Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation
Tribal code
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation
Community Wildfire Protection Plan
June, 1 2015
Table of Contents
Contents
1.
2.
Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1.
Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2.
Planning Team and Process.............................................................................................. 1
Community Description .......................................................................................................... 3
2.1.
Community Description ................................................................................................... 3
2.2.
Fuels Mitigation ............................................................................................................... 5
2.3.
Fire History ...................................................................................................................... 7
2.4 Wildland Urban Interface ..................................................................................................... 8
3
4.
Policies and Programs ........................................................................................................... 10
3.1
Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) ...................................................................... 11
3.2
National Fire Plan........................................................................................................... 11
3.3
Federal Land Assistance, Management and Enhancement ............................................ 11
3.4
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Codes and Standards ............................. 12
3.5
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Disaster Mitigation Act ................ 13
Wildfire Risk Assessment ..................................................................................................... 13
4.1
Wildfire Hazard .............................................................................................................. 14
4.1.1
Slope and Weather Patterns .................................................................................... 15
4.1.2
Heavy Fuel Loading................................................................................................ 18
4.1.3
Limited Access and Egress ..................................................................................... 22
4.1.4
High Residential Density ........................................................................................ 24
4.1.5
High Structural Vulnerability ................................................................................. 25
4.2
Protection capabilities .................................................................................................... 27
4.3
5
Values at Risk ............................................................................................................. 27
Mitigation Action Plan.......................................................................................................... 31
5.1
High Priority Actions ..................................................................................................... 31
Himalayan blackberry, Himalayaberry ................................................................................. 31
Removal ................................................................................................................................ 33
Recommendation .................................................................................................................. 34
5.2
Other Actions ................................................................................................................. 34
5.2.1
Fuels Mitigation Projects ........................................................................................ 34
i|Page
5.2.2
Increased Responsibility and Funding .................................................................... 35
5.2.3
Long Term Wildfire Risk Reduction Planning with WUI Partners ........................ 35
5.3
Education and Community Outreach ............................................................................. 36
5.4
Monitoring and Evaluation............................................................................................. 36
References ..................................................................................................................................... 37
ii | P a g e
List of Figures
Figure 1: showing location of Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation, major roads, topography and
defined urban area. ........................................................................................................ 3
Figure 2: Map showing the 7 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Districts as well as critical (red)
and noncritical (blue) infrastructure.............................................................................. 5
Figure 3: Pictures showing before and after fuels reduction work on a Tribal Community Fuels
Reduction Project to make a recreation area usable again. ........................................... 7
Figure 4: Map showing 1999-2003 wildfires displayed by cause and size for the Hoopa Valley
Indian Reservation (From USGS Federal Wildland Fire Occurrence Data (2014)). .... 8
Figure 5: Map showing the Community Wildfire Protection Plan Wildland Urban Interface
(WUI), the 7 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Districts as well as critical (red) and
noncritical (blue) infrastructure. ................................................................................. 10
Figure 6: Map showing the 2008 Fire Hazard Severity Map for Hoopa Valley Tribe Indian
Reservation ................................................................................................................. 15
Figure 7: Map showing slope as a percent rise for the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation and a
close-up of the buffered (1.5 miles) area of urbanization as a defined Wildland urban
interface (Developed from NED 10 DEM). ................................................................ 16
Figure 8: Showing Northern Interior California Palmer Drought Severity Index and
Classifications for 1895-2014. Values below -1.0 on the graph are considered to be in
drought conditions. Please note that 2014 was most extreme drought conditions since
1895 (From NOAA (2015)) ........................................................................................ 17
Figure 9: Map showing vegetation classes for the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation including
enlargement of district area. ........................................................................................ 18
Figure 10: Pictures A) and B) shows the woody understructure of the Himalayan Blackberry, its
ability to become a major ladder fuel and how it aggressively replaces native grasses
and shrubs. .................................................................................................................. 20
Figure 11: Picture showing vegetation including Himalayan Blackberry encroachment on water
tank.............................................................................................................................. 20
Figure 12: Map showing potential locations of Himalayan Blackberry infestation and vegetation
type change in the Trinity River Valley Hoopa Indian Reservation near districts.
Maps developed from data supplied by Hoopa Forestry (2015)................................. 21
Figure 13: Map showing main (Highway 96) and secondary evacuation routes for Hoopa Valley
Indian Reservation. ..................................................................................................... 23
Figure 14: Examples of residential fire risk in high density communities on the Hoopa Valley
Indian Reservation. A) Firewood stacked next to house and B) Firewood stacked
next to propane tank .................................................................................................... 24
Figure 15 Shows examples of the vegetation/debris as well as multiple structures in the
defensible space zones. ............................................................................................... 26
Figure 16: False color image (Vegetation is red and bare ground blue) showing potential
blackberry location A and B in Campbell district. ..................................................... 32
Figure 17: Examples of overgrown Himalayan Blackberry thickets in the Campbell District,
Hoopa Indian reservation. ........................................................................................... 32
iii | P a g e
List of Tables
Table 1: CWPP Process and key Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation members .............................. 2
Table 2: 2013 Hoopa Forestry Fuels Reduction Accomplishments ............................................... 6
Table 3: 2011 Potential Wildfire Loss estimates ......................................................................... 28
Table 4: 2011 Critical infrastructure by district and majority Fire Risk Level ........................... 30
List of Maps (Full Plates in Appendix A)
Map 1: Location Map of Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation with area of urbanization
Map 2: Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Districts as well as critical and noncritical
infrastructure
Map 3: 1999-2003 wildfires displayed by cause and size for the Hoopa Valley Indian
Reservation
Map 4: Community Wildfire Protection Plan Wildland Urban Interface (WUI), Hoopa Valley
Indian Reservation Districts, and critical and noncritical infrastructure
Map 5: 2008 Fire Hazard Severity Map for Hoopa Valley Tribe Indian Reservation
Map 6: Slope as a percent rise for the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation and close-up of the
Wildland Urban Interface (WUI)
Map 7: Vegetation classes for the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation including enlargement of
WUI
Map 8: Potential locations of Himalayan Blackberry infestation and vegetation type change in
the Trinity River Valley Hoopa Indian Reservation near districts
Map 9: Main (Highway 96) and secondary evacuation routes for Hoopa Valley Indian
Reservation
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Maps
Appendix B: Completed Community Wildfire Risk and Hazard Assessment Forms NFPA 2991144 and Blank form for future use
Appendix C: Education and Community Outreach Documentation
iv | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
1.
Introduction
1.1.
Purpose and Need
The Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation (HVIR) is a region of steep terrain, large areas of
continuous fire fuels, long periods of drought, and a region of high arson activity make
wildfire a major concern for the Tribe. Action can and should be taken to help reduce the
overall risk of wildfire while developing a community that is resilient to the aftereffect of a
major fire. These steps can also help improve the ecosystem around HVIR by restoring
native plants (used for ceremony and economy), and improve response to wildfire. To
achieve this a combination of assessment, education, mitigation (fuels and housing safety)
and effective fire suppression must be undertaken to achieve the goal of a resilient
community and its surrounding wildlands to be prepared for the effects of wildfires.
