-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

age of some of the building stock, may fail to withstand the weight of the ash. All transportation routes in the area would be exposed to ash fall and tephra accumulation, which could create hazardous driving conditions on roads and highways and hinder evacuations and response. Utilities, including water treatment plants and wastewater treatment plants are vulnerable to contamination from ash fall, as well as impact from the ash itself that could damage motors.

Impact on Economy

Economic impact could result from potential agricultural losses, the loss of tourism and visitors to the area, structural losses, including businesses and Tribal governmental offices/buildings. Lost revenues from businesses disrupted by structural damage or as a result of fewer patrons would impact the area’s economy. The tourism industry could also be impacted for a substantial amount of time if ash impacts the fishing industry.

Impact on Environment

The environment is highly exposed to the effects of a volcanic eruption. Even if the related ash fall from a volcanic eruption were to fall elsewhere, the watersheds, lakes, rivers, and tributaries are vulnerable to damage due to ash fall since ash fall can be carried throughout the area by its rivers. A volcanic blast would expose the local environment to other effects, such as lower air quality, and many elements that could harm local vegetation and water quality, adversely impact wildlife and fish habitat. The sulfuric acid contained in volcanic ash could be very damaging to area vegetation, increasing the risk of wildfire danger, as well as wildlife.

15.4 RESULTS

Based on review of the data and analysis completed, the Planning Team has determined that the probability of a volcanic eruption occurring is low. The potential structural impact associated with an event would be limited in nature, as USGS maps indicate the majority of the Planning Area falls outside of the lahar zone. However, the area would be subject to ash accumulations. The level of accumulations is variable, but even a small amount could have dramatic impacts on the health of Tribal Members, Treaty resources, and the environment. Greater amounts of ash would be required to cause major structural damage, although machinery would be impacted unless precautions were taken to reduce the level of intake of ash (e.g., filters). While potential impact does exist, the very low probability of occurrence significantly reduces the risk. Therefore, the Planning Team feels the overall vulnerability is low, with a CPRI score of 1.55.

15.5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRENDS

The Tribes utilize the most recent building codes which requires more stringent regulations with respect to support and payload structuring of facilities. Land use development has little influence as the area is only minimally impacted by a Lehar zone. However, building codes with respect to load capacity does influence the ability to withstand impact.

15.6 ISSUES

In the event of a volcanic eruption, there would probably not be any direct loss of life in the planning area as a direct result of the eruption. However, there could be significant health issues related to ash fall and health concern (especially for the young, elderly and those with breathing issues). In addition, there is also the potential for the increased potential for motor vehicle accidents; and potential structural damage if large amounts of ash accumulate as a result of the weight of the ash on structures. The potential exists for impact

15-10 VOLCANO on the agricultural community, which would have an economic impact on the planning region. There would also be the possibility of severe environmental impacts due to ash within area lakes and streams, with the water supply potentially impacted. A large area could be affected by this, and it is felt that the most severe impacts would be on the planning area’s environment and the water supply.

15-11

CHAPTER 16. WILDFIRE

16.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND A wildfire is any uncontrolled fire occurring on undeveloped land that requires fire suppression. Wildfires can be ignited by lightning, or by human activity such as: smoking, campfires, equipment use, arson, debris burning, and railroad activity. In general, people start most wildfires. Major causes include arson, recreational fires that get out of control, smoker carelessness, debris burning, and children playing with fire. Wildfires started by lightning historically have burned more state-protected acreage than any other cause annually. Fires during the early and late shoulders of the fire season usually are associated with human- caused fires; fires during the peak period of July, August and September often are related to thunderstorms and lightning strikes.

The wildfire season in Oregon usually begins in June and ends in October; however, wildfires have occurred in every month of the year. Drought, snow pack, and local weather conditions can expand the length of the fire season (Oregon EHMP, 2015). A 2012 study completed by Headwater Economics25 found that just a 1 degree increase in the average summer temperature is associated with an increase of 420 wildfires a year in Oregon, adding to the average total of 1,800 wildfires reported each year.

Managing wildfire risk in the western United States is becoming an increasingly complex challenge as wildland fuels continue to build, drought conditions persist, human development spreads, and budgets are flat or declining while suppression costs increase. As a result, the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF and Agency), on behalf of the Council of Western State Foresters (CWSF) and the Western Forestry Leadership Coalition (WFLC), conducted a wildfire risk assessment and report for the 17 western states and selected U.S. affiliated Pacific Islands. At the highest level, this assessment is known as the West Wide Wildfire Risk Assessment, or WWA. Given the magnitude of the study conducted during the WWRA, the planning team felt this data, coupled with LANDFIRE data, is the most relevant and advanced study currently available, and therefore elected to use this data for development of the Klamath Tribes’ Wildfire Profile.

The results of the West Wide Wildfire Risk Assessment (WWRA) was published in 2013. The WWRA identified that six Oregon counties that each have over 1 million wildland acres at moderate risk of wildfire. Over 751,000 Oregonians live in wildland development areas that are at risk of wildfire. Over 12 million acres of forest are at moderate to high risk of wildfire in Oregon. Figure 16-1 identifies the wildfire threat statewide based on the 2013 study (State EHMP, 2015).

25 https://headwaterseconomics.org/wildfire/homes-risk/oregon-homes-and-cost-of-wildfires/

16-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 16-1 Wildfire Threat in Oregon

Wildland-Urban Interface Areas The wildland urban-interface (WUI) is the area where development meets wildland areas. This can mean structures built in or near natural forests, or areas next to active timber and rangelands. The federal definition of a WUI community is an area where development densities are at least three residential, business, or public building structures per acre. For less developed areas, the wildland-intermix community has development densities of at least one structure per 40 acres.

In 2001, Congress mandated the establishment of a Federal Register which identifies all urban wildland interface communities within the vicinity of Federal lands, including Indian trust and restricted lands that are at high-risk from wildfire. The list assimilated information provided from States and Tribes, and is intended to identify those communities considered at risk. Figure 16-2 and Table 16-1 identify the WUI areas within the Tribal Planning Area.

16-2 WILDFIRE

Figure 16-2 Wildland Urban-Interface Areas in Klamath and Lake Counties

16-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 16-1 WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES Klamath County Lake County Beatty Adel Beaver Marsh Christmas Valley Bly Drew’s Gap Bly Mountain Lakeview Basin Bonanza New Pine Creek Chemult Paisley Chiloquin Plush Crater Lake Silver Lake Crescent South Drews Crescent Lake Summer Lake Dairy Valley Falls / Chandler

Diamond Lake Junction

Gilchrist

Harriman

Keno

Klamath Falls

Little River

Malin

Merrill

Odell Lake

Rocky Point

Rosedale

Running Y

Sand Creek

Klamath

Sprague River Valley

Sycan Estates

When identifying areas of fire concern, in addition to the Federal Register, the Oregon State Department of Natural Resources and its federal partners also determine communities at risk based on fire behavior potential, fire protection capability, and risk to social, cultural and community resources. These risk factors include areas with fire history, the type and density of vegetative fuels, extreme weather conditions, topography, number and density of structures and their distance from fuels, location of municipal watersheds, and likely loss of housing or business, among other things.

According to the WWRA, Klamath County is one of the counties identified as being most vulnerable to wildfire. Lake County was not identified as being one of the most vulnerable counties, but does maintain a level of vulnerability, as do all counties throughout the state (Oregon EHMP, 2015; WWRA, 2013).

16-4 WILDFIRE

Wildfire Behavior The wildfire triangle (see Figure 16-3; DeSisto et al., 2009) is a simple graphic used in wildland firefighter training courses to illustrate how the environment affects fire behavior. Each point of the triangle represents one of three main factors that drive wildfire behavior: weather, vegetation type (which firefighters refer to as “fuels”), and topography. The sides represent the interplay between the factors. For example, drier and warmer weather combined with dense fuel loads (e.g., logging slash) and steeper slopes will cause more hazardous fire behavior than light fuels (e.g., short grass fields) on flat ground. Figure 16-3 Wildfire Behavior Triangle The following are key factors affecting wildfire behavior:

• Fuel—Lighter fuels such as grasses, leaves and needles quickly expel moisture and burn rapidly, while heavier fuels such as tree branches, logs and trunks take longer to warm and ignite. Snags and hazard trees—those that are diseased, dying, or dead—are larger but less prolific west of the Cascades than east of the Cascades. The hazard of wildland fire in the planning area is high due to ladder fuels and overstocked ponderosa pine stands, juniper invasion into sagebrush and grasslands, and the pervasiveness of invasive weeds such as cheat grass and Medusahead grass. Fire risk is extreme during the late summer and fall months when grasses and weeds are dry. These flashy fuels are easily ignited, burn rapidly, and resist suppression. • Weather— Relevant weather conditions include temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, cloud cover, precipitation amount and duration, and the stability of the atmosphere. Of particular importance for wildfire activity are wind and thunderstorms: – Strong, dry winds produce extreme fire conditions. Such winds generally reach peak velocities during the night and early morning hours. The planning area does experience winds on a regular basis during all times of the year. The planning area also experiences daily wind shifts, especially during summer months, which make predictions much more difficult to determine. – The thunderstorm season typically begins in May/June with wet storms, and turns dry with little or no precipitation reaching the ground as the season progresses into July and August. The lightning potential in planning area is very high. For example, in Lake County only about 5% of the fires were human ignited, while 95% were lightning caused. There is very little that can be done in terms of ignition prevention from lightning. • Topography—Topography includes slope, elevation and aspect. The topography of a region influences the amount and moisture of fuel; the impact of weather conditions such as temperature and wind; potential barriers to fire spread, such as highways and lakes; and elevation and slope of land forms (fire spreads more easily uphill than downhill). • Time of Day—A fire’s peak burning period generally is between 1 p.m. and 6 p.m. • Forest Practices—In densely forested areas, stands of mixed conifer and hardwood stands that have experienced thinning or clear-cut provide an opportunity for rapidly spreading, high- intensity fires that are sustained until a break in fuel is encountered. Fires can be categorized by their fuel types as follows:

16-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

• Smoldering—Involves the slow combustion of surface fuels without generating flame, spreading slowly and steadily. Smoldering fires can linger for days or weeks after flaring has ceased, resulting in potential large quantities of fuel consumed. They heat the duff and mineral layers, affecting the roots, seeds, and plant stems in the ground. These are most common in peat bogs, but are not exclusive to that vegetation. • Crawling—Surface fires that consume low-lying grass, forest litter and debris. • Ladder—Fires that consume material between low-level vegetation or forest floor debris and tree canopies, such as small trees, low branches, vines, and invasive plants. • Crown—Fires that consume low-level surface fuels, transition to ladder fuels, and also consume suspended materials at the canopy level. These fires can spread rapidly through the top of a forest canopy, burning entire trees, and can be extremely dangerous (sometimes referred to as a “Firestorm”). Wildfires may spread by jumping or spotting, as burning materials are carried by wind or firestorm conditions. Burning materials can also jump over roadways, rivers, or even firebreaks and start distant fires. Updraft caused by large wildfire events draw air from surrounding area, and these self-generated winds can also lead to the phenomenon known as a firestorm.

Wildfire Impact Short-term loss caused by wildfire can include the destruction of timber, wildlife habitat, scenic vistas, and watersheds. Long-term effects include timber harvests, reduced access to affected recreational areas, and destruction of cultural and economic resources and community infrastructure. Vulnerability to flooding increases due to the destruction of watersheds. The potential for significant damage to life and property exists in WUI areas, where development is adjacent to densely vegetated areas (DeSisto et al., 2009).

Forestlands in the planning area are susceptible to disturbances such as logging slash accumulation, forest debris due to weather damage, and periods of drought and high temperature. Forest debris from western red cedar, western hemlock, and Sitka spruce can be especially problematic and at risk to wildfires when slash is accumulated on the forest floor, because such debris resists deterioration. When ignited, these fuels can be explosive and serve as ladder fuels carrying fire from the surface to the canopy.

Identifying Wildfire Risk Risk to communities is generally determined by the number, size and types of wildfires that have historically affected an area; topography; fuel and weather; suppression capability of local and regional resources; where and what types of structures are in the WUI; and what types of pre-fire mitigation activities have been completed. Identifying areas most at risk to fire or predicting the course a fire will take requires precise science. The following data sets are most useful in assessing risk in the area:

• Topography (slope and aspect) and Vegetation (fire fuels)—These are two of the most important factors driving wildfire behavior. • Weather—Regional and microclimate variations can strongly influence wildfire behavior. Because of unique geographic features, weather can vary from one neighborhood to another, leading to very different wildfire behavior. • Critical Facilities and Asset Locations —A spatial inventory of assets—including homes, roads, fire stations, and natural resources that need protection—in relation to wildfire hazard helps prioritize protection and mitigation efforts.

16-6 WILDFIRE

Secondary Hazards Wildfires can generate a range of secondary effects, which in some cases may cause more widespread and prolonged damage than the fire itself. Fires can cause direct economic losses in the reduction of harvestable timber and indirect economic losses in reduced tourism. Wildfires cause the contamination of reservoirs, destroy transmission lines, and contribute to flooding. They strip slopes of vegetation, exposing them to greater amounts of runoff. This in turn can weaken soils and cause failures on slopes. Major landslides can occur several years after a wildfire. Most wildfires burn hot and for long durations that can bake soils, especially those high in clay content, thus increasing the imperviousness of the ground. This increases the runoff generated by storm events, thus increasing the chance of flooding.

16.2 HAZARD PROFILE Extent and Location

The entire planning area is susceptible to the impacts of wildfires. Wildfire incidents, while customarily occurring during wildfire season of June through October, have occurred every month year-round. The planning area, because of its densely forested and steep terrain, is highly susceptible to fire. The area has a high transient population as well, with campers and visitors frequently the national park, which further increases the threat of fires from campers. With a significant number of rail track miles in the area, that also increases the risk to wildfires. Severe weather events which are often accompanied by strong winds and lightening, when coupled with drought and climate change conditions, all increase fire danger throughout the Tribal Planning Area.

Previous Occurrences Wildfires have been a common occurrence throughout Oregon for thousands of years. Evidence from tree rings or fire-scarred trees indicates cycles of prehistoric fires burned in many locations throughout the state. Figure 16-4 and Table 16-2 identify some of the historic events occurring within Oregon, with an emphasis on those affecting and/or near to the planning area (list is not all inclusive due to number). Those immediately outside of the planning area have been included due to the potential for smoke impacting Tribal Residents, firefighting requirements utilizing local resources, and the impact to roadways on and off of the Tribal Planning Area. Review of the database maintained by the Oregon Department of Forestry identifies in excess of 1,600 fires occurring in the boundaries of the Klamath Tribal Planning Area since 1967. This includes any type of fire start, no matter what the size. This demonstrates the significance of the fire hazard in the planning area.

The Oregon Department of Forestry maintains an on-going list of fires statewide, which is searchable by County. Due to the number of fires occurring, the lists provided herein are by no way exhaustive, reflecting only a sample of the fires which have impacted the planning area. Additional and up-to-date fire data is available at: http://www.odf.state.or.us/DIVISIONS/protection/fire_protection/fires/SeasonFireStats.asp . That data is maintained and updated regularly as fires occur.

16-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 16-4 Location of Historical Fires in Planning Area

16-8 WILDFIRE

TABLE 16-2 HISTORIC WILDFIRES IN KLAMATH AND LAKE COUNTIES

Date or Disaster No. Name Description 1848 Nestucca Fire Burned 290,000 acres 1849 Siletz Fire Burned 800,000 acres 1853 Yaquina Fire Burned 484,000 acres 1865 Silverton Fire Burned 988,000 acres in the Cascades 1902 Yacolt Fire One of the most rapid and tragic wildfires in US History; 1 million acres of Washington and Oregon land burned; 38 people perished, many of whom were fleeing on foot or horseback when flames overtook them. 1933-1951 Tillamook Burn Several fires collectively named; concurrent with a severe drought cycle, included massive burns in the Tillamook region of Coastal Oregon, destroying 355,000 acres 1987 Siege of ‘87 Series of fires in Northern California that scorched 640,000 acres of public forest land in the Klamath and Stanislaus National Forest 1987 Bland Mountain Fire Burned 10,300 acres; lightning storms touched off fires that tore through 90,000 acres of forest, threatening homes in seven counties, including the Klamath planning area. 1992 Lone Pine Fire Burned 30,320 acres and destroyed three structures east of Chiloquin; the fire was caused by juveniles (under 12) playing with fire; the fire took 8 days to control, with estimated costs associated with the fire exceed $1.388 million dollars. 1994 Hull Mountain Fire Hull Mountain Fire consumed 8,000 acres of forest and brush, destroyed 8 houses and 36 outbuildings, and took the life of a firefighter. In the same season, fires on the outskirts of Chiloquin and Klamath Falls threatened houses and infrastructure. 2000 Summer of 2000 One of the biggest fire seasons in the history of the western U.S. Fires from Alaska through the western contiguous 48 states, including Oregon, destroyed 7.2 million acres, more than twice the usual 10-year average. 2002 Fire Season One of the most destructive fire seasons in Oregon in 50 years. The Winter Fire in Lake County devastated 35,779 acres, while fires statewide raged through 100,000 acres of state forests, destroyed 50 homes, threatened more than 20,000 homes, and sent fire suppression costs off the charts. 2008 Royce Butte Fire $385,578 in PA funding paid to impacted jurisdictions; $169,822 DR 2787 paid in Category A and B recoverable costs to the Klamath County area. 2014 Oregon Gulch Fire Lightning strike burned area between Ashland and Klamath Falls, DR 5066 OR and Siskiyou County California. Fire burned down to mineral soil, moving towards Klamath River 2014 Moccasin Hills Fire Over 2,750 acres burned; two injuries occurred; 17 structures were DR 5060 (see Figure 16-5) lost, but 21 in serious jeopardy were saved as a result of this fire; Red Cross established shelters at Sprague River Community Center to assist impacted residents; fire burned in heavy timber and brush areas, spreading quickly.

16-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Natural fire occurrence is directly related, but not proportional, to lightning incidence levels. It is rare for a summer to pass without at least one period of lightning activity. Lightning incidence is greatest during the spring to fall, though storms capable of igniting fires have occurred at all times of the year. Lightning storms generally track across the state in a southwest to northeast direction. At a national level, lightning starts over 4,000 house fires each year, which can ignite wildland fires through ember ignition and as a result of proximity to wildland areas. Lightning-caused fires cause over 10 times more acreage damage than human-caused fires, requiring great resource allocation.

Historically, 70% of the wildfires suppressed on lands protected by the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) result from human activity. The remaining 30% result from lightning. Typically, large wildfires result primarily from lightning in remote, inaccessible areas. The planning area has a fairly high amount of national and state park-lands, further increasing the risk associated of wildfires, especially when considering the potential spread of embers during windy conditions. However, with respect to the 2016 fire season, ODF states that “[while acres burned were significantly less than normal, the number of human- caused fires was well above average. ODF's fire statistics show that more than 90 percent of the ignitions in 2016 resulted from people, up nearly 25 percent from the average” (ODF, Wildfire, 2016).

Within Lake County, only about 5% of the fires were human ignited, while 95% were lightning caused. There is very little that can be done in terms of ignition prevention from lightning. For more populated areas like Klamath County, historic wildfire occurrence shows that most of the large and damaging wildfires that threatened communities or other improvements were caused by humans. Table 16-3 identifies the causes to wildfires in Klamath and Lake Counties.

Source: KTVC.com News (http://www.ktvz.com/news/klamath-county-wildfire-destroys-homes/26938770)

Figure 16-5 Moccasin Hills Fire, July 2014

16-10 WILDFIRE

TABLE 16-3 1967 – 2015 WILDFIRES IN KLAMATH AND LAKE COUNTIES BY CAUSE

Description Total Percent of Total Arson 50 3.0% Debris Burning 244 14.8% Equipment Use 103 6.2% Juveniles 63 3.8% Lightning 796 48.2% Miscellaneous 114 6.9% Railroad 71 4.3% Recreationist 101 6.1% Smoking 104 6.3% Under Investigation 6 0.4% Total 1652 100.0%

Severity Potential losses from wildfire include human life, structures and other improvements, and natural resources. Smoke and air pollution from wildfires can be a health hazard, especially for sensitive populations such as children, the elderly and those with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. Wildfire may also threaten the health and safety of those fighting the fires. Wildfire can lead to ancillary impacts such as landslides in steep ravine areas and flooding due to the impacts of silt in local watersheds. The destruction of forestlands can have a significant impact on fish rearing for generations.

Wildfire in the area is highly susceptible to El Niño conditions, when winters can be warmer and drier than average in Oregon. This often leads to an increased threat for large wildfires the following summer and autumn.

Extreme fires, when they occur, are characterized by more intense heat and preheating of surrounding fuels, stronger flame runs, potential tree crowning, increased likelihood of significant spot fires, and fire-induced weather (e.g., strong winds, lightning cells). Extreme fire behavior is significantly more difficult to combat and suppress, and can drastically increase the threat to homes and communities.

Due to many years of fire suppression, logging, and other human activities, the forests and rangelands of planning area have changed significantly. Areas that historically experienced frequent, low-severity wildfires now burn with much greater intensity due to the build-up of understory brush and trees. This area’s fires are larger and more severe, killing the trees and vegetation at all levels. The combination of steep slope, canyons, open rangeland, and fuel type have a history and potential for fast moving and fast spreading wildfires.

The Klamath Tribes’ planning area is also vulnerable to wind-driven fires, whose embers could ignite grasses and weeds, and cause spot fires in more populated areas. Typical summer conditions could prove to be problematic due to a fire moving uphill from a structure fire on a lower slope, or from a wildland fire pushing upslope through the trees on a windy day, endangering multiple homes simultaneously in a very short period of time. Residents would have very short notice of an approaching fire.

16-11 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Frequency

Historic Fire Regime Many ecosystems are adapted to historical patterns of fire. These patterns, called “fire regimes,” include temporal attributes (e.g., frequency and seasonality), spatial attributes (e.g., size and spatial complexity), and magnitude attributes (e.g., intensity and severity), each of which have ranges of natural variability.

Alterations of historical fire regimes and vegetation dynamics have occurred in many landscapes in the U.S. through the combined influence of land management practices, fire exclusion, insect and disease outbreaks, climate change, and the invasion of non-native plant species. Anthropogenic influences to wildfire occurrence have been witnessed through arson, incidental ignition from industry (e.g., logging, railroad, sporting activities), and other factors. Likewise, wildfire abatement practices have reduced the spread of wildfires after ignition.

Due to years of fire suppression, logging and other human activities, the forests in the planning area have changed significantly. Areas which previous experienced frequent but low-severity wildfires now burn with much greater intensity due to the build-up of understory brush and trees.

