DOCSLIB.ORG

Fire Retardant FEIS Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fire Retardant FEIS Contents Cover photo by Kreig Rasmussen, Fishlake National Forest, 2005. The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720- 2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20250- 9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Contents Table C-4. Representative Ecoregions for Retardant Application. 236 Table D-1. Misapplication of Fire Retardant Data, 2008–2010. 240 Table E-1. National Screening Process for Federally Listed Species 244 Table E-2. National Screen for Forest Service Sensitive Species. 245 Table F-1. Federally Listed Aquatic Fish, Mollusk, and Crustacean Species Under the Jurisdiction of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, by Forest Service Region, Considered for this Consultation. 248 Table F-2. Determinations for Fish Species Under the Jurisdiction of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 256 Table F-3. Likelihood of Adverse Effects to Species and Critical Habitat Under the Jurisdiction of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by National Forest / Grassland. 259 Table F-4. Determinations for Aquatic Crustaceans and Mollusks under the Jurisdiction of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 268 Table F-5. Likelihood of Adverse Effects to Mollusks and Crustaceans Under the Jurisdiction of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by National Forest / Grassland. 271 Table F-6. Species and Critical Habitat Designations Under the Jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries Considered in This Consultation. 278 Table F-7. Species, Critical Habitat, and Essential Fish Habitat Determinations by Species Under the Jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries. 280 Table F-8. Northwest National Forests and Determinations of Effects. 282 Table F-9. Southwest National Forests and Determinations of Effects for Species Under the Jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries. 285 Table F-10. Southeast National Forests and Determinations of Effects for Species Under the Jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries. 286 Table G-1. Federally Listed Plant Species With the Potential to be Impacted by Aerial Fire Retardant. 291 Table G-2. Federally Listed Plant Species With no Potential to be Impacted by Aerial Fire Retardant (No Effect Determination for Alternatives 2 and 3). 296 Table G-3. Federally Listed Plant Species Protected by Avoidance Mapping Associated With RPA Adoption and Alternative 2 (20 Species and 14 Designated Critical Habitats, FWS 2008). 303 Table G-4. Impacts to Designated Critical Habitat for Plant Species Impacted From Aerially Applied Fire Retardant for Alternatives 2 and 3. 304 Table G-5. Federally Listed Plant Species Likely Adversely Affected From Aerially Applied Fire Retardant for Alternative 3. 307 Table G-6. Federally Listed Plant Species Not Likely Adversely Affected From Aerially Applied Fire Retardant for Alternative 3. 313 Table H-1. Soil Risk Rating Indicators and Levels 324 Table I-1. Definition of terms used in wildlife effects screening process. 329 Table I-2. List of USFWS ESA listed Threatened & Endangered Species that occur on or adjacent to NFS lands included in this Analysis with a May Affect Determination. Note: Region 10 not shown due to listed listed ESA species in this region are all No Effect in Table I-3. 339 Table I-3: List of USFWS ESA listed Threatened and Endangered Species that occur on or adjacent to NFS lands included in this Analysis with No Effect Determinations. 344 Fire Retardant FEIS Contents Table I-4 – Wildlife Forest Service Sensitive Species – Trending Toward Listing with use of aerial application of fire retardant. 348 Table I-5. Wildlife Avoidance Area Mapping: Threatened and Endangered Species. 358 Table I-6. Wildlife 362 Table P-1. Terrestrial Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species Aerial Fire Retardant Avoidance Areas within National Forest System Lands 444 Table P-2. National Forest System Lands Covered by Water Features Buffered by 300 Feet 448 Table Q-1. Draft EIS Commenters, Letter Numbers, and Associated PCs. 455 Table Q-2. Public Concern Statements Organized by Subject. 458 Table Q-3. Number of Coded (Substantive) Comments by Subject. 458 List of Figures Figure 1 Map of National Forest System lands. 