To achieve the goal of a fire safe community the United States Congress passed the 2003
Healthy Forests Act (HFRA), which allowed for the development of Community Wildfire
Protection Plans (CWPP). The CWPP educates and creates a pathway for communities to
understand and reduce their wildfire risk. The CWPP achieves this through an understanding
of fire risk to the community as well as the area defined as the interface between the
community and the wildlands (Wildland Urban Interface – WUI).
1.2.
Planning Team and Process
This CWPP is written for the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation to develop assessment,
outreach and mitigation planning actions for wildfire risk reduction. This is not a legal
document but is meant to educate and help secure potential funding for the Tribe. The work
done for this CWPP followed the timeline as listed below in table 1. The work was completed
with input from the HVIR community, subject matter experts both internal and external to the
HVIR and reviewed by the HVIR CWPP key members also listed in table 1. The list of key
CWPP members in not inclusive of everyone who helped in the process of the CWPP
development.
1|Page
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Table 1: CWPP Process and key Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation members*
Task
Explanation
Form decision team
Development of responsible parties at Hoopa Valley
Indian Reservation
Involve Federal Partners
Engage Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S Forest Service,
Humboldt County and CAL FIRE and other agencies as
appropriate
Meet with subject matter
experts
Community meeting with decision team and community
subject matter experts to determine and prioritize location,
issues, concerns, and mitigation plans
Meet with Community
Community meeting with decision team and community
to determine and prioritize location, issues, concerns, and
mitigation plans
Establish base map
Develop a base map that defines community at risk
including wildland urban interface and critical
infrastructure
Develop Fire Risk
Assessment
Look at topography, climate, fuels, access, residential
density and structure risk to categorize overall
communities fire risk
Form mitigation action
plan based on SME and
community input
Develop a mitigation plan based on risk assessment and
community meeting based on prioritization from
development team, subject matter experts and community
Finalize CWPP
Review with development team and finalize CWPP
Hoopa Valley Indian
Reservation Approval of
CWPP
Receive approval from Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation
Tribal Council on CWPP
Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation CWPP Key Members*
Darin Jarnaghan Sr.
Forestry Manager, Hoopa Tribal Forestry
Kevin Lane
Fuels Specialist, Hoopa Tribal Forestry
Rod Mendes
Director Office of Emergency Services, Hoopa Valley
Tribe
Amos Pole
Fire Chief, Hoopa Volunteer Fire Department Hoopa
Valley Tribe
Pliny (Jack) Jackson
Chairman, Hoopa Fire Safe Council, Hoopa Valley Tribe
Jim Campbell
GIS Specialist, Hoopa Forestry
*Please note that since the completion of the CWPP in June of 2015 that the Hoopa Valley
Wildfire department has been restructured and is now the Hoopa Valley Fire Department
(HVFD) and the main point of contact is Rod Mendes, Chief Hoopa Fire Department and
2|Page
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Director of the Office of Emergency Services. The HVFD reports directly to the Tribal
Chairman. This note documents the change in communication structure and point of contact
for the Hoopa Valley Fire Department and the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe Community
Wildlfire Protection Plan.
2.
Community Description
2.1.
Community Description
The Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation (HVIR) is located in the Northeastern portion of
Humboldt County, California. It is located 65 east miles of Eureka, 120 Miles west of
Redding and 300 miles north of San Francisco. The HVIR is roughly square in shape with
sides approximately 12 miles long encompassing an area of over ninety two thousand acres
covering approximately 50% of the Hupa Aboriginal territory. Figure 1 shows location of
HVIR in relation to Eureka, San Francisco and Sacramento in Northern California.
Figure 1: showing location of Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation, major roads,
topography and defined urban area.
3|Page
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
This makes HVIR the largest reservation in California. The main area of urbanization
including Tribal government is located in the Trinity River Valley Floor. The valley is
located near the reservation center and approximately 6 miles long by a mile wide. The
Valley is separated into 7 districts, or fields, which represent traditional villages of the Hoopa
People. The field names are Norton, Soctish/Chenone, Mesket, Agency, Bald Hills,
Hostler/Matilton and Campbell. These districts constitute the classified urban area in the
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) with a 1.5 mile buffer. The slope increases
dramatically and is steep sloped and heavily forested above the valley floor.
According to the 2010 US census the total population of HIVR is 3,041. The majority of this
population live (85%) live in the 6 districts that are situated on the valley floor. The largest
concentration of housing is in Campbell district. The Bald Hill district contains the rest of
the HIVR population as dispersed housing in an upland setting. Commercial buildings are
scattered along Highway 96 but are mainly concentrated in Agency, Campbell and
Hostler/Matilton. Medical services including Kimaw Medical & Dental clinic, ambulance
service and the rest home are located in Hostler/Matilton. Tribal government, records and
most offices, as well as the K-12 schools and head start program, are located in Agency.
These all were identified as critical infrastructure by the HIVR. Figure 2 shows the districts
location on the HIVR as well as defined critical infrastructure (Tribal, commercial, and
federal) in red and noncritical infrastructure in blue.
4|Page
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Figure 2: Map showing the 7 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Districts as well as
critical (red) and noncritical (blue) infrastructure.
2.2.
Fuels Mitigation
Fuel mitigation for the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation is managed by Hoopa Forestry
(Hoopa Wildland Fire Department (HWFD)). Despite a lack of funding from the BIA and
other sources, the HWFD has developed a fuel mitigation strategy that includes: fuels
reduction, timber sales, Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) management, and maintains or
5|Page
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
improves cultural resources (traditional plants as an example). They have also worked to
develop a fire prevention strategy that emphasizes the importance of enforcement in deterring
incendiary fires.
Fuels reduction in all areas consists of prescribed burns, fuel breaks, hazel and Beargrass
improvements, wildlife enhancement and specific work done on WUI lands. In 2013 a total
of 782 acres received mechanical treatment while another 733 acres were prescribed burned.
Table 1 below shows a summary of 2013 fuels reduction by Hoopa Forestry.
Table 2: 2013 Hoopa Forestry Fuels Reduction Accomplishments
Project Type
Timber Sales
Beargrass Habitat
Enhancement
Hazel Habitat Enhancement
Fuel Breaks
Wildlife enhancement
WUI Specific fuels
reduction
Totals Acres
Mechanical
Treatment
(acres)
300
RX Burn
(acres)
300
15
15
66
75
26
66
0
52
300
26
782
733
Additional work planned for 2014 is to 150 acres of prescribed cultural burning (Beargrass
and Hazel habitat enhancement), 100-500 acres of fuels reduction burning, and 300-500 acres
of timber sales burning. An example of the type of work was the Tribal Community Fuels
Project. This project was initiated to take a popular recreation area and return it to a useable
state by removing hazardous fuels and noxious plants (poison oak). Figure 3 illustrates the
effect a planned fuels reduction project can have for access and usability of an area with a
high fuel load.
6|Page
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Figure 3: Pictures showing before and after fuels reduction work on a Tribal Community
Fuels Reduction Project to make a recreation area usable again.
2.3.
Fire History
Wildfires are a part of life in the western United States and especially northern California.
