for
Flagstaff and Surrounding Communities
in the Coconino and Kaibab National Forests
of Coconino County, Arizona

January 2005

A collaborative planning and implementation effort coordinated by:
Greater Flagstaff Forests Partnership
&
Ponderosa Fire Advisory Council

Community Wildfire Protection Plan for Flagstaff and
Surrounding Communities in the Coconino and Kaibab National Forests of
Coconino County, Arizona

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Signature Page
Introduction
Context
.
.
.
.
.
.
Goal .
.
.
.
.
.
.
Partners
.
.
.
.
.
.
Principles
.
.
.
.
.
.
Process
.
.
.
.
.
.
Relationship to Other Plans .
.
.
.
For More Information .
.
.
.
.
Community Identification and Description
Analysis Area .
.
.
.
.
.
Wildland/Urban Interface Zone
.
.
.
Community Assessment
Fuel Hazard .
.
.
.
.
.
Risk of Ignition & Occurrence .
.
.
.
Community Values-At-Risk .
.
.
.
Community Preparedness & Protection Capability .
Community Mitigation Plan
Fuel Hazard Reduction
.
.
.
.
Desired Future Conditions .
.
.
.
Treatment Guidelines .
.
.
.
.
Wildfire Prevention and Fire Loss Mitigation .
.
Improved Protection Capabilities
.
.
.
Implementation and Monitoring
Community Mitigation Treatments .
.
.
Priority Areas and Treatment Costs .
.
Predicted Treatment Effects .
.
.
.
Monitoring and Assessment Plan
.
.
.
Roles & Responsibilities of Stakeholders
.
.
Assistance .
.
.
.
.
.
.
Glossary
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Appendices:
Appendix 1 – GFFP and PFAC Membership .
.
.
Appendix 2 – Guiding Principles for Forest Restoration and
Community Protection.
.
.
Appendix 3 - Attributes utilized to develop Threat Map
.
Appendix 4 – PFAC Operating Plan .
.
.
Appendix 5 – PFAC Smoke Management Plan
.
.
Appendix 6 – Utilization: Vision, Accomplishments, Plan .
Appendix 7 – Coconino National Forest Prevention Plan .
Appendix 8 – After the Fire .
.
.
.
.
Appendix 9 – GFFP Monitoring & Research Team Adaptive
Management Framework
.
.
.
C W P P

f o r

F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

1
1
2
3
4
5
6

.
.

.
.

7
15

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

19
24
27
28

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

30
30
31
37
40

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

44
45
50
50
56
58
60

.

.

63

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

65
74
80
89
93
100
108

.

.

116

C o m m u n i t i e s

LIST OF FIGURES
Photo 1 - Volunteers preparing a future prescribed fire site .
.
Photo 2 - A treated forest
.
.
.
.
.
.
Photo 3 - A FireWise Home .
.
.
.
.
.
Map 1 - Analysis Area, Communities
.
.
.
.
Map 2 - Analysis Area, Land Ownership
.
.
.
.
Map 3 - Analysis Area, Predicted Fire Behavior, Current Conditions
Map 4 - Analysis Area, Threat Level .
.
.
.
.
Map 5 - Wildland/Urban Interface
.
.
.
.
.
Photo 4 - A common scene in today’s forest .
.
.
.
Map 6 - Analysis Area, Dominant Overstory Vegetation
.
.
Map 7 - Analysis Area, Tree Density .
.
.
.
.
Map 8 - Completed Treatments, City of Flagstaff – July 2004
.
Map 9 - Analysis Area, Fire Risk
.
.
.
.
.
Map 10 - Rodeo/Chedeski Fire Boundary Overlay on Flagstaff Area
Photo 5 - “Traditional” harvesting operation .
.
.
.
Photo 6 - “Micro” harvesting: cutting with a small shear
.
.
Photo 7 - “Micro” harvesting: Skidding wood with an ATV .
.
Photo 8 - Pile burn operation .
.
.
.
.
.
Photo 9 - Broadcast burning .
.
.
.
.
.
Photo 10 - Public involvement is critical to success .
.
.
Map 11A - Wildland/Urban Interface, Potential Treatment Type
.
Map 11B - Analysis Area, Potential Treatment Type .
.
.
Map 12A - Wildland/Urban Interface, Predicted Post-Treatment Effects
On Fire Behavior
.
.
.
.
.
Map 12B - Analysis Area, Predicted Post-Treatment Effects
On Fire Behavior
.
.
.
.
.
Map 13 - Comparison of Pre and Post-Treatment Fire Behavior .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

2
2
2
8
9
12
14
17
19
20
21
24
26
28
34
34
34
35
35
37
47
48

.