23 Figure 2 National Federal large airtanker, MAFFS, SEAT, and helitanker bases, May 24 2004 53 Figure 3 Gallons of aerially applied fire retardant by Forest Service region, 2000–2010 57 Figure 4 Number of fire retardant drops by Forest Service region, 2000–2010 57 Figure 5 Comparison of percentage of fires versus percentage retardant drops by region 90 Figure 6 Fate of aerially applied fire retardant 109 Fire Retardant FEIS Contents Fire Retardant FEIS Abstract Abstract Nationwide Aerial Application of Fire Retardant Final Environmental Impact Statement Lead Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service Cooperating Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI), Bureau of Land Management Responsible Official: Thomas Tidwell, Chief, USDA Forest Service For Information Contact: Glen Stein, Fire and Aviation Management, USDA Forest Service, [email protected], (208) 869-5405 Abstract: The USDA Forest Service is proposing to continue the aerial application of fire retardant on National Forest System lands in response to the July 2010 direction from the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana requiring the Agency to issue a decision no later than December 31, 2011. This final environmental impact statement discloses the environmental and economic effects of the proposed action. The purpose of the proposed action is to address the need for the continued use of aerially applied fire retardant as a firefighting tool because it reduces fire intensities and rates of spread and increases the ability to safely fight wildland fires with ground-based forces. The Forest Service provides standards for use of fire retardant to balance the need to protect critical or sensitive resources with the need to use fire retardant as an effective firefighting tool to protect life and property from wildfire. Twenty-seven comments were received in response to the notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. Fifty-three comments were received in response to the draft environmental impact statement. The Agency considered three alternatives in detail, including the proposed action, which were developed in response to the comments received and issues identified. Alternative 1 No Aerial Application of Fire Retardant) is the no-action alternative; Alternative 2 (Continued Aerial Application of Fire Retardant Under the 2000 Guidelines, Including the 2008 Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives) is the proposed action; and Alternative 3 (Continued Aerial Application of Fire Retardant, Using Aerial Application of Fire Retardant Direction and Adopting the 2008 Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives) is the preferred alternative. The final environmental impact statement describes the effects of each alternative with respect to the purpose and need and significant issues. The final environmental impact statement is available online at http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/retardant. Under 40 CFR 1506.10(b)(2) this final environmental impact statement is available for consideration by theChief of the Forest Service for a minimum of 30 days before the Agency will record a decision. Fire Retardant FEIS 2 Summary Summary On July 27, 2010, the United States District Court for the District of Montana invalidated the Forest Service’s 2008 decision to continue using the 2000 Guidelines for Aerial Application of Retardants and Foams in Aquatic Environments and adopt the 2008 Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (Appendix A) identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries, holding that the 2000 Guidelines were developed in violation of the National Environmental Planning Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The district court vacated the 2008 decision, and remanded it to the USDA, FWS, and NOAA Fisheries for further proceedings (Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics vs. Forest Service, 726 F.Supp.2d 1195 (US District Court, Montana 2010) . On August 27, 2010, a notice of intent was published in the Federal Register announcing the intention of the Forest Service to prepare an EIS and initiate a 45-day scoping period. As a result of this notice, 27 comment letters were received by October 12, 2010. A notice of availability was posted in the Federal Register on May 13, 2011, for the draft EIS titled Nationwide Aerial Application of Fire Retardant Project, Proposing to Continue the Aerial Application of Fire Retardant on National Forest System Lands. This began the 45-day comment period, which ended on June 27, 2011. The Forest Service received
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Human Health Risk Assessment of Wildland Fire-Fighting Chemicals: Long-Term Fire Retardants
    HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF WILDLAND FIRE-FIGHTING CHEMICALS: LONG-TERM FIRE RETARDANTS Prepared for: Fire and Aviation Management U.S. Forest Service By: Headquarters: 1406 Fort Crook Drive South, Suite 101 Bellevue, NE 68005 September 2017 Health Risk Assessment: Retardants September 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF WILDLAND FIRE-FIGHTING CHEMICALS: LONG-TERM FIRE RETARDANTS September 2017 The U.S. Forest Service uses a variety of fire-fighting chemicals to aid in the suppression of fire in wildlands. These products can be categorized as long-term retardants, foams, and water enhancers. This chemical toxicity risk assessment of the long-term retardants examined their potential impacts on fire-fighters and members of the public. Typical and maximum exposures from planned activities were considered, as