The LANDFIRE Project produces maps of simulated historical fire regimes and vegetation conditions using the LANDSUM landscape succession and disturbance dynamics model. The LANDFIRE Project also produces maps of current vegetation and measurements of current vegetation departure from simulated historical reference conditions. These maps support fire and landscape management planning outlined in the goals of the National Fire Plan, Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy, and the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. The simulated historical mean fire return interval data layer quantifies the average number of years between fires under the presumed historical fire regime. This data is derived from simulations using LANDSUM. LANDSUM simulates fire dynamics as a function of vegetation dynamics, topography, and spatial context, in addition to variability introduced by dynamic wind direction and speed, frequency of extremely dry years, and landscape-level fire characteristics. The historical fire regime groups simulated in LANDFIRE categorize mean fire return interval and fire severities into five regimes defined in the Interagency Fire Regime Condition Class Guidebook:

Regime 1: 0-35 year frequency, low to mixed severity Regime II: 0-35 year frequency, replacement severity Regime III: 35-200 year frequency, low to mixed severity Regime IV: 35 -200 year frequency, replacement severity Regime V: 200+ year frequency, any severity Fire regimes in the Tribal Planning Area (including both Klamath and Lake Counties) are shown on Figure 16-6.

16-12 WILDFIRE

Figure 16-6 LANDFIRE Fire Regimes in the Tribal Planning Area

16-13 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

16.3 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Overview

Structures, above-ground infrastructure, critical facilities, and natural environments are all vulnerable to the wildfire hazard.

Methodology There is currently no validated damage function available to support wildfire mitigation planning because no such damage functions exist. Instead, dollar loss estimates were developed by calculating the assessed value of exposed structures utilizing the various LANDFIRE Fire Regime (1-5) datasets. Population impact also utilized the various Fire Regimes, with population estimated using the exposed structure count of buildings in each Fire Regime area and applying the census value of 2.5 persons per household.

Warning Time

Wildfires are often caused by humans, intentionally or accidentally, although in Lake County, history demonstrates the majority of fires were ignited by lightning strikes. There is no way to predict when one might break out. Dry seasons and droughts are factors that greatly increase fire likelihood. Dry lightning may trigger wildfires, and is the primary source of ignition within Lake County. Wildfire in the area is also highly impacted by El Niño winters, which can be warmer and drier than average in Oregon. This often leads to an increased threat for large wildfires the following summer and autumn.

Severe weather can be predicted, so special attention can be paid during weather events that may include lightning. Reliable National Weather Service lightning warnings are available on average 24 to 48 hours prior to a significant electrical storm; however, most significant to remember is the fact that fires can rapidly spread, leaving little to no time for warning of the population living in the area.

Understanding the relationship between weather, potential fire activity, and geographical features enhances the ability to prepare for the potential of wildfire events. This knowledge, when paired with emergency planning and appropriate mitigation measures, creates a safer environment.

If a fire breaks out and spreads rapidly, residents may need to evacuate within a short timeframe. A fire’s peak burning period generally is between 1 p.m. and 6 p.m. In normal situations, fire alerting would commence quickly, helping to reduce the risk. However, in more remote locations, or in areas where cell phone services are sporadic at times, warning time and calls for assistance may be reduced.

Impact on Life Health & Safety There are no recorded fatalities from wildfire in the Tribal Planning Area; however, a statistical number of the population vulnerable to impact from fire is impossible to determine with any accuracy, due to the high number of variables that impact fire scenarios. The population at risk must also take into consideration tourists given the area’s proximity to the parklands and its high-tourist destinations. With its relatively high tourism rate, especially during summer months, there is an increase in the population vulnerability to fire. Given the increased in tourism during the summer months, when fire danger is at its greatest, increased consideration must be considered for fire response. Isolation as a result of restricted access can also occur, further increasing the vulnerability of populations in the area of the fire.

Smoke and air pollution from wildfires can be a severe health hazard, especially for sensitive populations, including children, the elderly and those with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. The Tribal Planning

16-14 WILDFIRE

Area has a high population of elders living in the area, further increasing the potential impact on the fire hazard. Smoke generated by wildfire consists of visible and invisible emissions that contain particulate matter (soot, tar, water vapor, and minerals), gases (carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides), and toxics (formaldehyde, benzene). Emissions from wildfires depend on the type of fuel, the moisture content of the fuel, the efficiency (or temperature) of combustion, and the weather. Public health impacts associated with wildfire include difficulty in breathing, odor, and reduction in visibility. Wildfire may also threaten the health and safety of those fighting the fires. First responders are exposed to the dangers from the initial incident and after-effects from smoke inhalation and heat stroke.

Exposure to wildfire is dependent upon many factors. The maps used in the analysis show areas of relative importance in determining fire risk, though they do not provide sufficient data for a statistical estimation of exposed population. For purposes of this assessment, the various Fire Regimes were used with population estimated using the structure count of buildings exposed within the various Fire Regime areas, and applying the census value of 2.5 persons per household for the Tribal Planning Area. These estimates are shown in Table 16-4. Not calculated into the potential impact is the number of tourists who may be visiting the area at any given time. These figures are for planning purposes only.

TABLE 16-4 POPULATION WITHIN FIRE REGIME AREAS

Fire Regime 1 Fire Regime 2 Fire Regime 3 Fire Regime 4 % of % of % of % of Population Population Population Population Total Total Total Total Beatty 0 0.0% 4 1.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Chiloquin 12.5 4.7% 2.5 0.9% 75 28.0% 107.5 40.2% Klamath 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 10 3.7% 47.5 17.8% Falls Total 12.5 4.7% 6.5 2.4% 85 31.8% 155 57.9% Impact on Property Property damage from wildfires can be severe and can significantly alter entire communities. In the case of the Klamath Tribes, even the loss of one structure would be devastating as all of the homes support low- income tribal members, and the Tribal Government offices provide services to the entire population of the Klamath Tribes. As a small and impoverished community, rebuilding any number of structures would be difficult. Review of data indicates that all but one structure fall within regimes one through four. There are no structures in regime five (5). One structure is located in a barren area. Details on the number and value of structures exposed to LANDFIRE Wildfire Regime areas are provided in Table 16-5 through Table 16- 8.

Density and the age of building stock in the Klamath Tribal Planning Area are contributing factors in assessing property vulnerability to wildfire. Many of the buildings in the planning area are aged, with many being constructed with wood frames and shingle roofs.

16-15 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 16-5 PLANNING AREA STRUCTURES EXPOSED TO LANDFIRE FIRE REGIME 1

Buildings Estimated Value % of Total Exposed Structure Contents Total Value Beatty 0 0 0 0 0% Chiloquin 9 $7,901,273 $2,610,942 $10,512,217 15.2% Klamath Falls 0 0 0 0 0% Total 9 $7,901,273 $2,610,942 $10,512,217 15.2%

TABLE 16-6 PLANNING AREA STRUCTURES EXPOSED TO LANDFIRE FIRE REGIME 2

Buildings Estimated Value % of Total Exposed Structure Contents Total Value Beatty 6 $990,708 $361,701 $1,352,407 2.0% Chiloquin 2 $311,121 $155,561 $466,681 0.7% Klamath Falls 1 $7,209 $10,248 $17,457 0.0% Total 9 $1,309,038 $527,509 $1,836,545 2.7%

TABLE 16-7 PLANNING AREA STRUCTURES EXPOSED TO LANDFIRE FIRE REGIME 3

Buildings Estimated Value % of Total Exposed Structure Contents Total Value Beatty 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Chiloquin 32 $21,562,146 $11,317,783 $32,879,930 47.6% Klamath Falls 5 $3,050,084 $1,758,214 $4,808,298 7.0% Total 37 $24,612,230 $13,075,996 $37,688,228 54.5%

TABLE 16-8 PLANNING AREA STRUCTURES EXPOSED TO LANDFIRE FIRE REGIME 4

Buildings Estimated Value % of Total Exposed Structure Contents Total Value Beatty 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Chiloquin 49 $11,885,101 $4,342,974 $16,228,073 23.5% Klamath Falls 7 $2,095,122 $731,146 $2,826,269 4.1% Total 56 $13,980,223 $5,074,120 $19,054,342 27.6%

16-16 WILDFIRE

Loss estimations for the wildfire hazard are not based on damage functions, because no such damage functions have been generated. Instead, loss estimates were developed representing 10 percent, 30 percent, and 50 percent of the assessed value of exposed structures. This allows emergency managers to select a range of economic impact based on an estimate of the percent of damage to the general building stock. Damage in excess of 50 percent is considered to be substantial by most building codes and typically requires total reconstruction of the structure. The loss estimates for the general building stock for jurisdictions that have an exposure to Fire Regime Areas are listed in Table 16-9 through Table 16-12.

TABLE 16-9 ESTIMATED LOSS POTENTIAL FOR LANDFIRE FIRE REGIME 1

Exposed Value 10% Damage 30% Damage 50% Damage Beatty 0 0 0 0 Chiloquin $10,512,217 $1,051,221 $3,153,665 $5,256,108 Klamath Falls 0 0 0 0 Total $10,512,217 $1,051,221 $3,153,665 $5,256,108

TABLE 16-10 ESTIMATED LOSS POTENTIAL FOR LANDFIRE FIRE REGIME 2

Exposed Value 10% Damage 30% Damage 50% Damage Beatty $1,352,407 $135,240.70 $405,722.10 $676,203.50 Chiloquin $466,681 $46,668.10 $140,004.30 $233,340.50 Klamath Falls $17,457 $1,745.70 $5,237.10 $8,728.50 Total $1,836,545 $183,654.50 $550,963.50 $918,272.50

TABLE 16-11 ESTIMATED LOSS POTENTIAL FOR LANDFIRE FIRE REGIME 3

Exposed Value 10% Damage 30% Damage 50% Damage Beatty $0 $0 $0 $0 Chiloquin $32,879,930 $3,287,993 $9,863,979 $16,439,965 Klamath Falls $4,808,298 $480,830 $1,442,489 $2,404,149 Total $37,688,228 $3,768,823 $11,306,468 $18,844,114

TABLE 16-12 ESTIMATED LOSS POTENTIAL FOR LANDFIRE FIRE REGIME 4

Exposed Value 10% Damage 30% Damage 50% Damage Beatty $0 $0 $0 $0 Chiloquin $16,228,073 $1,622,807 $4,868,422 $8,114,037 Klamath Falls $2,826,269 $282,627 $847,881 $1,413,135 Total $19,054,342 $1,905,434 $5,716,303 $9,527,171

16-17 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure

Critical facilities of wood frame construction are especially vulnerable during wildfire events. In the event of wildfire, there would likely be little damage to most infrastructure. Most roads and railroads would be without damage except in the worst scenarios. Fueling stations could be significantly impacted. Power lines are also significantly at risk from wildfire because most poles are made of wood and susceptible to burning. Fires can create conditions that block or prevent access and can isolate residents and emergency service providers. Wildfire could also impact wood-structured bridges, peers, and docks, as well as to moor fishing or private boats associated with tourism. Also of concern to fire damage is all of the cultural sites located throughout the planning area. Many of those are not structural-type items, but can nonetheless be impacted and damaged through fire. Table 16-13 identifies critical facilities exposed to the wildfire hazard.

Hazardous Material Involved Fire Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure It is currently unknown how many registered Tier II hazardous material containment sites are located throughout the Tribal Planning Area, as local communities are not required to report storage to the Tribes. During a wildfire event, hazardous material storage containers could rupture due to excessive heat and act as fuel for the fire, causing rapid spreading and escalating the fire to unmanageable levels. In addition, the materials could leak into surrounding areas, saturating soils and seeping into surface waters, having a disastrous effect on the environment.

Impact on Economy Wildfire impact on the economy can be far reaching, ranging from damage to rail services, to non-use of park facilities and campsites impacting tourism, to loss of structures influencing lost revenue from the Casino or other tribal businesses. Secondary hazards associated with wildfire, such as increased landslides and flooding potential, would further impact the economy.

TABLE 16-13 CRITICAL FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE EXPOSED TO FIRE REGIME AREAS

Regime 1 Regime 2 Regime 3 Regime 4 Administration 1 0 0 3 Casino 0 0 13 0 Gathering Place 1 2 1 0 Haz-Mat 0 0 1 0 Health 0 0 2 3 Industry 2 0 2 0 Residential 5 4 14 37 Residential Multi Family 0 1 3 4 School 0 0 0 1 Storage 0 2 0 8 Wastewater 0 0 1 0 Total 9 9 37 56

16-18 WILDFIRE

Impact on Environment Fire is a natural and critical ecosystem process in most terrestrial ecosystems, dictating in part the types, structure, and spatial extent of native vegetation. However, wildfires can cause severe environmental impacts:

• Damaged Fisheries—Critical fisheries can suffer from increased water temperatures, sedimentation, and changes in water quality.

• Soil Erosion—The protective covering provided by foliage and dead organic matter is removed, leaving the soil fully exposed to wind and water erosion. Accelerated soil erosion occurs, causing landslides, and threatening aquatic habitats.

• Spread of Invasive Plant Species—Non-native woody plant species frequently invade burned areas. When weeds become established, they can dominate the plant cover over broad landscapes, and become difficult and costly to control.

• Disease and Insect Infestations—Unless diseased or insect-infested trees are swiftly removed, infestations and disease can spread to healthy forests and private lands. Timely active management actions are needed to remove diseased or infested trees.

• Destroyed Endangered Species Habitat—Catastrophic fires can have devastating consequences for endangered species.

• Soil Sterilization—Topsoil exposed to extreme heat can become water repellant, and soil nutrients may be lost. It can take decades or even centuries for ecosystems to recover from a fire. Some fires burn so hot that they can sterilize the soil.

16.4 RESULTS

Based on data from the 2013 West Wide Wildfire Risk Assessment, LANDFIRE Data, and review of the various CWPP’s in the area, the Planning Team determined that the probability for wildfire occurring in the planning area is very high. Structurally, 111 of the Tribes’ 112 structures fall within one of four fire regimes, with only one structure identified as being in a barren location. Klamath County also has a high percentage of wildland acres (and ultimately structures) vulnerable to fire risk, wildland development areas, fire effects, and fire threat, making them especially vulnerable. While Lake County is also at risk, the level is lower than that contained within Klamath County. With the uncertainty of climate change, and the significant drought issues throughout the Tribal Planning Area, the potential for an increase in wildfires is rising. Therefore, the Planning Team feels the overall vulnerability is high, with a CPRI score of 3.65.

16.5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRENDS

The Tribes are expecting that increased population growth will occur throughout the planning area as additional housing structures are built. As areas of the Tribal Planning Area become more urbanized, the potential exists that the fire risk may increase as urbanization tends to alter the natural fire regime, and the growth will expand the urbanized areas into undeveloped wildland areas. However, the Tribes feel that this expansion of the wildland-urban interface can be managed with strong land use and building codes. A growing body of research suggests that “the only effective home protection treatment is treatment in, on, and around the house (see Figure 16-7); homeowners must be responsible for protecting that property”

16-19 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

(Nowicki 2001, p. 1:3). U.S. Forest Service research scientist, Jack Cohen has stated that “home ignitions are not likely unless flames and firebrand ignitions occur within 40 meters [131 feet] of the structure; the WUI fire loss problem primarily depends on the home and its immediate site”.

Figure 16-7 Measures to Protect Homes from Wildfire

16.6 ISSUES The major issues for wildfire in the Klamath Tribal Planning Area are the following:

• Public education and outreach to people living in or near the fire hazard zones should include information about and assistance with mitigation activities such as defensible space, and advance identification of evacuation routes and safe zones. • Wildfires could cause landslides as a secondary natural hazard. • Climate change could affect the wildfire hazard. • Future growth into interface areas should continue to be managed. • Vegetation management activities should include enhancement through expansion of target areas as well as additional resources. • Building code standards need to include items such as residential sprinkler requirements and prohibitive combustible roof standards. • Increased fire department water supply is needed in high-risk wildfire areas. A worst-case scenario would include an active fire season throughout the American west, spreading resources thin. Firefighting teams would be exhausted or unavailable. Many federal assets would be

16-20 WILDFIRE responding to other fires that started earlier in the season. While local fire districts would be extremely useful in the urban interface areas, they have limited wildfire capabilities or experience, and they would have a difficult time responding to the ignition zones. Even though the existence and spread of the fire is known, it may not be possible to respond to it adequately, so an initially manageable fire can become out of control before resources are dispatched.

To further complicate the problem, heavy rains could follow, causing flooding and landslides, and releasing tons of sediment into rivers, permanently changing floodplains and damaging sensitive habitat and riparian areas. Such a fire followed by rain could release millions of cubic yards of sediment into streams for years, creating new floodplains and changing existing ones. With the forests removed from the watershed, stream flows could easily double. Floods that could be expected every 50 years may occur every couple of years. With the streambeds unable to carry the increased discharge because of increased sediment, the floodplains and floodplain elevations would increase.

16-21

CHAPTER 17. OTHER HAZARDS OF CONCERN

17.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND In addition to the natural hazards, there is also risk associated with other types of hazards, such as technological hazards, which include energy shortages, utility outages, and hazardous material incidents (addressed above within each hazard), among others. Human-caused threats are those resulting from the intentional actions of an adversary, and include civil unrest, terrorism, cyber incidents, and active shooter situations, among others. Additional hazards of interest were identified by the planning team as having some potential to impact the planning area, but at a much lower risk level than the other hazards of concern.

This chapter presents a short profile of each hazard of interest, including a qualitative discussion of its potential to impact. No formal risk assessment of these hazards was performed, as they are more thoroughly addressed in other emergency management planning efforts. However, everyone should be aware of these hazards and should take steps to reduce the risks they present whenever it is practical to do so.

17.2 HEALTH HAZARDS Health hazards that affect the residents of the planning area may arise in a variety of situations, such as during a communicable disease outbreak, after a natural disaster, or as the result of a bioterrorism incident. All populations in the Klamath Tribes are susceptible to bioterrorism or pandemic events. Populations who are young or elderly or have compromised immune systems are likely to be more vulnerable.

Public Health agencies have developed response plans which will be utilized in the event of an incident. The public would be informed through news media; local health department websites and the CDC would provide information regarding the best steps to take to protect one’s health.

Epidemic or Pandemic

The U.S. Center for Disease Control defines an outbreak as the occurrence of more cases of disease than normally expected within a specific place or group of people over a given period of time. Federal, state and local regulations require immediate reporting of any known or suspected outbreaks by health care providers, health care facilities, laboratories, veterinarians, schools, child day care facilities, and food service establishments. An epidemic is a localized outbreak that spreads rapidly and affects a large number of people or animals in a community. A pandemic is an epidemic that occurs worldwide or over a very large area and affects a large number of people or animals.

The following are some human diseases that could contribute to a serious epidemic in the area:  Zika Virus  Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus  West Nile virus  Influenza  H1N1 influenza  Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)  Measles  Hepatitis  Tuberculosis

17-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

 E. coli  Lye disease  Hantavirus  HIV/AIDS  Leptospirosis Factors that heighten the probability of occurrences of such events include large numbers of travelers arriving via the state and local air and sea ports, the transportation of infected animals into the area (rail and other vehicles), contaminated garbage or other waste, or disease transmission through individuals transporting or coming into contact with hospitalized or nursing-home-bound patients. Zika Virus26 As of this update, the most current viruses to impact the United States as a whole has been the Zika virus. The Zika virus that emerged from South America in the past year poses a novel threat to humans. Similar to West Nile virus, malaria, or dengue, Zika is a vector-borne disease carried by mosquitos. Unlike those viral infections, Zika is unique in that it may also be sexually transmitted, although its level of infectiousness as a sexually transmitted disease is still uncertain. Furthermore, its most susceptible victims appear to be babies in utero, who are at risk for microcephaly and neurological and developmental disabilities. Because of these multiple transmission pathways—and the scientific uncertainty about the virus’s infectiousness—the hazards which place women and their babies at risk encompass a range of risk factors that can challenge public health officials in communicating about the threat of Zika. Public health strategies include environmental tactics focused on controlling mosquito populations; behavioral strategies, such as reproductive decision-making (delaying pregnancy, using contraceptives, or avoiding travel to areas with Zika infections); and clinical interventions, including screening and testing for infection and the availability of pregnancy termination services. Compounding Zika’s challenge is that it is mainly a silent infection. Four out of five people infected with Zika show no symptoms. Among those who do, the symptoms are often somewhat mild and short-lasting, and can include non-descript symptoms such as a rash, fever, and headache. It is still unknown how infectious asymptomatic individuals are, and equally unknown how long the virus incubates in blood and semen.

17.3 TERRORISM The three key elements to defining a terrorist event are as follows:

• Activities involve the use of illegal force. • Actions are intended to intimidate or coerce. • Actions are in support of political or social objectives.

Terrorism evokes very strong emotional reactions, ranging from anxiety, to fear, to anger, to despair, to depression. In the case of Chemical, Biological, Radioactive, Nuclear and Explosive (CBRNE) agents, their presence may not be immediately obvious, making it difficult to determine when and where they may have been (or will be) released; who has been exposed, and what danger is present for first responders and emergency medical personnel.

26 Natural Hazards Center (2017). Awareness isn’t knowledge: A look at How the U.S. Public Perceives Zika. Accessed 1/10/17. Available at: https://hazards.colorado.edu/article/awareness-isn-t-knowledge-a-look-at-how-the-u- s-public-perceives-zika

17-2 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS

Types of Terrorists The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) categorizes terrorism in the United States primarily as one of two types: • International/foreign terrorism, which involves groups or individuals whose terrorist activities are foreign-based and/or directed by countries or groups outside the United States, or whose activities transcend national boundaries. Examples include the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the U.S. Capitol, and Mobil Oil’s corporate headquarters and the attacks of September 11, 2001 at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. • Domestic (homegrown) terrorism, which involves groups or individuals whose terrorist activities are directed at elements of our government or population without foreign direction. Domestic Terrorism as defined by the Congressional Research Service is described as “terrorist activity or plots perpetrated within the United States or abroad by American citizens, legal permanent residents, or visitors radicalized largely within the United States.” (Zuckerman et al., 2013) The bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City is an example of domestic terrorism. The FBI is the primary response agency for domestic terrorism. The FBI coordinates domestic preparedness programs and activities of the United States to limit acts posed by terrorists including the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). International terrorist (IT) organizations are said to be the result of a frustrated, extremist, culturally, or mentally polarized group of individuals motivated by radical or unconventional thought. Extremists generally adopt converse concepts of violence, morality, and in the rationale of “means and ends” than that of mainstream Western societies. This characterization of International Terrorist organizations bears similar cognitive threads to those of Domestic Terrorist (DT) organizations. However, DT advocates and their organizations profess ideologies (left or right) which adamantly exaggerate extremist beliefs toward values held by Western democratic or American cultures. Such terrorist groups would include: • Ethnic, religious & racial, sexual separatists • Left-wing “issue/cause” organizations that embrace animal, environmental, religious, abortionist, anti-government, and anarchist (freedom) • Right-wing, separatists, militants, survivalists, anti-government (freedom/rights protection and conformance); sovereignty, and militant anti-police and regulatory authority organizations.

For the individual homegrown terrorist, personal motives may vary greatly. It could be a desire for collective revenge against the U.S. for the purported “war on Islam,” poverty or social alienation, or brainwashing. There is no one path to radicalization. As DHS’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis has indicated, motives and paths to radicalization can vary significantly depending on one’s ideology and religious beliefs, geographic location, or socioeconomic condition. Nevertheless, trends do seem to exist among those attempted homegrown terror plots thwarted since 9/11, most significantly a seeming aversion to suicide or martyrdom (Zuckerman et al., 2013).