CAL FIRE has documented the entirety of Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation (HVIR) is on a
35 year burn cycle or less, and of mixed intensity. Between 1999 and 2013 there were a total
of 1,963 reported wildfires on the HVIR with over 97% being less than 10 acres in size (BIA
data from USGS Federal Wildland Fire Occurrence Data (2014) website). The majority of
these fires (98.5%) were human induced while all of the naturally occurring fires were
caused by lightning strikes. The table below lists a selected group of wildfires including
names, year, and acreage covered that were in the HVIR boundaries:
•
Megram Lightning Fire, October 1999: 4,830 Reservation acres (125,000 acres total)
•
Hoopa Fire, July 1999: 54 acres
•
Big Hill Fire, September-October 2002: 184 acres
•
Supply Creek #13 Fire, August- September 2002: 410 acres
•
Deerhorn Fire, September 2008:382 acres
•
Mill Creek 4 Fire, October-November 2009: 1,942 Reservation acres (2,750 acres total)
•
Mill Creek #1 Fire, July 2010: 50 acres
•
Campbell Field #4, September 2012: 58 acres
The costs associated with wildfire and other fire incidents between the years 1999-2011 on
the Reservation are totaled at $15,710,150. Figure 4 shows the total number of wildfires
7|Page
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
from 1999-2013 reported by the Bureau of Indian Affairs to USGS Federal Wildland Fire
Occurrence Data (2014) website.
Figure 4: Map showing 1999-2003 wildfires displayed by cause and size for the Hoopa
Valley Indian Reservation (From USGS Federal Wildland Fire Occurrence
Data (2014)).
The Native people of Hoopa Valley understood and used the natural cycle of
burning. Cultural burning for clearing areas for crops, basketry material (Hazel
and Beargrass, and hunting has been done for thousands of years in the region.
According to tribal elders, traditional and naturally occurring fires were used to
“cleanse” the land and were allowed to burn naturally without suppression.
This resulted in fuel load reduction and decreases in fire severity and intensity.
2.4 Wildland Urban Interface
The determination of the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) for the development of the CWPP
was based on the community demographics, critical infrastructure and political boundaries.
The definition of a WUI is ‘where houses mingle or meet with undeveloped wildland
8|Page
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
vegetation.’ The California Fire Alliance in 2001 defined the buffer region for a WUI to be
1.5 miles from the edge of defined structures. This value represents approximately the
distance a firebrand can be carried from a wildfire to the roof of a structure. This buffer
reinforces the idea that structures not near a potential wildfire location can still be at risk. It
should be noted that due to ceremonial locations, wildlife and food harvesting across the
reservation, the entire reservation is classified as a WUI. However, this classification was
reduced for this study to concentrate on the developed areas and the nearby regions only.
Since nearly all structures (both critical and noncritical) on HVIR are within the 7 defined
political districts (Figure 2), it was determined that these districts will serve as the base of the
WUI. We determined that the 1.5 mile buffer around the districts would potentially capture
the direct interface area as well as any new building that has occurred since the structure map
was developed by Hoopa Forestry. Figure 5 shows the defined WUI (districts and 1.5 mile
buffer) for this study along with critical and noncritical infrastructure.
9|Page
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Figure 5: Map showing the Community Wildfire Protection Plan Wildland Urban
Interface (WUI), the 7 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Districts as well
as critical (red) and noncritical (blue) infrastructure.
3
Policies and Programs
The Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation CWPP is designed to be a planning document that is used
in conjunction with other HVIR fire management and fuels reduction plans/legal documents to
create a fire safe environment for the Hoopa community.
There are no legally binding
requirements to implement any of the recommendations in the HVIR CWPP. Any actions on
Tribal land will be subject to, and require compliance with, Tribal policies and procedures as
well as any applicable federal, state, and county policies and procedures. Any actions taken on
private land should be in accordance with applicable land use codes, building codes and tribal
10 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
governance. The HVIR CWPP must also be approved by the Hoopa Tribal government, Hoopa
Forestry, and Hoopa Volunteer Fire Department.
There are several federal legislative acts that outline policy and guidance for the development of
the HVIR CWPP.
3.1 Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA)
The HFRA enacted in 2003 is federal legislation to promote healthy forest and open space
management, hazardous fuels reduction on federal land, community wildfire protection
planning, and biomass energy production. The HFRA promotes gathering of information on
wildland fire, early detection of pest/disease outbreaks allowing for ecosystem restoration
creating
a
sustainable
healthy
forest.
More
information
can
be
found
at:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-108hr1904enr/pdf/BILLS-108hr1904enr.pdf.
3.2 National Fire Plan
In 2000 Congress mandated the implementation of the National Fire Plan. This plan is a long
term commitment to deal with issues on unsustainable wildland fuel and ecosystem
conditions that have evolved from up to 100 years of active fire suppression in the United
States. In conjunction with the Western Governors association a 10-year comprehensive
strategy (2001) which developed an interagency plan that focuses on firefighting
coordination, firefighter safety, post-fire rehabilitation, hazardous fuels reduction,
community assistance, and accountability.
This plan directed federal agencies to work
directly with communities to develop adequate fire protection as well as maintain the
condition of the land. More information on the National Fire Plan can be found here:
http://www.fireplan.gov, and for the 10-year comprehensive strategy implementation plan
here: http://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/resources/plan/.
3.3 Federal Land Assistance, Management and Enhancement
In 2009 congress passed the Federal Land Assistance, Management, and Enhancement Act of
2009 (the FLAME Act).
This legislation was a natural continuation of the previous
legislation and actions taken by the Partner Caucus on Fire Suppression Funding Solutions
11 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
(http://www.americanforests.org/our-programs/public-policy/our-public-policy-work/ourpublic-policy-work-forests-fire/); a coalition of over 160 environmental, industry, outdoor
recreation, and forestry organizations led by National Association of State Foresters (NASF),
The Wilderness Society and American Forests. They led the initiative to develop legislation
that will lead to sustainable fire suppression strategies in the United States by the Department
of the Interior and the U.S. Forest Service. There are components in this legislation that
allow for community risk assessment, methods for allocation of hazardous fuel reduction
funding based on priority projects, and reinvest in non-fire programs, all of which progress
towards creating fire resilient communities. The 2009 FLAME Act: Report to Congress
(http://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/documents/reports/2_ReportToCongress0317
2011.pdf) has detailed information for further review.
3.4 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Codes and Standards
The NFPA is an international not-for-profit agency designed to reduce the loss of life and
property by developing codes, standards, training, and educational outreach protocols. They
have developed more than 350 standards and have over 65,000 members worldwide. These
standards/codes cover everything from a standard for electrical safety in the workplace
(NFPA 54) to Life Safety Code (NFPA 101). There are five standards that are used widely
for wildland fire suppression and intensity reduction for communities. They are:
•
NFPA 1141: The Standard for Fire Protection Infrastructure for Land Development
in Suburban and Rural Areas covers the requirements for the fire protection
infrastructure in suburban and rural areas when Land use/ land change occurs. This is
important for rezoning but also new development.
•
NFPA 1142: The Standard on Water Supplies for Suburban and Rural Fire Fighting
identifies a method for determining the minimum requirements for alternative water
supplies for structural fire-fighting purposes in areas. This standard is only applicable
where the jurisdictional authority determines that adequate and reliable water supply
systems do not otherwise exist.