51

.
.

52
54

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

7
10
11
13
15
18
31
49
53
57

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 - Ownership/Jurisdiction – Analysis Area .
.
Table 2 - Threat Matrix
.
.
.
.
.
Table 3 - Predicted Pre-Treatment Fire Behavior, Analysis Area
Table 4 - Threat Level, Analysis Area
.
.
.
Table 5 - Threat Level by Ownership/Jurisdiction, Analysis Area
Table 6 - Ownership/Jurisdiction, Wildland/Urban Interface zone
Table 7 - Principles of Fire Resistant Forests
.
.
.
Table 8 - Acreage & Estimated Initial Treatment Costs
Table 9 - Post Treatment Predicted Fire Behavior .
.
Table 10 - Roles and Responsibilities of Key Stakeholders .

C W P P

f o r

F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

C o m m u n i t i e s

C W P P

f o r

F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

INTRODUCTION
CONTEXT

public support of and an expectation for forest

Wildfire is a natural event within the southwestern
ponderosa pine forest.

Its very occurrence is a

necessary ingredient to a healthy ecosystem.
However,

historic

fires

were

predominantly

frequent surface fires of low intensity that thinned
the forest of fuel accumulations, with occasional
intense stand replacement fires occurring in
patchy areas or under extreme fire conditions.
Due

to

past

societal

demands

and

land-

management practices, natural fuel accumulations
have been increasing for decades, resulting in an
escalating trend in uncharacteristic, danger-ous,
destructive, and costly wildfires.
When a forest is “healthy” it would support low
intensity, ground fires every 2-20 years across the
landscape. Every year hundreds of thousands of
acres of surface fuels would burn through natural
ignitions or ignitions by native (pre-European)
peoples. Thus, one of the best defenses against
“catastrophic crown fires” is to live with and adapt
to the type of fire that is natural to the system. As
one of the goals of the national fire plan states, a
“Community-based

approach

to

wildland

fire

treatments.

effective with our treatments, land managers will
be able to make greater use of characteristic, low
intensity

environment with a proactive approach that
recognizes fire as part of a healthy, sustainable
ecosystem.”
The 1996 fire season in our area clearly
focused public attention on the plight of our forests
and the risk posed by catastrophic wildfire. The
result was an energized community committed to
action, the founding of the Greater Flagstaff
Forests Partnership (GFFP), and the increased
involvement of the Ponderosa Fire Advisory
Council (PFAC).

Since that time, continued

wildfire activity and on-going education and
mitigation efforts have resulted in widespread
C W P P

f o r

fires

through

prescribed

burns,

appropriate wildland fires for resource benefit and
containment of wildland fires as more effective,
cost efficient strategies – a true measure of living
with and adapting to a fire-dependent ecosystem.
Community protection and preparedness is a
critical step toward mitigating immediate fire
hazards and restoring adjacent wildlands.
combination
standards,

of
and

fuel

management,

appropriate

A

FireWise

fire-use

and/or

suppression response across ownerships withinand-adjacent to at-risk communities will reduce
threats to life and property, protect values-at-risk,
and create a safe context for the use of fire in
subsequent forest ecosystem:
restoration efforts.

This plan outlines actions

needed to prepare and equip the greater Flagstaff
community to live and thrive within our fireadapted ponderosa pine forests.

