DOCSLIB.ORG

Wildfire Mitigation Projects in the State of Colorado

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wildfire Mitigation Projects in the State of Colorado Wildfire Mitigation Projects in the State of Colorado Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment Colorado | March 2017 Federal Emergency Management Agency U.S. Department of Homeland Security Denver Federal Center Building 710, Box 25267 Denver, CO 80225-0267 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................... i Acronyms And Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... iv 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Overview ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Background ..................................................................................... 2 1.1.2 Area of Study .................................................................................. 3 1.1.3 Process for Use of this PEA ............................................................ 4 2 Purpose and Need .............................................................................................................. 5 3 Alternatives ........................................................................................................................ 6 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 6 3.2 Alternatives Considered .............................................................................. 6 3.2.1 Alternative 1: No Action ................................................................. 6 3.2.2 Alternative 2: Vegetation Management .......................................... 7 3.3 Alternatives Not Considered ....................................................................... 9 4 Affected Environment And Environmental Consequences .......................................... 11 4.1 Physical Resources .................................................................................... 11 4.1.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 11 4.1.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 17 4.2 Transportation Resources .......................................................................... 18 4.2.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 18 4.2.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 20 4.3 Safety and Occupational Health ................................................................ 21 4.3.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 21 4.3.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 22 4.4 Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice ............................................. 25 4.4.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 25 4.4.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 25 4.5 Air Quality................................................................................................. 27 4.5.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 27 4.5.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 29 4.6 Noise.......................................................................................................... 30 4.6.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 30 4.6.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 32 4.7 Public Services And Utilities .................................................................... 32 4.7.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 32 4.7.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 34 4.8 Water Resources ........................................................................................ 36 4.8.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 36 4.8.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 40 Colorado Wildfire Mitigation Projects Page i March 2017 DRAFT Programmatic Environmental Assessment Table of Contents 4.9 Biological Resources ................................................................................. 43 4.9.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 43 4.9.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 50 4.10 Cultural Resources .................................................................................... 52 4.10.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 52 4.10.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 55 4.11 Hazardous Materials .................................................................................. 57 4.11.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 57 4.11.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 59 4.12 Cumulative Impacts................................................................................... 60 4.12.1 Summary of Cumulative Impacts .................................................. 60 5 Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Mitigation Measures .................................... 62 6 Summary of Impacts ........................................................................................................ 65 7 Public Involvement ........................................................................................................... 66 7.1 Public Notice of Availability For Comment ............................................. 66 8 List of Preparers............................................................................................................... 67 9 References ........................................................................................................................ 68 FIGURES Figure 1-1: Action Area ...................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 4-1: Generalized Bedrock Geology for Colorado .................................................................. 12 Figure 4-2: Colorado Soil Taxonomy Suborders .............................................................................. 14 Figure 4-3: Major Land Use Distribution by Coverage Type in Colorado ....................................... 16 Figure 4-4: Colorado Transportation Networks ................................................................................ 19 Figure 4-5: Colorado Historic Wildfires ........................................................................................... 23 Figure 4-6: Sound Levels of Typical Sounds .................................................................................... 