DOCSLIB.ORG

Policy Initiatives in Wildland Fire Management

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Policy Initiatives in Wildland Fire Management Fire today ManagementVolume 61 • No. 4 • Fall 2001 FIRE POLICY UPDATE United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service 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 public 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/planning/firenote.htm>. Ann Veneman, Secretary April J. Baily U.S. Department of Agriculture General Manager Dale Bosworth, Chief Robert H. “Hutch” Brown, Ph.D. Forest Service Managing Editor Jerry Williams, Director Madelyn Dillon Fire and Aviation Management Editor 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 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 USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Disclaimer: The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement of any product or service by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Individual authors are responsible for the technical accuracy of the material presented in Fire Management Today. 2 Fire Management Today Fire today Management Volume 61 • No. 4 • Fall 2001 On the Cover: CONTENTS Policy Initiatives in Wildland Fire Management ............ 4 Hutch Brown Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy ........................................... 7 Executive Summary Tabular Crosswalk Between the 1995 and 2001 Federal Fire Policies .............................................. 11 A hand crew utilizes a rocky An Agency Strategy for Fire Management ................ 14 area for additional safety Executive Summary and fireline effectiveness. Protecting People and Sustaining Resources in Our first priority, recon- Fire-Adapted Ecosystems: A Cohesive Strategy ......... 16 firmed by the 2001 Federal Executive Summary Fire Policy (see the executive summary on page 7), is Reducing Fire Danger: Is Current Policy on Course? .. 18 firefighter and public safety. Hutch Brown Photo: Ravi Miro Fry, USDA Fires 2000: Fact vs. Fiction ................................... 26 Forest Service, Boise Na- Stephen W. Barrett tional Forest, Boise, ID. A Consistent Wildland Fire Risk Terminology Is Needed! ........................................................... 28 Andreas Bachmann and Britta Allgöwer Fighting the Pumpkin Fire—Indirect Attack and Aerial Ignition ................................................. 34 Allen Farnsworth Six National Fire Use Awards Presented for The FIRE 21 symbol (shown below and on the cover) stands for the safe and effective use of 1998 and 1999 ................................................... 39 wildland fire, now and throughout the 21st Dave Bunnell century. Its shape represents the fire triangle (oxygen, heat, and fuel). The three outer red triangles represent the basic functions of The 1910 Fires: A New Book by Stephen J. Pyne ..... 45 wildland fire organizations (planning, operations, Hutch Brown and aviation management), and the three critical aspects of wildland fire management (prevention, suppression, and prescription). The black interior First Annual Photo Contest (Correction) .................. 48 represents land affected by fire; the emerging green points symbolize the growth, restoration, and sustainability associated with fire-adapted ecosystems. The flame represents fire itself as an SHORT FEATURES ever-present force in nature. For more informa- tion on FIRE 21 and the science, research, and innovative thinking behind it, contact Mike Guidelines for Contributors..................................... 44 Apicello, National Interagency Fire Center, 208-387-5460. Websites on Fire................................................... 47 Before Helicopters: Blimps for Wildland Firefighting? ......................................................... 50 Hutch Brown Annual Photo Contest ............................................ 51 Firefighter and public safety is our first priority. Volume 61 • No. 4 • Fall 2001 3 POLICY INITIATIVES IN WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT Hutch Brown ires in recent decades have grown in size and severity on Severe fire seasons and evolving insights F national forest lands. In 1987, into land and resource management have for only the first time since 1919, generated a series of recent initiatives fires burned more than a million acres (400,000 ha) on the National for wildland fire management. Forest System. More than a million acres burned again in 1988, 1994, tee of Scientists (COS 1999), the Agency Strategy for Fire Manage- and 1996. In 2000, more than 2 promulgated rule confirms the ment, a report addressing major million acres (800,000 ha) burned. principle of ecological, social, and long-term issues such as a Suppression costs have climbed economic sustainability.