•
NFPA 1143: The Standard for Wildland Fire Management provides minimum
requirements for fire protection organizations on the management of wildland fire,
including prevention, mitigation, preparation, and suppression. This standard is
already met by Hoopa Forestry.
•
NFPA 1144: Standard for Reducing Structure Ignition Hazards from Wildland Fire.
This standard provides a methodology to assess wildland fire ignition hazards around
12 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
existing structures and residential developments as well as planned or improved
properties that will located in the WUI. It also provides minimum requirements for
new construction in the WUI. The main goal of this standard is to reduce the number
of structures ignited from wildland fires.
•
NFPA 299: Standard for the Protection of Life and Property from Wildfire. This
standard provides a method for the assessment of wildfire hazard Severity Analysis
existing and improved structures; location, design and construction of new structures;
creation of defensible space and community planning. This is one of the fundamental
standards for community wildfire protection.
These five standards, as well as a review of all other codes/standards, if appropriate, should
be considered for future planning by Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation. More information
including all detailed information on the codes and standards can be found at the NFPA
website: http://firewise.org/wildfire-preparedness/regulations-and-plans.aspx.
3.5 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Disaster Mitigation Act
The FEMA Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 provides a legal basis for Indian Tribal, state and
local governments to develop multiple-hazard and mitigation planning. This Act allows for
up to 7% of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Planning Funds available for the development of
Indian Tribal, State and Local mitigation plans. More information on the FEMA Disaster
Mitigation
Act
of
200
can
be
found
here:
http://www.fema.gov/media-
library/assets/documents/4596. FEMA may be a potential avenue for project funding in
conjunction with an adopted Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP). The FEMA website on Grants
has more information on potential funding opportunities: http://www.fema.gov/grants.
Additionally, the national Firewise program (http://www.firewise.org) focuses on education
about enhanced fire safety in the wildland Urban Interface. It provides resources and guidance
on preparedness, prevention and mitigation for individuals and communities.
4. Wildfire Risk Assessment
A risk wildfire risk assessment was undertaken based on discussion from the community and
subject matter meeting. This assessment was based on analysis of Wild fire hazards, protection
13 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
capabilities, and values at risk. The information is based on the priorities and issues that were
identified and discussed at the meeting with tribal members and officials. GIS data and analysis
is based on data from Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation (HVIR) Forestry Department (Hoopa
Forestry), Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection (CAL FIRE) 2012 Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP). The CAL FIRE
FRAP data that was used for this study is and aggregation of tribal, city, county, federal (BIA as
an example) which is processed and archived on the CAL FIRE site (per personal
communication with Josh Simmons). The federal LANDFIRE Project site was also explored for
data but the spatial resolution on these data was too coarse to be of use in this analysis. Hoopa
Forestry stated that they are looking at developing higher resolution data sets for HVIR and
follow the methodology of the LANDFIRE Project to develop more accurate maps that detail
existing vegetation, wildland fuel and map departure of landscape from historical conditions.
4.1 Wildfire Hazard
The wildland fire season for HVIR is from May to October with the months between July
and September being the highest risk. As shown in Figure 2.3.1, humans are responsible for
nearly all fire ignitions on the HVIR. Anthropogenic ignition (human caused fires) has been
an ongoing problem throughout the Reservation, to the extent that arson or suspicion of arson
has represented more than 90% of fires since 1999. The rest of the anthropogenic fires result
from campfires, trash/brush burning, vehicles, and fireworks. Lightning is the sole natural
cause for fires reported on the Reservation and is only responsible for 0.54% of fire starts
since 1999. Therefore, with 160-250 ignitions occurring each year, HIVR approaches 100%
risk for wildfire development.
The majority (94%) of the HVIR is classified by CAL FIRE as Very High and High being
around 5%. Moderate and urban/unclassified are both classified as 1%. The fire severity
map for the WUI show have values of: Very High 87%, High 7%, Moderate 2%, and
urban/unclassified 4%. It should be noted that all of the moderate and urban/unclassified are
located in the WUI so that is the main cause for the percentage changes. The CAL FIRE
severity map and close-ups of the districts and WUI so the dominance of Very High Fire
severity risk for the HVIR region of interest (See Figure 6 for reference).
14 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Figure 6: Map showing the 2008 Fire Hazard Severity Map for Hoopa Valley Tribe
Indian Reservation
4.1.1 Slope and Weather Patterns
Slope
The Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation is located in the Northeastern portion of
Humboldt County with the main population centers located along Highway 96 in
the Hoopa Valley (See location map figure 7 for reference) in the Trinity River
Watershed.
The valley floor is an alluvial plain for the Trinity River and is
approximately 7 miles in length and on average 1.5 miles wide. This is the only
region on the reservation that has moderate slopes adequate for development with
the town of Hoopa, (the densest population and center of tribal government) also
located here (See Figure 6; regions with a percent rise >21% indicates a greater than
45 degree slope). Slope plays a role in fire severity of the fire. Steeper slopes allow
preheating of fuels upslope which exacerbates rate, extent, and flame length.
15 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Steeper slopes on the HVIR will create ladder fuel situations where fires transition
from a ground fire into tree canopy becoming a crown fire. Crown fires can become
severe, thus increasing the amount of potential acreage and property destroyed.
Steep slopes and ladder fuels exist in all districts of the HVIR outside of the valley
floor, including some areas of Bald Hill.
Figure 7: Map showing slope as a percent rise for the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation
and a close-up of the buffered (1.5 miles) area of urbanization as a defined
Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) (Developed from NED 10 DEM).
While Slope and terrain do not increase the likelihood of a fire they contribute
significantly to the potential for severe fire and limit the ability to combat a fire.
Climate and Weather
Like most of California, the HVIR enjoys a Mediterranean type climate with hot
dry summers and cool moist winters. The mean annual temperatures are a high of
16 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
69° F (July is the hottest month at 92°F) and a low of 40°F (December is the coldest
month at 32° F). The mean annual precipitation is 57 inches with 90 percent
occurring between October and April. Precipitation during fire season (JuneAugust) averages only 1.15 inches indicating this region is at its greatest risk for
fire during these months. The region also is affected by straight-line winds (winds
in excess of 50 miles per hour) which occur regularly with some instances where
wind speeds exceed 70 mph. These wind conditions can affect fuel load because of
their ability to promote fuel drying which can accelerate an active fire. These winds
can dry out understory vegetation if they arrive in late spring / early summer, thus
increasing fuel load potential. Droughts occur regularly within the region which
have the potential to last decades or more. This reduction in total precipitation
leaves the region more susceptible to wildfire and also reduces resources to fight
fires when they occur. This phenomena can potentially create conditions that lead
to a year-round fire season, well beyond the normal 5 month season (May-October).
The Histogram in Figure 4.1.1.2 shows the monthly Palmer Drought Severity Index
(PDSI) values for interior Northern California from 1895-2014 with associated
drought determinations to show frequency of long term drought in the region.