31 Figure 4-7: Colorado Water Resources .............................................................................................. 37 Figure 4-8: Colorado Wetlands ......................................................................................................... 41 Figure 4-9: ESA Designated Critical Habitat for Colorado .............................................................. 49 Figure 4-10: TOXMAP Superfund/NPL and TRI Facilities in Colorado ......................................... 58 TABLES Table 4-1: Major Land Use in Colorado by Coverage Type ............................................................ 15 Table 4-2: Impact Significance Criteria for Physical Resources ...................................................... 17 Table 4-3: Colorado Interstates .......................................................................................................... 18 Table 4-4: Impact Significance Rating Criteria for Transportation Resources ................................. 20 Table 4-5: Significant Colorado Wildfires–1994-2013 .................................................................... 22 Table 4-6: Impact Significance Rating Criteria for Safety and Occupational Health ....................... 22 Table 4-7: Impact Significance Rating Criteria for Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice .... 26 Colorado Wildfire Mitigation Projects Page ii March 2017 DRAFT Programmatic Environmental Assessment Table of Contents Table 4-8: Colorado Exceedances for National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in 2013 ............................................................................................................................................................ 28 Table 4-9: Impact Significance Rating Criteria for Air Quality ....................................................... 29 Table 4-10: Impact Significance Rating Criteria for Noise .............................................................. 32 Table 4-11: Colorado Public Safety Infrastructure ........................................................................... 33 Table 4-12: Colorado First Responder Personnel ............................................................................. 33 Table 4-13: Impact Significance Rating Criteria
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Social and Economic Issues of the Hayman Fire
    Social and Economic Issues of the Hayman Fire Brian Kent, Krista Gebert, Sarah McCaffrey, Wade Martin, David Calkin, Ervin Schuster, Ingrid Martin, Holly Wise Bender, Greg Alward, Yoshitaka Kumagai, Patricia J. Cohn, Matt Carroll, Dan Williams, Carol Ekarius Introduction ____________________ frequency and magnitude of wildfires has increased, especially in lower elevation Ponderosa pine and mixed On June 26, 2002, U.S. Representative Mark Udall conifer forests because of significant fuel buildups and wrote the US Forest Service Chief, requesting that the extreme drought, more wildfires are causing signifi- Forest Service conduct an analysis of the Hayman cant damage and disruption to both social and eco- Fire. In response to the Congressman’s letter, five nomic systems. This trend ensures that the interplay teams were established in August, 2002 to analyze between wildland fire management and human di- various aspects of the Hayman Fire experience. This mensions issues takes on far greater importance than report describes the Hayman Fire analysis work con- it did historically. As pointed out in (Machlis and ducted by the social/economic team and presents our others 2002): findings. The human dimension of Federal wildland fire man- When a fire the size and intensity of the Hayman agement – the relationship of people and wildland fire in Fire occurs largely in an urban/wildland area as highly America – is an important and driving force in how Federal agencies respond to wildland fire, now and in the developed as the Colorado Front Range, the social and future. In many ways, it is the critical element, for the economic effects or consequences will be extensive, management of wildland fire is very much the manage- complex, and long lasting.
    [Show full text]
  • Teller County CWPP Program Goals and Objectives
    TELLER COUNTY, COLORADO COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN UPDATE NOVEMBER 2011 The maps in this document (unless otherwise cited) were created by staff of the Coalition for the Upper South Platte and made possible by a grant from the ESRI Conservation Program. (blank) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Significant Activities and Progress . 1 Review 2005 Goals and Objectives . .. 1 Public Lands . .. 2 Private lands . .. 3 Recommended Actions . .. 5 Other Activities . .. 6 Wildfire Profile and Community Risk Assessment . 7 Fire History . .. 8 Suppression Capabilities and Advances . 8 Wildfire Science . 10 Factors Affecting Fire Behavior. 11 Identifying High Hazard Areas ... 14 Values at Risk .. 15 Integrating Values and Wildfire Hazards . .. 20 Wildland Urban Interface Identification . 20 Communities and Other Values at Risk . 23 Priority Area Identification . .. 24 Mitigation Recommendations . .. 26 Goals and Objectives, 2011 . .. 27 Private Land Recommendations . .. 29 Subdivision Risk Assessment . .. 30 MAPS Page Map 1: Land Ownership and CWPP Communities . 2 Map 2: Fuel Reduction Treatments, Teller County . 3 Map 3: Teller Cover Vegetation . 12 Map 4: Slope Assessment . 13 Map 5: Aspect Assessment . 13 Map 6: Combined Rating Assessment . 14 Map 7: Watersheds in Teller County . 17 Map 8: Front Range Round Table Assessment . 20 Map 9: Subdivision Locations (Populations over 100) . 21 Map 10: Prioritized Subdivisions 2008 . 22 Map 11: Community Locations with Hazard Assessment . 23 Map 12: Priority Areas selected by Committee. 24 Map 13: Priority Areas with Ownership . 25 PHOTOS Photo 1: Divide Slash Site . 5 Photo 2: Crown Fire . 10 Photo 3: Ground Fire . 11 Photo 4: Ute Cultural Tree . 19 SIGNIFICANT ACTIVITIES AND PROGRESS While many counties are just beginning to move forward with wildfire mitigation practices, Teller County has forged ahead with on-the-ground fuel reduction and other efforts to address the highest priorities identified.
