|
Table 12-Probability of treatment success by Regions. Treatments are grouped Into three
<br />categories: hillslope, channel, and road.
<br />BAER Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
<br />Treatment Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range
<br /> ------ ----------------- --Percent------- ----------------
<br />Hillslope 69 60-80 82 74-87 90 8694
<br />Channel 74 57-80 83 74-88 89 84-93
<br />Road 86 79-90 89 78-94 94 87-100
<br />of the coat plus estimated lose for the proposed treat-
<br />ments. For the 321 project fires, estimates of the costs
<br />of no action and treatment alternatives ranged from
<br />$9,000 to $100 million. BAER teams calculated these
<br />estimates based on downstream property value at
<br />risk, soil productivity value, water quality value, T &
<br />E species value, and other resource values estimated
<br />to be affected by the fire and possible floods or debris
<br />flows. Potential soil productivity loeaea may be based
<br />on: estimated site index changes due to fire and pos-
<br />aible lose in harveatabletimber during the next regen-
<br />erationcycle;the coat of top soil if purchased commer-
<br />ciallytoreplacethatanticipatedtobeloat;oreatimatea
<br />by professional judgment. Water quality values are
<br />based on the cost of cleaning reservoirs, increased
<br />coats of treating drinking water, and estimates of
<br />aquatic habitat degradation.
<br />Coats of BAER treatments were compared to esti-
<br />mated losses (without treatment) from the Burned
<br />Area Report forms (fig. 16). BAER treatments appear
<br />to be very coat effective, generally wstingone-tenth as
<br />much as the expected loeaea if no treatment were to be
<br />implemented. Expected losses are just estimates; we
<br />z°
<br />N HI
<br />J ~
<br />W
<br />J ~
<br />>_
<br />0
<br />y u
<br />va
<br />w
<br />NV,VUV,WV
<br />100,000,000 ~
<br /> ~ .
<br />~ ~
<br />10,000,000 ~~
<br /> ~~~
<br /> .. .;
<br />t,ooo,ooo
<br />.
<br />~
<br /> .
<br />• _
<br /> .
<br />,
<br />toa,ooo ~;
<br />
<br />~n nm
<br />ro,ooo roo,ooo r,ooc,ooo to,ooo,oco
<br />BAER Spending (1999 $)
<br />Figure 16-BAER spending compared to projectetl value loss
<br />if no action was taken (log scale). BAER spending did not
<br />exceed estimated values.
<br />do not have data on actual loeaea that may have
<br />occurred.
<br />BAER Team Members
<br />The crompoaition of BAER teams by discipline and
<br />Region was determined from the Burned Area Report
<br />forma to determine appropriate disciplines to target
<br />for additional training (table 13). Just under 43 per-
<br />cent of all the BAER teams included in this data set
<br />(470) came from Region 5. The smallest number was
<br />from Region 2 (4 percent). Regions 4, 1, 3, and 6 had 10,
<br />12, 15, and 17 percent, respectively.
<br />The predominant disciplines on the BAER teams
<br />were hydrology and soil science (table 13). Except for
<br />Region 3, the percentages of BAER teams containing
<br />hydrologists and soil scientists were fairly consistent
<br />(78 to 87 percent) across Regions. Only two-thirds of
<br />Region 3 BAER teams had members from these disci-
<br />plines. The next moat common BAER team diaci-
<br />plinea,wildlife biology (34 to 71 percent), timber man-
<br />agement (30 to 65 percent), and engineering (22 to 56
<br />percent), exhibited atwo-fold range between Regions.
<br />Region 1 had the lowest representation on its BAER
<br />teams for engineering, range management, geology,
<br />archeology, fire management, contracting, and re-
<br />search disciplines. Region 4 had the highest represen-
<br />tation of wildlife biology, fire management, ecology,
<br />fisheries, contracting, and research disciplines.
<br />Monitoring Reports
<br />A wide variety of monitoring reports was collected
<br />from the six Regions. Most were internal administra-
<br />tive reports dealing with one fire or several fires in
<br />proximity. Several were regional burn area rehabilita-
<br />tionactivity reviews, resulting from interdisciplinary
<br />team review of multiple fires over several forests to
<br />evaluate current policies and techniques.
<br />We obtained 157 documents that contained poatfire
<br />monitoring information. Of those, 65 (35 percent)
<br />contained quantitative data of some kind. The rest
<br />(65 percent) contained qualitative evaluations of
<br />treatment success, such as trip report narratives or
<br />30 USDA Foresl Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-63.2000
<br />
|