PDSI Classifications
4.0 or more
extremely wet
3.0 to 3.99
very wet
2.0 to 2.99
moderately wet
1.0 to 1.99
slightly wet
0.5 to 0.99
incipient wet spell
0.49 to -0.49
near normal
-0.5 to -0.99
incipient dry spell
-1.0 to -1.99
mild drought
-2.0 to -2.99
moderate drought
-3.0 to -3.99
severe drought
-4.0 or less
extreme drought
Figure 8: Showing Northern Interior California Palmer Drought Severity Index and
Classifications for 1895-2014. Values below -1.0 on the graph are considered
to be in drought conditions. Please note that 2014 was most extreme drought
conditions since 1895 (From NOAA (2015))
17 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
4.1.2 Heavy Fuel Loading
The natural vegetation of the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation is predominantly Douglas
fir (Old Growth and 2nd and 3rd Growth) along with some mixed conifer (white fir and red
fir). Stands of Oak Woodlands occur on the eastern slope of the Trinity River Valley and
interspersed elsewhere on the reservation lands. Other hardwoods include California bay
laurel, red alder and Pacific madrone. Other softwoods on the reservation include, but
may not be limited to, coastal redwood, giant sequoia, grand fir, western hemlock, cedars
(western red, incense, and Port Orford), pine species (Jeffrey, ponderosa, and sugar), and
Pacific yew. The valley has a mix of wild rose and other briars (shrubs), grasses, and
ferns Figure 9 shows the distribution of major vegetation by classes from Hoopa Forestry
updated vegetation survey data (2013).
Figure 9: Map showing vegetation classes for the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation
including enlargement of WUI regions.
18 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
The Hoopa Valley Tribe Indian Reservation historically, as was the policy of the time for
the western United States, actively suppressed wildfires since the 1930’s. Results from
altering the natural fire regime, as indicated from CAL FIRE data, shows that
approximately 90% of the HVIR has been moderately altered from its natural fire regime
(~60% significantly and ~30% moderately).
This deviation, largely caused by fire
suppression, promotes conditions for increased vegetation density and debris/litter on the
forest floor as well as increased tree density. This litter and debris increase the fuel load
thereby increasing potential for greater flame height and duration, thus creating
conditions for more intense fires. The ecosystem in this region has evolved < 35 year fire
cycle which is normally adequate to manage understory debris with low intensity fires.
More intense fires can utilize the debris as ladder fuel to reach the canopy/crown and
allow the fires to become much more destructive.
Himalayan Blackberry also contributes significantly to fuel loading. . This aggressive
invasive species outcompetes lower fuel load grasses and natural briars (wild rose and
huckleberry). Blackberries occur in large dense thickets that can clog riparian areas and
contribute large masses of woody debris. The blackberry extent has not been fully
mapped on the reservation though an updated vegetation map was sent to CAL FIRE for
the 2015 FRAP by Hoopa Forestry. The widespread nature of the blackberry has caused
a significant change in fuel load along the valley floor and in the defined urban interface
area of concern for wildfires. Figures 10 A and B illustrate the woody nature of the
Himalayan Blackberry as a ladder fuel which can promote high intensity fires on tribal
lands.
19 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
A)
B)
Figure 10: A) and B) shows the woody understructure of the Himalayan Blackberry,
its ability to become a major ladder fuel and how it aggressively replaces
native grasses and shrubs.
The blackberry is present in all districts, along all major drainages and natural fire breaks.
It has also grown in around critical infrastructure and (pictured in figure 10 A) near
emergency siren and cell tower as well as water tanks (Figure 11) on the reservation.
Figure 11: Picture showing
vegetation including
Himalayan Blackberry
encroachment on water tank.
This creates a heavy fuel load near critical infrastructure and is a current concern for the
Hoopa Valley tribe. The blackberry is a significant ladder fuel, along with other debris
that can quickly change a ground fire to a crown fire. It has changed the fire regime and
fire severity potential for the whole valley floor as well as along all access roads. Figure
12 the potential region of Blackberry spread as differentiated from the original CAL
FIRE vegetation map. This is potential map of the blackberry spatial extent as it is
20 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
increasing each year even in the face of severe drought. These results may not include all
areas of infestation.
Figure 12: Map showing potential locations of Himalayan Blackberry infestation and
vegetation type change in the Trinity River Valley Hoopa Indian
Reservation near districts. Maps developed from data supplied by Hoopa
Forestry (2015).
21 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
There is also a history of even aged silviculture (clear-cutting) practices on tribal lands.
This has resulted in regions of the reservation that have a fire behavior indicative of areas
with shrub/brush fuel loads. This can potentially increases the rate of spread in these
areas. If open spaces contain dense blackberries or briars, then the presence of heavier
than expected ladder fuels will increase flame heights and burn time, leading to increased
fire severity.
4.1.3 Limited Access and Egress
The Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation has one main ingress and egress (Highway 96) and
one bridge that links Norton, Mesket, and Hostler/Matilton districts with the rest of city;
including services residing in the Agency district. There are other external access roads
that can reach HVIR, but most are mountainous and unimproved making it potentially
difficult for emergency vehicles to access and respond. These other access/egress roads
are Mill Creek Road, Tish Tang Road, Bair Road and Pine Creek Road. Most roads are
local for neighborhood access and can sometimes be very narrow and choked with
vegetation (invasive blackberry as an example). This is evident in Campbell district
where dense understory thickets make conditions difficult for evacuation or access should
a wildfire ignite in these locations. Bald Hill as another example its access is not cut off
by the bridge however Bald Hill through Loop Road has a single point of ingress/egress
and therefore potential issue. It should also be noted that one of the main secondary
routes, Pine Creek Road is accessible from the Bald Hill community. Figure 1 highlights
primary and secondary roads as well as evacuation routes into and out of the reservation.
A review of the 2013 Hoopa Corral Complex Fire Structure Protection and Evacuation
Plan reiterated that primary evacuation routes are narrow and there are issues with limited
turnaround points for emergency vehicles in each of the defined evacuation districts.
22 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Figure 13: Map showing the main (Highway 96) and secondary evacuation routes
for Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation.
23 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
4.1.4 High Residential Density
Residential housing is concentrated along the valley floor with large housing
communities in Campbell, Hostler/Matilton and Norton. In Campbell, which has the
highest housing density, with residents are clustered into groups with a single
egress/ingress. These conditions increase the risk for multiple structure fires. Limited
access for emergency vehicles and evacuation compound the community’s vulnerability
to multiple structure fires. These conditions, coupled with the high number of human
caused fires in Campbell, make this community a high risk for property loss and loss of
life to wildfire. There are two modular housing locations on the reservation that are at
great risk to wildfire. One is located in Campbell off of Shoemaker Road and the other is
off of Highway 96 in Hostler/Matilton. The development in Campbell has a single point
of access and is in a woody and developed area on the western slope up from the valley
floor. There is potential for ladder fuels to start a crown fire in this area that could
quickly overtake the development and block access causing great risk for property loss
and loss of life. The Hostler development is on the valley floor in an area that has been
cleared of standing fuels but has extensive Blackberry encroachment that could change
the fire severity risk. At both community locations it was noted that firewood was stored
near houses and also by propane tanks, thus increasing the fire risk in these locations.