    [Show full text]
  • WCCP Complete Document
    Wild Connections Conservation Plan for the Pike & San Isabel National Forests WILD CONNECTIONS CONSERVATION PLAN For Protecting Biological Diversity and Ecosystem Health in the Pike and San Isabel National Forests Submitted as an option for the Pike and San Isabel National Forests Plan Revision June 2006 Authored by: The Upper Arkansas and South Platte Project June, 2006 Wild Connections Conservation Plan for the Pike & San Isabel National Forests All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system without permission in writing from the publisher. © Upper Arkansas and South Platte Project, 2006 The following people have generously provided photographs: Cover: Hiking in Browns Canyon Wilderness Study Area, Kurt Kunkle (Colorado Environmental Coalition); elk calf and mountain lion, Dave Jones. Executive summary: Dave Jones, Jean C. Smith, John Stansfield and Darel Hess ( © Hess – www.2bnTheWild.com). Complex title pages: Badger Creek roadless area, Deb Callahan; Salt Creek and Pikes Peak West roadless areas, Jean C. Smith; Square Top roadless area, Mike Foster; Limbaugh Canyon, Blanca Peak and Thirtynine Mile roadless areas, Michael Dwyer; Collegiate Peaks Wilderness, Michael Rogers; Sheeprock and Northrup Gulch roadless areas, Mike Kienast; Purgatoire roadless area, Trey Beck; Highline roadless area, Stephanie Hitzthaler. Southern Rockies Wildlands Network Vision map courtesy of the Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project; Southern Rocky Mountain Ecoregional Assessment map courtesy of The Nature Conservancy. 35% post consumer waste June, 2006 Wild Connections Conservation Plan for the Pike & San Isabel National Forests i.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado Subject Headings
    Colorado Subject Headings Thursday, March 28, 2019 1:24:29 PM Title See See also See also 2 File Number 1st Calvary - United States Army see Military - United States Army - 1st Calvary 4-H Club see Clubs - 4-H Club 8th Calvary - United States Army see Military - United States Army - 8th Calvary 9th Calvary - United States Army see Military - United States Army - 9th Cavalry Abortion PCCLD-VT-C-01 Action 22 see Politics - Action 22 AdAmAn Club of Colorado Springs, see Clubs - AdAmAn Club of Colorado Colorado Springs, Colorado Adams County, Colorado PCCLD-VT-C-02 Adams State College see Schools - Adams State College - Alamosa, Colorado Adobe Architecture see Architecture - Adobe Adolph Coors Company see Business - Adolph Coors Company Adoption PCCLD-VT-C-03 Aeration see Water - Aeration Aeronautics see Women - Aeronautics Aeronautics PCCLD-VT-C-04 African Americans see Blacks Page 1 of 211 Title See See also See also 2 File Number Agriculture - American Agriculture PCCLD-VT-C-05 Strike Agriculture - Apples PCCLD-VT-C-06 Agriculture - Barns PCCLD-VT-C-07 Agriculture - Beets and Beet Sugar PCCLD-VT-C-08 Agriculture - Canola PCCLD-VT-C-09 Agriculture - Catalogs PCCLD-VT-C-10 Agriculture - Census of Agriculture - PCCLD-VT-C-11 1982 Agriculture - Colorful Colorado PCCLD-VT-C-12 Articles Agriculture - Cooperative Societies PCCLD-VT-C-13 Agriculture - Equipment PCCLD-VT-C-14 Agriculture - Farm Labor PCCLD-VT-C-16 Employment Agriculture - Farm Mechanization PCCLD-VT-C-17 Agriculture - Farmers PCCLD-VT-C-19 Agriculture - Farmhouses PCCLD-VT-C-15
    [Show full text]
  • City of Manitou Springs Community Wildfire Protection Plan
    City of Manitou Springs Community Wildfire Protection Plan City of Manitou Springs Community Wildfire Protection Plan Recommendation and Approval Recommended by: Bobby White, Wildland Fire Coordinator Date Manitou Springs Fire Department Approved by: Ken Jaray, Mayor Date City of Manitou Springs Dave Root, District Forester Date Colorado State Forest Service John K. Forsett, Fire Chief Date City of Manitou Springs Roy C. Chaney, Interim City Administrator Date City of Manitou Springs ii Table of Contents: Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Fire Adapted vs. Mitigation ................................................................................................................... 1 Area Description ................................................................................................................................... 4 Topography ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Fuels .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Weather ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Manitou Springs Fire Department ........................................................................................................ 7 Wildfire