When one hears the term terrorism, they often equate it to the use of weapons of mass destruction, which include chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive weapons. However, terrorism also includes arson, incendiary and explosive devices, school shootings, sabotage (including industrial sabotage), hazardous materials releases, agro-terrorism, and cyber-terrorism.

17-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Terrorism-Related Threats Threats related to terrorism vary in nature and type. FEMA has provided guidance in developing and capturing information related to terrorist incidents. Table 17-1 provides an event profile summary for terrorism-related threats.

For each type of threat, the following factors are addressed:

• Application Mode—Application mode describes the human acts or events necessary to cause the threat to occur. • Duration/Hazard Impact—Duration is the length of time the threat is present. For example, the duration of a tornado (a hazard) may be just minutes, but a chemical warfare agent (threat) such as mustard gas, if un-remediated, can persist for hours or weeks under the right conditions. • Severity/Characteristics—These characteristics of a threat describe tendency, or that of its effects, to either expand, contract, or remain confined in time, magnitude, and space. For example, the physical destruction caused by an earthquake (hazard) is generally confined to the place in which it occurs, and it does not usually get worse unless aftershocks or other cascading failures occur. In contrast, a cloud of chlorine gas leaking from a storage tank can change location by drifting with the wind and can diminish in danger by dissipating over time. • Mitigating or Exacerbating Conditions—Mitigating conditions are characteristics of the target and its physical environment that can reduce the effects of a threat. These can range from deterrence or interdiction capabilities, such as fencing or security cameras, to sunlight, which can render some biological agents ineffective. These are also mechanisms which can minimize the likelihood of someone approaching a target unseen, or can reduce its effectiveness. In contrast, exacerbating conditions are characteristics that can enhance or magnify the effects of a hazard. For example, depressions or low areas in terrain can trap heavy vapors, and a proliferation of street furniture (trash receptacles, newspaper vending machines, mailboxes, etc.) can provide hiding places for explosive devices.

TABLE 17-1 EVENT PROFILES FOR TERRORISM

Duration/Threat Mitigating and Exacerbating Threat Application Mode Impact Severity Conditions Conventional Detonation of Instantaneous; Extent of damage is Overpressure at a given standoff is Bomb explosive device on or additional determined by type inversely proportional to the area of the near target; delivery “secondary and quantity of distance from the blast; thus, each via person, vehicle, or devices, and/or explosive. Effects additional increment of standoff projectile. diversionary generally static other provides progressively more protection. activities may be than cascading Terrain, forestation, structures, etc., can used, lengthening consequences, provide shielding by absorbing and/or the time duration incremental deflecting energy and debris. of the hazard until structural failure, etc. Exacerbating conditions include ease of the attack site is access to target; lack of barriers and determined to be shielding; poor construction; and ease clear. of concealment of device.

17-4 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS

TABLE 17-1 EVENT PROFILES FOR TERRORISM

Duration/Threat Mitigating and Exacerbating Threat Application Mode Impact Severity Conditions Chemical Liquid/aerosol Chemical agents Contamination can Air temperature and humidity can Agent contaminants can be may pose viable be carried out of the affect the composition of some dispersed using threats for hours initial target area by chemicals agents, as well as sprayers or other to weeks persons, vehicles, evaporation of aerosols. Ground aerosol generators; depending on the water, and wind. temperature affects evaporation of liquids vaporizing agent and the Chemicals may be liquids. Humidity can enlarge aerosol from puddles/ conditions in corrosive or particles. While precipitation can dilute containers; or which it exists. otherwise damaging agents, it can also further disperse munitions. over time if not agents, spreading contamination. Wind remediated. can disperse vapors, in some cases rendering them less dangerous, but also increase the spread of the chemical agent used. The micro-meteorological effects of buildings and terrain can alter travel and duration of agents, but can also increase dosage by enclosing the agent within a structure. Shielding in the form of sheltering in place can protect people from harmful effects.

Arson/ Initiation of fire or Generally Extent of damage is Mitigation factors include built-in fire Incendiary explosion on or near minutes to hours. determined by type detection and protection systems and Attack target via direct and quantity of fire-resistive construction techniques, contact or remotely device, accelerant, or security measures which reduce via projectile. and materials present exposure. Inadequate security can at or near target. allow easy access to target, easy Effects generally concealment of an incendiary device, static other than and undetected initiation of a fire. Non- cascading compliance with fire and building consequences, codes, as well as failure to maintain incremental existing fire protection systems, can structural failure, etc. substantially increase the effectiveness of a fire weapon.

Armed Attack Tactical assault or Generally Varies based on the Inadequate security can allow easy sniping from remote minutes to days. perpetrators’ intent access to target, easy concealment of location, or random and capabilities. weapons, and undetected initiation of attack based on fear, an attack. Screening devices, such as emotion, or mental cameras, pass-through metal detectors instability. or limited searches at entrances may decrease the likelihood of a weapon in some mass gathering facilities.

17-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 17-1 EVENT PROFILES FOR TERRORISM

Duration/Threat Mitigating and Exacerbating Threat Application Mode Impact Severity Conditions Biological Liquid or solid Biological agents Depending on the Altitude of release aboveground can Agent contaminants can be may pose viable agent used and the affect dispersion; sunlight is destructive dispersed using threats for hours effectiveness with to many bacteria and viruses; light to sprayers, aerosol to years which it is deployed, moderate wind will disperse agents but generators or by point depending on the contamination can be higher winds can break up aerosol or line sources such as agent and the spread via wind and clouds; the micro-meteorological munitions, covert conditions in water. Infection can effects of buildings and terrain can deposits, and moving which it exists. spread via human or influence aerosolizing and travel of sprayers. Biological animal vectors. agents. agents may also be introduced into food and water supplies, or through direct application to skin. Cyber-attack Unlawful attacks and Minutes to days. Generally no direct Inadequate security can facilitate or threats of attack effects on built access to critical computer systems, Cyber- against computers, environment; allowing them to be used to conduct Espionage networks and secondary impact attacks, or gather information to information stored from system attacked support other terrorist-related activities. therein. (e.g., SCADA system regulating water release)

Agro-terrorism Direct, generally Days, months, Varies by type of Inadequate security can facilitate covert contamination years. incident. Food adulteration of food and introduction of of food supplies or contamination events pests and disease agents to crops and introduction of pests may be limited to livestock. and/or disease agents specific distribution to crops and livestock. or growing sites, whereas pests and diseases may spread widely. Generally, no direct impact on built environment, but may increase fire danger in urban interface areas.

17-6 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS

TABLE 17-1 EVENT PROFILES FOR TERRORISM

Duration/Threat Mitigating and Exacerbating Threat Application Mode Impact Severity Conditions Radiological Radioactive Contaminants Initial effects will be Duration of exposure, type of radiation, Agent contaminants can be may remain localized to site of distance from source of radiation, and dispersed using hazardous for attack; depending on the amount of shielding between source sprayers/ aerosol years depending meteorological and target determine exposure to generators, or by on material used. conditions, radiation. point or line sources subsequent behavior such as munitions. of radioactive Direct contamination contaminants may be may also occur at site dynamic. Agent may if structures are also unknowingly be damaged. transferred to other areas.

Nuclear Bomb Detonation of nuclear Light/heat flash Initial light, heat, Harmful effects of radiation can be device underground, and blast/shock and blast effects of a reduced by minimizing the time of at the surface, in the wave last for subsurface, ground, exposure. Light, heat, and blast energy air, or at high altitude. seconds; nuclear or air burst are static decrease logarithmically as a function radiation and and determined by of distance from seat of blast. Terrain, fallout can persist the device’s forestation, structures, etc. can provide for years. characteristics and shielding by absorbing and/or Electromagnetic employment; fallout deflecting radiation and radioactive pulse from a of radioactive contaminants. high-altitude contaminants may be detonation lasts dynamic, depending for seconds and on meteorological affects only conditions. unprotected electronic systems. Intentional Solid, liquid, and/or Hours to days. Chemicals may be As with chemical weapons, weather Hazardous gaseous contaminants corrosive or conditions affect how the threat Material may be released from otherwise damaging develops. The micro-meteorological Release (fixed fixed or mobile over time. Explosion effects of buildings and terrain can alter facility or containers and/or fire may be travel and duration of agents. In some transportation) subsequent. instances, sheltering in place can Contamination may protect people from harmful effects. be carried out of the Established safety codes, safety plans incident area by and reporting requirements, can persons, vehicles, decrease danger. Chemical-specific water, and wind. containment, suppression devices, building codes and safety standards can substantially decrease the damage from a hazardous materials release.

Source: FEMA 386-7 (in part)

17-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Science and the Internet have made information related to weapons of mass destruction (WMD) technology widely available to an increasing audience. It is known that terrorists, terrorist cells and criminal organizations have used the Internet for actual WMD experimentation and research. Experts offer five classifications for “major” terrorist incident planning:

• Biological agents pose a serious threat due to their accessibility and the rapid manner in which they can be spread. Typical threats are anthrax (sometimes found in sheep and cattle), tularemia (rabbit fever), cholera, the plague (sometimes found in prairie dog colonies), and botulism. A biological incident is most likely first detected in a hospital emergency room, medical examiner’s office, or within the public health community long after the terrorist act. The consequences present communities with a need for massive reactive and precautionary treatments to exposed populations, patient care facilities and to stage mass fatality management and environmental health clean-up operations, procedures and plans. Anthrax incidents in the U.S. in October 2001 demonstrated the potential for spreading terror through biological WMDs. The introduction of Newcastle disease in the United States demonstrates how an agent can be introduced to livestock, causing harm to public health and the economy. • Chemical agents are compounds with unique chemical properties that can produce lethal or damaging effects in humans, animals, and plants. Most chemical agents can be introduced into an unaware population relatively easily using aerosol generator, explosive devices, container breakages, and other forms of covert application. Dispersed as an aerosol or inserted into a water system, chemical agents have their greatest potential for inflicting mass casualties. • Nuclear threat is the use, threatened use, or threatened detonation of a nuclear bomb or device. Presently, there is no known instance in which any non-governmental entity has been able to obtain or produce and assemble the components of a nuclear weapon. The most likely nuclear scenario is the detonation of a large conventional explosive that incorporates nuclear material or explosives detonation in close proximity to nuclear materials in use, storage, or transit. Of concern is the increasing frequency of radiological materials shipments throughout the U.S. and world. Major transportation arteries for vehicles or rail contribute to the risk of a radiological event as such products can unknowingly pass through any one of the regional transportation corridors. Eastern Washington’s Hanford Nuclear site represents one of the world’s largest nuclear use, waste storage, and potential radioactive contaminated sites. The site is approximately 400 miles Northeast of the Klamath Tribal Planning Area. • Incendiary devices are either mechanical, electrical, or chemical devices used to intentionally initiate combustion and start fires. Their purpose is to destroy and ignite their target or other proximate materials and/or structures or as a diversion preceding an even larger terrorist or criminal act. These devices are detonated singularly or in series. • Explosive incidents account for 70 percent of all terrorist attacks worldwide. Bombs are terrorist’s weapon of choice. The Internet and even local libraries provide ample information for the design and construction of many forms of explosive devices. Elements necessary to construct a WMD are readily available. Additionally, the agricultural communities maintain sufficient products and quantities for use in explosive events. Residential properties are reported as one the most common bombing targets. According to a White House report released after the Boston Marathon bombing, such devices “remain one of the most accessible weapons available to terrorists and criminals to damage critical infrastructure and inflict casualties.” (McClatchyDC.com, 2013)

17-8 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS

WMD agents can be combined to have a greater total effect. When combined, the impacts of the event can be immediate and longer-term. Casualties will likely suffer from both immediate and long-term impact.

The effects of terrorism can vary from loss of life and injuries to property damage and disruptions in services such as electricity, water supplies, transportation, or communications. Any of the methods above may have an immediate effect or a delayed effect which lingers.

Bioterrorism The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) defines bioterrorism as the deliberate use of viruses, bacteria, or other agents to cause illness or death in people, animals, or plants (CDC, 2007). Biological agents pose a serious threat due to their accessibility and the rapid manner in which they can be spread within a population. The most commonly discussed agents include anthrax (sometimes found in sheep and cattle), tularemia (rabbit fever), cholera, the plague (sometimes found in prairie dog colonies), and botulism (found in improperly canned food). A biological incident is likely to be first detected in a hospital emergency room, medical examiner’s office, or within the public health community long after the terrorist act. The consequences of such an act will require communities to provide massive reactive and precautionary treatments to exposed populations and to stage mass fatality management and environmental health clean-up operations, procedures, and plans.

Incendiary Devices Incendiary devices are mechanical, electrical, or chemical devices used to intentionally initiate combustion and start fires. Their purpose is to destroy and ignite their target or other nearby materials or structures or to provide a diversion preceding an even larger terrorist or criminal act. These devices are detonated singularly or in series. Bombs are terrorist’s weapon of choice. Explosive incidents account for 70 percent of all terrorist attacks worldwide. According to the FBI, 172 improvised explosive devices were reported in the United States between October 2012 and April 2013 (most recent report available as of 2017 update).

Potential Threat Elements In dealing with intentional human-caused threats, the unpredictability of human beings must be considered. People with a desire to perform criminal acts may seek out targets of opportunity that may not fall into established lists of critical areas or facilities. First responders train not only to respond to organized terrorism events, but also to respond to random acts by individuals who, for a variety of reasons ranging from fear to emotional trauma to mental instability, may choose to harm others and destroy property.

Oregon State has a fairly extensive list of potential threats in the form of recognized organizations. Reports indicate that since 2008, the planning region has also seen an increase in gang activities. Some of these have a demonstrated violent history, have weapons of mass destruction capabilities (CBRNE or other), and who have extremist motivations. Table 17-2 identifies some of the known organizations in Oregon. While the list represents statewide factions, it would not be out of the question that any of those listed could travel to the planning area. The State of Oregon recognizes the implications and potential threat associated with gang activity. Within the State of Oregon, the Department of Justice defines a “gang” as “an organization, association, or group of two or more persons, whether formal or informal, reasonably suspected of having as one of its activities the commission of a pattern of criminal acts that further an interest of the organization.” Over the course of the last several years, Klamath County has seen a significant increase in gang-related criminal activity.

17-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 17-2 POTENTIAL THREAT ELEMENTS Violent WMD WMD History Capability Motivationa Categoriesb American Front American Nazi Party Animal Liberation Front E Aryan Nation X X Ra Bloods X Crips X Earth First E Earth Liberation Front (ELF) X E Haken Kreuz X Ra Hammerskins X P, Ra Ku Klux Klan X X Ra National Alliance National Assoc. for the Advancement of White People X National Socialist Movement X P, S Norteno X Notorious X Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs X Phineas Priesthood X X Public Enemy Number 1 (Prison) Saint Michael’s Parish Second Amendment Skin Head X Ra Stormfront (Web-based organization) Surenos X Westside 18th Street X World Church of the Creator X Ra White Aryan Resistance X Ra Valhalla Bound Skinheads X Ra Volksfront X Ra The Order X P, R, Ra a. Motivation categories: P = Political R = Religious E = Environmental Ra = Racial S = Special Interest b. WMD categories: C = Chemical B = Biological R = Radiological N = Nuclear E = Explosive O = Other

17-10 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS

17.4 CYBERSECURITY In the United States, we define cyber incidents in terms of cyber-attacks and cyber espionage. “A cyber- attack is a non-kinetic offensive operation intended to create physical effects or to manipulate, disrupt, or delete data. It might range from a denial-of-service operation that temporarily prevents access to a website, to an attack on a power turbine that causes physical damage and an outage lasting for days. Cyber espionage refers to intrusions into networks to access sensitive diplomatic, military, or economic information” (Clapper, 2013).

FEMA characterizes an event profile for a cyber-attack or cyber-espionage as follows:

• Application Mode—Unlawful attacks and threats of attack against computers, networks and information stored therein • Duration/Threat Impact—Minutes to days • Severity—Generally no direct effects on built environment; secondary impact from system attacked (e.g., computerized control system regulating water release) • Mitigating and Exacerbating Conditions—Inadequate security can facilitate access to critical computer systems, allowing them to be used to conduct attacks, or gather information to support other terrorist-related activities.

Cyber Crimes/Cyber-criminals also threaten US economic interests, although their activities are not recognized necessarily as a terrorist-type event. Cyber criminals selling tools, via a growing black market, that might enable access to critical infrastructure systems or get into the hands of state and non-state actors. In addition, some commercial companies sell computer intrusion kits on the open market. These hardware and software packages can give governments and cybercriminals the capability to steal, manipulate, or delete information on targeted systems. Even more companies develop and sell professional-quality technologies to support cyber operations—often branding these tools as lawful-intercept or defensive security research products. Many individuals, groups and foreign governments already use some of these tools to target and breach national and local systems.

A study prepared by the California Department of Justice (2015) identified the types of security breaches which most often occur, as follows:

• Malware and hacking presents the greatest threat both in the number of breaches and the number of records breached. This is a growing problem compared to other types of breach, increasing by 22 percent in the past four years, from 45 percent of breaches in 2012 to 58 percent in 2015. The retail sector in particular struggles with malware and hacking, which comprises 90 percent of all retailer breaches.

• Physical breaches result from theft or loss of unencrypted data on electronic devices. When compared to malware and hacking, physical breaches came in a distant second. The relative share of this type of breach declined, from 27 percent of all breaches in 2012 to 17 percent in 2015. The health care sector had the greatest problem with breaches of this type (more than half of all its breaches), and small businesses were more than 50 percent more likely to report a physical breach than were larger businesses.

• Breaches caused by errors predominantly mis-delivery (of email, for example) and inadvertent exposure on the public Internet, were a close third, and have held steady at around 17 percent. Half of government breaches were of this type.

17-11 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

17.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations lists thousands of hazardous materials, including gasoline, insecticides, household cleaning products, and radioactive materials. Entities are required to report use, manufacture and storage of hazardous materials based on the type and quantity of materials. The use of hazardous materials is associated with almost every industry to some degree, increasing the potential for a hazardous material incident. These hazardous materials incidents can be associated with the manufacture, transportation, storage, and the daily use of hazardous materials. Tier II facilities are throughout the planning area, including railways that ship chemicals, and facilities that produce, store, or utilize chemicals as in course of business. For example, water treatment plants use chlorine on-site to eliminate bacterial contaminants. Hazardous materials are transported along interstate highways and railways daily. Even the natural gas used in every home and business is a dangerous substance when a leak occurs. The following are the most common type of hazardous material incidents: • Fixed-Facility Hazardous Materials Incident—This is the uncontrolled release of materials from a fixed site capable of posing a risk to health, safety, and property as determined by the Resource and Conservation Act. It is possible to identify and prepare for a fixed-site incident because federal and state laws require those facilities to notify state and local authorities about what is being used or produced at the site. • Hazardous Materials Transportation Incident—A hazardous materials transportation incident is any event resulting in uncontrolled release of materials during transport that can pose a risk to health, safety, and property as defined by Department of Transportation Materials Transport regulations. Transportation incidents are difficult to prepare for because there is little if any notice about what materials could be involved should an accident happen. Hazardous materials transportation incidents can occur at any place within the country, although most occur on the interstate highways or major federal or state highways, or on the major rail lines.

In addition to materials such as chlorine that are shipped throughout the country by rail, thousands of shipments of radiological materials, mostly medical materials and low-level radioactive waste, take place via ground transportation across the United States. Many incidents occur in sparsely populated areas and affect very few people. Occasionally, however, accidents occur in areas with much higher population densities, such as the January 6, 2005 train accident in Graniteville, South Carolina that released chlorine gas killing nine, injuring 500, and causing the evacuation of 5,400 residents. Or the 2013 incident that killed 47 people in Quebec, and the June 2013 incident at the West Fertilizer Company plant explosion in West, Texas, which killed 15 people and injured hundreds more, flattening buildings and prompting widespread evacuations. Most recently in Mosier, Oregon, on June 3, 2016, 11 Union Pacific train cars derailed, sparking a fire and an oil spill near the Columbia River (see Figure 17-1). The train was towing a highly volatile type of oil, Bakken, and required road closures and evacuations. Enroute for Tacoma, Washington, the crash released 42,000 gallons of oil alongside the tracks running parallel to the Columbia River.

17-12 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS

Source: Associated Press: http://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2016-06-03/oregon-train-derailment-spills-oil-sparks-fire

Figure 17-1 June 2016 Mosier, Oregon Union Pacific Train Derailment

17.6 INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITY FAILURE Technological hazards can impact all utilities within the planning area. Various types of energy consumption could be impacted by a utility failure. Impact can occur as a result of system failure – such as a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) computer system which is used to monitor and control plant or equipment industries, or as a result of an accidental incident severing lines.

• Electrical Power—A power failure is any interruption or loss of electrical service due to disruption of power generation or transmission caused by an accident, natural hazards, equipment failure, or fuel shortage. These interruptions can last anywhere from a few seconds to several days. Power failures are considered significant only if the local emergency management organization is required to coordinate basic services such as the provision of food, water, and heating as a result. Power failures are common with severe weather and winter storm activity. • Natural Gas – The loss of natural gas or interruption of service caused by an accident natural hazards, equipment failure – including lines or SCADA systems, or commodity shortage. These interruptions can last a short period of time to several days. The loss of natural gas when a primary heat source can have significant impact on the population if the event occurs during periods of a cold-weather. • Cyber Failure, Data, and Telecommunications—The loss of data (non-terrorist related event) and/or telecommunications is often a secondary hazard to natural and or technological hazards. Data and telecommunications provide a primary method for service to the community by the government and the private sector. A loss of data and telecommunications could result in loss of emergency dispatch capabilities, emergency planning services, infrastructure monitoring capabilities, access to statistical data, and loss

17-13 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

of financial and personnel records. Sustained loss of data could impact continuity of governmental operations. Random hackers are one source common to cyber-attacks, as are organized crime syndicates who also engage in cyber-attacks for monetary gain, primarily through the use of stealing personal information such as credit card numbers (identity theft). • Water Disruption—A breach in water pipelines, including those areas who are reliant on wells, would have significant temporary impacts until alternative water sources are obtained. Long-term disruption of the water supply would have significant impacts on residences and businesses should demand exceed secondary supplies and water conservation measures not provide enough relief to reduce demand to equal the secondary supplies. • Wastewater Disruption—Disruption of wastewater collection and treatment would have significant regional impacts. Wastewater treatment plants may also have emergencies internal to the plant such as chlorine gas leaks or oxygen deficiencies that render them incapable of treating waste. The disruption of service may also have significant environmental impacts on the waterways adjacent to the treatment plants. Loss of these services due to accidents would mean a potential life-threatening situation in the case of electricity for medically dependent residents, and a public health threat if the services are disrupted for some time. Loss of services could also impact the continuity of government operations.

17.7 HAZARD PROFILE Extent and Location Terrorists often choose targets that offer limited danger to themselves and areas with relatively easy public access. Foreign terrorists look for visible targets where they can avoid detection before and after an attack such as international airports, large cities, major special events, and high-profile landmarks. Terrorists are also now known to advance two techniques of growing concern within the public safety arena: the targeting of first responders employing secondary timed (or multiple) explosive devices and Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) hoaxes.