These fire risks should be remediated to reduce the fire potential (See figure 14 A and B).
Figure 14: Examples of
residential fire risk in
high density
communities on the
Hoopa Valley Indian
Reservation. A)
Firewood stacked next
to house and B)
Firewood stacked next
to propane tank
It was also noted that there were quite a few locations where multiple structures were
evident on one parcel of land. Some of these structures are in poor condition and covered
or filled with debris creating a significant fuel source and potential point of ignition.
24 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Although not possible to evaluate every residence in HVIR for the CWPP, we did
evaluate the two residential (modular housing) communities. We used the NFPA Fire
Risk Assessment form 299-1144 to determine the fire risk for both developments. This
form can also be used for individual houses and is included in the appendix B of this
CWPP.
The assessment form examines subdivision/house area design, vegetation,
topography, utility types, available fire protection and building/roofing materials and
methods. It categorizes risk from low to extreme. Both communities rated as a high fire
hazard (both scored an 88 with the cut off being 112 for extreme) approaching extreme
fire hazard conditions based on the NFPA Firewise program standards. The analysis was
conducted at the community scale and does not reflect the fire safety of individual
houses, which should be considered as well. Some of the values that factored into high
risk are due of course to topography and surrounding vegetation type and would be hard
to mitigate other factors can be easy mitigated. It should be noted that the subject matter
expert meeting highlighted a concern regarding hydrant functionality on HVIR. It was
stated that some hydrants on HVIR do not currently work or have not been tested for
pressure or rating. This requires further inquiry but were noted as a concern on the
assessment form.
The NFPA Firewise form also allows for reassessment of the
residence/subdivision and can be further customized based on location specific issues
(such as above ground propane tanks, time to access instead of distance for response,
etc.).The assessment sheets for the communities as well as a blank copy are available in
Appendix B.
4.1.5 High Structural Vulnerability
Almost all residences in the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation are in the wildland urban
interface region of interest.
Of these residences, 38% are mobile homes and the
remaining majority are stick frame construction with traditional roofing material (not
metal or Class A fire-rated roof covering). A significant proportion of residences do not
have defensible space zones clear of heavy vegetation including Himalayan Blackberry,
and also have debris and litter on roofs.
In some instances multiple structures
(abandoned mobile homes as an example) are within the recommended 30 feet of the
main living structure.
25 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Figure 15 shows some examples of vegetation/debris and multiple structures within the
defensible space zone.
Figure 15 Shows
examples of the
vegetation/debris as
well as multiple
structures in the
defensible space
zones.
The percentage of mobile in specific districts pose another concern for structural
vulnerability. Mobile homes of older construction subject to complete destruction will
burn rapidly and completely causing total loss. Limited access also poses an issue with
these heavy fuels and high risk structures in that, if fires break out in some regions, the
emergency vehicles cannot reach them in time to contain the fire, increasing the potential
26 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
for multiple structure fires, loss of life, and combustion of ladder fuels, thus creating
conditions favorable for larger scale wildfires.
4.2 Protection capabilities
In 1991, the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation, through the self-governance process,
compacted the Wildland Fire Program from the BIA and formed the Hoopa Volunteer Fire
Company (HVFC). Since then fire protection on the reservation is undertaken by the Hoopa
Wildland Fire Company (HWFC) and the Hoopa Volunteer Fire Company (HVFC). The
HWFC is supported by ten full-time members, seven temporary members, and six seasonal
members. They are responsible for wildland fires and are under the jurisdiction of Hoopa
Forestry. Their apparatuses include: four type-3 engines, two type-4 quick attack engines,
and one water tender. The HVFC, established by the tribal council, is an all-risk organization
that deals with structural fires and provides fire services to all residents within the reservation
boundaries. It consists of 14 volunteers, and their apparatuses include: one type-1 engine,
one type-3 engine, one rescue utility vehicle, a command vehicle, and a Yamaha jet outboard
unit. During the fire offseason the HWFC maintains a “skeleton crew” to staff an engine 365
days a year. Volunteer Fire generally has at least 3-5 volunteers on call 24 hours a day and
365 days a year. Both programs are trained in ICS and pertinent emergency response
programs. The HWFC works through the use of Mutual Aid agreements to partner with
other agencies including the HVFC to provide structural fire suppression in wildland fire
situations.
4.3 Values at Risk
Assets are defined as anything that impacts quality of life and the economics of the
reservation. So these are defined in terms of what would be impacted from wildfire. These
may include community assets such as homes, businesses, ceremonial or sacred sites, as well
as environmental values such as wildlife habitat, natural resources, and air quality, along with
any other important attribute that individual communities rely on for their wellbeing. All
assets involved in a wildfire will be impacted and can have social and/or economic
ramifications. For this section we evaluated critical infrastructure other than residential that
would impact social, economic or operational nature of the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation
and its people. Given the current drought, fuel load, structure density, vulnerability and
27 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
limited ingress/egress nearly entirety of the Reservation is at risk for a catastrophic wildfire.
This threat is increased given the level of potential wildfires anticipated in the western United
States, coupled with finite fire crews who will be stretched across these fires this oncoming
summer. All structures (private, governmental and commercial) could potentially be at risk
or destroyed in a catastrophic wildland fire along with human life and health which would
also be at serious risk. These observations are supported through evidence in past fires and
limited evacuation options. During the 1999 Megram fire, PM10 levels proved to be well
above levels identified as a risk to human health.
This potentially would involve a
reservation wide evacuation. The potential economic loss would be enormous as value of the
timber is estimated in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Table 2 below, modified from the
2011 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan update, shows the
potential wildfire losses with the Urban Zone defined as all districts but Bald Hill which is
upland residential. The upland region is all tribal land other than the districts.
Table 3: 2011 Potential Wildfire Loss estimates
Upland
Region
Reservation area
outside WUI Buffer
Very
High
Contents
Losses
Very
High
Structure
losses
Bald Hill and WUI
Buffer
Upland
Residential
Number of
2
Structures
High
Structure
1
Ownership
Districts
Estimated
Vulnerability
Assessment
Area
Urban
Zone
Soctish/Chenone,
Hostler/Matilton,
Agency, Campbell,
Mesket, Norton
and WUI Buffer
T
26
$34 Million
$21 Million
P
1078
$129 Million
$22 Million
O
5
$137 Million
$1.4 Million
T
1
$300 Thousand
$50 Thousand
P
25
$3 Million
$510 Thousand
O
0
n/a
n/a
T
n/a
n/a
n/a
P
n/a
n/a
n/a
O
n/a
n/a
n/a
Location/Comments
All structures and
infrastructure are valuable
All structures and
infrastructure are valuable
Mostly Loss of Timber,
revenue and cultural
resources
1 - T = Tribal Ownership, P = Private Ownership, and O = Other Ownership (Federal, State County, School District, etc.)
2 - Tribal buildings, residences and other structures identified and tallied based on 2005 aerial photos
28 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Community members and subject matter experts were consulted during open meetings to
define and then refine a listing of critical infrastructure on the HVIR. These were broken
down by district and noted issues were discussed. Table 3 lists these values at risk.
