DOCSLIB.ORG

2020/2021 Strategic Fire Plan for the San Bernardino Unit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2020/2021 Strategic Fire Plan for the San Bernardino Unit 2020/2021 STRATEGIC FIRE PLAN FOR THE SAN BERNARDINO UNIT A VISION FOR A NATURAL ENVIRONMENT THAT IS MORE FIRE RESILIENT; BUILDINGS AND INFASTRUCTURE THAT ARE MORE FIRE RESISTANT; AND A SOCIETY THAT IS MORE AWARE OF AND RESPONSIVE TO THE BENEFITS AND THREATS OF WILDFIRE; ALL ACHIEVED THROUGH LOCAL, STATE, FEDERAL, TRIBAL, AND PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS. UNIT STRATEGIC FIRE PLAN AMENDMENTS Date Section Updated Page Numbers Description of Updated Updated Updates By 5-1-13 Minor changes Debbie throughout Chapman document 5-1-14 Minor changes Debbie throughout Chapman document 4-11-15 Minor changes Debbie throughout Chapman document 4-21-16 Minor changes Debbie throughout Chapman document 1-17-17 Minor changes Debbie throughout Chapman document 5-9-18 Minor changes Matt throughout Kirkhart 5-3-19 Several minor Matt changes Kirkhart 5-6-20 Several minor Shelley changes Redden TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents SIGNATURE PAGE ............................................................................................................................ 5 Unit Strategic Fire Plan developed for San Bernardino Unit: ................................................................. 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: .................................................................................................................... 6 SECTION I: UNIT OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................... 7 UNIT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................. 7 UNIT PREPAREDNESS AND FIREFIGHTING CAPABILITIES ................................................................... 7 SECTION II: COLLABORATION ........................................................................................................... 9 COMMUNITY / AGENCIES / FIRE SAFE COUNCILS ............................................................ 9 Plan Development Team: ............................................................................................................ 9 SECTION III: ............................................................................................................................... 11 VALUES ...................................................................................................................................... 11 SECTION IV:............................................................................................................................... 14 PRE-FIRE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ................................................................................. 14 SECTION V: PRE- FIRE MANAGEMENT TACTICS ................................................................................. 16 DIVISION / BATTALION / PROGRAM PLANS ....................................................................................... 16 BATTALION 1: .......................................................................................................................... 16 OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................................. 16 PRIORITIES: .......................................................................................................................... 17 COLLABORATION: ................................................................................................................ 20 BATTALION 2: ............................................................................................................................ 21 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................... 21 PRIORITIES: .......................................................................................................................... 21 COLLABORATION: ................................................................................................................ 24 BATTALION 3: ...................................................................................................................... 25 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................... 25 PRIORITIES: .......................................................................................................................... 26 COLLABORATION: ................................................................................................................ 28 BATTALION 4: ............................................................................................................................ 30 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 30 PRIORITIES: ......................................................................................................................... 31 COLLABORATION: ................................................................................................................ 33 BATTALION 6: ............................................................................................................................ 34 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 34 PRIORITIES: ......................................................................................................................... 35 COLLABORATION: ................................................................................................................ 36 TRAINING BUREAU: .................................................................................................................. 37 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 37 PRIORITIES: ......................................................................................................................... 37 PREVENTION BUREAU: ............................................................................................................ 39 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 39 PRIORITIES: ......................................................................................................................... 39 COLLABORATION: ............................................................................................................... 41 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: .................................................................................................... 42 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 42 Resource Management Programs ......................................................................................... 45 Grants .................................................................................................................................... 45 Projects .................................................................................................................................. 45 Wildland Fire Response .......................................................................................................... 46 Forest Health .......................................................................................................................... 