well as an accidental drench of an individual in the path of an aerial drop. This risk assessment evaluates the toxicological effects associated with chemical exposure, that is, the direct effects of chemical toxicity, using methodologies established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. A risk assessment is different from and is only one component of a comprehensive impact assessment of all types of possible effects from an action on health and the human environment, including aircraft noise, cumulative impacts, physical injury, and other direct or indirect effects. Environmental assessments or environmental impact statements pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act consider chemical toxicity, as well as other potential effects to make management decisions. Each long-term retardant product used in wildland fire-fighting is a mixture of individual chemicals. The product is supplied as a concentrate, in either a wet (liquid) or dry (powder) form, which is then diluted with water to produce the mixture that is applied during fire-fighting operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Gao-13-684, Wildland Fire Management
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters August 2013 WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT Improvements Needed in Information, Collaboration, and Planning to Enhance Federal Fire Aviation Program Success GAO-13-684 August 2013 WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT Improvements Needed in Information, Collaboration, and Planning to Enhance Federal Fire Aviation Program Success Highlights of GAO-13-684, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found The Forest Service and Interior The Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service and the Department of the contract for aircraft to perform various Interior have undertaken nine major efforts since 1995 to identify the number and firefighting functions, including type of firefighting aircraft they need, but those efforts—consisting of major airtankers that drop retardant. The studies and strategy documents—have been hampered by limited information Forest Service contracts for large and collaboration. Specifically, the studies and strategy documents did not airtankers and certain other aircraft, incorporate information on the performance and effectiveness of firefighting while Interior contracts for smaller aircraft, primarily because neither agency collected such data. While government airtankers and water scoopers. reports have long called for the Forest Service and Interior to collect aircraft However, a decrease in the number of performance information, neither agency did so until 2012 when the Forest large airtankers, from 44 in 2002 to 8 in Service began a data collection effort. However, the Forest Service has collected early 2013—due to aging planes and several fatal crashes—has led to limited data on large airtankers and no other aircraft, and Interior has not initiated concerns about the agencies’ ability to a data collection effort.
    [Show full text]
  • Cub Creek 2 Fire Evening Update July 17, 2021 Evening Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest
    Cub Creek 2 Fire Evening Update July 17, 2021 Evening Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest Fire Information Line – (541)-670-0812 (8:00 am to 8:00 pm) Winthrop, WA — Cub Creek 2 – Extended attack of the Cub Creek 2 Fire continued today with retardant drops from large air tankers, water scooping/dropping planes, helicopters with buckets and various ground forces of hand crews and engines. The fire burned vigorously throughout the day on Washington Department of Natural Resource and Okanogan County Fire District 6 protected lands and also the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest. The majority of the left flank of the fire is lined with dozer line from the heel of the fire to First Creek Road which ties into Forest Road 140 leading to Buck Lake. The north flank remains unchecked at this time. The northeast flank is backing down toward West Chewuch Road where it had crossed north of the junction of the East and West Chewuch Road to Heaton Homestead. The fire is also located east of Boulder Creek Road and is burning towards the north being pushed by diurnal winds. Northwest Incident Management Team 8 assumed management of the fire this evening at 6 p.m. Tonight, a night shift of firefighters include a 20-person handcrew, five engines, and multiple overhead. The Washington State structure strike team has been reassigned to protect properties in the Cub Creek 2 Fire. 8 Mile Ranch is the designated staging area. Evacuation Information: The Okanogan County Emergency Management (OCEM) evacuations for the Chewuch River drainage effected by the Cub Creek 2 Fire remain.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire Extinguisher Booklet
