1 Introduction
The devastating fire season of 2002 forced many Black Forest residents to recognize the potential severity of a problem that has grown over the years. Like many of the counties that suffered during that time, the Black Forest has not had a wildfire to remove the ever-increasing fuel load. Without a planned and vigorous effort to reduce the risk and contain the spread of wildfires, we will become more susceptible to this threat in the future.
The Black Forest community is a patchwork of 5 acre residential lots, with some considerably larger landholdings and some smaller residential lots that either preceded zoning, are within a water district, or are clustered within an overall subdivision that approximates 5 acre zoning. In many areas it is heavily forested but in others essentially open prairie, with perhaps a few isolated trees. The trees are primarily ponderosa pine, with a few aspen, cottonwood, and scrub oak. Our climate is naturally semi-arid and the drought conditions of recent years have made the overgrown forest even more vulnerable to catastrophic fire. The area continues to grow and much of the housing growth is in the trees.
The area receives fire suppression from the Black Forest Fire/Rescue Protection District BFFRPD), which has mutual aid agreements with all surrounding fire agencies, including the City of Colorado Springs. Water is supplied via hydrants in the Park Forest Water District on the southeastern side of the area, and via tanker shuttle elsewhere, although most recent subdivisions have installed 10 to 30 thousand gallon underground tanks from which water may be drafted.
In early 2006, increasing concern amongst citizens, BFFRPD officials, forest management agencies, and El Paso County officials led to a growing consensus that a community fire plan would be beneficial. The Black Forest Community Club (BFCC) agreed to sponsor such an activity and a group was formed to undertake the effort.
The incentive for communities to engage in comprehensive forest planning was given new and unprecedented impetus with the enactment in late 2003, of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA). This landmark legislation includes the first meaningful statutory incentives for the US Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to give consideration to the priorities of local communities as they develop and implement forest management and hazardous fuel reduction projects. In order for a community to take full advantage of this new opportunity, it must first prepare a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP).
The CWPP Development Process
The BFCC CWPP development group consists of the following volunteers:
Chairman: Dan Gorton, System Manager, Pikes Peak Regional Communications Network
Jerry Haile, Director of El Paso County Environmental Services
Mark Johnston, Manager of the El Paso County Forestry and Noxious Weed Division
Dave Root, Forester, USFS
Ruth Ann Steele, manager of the Slash/Mulch Program
Jim Reid, Division Commander of Emergency Services Division (Fire Marshall)
Ron Brown, Board Member, BFCC
Chuck Lidderdale, Vice President and Webmaster, BFCC
Dave Ury, Fire Chief BFFRPD
Brandon Payne, Asst. Chief, BFFRPD
Pete Burleson, Chair, Board of Directors, BFFRPD
At the preliminary meeting of the development group, it was recognized that the full level of detail desired for the plan would take considerable effort over a sustained time period.
The group therefore resolved to produce the plan in two phases – an initial plan that would meet the requirements of the HFRA, and a subsequent document that would provide a much finer-grained description of the topography, conditions, ownership, risks, and mitigation recommendations. It was also recognized that this CWPP may become a component of an overall Community Emergency Preparedness Plan that addresses all risks. This document represents the first step in the CWPP process.
Objectives of the CWPP
The overall objective of the CWPP is to provide guidance to community agencies and individuals that will reduce the risk to life and property due to wildfire, There are many sub-objectives, including:
Promote thinning
Promote cleanup of slash and other combustibles
Establish/enhance buffer zones
Improve defensible space
Identify high-risk areas and recommend mitigation alternatives
Design and establish programs to:
Increase public awareness of fire-related risks, remedies, and advantages
Train homeowners about fire defensive methods
Inform residents about evacuation communications and recommendations
Provide incentives for fuels reduction
Assist firefighters in real-time priority assessment
Create a basis for grant funding for:
slash/mulch program
proactive community fire/safety programs
forest health
2 Community Identification & Description
2.1 Black Forest Physiographic Description: Located North and somewhat East of the City of Colorado, yet south of the Northern border of El Paso County, the Black Forest community has become largely a bedroom community of the City. For purposes of this plan, the study group has determined to use the borders of the BFFRPD to identify the community. Approximately 80 square miles in size, the Black Forest ranges in elevation from 6500 ft at the Southern end to 8000 ft along portions of the Palmer Divide. The vegetation is primarily ponderosa pine and grasslands.