29 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Table 4: 2011 Critical infrastructure by district and majority Fire Risk Level
District
Soctish/Chenone
Bald Hill
Hostler/Matilton
Pine Creek Road - Evacuation
Route
Pine Creek Road - Evacuation
Route
Evacuation Route - Tish Tang Road
Agriculture/Livestock
Cell Tower
Police Department
Pump Station
76 Gas Station
Emergency Siren
Lucky Bear Casino and shopping mall
Village/Dance Grounds
Central Coast Credit Union
Water Tanks (4)
Tsewenaldin Inn
Agriculture/Livestock
Post Office
Critical
Infrastructure
Radio Station
Trinity River Bridge
Kimaw Medical & dental clinic,
Ambulance, & rest home
Airport
2 Village/Dance Grounds
Water Tanks (4 - 3 in service)
Ceremonial Grounds
Wildland Fire Risk
Very High
High/Very High
Very High
District
Agency
Campbell
Norton and Mesket
Critical
Infrastructure
Wildland Fire Risk
School Grounds (K-12) and Head
Start
Modular Plant
Mill Creek Road - Evacuation Route
PGE Substation
Roads Department Main Office
Village/Dance Grounds
Public Utilities Department
Aggregate Plant
Norton Field Housing Authority
J.M. Water Treatment
TCCC/Americore
Emergency Siren
Emergency Operation Center
Village/Dance Grounds
Water Tank
Tribal Council Offices and Tribal
Records
water tanks (2)
Tribal Forestry
Evacuation Route - Bair Road
Volunteer Fire Department
Hoopa Modular Construction Site
Very High/High, some Moderate
Very High
Very High/High some Moderate
It should be noted that all districts fall into the Very high category even in the CAL FIRE
analysis which does not classify the urban areas. These urban areas as discussed in this
section are all at least at HIGH RISK though most are at VERY HIGH RISK for severe
impact from a wildland fire.
30 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
5
Mitigation Action Plan
5.1 High Priority Actions
Himalayan blackberry, Himalayaberry
Himalayan Blackberry, an invasive species in California and the west coast, grows into
dense thickets near Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources (CIKR) throughout the
Hoopa Reservation. It established itself initially along route 96 in drainage and then
spread to much of the open ground. Blackberry is now pervasive in all Districts on the
Hoopa Reservation. These dense woody thickets become a major fire hazard that has
significantly different fuel characteristics than the native grasses and shrubs they have
replaced. Areas including regions BIA designed as firebreaks as well as roadways and
natural water courses (natural fire breaks) are congested with blackberry. Figure 16
shows a false color image of Campbell District overlain on a false color map (red is
vegetation and blue is bare soil and buildings) with two representative locations of
blackberry infestation outlined in green.
Location A is along a BIA firebreak and
location B along an access road to housing which would block emergency equipment
access.
31 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Figure 16: False color image (Vegetation is
red and bare ground blue) showing
potential blackberry location A and B in
Campbell district.
Livestock avoid blackberry thickets as they are unpalatable. The increased pervasiveness
of this invasive on open pastures reduces the available forage production of those
pastures, thus impacting the local economy.
Figure 2 is an example of a typical
blackberry thicket on the Hoopa Reservation.
Figure 17: Examples of overgrown Himalayan Blackberry thickets in the Campbell
District, Hoopa Indian reservation.
32 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) grows as a dense thicket of long, bending
branches (canes), appearing as tall, ten-foot mounds or banks, particularly along
watercourses. Canes have hooked prickles. The canes can reach a length of 40 feet and
build and create dense woody thickets of over 500 stems per square meter. Flowers are
white, yielding blackberries that usually ripen later than native black berries. It seeds
heavily and seeds are readily dispersed by mammals and birds. Seeds can be spread
considerable distances by streams and rivers. Himalayan blackberry thickets can produce
7,000 to 13,000 seeds per square meter. However, Himalayan blackberry seedlings
receiving less than 44 percent of full sunlight typically do not survive. It is intolerant of
shade. Flowering begins in May and continues through July. Fruit is produced from July
to September. Fruit ripens late compared with native blackberries and over a considerable
interval from mid-summer to fall. It also spreads vegetatively by rooting of cane tips.
Removal
Mechanical removal or burning may be the most effective ways of removing mature
plants. Post removal herbicide treatment is recommended; however, proximity to
floodplain increases a non-point source risk to the surrounding environment. Options
include physical control through mechanical methods and manual methods. Mechanical
control techniques, such as cutting or using a weed wrench, are suitable for Himalayan
blackberry. Care should be taken to prevent vegetative reproduction from cuttings.
Burning slash piles is an effective method of disposal. Removal of canes of alone is
insufficient to control Himalayan blackberry, as root crowns will re-sprout and produce
more canes. Another option is a manual method including hand digging removal of
rootstocks. It is a slow but effective way of destroying Himalayan blackberry, which
resprouts from roots. The work must be thorough to be effective because every piece of
root that breaks off and remains in the soil and may produce a new plant. This technique
is suitable only for small infestations and around trees and shrubs where other methods
aren’t practical. Himalayan blackberry plants may be trimmed back by tractor mounted
mowers on even ground or by scythes on rough or stony ground. These perennial weeds
require several cuttings before underground plan parts exhaust their reserve food supply.
If only a single cutting can be made, the best time is when plants begin to flower.
33 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Prescribed burning is suitable for removing large thickets, but requires follow-up to
control resprouts as root systems can be greater than 4 feet in depth (Francis).
Biological control is not supported by the USDA; however, grazing with sheep, cattle and
horses can be effective in reducing the spread. This method has been effective in
preventing canes from covering large areas. In many areas of California, the use of
angora and Spanish goats is showing promise in controlling Himalayan blackberry.
(California Invasive Plant Council, n.d.)
Recommendation
Blackberry infestation should be identified around CIKR and removed as first priority.
The subsequent recommendations are: 1) a detailed mapping of Blackberry infestation on
reservation land, 2) Develop a prioritized removal plan based on mapping and CIKR, 3)
Determine best method for removal of Blackberry thickets in region and finally 4)
Implement removal plan. It is suggested that some test sites be implemented to see best
method for removal in conjunction with removal around CIKR and infestation mapping
to reduce timeline for removal.
5.2 Other Actions
5.2.1 Fuels Mitigation Projects
Public outreach remains one of the key methods to develop awareness and
acknowledgement of a community wide hazard, risk, vulnerability and/or problem.
Incentives create a reward system for those who comply with common sense fire safety;
however, discovering what inspires homeowners into action is unique. A variety of
wildfire specific, public information and support is available through the internet. A
simple Google search on “Wildfire Safety Outreach” provides a link to a variety of
resources. The U.S. Fire Academy provides publications that provide short overviews for
all audiences. And, provides links to other organizations. Hoopa Valley Forestry is
currently working on a Fuels reduction plan for 2015 forward and is in review with the
Bureau of Indian Affairs. Once approved it will be reviewed with the CWPP, and the
CWPP will be updated with current projects so that the impact to wildfire risk and
severity in the WUI can be reevaluated.