Communities nationwide are vulnerable to both IT and DT terrorist acts. The Klamath Tribal Planning Area, comprised of both urban and rural areas, provides a relatively low target-rich landscape for these groups whether infrastructure or origin, the potential for an incident to occur would not be out of the question, especially in light of the fact that gangs have infiltrated the planning region.

Targets for terrorist or other large-scale incidents are often located near high traffic/high-visibility routes, with convenient transportation access. Examples of targets include:

– Military installations and suppliers; – Government office buildings, court houses, schools, hospitals, and “symbolic” targets whose operations, practices or associations represent values in conflict with the terrorists’ ideology; – Railheads, interstate highways, tunnels, airports, bridges, and overpasses; – Dams, water supplies, electrical and gas distribution systems, pipelines, and chemical facilities; – Recreational facilities such as casinos, sports arenas/stadiums, theaters, parks, concert halls/facilities, public venues, and areas which have high-traffic volumes of tourists;

17-14 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS

– Financial institutions and banks; – Sites of historical and symbolic significance; – Scientific research facilities, academic institutions, and museums; – Telecommunications, newspapers, radio, and television stations; – Chemical, industrial, and petroleum plants; business offices, and convention centers; – Law, fire, emergency medical services, and responder facilities and operations centers; – Special events, parades, religious services, festivals, celebrations; – Planned Parenthood facilities and abortion clinics.

With respect to cyber-related incidents, research demonstrates that anyone with a computer is susceptible to impact from some type of breach. The higher the dependence on a cyber system, the more vulnerable. Systems which manage infrastructure do not need to be local to impact a region. National power grids and previous incidents of a system failure in one area impacting areas great distances away have occurred several times throughout recent years. Hazardous materials incidents have the potential to have a far-reaching impact with respect to extent and location. Any release into a waterbody can have far reaching implications. Chemicals which are toxic can also be spread through the air, and once in the atmosphere, cannot be contained.

Previous Occurrences Many of the terrorist events in the United States have been bombing attacks, involving detonated and undetonated explosive devices, tear gas, pipe bombs, and firebombs. The Global Terrorism Database maintained by the University of Maryland’s National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Response to Terrorism maintains a list of incidents which have occurred globally since 1983. Figure 17-2 illustrates the type of events which have occurred throughout the United States during that time period (data not sortable by County or State). This data includes active-shooter incidents, bombings, arson, etc. One of the largest and most recent attacks registered in the database is the San Bernardino bombing and armed assault in which 16 individuals were killed, and 17 more were injured. A brief description of a few incidents which have occurred in the State and planning region follows. This list is not all-inclusive; it represents only a few open-source references. • October 2009, Terrorist Plot was unraveled in Bly, Oregon. The barren rangeland, suggestive of Afghanistan, was to become an Islamic fighter training base.27 • May 2013, a West Albany High School junior was arrested for manufacturing a destructive device and charged with attempted aggravated murder.28 • May 2015, the Klamath Falls area was targeted by an incendiary device found at the Klamath County Library (Herald and News, 2015). • July 2015, a chemical bomb made from a 2-liter soda bottle was found inside the Klamath County jail. 29 • May 2016, a Klamath Falls man arrested for making home-made bombs.30

27 (Source: Oregonian http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/10/terrorist_plot_unravels_at_rur.html) 28 ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/US/oregon-school-bomb-plot-suspect-spoke-classmates- bombs/story?id=19263037) 29 KDVR: http://www.kdrv.com/news/Chemical_Bomb_Found_Inside_Klamath_County_Jail_.html 30 News 10: http://ktvl.com/news/local/police-klamath-falls-man-arrested-for-making-home-made-bomb

17-15 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

• December 2016, an explosive device thrown at Oregon State Troopers during chase along Highway 66. • In January 2016, Oregon made national news with the occupation of the Malheur National Wildfire Refuge in Harney County, Oregon by anti-government militants in protest to the incarceration of convicted arsonists. The occupation lasted nearly six weeks. In direct response to this instance, in June 2016, the Klamath County Sheriff’s office entered into mutual aid agreements allowing for immediate law enforcement responses to threats of similar nature to the occupation, which occur on property owned by large companies in the area, such as BNSF and PacifiCorp.31

Figure 17-2 Number of Terrorist Plots against United States 1983-2015

Civil Disorders The United States has a long history of civil disorders and civil unrest. It is part of our nation’s history. Unlike other large-scale emergencies that bring communities together, civil disorders are divisive. Since the 1960s, this division is often racial. These disturbances often follow a protest or high profile event affecting local communities. These disturbances are classified as communal riots and are considered to be conflicts between two or more ethnic groups. In the 1960’s, commodity riots emphasized the economic and political distribution of power among groups. The last decade, however, has seen increased civil disturbances, including rioting and looting following incidents such as the Michael Brown and Eric Garner shootings, immigration-related rulings, and even major-league sports events throughout the United States. Civil disorders have, and will continue to occur throughout our country. Active Shooter In recent years, the number of active shooter incidents has increased significantly, with larger numbers of victims being recorded. The FBI defines an active shooter as “one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area.”32 The “active” aspect of the definition inherently implies that both law enforcement personnel and citizens have the potential to affect the outcome of the

31 Herald and News available at http://www.heraldandnews.com/news/county-to-bolster-terrorist-response- ability/article_f67c8270-8c58-5fab-9aee-f30f90db8830.html 32 Federal Bureau of Investigation (2016) Active Shooter Incidents in the United States in 2014 and 2015. Accessed Sept 2016. Available at: https://www.fbi.gov/about/partnerships/office-of-partner-engagement/active-shooter- incidents

17-16 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS event based upon their responses to the situation (ibid). Cursory review of FBI and other datasets indicates that since 2000, there have been over 175 active-shooter events within schools alone. Within Oregon, these include: – June 2014 – Troutdale, Oregon - 14-year-old freshman was killed, a physical education teacher was injured, and the gunman, a 15-year-old exchanged gunfire with police officers. – December 2014 – North Portland, Oregon - A gunman shot three students and a man outside Rosemary Anderson High School. Two men, aged eighteen and twenty-two, were arrested in connection with the shooting. – October 2015 Roseburg, Oregon – An Umpqua Community College student killed eight students and one teacher, injuring nine others, killing himself after engaging in a gunfight with responding law enforcement. Review of data by the Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) indicates that during the time period 2000-2015, the number of active shooter incidents in the United States has continued to increase, with 2014 and 2015 each experiencing 20 incidents each (discussed below). A 2014 study completed by the DOJ covering the time period 2000-2013 also demonstrated an increase, with the 2000- 2013 period averaging 11.4 incidents annually, with a total of 160 (see Figure 17-3). Of those 160 incidents occurring between 2000-2013, 1,043 causalities resulted (wounded or killed [shooters were not included in the total]), with 486 killed, and 557 wounded.

Figure 17-3 Accounting of Active Shooter Incidents Throughout the United States 2000-2013 Source: http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/september/fbi-releases-study-on-active-shooter-incidents

Of the 160 incidents analyzed in the 2014 study, the location of the shootings varied (see Figure 17-4), with the greatest number occurring in business which were open to pedestrian traffic (27.5% or 44 incidents). Businesses with closed pedestrian traffic had 23 incidents during that time period, with malls across our nation having six incidents. With respect to Educational facilities impacted, there were 27 incidents occurring in the Pre-K-12th grade, and 12 incidents occurring at institutions of higher learning.

17-17 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 17-4 FBI Location Categories of Active Shooter Incidents 2000-2013 Source: http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/september/fbi-releases-study-on-active-shooter-incidents

For the 40 incidents occurring during 2014 and 2015, statistical review shows the following:

– 26 states were involved. – There were 231 casualties, with 92 killed and 139 wounded (excluding the shooters). – Four (4) law enforcement officers were killed and 10 wounded in six incidents; three (3) unarmed security guards were wounded. – Six (6) of the incidents ended when citizens acted to end the threat. – 26 of the incidents ended with law enforcement at the scene; 14 of those incidents ended with an exchange of gunfire between the 16 shooters and law enforcement. – During the incidents which ended with an exchange of gunfire between the shooters, 12 were killed by police, one while off-duty. Three (3) of the suspects committed suicide during the standoff, while one surrendered to law enforcement. – Of the 42 shooters, 39 were male and three (3) were female. There were two (2) husband-and-wife teams. – 16 of the shooters remaining (not included in the above analysis), committed suicide; seven (7) at the scene before law enforcement arrived, seven (7) at the scene after law enforcement arrived, and two (2) at another location. – A total of 14 shooters were killed by law enforcement, with 12 shooters being apprehended; seven (7) by law enforcement alone and five (5) through citizen involvement. – 15 of the 40 incidents occurred in areas of commerce, with six (6) occurring in educational environments (three at pre-K-12th grade) and three (3) at Institutions of Higher Education. – Six incidents occurred in a variety of open space locations; six (6) occurred on government or military property; two (2) incidents occurred in health care facilities; two (2) at a house of worship or religiously-affiliated facility; three (3) took place or were initiated at a residence. – Fifteen of the 40 (37.5%) incidents occurring in 2014-2015 meet the criteria cited in the federal definition of a “mass killings,” that is, “3 or more killings in a single incident.”33 This is

33 The Investigative Assistance for Violent Crimes Act of 2012, 28 USC 530C(b)(1)(M)(i) is silent on whether to include the shooter in the total of 3 or more; The FBI does not include the shooter in its totals of killed and wounded.

17-18 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS

consistent with the FBI’s previous study of 160 active shooter incidents that found 40% of the incidents fell within the federal definition of mass killings. Of the active shooter incidents occurring within the last two years, none took place in the Klamath Tribal Planning Area; however, one involved a Tribal Administration Office and one involved a Casino. The following is a brief excerpt of those incidents as provided by the FBI report (ibid): – On February 20, 2014, Cherie Louise Rhoades (female), 44, armed with a handgun, allegedly began shooting at an eviction hearing at the Cedarville Rancheria Tribal Office in Alturas, California. Four people were killed, including 3 of the shooter’s relatives; 2 were wounded. After the shooter expended all of her ammunition, a citizen was able to restrain her until law enforcement arrived. – On August 2, 2014, Justin Joe Armstrong, 28, armed with a rifle, began shooting in the parking lot of the Hon-Dah Resort Casino and Conference Center in Pinetop, Arizona. After wounding 2, the shooter moved to the middle of the nearby highway and began shooting at passing cars. No one was killed; 2 people were wounded, including the wounding of an unarmed security guard. The shooter was killed during an exchange of gunfire with law enforcement.

Cyber Crime

Data breaches, particularly when they involve sensitive information such as Social Security numbers and health records, threaten not only the privacy but also the security and economic wellbeing of consumers. Breaches also impact a wide range of industries, from the health care and financial services sectors to retail and small businesses, and pose a threat to critical infrastructure and national security. Now that organizations rely increasingly on the collection and use of personal information, criminals take advantage of security weaknesses to obtain and profit from that same information. As a result, it is more important than ever that mechanisms are in place to ensure data does not end up in the wrong hands.

Cyber-attacks on infrastructure can originate from adversaries such as hostile governments, criminal organizations, or lone individuals. Incidents can range from ransomware (a type of malware that encrypts, or locks, digital files and demands ransom to release the data), to people hacking systems just to look for bragging rights. Businesses may attempt to gain an upper hand in the marketplace by hacking a competitor’s website, and of course, there are criminals wanting to steal your personal information to sell on the black markets. Cyber-attacks against governments have historically required that the information be used for the purpose of gaining warfare information or access. Regardless of the cause – the number of incidents have climbed exponentially.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which regulates national banks, has issued warnings to banks and business of their potential risk, and has stated that “attacks have been increasingly aimed at businesses with fewer than 250 employees.”34 According to the same report, financial institutions are reluctant to provide details and information about potential cyber-attacks for fear of becoming a greater target; therefore, attacks often go unreported. Software manufactures estimate that cyber-attacks against U.S. businesses have increased 42 percent over the course of the last several years.35

Reports by the National Intelligence Agency to the Senate Intelligence Committee (March 2013) indicated that “U.S. agencies judge that there is only a ‘remote chance’ over the next two years of a ‘major cyber-

34 Associated Press. (2013). As Cyber Attacks Detonate, Banks Grid for Battle. Available at: http://www.krem.com/news/national/215674771.html. Accessed August 22, 2014. 35 ibid

17-19 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

attack against US critical infrastructure’ such as a regional power grid. Less sophisticated attacks, such as denial-of-service attacks against bank websites, could be more likely.36

Since the 2013 report was released, there have been several well-documented reports of victims, including the Sony Corp (Las Angeles, CA), which was breached at an unprecedented, well-planed level beginning November 24, 2014. Investigators indicated that the Sony attack was carried out by an organized group. Guardians of Peace (GOP) claimed responsibility for the hacking. Within days of the Sony Corp being struck by the initial attack, Sony PlayStation was also attacked with denial of service by patrons worldwide. In addition, Sony employees also received threatening emails from the GOP. Other large companies, such as eBay was also compromised, with 233 million users’ personal records obtained by hackers (2014), as was J.P. Morgan & Company. In 2015, various health departments and insurance companies were compromised, as have large nationwide chain stores and restaurants, such as Target, Home Depot, P.F. Chang’s, Domino’s Pizza, and others. In some instances, the hackers attempt to extort the businesses in exchange for ending the hack, or take down companies with a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS). The U.S. Department of Justice was hacked with a denial of service. During the time period January – March 2016, it is estimated by numerous sources that over 8,000 cyber security issues of various nature have occurred.

Incendiary Attacks From the standpoint of structural design, the vehicle bomb is the most important consideration and has been a favorite tactic of terrorists. Ingredients for homemade bombs are easily obtained on the open market, as are the techniques for making bombs. The severity of impact is based on the amount and type of explosive materials used. FEMA characterizes a terrorist attack involving an incendiary attack as follows:

• Application Mode—Initiation of fire or explosion on or near target via direct contact or remotely via projectile. • Duration/Threat Impact—Generally minutes to hours. • Severity—Extent of damage is determined by type and quantity of device, accelerant, and materials present at or near target. Effects generally static other than cascading consequences, incremental structural failure, etc. • Mitigating and Exacerbating Conditions—Mitigation factors include built-in fire detection and protection systems and fire-resistive construction techniques, or security measures which reduce exposure. Inadequate security can allow easy access to target, easy concealment of an incendiary device, and undetected initiation of a fire. Non-compliance with fire and building codes, as well as failure to maintain existing fire protection systems, can substantially increase the effectiveness of a fire weapon. Historically, more building damage has been due to collateral effects than direct attack. Based on access to the agent, the degree of difficulty, and past experience, it can be stated that the chance of a large-scale explosive attack occurring is extremely low and that a smaller explosive attack is far more likely37.

Severity To date, the Zika virus has been found in 50 other countries in the Americas and the Caribbean. The virus is also disbursing through the continental United States. With the absence of medical countermeasures (e.g.,

36 http://www.khq.com/story/21586758/spy-agencies-say-cyber-attacks-top-current-threats-against-us 37 www.fema.gov/pdf/plan/prevent/rms/155/e155_unit_v.pdf FEMA 452: Risk Assessment: A How-To Guide to Mitigate Potential Terrorist Attacks

17-20 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS vaccines and / or treatments), the basic public health strategy in the United States has been to focus on aggressive vector control campaigns in areas likely to be breeding grounds for mosquitoes that carry the virus and to be prepared to mobilize quickly in the event that outbreaks occur.

As with most vector and/ or health related hazards, much of the strategy is predicated on targeted risk communication. As such, it is critical for public health officials to know their potential audiences, the public’s knowledge and attitudes about Zika, and the public’s general receptivity to the most common public health strategies and messages.

The severity of human-caused threats is challenging to measure due to the human nature involved and the unpredictability of the type of threat. In most cases, the intent behind a terrorist event is to cause high impact on people through death and injury, followed by economic impact (through property damage, loss of income, etc.) and loss of continuity of government.

In general, the largest credible explosive size of incendiary or explosive devices is a function of the security measures (deterrence mechanisms) in place. Each line of security may be thought of as a sieve, reducing the size of the weapon that may gain access. Therefore, the largest weapons are considered in totally unsecured public spaces (e.g., in a vehicle on the nearest public street), and the smallest weapons are considered in the most secured areas of a building (e.g., in a briefcase smuggled past the screening station). The FBI has provided various Bomb Threat Stand-Off Distance calculations for use in general emergency planning.38 See Figure 17-5, Figure 17-6, and Figure 17-7 for additional information concerning potential impact.

Courtesy U.S. Technical Support Working Group (TSWG)

Figure 17-5 Bomb Threat Stand-Off Distance Data - TSWG

38 DHS News & Terrorism – Communicating in a Crisis. IED Attack Fact Sheet. Accessed 4 Jan 2017. Available at: https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/prep_ied_fact_sheet.pdf

17-21 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Figure 17-6 FBI Bomb Threat Standoff Distance Source: http://www.nctc.gov/site/pdfs

17-22 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS

Figure 17-7 Explosive Impact While these graphics provide information for use during an emergency situation, a building’s given vulnerability to explosions depends on too many factors to determine a common, blanketed response determination. Construction and composition, as well as content, are also factors which pre-planning should take into consideration. This 2017 plan update provides general information for planning purposes only, and should not be used in making life-safety decisions. A much greater level of information would be necessary to determine safety measures, well beyond the scope of this planning document.

Mass-casualty incidents (MCI) could result from any human-caused threat, including random acts of violence such as shootings or hostage situations, detonation of explosive devices, such as the Roseberg, Oregon Shooting, the Boston Marathon bombing, or release of a WMD, including a chemical, biological, or radiological incident, contaminating persons and requiring mass decontamination. Effects may include serious injuries, loss of life, and associated property damage. Because large numbers of patients may be involved, significant MCIs may tax local emergency medical and hospital resources, and therefore require a regional response.

Frequency While education, heightened awareness, and early warning of unusual circumstances may deter crime and terrorism, intentional acts that harm people and property are possible at any time. Public safety entities would then react to the threat, locating, isolating, and neutralizing further damage and investigating potential scenes and suspects to bring criminals to justice.

17-23 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Various terrorism trends have resulted in a threat environment more complex and diverse than ever before. In the past 10 years, al Qaeda, its affiliates, and homegrown terrorists all have attempted attacks on the homeland. New tactics and tradecraft have emerged that further complicate the myriad of threats facing the United States. The increased availability of information on the Internet has allowed terrorist groups to overcome their geographic limits and plays an increasing role in facilitating terrorist activities in any geographic location. Due to this more decentralized threat environment, the next attack could come at the hands of a well-trained al Qaeda operative equipped with a sophisticated improvised explosive device or a lone homegrown domestic terrorist using an automatic weapon to attack a shopping mall. In the past several years, terrorists have succeeded in attacking various areas in the United States several times, which have resulted in several fatalities and injuries. In addition to the mass fatalities discussed in sections above (active shooter, school shootings, etc.), there are also additional incidents, such as:

– The intentional driving of an SUV into a crowd of students at the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill in 2006 – The shooting at an army recruitment office in Little Rock, Arkansas, in 2009 – The shooting by U.S. Army Major Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood, also in 2009; – The bombings at the Boston City Marathon on April 15, 2013 – The Washington Navy Yard shooting which occurred on September 16, 2013, when lone gunman Aaron Alexis fatally shot 12 people and injured three others in a mass shooting at the headquarters of the Naval Sea Systems Command inside the Washington Navy Yard in southeast Washington, D.C.39,40. – June 12, 2016 massacre at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida, in which at least 49 people were killed. – July 25, 2016 - Fort Meyers, Florida nightclub shooting, in which two teenagers were killed and more than 18 injured. As indicated, the number of active shooter situations has also increased, with targets including more businesses than any other industry type.

A large portion of attempts identified nationwide are considered homegrown terror plots. This means that one or more of the actors were American citizens, legal permanent residents, or visitors radicalized predominately in the United States when applying the Congressional definition of domestic or homegrown terrorist. Of those incidents, primary target focal points included military facilities; highly populated targets, and areas which include mass gatherings, such as sporting events (including races and marathons), nightclubs and bars, casinos, and shopping malls41.

39 “Aaron Alexis easily passed two background checks, bought shotgun from Sharpshooters in Lorton, Va.” The Washington Times. Retrieved November 23, 2014.

40 Yan, Holly; Duke, Alan (September 22, 2013). “Who were the victims of the Navy Yard shooting?” CNN. Retrieved November 23, 2014.

41 Jessica Zuckerman, Steve Bucci, Ph.D. and James Carafano, Ph.D. The Heritage Foundation. “60 Terrorist Plots Since 9/11: Continued Lessons in Domestic Counterterrorism, July 2013, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/07/60-terrorist-plots- since-911-continued-lessons-in-domestic-counterterrorism (Accessed November 17, 2014).

17-24 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS

17.8 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT Overview The entire Tribal Planning Area is susceptible to the various hazards discussed briefly within this profile, and many more hazards could be included within this assessment, although the purpose is only to give a very limited overview of only some of the other hazards of concern. Future planning efforts may elect to focus more in depth into any of these hazards.

Terrorists go to great lengths to ensure their actions result in disproportionate impact, even if it means destroying an entire structure or killing and wounding thousands of persons proximate to the intended target. While the likelihood of a terrorist event is low, the fact that commercially available materials and agents can easily be developed into a WMD does not extinguish the potential for an incident to occur because the human factor involved is a constant variable. Additionally, anniversary dates often attempt to bring attention back to a specific issue, and are often viewed favorably by groups.

Cyber incidents do not need to occur within the planning area for them to be effective against any of the Tribal assets, members, or infrastructure in place. Denial of access incidents occur regularly against large and small organizations and businesses. SCADA systems used commonly within the utility industries to control the flow of water and energy have become more of a target of cyber incidents over the course of the last several years.

Transportation incidents which occur within the geographic area can disrupt access and evacuation if necessary, but commodity flow can also be impacted from incidents occurring in areas outside of the planning area.

Health hazards can be transported and spread through various means. Various strains of viruses have become increasingly resistant to the historic treatment protocols used for controlling their spread. Each year, new strains of flu are introduced into the population, which do not respond to treatment previously utilized.

Warning Time

Only a very small percentage of all terrorism incidents are preceded by a warning from the terrorists themselves. However, in the case of the attempted bombings and various other terrorist activities nationwide, many have been thwarted as citizens are much more aware of their surroundings, and are providing key information to law enforcement, which greatly enhances the ability of public officials to provide critical advanced warning information. Likewise, law enforcement, through the sharing of information and establishment of new terrorist-related programs like state fusion centers, law enforcement personnel are able to gather intelligence information which is more reliable, allowing for precautionary measures to be taken to help reduce or eliminate the impact from terrorist incidents.

For health hazards, organizations such as the CDC and WHO provide advanced warning, providing both recommendations for treatment, as well as methods for curtailing spread.

Impact on Life, Health and Safety Impact from any of the hazards identified could range from an isolated incident, to a highly-coordinated act of destruction by multiple agents upon multiple targets. Large-scale incidents have the potential to kill or injure many citizens in the immediate vicinity, and may also affect people a relative distance from the initial event. The cost of a terrorist act would be felt in terms of loss of life, disruption of activity and long-term

17-25 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

emotional impacts. Variables affecting exposure for a WMD attack include the type of product, the physical and chemical properties of the substance, the physical state of the product (solid, liquid, or gas), and the ambient temperature, wind speed, wind direction, barometric pressure, and humidity.