2.1.1 Land Distribution: (What I think goes here is a pie chart showing sizes of lots, including a category for public – the regional park, churches, school and school section, fire dept., etc)
Perhaps less than 2,5 acres, 2.5 to 5 acres, 5 to 35 acres, over 35 acres, and public?
3 Community Assessment
3.1 Assessment Strategy Before getting in to the details of hazard identification, the group clarified a strategy to guide how the entire project would be pursued. The following are the key strategies that guided the work.
Empirical: One key element of the project strategy was a commitment to be empirical. In other words, the group felt it essential to base its analysis and especially any conclusions, on observable, measurable, objective information.
Map oriented. Given the large scale of this project and the huge volumes of data involved, the group quickly centered on using digital maps as the base of organizing hazard data. The El Paso County Information Services Department has excellent computer-based mapping capabilities. Tools made available to the group by the County IS department included mapping tools that can include many “layers” of data including topography, roads, infrastructure, fuels profiles, population densities.
Additionally, the group worked with Colorado State Forest Service and the US Forest Service to use satellite imagery and aerial photograph imagery combined with mathematical modeling capability to forecast fire behavior in selected areas within the BFFRPD area. All of the map projection and mathematical modeling results could be projected into map displays using the Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology.
Highest Priorities First: It was clear to the group members from the beginning that it would be easy to get consumed in detail that would threaten ever getting this project done. Accordingly, it was agreed at the beginning that study efforts would be comprehensive (in other words cover the entire area and all of the key factors) and identify the overall highest priority issues. But then, the strategy was selective – only certain selected priority issues were scrutinized to the level of detail needed as a foundation for recommendations. This meant for example, that detailed mitigation plans inside all subdivisions, detailed cost analyses, and so on are not included in this CWPP. The group intends that future versions of this living document will address increasing levels of detail as necessary.
Don’t reinvent: An important aspect of the CWPP is to provide property owners with information on what they can do to increase safety. Property owner projects involving “defensible space”, structure ignitability factors, thinning specifications, and neighborhood fire protection require access to how-to information as well as information on sources of help including access to fire mitigation grants.
3.2.1 Principle: Catastrophic Fire vs. Ground Fire and their Effects
Although there are an infinite variety of wildfire behaviors, it is useful in the ponderosa forests that dominate the Black Forest to distinguish Catastrophic Fires from Ground Fires. Catastrophic fires for this analysis are wildfires that move in dense forest and burn from the ground all the way through the tree crowns. They jump downwind by spotting and torching. They destroy forests, killing all or most trees, sterilizing soils, and accelerating erosion. Ground fires burn through a forest with flames staying nearer the ground and generally not reaching up into the canopy. The effects of ground fires are often beneficial to the health and safety of the forest and long-term damage to the forest and watersheds is minimal. The problem is to ensure that they are contained effectively.
Figure ? Ground Fire
The mitigation strategies followed by the group were based on the notion that grassfires will occur and there is minimal (but some) opportunity to reduce the incidence of wild fire ignitions. The goal is to reduce the likelihood of catastrophic fire in any area. Any such fire within the area threatens values such as structures, watersheds, and infrastructure. Further the goal is to provide areas or “zones” in the forest where an any catastrophic fire can be rapidly contained and forced to “lay down” into a more benign ground fire.
3.2.2 Principle: Wildfire Behavior and Fire Suppression
Any catastrophic fire in this area would be immediately confronted by the combined resources of all nearby fire departments, and would undoubtedly be supported by state perhaps federal entities as well. Because such fires are difficult to suppress. it is important in advance to establish defensive barriers (fire breaks) that will help contain the fire..
3.2.3 Principle: Causative factors
Catastrophic fires will usually occur in areas of increased forest density, steep terrains, plentiful “ladder fuels”, and lower tree moisture levels. Ground fires will be usually maintained in areas where trees are thinned with substantial gaps in the canopy, trees are trimmed of low branches, ladder fuels are removed, and moisture levels are higher.
3.2.4 Principle: Thinning Works
A compelling body of evidence demonstrates that by performing thinning in an otherwise catastrophic fire-prone forest, its safety can be dramatically enhanced. Experience documents that even a dangerous crowning and torching fire that advances into a forest area that has been properly treated with thinning procedures, may “lay down” to become a manageable ground fire.
3.2.5 Principle: Buffer Zones Work.
Much of the mitigation strategy recommended by the group is based on creating “buffer zones” throughout the forest. The fuel breaks or buffer zones should be designed to allow any advancing catastrophic fire to transition to a ground fire and hence give a possible opportunity to suppress the wildfire before it spreads.