    [Show full text]
  • Hayman Fire Case Study: Summary
    United States Department of Agriculture Hayman Fire Case Study: Forest Service Rocky Mountain Summary Research Station General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-115 Russell T. Graham, Technical Editor September 2003 Abstract __________________________________________ Graham, Russell T., Technical Editor. 2003. Hayman Fire Case Study: summary. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-115. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 32 p. This publication summarizes the findings in the 400-page companion document, Hayman Fire Case Study, Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114. This summary document’s purpose is to convey information quickly and succinctly to a wide array of audiences. In 2002 much of the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains in Colorado was rich in dry vegetation as a result of fire exclusion and the droughty conditions that prevailed in recent years. These dry and heavy fuel loadings were continuous along the South Platte River corridor located between Denver and Colorado Springs on the Front Range. These topographic and fuel conditions combined with a dry and windy weather system centered over eastern Washington to produce ideal burning conditions. The start of the Hayman Fire was timed and located perfectly to take advantage of these conditions resulting in a wildfire run in 1 day of over 60,000 acres and finally impacting over 138,000 acres. The Hayman Fire Case Study, involving more than 60 scientists and professionals from throughout the United States, examined how the fire behaved, the effects of fuel treatments on burn severity, the emissions produced, the ecological (for example, soil, vegetation, animals) effects, the home destruction, postfire rehabili- tation activities, and the social and economic issues surrounding the Hayman Fire.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Wildfire Protection Plan
    Community Wildfire Protection Plan For The City of Cripple Creek, Colorado “Sharing the Responsibility” i City of Cripple Creek Community Wildfire Protection Plan “Sharing the Responsibility” Recommended by: Date: Dean O’Nale, Fire Chief Cripple Creek Fire Department Approved by: Date: Larry Long, Woodland Park Field Office, Supervisory Forester, Colorado State Forest Service Approved by: Date: Norm Steen Teller County Commission Approved by: Date: Bruce Brown, Mayor Cripple Creek, Colorado ii Reviewed By: Neighborhood Champions Mr. Thomas Litherland Ms. Nancy McDonald Mrs. Nancy Poch Mr. Carl Poch Dr. Curt Sorenson Interagency Cooperators Oscar Martinez, District Ranger, USFS Pikes Peak Ranger District Jay Karle, USFS Pikes Peak Ranger District Ed Skerjanec, Bureau of Land Management Dave Root, Assistant District Forester, Colorado State Forest Service, Woodland Park District Steve DiCamillo, Director of Cripple Creek Public Works Mickey Groves, Director of Plant Operations, Cripple Creek Waste Water Treatment Doug Estrada, Cripple Creek Information Technology Cole Hammond, Black Hills Energy Diane Pritchard, Dispatch Supervisor, Cripple Creek Police Department Jim Hammond, Spring Creek Realty, Mt. Pisgah Candy Shoemaker, EMS Director, Southwest Teller County EMS Tom Ohlsson, Red Dog Radios Intermountain Rural Electric Association Colorado Natural Gas Company Intra-agency Cooperators Ryan Lohmeier, Captain, Cripple Creek Fire Department Dan Battin, Engineer, Northeast Teller County Fire Sonny Brown, Fire Fighter, Cripple Creek Fire Department Contributors Christina Randall, Wildfire Mitigation Administrator, Colorado Springs Fire Department Edited by Richard Ingold, Fire Corp Volunteer, Cripple Creek Fire Department iii Summary of Changes Date Item Description of Change 11/15/18 CCFD CWPP Revised Baseline Document iv Executive Summary The Cripple Creek Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) is developed in compliance with federal, state, and local laws and the helpful cooperation of their departments and representatives.