46 Forest Practice & Environmental Compliance ......................................................................... 48 Outreach & Education ............................................................................................................ 48 Priorities: ............................................................................................................................... 49 Collaboration: ........................................................................................................................ 50 FENNER CANYON CC: .............................................................................................................. 51 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 51 RESPONSE AREA: ............................................................................................................... 52 PROJECTS: .......................................................................................................................... 52 COLLABORATION: ............................................................................................................... 55 PILOT ROCK CC: ....................................................................................................................... 56 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 56 RESPONSE AREA................................................................................................................ 56 PROJECTS ........................................................................................................................... 56 COLLABORATION: ............................................................................................................... 59 PRADO CC: ................................................................................................................................ 60 OVERVIEW ...............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 800/834-7557
    Searles Valley Delano Kernville 178 Death Valley 155 National Monument Delano Munipal 155 China Lake Naval Airport Weapons Ctr 99 Woody Rd na 155 Wofford Heights Tro 65 Ridgecrest Inyokern 38 China Lake 155 Mcfarland 178 178 178 178 99 178 Ridgecrest d South Lake 14 an R Bowm E Mountain Mesa 127 Lake Isabella Famoso Woody Rd Bodfish Cerro Coso Junior College y w H e l l i v r China Lake Naval e t r o d P Weapons Ctr R n tio ta S s e rl 395 a e S 43 Shafter-Minter 65 Field 178 Shafter y w H 99 e l l i G v o r l e d t en r S o ta P te H wy Meadows d R a Field Kern River n o 44 r State Park T Oildale ll rre Fort Irwin Ha red Alf wy H Garlock Rio Bravo Country Club Red Rock Canyon Red 178 State Rec Area Rosedale Mountain Randsburg 58 184 Greenacres 14 Bakersfield 43 Cantil Baker 43 Bakersfield Municipal Airport ck ba 58 de ud C d R Lamont A W Noon Weedpatch Park Galileo 5 Park South Co lumbi a Rd d lv B d ir 223 rb 223 46 de un h Arvin T Borax Bill Merrick Blvd 395 C Park h ick Blvd ip Rudn a California n g Um rd Ave a tali Rd Stanfo li City ey Rd S Vall t Bear 14 r d B Gordon Blvd e R e a w y r o le V 184 L l a dberg Blvd d a ll Lin rge Blv V ey Geo Cumberland R d buru Rd Rd v u Rd Mendi d W l Mendibur d B e d R Golden s v n y l e B t ppy Blvd N Loop Blvd l w o Po l B a r a lv o l b a V Hills d d l r o r v e a Bear Valley Springs B l e d e rnia City Blvd h B Califo B 204 Y dsburg Cutoff c C Ran t i a t Teha reat Circle Dr S Loop Blvd li chap M G fo i d S Blvd r 202 Valley Blvd v n l y d ia r r v Blvd B r Redwood l C 99 u D i n t B y i l
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Fire Treatment Effectiveness for Hillslope Stabilization
    United States Department of Agriculture Post-Fire Treatment Forest Service Rocky Mountain Effectiveness for Research Station General Technical Hillslope Stabilization Report RMRS-GTR-240 August 2010 Peter R. Robichaud, Louise E. Ashmun, and Bruce D. Sims A SUMMARY OF KNOWLEDGE FROM THE Robichaud, Peter R.; Ashmun, Louise E.; Sims, Bruce D. 2010. Post-fire treatment effectiveness for hill- slope stabilization. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-240. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 62 p. Abstract This synthesis of post-fire treatment effectiveness reviews the past decade of research, monitoring, and product development related to post-fire hillslope emergency stabilization treatments, including erosion barri- ers, mulching, chemical soil treatments, and combinations of these treatments. In the past ten years, erosion barrier treatments (contour-felled logs and straw wattles) have declined in use and are now rarely applied as a post-fire hillslope treatment. In contrast, dry mulch treatments (agricultural straw, wood strands, wood shreds, etc.) have quickly gained acceptance as effective, though somewhat expensive, post-fire hillslope stabilization treatments and are frequently recommended when values-at-risk warrant protection. This change has been motivated by research that shows the proportion of exposed mineral soil (or conversely, the propor- tion of ground cover) to be the primary treatment factor controlling post-fire hillslope erosion. Erosion barrier treatments provide little ground cover and have been shown to be less effective than mulch, especially during short-duration, high intensity rainfall events. In addition, innovative options for producing and applying mulch materials have adapted these materials for use on large burned areas that are inaccessible by road.
    [Show full text]
  • Motorized Travel Management
    Inyo National Forest Travel Management EIS – August 2009 Chapter 3: Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3.1 Introduction This Chapter summarizes the physical, biological, social, and economic environments that are affected by the Proposed Action and alternatives and the effects (or consequences) that would result from implementation of those alternatives. The effects disclosed in this Chapter provide the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of the benefits and risks of the alternatives. The Affected Environment Section under each resource topic describes the existing, or baseline, condition against which environmental effects of the alternatives were evaluated and from which progress toward the desired condition can be measured. Environmental consequences form the scientific and analytical basis for comparison of alternatives through compliance with standards set forth in the 1988 Inyo National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (also referred to as the Forest Plan or LRMP), as amended, and monitoring required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and National Forest Management Act of 1976. The environmental consequences discussion centers on direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the alternatives, including recommended mitigation measures. Effects can be neutral, beneficial, or adverse. These terms are defined as follows: • Direct effects are caused by the action and occur at the same place and time as the action. • Indirect effects are caused by the action and are later in time, or further removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. • Cumulative effects are those that result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions.