Although terrorism and civil disturbance have not resulted in a large number of deaths in this area, this type of hazard can be deadly and widespread, and has the potential to occur based on the unknown factor of human response and emotions. Any individuals exposed to these hazards are considered to be at risk, particularly those working as first responder professionals. History has also shown us that active shooter incidents can occur anywhere – in any size community. The fact that the Klamath Falls library and the Klamath County Jail have been targets for attempted bombings demonstrates the potential for harm to be inflicted.

Impact on Property Depending on the incident involved, property damage resulting from any of the hazards referenced in this section could involve both private residences and business, and public facilities, and all are equally at risk.

The opportunity for access, unmonitored areas, and the proximity of many structures to transportation corridors, pipelines or facilities which maintain chemicals all have the potential to increase exposure of structures to human-caused threats.

Impact on Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Critical infrastructure is customarily defined as assets, systems, and networks, whether physical or virtual, so vital that the incapacity or destruction of such asset, system or network would have a debilitating impact on security, economy, public health or safety, or any combination of those matters42.

All structures in the planning area are physically vulnerable to the threats outlined in this chapter. The emphasis on accessibility, the opportunity for roof access, driveways underneath some structures, unmonitored areas, the proximity of many structures to transportation corridors and underground pipelines, and the potential for a terrorist to strike any structure randomly all have an impact on the vulnerability of structures. In general terms, the majority of all critical facilities carry some level of risk because of their accessibility, including vehicle accessibility, and lack of a secure or hardened design.

Societal norms indicate that we are fully dependent upon information technology and information infrastructure. At the core of the information infrastructure upon which we rely is the Internet, which connects one computer to another, networking the nation’s infrastructure and essential services. Services such as electrical transforms, water distribution centers, security systems (radar), and economic sectors (stock markets) all exist with the infrastructure at its nexus.

While a technological incident of cyber-failure can occur internal to organizations or be a widespread incident due to an accident or resulting from a natural hazard, loss of information networks can have serious consequences, such as disruption of critical operations, loss of revenue or intellectual property, or loss of life. Of primary concern is the lack of redundant systems (or security measures) which could impact infrastructure to the extent capable of causing debilitating disruption, including compromising computer functions, and prolonged disruption of service. Those impacted by such cyber failures, including potential

42 http://www.dhs.gov/what-critical-infrastructure

17-26 HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS data loss, can include government and private sector owned control systems for transportation and communications, industrial processes, power and other utility generation and distribution.

Impact on Economy Economic impacts from these threats have demonstrated themselves to be significant as it includes not only the actual direct impact on businesses, but the potential for secondary economic loss from the inability of government to function fully. Recovery could take significant resources and expense at the local level.

The impact from the World Trade Center bombings demonstrates how such a terrorist event can have global impacts on the economic front. While the primary impact of a terrorist act would be felt in terms of loss of life and injuries (mass casualties), property damage, disruption of business activity and long-term emotional impacts would take significant resources and expense at the local level, significantly impacting recovery.

Further economic impacts could include:

– Utility losses, which could cause a reduction in employment, wholesale and retail sales, utility repairs, and increased medical risks. Local governments may lose sales tax, and the finances of private utility companies and the businesses that rely on them would be disrupted. – The economic impact of computer security breaches associated with data and telecommunications losses could be staggering. – The economic impacts should a transportation facility be rendered impassable would be significant. The loss of a roadway or railway would have serious effects on the economy and local jurisdictions’ ability to provide services. Loss of travel routes would result in loss of commerce, and could impact the ability to provide emergency services to citizens by delaying response times or limiting routes for equipment such as fire apparatus, police vehicles, and ambulances. – The ability to receive fuel deliveries and other commodities would also be impacted.

Impact on Environment Human-caused and technological events have caused significant damage to the environment; however, estimating damage is difficult due to the variables of the threat itself. Loss estimation platforms such as ALOHA are able to measure potential environmental impacts based on inputs existing at the time of the event. For planning purposes, review of damages from past events provides credible information concerning potential environmental impact.

The risk of human-caused threats to the environment is considerable when considering the potential use of CBRNE materials. Reducing the exposure to the built environment will help mitigate potential losses to the natural environment.

17-27

CHAPTER 18. HAZARD RANKING

The risk ranking process conducted by Planning Team members assessed the probability of each hazard’s occurrence, as well as its likely impact on the people, property, and economy of the planning area. Also of significant concern to the Klamath People is the impact of these hazards on the environment, which factor was also taken into consideration during this plan update.

For some hazards, estimates of risk were generated with data from Hazus, using methodologies promoted by FEMA. For other hazards, citizens and Planning Team members (who have an extensive historic perspective and knowledge base concerning the impact of hazards on the Tribes) provided invaluable information during this process. That information had a significant impact on the risk ranking process. In ranking the hazards, the Planning Team completed a Calculated Priority Risk Index worksheet for each hazard (Table 18-1). The Index examines the various criteria for each hazard (probability, magnitude/severity, geographic extent and location, warning time, and duration) as discussed in Chapter 7, defines a risk index for each criterion according at four levels (1-4), and then applies a weighting factor.

The result is a score that has been used to rank the hazards for the Klamath Tribes’ identified Tribal Planning Area. Table 18-2 presents the results of the Calculated Priority Risk Index (CPRI) scoring for the hazards of concern. Table 18-3 presents the CPRI score and the hazard ranking based on that score.

Once the hazard ranking was completed, the Planning Team then conducted an additional hazard Vulnerability Overview contained in Table 18-4. Vulnerability was measured, in general, based on an assigned qualitative assignment of value of the CPRI, summarizing the potential impact based on past occurrences, spatial extent, and (subjective) damage and casualty potential. Those items were categorized into the following levels: □ Extremely Low—The occurrence and potential cost of damage to life and property is very minimal to nonexistent. □ Low—Minimal potential impact. The occurrence and potential cost of damage to life and property is minimal. □ Medium—Moderate potential impact. This ranking carries a moderate threat level to the general population and/or built environment. Here the potential damage is more isolated and less costly than a more widespread disaster. □ High—Widespread potential impact. This ranking carries a high threat to the general population and/or built environment. The potential for damage is widespread. Hazards in this category may have occurred in the past. □ Extremely High—Very widespread with catastrophic impact.

18-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 18-1 CALCULATED PRIORITY RISK INDEX DESCRIPTION

18-2 HAZARD RANKING

TABLE 18-2 KLAMATH TRIBES CALCULATED PRIORITY RANKING SCORES

Magnitude Geographic Calculated and/or Extent and Warning Priority Risk Hazard Probability Severity Location Time Duration Index Score Climate Change 4 2 4 1 4 3.20 Dam Failure 2 2 2 4 2 2.20 Drought 4 2 2 1 4 2.80 Earthquake 4 3 4 4 1 3.60 Flood 2 2 1 2 2 1.80 Landslide 2 2 2 4 1 2.15 Severe Weather 4 3 4 2 3 3.50 Volcano 1 2 2 1 3 1.55 Wildfire 4 4 3 4 1 3.65

The Calculated Priority Risk Index scoring method has a range from 0 to 4. “0” being the least hazardous and “4” being the most hazardous situation.

TABLE 18-3 HAZARD SCORE AND RANK Hazard CPRI Hazard Score Rank Climate Change 3.20 4 Dam Failure 2.20 6 Drought 2.80 5 Earthquake 3.60 2 Flood 1.80 7 Landslide 2.15 7 Severe Weather 3.5 3 Volcano 1.55 9 Wildfire 3.65 1

18-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 18-4 VULNERABILITY LEVEL OF IMPACT Population Groups Impacted Level of (By Group Type) Impact Extremely Summarized Extent and Location High,

High,

Medium,

Synopsis of Potential Impact Low, Hazard Extremely

Low

Business Children Disabled Elders Families Low Income Language Climate Climate change is measured X X X X X X X High Climate change itself Change in terms of impact on other customarily does not impact hazards of concern in a structures; however, the defined geographical area. entire population and natural Impact varies, but can resources of the Tribal include physical drought Planning Area will be conditions, water shortage, impacted by climate change. increased flood incidents, or increased wildfire danger.

Dam Dam inundation resulting X X X X X X X Medium All people, property and from dam failure can occur environment within the dam with little warning. inundation zone would be impacted. However, there are Dam owners many times do limited structures in place not share inundation zones based on current data with local communities, available. considering it privileged or protected data, leaving residents without sufficient knowledge.

Socioeconomic issues many times place individuals in areas of higher hazard because costs to reside in those areas are lower.

Dams impact fish passage and have negative impact on other environmental / natural resources, sacred to the Klamath Tribes.

18-4 HAZARD RANKING

TABLE 18-4 VULNERABILITY LEVEL OF IMPACT Population Groups Impacted Level of

(By Group Type) Impact Extremely Summarized Extent and High, Location

High,

Medium,

Low, Hazard Synopsis of Potential Impact

dren Extremely

Low

Business Chil Disabled Elders Families Low Income Language Drought is typically X X X X X X measured in terms of water availability in a defined geographical area, and is not Drought customarily does not a sudden-onset hazard, impact structures, but would Drought allowing some preparation. High impact people, cultural Socioeconomic droughts resources, and agricultural occur when physical water businesses within the Tribal shortage begins to affect Planning Area. people, individually and collectively.

Most socioeconomic definitions of drought associate it with supply, demand, and economic good.

Older structures (pre ~1970) X X X X X X X Many structures in the area have high probability of were built pre-1970, or when collapse due to building code lower codes were in place, standards; making the structures more vulnerable to collapse, Earthquake Non-English speakers may increasing the potential for have issues gaining hazard injury of individuals in the High information for preparedness. area.

Low-income individuals may The EQ risk in the area is not be able to stockpile lower than in other parts of supplies or medications. the state, but due to the age Elderly populations are of the building stock, the age vulnerable due to health of the population, and the issues, the lack of physical higher-than-average rate of strength to extricate unemployment, this increases themselves, etc. the vulnerability the hazard Businesses many times do will have in the Tribal not carry insurance which Planning Area will help them recover from losses.

18-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 18-4 VULNERABILITY LEVEL OF IMPACT Population Groups Impacted Level of

(By Group Type) Impact Extremely Summarized Extent and High, Location

High,

Medium,

Low, Hazard Synopsis of Potential Impact Extremely

Low

Business Children Disabled Elders Families Low Income Language Flood Year of construction will X X X X X X X Flooding in the area has been influence the building code less significant than other and the height to which the hazards of concern. structures was built when Currently, there are no compared to the Base Flood structures identified within Elevation. FEMA’s 100-year floodplain. No 500-year study was

In most instances, weather contained in the 1984 study. patterns which cause flooding Medium However, as a new flood are identified in advance, study is completed by allowing pre-planning for FEMA, that may change. evacuation, thereby potentially reducing the Flooding in the area can individuals at risk. impact transportation, causing roadways to be Individuals without blocked. homeowner’s insurance which covers flooding may suffer extreme financial risk.

Businesses impacted many times do not carry insurance which will help them recover from losses.

Landslide Landslides may occur X X X X X X Klamath County as a whole suddenly, or slowly over has a fairly high landslide time. In many cases, weather susceptibility based on patterns which cause flooding Medium DOGAMI analysis. or precipitation may also However, there are limited increase the risk for flooding. structures owned by the Tribes in the Tribal Planning

Areas which have historically Area which are vulnerable. experienced landslide risk are

at greater risk for future landslide occurrences. In some areas of high landslide

susceptibility, specific landslide insurance is

required.

18-6 HAZARD RANKING

TABLE 18-4 VULNERABILITY LEVEL OF IMPACT Population Groups Impacted Level of

(By Group Type) Impact Extremely Summarized Extent and Location High,

High,

Medium,

Low, Hazard Synopsis of Potential Impact Extremely

Low

Business Children Disabled Elders Families Low Income Language Severe Severe weather occurs X X X X X X X The region is susceptible to Weather regularly throughout the severe weather incidents. planning area. In most Incidents of some nature and instances, weather patterns High are forecasted in advance, degree occur annually. allowing for preparation. Depending on the type of event, roadways may be impassible. Individuals with lower Power outages, which occur fairly income may not have the regularly during high-wind ability to stock supplies, nor events, do not customarily last for afford the cost of increased a significant period of time. energy costs for both heating However, when coupled with cold or cooling, depending on the conditions, the impact to weather event. vulnerable populations increases.

In snow or ice conditions, With extreme heat events, the secondary impacts from increased fire danger impacts the driving or shoveling snow entire Tribal Planning Area. increases the risk of impact.

Elderly and young children are especially susceptible to snow and heat conditions.

Volcano In most instances, volcanic X X X X X X The area is susceptible to volcanic activity provides for eruptions; recurrence intervals are advanced warning, allowing long. Advanced warning allows citizens to evacuate. Low significant planning time for evacuation. Only a limited Ash associated with volcanic amount of tribal lands are eruptions can be carried susceptible to lahars. Ash significant distances both by accumulations, depending on wind, and by vehicles wind patterns, could cause traveling through the area. significant concern for individuals Particulates within the air with breathing/ health issues, as increase the vulnerability of well as impacting water supplies, the young, elderly, and intake valves to machinery, and individuals with breathing acidic rain killing vegetation. related conditions.

18-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 18-4 VULNERABILITY LEVEL OF IMPACT Population Groups Impacted Level of

(By Group Type) Impact Extremely Summarized Extent and Location High,

High,

Medium,

Low, Hazard Synopsis of Potential Impact Extremely

Low

Business Children Disabled Elders Families Low Income Language Wildfire Impact from wildfires has X X X X X X X Wildfire danger can impact the increased over time due to entire planning area. The various effective suppression tactics. Fire Regimes do identify areas of This has now caused fires to higher levels of risk, although burn with greater intensity, wildfires can occur in any area with the traditional fire with vegetation. regimes being modified. Due to the wind patterns in the Embers from wildfires can be area, including the shift of winds High carried significant distances during afternoon hours, embers (miles). With climate change have the potential to travel great impacting drought distances (miles) and ignite fires conditions, the potential for in areas which are densely wildfire increases as moisture wooded. In some instances, these content is depleted. fires can burn for periods of time, going un-noticed until ignition Lightning strikes and people consumes a large area, making are the major causes to containment difficult. wildfires, which can spread very quickly, leaving little to Elderly, young and individuals no time to evacuate. with breathing/health issues are more vulnerable due to smoke Individuals with access and and particulates. functional needs, the young and elderly are at greater risk Language may also be a barrier due to their potential for non-English speaking dependence on others to populations due to the inability to assist with evacuation. understand evacuation orders, which can be very short-notice. Individuals, including the young and elderly, with health concerns are impacted significantly by smoke. Increased rates of death due to smoke is not uncommon.

18-8

Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan

PART 4 — MITIGATION STRATEGY

CHAPTER 19. MITIGATION STRATEGY

The development of a mitigation strategy allows the community to create a vision for preventing future disasters. This is accomplished by establishing a common set of mitigation goals and objectives, a common method to prioritize actions, and evaluation of the success of such actions.

Once identified, the goals and objectives establish an overall mitigation strategy by which the Tribes will enhance resiliency of the planning area. When combined with the Risk Assessment data developed during this plan update, the Planning Team identified a set of mitigation action items (sometimes referred to as initiatives or strategies) which, when implemented, will help reduce the impact of the hazards on the Klamath Tribes.

19.1 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Hazard mitigation plans must identify goals and objectives for reducing long-term vulnerabilities to identified hazards (44 CFR Section 201.7(c)(3)(i)). The established goals and objectives for this plan were based on data developed during the risk assessment portion of this process, and the results of the public involvement strategy.

Goals

In identifying the 2017 goals, the Planning Team reviewed the goals from the 2007 Hazard Mitigation Plan, and felt that the goals were very limited in nature. The Planning Team determined it would be beneficial to update the goals to be more of an “all-hazards” approach, while further supporting the Tribes’ initiatives to be more self-sustaining, allowing them to: respond, recover, mitigate, protect, and prepare for the hazards of concern. Based on the review, the following goals were identified for this 2017 update process:

• Goal 1—Reduce or prevent future hazard-related injuries and losses of life, property damage, and environmental impact.

• Goal 2—Reduce the adverse impacts on the economy caused by disaster incidents.

• Goal 3—Encourage the development and implementation of long-term, cost-effective and environmentally sound mitigation projects.

• Goal 4—Enhance community emergency management capability through increased public awareness and readiness (i.e., prepare, protect, respond, recover, mitigate).

• Goal 5—Promote disaster-resistant and resilient communities.

• Goal 6—Preserve the cultural integrity of the Klamath Tribes.

Objectives

Objectives were not identified during the last planning process. As such, through a facilitated exercise, the Planning Team identified a list of objectives which support the identified goals and action items. The objectives are listed in the Table 19-1. The effectiveness of a mitigation strategy is assessed by determining

Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

how well the goals are achieved. Each identified objective meets multiple goals, serving as a measure of the effectiveness of a mitigation action, rather than as a subset of a goal. The objectives are measurable in nature, and are used to help establish priorities.

TABLE 19-1 OBJECTIVES

Objective Goals for which it Number Objective Statement can be applied O-1 Acquire (purchase), retrofit, or relocate structures in high hazard areas. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 O-2 Encourage open space uses in hazardous areas or ensure that if building occurs 1, 2, 5, 6 in these high-risk areas that it is done in such a way as to minimize risk. O-3 Use best available data, science and technologies to improve understanding of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 location and potential impacts of hazards, and to promote disaster resilient communities that minimize risk. O-4 Consider the impacts of natural hazards in all planning mechanisms that address 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 current and future land uses in the Tribal Planning Area. O-5 Increase resilience and the continuity of operations of identified critical facilities 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 within the Tribal Planning Area. O-6 Preserve the Cultural Resources of the Klamath Tribes. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 O-7 Establish a partnership among the Tribal Government and Tribal business leaders 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 with surrounding area government and business community to improve and implement methods to protect life, property, and the environment, while preserving the cultural integrity of the Klamath Tribes. O-8 Enhance community emergency management capabilities to prepare for, protect 4, 5 from, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the impact of hazards. O-9 Encourage the development and implementation of long-term, cost-effective, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and environmentally sound mitigation projects by encouraging use of incentives. O-10 Develop or improve emergency warning response and communication systems 1, 4 and evacuation procedures. O-11 Provide/improve fire protection activities through various means, including: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 public education and outreach activities, defensible space, fire-resistant landscaping, spatial distribution of development, fuel treatment activities, and enhanced water supply systems where appropriate and feasible. O-12 Encourage hazard mitigation measures that result in the least adverse effect on 3, 5, 6 the natural environment and that use natural processes, while preserving and maintaining the cultural elements of the Klamath Tribes.

19.2 MITIGATION ACTION ITEM IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS FEMA’s 2013 Catalog of Mitigation Ideas was presented to the planning team and served as the beginning point in the development of the Tribes’ initiatives. The FEMA document includes a broad range of alternatives for consideration in the planning area, in compliance with 44 CFR (Section 201.7.c.3.ii). Many of the action items or initiatives can be applied to both existing structures and new construction, as identified below. The catalog provides a baseline of mitigation initiatives that are backed by a planning process, are

19-2 MITIGATION STRATEGY consistent with the planning partners’ goals and objectives, and are within the capabilities of the Tribes to implement.

The Planning Team developed strategies/action items that are categorized and assessed in several ways: • By what the alternative would impact – new or existing structures, to include efforts which: – Manipulate/mitigate a hazard; – Reduce exposure to a hazard; – Reduce vulnerability to a hazard; • By who would have responsibility for implementation: – Individuals; – Businesses; – Government (Tribal, County, Local, State and/or Federal). • By the timeline associated with completion of the project, based on the following parameters: – Short Term = to be completed in 1 to 5 years – Long Term = to be completed in greater than 5 years – Ongoing = currently being funded and implemented under existing programs. – By the type of mitigation activity involved (most of which also coincide with CRS activities): – Prevention - Government, administrative or regulatory actions that influence the way land and buildings are developed to reduce hazard losses. This includes planning and zoning, floodplain laws, capital improvement programs, open space preservation, and stormwater management regulations. – Public Information and Education - Public information campaigns or activities which inform citizens and elected officials about hazards and ways to mitigate them – a public education or awareness campaign, including efforts such as: real estate disclosure, hazard information centers, and school-age and adult education, all of which bring awareness of the hazards of concern. – Structural Projects —Efforts taken to secure against acts of terrorism, manmade, or natural disasters. Types of projects include levees, reservoirs, channel improvements, or barricades which stop vehicles from approaching structures to protect. – Property Protection – Actions taken that protect the properties. Types of efforts include: structural retrofit, property acquisition, elevation, relocation, insurance, storm shutters, shatter-resistant glass, sediment and erosion control, stream corridor restoration, etc. Protection can be at the individual homeowner level, or a service provided by police, fire, emergency management, or other public safety entities. – Emergency Services / Response —Actions that protect people and property during and immediately after a hazard event. Includes warning systems, emergency response services, and the protection of essential facilities (e.g., sandbagging). – Natural Resource Protection – Wetlands and floodplain protection, natural and beneficial uses of the floodplain, and best management practices. These include actions that preserve or restore the functions of natural systems. Includes sediment and erosion control, stream

19-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

corridor restoration, watershed management, forest and vegetation management, and wetland restoration and preservation. – Recovery —Actions that involve the construction or re-construction of structures in such a way as to reduce the impact of a hazard, or that assist in rebuilding or re-establishing a community after a disaster incident. It also includes advance planning to address recovery efforts which will take place after a disaster. Efforts are focused on re-establishing the planning region in such a way as enhance resiliency and reduce impacts to future incidents. Recovery differs from response, which occurs during, or immediately after an incident. Recovery views long-range, sustainable efforts. • Benefit: By who the strategy benefits:  A specific structure or facility;  A local community;  County-level efforts;  Regional level benefits.

During development of these strategies, the initial starting point was review of the 2007 action items. As this current plan update is of a new format and organizational structure, the Planning Team elected to use this opportunity to modify the structure of the projects previously identified in the 2007 plan to eliminate those which are no longer relevant, combine the strategies as appropriate, and to reword existing strategies to make them more viable and hazard specific, eliminating repetitive strategies for each hazard. It was determined that streamlining the strategies will assist in maintenance activities in the future, and allow for ease in annual reporting of its mitigation strategies. Therefore, those projects which remain valid have been included within Table 19-2, and referenced as having been previously identified. The status of the 2007 projects are discussed in detail in Table 19-4.

In addition to the referenced Catalog, many of the hazard mitigation initiatives recommended in this plan were selected from among the examples presented from other planning and strategic documents – integrating various planning efforts already in existence to the greatest extent possible.