GOAL

issues combines cost-effective fire prepared-ness
and suppression to protect communities and the

In addition, as we become more

To

protect

communities,

Flagstaff

and

and

associated

surrounding
values

and

infrastructure, from catastrophic wildfire by means
of:
a) An educated and involved public,
b) Implementation of forest treatment pro-jects
designed to reduce wildfire threat and improve
long-term forest health, in a progressive and
prioritized manner, and
c) Utilization of FireWise building techniques and
principles.
The

Community

Wildfire

Protection

Plan

(CWPP), authorized by the Healthy Forests
Restoration Act of 2003, is a strategic plan as well

1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

as an action plan: it provides a broad operating

prescribed fire to mimic the natural event) are key

framework for all agencies and ownerships –

to reducing the wildfire threat in our area. These

private, city, county, state, and federal – within the

treatments, along with other practices over a

area,

period of time, are required to create the

while

priorities.

identifying
Site

community

specific

protection

planning

and

implementation remains the responsibility of each

conditions necessary for an improvement in
overall forest ecosystem health.

owner/jurisdictional agency, acting in concert with
the guidelines expressed within this plan.

Photo 3: A FireWise Home

Photo 1: Volunteers preparing a future prescribed fire
site

PARTNERS:
PFAC is a 16 member group of local
emergency and prevention fire agencies; GFFP is
a 27 member group committed to ecological forest
restoration and community wildfire protection.
Membership for each organization is included in
Appendix 1. Both groups have partnered to
coordinate development of this plan. Staff of the
Coconino National Forest (USFS), which is a
member

of

PFAC

and

operates

under

a

Memorandum of Understanding with GFFP, have
been consulted throughout this process as well.
Both PFAC and GFFP, in concert with strong
citizen support, have been collaborating for years
Photo 2: A treated forest

to reduce the risk of wildfire. Traditionally, PFAC

Fuel management treatments designed to

has focused on response to fire events and public

reduce the threat of catastrophic wildfire and

education designed to lessen the risk, while GFFP

protect communities incorporate the principles of

has designed forest restoration and community

ecological restoration.

protection projects in 10,000-acre blocks around

Practices designed to

reduce excessive numbers of smaller trees, retain
large trees, and accept natural fire (or apply
C W P P

f o r

the greater Flagstaff area.
Signed by President Bush in December 2003,

2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

the

Healthy

Forest

Restoration

Act

(HFRA)

requires development and approval of a CWPP by

(vegetation, canopy closure, etc.),
•

communities who wish to receive priority funding

compare the cumulative effects of these

for implementation of forest treatments designed
to

reduce

wildfire

risks

to

their

respective

Design treatment scenarios and test and
modeled treatments on fire behavior, and

•

Predict fire hazard and behavior across the
entire Analysis Area.É

community.
The GFFP and PFAC have identified five

It is recognized this is a “coarse-filter”

mutual objectives: though not all are specifically

approach restricted to ponderosa pine forest

referenced or included in the CWPP, they

ecosystems that does not exactly match what

nonetheless influenced plan development.

various agencies would utilize to plan and

They

are:
•

•
•

•

•

implement site-specific treatments.

Therefore,

Create a healthy and sustainable forest and

information presented throughout this plan can

protect communities by implementing forest

and should be augmented by the Jurisdiction-

treatments designed to reduce the threat of

Having-Authority (JHA) with site-specific data

catastrophic wildfire.

during project planning efforts. This may result in

Engage the public by providing opportunities

adjustments

in both preparedness and mitigation efforts.

treatments.

Support efforts to establish effective and

of

priorities,

locations,

and

The inclusion, application and analysis of

sustainable methods to utilize small-diameter

ForestERA

data

is

intended

to

provide

a

wood and other forest biomass.

framework for discussion and illustrate both the

Promote FireWise building materials and

threat and potential impacts of a range of

construction techniques, as well as creation

treatments that could be applied throughout both

and maintenance of defensible properties and

the Wildland/Urban Interface zone and the entire

neighborhoods.

Analysis Area.

Attract

necessary

contracts,

funding

donations,

(appropriations,

grants,

etc.)

to

PRINCIPLES:

successfully reduce fire threat.