34 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
5.2.2 Increased Responsibility and Funding
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Pre-Disaster Mitigation Project Grant
(PDM)
This competitive funding is based upon reducing the vulnerability to a known
hazard by completing long term changes to the “built structure”. The funding is
provided to support new mitigation plans, updates to mitigation plans, and to
support mitigation projects. The maximum allowable on a mitigation project is
up to $3 million dollars. Under this funding stream, “hazardous fuels reduction”
projects are possible. The period of performance is (2) two years and the match
can be as low as 10% for a federally recognized tribe with high unemployment,
low per capita demographics and a population of 3,000. Normally, the match is
25%.
The FEMA PDM project grant is available annually and must be submitted to the
FEMA Regional office. There is technical support through the FEMA Regional
office and advanced technical support available through the FEMA Headquarters
office.
5.2.3 Long Term Wildfire Risk Reduction Planning with WUI Partners
County resources are available through direct collaboration with Humboldt County
representative, Cybell Immett. Ms. Immett’s commitment, experience and knowledge
demonstrate the collaborative spirit of the local jurisdictions. An idea surfaced while
discussing the CWPP during an interview and following email conversations. The idea
was to create a demonstration project. The project would focus on actions, such as
removal, that reduce wildfire risk. Signage would display various stages in the removal
actions, beginning with an introduction, then, change as the work progressed. The point
is to give local commuters an education on wildfire hazard and demonstrate the
effectiveness of simple changes. Some of the changes include:
•
Moving firewood away from the structure
•
Relocating fuel tanks away from structure
•
Reduce ladder fuels
•
100’ clearance away from structure
35 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Public outreach and education opportunities are available as well. Using pre-printed and
vetted public information can assist in development of this component. As a local
partner, Humboldt County demonstrates a willingness to collaborate.
5.3 Education and Community Outreach
The use of existing website and documentation from sites such as the Firewise program or
the Ready, Set, Go! (RSG) Program, managed by the International Association of Fire Chiefs
(IAFC).
These organizations have developed presentations, tools and handouts to help
communities become wildfire resilient and have better communication and outreach between
first responders and the community in general. Their information is easy to understand and
should be made available for distribution and also linked to the relevant HVIR websites.
This along, with community awareness meetings, help increase the understanding of the risk
for individuals living in the HVIR WUI and what they can do to reduce their risk can help to
facilitate a more resilient HVIR community against wildland fire. Examples of the Firewise
(http://www.firewise.org/),
FEMA’s
America’s
prepareAthon
website
(http://www.community.fema.gov/connect.ti/AmericasPrepareathon), and the Ready, Set,
Go! (RSG) Program (http://www.wildlandfirersg.org/) are in Appendix C and include a look
at wildfire hazards in the WUI, a brochure for homeowners on defensible space and a FEMA
report on what individuals can do to help develop a fire resistant community.
5.4 Monitoring and Evaluation
Annual updates to the Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan will automatically monitor and evaluate
each plan, each initial implementation, and each final project. With every completed project,
it is recommended that a thorough after action cycle is completed. Evaluate the project,
create a “lessons learned” list and follow through with recommended changes.
36 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
References
Amos Pole. Fire Chief, Hoopa Valley Volunteer Fire Department. (2013). 2013 Hoopa Corral
Complex Fire Structure Protection and Evacuation Plan. Hoopa Valley Tribe.
California Fire Alliance. (2001). Characterizing the fire threat to wildland-urban interface areas
in California. Sacramento: California Fire Alliance.
CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). (2007). Fire Resources
Assessment Program (FRAP). http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/.
Francis, J.K. Himalayan blackberry. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
International Institute of Tropical Forestry, Jardín Botánico Sur, 1201 Calle Ceiba, San Juan PR
00926-1119, in cooperation with the University of Puerto Rico, Río Piedras, PR 00936-4984.
Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe. (2013). Emergency Operations Plan. Hoopa: Hoopa Valley Indian
Tribe Office of Emergency Services.
Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe. (2011). Multi Hazard Mitigation Plan update. Hoopa: Hoopa Valley
Indian Tribe Office of Emergency Services.
Humboldt County Fire Safe Council. (2013). Humboldt County Community Wildfire Protection
Plan. Humboldt County: Humboldt County Public Works.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2015). America’s PrepareAthon program.
http://www.community.fema.gov/connect.ti/AmericasPrepareathon.
International Association of Fire Chiefs. (2015). Ready, Set, Go! program Website.
http://www.wildlandfirersg.org/
Josh Simmons, Bureau of Indian Affairs Fuels Management Specialist, personal communication,
May 26, 2015.
National Fire Protection Association. (2014). Firewise communities website. http://firewise.org/.
National Fire Protection Organization (2015). National Fire Protection Organization Website.
http://www.nfpa.org/
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). (2015). National Centers for
Environmental Information: Climate Monitoring. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/climate-monitoring/
Lane, Kevin. (2013). Fire Use on the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation. Hoopa Forestry: Hoopa
Valley Indian Reservation. http://project-websites/tribal-work-group/feb-2014-fire-use-hoopavalley-pdf/.
USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) and USDI United States Department of
Interior). (2001). Urban wildland interface communities within vicinity of Federal lands that are
at high risk from wildfire. Federal Register 66:75 1-777.
37 | P a g e
2015 Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Community Wildfire Protection Plan
USGS (United States Geological Survey). (2014). Federal Wildland Fire Occurrence Data.
http://wildfire.cr.usgs.gov/firehistory/index.html.
Ryan, C. K. Lee, M. K. Rollins, G. M. Zhu, Z., Smith, J. Johnson, D. (2006). Land fire:
Landscape Fire and Resource Management Planning Tools Project. USDA Forest Service
Proceedings RMRS-P-41.
Soll, J. 2004. Controlling Himalayan Blackberry in the Pacific Northwest (Rubus armeniacus
(R. discolor, R. procerus)). Edited by Brian Lipinski. The Nature Conservancy.
38 | P a g e
APPENDIX A
Maps
Map 1: Location Map of Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation with
area of urbanization
Map 2: Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation Districts as well as
critical and noncritical infrastructure
Map 3: 1999-2003 wildfires displayed by cause and size for the
Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation
Map 4: Community Wildfire Protection Plan Wildland Urban
Interface (WUI), Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation
Districts, and critical and noncritical infrastructure
Map 5: 2008 Fire Hazard Severity Map for Hoopa Valley Tribe
Indian Reservation
Map 6: Slope as a percent rise for the Hoopa Valley Indian
Reservation and close-up of the Wildland Urban Interface
(WUI)
Map 7: Vegetation classes for the Hoopa Valley Indian
Reservation including enlargement of WUI
Map 8: Potential locations of Himalayan Blackberry infestation
and vegetation type change in the Trinity River Valley
Hoopa Indian Reservation near districts
Map 9: Main (Highway 96) and secondary evacuation routes for
Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation
APPENDIX B
Completed Community Wildfire Risk and Hazard
Assessment Forms NFPA 299-1144 and Blank form
for future use
Hostler/Matilton modular housing development Assessment
Campbell modular housing development Assessment
Blank NFPA 299-1144Wildfire Risk and Hazard Assessment Form
APPENDIX C
Education and Community Outreach Documentation
How to Have a Firewise home
A new look at understanding hazard assessment methodologies
Firewise guide to Landscape and construction
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.