* Land and declining workforce and the grow- accordingly, reaching a record $1.6 resource management are to be ing number of large fires (S&PF billion across all ownerships in based on cooperatively developed 2000). The report recommends 2000 (ACPP 2000). landscape-level goals following restructuring the fire organization, Planning Revisions scientific regional assessments. partly for “improved integration of fire into ecosystem management, The trend toward larger fires and 2001 Federal Fire Policy. The planning, and decisions.” higher costs became clear in 1994, 2000 Cerro Grande Fire,** an generating a series of reports under escaped prescribed burn that spread the rubric FIRE 21 (see sidebar). to Los Alamos, NM, triggered a New research and insights have review of fire policy. The findings generated a second series of reports, strengthened the 1995 Federal Fire linked to the Forest Service’s Policy (NWCG 1995), replacing it in strategic direction for land and January 2001 with a new inter- resource management planning. agency policy for managing wild- land fire (NWCG 2001). The new Strategic Direction. The National policy calls for using “the full range Forest Management Act of 1976 of fire management activities … to requires the Forest Service to achieve ecosystem sustainability,” establish a rule to guide local including fire use. The policy managers in preparing land and stresses the need to complete or resource management plans for the revise fire management plans that National Forest System. The first are “more effectively and directly” planning rule, adopted in 1982, was integrated “with other natural due for revision by the 1990s. After resource goals.” more than 10 years of preparation, a new planning rule was proposed in Agency Strategy. In January 2000, October 1999 and promulgated in the Forest Service released An December 2000 after extensive public hearings. Based on a March The Rabbit Creek Fire, part of the Idaho 1999 report by the second Commit- City Complex on Idaho’s Boise National *Although the new rule was under review as this issue Forest in 1994. The fire was enormous, went to print, its implications for fire management are likely to remain about the same. burning 146,400 acres (59,250 ha) in 73 Hutch Brown is the managing editor of Fire days. Photo: Karen Wattenmaker, USDA ** For more on the Cerro Grande Fire, see Jim Paxon, Management Today, USDA Forest Service, “‘Remember Los Alamos’: The Cerro Grande Fire,” Fire Forest Service, Boise National Forest, Washington Office, Washington, DC. Management Today 60(4): 9–14. Boise, ID, 1994. 4 Fire Management Today Cohesive Strategy. In October The 2001 Federal Fire Policy calls for using 2000, the Forest Service released Protecting People and Sustaining “the full range of fire management activities … Resources in Fire-Adapted Ecosys- to achieve ecosystem sustainability.” tems: A Cohesive Strategy (F&AM 2000a) in response to a report to Congress by the General Account- ing Office (GAO 1999). Building on the Agency Strategy, the Cohesive FIRE 21 Strategy calls for “sustaining natural resources in short-interval, FIRE 21 was conceived by the The FIRE 21 symbol reflects the fire-adapted ecosystems” through USDA Forest Service to capture Forest Service’s ongoing commit- adaptive management. The report the synergy among the reports ment to the safe and prudent use recommends specific actions for that emerged following the 1994 of fire in managing natural restoring and maintaining fire- fire season.* In that year, 34 resources in the 21st century. It adapted ecosystems, including fire firefighters perished, by far the was developed in 1996 by Michael use. most in any single fire season G. Apicello and Rodney C. Kind- since 1990. In addition, some
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 12: Integrating Ecological and Social Science to Inform Land Management in the Area of the Northwest Forest Plan
    Synthesis of Science to Inform Land Management Within the Northwest Forest Plan Area Chapter 12: Integrating Ecological and Social Science to Inform Land Management in the Area of the Northwest Forest Plan Thomas A. Spies, Jonathan W. Long, Peter Stine, Susan to reassess how well the goals and strategies of the Plan are Charnley, Lee Cerveny, Bruce G. Marcot, Gordon Reeves, positioned to address new issues. Paul F. Hessburg, Damon Lesmeister, Matthew J. Reilly, The NWFP was developed in 1993 through a political Martin G. Raphael, and Raymond J. Davis1 process involving scientists in an unusual and controversial role: assessing conditions and developing plan options “We are drowning in information, while starving directly for President Bill Clinton to consider with little for wisdom. The world henceforth will be run by involvement of senior Forest Service managers. The role of synthesizers, people able to put together the right Forest Service scientists in this planning effort is differ- information at the right time, think critically about ent—scientists are now limited to producing a state-of-the- it, and make important choices wisely.” science report in support of plan revision and management —E.O. Wilson, Consilience: The Unity of (USDA FS 2012a), and managers will conduct the assess- Knowledge (1988) ments and develop plan alternatives. Implementation of the NWFP was followed by moni- Introduction toring, research, and expectations for learning and adaptive Long-term monitoring programs and research related to management; however, little formal adaptive management Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP, or Plan) goals, strategies, actually occurred, and the program was defunded after a few and outcomes provide an unprecedented opportunity years.