    NY Fire Consultants, Inc. NY Fire Safety Institute 481 Eighth Avenue, Suite 618 New York, NY 10001 (212) 239 9051 (212) 239 9052 fax Fire Extinguisher Training The Fire Triangle In order to understand how fire extinguishers work, you need to understand some characteristics of fire. Four things must be present at the same time in order to produce fire: 1. Enough oxygen to sustain combustion, 2. Enough heat to raise the material to its ignition temperature, 3. Some sort of fuel or combustible material, and 4. The chemical, exothermic reaction that is fire. Oxygen, heat, and fuel are frequently referred to as the "fire triangle." Add in the fourth element, the chemical reaction, and you actually have a fire "tetrahedron." The important thing to remember is: take any of these four things away, and you will not have a fire or the fire will be extinguished. Essentially, fire extinguishers put out fire by taking away one or more elements of the fire triangle/tetrahedron. Fire safety, at its most basic, is based upon the principle of keeping fuel sources and ignition sources separate Not all fires are the same, and they are classified according to the type of fuel that is burning. If you use the wrong type of fire extinguisher on the wrong class of fire, you can, in fact, make matters worse. It is therefore very important to understand the four different fire classifications. Class A - Wood, paper, cloth, trash, plastics Solid combustible materials that are not metals. (Class A fires generally leave an Ash.) Class B - Flammable liquids: gasoline, oil, grease, acetone Any non-metal in a liquid state, on fire.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape Fire Crisis Mitigation
    FIRE-IN FIre and REscue Innovation Network Thematic Working Group Vegetation Fires EC 20171127 1 | F IRE-IN has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme under grant agreement N°740 575 Main Activities Objective main lines: (i) Identification and harmonisation of operational Improve the National capability gaps and European Fire & (ii) Scouting of Rescue Capability promising Development solutions Process (iii) Definition of a Fire & Rescue Strategic Research and Standardisation Agenda | 2 Conceptual Pillars | 3 5 Thematic Working Groups + involvement of Associated Experts A. Search and Rescue B. Structural fires C. Vegetation fires D. Natural disasters E. CBRNE (SAR) and emergency CNVVF GFMC THW CAFO Medical Response ENSOSP, CAFO, SGSP, CFS, PCF, MSB, KEMEA MSB, CNVVF, CFS, KEMEA ENSOSP, SGSP, CFS, MSB KEMEA, CNVVF SAFE, ENSOSP, CNVVF, FIRE-IN CAFO Associated Experts (AE) community (international community including key thematic practitioner experts from public, private, NGOs bodies, and representative of thematic working groups from existing networks) 1000 experts expected | 4 Thematic Group C – Vegetation / Landscape Fires Partners - Global Fire Monitoring Center (GFMC) (lead) - Catalonian Fire Service - Pau Costa Foundation - Int. Ass. Fire & Rescue Services (CTIF) - KEMEA - European Associated Experts and thematic networks and other stakeholders (community of practitioners) | Thematic Group C – Vegetation / Landscape Fires Emphasis - Science-Policy-Interface - Underlying causes of landscape
    [Show full text]
  • Wildland Fire Incident Management Field Guide
    A publication of the National Wildfire Coordinating Group Wildland Fire Incident Management Field Guide PMS 210 April 2013 Wildland Fire Incident Management Field Guide April 2013 PMS 210 Sponsored for NWCG publication by the NWCG Operations and Workforce Development Committee. Comments regarding the content of this product should be directed to the Operations and Workforce Development Committee, contact and other information about this committee is located on the NWCG Web site at http://www.nwcg.gov. Questions and comments may also be emailed to [email protected]. This product is available electronically from the NWCG Web site at http://www.nwcg.gov. Previous editions: this product replaces PMS 410-1, Fireline Handbook, NWCG Handbook 3, March 2004. The National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) has approved the contents of this product for the guidance of its member agencies and is not responsible for the interpretation or use of this information by anyone else. NWCG’s intent is to specifically identify all copyrighted content used in NWCG products. All other NWCG information is in the public domain. Use of public domain information, including copying, is permitted. Use of NWCG information within another document is permitted, if NWCG information is accurately credited to the NWCG. The NWCG logo may not be used except on NWCG-authorized information. “National Wildfire Coordinating Group,” “NWCG,” and the NWCG logo are trademarks of the National Wildfire Coordinating Group. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names or trademarks in this product is for the information and convenience of the reader and does not constitute an endorsement by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group or its member agencies of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable.