Development of the CWPP has been guided

Both groups take seriously their respective

by the following framework:

responsibility to resolve the issues we – as a

Fuel Management:

greater community – now face. Together, we are

hazardous fuels is based upon known fire risk,

committed to action that will reduce wildfire threat

fire behavior, and threats to values-at-risk.

across jurisdictions and within our mutual area-of-

•

interest.
The

Reduction of target

Social and Political. Social and political
concerns play a major part in defining

Northern

Ecosystem

Arizona

Restoration

University

Analysis

Forest

(ForestERA)

treatments and their locations.
•

Operational: Due to financial, infra-structure,

project was engaged to provide baseline data and

and personnel constraints, emphasis must be

analysis to assess the impacts of ponderosa pine

placed on strategically located fuel treatments

restoration and fuel-reduction treatments.

Using

designed to protect key values-at-risk, and

the latest available data (2001 satellite imagery),

that can serve as anchor points for larger,

spatial analysis tools in an ArcGIS environment
É

were used to:
•

Identify areas for management focus,

•

Provide baseline data on current condi-tions
C W P P

f o r

NOTE: Interested parties are invited to visit
the ForestERA website (www.forestera.nau.edu)
for a more detailed discussion of available data
and their modeling process.

3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

landscape-scale treatments.
•

•

Ecosystem:

Reduction of hazardous fuels

These steps are:

should be integrated with overall ecosystem

Step One: Convene decision makers.

conservation, restoration and management

Step Two: Involve federal agencies.

goals.

Step Three: Engage interested parties.

Economic: Implementation and main-tenance

Step Four: Establish a community base map.

of fuel treatment benefits greatly outweigh

Step Five: Develop a community risk assess-ment

their costs

Step Six: Establish community hazard re-duction

Ø

They

save

money

suppression

Ø
Ø

by

avoiding

expenditures,

rehabil-

and

recommendations

to

reduce

structural ignitability.

itation costs, and compensation for

Step

property damage

assessment strategy.

They are an investment in protect-ing

Step Eight: Finalize the Community Wildfire

firefighter and civilian lives

Protection Plan.

Seven:

Develop

an

action

plan

and

They present new opportunities for
rural economic development

Ø

priorities

In addition, we endeavored to reflect the

They may help address issues related

standard themes of any emergency plan –

to the availability of homeowner’s

Prevention, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery –

insurance

where appropriate in the plan.

in

fire

prone

forest

ecosystems

To facilitate development of the CWPP, both

Ethical: The continuing decline in forest health

PFAC and GFFP, operating together, initiated the

and the increasing probability of catastrophic fires,

following:

and their potential impact on the greater Flagstaff

1. Issued a press release outlining the effort and

region, is a reality. The need to act now to restore

offering the public opportunities to become

forest

involved and offer comment (CWPP Project

health

and

reverse

this

dangerous

downward spiral is of utmost importance.
In addition, the Arizona Governor’s Forest
Health Advisory Council developed a set of
“Guiding Principles for Forest Restoration and
Community Protection” through collaboration by a

Record).
2. Split development of the five sections into
separate

work

groups,

with

on-going

consultation with the USFS.
3. Conducted regular outreach to the community

wide variety of forest professionals to help

via:

communities think through how to articulate a plan

A. Posting of Development Team meetings in

of action for restoring their forests, and for

the AZ Daily Sun
th

protecting their communities. Those Principles are

B. Informational insert in the July 4 and July

included as Appendix 2 and were used during

11 edition of the AZ Daily Sun – 13,000

development of this plan and in the design of

copies each day

th

C. Article in the summer edition of CityScape

actions to achieve our goal.

– 34,000 copies

PROCESS:

D. Article in newsletters.

Development of the CWPP incorporated the
eight steps outlined in “Preparing a Community
Wildfire Protection Plan: A Handbook for WildlandUrban Interface Communities” (March 2004).
C W P P

f o r

1) Summit Fire District – 3,200 copies
2) Continental Home Owner Asso-ciation
(HOA) – 2,400 copies
E. E-Mail

4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

posting

to

C o m m u n i t i e s

employees

–

announcement of CWPP planning effort:

distributed, followed by a formal 45-day public

1) City of Flagstaff – 600 addresses

comment period. Nine formal comments were

2) Coconino County – 750 addresses

received, with most items incorporated into the

F. Meetings/Programs/Presentations:

Final Plan.