19-4 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-2 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN MATRIX

Initiative Type: Who or What Emergency Services, Benefits from Property Protection, Action? Applies to Included Prevention, Recovery, Facility, Tribal, new or in Structural Projects, Local, existing Hazards Objectives Estimated Sources of Previous Public Info., Natural County, assets Mitigated Met Lead Agency Cost Funding Timeline Plan? Resources Region 1. Study and retrofit tribal facilities to better withstand damage from a major earthquake. Existing EQ 1, 3, 5, 8, Planning, High General Short- Y - Structural Tribal 12 Facilities Fund, Term Modified HMGP, HUD 2. Evaluate and enhance the current capital improvements program for roads and drainage projects to provide better flood control in known flood problem areas. New and CC, Dam, 3, 4, 8, 9 Planning, High State Long- N Protection, Tribal, Local, Existing F, LS, SW Roads & Ecology Term Prevention, Natural County, Surface FCAAP, Resources Region Water PDM, HMGP, DOT 3. Working with county and state agencies as appropriate, seek steep slope stability project funding or relocation funding for roads with histories of instability. Existing EQ, F, LS, 1, 2, 3, 4, Planning, High PDM, Long- N Emergency Tribal, Local, SW 8, 9, 11, Roads & HMGP, Term Services, Protection, County, 12 Surface USDOT, Prevention Region Water, WADOT Klamath County and local jurisdictions 4. Seek grant funding for acquisition of properties within high-hazard areas. Existing All 1, 2, 4, 8, All High PDM, Long- Y – All Facility, 9, 12 HMGP Term Modified Tribal 5. Identify facilities such as the community centers which require generators to maintain use of kitchen facilities for long-term incidents. In addition, develop database of grocery stores and fueling stations in the immediate area who have generators in order to determine potential need for generators, and availability of food in the event of a disaster. New and All 3, 5, 7, 8, Planning, Low General On- N Recovery Facility, Existing 9 Facilities Fund Going Tribal, Local 6. Work toward becoming a StormReady Community. New and F, LS, 3, 4, 5, 6, EM Low General Short- N Prevention, Public Tribal Existing SW, 7 8, 10, Fund Term Education 12 7. Conduct a needs assessment to determine logistical requirements for equipment and parts for wells and water distribution sources to ensure a surplus allowing for continued supply of water in case commodity flow is impacted by a major event.

19-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 19-2 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN MATRIX

Initiative Type: Who or What Emergency Services, Benefits from Property Protection, Action? Applies to Included Prevention, Recovery, Facility, Tribal, new or in Structural Projects, Local, existing Hazards Objectives Estimated Sources of Previous Public Info., Natural County, assets Mitigated Met Lead Agency Cost Funding Timeline Plan? Resources Region Existing Dam, F, 1, 3, 4, 5, Planning, Low General Short- N Emergency Tribal, Local, EQ, LS, 7, 8, 11, Facilities Fund Term Services, Protection County SW, V, 12 WF 8. Seek grant funding to construct an emergency operations center location which can support Tribal efforts. New All 3, 4, 5, 6, Tribal High HLS Long- N All Tribal 7, 8, 10 Administra- Term tion 9. Continue to design and build facilities to meet or exceed seismic (or load) standards, including redundant essential equipment. Apply current IBC seismic and load standards to all renovation or replacement of existing facilities, and/or equipment. New and EQ, LS, 1, 2, 3, 4, Planning, Medium PDM, Long- Y - Prevention Existing SW, V 5, 6, 8, 9 Facilities HMGP Term Modified 10. Conduct activities that support mitigation efforts to reduce the negative influence of natural hazards impacting the Klamath Tribal Planning Area and Klamath County as a whole, such as appropriate hazard identification, warning, dissemination of relevant information and data, and public outreach. New All All Planning, Low General On- Y – All All Health Fund, HLS, Going Modified Health 11. Conduct a detailed threat hazard identification and risk assessment on identified critical infrastructure and high-population facilities to determine potential risk. New and Other 3, 4, 5, 6, Planning Medium DOJ Grants, Short- N Prevention, Property Tribal Existing Hazards 7, 8, 9, HLS Term Protection (e.g., 01, 12 Terrorism, Hazmat) 12. Work with local public and private entities to review infrastructure control systems and ensure appropriate level of security and protection measures are in place. As appropriate, conduct audit of policies and procedures to ensure consistency and accuracy in application of security devices in place. New and Other 3, 7, 8, Planning Medium General Long- N Property Protection, All Existing Hazards 10, 11, Funds Term Structural, (e.g., 12 Emergency Techno, Services, Prevention Hazmat) 13 Utilize data gathered during risk assessment to identify capital projects that, when modified, increase the resilience of the Tribal structures and conveyances to damage, or that allow a more expedited process for recovery from the impact of disaster incidents. New and All All All Low General Long- N Recovery, Tribal Existing Funds, Term Prevention, Grants Structural

19-6 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-2 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN MATRIX

Initiative Type: Who or What Emergency Services, Benefits from Property Protection, Action? Applies to Included Prevention, Recovery, Facility, Tribal, new or in Structural Projects, Local, existing Hazards Objectives Estimated Sources of Previous Public Info., Natural County, assets Mitigated Met Lead Agency Cost Funding Timeline Plan? Resources Region 14. Consider projects enhancing resistance of tribal structures to impact from hazards of concern, such as seismic bracing of equipment, piping and fixtures, removal of high hazard beams; increased load capacity from wind, snow, and volcanic ash; or access road reinforcement. New and EQ, LS, 1, 2, 3, 5, Facilities, High General Long- N Emergency Tribal Existing SW, V 7, 8, 9, Planning Funds, OR Term Services, Recovery, 10, 11, DOT, US Prevention, 12 DOT, PDM, Structural HMGP 15. Implement a recovery system to ensure maximum FEMA reimbursement for disaster response, repair, mitigation and recovery, which will capture and track damages sustained, emergency activities, associated expenses (mileage, supplies, expendables, outside vendors, etc.), employee time, and dedicated resources. New and All 3, 7, 8, 9, Finance, Medium EMPG, On- N Emergency Tribal Existing 10 Tribal General Going Services, Response, Administra- Fund Recovery tion 16. Utilize data from the current risk assessment to update GIS capacity and capabilities. New and All 3, 10 GIS/NR Low General On- N Emergency Tribal Existing Fund, Going Services, HMGP Prevention, Protection 17. Identify and train Tribal staff, youth, and volunteers that will be utilized for emergency management efforts. Training to be considered includes: ICS classes for NIMS compliance, ATC 20/45, Disaster Site Worker Training, Emergency Response Training, and Damage Assessment. New All 8 EM, HR, Medium General On- N Emergency Services Tribal Facilities, Fund, HLS Going Local Law Enforcement 18. Work with local transit organizations to develop an exercise related to evacuation of residents. New All 8 Human Medium DOT, Short- N Emergency Tribal, Local, Services, HMEP, Term Services, Recovery County Planning, EMPG, Fire Tribal Grants, Council, HUD, DOH Tribal and Klamath County Transit 19. Leverage resources and partnerships to train and exercise together to ensure continuity during real world events. New All 8 EM, Medium General On- N Emergency All Planning Budget, Going Services, Prevention Grants

19-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 19-2 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN MATRIX

New and All All Tribal Low General Long- Y – Prevention, Public Tribal Existing Council, Fund Term Modified Information, Planning Property Protection, Emergency Services, Natural Resource Protection 24. Utilizing data from this HMP, update the Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) to include all hazards of concern to establish management and operations during emergency or disaster situations. New and All All EM, Low General Short- N Emergency Tribal Existing Planning Fund, THLS Term Services, Recovery

25. Develop a post-disaster action plan for all hazards of concern that addresses debris management, cultural/historical data gathering, substantial damage assessment, and grant management. New and All All EM, Low General Long- N Emergency Tribal Existing Planning, Fund, BIA, Term Services, Recovery Cultural THLS Heritage

19-8 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-2 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN MATRIX

New and CC, Dam, 5, 8, 10, Facilities Medium HMGP, Short- N Emergency Facilities, Existing EQ, F, LS 11 THLS, BIA, Term Services, Recovery Tribal SW, WF DOH, General Fund 29. Consider a building setback/spacing requirement for new construction in areas susceptible to wildfire exposure.

New CC, 1, 2, 4, Planning Low General Long- N Prevention Facilities Drought, 10, 12 Fund Term WF 30. Join the Firewise program by adopting the program’s policies for managing wildland-urban interface areas in the Tribal Planning Area. New and CC, 11 Facilities, Low Various Fire Short- N Prevention, Public Facilities, Existing Drought, Planning, Grants, Term Education Tribal WF Natural Oregon Resources DNR wildfire grants 31. Consider planting standards in wildland buffer areas to require fire-resistant plants with loose branching habits, non-resinous woody material, high moisture content leaves and limited seasonal accumulation of dead vegetation. New Drought, 2, 3, 4, 6, Planning Low Various Fire Short- Y – Prevention, Facilities, WF 7, 8, 9, Grants, Term Modified Protection, Tribal 11 HMGP, Structural, Natural Oregon Resources DNR

19-9 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 19-2 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN MATRIX

Initiative Type: Who or What Emergency Services, Benefits from Property Protection, Action? Applies to Included Prevention, Recovery, Facility, Tribal, new or in Structural Projects, Local, existing Hazards Objectives Estimated Sources of Previous Public Info., Natural County, assets Mitigated Met Lead Agency Cost Funding Timeline Plan? Resources Region 32. Continue working with Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board for various watershed improvement activities. New and CC, Dam, 1, 2, 3, 7 Natural Medium OR WEB Long- N Prevention, Region Existing Drought, Resources Grants Term Protection, Natural F, SW Resources 33. Continue working on the Legacy Road Reconstruction program for projects such as: decommissioning/vacating of roadways of high negative impact to natural resources; road upgrades; surface drainage improvements; road stabilization, and culvert replacement for fish passage. New and CC, F, 1, 2, 3, 4, Transporta- Medium DOT, Long- N Prevention, Region Existing SW 6, 7, 8, 9, tion HMGP, Term Protection, Natural 10, 12 PDM, EPA, Resources OR State Grants, 34. Work with dam owners to obtain current Emergency Action Plans and inundation maps. New and Dam, EQ, 1, 3, 4, 6, EM, Low General Short- Y – Protection, Region Existing F, SW 8, 10 Planning Fund Term Modified Emergency Services, Recovery, Natural Resources 35. Work with county and local water purveyors and well owners to ensure plans are in place to address future drought and climate change conditions; potential contamination of water (either from hazmat or human acts of aggression), and from possible contamination from volcanic ash. Include dam owners in this effort. New and CC, 3, 4, 8, EM, Medium DOH, EPA, Long- N Prevention, Public Region Existing Drought, 11, 12 Facilities, Bureau of Term Education, V, WF, Planning Reclamation Protection, Other Recovery, Natural Hazards of Resources Concern 36. Retrofit Williamson River Indian Mission and Braymill Property to higher seismic and load standards for use as potential shelters. Existing All All EM, High HMGP, Long- N Structural, Facilities, Facilities PDM Term Emergency Tribal, Local, Services, Recovery County 37. Determine, though engineered assessment, the structural stability of critical facility roofs, carports, and garages to withstand ice and snow loads, as well as the volume of volcanic ash.

Existing SW, V 1, 3, 4, 5, EM, High HMGP, Long- Y Prevention, Public Facilities 6, 8, 12 Facilities, PDM Term Information, Planning Structural Protection 38. Develop emergency response plans which provide information to the public about volcanic ash, including instructions for keeping ash out of buildings, vehicles, and other equipment, and participating in clean-up operations.

19-10 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-2 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN MATRIX

Initiative Type: Who or What Emergency Services, Benefits from Property Protection, Action? Applies to Included Prevention, Recovery, Facility, Tribal, new or in Structural Projects, Local, existing Hazards Objectives Estimated Sources of Previous Public Info., Natural County, assets Mitigated Met Lead Agency Cost Funding Timeline Plan? Resources Region New and V 1, 3, 4, 5, Facilities, Low General Short- Y Prevention, Public Facilities Existing 6, 8, 12 Planning Fund, Term Information, HMGP, Structural, PDM Protection, Natural Resources 39. Construct shelter facility for use during disaster incident. Facility can also be used as a warming, cooling, or feeding shelter during extreme weather events. Shelter should be constructed large enough to enable sheltering of citizens visiting the Tribal Planning Area, including Casino guests who may be stranded as a result of sudden-onset incident (e.g., earthquake). New All 7, 8 EM High HUD Block Short- N Prevention, Tribal, Local, Grants, Term Structural, County, General Protection, Natural Region Fund, Resources HMGP, PDM, Fire Grants 40. Seek out and apply for grant funding to obtain a communications systems for use within the Tribal Planning Area. This could include towers, satellite systems, and radios. The Tribes currently have no reliable means of communicating during an incident as cell phone coverage in many areas is spotty, and most structures do not have generators to power phones. While law enforcement and fire dispatching occurs through the County 9-1-1 system, the Tribe’s Game Enforcement Department has no adequate means of communications due to inoperability of the type and frequency of radios, causing officer-safety issues. In addition, during an incident, the various tribal offices have no means to communicate to direct incident command and manage an incident occurring within the Tribal Planning Area. New All 3, 5, 7 EM, High Homeland High N Emergency Tribal, Local, Planning, IT, Security, Services, Public County, Administra- Fire Grants, Info, Prevention, Region tion State Inter- Protection, Operability Recovery Grants 41. Work with local hazmat carriers, including rail carriers, to obtain information on the types and loads of materials traveling through the Tribal Planning Area. New All 3, 5, 7 EM, Low HMEP, Short- N Prevention, Public Regional Planning HLS, DOT, Term Information, Fire Structural, Emergency Services, Protection, Recovery, Natural Resources 42. As the Tribes’ Public Safety Department is developed, obtain training for hazmat responders at various levels, and obtain equipment necessary to protect responders.

19-11 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 19-2 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN MATRIX

19.3 BENEFIT/COST REVIEW Once established, the action plan must then be prioritized according to some form of a benefit/cost analysis of the proposed projects and their associated costs. The benefits of proposed projects were weighed against estimated costs as part of the project prioritization process. The benefit/cost analysis was not of the detailed variety required by FEMA for project grant eligibility under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) grant program. A less formal approach was used because some projects may not be implemented for up to 10 years, and associated costs and benefits could change dramatically in that time. Therefore, a review of the apparent benefits versus the apparent cost of each project was performed. Parameters were established for assigning subjective ratings (high, medium, and low) to the costs and benefits of these projects.

Cost ratings were defined as follows: • High—Existing funding will not cover the cost of the project; implementation would require new revenue through an alternative source (for example, bonds or grants). • Medium—The project could be implemented with existing funding but would require a re- apportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of the project would have to be spread over multiple years. • Low—The project could be funded under the existing budget. The project is part of or can be part of an ongoing existing program.

Benefit ratings were defined as follows:

19-12 MITIGATION STRATEGY

• High—Project will provide an immediate reduction of risk exposure for life and property. • Medium—Project will have a long-term impact on the reduction of risk exposure for life and property, or project will provide an immediate reduction in the risk exposure for property. • Low—Long-term benefits of the project are difficult to quantify in the short term.

Using this approach, projects with positive benefit versus cost ratios (such as high over high, high over medium, medium over low, etc.) are considered cost-beneficial and are prioritized accordingly.

For many of the strategies identified in this action plan, the Klamath Tribes may seek financial assistance under the HMGP or PDM programs, both of which require detailed benefit/cost analyses. These analyses will be performed on projects at the time of application using the FEMA benefit-cost model. For projects not seeking financial assistance from grant programs that require detailed analysis, the Klamath Tribes reserve the right to define “benefits” according to parameters that meet the goals and objectives of this plan.

19.4 ACTION PLAN PRIORITIZATION Table 19-3 lists the priority of each initiative, using the same parameters used in selecting the initiatives. A qualitative benefit-cost review was performed for each of these initiatives. The priorities are defined as follows: • High Priority—A project that meets multiple objectives (i.e., multiple hazards), has benefits that exceed cost, has funding secured or is an ongoing project and meets eligibility requirements for the HMGP or PDM grant program. High priority projects can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years). • Medium Priority—A project that meets goals and objectives, that has benefits that exceed costs, and for which funding has not been secured but that is grant eligible under HMGP, PDM or other grant programs. Project can be completed in the short term, once funding is secured. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured. • Low Priority—A project that will mitigate the risk of a hazard, that has benefits that do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify, for which funding has not been secured, that is not eligible for HMGP or PDM grant funding, and for which the time line for completion is long term (1 to 10 years). Low priority projects may be eligible for other sources of grant funding from other programs.

19-13 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 19-3 PRIORITIZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES

# of Do Benefits Is Project Can Project be Funded Initiative Objectives Equal or Grant Under Existing Priority (High, # Met Benefits Costs Exceed Costs? Eligible? Programs/ Budgets? Med., Low) 1 5 H H Y Y N H

2 5 M H Y Y Y M

3 8 H H Y Y N H

4 6 H H Y Y N H

5 5 M L Y N Y M

6 8 M L Y N Y L

7 8 H L Y N Y L

8 7 H H Y Y N H

9 8 H H Y Y N H

10 12 H L Y Y Y H

11 9 H M Y Y N M

12 6 H M Y Y Y M

13 12 H L Y Y Y H

14 10 M H Y Y Y H

15 5 M M Y Y Y M

16 2 H L Y N Y M

17 1 H M Y N Y H

18 1 H M Y Y N H

19 1 H M Y Y N M

20 4 H M Y Y Y H

21 3 H L Y Y Y H

22 6 M L Y Y Y M

23 12 M L Y Y Y M

19-14 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-3 PRIORITIZATION OF MITIGATION INITIATIVES

25 12 H M Y Y N M

26 12 M L Y Y Y L

27 8 H L Y N Y M

28 4 H M Y N N H

29 5 H L Y Y Y M

30 1 H L Y N Y H

31 8 H L Y Y Y H

32 4 H M Y Y Y M

33 10 H M Y N Y H

34 6 H L Y Y Y M

35 5 H M Y N Y H

36 12 H H Y N N H

37 7 M H Y Y N M

38 7 H L Y Y N L

39 2 H H Y Y N H

40 3 H H Y Y N H

41 12 H L Y Y Y H

42 12 H H Y Y Y H

43 12 H H Y Y N H

19.5 2007 ACTION PLAN STATUS In addition to establishing new action items for the 2017 update, a comprehensive review of the 2007 action plan was performed to determine which actions were completed, which should carry over to the updated

19-15 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

plan, and which were no longer feasible and should be removed from the plan. Table 19-4 identifies the results of this review.

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or ✓ With completion of this plan, the Explore the need for Tribes will hazard zoning and high- continue to look 1.A risk hazard land use at Land Use ordinances. planning as a means of reducing risk. Organize an annual event ✓ ✓ The Tribes have / fair for homeowners, taken part in builders and Tribal countywide Promote Government that includes efforts for disaster- 1 sale of NOAA weather information resistant radios, dissemination of exchange with development. information brochures Tribal members; about disasters and completion of this building retrofits, plan will again 1.B demonstration of require public “defensible-space” outreach. concept and fire resistant construction materials (for roofs/exterior finishes and inflammable coverings for openings like chimneys and attics) etc.

19-16 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or ✓ ✓ The Tribes are currently developing land use authority, and Update land acquisition this process has criteria within Tribal continued since planning and real estate 1.C the 2007 plan; development documents new data captured to include a hazard since the 2007 analysis component. plan was incorporated within this update. ✓ ✓ Some efforts were completed Create a mitigation in conjunction outreach program, with countywide including newsletters, efforts; this effort flyers, Public Service will continue and 2.A Announcements, and be enhanced with Build and videos, that helps Tribal update of THMP, support local members prepare for including capacity to disasters. availability of enable Tribal hazard maps on members to Tribes’ website. prepare for, Develop a plan and seek ✓ ✓ respond to, funding for backup and recover electric and 2.B from disasters. telecommunications systems in Tribally owned critical facilities. Implement a Tribal ✓ (Carried over as emergency response team ✓ Training of Tribal 2.C (CERT) program that also Employees and includes a mitigation Volunteers) component. Maintain contact with the USGS contact re: Reduce the ✓ ✓ USGS regarding real time drought 3 possibility of 3.A drought conditions and conditions is a damage and drought forecasts. continual process.

19-17 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or losses due to Institute water Carried over to drought. conservation practices as ✓ ✓ include working necessary. Residents with dam owners should be encouraged to to review, employ water saving development or 3.B measures in their daily update plans for lives. Communities water usage by should prioritize or upstream control water use, residents. especially when needed for firefighting. ✓ ✓ Since the 2007 plan, drought Prepare a drought conditions have contingency plan to guide continued to response efforts. The plan impact the should: identify drought planning area; the risks and liabilities; Tribes work with determine actions that can the County and be taken to address those dam owners with risks and liabilities; respect to 3.C address funding shortfalls regulating water that could result from on a regular drought response efforts; basis; the Tribes and plan for ways to continue to work coordinate programming with the dam among local governments owners to address and other organizations to water shortages, ensure an efficient including for response to the drought. protection of habitat.

19-18 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or ✓ ✓ The Tribes take Promote public education part in regarding earthquake countywide hazards. Make Tribal public outreach members aware of what efforts whenever to do in the event of an possible. earthquake and ways they Completion of can mitigate damages this THMP will from earthquakes help further that 4.A including structural outreach to Tribal seismic retrofits as well as Members, as well non-structural mitigation as bring new and actions. Non-structural updated data to hazards can include light. The Risk unsecured bookcases, Assessment will filing cabinets, and light further support fixtures, which can cause granting injuries and block exits. opportunities in Reduce the the future. possibility of Inspect and retrofit any 4 damage and ✓ ✓ Tribal critical facilities losses due to that do not meet current earthquake. Oregon State Building Codes. This is especially 4.B important in the Planning Area because of the recent change from moderate to high seismic hazard requirements. Develop an unreinforced ✓ ✓ Modified to seek masonry grant/loan HMGP or PDM program that helps correct grand funding as earthquake-risk non- the Tribes do not masonry building have such a loan 4.C problems (including program in place. chimney bracing and anchoring water heaters) for Tribal members’ private residences and critical facilities.

19-19 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or The Tribes will ✓ ✓ again review this Look into joining the opportunity in the National Flood Insurance future; however, Program, which requires the land use Tribal regulation of implications may development in the 5.A have a negative floodplain and provides impact on the for Federally-backed Tribes. flood insurance to Tribal Therefore, further members. data gathering is necessary. ✓ ✓ The Tribes have no repetitive flood properties on record. However, in an Explore mitigation effort to maintain Reduce the opportunities for damage data with possibility of repetitively flooded respect to RFC 5 damage and properties, and if and SRL losses due to necessary, carry-out properties, the floods. acquisition, relocation, Tribes have elevation, and flood- developed a new proofing measures to action item for protect these properties. 2017 to develop a 5.B Examples include: system for construct or modify maintaining retaining walls with damage impact proper damage; construct data, which will berms to divert water include flood data flow; install debris fences to support future or traps; construct onsite grant options detention ponds; improve which address onsite draining and add Tribal structures French drains. meeting the SRL/RFC definition to ensure mitigation of the impact from flooding.