    [Show full text]
  • CDFW Unpublished Data)
    State of California Natural Resources Agency Department of Fish and Wildlife REPORT TO THE FISH AND GAME COMMISSION FIVE-YEAR SPECIES REVIEW OF SIERRA NEVADA BIGHORN SHEEP (Ovis canadensis sierrae) March 2021 Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep Ram, photo by Josh Schulgen Charlton H. Bonham, Director California Department of Fish and Wildlife TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 4 II. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 5 A. Five-Year Species Review ............................................................................................ 5 B. Listing and Review History ............................................................................................ 6 C. Notifications and Information Received ......................................................................... 6 III. BIOLOGY ........................................................................................................................... 6 A. Taxonomic and Physical Description ............................................................................. 6 B. Life History and Ecology ............................................................................................... 7 C. Habitat Necessary for Species Survival ........................................................................ 8 i. Vegetation Communities and Foraging Habitat ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Weld County 2011-2013 Annual Wildfire Operating Plan
    WELD COUNTY 2011-2013 ANNUAL WILDFIRE OPERATING PLAN Prepared by: Weld County Office of Emergency Management Weld County Fire Chiefs’ Association Colorado State Forest Service, Fort Collins District Pawnee National Grasslands, Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forests This agreement is to remain in effect until the next Annual Operating Plan is modified and signed TABLE OF CONTENTS I. ANNUAL WILDFIRE OPERATING PLAN APPROVALS ............................................. 3 II. JURISDICTIONS / MAP ..................................................................................................... 4 III. AUTHORITIES FOR THIS PLAN ..................................................................................... 4 IV. PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................ 4 V. FIRE MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................... 4 VI. RESOURCE LIST ............................................................................................................... 4 VII. WILDFIRE READINESS .................................................................................................... 5 A. Planning ................................................................................................................................ 5 B. Training ................................................................................................................................. 5 C. Equipment ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vendors by Managing Organization
    Look up by Vendor, then look at managing dispatch. This dispatch center holds the virtual ownership of that vendor. When the vendor obtains their NAP user account, the vendor would then call this dispatch center for Web statusing permissions. You can run this list in ROSS reports: use the search function, type "vendors" or "managing" then search. Should show up. You can filter and sort as necessary. Managing Org Name Org Name Northwest Coordination Center 1-A Construction & Fire LLP Sacramento Headquarters Command Center 10 Tanker Air Carrier LLC Northwest Coordination Center 1A H&K Inc. Oregon Dept. of Forestry Coordination Center 1st Choice Contracting, Inc Missoula Interagency Dispatch Center 3 - Mor Enterprises, Inc. Southwest Area Coordination Center 310 Dust Control, LLC Oregon Dept. of Forestry Coordination Center 3b's Forestry, Incorporated State of Alaska Logistics Center 40-Mile Air, LTD Northern California Coordination Center 49 Creek Ranch LLC Northern California Coordination Center 49er Pressure Wash & Water Service, Inc. Helena Interagency Dispatch Center 4x4 Logging Teton Interagency Dispatch Center 5-D Trucking, LLC Northern California Coordination Center 6 Rivers Construction Inc Southwest Area Coordination Center 7W Enterprises LLC Northern California Coordination Center A & A Portables, Inc Northern California Coordination Center A & B Saw & Lawnmowers Shop Northern Rockies Coordination Center A & C Construction Northern California Coordination Center A & F Enterprises Eastern Idaho Interagency Fire Center A & F Excavation Southwest Area Forestry Dispatch A & G Acres Plus Northern California Coordination Center A & G Pumping, Inc. Northern California Coordination Center A & H Rents Inc Central Nevada Interagency Dispatch Center A & N Enterprises Northern California Coordination Center A & P Helicopters, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildfires from Space
