DOCSLIB.ORG

Utility Guidance for Mitigating Catastrophic Vegetation Change in Watersheds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Utility Guidance for Mitigating Catastrophic Vegetation Change in Watersheds Subject Area: Water Resources and Environmental Sustainability Utility Guidance for Mitigating Catastrophic Vegetation Change in Watersheds ©2009 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED About the Water Research Foundation The Water Research Foundation (formerly Awwa Research Foundation or AwwaRF) is a member-supported, international, 501(c)3 nonprofit organization that sponsors research to enable water utilities, public health agencies, and other professionals to provide safe and affordable drinking water to consumers. The Foundation’s mission is to advance the science of water to improve the quality of life. To achieve this mission, the Foundation sponsors studies on all aspects of drinking water, including resources, treatment, distribution, and health effects. Funding for research is provided primarily by subscription payments from close to 1,000 water utilities, consulting firms, and manufacturers in North America and abroad. Additional funding comes from collaborative partnerships with other national and international organizations and the U.S. federal government, allowing for resources to be leveraged, expertise to be shared, and broad-based knowledge to be developed and disseminated. From its headquarters in Denver, Colorado, the Foundation’s staff directs and supports the efforts of more than 800 volunteers who serve on the board of trustees and various committees. These volunteers represent many facets of the water industry, and contribute their expertise to select and monitor research studies that benefit the entire drinking water community. The results of research are disseminated through a number of channels, including reports, the Web site, Webcasts, conferences, and periodicals. For its subscribers, the Foundation serves as a cooperative program in which water suppliers unite to pool their resources. By applying Foundation research findings, these water suppliers can save substantial costs and stay on the leading edge of drinking water science and technology. Since its inception, the Foundation has supplied the water community with more than $460 million in applied research value. More information about the Foundation and how to become a subscriber is available on the Web at www.WaterResearchFoundation.org. ©2009 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Utility Guidance for Mitigating Catastrophic Vegetation Change in Watersheds Prepared by: Elizabeth M. Strange, Diana R. Lane, and Charles N. Herrick Stratus Consulting Inc., 1920 L Street, NW, Suite 420, Washington, DC 20036 P.O. Box 4059, Boulder, CO 80306-4059 Jointly sponsored by: Water Research Foundation 6666 West Quincy Avenue, Denver, CO 80235-3098 and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC 20460 Published by: ©2009 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED DISCLAIMER This study was funded by the Water Research Foundation (Foundation) and the Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) under cooperative agreement No. X-83294801. The Foundation and USEPA assume no responsibility for the content of the research study reported in this publication or for the opinions or statements of fact expressed in the report. The mention of trade names for commercial products does not represent or imply the approval or endorsement of the Foundation or USEPA. This report is presented solely for informational purposes. Copyright © 2009 by Water Research Foundation ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this publication may be copied, reproduced or otherwise utilized without permission. ISBN 978-1-60573-055-4 Printed in the U.S.A. ©2009 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CONTENTS TABLES ......................................................................................................................................... ix FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................... xi FOREWORD ............................................................................................................................... xiii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................xv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... xvii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 Project Objectives ................................................................................................................2 Challenges Faced by Utilities Threatened by Large-Scale Vegetation Change ...................3 Why Preparation and Response Strategies Can Benefit Water Utilities ..............................4 Summary of the Project Approach .......................................................................................4 Structure of this Research Report ........................................................................................4 CHAPTER 2: IMPLICATIONS OF CHANGES IN WATERSHED SOILS AND VEGETATION FOR DRINKING WATER TREATMENT ..................................................... 7 The Influent Challenge .........................................................................................................7 Meeting The Influent Challenge ..........................................................................................7 Characterizing Changes in the Influent Challenge Resulting From Changes in Vegetation and Soils .................................................................................................10 Changes in Vegetation and Soils ............................................................................12 Altered Surface Runoff ..........................................................................................12 Altered Biogeochemical Cycling ...........................................................................13 Altered Infiltration Into Soils and Groundwater ....................................................13 Mobilization of Organic Matter, Organic and Inorganic Chemicals, and Micro-organisms .............................................................................................13 Altered Soil Erosion Potential ...............................................................................14 Landslides and Stream Channel Erosion ...............................................................14 Sediment-Altered River, Lake, or Reservoir Dynamics ........................................14 Responding to Changes in the Influent Challenge .............................................................15 CHAPTER 3: WILDFIRE ............................................................................................................ 17 Effects on Vegetation and Soils .........................................................................................17 Factors That Influence Fire Severity ......................................................................17 Factors Affecting the Frequency of Wildfire..........................................................19 Effects on Watershed Processes .........................................................................................21 Effects on Surface Water Quantity and Quality .................................................................22 Management Strategies ......................................................................................................23 Additional Information ......................................................................................................26 v ©2009 Water Research Foundation. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CHAPTER 4: TIMBER HARVEST AND LOGGING ROADS .................................................. 27 Effects on Vegetation and Soils .........................................................................................27 Effects on Watershed Processes .........................................................................................27 Effects on Surface Water Quantity and Quality .................................................................28 Management Strategies ......................................................................................................29 Sediment Control ...................................................................................................29 Recovery of Vegetative Cover ...............................................................................31 Management for Diversity .....................................................................................31 Additional Information ......................................................................................................32 CHAPTER 5: STORMS ............................................................................................................... 33 Effects on Vegetation and Soils .........................................................................................33 Effects on Watershed Processes .........................................................................................33 Effects on Surface Water Quantity and Quality .................................................................34 Management Strategies ......................................................................................................35 CHAPTER 6: URBANIZATION ................................................................................................. 37 Effects on Vegetation and Soils .........................................................................................37
Recommended publications
  • California Fire Siege 2007 an Overview Cover Photos from Top Clockwise: the Santiago Fire Threatens a Development on October 23, 2007