1) GFFP Community Forest Forum –

9. Finally, the CWPP:
A. Received Concurrence by the GFFP,

June 1
2) Flagstaff

Mayor’s

Community

PFAC, the Coconino National Forest and

Leadership Group – June 15

the National Park Service.
B. Was Approved by the Coconino County

3) Community Open-House (Flagstaff) –
June 16

Board of Supervisors,

4) Coconino

County

Board

of

Supervisors (Flagstaff) – July 13

Districts,

and

the

AZ

State

Land

Department – Fire Management Division.

City of Flagstaff employees – July

Coordination occurred with both the Kaibab

6) Sedona Fire District Board of Directors
(Sedona) – July 27

National Forest and the Williams Interagency Fire
Advisory Council regarding areas both west and

7) Highlands Fire District Board of Directors
(Kachina Village) – August 11
Fire

City

Council, local Fire Departments and Fire

5) Power-point overview provided to all

8) Pinewood

Flagstaff

District

Open

northwest of this CWPP area, and will continue as
they work toward development of a CWPP in their

House

(Munds Park) – August 21

area.

Other adjacent areas, such as the Blue

Ridge area, will be monitored and coordination will

9) Joint session Flagstaff City Council and

occur as they begin development of CWPPs or are

Coconino County Board of Supervisors –

added to this plan by amendment. In addition, the

September 13

CWPP for Flagstaff and surrounding communities

10) Kachina Village Open Space event –
September 25

by

11) Parks-Bellemont

Fire

District

Public

Meeting (Parks) – September 30

a

CWPP

Review

Team

consisting

of

representatives of PFAC, GFFP, the USFS, local
governments, environmental groups and citizens.

G. Periodic updates in City of Flagstaff
Weekly Report.

If substantive changes are required, it will be
submitted to the appropriate authorities for review

4. Met with 20 members of the Communities
Committee

will be reviewed in six months and then annually

(developers

of

“Preparing

a

Community Wildfire Protection Plan”) on April
th

30 .

and approval.

RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS
In March 2000, the then Grand Canyon

5. Drafts of individual sections were reviewed,

Forests Partnership (GCFP), later renamed the

edited, and compiled into a working draft

GFFP, in partnership with PFAC, developed a

CWPP document.

“Flagstaff Area Wildfire Risk Assessment” report.

6. Monthly status updates were provided at both

That report detailed wildfire risk in the greater

the PFAC and GFFP Partnership Advisory

Flagstaff area generally based upon a half to 1

Board meetings.

mile set-distance from selected communities

7. All members of PFAC and GFFP, along with

within the boundaries of the GCFP. This CWPP

the public, were afforded an opportunity to

supercedes that earlier document: we have

provide comment on the working draft.

expanded

8. A

Final

Draft

was

C W P P

then

f o r

prepared

and

the

analysis

area,

incorporated

additional communities, and utilized data not

5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

available at the time of the earlier report to
develop a more realistic picture of both threat and
need.
This plan is compatible with and inclusive of
on-going planning and implementation efforts of
various agencies and jurisdictions engaged in its
development. In addition, this plan is designed to
compliment

both

emergency/disaster

existing

and

management

developing
plans

and

Homeland Security related efforts.

FOR MORE INFORMATION
This plan is posted on the GFFP website at
www.gffp.org.

Individuals interested in learning

more are encouraged to contact either PFAC or
GFFP via email at:
fuelmanagement@ci.flagstaff.az.us
or:
info@gffp.org, respectively.