    [Show full text]
  • COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN North-West
    Community Wildfire ProteCtion Plan North-West Fire Protection District Park County COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN NORTH-WEST FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT PARK COUNTY, COLORADO March 2010 Submitted By __________________________________________________________ __________________ Brian Roach: for the CWPP Team Date Concurred __________________________________________________________ __________________ Mike Roll Date Chief, North-West Fire Protection District __________________________________________________________ __________________ Mark Dowaliby Date Chair, Park County Board of Commissioners __________________________________________________________ __________________ Larry Long Date District Forester, Woodland Park District, Colorado State Forest Service TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction: ………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………...P. 1 Section 1: CWPP Development and Stakeholder Involvement…………………………………….P. 2 1.1 The Team 1.2 Overall Goals and Objectives Section 2: The North-West Fire Protection District Area………………….………………………….P. 8 2.1 Ecological Description 2.2 Insect and Disease Conditions 2.3 Fuel Treatment Issues Section 3: Values at Risk; Hazards and Subdivision Assessment………………………………….P. 17 3.1 Area Hazard Assessment 3.2 Values at Risk 3.3 Subdivision Assessment Section 4: Wildland Fire Response Infrastructure and Capabilities…….……………………….P. 36 4.1 Fire Service Response 4.2 Park County Emergency Management 4.3 Equipment 4.4 Water Resources 4.5 Emergency Management Services 4.6 Staging, Evacuation and Safety Zones 4.7 Public Information
    [Show full text]
  • At Home in the W- National.Indd
    Wildfi re Web Site a ‘Hit’ for Homeowners Colorado Springs residents go online to fi nd fi re rating IT’S A CITY SYNONYMOUS WITH PIKES PEAK, whose breathtaking views inspired a visiting professor of lit er a ture by the name of Kathryn Lee Bates to pen the words to “America the Beautiful” nearly a century ago. Colorado Springs’ legendary grandeur has always drawn people attracted to its natural beauty and healthy cli mate. On a typical June day, a steady stream of vehicles makes its way to the 14,110-foot summit of “Amer i ca’s mountain,” where tourists step from their cars to take in this top-of-the- world pan ora ma. But in June 2002, traffi c on the Pikes Peak Highway slowed to a trickle, and the region’s purple mountain majesty gave way to a more sinister hue. A raging forest fi re burned just 20 or so miles northwest of town. The Hayman Fire, named after a mining ghost town in the nearby Pike Na tion al Forest, would even tu - al ly cover 137,000 acres, making it the larg- est wildfi re in the history of the state. A ban- ner headline in the Colorado Springs Gazette proclaimed “Colorado Burning!” Thousands of residents in three counties bordering the national forest would be ordered to evacuate. looming threat of wild fi res. Outside, beyond Colorado Springs Fire And while fl ames never directly threatened the broad boulevards and busy city streets, Chief Manuel Navarro city residents, fi re had left its calling card.