    [Show full text]
  • Ten Years After the Biscuit Fire: Evaluating Vegetation Succession and Post- Fire Management Effects
    Project Title: Ten years after the Biscuit Fire: Evaluating vegetation succession and post- fire management effects Final Report: JFSP 11-1-1-4 Date of Final Report: 29 June 2015 Principle Investigator: Dr. Daniel C. Donato Washington State Department of Natural Resources 1111 Washington St SE, Box 47014 Olympia, WA 98504-7014 and University of Washington School of Environmental & Forest Sciences Seattle, WA 98195 360-902-1753 [email protected] Co-Principle Investigators: Dr. John L. Campbell Oregon State University Department of Forest Ecosystems & Society 321 Richardson Hall Corvallis, OR 97331 [email protected] Dr. Joseph B. Fontaine Murdoch University School of Veterinary and Life Sciences 90 South St. Perth, WA 6150, Australia [email protected] This research was supported in part by the Joint Fire Sciences Program. For further information go to www.firescience.gov Abstract Increases in the area of high-severity wildfire in the western U.S. have prompted widespread management concerns about post-fire forest succession and fuels. Key questions include the degree to which, and over what time frame: a) forests will regenerate back toward mature forest cover, and b) fire hazard increases due to the falling and decay of fire-killed trees, with and without post-fire (or ‘salvage’) logging. While a number of recent studies have begun to address these questions using chronosequences and model projections, we had the unique opportunity to track regeneration and fuel dynamics over a decade of post-fire succession by re-visiting our network of sample plots distributed in the 2002 Biscuit Fire in southwest Oregon.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire Management.Indd
    Fire today ManagementVolume 65 • No. 2 • Spring 2005 LLARGEARGE FFIRESIRES OFOF 2002—P2002—PARTART 22 United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Erratum In Fire Management Today volume 64(4), the article "A New Tool for Mopup and Other Fire Management Tasks" by Bill Gray shows incorrect telephone and fax numbers on page 47. The correct numbers are 210-614-4080 (tel.) and 210-614-0347 (fax). Fire Management Today is published by the Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. The Secretary of Agriculture has determined that the publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the pub- lic business required by law of this Department. Fire Management Today is for sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, at: Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: 202-512-1800 Fax: 202-512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001 Fire Management Today is available on the World Wide Web at http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/fmt/index.html Mike Johanns, Secretary Melissa Frey U.S. Department of Agriculture General Manager Dale Bosworth, Chief Robert H. “Hutch” Brown, Ph.D. Forest Service Managing Editor Tom Harbour, Director Madelyn Dillon Fire and Aviation Management Editor Delvin R. Bunton Issue Coordinator The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communica- tion of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720- 2600 (voice and TDD).
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Annual Fire Report
    Northwest Annual Fire Report 2012 Northwest Interagency Coordination Center Predictive Services Unit - Intelligence Section Available on www.nwccweb.us Published April 22, 2013 SUMMARY INFORMATION | NWCC Mission Table of Contents SUMMARY INFORMATION .......................................................................................... 2 NWCC Mission....................................................................................................................2 NWCC Annual Fire Report ...................................................................................................3 Table 1: Agency Identifier Legend ......................................................................................................... 3 2012 Northwest Fire Season Summary ................................................................................4 Chart 1: NW 2012 Reported Acres Burned vs. 10-Year Average ....................................................... 4 Chart 2: 2012 NW Preparedness Levels ............................................................................................ 4 FIRE MAPS & STATISTICS ............................................................................................. 5 Table 2: NW 2012 Large Fires List ........................................................................................5 Table 3: NW 2012 Fires List: Confine/Monitor/Point Zone Protection ..................................6 NW 2012 Large Fire Location Maps .....................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Lankesteriana IV
    LANKESTERIANA 7(1-2): 229-239. 2007. DENSITY INDUCED RATES OF POLLINARIA REMOVAL AND DEPOSITION IN THE PURPLE ENAMEL-ORCHID, ELYTHRANTHERA BRUNONIS (ENDL.) A.S. GEORGE 1,10 2 3 RAYMOND L. TREMBLAY , RICHARD M. BATEMAN , ANDREW P. B ROWN , 4 5 6 7 MARC HACHADOURIAN , MICHAEL J. HUTCHINGS , SHELAGH KELL , HAROLD KOOPOWITZ , 8 9 CARLOS LEHNEBACH & DENNIS WIGHAM 1 Department of Biology, 100 Carr. 908, University of Puerto Rico – Humacao campus, Humacao, Puerto Rico, 00791-4300, USA 2 Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK 3 Department of Environment and Conservation, Species and Communities Branch, Locked Bag 104 Bentley Delivery Centre WA 6893, Australia 4 New York Botanic Garden, 112 Alpine Terrace, Hilldale, NJ 00642, USA 5 School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, Sussex, BN1 9QG, UK 6 IUCN/SSC Orchid Specialist Group Secretariat, 36 Broad Street, Lyme Regis, Dorset, DT7 3QF, UK 7 University of California, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Irvine, CA 92697, USA 8 Massey University, Allan Wilson Center for Molecular Ecology and Evolution 9 Smithsonian Institution, Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, Box 28, Edgewater, MD 21037, USA 10 Author for correspondence: [email protected] RESUMEN. La distribución y densidad de los individuos dentro de las poblaciones de plantas pueden afectar el éxito reproductivo de sus integrantes. Luego de describir la filogenia de las orquideas del grupo de las Caladeniideas y su biología reproductiva, evaluamos el efecto de la densidad en el éxito reproductivo de la orquídea terrestre Elythranthera brunonis, endémica de Australia del Oeste. El éxito reproductivo de esta orquídea, medido como la deposición y remoción de polinios, fue evaluado.
