HYDRO20750

• Permit No: C1980007
• IBM Index Class Name: Hydrology
• Doc Date: 7/5/2005
• Doc Name: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Postfire Rehabilitation Treatments
• From: MCC
• To: DMG
• Permit Index Doc Type: Correspondence
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Millions
10-
21.7
9~
Z B
Q 7-
.-
W p~ s
4. ~ 5-
c- 4
Ill ~ 3
m 2
pp O p
~c~oo a\c9 Ct0~J` ~J\d„o~oJ~p .09 9 O p ~ Bp,S
~`p9e~ geaS9 oo~e~pugccric\Jy\o~ yle~ey .\og 0 0 7O~S
s et~~"~ co~~oJ~~~sg* e'd~~ ~~~~o~i~QQsQte~a~ce\ua9e tet'~g
~ `eN p ~ o~
9~e~\e l0 4\c9 ~\~~0 Ota~ s\`
`Q~~ ~~a
HILLSLOPE TREATMENT
Figure 17-BAER spending on hillslope treatments by degde in 7999 dollars. Treatments are ordered
by decreased spending.
Millions
10
s
8
7
8
5
a
3
2
1
0
m
m
_~
z
0
z
a
N
K
a
m
fea
123456123488123456123456123488
wntour seeding- seadin9 mulching seeding-
felling aedel and ground
fertilizer
HIlLSLOPE TREATMENTS BY REGION
Figure 18-BAERspendingon the five mostexpensive hillslope
Ueatments by Region in 1999 dollars.
straw wattle dame were rated "excellent," or "goods in
effectiveness, and better than rock grade stabilizers.
No one considered the effectiveness of these BAER
treatments to be "poor.a
BAER spending an debris basins, straw bale check
dams, and channel debris clearing was about three
times greater than spending on the other channel
treatments (fig. 21). When comparing the change in
use overthe past three decades, straw bale check dams
were extensively used only inthe 1990'x. BAERspend-
ing on debris basins was non-existent in the 1970'x,
and doubled each decade from the 198O's to the 199O's
(debris basins were in use in the 1970's but filnding
came from sources other than the Forest Service or
postfire emergency treatments}, 'T'hese treatments
were generally installed in channels to protect down-
streamurban areas in California. Interestingly, spend-
ing on channel debris clearing decreased five-fold
during the last 30 years, as the value of inatream
debris was realized.
38 USDA Forest Serv(ce Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRSGTR-63.2000