19-20 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or As roads are Upgrade Tribal roads, ✓ ✓ developed, this is culverts, and bridges as one of the items 5.C necessary to which the Tribes accommodate large-scale assess prior to flood events. construction. ✓ ✓ With the transport of Bakken Oil through the Tribal Planning Area, this hazard has Develop hazardous been addressed substances educational very frequently materials for the public, since completion and distribute these of the 2007 plan through the website, through various annual fair, and other outlets. This channels. Materials hazard has again Reduce the should include been addressed in possibility of information on the proper the 2017 update, damage and use, storage, and disposal 6 6.A and is something losses due to of hazardous substances, which the Tribes Hazardous non-toxic alternatives to are working with Materials. commonly used toxic the State and products, information on various railroads local hazardous-material companies to risks from petroleum address. As refinery and policies at the transportation corridors, federal and state and local evacuation and level are shelter-in-place strategies. developed, this will influence how the Tribes address this issue in the future.

19-21 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or Prepare a site-specific The Tribes summary of hazardous currently feel that materials used, stored and this is beyond the commonly transported in staffing capacity the Planning Area. The and expertise of summary should include ✓ ✓ Tribal staff, and substance-specific rely on the 6.B response information such County and Local as toxicity and mitigation jurisdictions to protocols, as well as assist in this mapped locations of process as the facilities with hazardous Tribes do not substance inventories. have first Distribute to all area first responders. responders. Partner with the ✓ ✓ Same as above. petroleum refinery in Klamath Falls to learn about and evaluate its 6.C security measures and seismic bracing/ anchoring. Work with the refinery to improve these as necessary. The Tribes are currently developing land use rules and Develop an ordinance that regulations which limits hazards waste ✓ ✓ may include handlers within a 1,000 hazardous feet of public water materials; 6.D systems and addresses however, the underground storage Tribes only assert tanks and hazardous land use chemicals. regulatory authority and jurisdiction for items falling on Tribal lands.

19-22 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or ✓ ✓ Tribes do not have the capacity to complete a Apply for funding to study of this type 6.E develop a flow study of and has not been the major corridors. able to obtain funding to complete such a study. In areas with Tribal ✓ structures where ✓ ✓ repetitive and ongoing landslide hazards cannot be mitigated and when 7.A opportunities and funding become available, explore options for the acquisition of the developed areas or relocation of facilities. Reduce the possibility of Develop and implement ✓ ✓ The Tribes will 7 damage and vegetation management continue to work losses due to plan and program. Proper in this area. landslides. vegetation can supply While not an slope-stabilizing root official strength, and facilitate in vegetation intercepting precipitation. program, the 7.B Establishing and Tribes do manage maintaining appropriate vegetation growth vegetation of areas above as appropriate, the bluff slope may be the and for fire single most important and suppression/ cost-effective mitigation reduction. measure available.

19-23 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or Identify areas of high ✓ ✓ potential of or of repetitive past slide damages so that alternative routes for emergency response can be pre-determined. In the case of the Highway 97 corridor, evaluate what 7.C first-response and emergency medical care is available north of the rockfall-prone area and plan for the contingency of access to facilities to the south of the Planning Area being temporarily inaccessible due to rockfall. Inventory backup power ✓ ✓ The Tribes will and emergency operation again be seeking plans of critical facilities. grant 8.A Where lacking, work with opportunities to Reduce the management to develop fund generators possibility of comprehensive plans and for critical damage and adequate backup. facilities. 8 losses due to ✓ ✓ The Tribes do not severe storms: own the Install lightning thunderstorms. communications protection devices on 8.B infrastructure. communications Rather, that is infrastructure. provided through an MOU/ MOA

19-24 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or Institute building codes/ ✓ ✓ Current land-use development standards development for all new development regulation that include structural underway. This bracing, window shutters, type of data will laminated glass in be incorporated 8.C windows, and hail- into the process resistant roofing to as appropriate. minimize damage to public and private structures. Provide incentives for retro- fitting. Utilize underground utility lines and back-up generators in heavily forested locations with critical infrastructure to reduce losses and maintain electrical service to essential users (i.e., 9.A emergency response workers). Where this is not practical, consider Reduce the adopting more possibility of prescriptive rules relative damage and 9 to the construction and losses due to maintenance of overhead severe storms: lines. windstorms. Manage vegetation in ✓ ✓ On-going areas within and adjacent maintenance. to rights-of-way and in close proximity to critical facilities in order to 9.B reduce the risk of tree failure and property damage and avoid the creation of wind acceleration corridors within vegetated areas.

19-25 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or Develop an annual free tree chipping and tree ✓ ✓ pick-up day that encourages Tribal 9.C members to manage trees and shrubs at risk of falling on overhead power lines. Reduce the Determine the structural ✓ ✓ possibility of stability of critical facility damage and 10 10.A roofs, carports, and losses due to garages to withstand ice severe storms: and snow loads. winter storms. Provide information to ✓ ✓ the public about volcanic ash, including instructions 11.A for keeping ash out of buildings and participating in clean-up operations. Ensure that emergency ✓ ✓ vehicles carry extra air and oil filters, extra oil, Reduce the 11.B windshield wiper blades possibility of and windshield washer 11 damage and fluid to be used during losses due to and after an ash fall. volcanoes. Develop communication ✓ ✓ plans and procedures for notifying tribal employees of potential ash fall warnings, reducing or 11.C shutting down operations, and accelerating maintenance of buildings and machinery during cleanup operations.

19-26 MITIGATION STRATEGY

TABLE 19-4 2007 MITIGATION ACTION PLAN STATUS

Goals Potential Actions Status

Taken

Comment

Action Completed Carried Over

Goal Longer Relevant

Goal Item No Action Continual/Ongoing # Description Number Description Removed (R) or Develop and provide funding and/or incentives ✓ ✓ for defensible space 12.A around structures in Reduce the wildland fire high hazard possibility of areas. 12 damage and Continue to conduct losses due to ✓ ✓ wildland fires. current fuel management programs and investigate 12.B and apply new and emerging fuel management techniques. ✓ ✓ The Tribes continue to work Explore mitigation with dam owners opportunities (i.e., to obtain elevation, acquisition) for 13.A inundation maps critical facilities located to determine within high hazard dam which facilities failure areas. are located in Reduce the high hazard areas. possibility of The Tribes do not Develop dam inundation ✓ ✓ 13 damage and own the dams, maps and provide this losses due to and therefore are 13.B information to relevant dam failures. not provided data agencies and on which to form communities. this information. ✓ ✓ The Tribes Develop interagency continue to work cooperation agreements with dam owners 13.C for dam operations and and Army Corps safety. of Engineers on this matter.

19.6 ADDITIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PROJECTS

In addition to the above project status, the Tribes have also completed other mitigation-related efforts since completion of the 2007 plan, which include, but are not limited to:

19-27 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

 2008 Ken Knight Bank Stabilization Project  2008 Wood River Wetland Project on the Upper Klamath River  2008 Pipeline Irrigation System  2007 Fish Passage Restoration Project

The Tribes have worked in partnership with a number of different agencies and organizations for various projects since completion of the 2007 plan. Some of these organizations, boards and project agencies are identified below. This list is not all-inclusive, but rather just a demonstration of some of the on-going efforts. Several of these entities also provide funding to the Tribes for use in completing the various projects.

Klamath Tribes Water Preservation Project During Fall 2016, the Klamath Tribes were notified that they are the recipient of a grant award in the amount of $125,000 for the Klamath Tribes Water Preservation Project. The grant came from the Spirit Mountain Community Fund and the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde. The Klamath Tribes have received several grants from the Spirit Mountain fund in the past, which have been instrumental in helping tribal programs with storage and other building needs. The 2016 award was specific to tribal government and the Tribes’ Water Preservation Project, which continues to be a top priority for treaty resource protection and water rights issues.

Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board Working with the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, the Tribes have completed several watershed improvement activities in support of various natural resource mitigation efforts, such as: grazing management, livestock and wildlife watering, and erosion control efforts. Much of the funding for the various projects have been through the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board. The Tribes will continue to work with the Board to continue to improve the various watersheds throughout the Tribal Planning Area.

Legacy Road Reconstruction Projects Through this program, the Tribes have worked with the surrounding communities for road decommissioning to improve the environmental quality of natural resources throughout the planning area, including the reduction of runoff and pollutants into waterways. The Tribes have also worked with the local and federal agencies to complete: road improvements and upgrades; surface drainage improvements; road stabilization projects, and culvert replacements.

19-28

CHAPTER 20. IMPLEMENTATION

20.1 PLAN ADOPTION A hazard mitigation plan must document that it has been formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting federal approval of the plan (44 CFR Section 201.7(c)(5)). DMA compliance and its benefits cannot be achieved until the plan is adopted. This plan was adopted by the Tribal Council in May 2017, with language allowing for plan modification if requested by FEMA without the necessity of re- adoption by the Tribe. A copy of the resolution is provided in Figure 20-1.

INSERT RESOLUTION

Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Insert Plan Adoption Resolution

Figure 20-1 Resolution Adopting Hazard Mitigation Plan

20-2 IMPLEMENTATION

20.2 PLAN MAINTENANCE STRATEGY A hazard mitigation plan must present a plan maintenance process that includes the following (44 CFR Section 201.7(c)(4)): • A section describing the method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan over a 5-year cycle. • A process by which Tribal governments incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms, such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate. • A discussion on how the community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process.

This chapter details the formal process that will ensure that the Hazard Mitigation Plan remains an active and relevant document and that the Klamath Tribes maintain their eligibility for applicable funding sources. The plan maintenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating the plan annually and producing an updated plan every five years. This chapter also describes how public participation will be integrated throughout the plan maintenance and implementation process. It also explains how the mitigation strategies outlined in this Plan will be incorporated into existing planning mechanisms and programs, such as comprehensive land-use planning processes, capital improvement planning, and building code enforcement and implementation. The Plan’s format allows sections to be reviewed and updated when new data become available, resulting in a plan that will remain current and relevant.

Plan Implementation

The effectiveness of the hazard mitigation plan depends on its implementation and incorporation of its action items into existing local plans, policies, and programs. Together, the action items in the Plan provide a framework for activities that the Klamath Tribes can implement over the next 5 years. The Planning Team has established goals and objectives, and has prioritized mitigation actions that will be implemented through existing plans, policies, and programs.

The Planning Department will have lead responsibility for overseeing the Plan implementation and maintenance strategy. Plan implementation and evaluation will be a shared responsibility among all departments and agencies identified as lead agencies in the mitigation action plan.

Planning Team

The Planning Team, while all tribal staff, served on the team in a voluntary capacity that oversaw the development of the Plan and made recommendations on key elements of the plan, including the maintenance strategy. The principal role of the Planning Team in this plan maintenance strategy will be to review the annual progress report and provide input to the Planning Director on possible enhancements to be considered at the next update. Future plan updates will be overseen by a Planning Team similar to the one that participated in this plan development process, so keeping an interim Planning Team intact will provide a head start on future updates. It will be the Planning Team’s role to review the progress report in an effort to identify issues needing to be addressed by future plan updates.

20-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Annual Progress Report

The minimum task of the ongoing annual planning team meeting will be the evaluation of the progress of its individual action plan during a 12-month performance period. This review will include the following: • Summary of any hazard events and the impact these events had on the planning area; • Review of mitigation success stories; • Review of continuing public involvement; • Brief discussion about why targeted strategies were not completed; • Re-evaluation of the action plan to determine if the timeline for identified projects needs to be amended (such as changing a long-term project to a short-term one because of new funding); • Recommendations for new projects; • Changes in or potential for new funding options (grant opportunities); • Impact of any other planning programs or initiatives that involve hazard mitigation.

The planning team has created a template for preparing a progress report (see Appendix C). The planning team will then prepare a formal annual report on the progress of the plan. This report should be used as follows: • Presented to Tribal Council to inform them of the progress of actions implemented during the reporting period.

Annual progress reporting is not a requirement specified under 44 CFR. However, it may enhance opportunities for funding. While failure to implement this component of the plan maintenance strategy will not jeopardize compliance under the DMA, it may jeopardize the opportunity to leverage funding opportunities with other agencies.

Plan Update

CFR 201.7 requires that tribal hazard mitigation plans be reviewed, revised if appropriate, and resubmitted for approval in order to remain eligible for benefits under the DMA (44 CFR, Section 201.7(d)(3)). The Klamath Tribes intend to update the hazard mitigation plan on a 5-year cycle from the date of initial plan adoption. This cycle may be accelerated to less than 5 years based on the following triggers: • A Presidential Disaster Declaration that impacts the planning area; • A hazard event that causes loss of life; or • New data becomes available which significantly changes the findings of the risk assessment.

It will not be the intent of future updates to develop a complete new hazard mitigation plan for the planning area. The update will, at a minimum, include the following elements: • The update process will be convened through a planning team. • The hazard risk assessment will be reviewed and, if necessary, updated using best available information and technologies.

20-4 IMPLEMENTATION

• The action plan will be reviewed and revised to account for any initiatives completed, dropped, or changed and to account for changes in the risk assessment or new policies identified under other planning mechanisms (such as the comprehensive plan). • The draft update will be sent to appropriate agencies and organizations for comment. • The public will be given an opportunity to comment on the update prior to adoption. • Tribal Council will adopt the updated plan.

Continuing Public Involvement

The public will continue to be apprised of the plan’s progress through the Tribes’ website and by providing copies of annual progress reports at various public outreach meetings. Copies of the plan will be shared with the various Klamath Tribal departments and tribal members as requested. Upon initiation of future update processes, a new public involvement strategy will be initiated based on guidance from a new Planning Team. This strategy will be based on the needs and capabilities of the Klamath Tribes at the time of the update. At a minimum, this strategy will include the use of local media outlets within the planning area.

Incorporation into Other Planning Mechanisms

The information on hazard, risk, vulnerability, and mitigation contained in this plan is based on the best science and technology available at the time this plan was prepared. The Klamath Tribes, through its various on-going capital improvement projects has planned for the impact of natural hazards. The plan development process provided the opportunity to review and expand on policies in these planning mechanisms. The Emergency Operations Plan and land use regulations are complementary documents that work together to achieve the goal of reducing risk exposure.

The Klamath Tribes will create a linkage between the hazard mitigation plan and the comprehensive land use plan by identifying a mitigation initiative as such and giving that initiative a high priority. Other planning processes and programs to be coordinated with the recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan include the following: • Emergency response plans • Capital improvement programs • Tribal codes • Community design guidelines • Restoration plans • Water-efficient landscape design guidelines • Stormwater management programs • Water system vulnerability assessments • Community Wildfire Protection Plans • Vegetation Studies • Transportation Plans

20-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

• Master fire protection plans.

Some action items do not need to be implemented through regulation. Instead, these items can be implemented through the creation of new educational programs, continued interagency coordination, or improved public participation. As information becomes available from other planning mechanisms that can enhance this plan, that information will be incorporated via the update process.

20-6

REFERENCES

Burns, W. J., Mickelson, K. A., & Saint-Pierre, E. C. (2011). Statewide landslide information database for Oregon, release 2 (SLIDO-2). Portland, OR: Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries.

Center for Disease Control. 2009. Deaths Related to 2009 Pandemic Influenza A (H1N1) Among American Indian/Alaska Natives –12 States. CDC Accessed 21 Aug. 2012. Available online at: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5848a1.htm?s_cid=mm5848a1_e

FEMA 2010. http://www.fema.gov. Website accessed 2009,2010, 2011

FEMA. 2001. Understanding Your Risks; Identifying Hazards and Determining your Risks. FEMA (386- 2). August 2001

FEMA. 2002. Getting Started; Building support for Mitigation Planning; FEMA (386-1). September 2002

FEMA. 2003. Developing the Mitigation Plan; Identifying Mitigation Actions and Implementing Strategies. FEMA (386-3). April 2003

FEMA. 2004. Using HAZUS-MH for Risk Assessment, How to Guide, FEMA (433). August 2004

FEMA. 2007. FEMA, National Flood Insurance Program, Community Rating System; CRS Coordinator’s Manual FIA-15/2007 OMB No. 1660-0022

Headwaters Economic. (2012). Oregon Home Building, Higher Temperatures Drive Price Tag Ever Higher. Accessed 23 Dec 2016. Available at: https://headwaterseconomics.org/wildfire/homes- risk/oregon-homes-and-cost-of-wildfires/

Herald and News. (2015). Bomb Squad Defuses Device. Accessed 1 Sept 2016. Available online at: http://www.heraldandnews.com/news_flash/bomb-squad-defuses-device/article_50463489-3302-5702- 8320-657964b01fd7.html

International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. 11/11/2008. “Disaster Risk Reduction Strategies and Risk Management Practices: Critical Elements for Adaptation to Climate Change.”

Klamath News (2016). 4th Quarter News Letter. Vol. 32, Issue 5.

Lewis, D. (2007). Statewide seismic needs assessment: implementation of Oregon 2005 Senate Bill 2 relating to public safety, earthquakes, and seismic rehabilitation of public buildings (Open-File Report O- 07-02). Portland, OR: Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries.

Longwoods International. (2013). Oregon Visitor Report: 2011. Accessed 24 Aug 2016. Available at: http://industry.traveloregon.com/research/archive/oregon-visitor-report-2011-longwoods-international/

NASA, 2004. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/view.php?id=25145 NASA Earth Observatory News Web Site Item, dated August 2, 2004.

Natural Hazards Center. (2017). Awareness isn’t Knowledge: A look at How the U.S. Public Perceives Zika. Accessed 1/10/17. Available at: https://hazards.colorado.edu/article/awareness-isn-t-knowledge-a- look-at-how-the-u-s-public-perceives-zika

R-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan

NOAA. 2016. http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwEvent~Storms. NOAA, National Climatic Data Center website, accessed 2016

Oregon Department of Forestry. (2013) (WWRA) West Wide Wildfire Risk Assessment – Final Report. Accessed 30 Aug 2016. Available at: http://www.odf.state.or.us/gis/data/Fire/West_Wide_Assessment/WWA_FinalReport.pdf

Oregon Department of Forestry. (2016). 2016 Wildfire Season ends. Accessed 23 Dec 2016. Available at: http://wildfireoregondeptofforestry.blogspot.com/

Oregon Health Authority. (2014). Oregon Climate and Health Vulnerability Assessment. Accessed 8 Dec 2016. Available at: https://public.health.oregon.gov/HealthyEnvironments/climatechange/Documents/Social-Vulnerability- Assessment.pdf

OTA (Congressional Office of Technology Assessment). 1993. Preparing for an Uncertain Climate, Vol. I. OTA–O–567. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States maintained by the University of South Carolina’s (USC ) Hazard Research Lab

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2006. Excessive Heat Events Guidebook. EPA 430-B-06- 005. Available online at http://www.epa.gov/heatisld/about/pdf/EHEguide_final.pdf.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2010. Climate Change Indicators in the United States . U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2011. Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, EPA Response to Public Comments. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Accessed 3/16/2012.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2013. Climate Change Facts: Answers to Common Questions. U.S. EPA Website. Accessed April 14, 2013 at: http://epa.gov/climatechange/facts.html

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2013b. Climate Change Indicators in the United States: U.S. and Global Temperatures. www.epa.gov/climatechange/indicators.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2013c. Climate Change Indicators in the United States: Heavy Precipitation. www.epa.gov/climatechange/indicators.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2013d. Climate Change Indicators in the United States: Snowfall. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/indicators/snow-ice/snowfall.html.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2013e. Climate Change Indicators in the United States: Sea Level Rise. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/pdfs/print_sea-level-2013.pdf.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2013f. Climate Change Indicators in the United States: Atmospheric Concentrations of Greenhouse Gases. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/pdfs/print_sea- level-2013.pdf.

R-2 …REFERENCES

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2013g. Glossary of Climate Change Terms. Accessed in August 2016, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/glossary.html#M.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1989. The Severity of an Earthquake. U.S. Government Printing Office: 1989-288-913. Accessed online at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/earthq4/severity_text.html

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1993. Precisely Locating the Klamath Falls, Oregon, Earthquakes. U.S. Government Printing Office – Geological Survey 1993. Accessed online at: https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/70168779

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2008. An Atlas of ShakeMaps for Selected Global Earthquakes. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1236. Prepared by Allen, T.I., Wald, D.J., Hotovec, A.J., Lin, K., Earle, P.S. and Marano, K.D.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2010. PAGER—Rapid Assessment of an Earthquake’s Impact. U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2010-3036. September 2010.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2012. ‘Earthquake Hazards Program: Pacific Northwest.” Last modified July 18, 2012. Available on-line at http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/pacnw/.

U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States. Thomas R. Karl, Jerry M. Melillo, and Thomas C. Peterson (eds.). United States Global Change Research Program. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.

Washington State Emergency Management. (2012). Mt. Baker and Glacier Peak Coordination Plan (2012). Accessed 29 Oct 2016. Available on-line at: http://www.emd.wa.gov/plans/documents/PromulgatedVersionMtBakerGlacierPeakCoordinationPlanAug ust2012-Expanded.pdf

R-3

Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan APPENDIX A. ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS

APPENDIX A. ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS

ACRONYMS CFR—Code of Federal Regulations cfs—cubic feet per second CIP—Capital Improvement Plan CRS—Community Rating System DFIRM—Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps DHS—Department of Homeland Security DMA —Disaster Mitigation Act EAP—Emergency Action Plan EPA—U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA—Endangered Species Act FEMA—Federal Emergency Management Agency FERC—Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FIRM—Flood Insurance Rate Map FIS—Flood Insurance Study GIS—Geographic Information System HAZUS-MH—Hazards, United States-Multi Hazard HMGP—Hazard Mitigation Grant Program IBC—International Building Code IRC—International Residential Code MM—Modified Mercalli Scale NEHRP—National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program NFIP—National Flood Insurance Program NOAA—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NWS—National Weather Service PDM—Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program PDI—Palmer Drought Index PGA—Peak Ground Acceleration PHDI—Palmer Hydrological Drought Index SFHA—Special Flood Hazard Area

A-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

SHELDUS—Special Hazard Events and Losses Database for the US SPI—Standardized Precipitation Index USGS—U.S. Geological Survey

DEFINITIONS 100-Year Flood: The term “100-year flood” can be misleading. The 100-year flood does not necessarily occur once every 100 years. Rather, it is the flood that has a 1 percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. Thus, the 100-year flood could occur more than once in a relatively short period of time. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines it as the 1 percent annual chance flood, which is now the standard definition used by most agencies and by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

Acre-Foot: An acre-foot is the amount of water it takes to cover 1 acre to a depth of 1 foot. This measure is used to describe the quantity of storage in a water reservoir. An acre-foot is a unit of volume. One acre foot equals 7,758 barrels; 325,829 gallons; or 43,560 cubic feet. An average household of four will use approximately 1 acre-foot of water per year.

Asset: An asset is any man-made or natural feature that has value, including, but not limited to, people; buildings; infrastructure, such as bridges, roads, sewers, and water systems; lifelines, such as electricity and communication resources; and environmental, cultural, or recreational features such as parks, wetlands, and landmarks.

Base Flood: The flood having a 1% chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year, also known as the “100-year” or “1% chance” flood. The base flood is a statistical concept used to ensure that all properties subject to the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) are protected to the same degree against flooding.

Basin: A basin is the area within which all surface water—whether from rainfall, snowmelt, springs, or other sources—flows to a single water body or watercourse. The boundary of a river basin is defined by natural topography, such as hills, mountains, and ridges. Basins are also referred to as “watersheds” and “drainage basins.”