    [Show full text]
  • Status and Trend of Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest
    NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN THE FIRST 10 YEARS (1994–2003) Status and Trend of Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest Melinda Moeur, Thomas A. Spies, Miles Hemstrom, Jon R. Martin, James Alegria, Julie Browning, John Cissel, Warren B. Cohen, Thomas E. Demeo, Sean Healey, Ralph Warbington General Technical Report United States Forest Pacific Northwest D E PNW-GTR-646 E Department of R P A U T RTMENTOFAGRICUL Service Research Station November 2005 Agriculture The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood ,water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. 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 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).
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter Newsletter of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Retirees—Summer 2015 President’S Message—Jim Rice
    OldSmokeys Newsletter Newsletter of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Retirees—Summer 2015 President’s Message—Jim Rice I had a great career with the U.S. Forest Service, and volunteering for the OldSmokeys now is a opportunity for me to give back a little to the folks and the organization that made my career such a great experience. This past year as President-elect, I gained an understanding about how the organization gets things done and the great leadership we have in place. It has been awesome to work with Linda Goodman and Al Matecko and the dedicated board of directors and various committee members. I am also excited that Ron Boehm has joined us in his new President-elect role. I am looking forward to the year ahead. This is an incredible retiree organization. In 2015, through our Elmer Moyer Memorial Emergency Fund, we were able to send checks to two Forest Service employees and a volunteer of the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest who had lost their homes and all their possessions in a wildfire. We also approved four grants for a little over $8,900. Over the last ten years our organization has donated more than $75,000. This money has come from reunion profits, book sales, investments, and generous donations from our membership. All of this has been given to “non-profits” for projects important to our membership. Last, and most importantly, now is the time to mark your calendars for the Summer Picnic in the Woods. It will be held on August 14 at the Wildwood Recreation Area.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Madera-Mariposa-Merced Unit Fire Plan
    Madera-Mariposa-Merced Unit Fire Plan 2020 MMU Strategic Fire Plan Madera-Mariposa-Merced Unit Madera-Mariposa-Merced Unit Fire Plan 2020 UNIT STRATEGIC FIRE PLAN AMENDMENTS Page Section Date Numbers Description of Update Updated By Updated Updated 4/2020 Contents Page i-ii 2020 Update P4224 4/2020 Signature Page 1 Annual Update P4224 4/2020 Executive 2 Update C4200 Summary 4/2020 I Update P4224 4/2020 II None P4224 4/2020 III Update P4224 4/2020 IV Update B4220 4/2020 IV (B) Update F4208 3/2020 V Update All Battalions 4/2020 Appendix A Update P4224 4/2020 Appendix B None P4224 4/2020 Appendix C None P4224 4/2020 Appendix C-1 None P4224 4/2020 Appendix C-2 None P4224 4/2020 Appendix D None B4220 4/2020 Appendix E Update B4220 3/2020 Appendix F New P4224 4/2020 Appendix G Update B4211 3/2020 Appendix H None B4212 3/2020 Appendix I Update B4214 4/2020 Appendix J None B4215 4/2020 Appendix K None B16 4/2020 Appendix L None B17 3/2020 Appendix M Update B18 4/2020 Appendix N Update D4206 4/2020 Exhibits: Maps None GIS 4/2020 Accomplishments Update Various i Madera-Mariposa-Merced Unit Fire Plan 2020 Table of Contents UNIT STRATEGIC FIRE PLAN AMENDMENTS ............................................................. i Table of Contents .............................................................................................................ii SIGNATURE PAGE ........................................................................................................ 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fire Chiefs' Association of BC WHO I AM