    California Fire Siege 2007 an Overview Cover Photos from Top Clockwise: the Santiago Fire Threatens a Development on October 23, 2007

    CALIFORNIA FIRE SIEGE 2007 AN OVERVIEW Cover photos from top clockwise: The Santiago Fire threatens a development on October 23, 2007. (Photo credit: Scott Vickers, istockphoto) Image of Harris Fire taken from Ikhana unmanned aircraft on October 24, 2007. (Photo credit: NASA/U.S. Forest Service) A firefighter tries in vain to cool the flames of a wind-whipped blaze. (Photo credit: Dan Elliot) The American Red Cross acted quickly to establish evacuation centers during the siege. (Photo credit: American Red Cross) Opposite Page: Painting of Harris Fire by Kate Dore, based on photo by Wes Schultz. 2 Introductory Statement In October of 2007, a series of large wildfires ignited and burned hundreds of thousands of acres in Southern California. The fires displaced nearly one million residents, destroyed thousands of homes, and sadly took the lives of 10 people. Shortly after the fire siege began, a team was commissioned by CAL FIRE, the U.S. Forest Service and OES to gather data and measure the response from the numerous fire agencies involved. This report is the result of the team’s efforts and is based upon the best available information and all known facts that have been accumulated. In addition to outlining the fire conditions leading up to the 2007 siege, this report presents statistics —including availability of firefighting resources, acreage engaged, and weather conditions—alongside the strategies that were employed by fire commanders to create a complete day-by-day account of the firefighting effort. The ability to protect the lives, property, and natural resources of the residents of California is contingent upon the strength of cooperation and coordination among federal, state and local firefighting agencies.
  • Post-Fire Treatment Effectiveness for Hillslope Stabilization

    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.
  • Cert Petition

    Cert Petition

    No. 18-____ IN THE Supreme Court of the United States SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY, Petitioner, v. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ Of Certiorari to the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI Jeffrey N. Boozell Kathleen M. Sullivan QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART Counsel of Record & SULLIVAN, LLP Stephanie N. Solomon 865 S. Figueroa St., 10th Floor QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART Los Angeles, CA & SULLIVAN, LLP (213) 443-3200 51 Madison Ave., 22nd Floor New York, NY 10010 (212) 849-7000 kathleensullivan@ quinnemanuel.com April 30, 2019 Counsel for Petitioner i QUESTION PRESENTED Whether it is an uncompensated taking for public use in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amend- ments for a State to impose strict liaBility for inverse condemnation on a privately owned utility without ensuring that the cost of that liaBility is spread to the Benefitted ratepayers. ii PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING The following were parties to the proceeding Be- fore the California court of appeal: 1. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (“SDG&E”), Peti- tioner in this Court, was Petitioner Below. 2. The Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, Respondent in this Court, was Respond- ent Below. 3. Protect Our Communities Foundation was a Real Party in Interest Below. 4. The Utility Reform Network was a Real Party in Interest Below. 5. Utility Consumers Action Network was a Real Party in Interest Below. 6. Ruth Hendricks was a Real Party in Interest Below. 7. San Diego Consumers’ Action Network was a Real Party in Interest Below.
  • PROPOSED DECISION Agenda ID #15940 (Rev