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL REPORT Title: the Long-Term Legacy of the 2002 Hayman Fire on Stream Water Quality and Treatability
    FINAL REPORT Title: The Long-term Legacy of the 2002 Hayman Fire on Stream Water Quality and Treatability JFSP PROJECT ID: 14-1-06-11 September 2017 Chuck Rhoades US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station [email protected] Alex Chow Biogeochemistry & Environmental Quality Research Group, Clemson University [email protected] The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government. 1 ABSTRACT Forested watersheds supply drinking water for millions of people in the United States. The increased frequency and severity of wildfires during recent decades have elevated public concern regarding source water protection. Large, high-severity wildfires alter the physical and biological conditions that determine how watersheds retain and release nutrients and regulate stream water quality. The short-term water quality impacts of severe wildfire are often dramatic, but little is known about whether significant post-fire changes persist and what such changes mean for post- wildfire watershed resilience, sustained delivery of clean water from headwater catchments and challenges for water treatment. Our overall objective was to assess the effects of the largest fire in recorded Colorado history, the 2002 Hayman Fire, on stream water quality. Specifically, we set out to 1) examine stream nitrogen (N) and carbon (C) concentrations and export, 2) quantify the abundance and composition of precursors of potentially hazardous byproducts of treatment water chlorination (e.g., disinfection-by-products, DBPs) including trihalomethanes (THMs), haloacetonitrile (HANs), chloral hydrate (CHD) and haloketone (HKT) and 3) evaluate the chemical composition of C contained in soil organic matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Hayman Fire Case Study: Forest Service Rocky Mountain Summary Research Station General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-115 Russell T
    United States Department of Agriculture Hayman Fire Case Study: Forest Service Rocky Mountain Summary Research Station General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-115 Russell T. Graham, Technical Editor September 2003 Abstract __________________________________________ Graham, Russell T., Technical Editor. 2003. Hayman Fire Case Study: summary. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-115. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 32 p. This publication summarizes the findings in the 400-page companion document, Hayman Fire Case Study, Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114. This summary document’s purpose is to convey information quickly and succinctly to a wide array of audiences. In 2002 much of the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains in Colorado was rich in dry vegetation as a result of fire exclusion and the droughty conditions that prevailed in recent years. These dry and heavy fuel loadings were continuous along the South Platte River corridor located between Denver and Colorado Springs on the Front Range. These topographic and fuel conditions combined with a dry and windy weather system centered over eastern Washington to produce ideal burning conditions. The start of the Hayman Fire was timed and located perfectly to take advantage of these conditions resulting in a wildfire run in 1 day of over 60,000 acres and finally impacting over 138,000 acres. The Hayman Fire Case Study, involving more than 60 scientists and professionals from throughout the United States, examined how the fire behaved, the effects of fuel treatments on burn severity, the emissions produced, the ecological (for example, soil, vegetation, animals) effects, the home destruction, postfire rehabili- tation activities, and the social and economic issues surrounding the Hayman Fire.
    [Show full text]
  • Teller County Wildfire Council
    Teller County Wildfire Council Partnering to Move Mitigation Forward Prepared by the Community Mitigation Assistance Team October 30, 2020 INTRODUCTION Teller County, located in central Colorado on the western slope of the Front Range, spans 557 square miles of land and two square miles of water. Over 50 percent of the land is public, with the Pike National Forest covering 124,000 acres across the county. The elevation in Teller County ranges from 8,000 feet in Woodland Park to over 14,000 feet on the back side of Pikes Peak. The area is densely forested with mixed conifer (primarily ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir) with a grass understory. The population of just over 25,000 people, encompasses the city of Woodland Park, and towns of Cripple Creek, Florissant, Victor, Goldfield and Midland. The area has been impacted by some of Colorado’s largest and most destructive fires. In 2002, Teller County was directly affected by the Hayman Fire, which burned 138,000 acres and destroyed 600 structures. The 2012 Waldo Canyon Fire burned 18,247 acres, destroyed 346 structures, and two residents’ lives were lost. Both the Hayman and Waldo Canyon fires came within miles of Woodland Park’s city working group was completed and a memorandum of limits. understanding was established by the Woodland Park Healthy On the heels of the 2002 fire season, in 2004, Teller County Forest Initiative Committee comprised of local, state, federal developed the first Community Wildfire Protection Plan and private stakeholders. This work laid the foundation for an (CWPP) in Colorado and began coalescing an ad hoc action-oriented partnership that got to work.
    [Show full text]