    FIRE CHIEFS’ ASSOCIATION OF BC Fire Chiefs' Association of BC WHO I AM FCABC 1st Vice President (current) Direct responsibilities include provincial fire service training, fire service education, firefighter safety and pre-hospital medical care. Fire Chief, City of Pitt Meadows (since 2008) Service for 24 yrs as volunteer FF or career Chief in Pitt Meadows and Langley City Served 21 years as a paramedic (both ALS and BLS) in Metro Vancouver FCABC projects include: FCABC representative on Provincial Medical Leadership Committee and the BCEHS Provincial Executive Council - First Responder Committee Roll-out of the Fire Inspection and Prevention Initiative (FIPI) program with WorksafeBC FCABC lead on new provincial training standard matrix (“Playbook”) Fire Sprinklers, Shipping Container Hazards, Fire Safety at Work (BCIT), LGMA/Chief Orientation, BCIT Report on Fire Fighter Training in BC, and others FCABC ZONE 3 MEETING MAY 2, 2014 Fire Chiefs' Association of BC 2 WHO WE ARE “The Fire Chiefs’ Association of British Columbia shall be a source of peer support, information and education to its members and uphold their rights, it shall actively interface with both government and the public on issues relating to the Fire Service within the Province of British Columbia.” SMOKE ALARMS—THE FIRE SERVICE PERSPECTIVE Fire Chiefs' Association of BC 3 EXECUTIVE BOARD President Timothy Pley Port Alberni Fire Department 1st Vice President Don Jolley Pitt Meadows Fire Rescue Services 2nd Vice President Phil Lemire White Rock Fire Rescue Past
    [Show full text]
  • Tribal Wildfire Resource Guide
    JUNE 2006 re Tribal Wildfi re Resource Guide Developed in Partnership with: Intertribal Timber Council Resource Guide Resource Innovations, University of Oregon Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation Tribal Wildfi “According to the traditional beliefs of the Salish, the Creator put animal beings on the earth before humans. But the world was cold and dark because there was no fi re on earth. The animal beings knew one day human beings would arrive, and they wanted to make the world a better place for them, so they set off on a great quest to steal fi re from the sky world and bring it to the earth.” -Beaver Steals Fire, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Tribal Wildfi re Resource Guide June 2006 Developed in Partnership with: Intertribal Timber Council Written by: Resource Innovations, University of Oregon Graphic Design by: Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation Images from: Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation and the Nez Perce Tribe For thousands of years, Native Americans used fi re as a tool to manage their lands and manipulate vegetation to a desired condition. Tribes once lived harmoniously with nature until the U.S. Federal Government claimed much of their lands and changed the forests from a condition that we would today call “fi re-adapted ecosystems” into the fi re-prone forests that we now see throughout much of western United States. Many forests that were once abundant producers of natural resources are now resource-management nightmares. The cost to manage them now is astronomical compared with the natural method employed by Native Americans.