    PROPOSED DECISION Agenda ID #15940 (Rev

    ALJ/SPT/SL5/ek4 PROPOSED DECISION Agenda ID #15940 (Rev. 1) Ratesetting 11/30/20172017, Item #40 Decision PROPOSED DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES’ TSEN AND GOLDBERG (Mailed 8/22/17) BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Application of San Diego Gas & Electric Company (U902E) for Authorization to Application 15-09-010 Recover Costs Related to the 2007 Southern California Wildfires Recorded in the Wildfire Expense Memorandum Account (WEMA). DECISION DENYING APPLICATION 198906427197851767 - 1 - RA.15-09-010 ALJ/SPT/SL5/ek4 PROPOSED DECISION (Rev. 1) Table of Contents Title Page DECISION DENYING APPLICATION 1 PROPOSED DECISION DENYING APPLICATION 2 Summary 2 1. Factual Background 2 2. Procedural Background 3 3. Burden of Proof 8Legal Standards Applied9 4. Reasonableness Review: Prudent Manager Standard 9 5. Discussion and Analysis 911 5.1.4.1. Witch Fire 911 5.1.1.4.1.1. Witch Fire Background 911 5.1.2.4.1.2.SDG&E’s Position on its Operation and Management of its Facilities 4.1.3 ORA’s Position on SDG&E’s Operation and Management of its Facilities Prior to the Witch Fire 1321 5.1.3.4.1.4.Intervenors’ Position on SDG&E’s Operation and Management of its 5.1.4.4.1.5.Reasonableness Review: SDG&E’s Operation and Management of its 5.2.4.2. Guejito Fire 2729 5.2.1.4.2.1. Guejito Fire Background 27 5.2.2. SDG&E’s Position on its Operation and Management of its Facilities Prior to the Guejito Fire 29 5.2.3.
  • Major Fires in San Diego County History

    Major Fires in San Diego County History

    Major fires in San Diego County history September 1913: Barona fire burned 65,470 acres. September 1928: Witch Creek fire near Santa Ysabel charred 33,240 acres. September 1928: Beauty Peak fire near the Riverside County border in the North County blackened 67,000 acres. October 1943: Hauser Creek fire in the Cleveland National Forest, at least 9 firefighters dead (including 7 marines), 72 injuries and 10,000 acres burned. August 1944: Laguna Junction fire burned 60,000 acres August 1950: Conejos Fire charred 64,000 acres. [Month unknown] 1952: Cuyamaca fire burned 64,000 acres November 1956: Inaja fire killed 11 firefighters and burned 43,904 acres near Julian. September 26-Oct. 3 1970: The Laguna fire, the county's largest fire in modern times, burned 175,425 acres, killed eight people and destroyed 382 homes. In 24 hours the fire burned from near Mount Laguna into the outskirts of El Cajon and Spring Valley. September 1978: PSA Crash in North Park June 1985: Normal Heights fire destroyed or damaged 116 houses, causing $8.6 million in damage. October 1993: Guejito fire east of Escondido charred 20,000 acres and destroyed 18 houses. Estimated $1.25 million damage. October 1996: Harmony Grove fire burned 8,600 acres, from Harmony Grove west of Escondido to La Costa, destroying nearly 110 homes and killing one man. August 1997: Lake Wohlford fire northeast of Escondido - an arson blaze - destroyed seven houses and burned 500 acres. October 1999: La Jolla Fire (La Jolla Indian Reservation) burned approximately 7,800 acres and 1 firefighter died.
  • Out of the Ashes: Burn Survivor, Firefighter Brooke Linman