3.2.6 Principle: Defensible Space Works.
If sufficient defensible space is provided surrounding structures, a wildfire could advance through and around structures and other values without causing serious damage to values. Clearly, defensible space for a ground fire is more feasible than defending against an advancing catastrophic fire.
3.2.7 Principle: Mitigation Responsibility
The Black Forest area includes no federal or state property, and the amount of County and other public property is extremely limited, The Fire Department does not have mandated responsibility for preparing private property for fire safety. Therefore, the primary opportunity to decrease risk from wildfire lies in the hands of private property owners acting individually or as a community.
3.3 Private Lands Assessment
3.3.1 Background
The group’s consideration of private lands has currently been limited to creating an overall survey of hazard levels to increase citizen and organization awareness and to help encourage projects to increase safety.
3.3.2 Project Tasks
3.3.2.1 Identify basis for assessment data
The group agreed to assess overall hazard profiles at relatively general level and so decided to create a single general assessment for each section within the BFFRPD area. It was immediately clear that the satellite and aerial photo imagery data available through our GIS-based tools were not detailed, accurate, or recent enough to provide meaningful section–level assessments. (ISTHIS TRUE?) It was decided therefore, that a new on-site assessment of each section would be performed.
3.4.2.2 Subdivision Data Collection
A working group developed an assessment data collection plan and a corresponding Data Form to collect data on the hazard factors in each section. A sample assessment form is shown at attachment V. About 100 packages containing a section form, a section map, and preparation instructions were given to the Fire District. The BFFRPD in turn, sent fire crew staff to each section to perform the assessments.
4 Preparedness to Respond
El Paso County fire departments have considerable experience responding to wildfire incidents, although much of this has been gained through supporting other County or State efforts. The several fire incident responder agencies have relatively mature capabilities, plans, resources, and infrastructure. A description of this extensive capability is beyond the scope of this CWPP because thorough documentation is available in other publications. One key document to reference is the “El Paso County Annual Operating Plan” (ELCAOP) which describes operational plans, standard operation procedures, mutual aid agreements, and cooperative agreements. (IS THERE SUCH A THING?) Agencies that participate in the ELCAOP include all local Fire Departments, US Forest Service, Colorado State Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and National Park Service. (A CORRECT LIST?) Another document reference is the El Paso County FEMA All Hazards Plan.
Program Goals and Objectives:
We recommend that the local residents and County agencies cooperate in supporting programs to increase the safety and health of our forests on both private and public lands. The programs should address the following goals and objectives:
Goal #1 – Reduce frequency and/or severity of fires in the Black Forest
10 Objective #1 Reduce the fuel load at strategic locations in the BFFRPD
o Action#1 Develop model for wildland fire risk analysis
o Action #2 Identify high risk & high priority properties within the BFFRPD.
o Action #3 Develop partnerships and funding opportunities to execute the fuels mitigation projects.
10 Objective #2 Improve over all health of privately owned forests
o Action #1 Establish informative advocacy programs to encourage residents to improve forest conditions.
10 Objective #3 Increase voluntary landowner responsibility for fuel reduction
o Action #1 Include CWPP in Black Forest Website for public access.
o Action #2 Strengthen public education efforts and education.
o Action #3 Increase public awareness and support of County mitigation efforts.
6 Declaration of Agreement:
Each of the following organizations has been directly represented in group membership and concurs with the adoption of this CWPP.
- The USFS
- The BFFRPD
- El Paso County Forestry Division
- The BFCC
- The Slash/Mulch Committee (SAMCOM)
Each of the following organizations has participated in and provided technical support to aspects of the CWPP effort and recommends that this CWPP should be adopted. (DO WE HAVE ANY EQUIVALENTS?)
- County Fire Districts
- National Park Service
– Fossil Beds National Monument
- Colorado Front Range Fuels Treatment Partnership
- USFS: Pikes Peak National Forest
The members of the Black Forest CWPP group hereby recommend adoption of this CWPP.
MEMBER Signature
Jerry Haile
Mark Johnston
Jim Reid
Ron Brown
Chuck Lidderdale
Dave Ury
Ruth Ann Steele
Dave Root
Brandon Payne
Peter Burleson
This Black Forest Community Wildfire Protection Plan dated 31 July 2006 is accepted by the El Paso County Commissioners.