Benefit: A benefit is a net project outcome and is usually defined in monetary terms. Benefits may include direct and indirect effects. For the purposes of benefit-cost analysis of proposed mitigation measures, benefits are limited to specific, measurable, risk reduction factors, including reduction in expected property losses (buildings, contents, and functions) and protection of human life.

Benefit/Cost Analysis: A benefit/cost analysis is a systematic, quantitative method of comparing projected benefits to projected costs of a project or policy. It is used as a measure of cost effectiveness.

Building: A building is defined as a structure that is walled and roofed, principally aboveground, and permanently fixed to a site. The term includes manufactured homes on permanent foundations on which the wheels and axles carry no weight.

Capability Assessment: A capability assessment provides a description and analysis of a community’s current capacity to address threats associated with hazards. The assessment includes two components: an inventory of an agency’s mission, programs, and policies, and an analysis of its capacity to carry them out. A capability assessment is an integral part of the planning process in which a community’s actions to reduce

A-2 APPENDIX A. ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS losses are identified, reviewed, and analyzed, and the framework for implementation is identified. The following capabilities were reviewed under this assessment: • Legal and regulatory capability • Administrative and technical capability • Fiscal capability

Community Rating System (CRS): The CRS is a voluntary program under the NFIP that rewards participating communities (provides incentives) for exceeding the minimum requirements of the NFIP and completing activities that reduce flood hazard risk by providing flood insurance premium discounts.

Critical Area: An area defined by state or local regulations as deserving special protection because of unique natural features or its value as habitat for a wide range of species of flora and fauna. A sensitive/critical area is usually subject to more restrictive development regulations.

Critical Facility: Facilities and infrastructure that are critical to the health and welfare of the population. These become especially important after any hazard event occurs. For the purposes of this plan, critical facilities include: • Structures or facilities that produce, use, or store highly volatile, flammable, explosive, toxic and/or water reactive materials; • Hospitals, nursing homes, and housing likely to contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a hazard event. • Police stations, fire stations, vehicle and equipment storage facilities, and emergency operations centers that are needed for disaster response before, during, and after hazard events, and • Public and private utilities, facilities and infrastructure that are vital to maintaining or restoring normal services to areas damaged by hazard events. • Government facilities. For the purposes of this planning effort, the Planning Team elected to define all structures on the reservation, including culturally significant areas, as critical facilities due to the impact the loss of one structure would have on the Tribe.

Cubic Feet per Second (cfs): Discharge or river flow is commonly measured in cfs. One cubic foot is about 7.5 gallons of liquid.

Dam: Any artificial barrier or controlling mechanism that can or does impound 10 acre-feet or more of water.

Dam Failure: Dam failure refers to a partial or complete breach in a dam (or levee) that impacts its integrity. Dam failures occur for a number of reasons, such as flash flooding, inadequate spillway size, mechanical failure of valves or other equipment, freezing and thawing cycles, earthquakes, and intentional destruction.

Debris Avalanche: Volcanoes are prone to debris and mountain rock avalanches that can approach speeds of 100 mph.

Debris Flow: Dense mixtures of water-saturated debris that move down-valley; looking and behaving much like flowing concrete. They form when loose masses of unconsolidated material are saturated, become

A-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

unstable, and move down slope. The source of water varies but includes rainfall, melting snow or ice, and glacial outburst floods.

Debris Slide: Debris slides consist of unconsolidated rock or soil that has moved rapidly down slope. They occur on slopes greater than 65 percent.

Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA); The DMA is Public Law 106-390 and is the latest federal legislation enacted to encourage and promote proactive, pre-disaster planning as a condition of receiving financial assistance under the Robert T. Stafford Act. The DMA emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur. Under the DMA, a pre-disaster hazard mitigation program and new requirements for the national post-disaster hazard mitigation grant program (HMGP) were established.

Drainage Basin: A basin is the area within which all surface water- whether from rainfall, snowmelt, springs or other sources- flows to a single water body or watercourse. The boundary of a river basin is defined by natural topography, such as hills, mountains and ridges. Drainage basins are also referred to as watersheds or basins.

Drought: Drought is a period of time without substantial rainfall or snowfall from one year to the next. Drought can also be defined as the cumulative impacts of several dry years or a deficiency of precipitation over an extended period of time, which in turn results in water shortages for some activity, group, or environmental function. A hydrological drought is caused by deficiencies in surface and subsurface water supplies. A socioeconomic drought impacts the health, well-being, and quality of life or starts to have an adverse impact on a region. Drought is a normal, recurrent feature of climate and occurs almost everywhere.

Earthquake: An earthquake is defined as a sudden slip on a fault, volcanic or magmatic activity, and sudden stress changes in the earth that result in ground shaking and radiated seismic energy. Earthquakes can last from a few seconds to over 5 minutes, and have been known to occur as a series of tremors over a period of several days. The actual movement of the ground in an earthquake is seldom the direct cause of injury or death. Casualties may result from falling objects and debris as shocks shake, damage, or demolish buildings and other structures.

Exposure: Exposure is defined as the number and dollar value of assets considered to be at risk during the occurrence of a specific hazard.

Extent: The extent is the size of an area affected by a hazard.

Fire Behavior: Fire behavior refers to the physical characteristics of a fire and is a function of the interaction between the fuel characteristics (such as type of vegetation and structures that could burn), topography, and weather. Variables that affect fire behavior include the rate of spread, intensity, fuel consumption, and fire type (such as underbrush versus crown fire).

Fire Frequency: Fire frequency is the broad measure of the rate of fire occurrence in a particular area. An estimate of the areas most likely to burn is based on past fire history or fire rotation in the area, fuel conditions, weather, ignition sources (such as human or lightning), fire suppression response, and other factors.

Flash Flood: A flash flood occurs with little or no warning when water levels rise at an extremely fast rate

Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM): FIRMs are the official maps on which the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has delineated the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA).

A-4 APPENDIX A. ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS

Flood Insurance Study: A report published by the Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration for a community in conjunction with the community’s Flood Insurance rate Map. The study contains such background data as the base flood discharges and water surface elevations that were used to prepare the FIRM. In most cases, a community FIRM with detailed mapping will have a corresponding flood insurance study.

Floodplain: Any land area susceptible to being inundated by flood waters from any source. A flood insurance rate map identifies most, but not necessarily all, of a community’s floodplain as the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA).

Floodway: Floodways are areas within a floodplain that are reserved for the purpose of conveying flood discharge without increasing the base flood elevation more than 1 foot. Generally speaking, no development is allowed in floodways, as any structures located there would block the flow of floodwaters.

Floodway Fringe: Floodway fringe areas are located in the floodplain but outside of the floodway. Some development is generally allowed in these areas, with a variety of restrictions. On maps that have identified and delineated a floodway, this would be the area beyond the floodway boundary that can be subject to different regulations.

Fog: Fog refers to a cloud (or condensed water droplets) near the ground. Fog forms when air close to the ground can no longer hold all the moisture it contains. Fog occurs either when air is cooled to its dew point or the amount of moisture in the air increases. Heavy fog is particularly hazardous because it can restrict surface visibility. Severe fog incidents can close roads, cause vehicle accidents, cause airport delays, and impair the effectiveness of emergency response. Financial losses associated with transportation delays caused by fog have not been calculated in the United States but are known to be substantial.

Freeboard: Freeboard is the margin of safety added to the base flood elevation.

Frequency: For the purposes of this plan, frequency refers to how often a hazard of specific magnitude, duration, and/or extent is expected to occur on average. Statistically, a hazard with a 100-year frequency is expected to occur about once every 100 years on average and has a 1 percent chance of occurring any given year. Frequency reliability varies depending on the type of hazard considered.

Fujita Scale of Tornado Intensity: Tornado wind speeds are sometimes estimated on the basis of wind speed and damage sustained using the Fujita Scale. The scale rates the intensity or severity of tornado events using numeric values from F0 to F5 based on tornado wind speed and damage. An F0 tornado (wind speed less than 73 miles per hour (mph)) indicates minimal damage (such as broken tree limbs), and an F5 tornado (wind speeds of 261 to 318 mph) indicates severe damage.

Goal: A goal is a general guideline that explains what is to be achieved. Goals are usually broad-based, long-term, policy-type statements and represent global visions. Goals help define the benefits that a plan is trying to achieve. The success of a hazard mitigation plan is measured by the degree to which its goals have been met (that is, by the actual benefits in terms of actual hazard mitigation).

Geographic Information System (GIS): GIS is a computer software application that relates data regarding physical and other features on the earth to a database for mapping and analysis.

Hazard: A hazard is a source of potential danger or adverse condition that could harm people and/or cause property damage.

A-5 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP): Authorized under Section 202 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, the HMGP is administered by FEMA and provides grants to states, tribes, and local governments to implement hazard mitigation actions after a major disaster declaration. The purpose of the program is to reduce the loss of life and property due to disasters and to enable mitigation activities to be implemented as a community recovers from a disaster

Hazards U.S. Multi-Hazard (HAZUS-MH) Loss Estimation Program: HAZUS-MH is a GIS-based program used to support the development of risk assessments as required under the DMA. The HAZUS- MH software program assesses risk in a quantitative manner to estimate damages and losses associated with natural hazards. HAZUS-MH is FEMA’s nationally applicable, standardized methodology and software program and contains modules for estimating potential losses from earthquakes, floods, and wind hazards. HAZUS-MH has also been used to assess vulnerability (exposure) for other hazards.

Hydraulics: Hydraulics is the branch of science or engineering that addresses fluids (especially water) in motion in rivers or canals, works and machinery for conducting or raising water, the use of water as a prime mover, and other fluid-related areas.

Hydrology: Hydrology is the analysis of waters of the earth. For example, a flood discharge estimate is developed by conducting a hydrologic study.

Intensity: For the purposes of this plan, intensity refers to the measure of the effects of a hazard.

Inventory: The assets identified in a study region comprise an inventory. Inventories include assets that could be lost when a disaster occurs and community resources are at risk. Assets include people, buildings, transportation, and other valued community resources.

Landslide: Landslides can be described as the sliding movement of masses of loosened rock and soil down a hillside or slope. Fundamentally, slope failures occur when the strength of the soils forming the slope exceeds the pressure, such as weight or saturation, acting upon them.

Lightning: Lightning is an electrical discharge resulting from the buildup of positive and negative charges within a thunderstorm. When the buildup becomes strong enough, lightning appears as a “bolt,” usually within or between clouds and the ground. A bolt of lightning instantaneously reaches temperatures approaching 50,000ºF. The rapid heating and cooling of air near lightning causes thunder. Lightning is a major threat during thunderstorms. In the United States, 75 to 100 Americans are struck and killed by lightning each year (see http://www.fema.gov/hazard/thunderstorms/thunder.shtm).

Liquefaction: Liquefaction is the complete failure of soils, occurring when soils lose shear strength and flow horizontally. It is most likely to occur in fine grain sands and silts, which behave like viscous fluids when liquefaction occurs. This situation is extremely hazardous to development on the soils that liquefy, and generally results in extreme property damage and threats to life and safety.

Local Government: Any county, municipality, city, town, township, public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under State law), regional or interstate government entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local government; any Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, or Alaska Native village or organization; and any rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity.

A-6 APPENDIX A. ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS

Magnitude: Magnitude is the measure of the strength of an earthquake, and is typically measured by the Richter scale. As an estimate of energy, each whole number step in the magnitude scale corresponds to the release of about 31 times more energy than the amount associated with the preceding whole number value.

Mass movement: A collective term for landslides, mudflows, debris flows, sinkholes and lahars.

Mitigation: A preventive action that can be taken in advance of an event that will reduce or eliminate the risk to life or property.

Mitigation Actions: Mitigation actions are specific actions to achieve goals and objectives that minimize the effects from a disaster and reduce the loss of life and property.

Objective: For the purposes of this plan, an objective is defined as a short-term aim that, when combined with other objectives, forms a strategy or course of action to meet a goal. Unlike goals, objectives are specific and measurable.

Peak Ground Acceleration: Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) is a measure of the highest amplitude of ground shaking that accompanies an earthquake, based on a percentage of the force of gravity.

Preparedness: Preparedness refers to actions that strengthen the capability of government, citizens, and communities to respond to disasters.

Presidential Disaster Declaration: These declarations are typically made for events that cause more damage than state and local governments and resources can handle without federal government assistance. Generally, no specific dollar loss threshold has been established for such declarations. A Presidential Disaster Declaration puts into motion long-term federal recovery programs, some of which are matched by state programs, designed to help disaster victims, businesses, and public entities.

Probability of Occurrence: The probability of occurrence is a statistical measure or estimate of the likelihood that a hazard will occur. This probability is generally based on past hazard events in the area and a forecast of events that could occur in the future. A probability factor based on yearly values of occurrence is used to estimate probability of occurrence.

Repetitive Loss Property: Any NFIP-insured property that, since 1978 and regardless of any changes of ownership during that period, has experienced: • Four or more paid flood losses in excess of $1000.00; or • Two paid flood losses in excess of $1000.00 within any 10-year period since 1978 or • Three or more paid losses that equal or exceed the current value of the insured property.

Return Period (or Mean Return Period): This term refers to the average period of time in years between occurrences of a particular hazard (equal to the inverse of the annual frequency of occurrence).

Riverine: Of or produced by a river. Riverine floodplains have readily identifiable channels. Floodway maps can only be prepared for riverine floodplains.

Risk: Risk is the estimated impact that a hazard would have on people, services, facilities, and structures in a community. Risk measures the likelihood of a hazard occurring and resulting in an adverse condition that causes injury or damage. Risk is often expressed in relative terms such as a high, moderate, or low likelihood of sustaining damage above a particular threshold due to occurrence of a specific type of hazard. Risk also can be expressed in terms of potential monetary losses associated with the intensity of the hazard.

A-7 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

Risk Assessment: Risk assessment is the process of measuring potential loss of life, personal injury, economic injury, and property damage resulting from hazards. This process assesses the vulnerability of people, buildings, and infrastructure to hazards and focuses on (1) hazard identification; (2) impacts of hazards on physical, social, and economic assets; (3) vulnerability identification; and (4) estimates of the cost of damage or costs that could be avoided through mitigation.

Risk Ranking: This ranking serves two purposes, first to describe the probability that a hazard will occur, and second to describe the impact a hazard will have on people, property, and the economy. Risk estimates are based on the methodology used to prepare the risk assessment for this plan. The following equation shows the risk ranking calculation:

Risk Ranking = Probability + Impact (people + property + economy)

Robert T. Stafford Act: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public Law 100-107, was signed into law on November 23, 1988. This law amended the Disaster Relief Act of 1974, Public Law 93-288. The Stafford Act is the statutory authority for most federal disaster response activities, especially as they pertain to FEMA and its programs.

Sinkhole: A collapse depression in the ground with no visible outlet. Its drainage is subterranean. It is commonly vertical-sided or funnel-shaped.

Special Flood Hazard Area: The base floodplain delineated on a Flood Insurance Rate Map. The SFHA is mapped as a Zone A in riverine situations and zone V in coastal situations. The SFHA may or may not encompass all of a community’s flood problems

Stakeholder: Business leaders, civic groups, academia, non-profit organizations, major employers, managers of critical facilities, farmers, developers, special purpose districts, and others whose actions could impact hazard mitigation.

Stream Bank Erosion: Stream bank erosion is common along rivers, streams and drains where banks have been eroded, sloughed or undercut. However, it is important to remember that a stream is a dynamic and constantly changing system. It is natural for a stream to want to meander, so not all eroding banks are “bad” and in need of repair. Generally, stream bank erosion becomes a problem where development has limited the meandering nature of streams, where streams have been channelized, or where stream bank structures (like bridges, culverts, etc.) are located in places where they can actually cause damage to downstream areas. Stabilizing these areas can help protect watercourses from continued sedimentation, damage to adjacent land uses, control unwanted meander, and improvement of habitat for fish and wildlife.

Steep Slope: Different communities and agencies define it differently, depending on what it is being applied to, but generally a steep slope is a slope in which the percent slope equals or exceeds 25%. For this study, steep slope is defined as slopes greater than 33%.

Sustainable Hazard Mitigation: This concept includes the sound management of natural resources, local economic and social resiliency, and the recognition that hazards and mitigation must be understood in the largest possible social and economic context.

Thunderstorm: A thunderstorm is a storm with lightning and thunder produced by cumulonimbus clouds. Thunderstorms usually produce gusty winds, heavy rains, and sometimes hail. Thunderstorms are usually short in duration (seldom more than 2 hours). Heavy rains associated with thunderstorms can lead to flash flooding during the wet or dry seasons.

A-8 APPENDIX A. ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS

Tornado: A tornado is a violently rotating column of air extending between and in contact with a cloud and the surface of the earth. Tornadoes are often (but not always) visible as funnel clouds. On a local scale, tornadoes are the most intense of all atmospheric circulations, and winds can reach destructive speeds of more than 300 mph. A tornado’s vortex is typically a few hundred meters in diameter, and damage paths can be up to 1 mile wide and 50 miles long.

Vulnerability: Vulnerability describes how exposed or susceptible an asset is to damage. Vulnerability depends on an asset’s construction, contents, and the economic value of its functions. Like indirect damages, the vulnerability of one element of the community is often related to the vulnerability of another. For example, many businesses depend on uninterrupted electrical power. Flooding of an electric substation would affect not only the substation itself but businesses as well. Often, indirect effects can be much more widespread and damaging than direct effects.

Watershed: A watershed is an area that drains downgradient from areas of higher land to areas of lower land to the lowest point, a common drainage basin.

Wildfire: These terms refer to any uncontrolled fire occurring on undeveloped land that requires fire suppression. The potential for wildfire is influenced by three factors: the presence of fuel, topography, and air mass. Fuel can include living and dead vegetation on the ground, along the surface as brush and small trees, and in the air such as tree canopies. Topography includes both slope and elevation. Air mass includes temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, cloud cover, precipitation amount, duration, and the stability of the atmosphere at the time of the fire. Wildfires can be ignited by lightning and, most frequently, by human activity including smoking, campfires, equipment use, and arson.

Windstorm: Windstorms are generally short-duration events involving straight-line winds or gusts exceeding 50 mph. These gusts can produce winds of sufficient strength to cause property damage. Windstorms are especially dangerous in areas with significant tree stands, exposed property, poorly constructed buildings, mobile homes (manufactured housing units), major infrastructure, and aboveground utility lines. A windstorm can topple trees and power lines; cause damage to residential, commercial, critical facilities; and leave tons of debris in its wake.

Zoning Ordinance: The zoning ordinance designates allowable land use and intensities for a local jurisdiction. Zoning ordinances consist of two components: a zoning text and a zoning map.

A-9

Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan APPENDIX B. PUBLIC OUTREACH

APPENDIX B. PUBLIC OUTREACH SURVEY

Published as a separate document.

B-1

Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan APPENDIX C. EXAMPLE PROGRESS REPORT

APPENDIX C. EXAMPLE PROGRESS REPORT

The Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Annual Progress Report

Reporting Period: (Insert reporting period) Background: The Klamath Tribes developed a hazard mitigation plan to reduce risk from all hazards by identifying resources, information, and strategies for risk reduction. The federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires state and local governments to develop hazard mitigation plans as a condition for federal disaster grant assistance. To prepare the plan, the Klamath Tribes organized resources, assessed risks from natural hazards, developed planning goals and objectives, reviewed mitigation alternatives, and developed an action plan to address probable impacts from natural hazards. By completing this process, the Klamath Tribes maintained compliance with the Disaster Mitigation Act, achieving eligibility for mitigation grant funding opportunities afforded under the Robert T. Stafford Act. The plan can be viewed on-line at: INSERT LINK

Summary Overview of the Plan’s Progress: The performance period for the Hazard Mitigation Plan became effective on ____, 2017, with the final approval of the plan by FEMA. The initial performance period for this plan will be 5 years, with an anticipated update to the plan to occur before ______, 20__. As of this reporting period, the performance period for this plan is considered to be __% complete. The Hazard Mitigation Plan has targeted __ hazard mitigation initiatives to be pursued during the 5-year performance period. As of the reporting period, the following overall progress can be reported: • __ out of __ initiatives (__%) reported ongoing action toward completion. • __ out of __ initiatives (__%) were reported as being complete. • __ out of __ initiatives (___%) reported no action taken.

Purpose: The purpose of this report is to provide an annual update on the implementation of the action plan identified in the Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation Plan. The objective is to ensure that there is a continuing and responsive planning process that will keep the Hazard Mitigation Plan dynamic and responsive to the needs and capabilities of the Klamath Tribes. This report discusses the following: • Natural hazard events that have occurred within the last year • Changes in risk exposure within the planning area • Mitigation success stories • Review of the action plan • Changes in capabilities that could impact plan implementation • Recommendations for changes/enhancement.

The Hazard Mitigation Plan Planning Team: The Hazard Mitigation Plan Planning Team, made up of stakeholders within the planning area, reviewed and approved this progress report at its annual

C-1 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

meeting held on _____, 20___. It was determined through the plan’s development process that a Planning Team would remain in service to oversee maintenance of the plan. At a minimum, the Planning Team will provide technical review and oversight on the development of the annual progress report. It is anticipated that there will be turnover in the membership annually, which will be documented in the progress reports. For this reporting period, the Planning Team membership is as indicated in Table 1.

TABLE 1. PLANNING TEAM MEMBERS

Name Title Jurisdiction/Agency

Natural Hazard Events within the Planning Area: During the reporting period, there were __ natural hazard events in the planning area that had a measurable impact on people or property. A summary of these events is as follows: • ______• ______

Changes in Risk Exposure in the Planning Area: (Insert brief overview of any natural hazard event in the planning area that changed the probability of occurrence or ranking of risk for the hazards addressed in the hazard mitigation plan) Mitigation Success Stories: (Insert brief overview of mitigation accomplishments during the reporting period) Review of the Action Plan: Table 2 reviews the action plan, reporting the status of each initiative. Reviewers of this report should refer to the Hazard Mitigation Plan for more detailed descriptions of each initiative and the prioritization process.

Address the following in the “status” column of the following table: • Was any element of the initiative carried out during the reporting period? • If no action was completed, why? • Is the timeline for implementation for the initiative still appropriate? • If the initiative was completed, does it need to be changed or removed from the action plan?

TABLE 2. ACTION PLAN MATRIX Action Taken? Status (X, (Yes or No) Time Line Priority Status O,✓) Initiative #__—______[description]

Initiative #__—______[description]

Completion status legend: ✓= Project Completed O = Action ongoing toward completion X = No progress at this time

Changes That May Impact Implementation of the Plan: (Insert brief overview of any significant changes in the planning area that would have a profound impact on the implementation of the plan. Specify any changes in technical, regulatory and financial capabilities identified during the plan’s development) Recommendations for Changes or Enhancements: Based on the review of this report by the Hazard Mitigation Plan Planning Team, the following recommendations will be noted for future updates or revisions to the plan:

C-3 Klamath Tribes Hazard Mitigation Plan Update

• ______• ______• ______• ______• ______• ______

Public review notice: The contents of this report are considered to be public knowledge and have been prepared for total public disclosure. Copies of the report have been provided to the Klamath Tribes governing board and to local media outlets and the report is posted on the Klamath Tribes’ Hazard Mitigation Plan website. Any questions or comments regarding the contents of this report should be directed to: Insert Contact Info Here