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment a ‐ Forest Service Wildfire, NEPA, and Salvage Summary
    Attachment A ‐ Forest Service Wildfire, NEPA, and Salvage Summary Fiscal Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2007‐2016 Number of Fires 1 63 64 53 33 66 79 56 56 127 110 707 Total fire acres on NFS 2 1,751,118 1,326,893 549,108 211,327 1,489,029 2,411,413 1,141,353 741,465 1,587,843 1,038,686 12,248,235 High severity acres on NFS 3 842,658 368,595 268,944 76,192 619,020 809,720 513,957 265,045 489,668 397,654 4,651,453 Number of NEPA decisions identified 4 129 Acres of salvage planned in NEPA 5 218 17,255 2,134 14,010 22,761 28,937 13,809 13,264 112,388 Number of NEPA decisions litigated 6 125110332422 Litigation cases won by USFS 7 013110131112 Litigation cases lost by USFS 8 1120001011 7 Litigation cases pending 9 0000001002 3 Acres of salvage reported accomplished 10 328 2,665 8,125 3,464 8,774 6,916 11,672 19,792 16,926 21,234 99,896 1 Fires burning more than 1,000 acres on NFS land 10 Salvage harvest activity records identified as awarded in Forest Service Activity 2 Total acres inside fire perimeter on NFS land Tracking System (FACTS) by GIS analysis of fire perimeters. 3 Classified as greater than 75% mortality using Rapid Assessment of Vegetation Condition after Wildfire (RAVG) 4 Identified by fire salvage keyword search in PALS (Planning Appeals and Disclaimer: Only the litigation data is believed to be 100% complete and Litigation System) or reported with sale activity records in Forest Service systems accurate.
    [Show full text]
  • Types of Fire Extinguisher in Australia – All You Need to Know (February 02
    Types of fire extinguisher in Australia – all you need to know (February 02, 2018) There are 5 main fire extinguisher types in Australia – Water, Foam, Dry Powder, CO2 and Wet Chemical. You should have the right types of fire extinguisher for your house or business premises, or you may not meet current regulations. The various types of fire extinguisher put out fires started with different types of fuel – these are called ‘classes’ of fire. The fire risk from the different classes of fire in your home or your business premises will determine which fire extinguisher types you need. You will also need to make sure that you have the right size and weight of fire extinguisher as well as the right kind. Whilst there are 5 main types of fire extinguisher, there are different versions of Dry Powder extinguishers, meaning there are a total of 8 fire extinguisher types to choose from. The 6 types of fire extinguisher are: – Water – Foam – Dry Powder – Standard – Dry Powder – High performance – Carbon Dioxide (‘CO2’) – Wet Chemical There is no one extinguisher type which works on all classes of fire. Below is a summary of the classes of fire, and a quick reference chart showing which types of extinguisher should be used on each. We then provide a detailed explanation of each type of fire extinguisher below. The classes of fire There are six classes of fire: Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, ‘Electrical’, and Class F. – Class A fires – combustible materials: caused by flammable solids, such as wood, paper, and fabric – Class B fires – flammable liquids: such as petrol, turpentine or paint – Class C fires – flammable gases: like hydrogen, butane or methane – Class D fires – combustible metals: chemicals such as magnesium, aluminium or potassium – Electrical fires – electrical equipment: once the electrical item is removed, the fire changes class – Class F fires – cooking oils: typically a chip-pan fire Water and Foam Water and Foam fire extinguishers extinguish the fire by taking away the heat element of the fire triangle.
    [Show full text]