    Out of the Ashes: Burn Survivor, Firefighter Brooke Linman

    Prevention Burn Support Events Volunteers Holiday Safety Tips Isidro’s Passion Fire on the Fairways Keeping Seniors Safe 3 7 9 10 www.burninstitute.org VOLUME 44, NUMBER 2 FALL/WINTER 2010 Out of the Ashes: Burn Survivor, Firefighter Brooke Linman bad to worse, forcing the crew to pull back from their original position to avoid being surrounded by the quickly-moving fire. As they tried to pull out of the area to safety, their engine stalled. Surrounded by intense heat and smoke, they jumped into the engine’s cab for protection. In an instant, their refuge became a trap, as extreme heat blew out the engine’s windows. Choking smoke and flame quickly filled the cab. “Panic complete panic – you’re completely out of control,” recalled Linman, who was forced to crouch low behind the fire rig with the others. Badly injured, they took cover, praying that help would arrive. Somehow it did. U.S. Forest Service helicopter pilot Mike Wagstaff was flying water drops nearby. Despite the erratic winds, near-zero visibility and high-voltage power lines, Wagstaff bravely managed to locate and rescue the group. Richard Varshock, Linman, her captain and fellow firefighters were airlifted to safety and transported to UCSD Regional Burn Center for treatment. All were severely burned and sustained internal trauma from smoke inhalation. Thomas Varshock, 52, died as a result of his injuries. Firefighter Brooke Linman poses with 10-year-old daughter, Ciara. Three years ago, Linman was severely injured while fighting the Harris Fire in Potrero. THE ROAD TO RECOVERY n the three years since firefighter Brooke Linman country.
  • Pole Creek and Bald Mountain Fires Facilitated Learning Analysis

    Pole Creek and Bald Mountain Fires Facilitated Learning Analysis

    Pole Creek and Bald Mountain Fires Facilitated Learning Analysis The Pole Creek Fire on September 12, 2018. “‘Modified Suppression’ is a spectrum. ‘Confine/Contain’ is the creation of a box. They are not synonymous, yet not dissimilar.” Type 3 Incident Commander “Without planning for the worst-case scenario, we were constantly behind the power curve.” Firing Boss “We’re operating so far out of climatology. I’ve never seen it before.” Great Basin Predictive Services “I have never seen this before! How do we learn from this and act differently?” Forest Supervisor 1 2 Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 5 Background: UWF Fire Response Culture ................................................................................................. 6 The Story ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 The Bald Mountain Fire ............................................................................................................................. 7 August 24: Bald Mountain Fire, the Early Days......................................................................................... 8 September 6: Pole Creek Fire Ignites ........................................................................................................ 9 September 7: Implementing the Plan ....................................................................................................
  • 2007 Fire Activity Report

    2007 Fire Activity Report

    U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE Regional Map Akaska REGION 7 Pacific REGION 1 Mountain - Prairie Northeast REGION 6 REGION 5 Great Lakes-Big Rivers California and Nevada REGION 3 REGION 8 Southeast Southwest REGION 4 REGION 2 i TABLE OF CONTENTS 2007 Fire Statistics Regional Map .............................................................................................................. i Regional Activity Summaries Pacific .............................................................................................................. 1 Southwest ........................................................................................................ 5 Great Lakes-Big River .................................................................................... 8 Southeast ......................................................................................................... 12 Northeast ......................................................................................................... 18 Mountain-Prairie ............................................................................................. 24 Alaska .............................................................................................................. 28 California and Nevada...................................................................................... 41 Wildfires Fire Activity Map ............................................................................................. 50 Number / Acres ..............................................................................................
  • CAL FIRE Border Impact Statistics

    CAL FIRE Border Impact Statistics

    BORDER AGENCY FIRE COUNCIL The Harris Fire Year End Report 2007 1 2 What is BAFC? – The concerned citizens of the United States and Mexico formed the Border Agency Fire Council. It is a consortium of government and private entities, emergency responders, environmental specialists, law enforcement, fire protection, and elected officials. It began under emergency conditions and has proven to be an extremely successful collaboration. People are alive today because of BAFC. Threatened habitat is protected and even improved because of this program. An unprecedented bi-national mutual assistance agreement is in place and working because of this program. The members of BAFC have worked without judgment or malice toward their fellow human being. From the beginning, their motivation has been primarily to save lives and protect the sensitive habitat of the border area. Thirty-four organizations make up BAFC; a list of members is at the end of this report. The members meet quarterly during the winter and every six to eight weeks during fire season. They meet at the San Diego headquarters of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) in El Cajon, California. Through collaborative effort, they have altered the environment to allow better access into the wildland for emergency responders, while respecting the natural values of the area. They have enhanced communication among emergency responders on both sides of the U.S. - Mexico border. They have reached out to people in both countries with safety messages in Spanish and English. This report provides a brief description of the many projects the Council and agencies have accomplished this year and ongoing projects started in other years yet still active today.
  • What Information Do People Use, Trust, and Find Useful During A

