Summary
The US Forest Service (USFS) and the state of Nevada requested a review of the USFS
Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit's (LTBMU) fuels and vegetation management
program and its relationship to the fuels objectives of the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act (LTRA, November 2000).
Review Objectives
Objectives of the review were to (1) examine expended funds and effectiveness of
fuel treatment projects accomplished to date, (2) review plans for future fuels
treatments, (3) focus on integration of scientific findings into the LTBMU's program,
and (4) provide recommendations to ensure that fuels and vegetation management
projects successfully meet community protection and conservation goals.
Review Team and Process
A multi-agency team, led by the Director of Fire and Aviation Management for
Pacific Southwest Region of the Forest Service conducted the review. The team
included forestry and fire officials from Nevada and California Departments of
Forestry, local fire chiefs, and other Forest Service representatives from the Pacific
Southwest and Intermountain Regions. The review included extensive interviews, a
field trip and a weeklong meeting of the review team in the Lake Tahoe basin. More
than 100 people were contacted for interviews including residents of Lake Tahoe area
communities; federal, state, and local government employees, federal and state
legislators; and scientists working in and around the LTBMU. Over 50 interviews
were conducted by phone and 25 in person.
Review Findings
Overall, the people interviewed feel there is a serious fuels problem in the Basin.
They support rapid fuels treatments to reduce the wildfire hazard. There is general
agreement that everyone who lives/works in the Basin, and all agencies that have
responsibilities in the Basin own a piece of the problem. Because the Forest Service is
the largest land managing agency in the Basin, there is an expectation that the Forest
Service will lead the way toward a solution to the fuels problem.
Expended funds and effectiveness of fuel treatment projects accomplished
All of the recent expended funds are in the wildland urban interface, compatible with
the concerns of the local public and the National Fire Plan. Program
accomplishments in the fuels and vegetation management programs for 2001 were
low compared to original targets. Forty-five percent of the 2830 urban lots managed
by the USFS that need treatment have been treated. Less than 10% of the urban
interface has been treated. There is a large backlog (approximately 1000 acres) of
unburned piles. Timeframes for funding do not match timeframes for planning--
dollars are available for limited periods.
All agencies conducting fuel treatments in the Basin find that unit costs are very
high. This is apparently due to several contributing factors: a greater number of
regulations and regulatory agencies to work with in the Basin; operators' reluctance
to bid on LTBMU projects because of high costs and delays due to Basin-specific
permits; and treatments on sub-acre size urban lots with increased per acre cost due
to small size and associated land-line surveys.
The type and thoroughness of treatments needs to be improved to meet fire
protection objectives. The LTBMU is an innovator in the use of new, low impact
equipment and techniques and has improved the thoroughness and efficiency of
recent treatments by changing from multi-phase projects to all-encompassing,
contracted stewardship contracts.
The most consistent finding across all areas was the need to increase the amount and
effectiveness of communications with the public and other agencies regarding the
fuel reduction. There is a general perception that it is not clear what the
accomplishments have been, what is being proposed, and what the objectives are for
the planned or accomplished treatments. There is unanimous support from other
agencies to work with the LTBMU staff to increase accomplishments through joint
planning, assistance with project implementation, and sharing efficiency successes.
Review Plans for the Future
The public does not perceive that the LTBMU, nor the Basin as a whole, has a longterm
plan for treating and reducing fire hazard. There is no agreement among
agencies on a desired future condition for fuel treatment, including a multiownership
depiction of the urban-wildland interface.
Integration of scientific findings into the LTBMU program
The LTBMU has led and supported several key scientific endeavors that have and
will enhance the scientific basis for fuels hazard reduction and vegetation
management including: the Lake Tahoe Basin Watershed Assessment; the Basin
initiated and funded research on the nutrient outputs and effects on lake clarity
from different types of fuel hazard reduction treatments; and fire history studies.
Few persons in the Basin are aware of these works or their utility for fuels planning.
Current research to quantify total daily maximum load for land-uses in the Basin
excludes fuel reduction activities.
Recommendations
Most of the recommendations relate to the need to increase or improve
communications with the public and other agencies. Effective communication with
the public and other agencies would improve strategic planning, provide a better
understanding of objectives of planned treatments and accomplishments, and
ensure more coordinated, effective fuel treatments on all ownerships. Accurate and
timely tracking of targets, accomplishments, and expenditures needs to occur. The
LTBMU should work with other agencies and stakeholders to develop a Basin-wide
strategic plan for addressing fuel hazard, including a communication strategy. More
focus and expertise needs to be applied to communications and public affairs in
relation to fuel hazard.
In addition to improving communications, there needs to be clearer, quantitative
fuels objectives, and agreed upon, streamlined operating procedures with regulatory
agencies. A primary research liaison needs to be identified to ensure that current
and future research includes tradeoffs between different types of fuel treatments and
water quality. The level of expertise in fuel/fire planning needs to be increased to
more effectively and rapidly plan and implement projects in the complex setting of
the Basin.
Back to top
|