    [Show full text]
  • Northwest Forest Plan
    Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest Related Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl Attachment A to the Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest Related Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl Attachment A to the Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl Outline All sections of this document, considered together, are the complete compilation of standards and guidelines. However, these standards and guidelines are broken down into the following sections for clarity and ease of reference. A. Introduction - This section includes introduction, purpose, definition of the planning area, relationship to existing agency plans, introduction to the various land allocation categories used elsewhere in these standards and guidelines, identification of appurtenant maps, and transition standards and guidelines. B. Basis for Standards and Guidelines - This section includes a background discussion of the objectives and considerations for managing for a network of terrestrial reserves. This section also contains the Aquatic Conservation Strategy, which includes discussions of the objectives and management emphases for Riparian Reserves, Key Watersheds, watershed analysis, and watershed restoration. C. Standards and Guidelines - This section includes specific standards and guidelines applicable to all land allocation categories. It also contains descriptions of, and standards and guidelines applicable to, all designated areas, matrix, and Key Watersheds.
    [Show full text]
  • Perceptions of Forestry Alternatives in the US Pacific Northwest
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Journal of Environmental Psychology 26 (2006) 100–115 www.elsevier.com/locate/yjevp Perceptions of forestry alternatives in the US Pacific Northwest: Information effects and acceptability distribution analysis$ Robert G. Ribeà Department of Landscape Architecture, Institute for a Sustainable Environment, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-5234, USA Available online 10 August 2006 Abstract Conflicts over timber harvesting and clearcutting versus wildlife conservation have instigated alternative silvicultural systems in the US Pacific Northwest. Major forest treatments can be the most controversial element of such systems. A public survey explored the social acceptability of 19 forest treatments that varied by forest age, level of green-tree retention, pattern of retention, and level of down wood. The survey presented respondents with photos of the treatments, explanatory narratives, and resource outputs related to human and wildlife needs. Respondents rated treatments for scenic beauty, service to human needs, service to wildlife needs, and overall acceptability. Acceptability distribution patterns were analysed for all forest treatments. These showed broad, passionate opposition to clearcutting, conflict over the acceptability of not managing forests, conflict over old growth harvests, conflict with some passionate opposition to 15% retention harvests, and unconflicted acceptance of young forest thinnings and 40% retention harvests. Modelling of these responses found that socially acceptable forestry attends to scenic beauty
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Ecology and Management 286 (2012) 171–182
    (This is a sample cover image for this issue. The actual cover is not yet available at this time.) This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright Author's personal copy Forest Ecology and Management 286 (2012) 171–182 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Forest Ecology and Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foreco Carbon balance on federal forest lands of Western Oregon and Washington: The impact of the Northwest Forest Plan ⇑ Olga N. Krankina , Mark E. Harmon, Frank Schnekenburger, Carlos A. Sierra 1 Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA article info abstract Article history: The management of federal forest lands in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) region changed in early 1990s Received 12 May 2012 when the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) was adopted with the primary goal to protect old-growth forest Received in revised form 8 August 2012 and associated species. A major decline in timber harvest followed, extending an earlier downward trend.
    [Show full text]
  • Incident Management Situation Report Wednesday, April 16, 2003 – 1000 Mdt National Preparedness Level 2
    INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SITUATION REPORT WEDNESDAY, APRIL 16, 2003 – 1000 MDT NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS LEVEL 2 CURRENT SITUATION: Initial attack activity was light to moderate nationally, with 363 new fires reported yesterday. Eleven new large fires were reported, five in the Eastern Area, and six in the Southern Area. Twelve large fires were contained, five in the Eastern Area and seven in the Southern Area. Very high to extreme fire indices were reported in Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, and Ohio. COLUMBIA RESPONSE, Federal Emergency Management Agency. A FEMA Emergency Operations Center is established in Lufkin, Texas. A Type 1 Incident Management Team (Bennett) is assigned in Palestine, Texas. Four Type 2 Incident Management Teams (Crisman, Gray, Morcom and Raley) are assigned in Longview, Nacogdoches, Corsicana, and Hemphill, Texas. Forty-eight agencies are cooperating in the search and collection of shuttle materials. Approximately 80 percent of the current assigned area, or 506,202 acres, has been searched. NEWCASTLE, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. State and Federal personnel have been mobilized in response to the outbreak of the Exotic Newcastle Disease. They are working in support of the USDA APHIS operation under a Unified Command. Support operations are being conducted in Arizona, California, and Nevada. EASTERN AREA LARGE FIRES: GREER LAKE FIRE, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The fire is three miles southeast of Elbow Lake Village, MN. No new information was reported. WARFIELD ROAD, Huron-Manistee National Forest. This fire burning in oak and grass is five miles east of Wellston, MI. No major problems or concerns are expected.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire Management Plan Template
    Southwest Oregon Interagency Fire Management Plan – 2013 Chapter 2. POLICY, LAND MANAGEMENT PLANNING, AND PARTNERSHIPS The regulations and policy in the following documents guide the fire management as outlined in this FMP. 2.1. National and Regional Fire Management Policy Forest Service policy and direction that are relevant to this plan include: National Fire Plan The Implementation Plan for the 10 year Comprehensive Strategy and Collaborative Memorandum of Understanding Master Cooperative Wildland Fire Management and Stafford Act Response Agreement Protecting People and Sustaining Resources in Fire Adapted Ecosystems – A Cohesive Strategy 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and Program Review (January 2001) A Collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to Communities and the Environment: 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy, August 2001, May 2002, December 2006 Guidance for Implementation of Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy (February, 2009) Interagency Standards for Fire & Aviation Operations 2011 (Redbook) Interagency Helicopter Operations Guide (IHOG) 2009 Interagency SEAT Operations Guide 2009 Pacific Northwest Aviation Plan The Healthy Forests Initiative and Healthy Forests Restoration Act Interagency Special Status / Sensitive Species Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife - Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Fish and Wildlife Species in Oregon Forest Service Manual 5100 (Fire Management) Forest Service Manual 2320 (Wilderness Management) Forest Service Handbook 5109 (Fire Management) Aerial Application of Fire Retardant, ROD Dec 2011 Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH), 1995 Northwest Forest Plan BLM Manual 9200-9218 described the authority for fire management activities on Bureau of Land Management Lands Page 12 of 342 Southwest Oregon Interagency Fire Management Plan – 2013 National Park Service Reference Manual – 18 Senate Bill 360 (Oregon Forestland-Urban Interface Fire Protective Act of 1997) 2.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon's Forest Action Plan
    OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY Oregon’s Forest Action Plan Summary – Oregon's Forest Action Plan was developed in June 2010 by a team of Oregon Department of Forestry subject matter, geographic information and communications specialists to fulfill requirements of the 2008 Farm Bill that all States complete a Forest Assessment and Resource Strategy to maintain eligibility for U.S. Department of Forest Service State and Private Forestry funding for programs authorized by the federal Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act. Statewide Forest Assessment States were required to conduct an assessment of the current conditions of all forestland regardless of ownership type, and trends leading up to these conditions. In addition, states were required to identify threats to forests and opportunities for addressing threats. The final task of completing the assessment was to identify priority landscapes for implementing opportunities. What Oregon Did – Current conditions and trends leading up to these conditions were displayed in an external web-based Oregon's Forest Atlas. Threats and opportunities were organized around 6 priority issues – Communities at Risk of Wildfire, Maintain the Forestland Base, Diversity of Upland and Aquatic Habitats, Invasive Species, Water Quality and Climate Change. These are contained in Oregon’s DRAFT Statewide Forest Assessment Document. The issues were cross referenced to the USDA Forest Service’s National State and Private Forestry Themes and Subthemes and the Oregon Board of Forestry’s Goals for the Forestry Program for Oregon. Priority landscapes were developed for: 1) Urban/Rural Forest Priority Areas, 2) Communities at Risk of Wildfire, 3) Forests Vulnerable to Loosing Timber Markets, 4) Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation and 5) General Forestland Considerations (a composite prioritization across Communities at Risk of Wildfire, Forests Vulnerable to Loosing Timber Markets and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation.
    [Show full text]