    Wildfires from Space More Lessons from the Sky Satellite Educators Association http://SatEd.org This is an adaptation of an original lesson plan developed and published on-line by Natasha Stavros at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The original problem set and all of its related links is available from this address: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/edu/teach/activity/fired-up-over-math-studying-wildfires-from-space/ Please see the Acknowledgements section for historical contributions to the development of this lesson plan. This spotlight on the “Wildfires from Space” lesson plan was published in November 2016 in More Lessons from the Sky, a regular feature of the SEA Newsletter, and archived in the SEA Lesson Plan Library. Both the Newsletter and the Library are freely available on-line from the Satellite Educators Association (SEA) at this address: http://SatEd.org. Content, Internet links, and materials on the lesson plan's online Resources page revised and updated in October 2019. SEA Lesson Plan Library Improvement Program Did you use this lesson plan with students? If so, please share your experience to help us improve the lesson plan for future use. Just click the Feedback link at http://SatEd.org/library/about.htm and complete the short form on-line. Thank you. Teaching Notes Wildfires from Space Invitation Wildfire is a global reality, and with the onset of climate change, the number of yearly wildfires is increasing. The impacts range from the immediate and tangible to the delayed and less obvious. In this activity, students assess wildfires using remote sensing imagery.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 General Plan
    CITY OF CALIMESA 2014 GENERAL PLAN ADOPTED AUGUST 4, 2014 CITY OF CALIMESA 2014 GENERAL PLAN ADOPTED AUGUST 4, 2014 Prepared by the City of Calimesa General Plan Advisory Committee and ® City of Calimesa 908 Park Avenue Calimesa, CA 92320 909.795.9801 This document is available for electronic download at http://cityofcalimesa.net The preparation of this General Plan was funded in whole or in part through a grant awarded by the Strategic Growth Council The statements and conclusions of this report are those of the City of Calimesa and not necessarily those of the Strategic Growth Council or of the Department of Conservation, or its employees. The Strategic Growth Council and the Department make no warranties, expressed or implied, and assume no liability for the information contained in the succeeding text. Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Land Use Chapter 3: Transportation and Mobility Chapter 4: Infrastructure and Public Services Chapter 5: Housing Element Chapter 6: Resource Management Chapter 7: Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Chapter 8: Safety Chapter 9: Noise Chapter 10: Air Quality Chapter 11: Sustainability Appendix A: Housing Element Background Report - under separate cover Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Land Use Chapter 3: Transportation and Mobility Chapter 7: Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Chapter 8: Safety Chapter 2: Land Use Chapter 3: Transportation and Mobility Chapter 5: Housing Element Chapter 9: Noise Chapter 10: Air Quality CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION The Calimesa General Plan expresses our community’s vision of its long-term physical form and development. This General Plan is comprehensive in scope and represents the product of years of effort on the part of residents and businesses in the community working to maintain and improve Calimesa’s quality of life and implement the community’s shared vision for the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Department Emergency Operations Plan (DEOP)
    San Bernardino County PROBATION DEPARTMENT Department Emergency Operations Plan (DEOP) October 2020 San Bernardino County SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY Probation Department Emergency Operations Plan Department (DEOP) THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK San Bernardino County SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY Probation Department Emergency Operations Plan Department (DEOP) RECORD OF CHANGES On an annual basis, the County Departments/Agencies shall review their respective DEOP and/or update Department/Agency Functional Annexes as appropriate. Document the date of the review and the names of personnel conducting the review. Change Section Change Revised By Description of Change # Date 1 10/3/18 Carrie Cruz ICEMA response Part I - Basic 2 6/26/19 Carrie Cruz Added Sec. 4.2 – DEOP Implementation Language Plan, Sec. 4 Part I - Basic Added Sec. 4.2.1 – Decision Matrix for DEOP 3 6/26/19 Carrie Cruz Plan, Sec. 4 Implementation Part II – 4 6/27/19 Carrie Cruz Revised Sec. Title and Additional Language Annex 2 Part II – Added Sec. 2.1.1 – MEF Initial Screening Aid and 5 6/27/19 Carrie Cruz Annex 2 Language Part II – Added Standardized MEF Chart for all County 6 Annex 2, 6/27/19 Carrie Cruz Department/Agencies and Language Sec. 2.1.1 Table of 7 6/27/19 Carrie Cruz Updated TOC Contents Part II – 8 7/1/19 Carrie Cruz Added Planning Tips – Step 1 Annex 1 Part II – 9 7/1/19 Carrie Cruz Added Planning Tips – Step 2 Annex 2 Part II – 10 7/1/19 Carrie Cruz Added Planning Tips – Step 3 Annex 3 Part II – 11 7/1/19 Carrie Cruz Added Planning Tips – Step 4 Annex 4 Part II – 12 7/1/19 Carrie
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary
    Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration Date: January 9, 2019 Case No.: 2016-006868ENV Project Title: SFPUC Reliable Power Project Project Location: Portions of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Rights of Way in Stanislaus, Mariposa, and Tuolumne Counties Zoning: Various Project Sponsor San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Antonia Sivyer (415) 554-2474 Lead Agency: San Francisco Planning Department Staff Contact: Timothy Johnston – (415) 575-9035 [email protected] PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) proposes to implement the Reliable Power Project (proposed project) for maintaining the reliability of the SFPUC’s electrical transmission system between the Holm and Kirkwood Powerhouses and the Warnerville Substation. The project includes implementation of a long-term vegetation management program that would address the North American Electric Reliability Corporation’s reliability standard (FAC-003) and other regulatory requirements that seek to minimize the risk of power outages and fires from vegetation contact with transmission lines on or near the right of way for electrical transmission lines1. In addition to implementation of the vegetation management program, the proposed project would include repairs and replacements for culverts associated with transmission line access roads and construction of a sand storage shed to stockpile sand for winter road treatments needed for access during winter months. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would occur within existing SFPUC facility and right of way boundaries in Stanislaus County, Mariposa County, and Tuolumne County, and would not require the acquisition of new property. Project implementation involving vegetation management would be ongoing. Construction activities and duration for culvert repair and/or replacement would vary along the transmission corridor, but would be short-term in nature, generally requiring a few of days to a couple of weeks to complete.
    [Show full text]
  • Fire and Nonnative Invasive Plants September 2008 Zouhar, Kristin; Smith, Jane Kapler; Sutherland, Steve; Brooks, Matthew L
    United States Department of Agriculture Wildland Fire in Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station Ecosystems General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-42- volume 6 Fire and Nonnative Invasive Plants September 2008 Zouhar, Kristin; Smith, Jane Kapler; Sutherland, Steve; Brooks, Matthew L. 2008. Wildland fire in ecosystems: fire and nonnative invasive plants. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 6. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 355 p. Abstract—This state-of-knowledge review of information on relationships between wildland fire and nonnative invasive plants can assist fire managers and other land managers concerned with prevention, detection, and eradi- cation or control of nonnative invasive plants. The 16 chapters in this volume synthesize ecological and botanical principles regarding relationships between wildland fire and nonnative invasive plants, identify the nonnative invasive species currently of greatest concern in major bioregions of the United States, and describe emerging fire-invasive issues in each bioregion and throughout the nation. This volume can help increase understanding of plant invasions and fire and can be used in fire management and ecosystem-based management planning. The volume’s first part summarizes fundamental concepts regarding fire effects on invasions by nonnative plants, effects of plant invasions on fuels and fire regimes, and use of fire to control plant invasions. The second part identifies the nonnative invasive species of greatest concern and synthesizes information on the three topics covered in part one for nonnative inva- sives in seven major bioregions of the United States: Northeast, Southeast, Central, Interior West, Southwest Coastal, Northwest Coastal (including Alaska), and Hawaiian Islands.
    [Show full text]
  • Station Fire BAER Revisit – May 10-14, 2010
    United States Department of Agriculture Station Fire Forest Service Pacific Southwest BAER Revisit Region September 2009 Angeles National Forest May 10-14, 2010 Big Tujunga Dam Overlook May 11, 2010 Acknowledgements I would like to express thanks to the following groups and individuals for their efforts for planning and holding the Revisit. Thanks to all the Resource Specialists who participated; Jody Noiron - Forest Supervisor; Angeles National Forest Leader- ship Team; Lisa Northrop - Forest Resource and Planning Officer; Marc Stamer - Station Fire Assessment Team Leader (San Bernardino NF); Kevin Cooper - Assistant Station Fire Assessment Team Leader (Los Padres NF); Todd Ellsworth - Revisit Facilitator (Inyo NF); Dr. Sue Cannon, US Geological Survey, Denver, CO; Jess Clark, Remote Sensing Application Center, Salt Lake City, UT; Pete Wohlgemuth, Pacific Southwest Research Station-Riverside, Penny Luehring, National BAER Coordinator, and Gary Chase (Shasta-Trinity NF) for final report formatting and editing. Brent Roath, R5, Regional Soil Scientist/BAER Coordinator June 14, 2010 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, D.C.
    [Show full text]