    What Information Do People Use, Trust, and Find Useful During A

    Nat Hazards (2015) 76:615–634 DOI 10.1007/s11069-014-1512-x ORIGINAL PAPER What information do people use, trust, and find useful during a disaster? Evidence from five large wildfires Toddi A. Steelman • Sarah M. McCaffrey • Anne-Lise Knox Velez • Jason Alexander Briefel Received: 9 April 2014 / Accepted: 4 November 2014 / Published online: 16 November 2014 Ó Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014 Abstract The communication system through which information flows during a disaster can be conceived of as a set of relationships among sources and recipients who are concerned about key information characteristics. The recipient perspective is often neglected within this system. In this article, we explore recipient perspectives related to what information was used, useful, and trustworthy in a wildfire context. Using a survey (n = 873) on five large wildfires in 2009 and 2010, we found significant gaps between the sources that were used by the most respondents and those that that they rated as useful or trustworthy. The sources that were used most before the fires were highly correlated with the sources that were used most during the fire. Keywords Public information Á Communication Á Used Á Useful Á Trustworthy 1 Introduction Information is an essential resource during a disaster. Without information, responders cannot effectively manage a disaster, and those affected by the disaster cannot best adapt to T. A. Steelman (&) School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan, 329 Kirk Hall, 117 Science Place, Saskatoon, SK S7H 2J5, Canada e-mail: [email protected] S. M. McCaffrey Northern Research Station USDA Forest Service, 1033 University Place, #360, Evanston, IL 60626, USA e-mail: [email protected] A.-L.
  • Appendix D-21 Fire Protection Plan Supplemental Analysis Otay Ranch Resort Village 13 – Alternative H

    Appendix D-21 Fire Protection Plan Supplemental Analysis Otay Ranch Resort Village 13 – Alternative H

    APPENDIX D-21 FIRE PROTECTION PLAN SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS OTAY RANCH RESORT VILLAGE 13 – ALTERNATIVE H JANUARY 2019 PREPARED FOR: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 5510 OVERLAND AVENUE SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 PREPARED BY: MICHAEL HUFF DUDEK 605 THIRD STREET ENCINITAS, CA 92024 FIRE PROTECTION PLAN for the THE OTAY RANCH RESORT VILLAGE ALTERNATIVE H PROJECT Environmental Log No. PDS2004-04-19005 SCH No. 2004101058 Prepared for: County of San Diego Planning & Development Services Prepared by: 605 Third Street Encinitas, California 92024 SEPTEMBER 2018 Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Fire Protection Plan The Otay Ranch Resort Village - Alternative H Project TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No. ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................... V EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................VII 1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1 1.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Applicable Codes .................................................................................................... 2 2 PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE H SUMMARY ...............................................................3
  • Fires on Flathead Forest Grow Slightly, Expected to Burn for Weeks

    Fires on Flathead Forest Grow Slightly, Expected to Burn for Weeks

    Houston East (CAMS 1) monitoring site AUGUST 26, 2011 EXCEPTIONAL EVENTS DEMONSTRATION PACKAGE For the Houston-Galveston-Brazoria One-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY P.O. BOX 13087 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-3087 September 30, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ................................................................................................................. i List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................ iii List of Tables ........................................................................................................................v List of Figures .................................................................................................................... vi Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... viii Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 A Conceptual Model of Ozone for the HGB Area ................................................. 1-1 1.2 Trends in HGB Area Emissions and Ozone Levels ............................................. 1-2 1.3 Ozone Reduction Progress at the Houston East (CAMS 1) Monitoring Site ...... 1-4 1.4 The Exceptional Event of August 26, 2011 ......................................................... 1-5 Chapter 2: Exceptional Event Rule Requirements for States .........................................