C W P P

f o r

6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

COMMUNITY IDENTIFICATION AND
DESCRIPTION
ANALYSIS AREA

the

Map 1 depicts Flagstaff and surrounding
communities

at-risk

Analysis Area.

included

in

the

CWPP

The Analysis Area includes

portions of two counties (primarily Coconino, with
a very small part of Yavapai), two cities and their
associated adjacent areas (Flagstaff and Sedona),
several unincorporated communities (Munds Park,

greater

Flagstaff

Metropolitan

Planning

Organization area (joint County-City of Flagstaff
planning effort), two National Forests (primarily the
Coconino, with a small part of the Kaibab), and the
Flagstaff-area National Monuments.
Map 2 depicts ownership within the plan boundary.
Acreage breakouts for the Analysis Area are
shown

below:

Mormon Lake, Parks/Bellemont, Cosnino/Winona),

Table 1
Ownership/Jurisdiction – Analysis Area
Ownership/Jurisdiction

Acres

% of Total

Federal:
Flagstaff Monuments

4,832

5%

763,064

81.0%

28,619

3.0%

Land Department

34,575

3.5%

Camp Navajo (Division of Military
& Emergency Affairs)

26,371

3.0%

82,275

9.0%

939,736

100%

Coconino National Forest
Kaibab National Forest
State:

Private/Other (includes local
government)
TOTAL

The roughly 1,465-square mile Analysis Area stretches from the San Francisco Peaks to below the Mogollon
Rim, and is in the midst of the largest continuous ponderosa pine forest in the world. The full-time population
of the area is approximately 75,000, with another 20,000+/- visitors in the area on any given day.

C W P P

f o r

7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 1

Legend

-

Highways
Communities

Parks / Bellemont
Flagstaff

Munds Park
Mormon Lake
Sedona

0

5

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

ANALYSIS AREA – COMMUNITIES

C W P P

f o r

8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 2

Legend

-

0

Highways
Private / Other
State
Kaibab N.F.
Coconino N.F.
Navajo Army Depot
Sunset Crater N.M.
Walnut Canyon N.M.

5

Miles
20

10

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

ANALYSIS AREA – LAND OWNERSHIP

C W P P

f o r

9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

In addition, the plan encompasses an area

Headquarters of the Coconino National Forest,

that includes two Interstate Highways (I-17 and I-

the area also serves as the gateway to Grand

40), two Arizona Department of Transportation

Canyon National Park.

designated scenic byways (Hwy 89A and Hwy

bounded on the west by Camp Navajo, a weapons

180), a major east-west railroad line (Burlington

storage site and AZ Army National Guard training

Northern Santa Fe), a regional airport, a state

facility, and on the northeast and east by the

university and community college, two world-class

Flagstaff Area National Monuments (Wupatki,

observatories (three sites), numerous cultural

Sunset Crater, and Walnut Canyon).

attractions,

archaeological

recreational

sites,

treasures,

and

To

facilitate

Finally the area is

establishment

of

the

community

Wildland/Urban Interface, a Threat Matrix utilizing

watersheds (Flagstaff – Rio de Flag and Lake

ForestERA data for the entire Analysis Area was

Mary; Sedona – Oak Creek), and the San

developed.

Francisco Peaks, the highest mountains in Arizona

both separately and in combination with others.

and a backdrop for the area recognized as a

Those selected to include in the final analysis

significant site for several Native American tribes.

were as follows:

three

critical

Multiple parameters were examined

Table 2
Threat Matrix
VALUES 1. Communities
2. Municipal watersheds (Lake Mary)

RISK

3. Fire behavior (predicted active and passive crown fire, surface fire)
4. Post-fire flooding potential (Rio de Flag and Oak Creek)

OTHER

5. Areas upwind (six-mile distance) from at-risk communities

Items which influenced the selection of these five parameters included:
1. Homes and businesses are the basis of the CWPP. We chose a minimum “buffer” value of 1½ miles
around at-risk communities. (Infrastructure was considered separately – see p. 21)
2. The Lake Mary watershed provides approximately 30% of the water supply for the Flagstaff area (since
1949).
3. Predicted fire behavior (Table 3 and Map 3) can be modeled based upon vegetation, slope, weather and
other factors.
4. Both the Rio de Flag and Oak Creek have a high potential for flooding (with associated erosion and
sedimentation) following a severe wildfire, with significant impacts to Flagstaff and Sedona, respectively.
5. Large fires are typically associated with wind events: it is not uncommon for long-distance spread of
several miles to occur in a relatively short period (4-6 hours).

C W P P

f o r

1 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Table 3
Predicted Pre-Treatment Fire Behavior
Analysis Area
Type Fire Behavior

Acres

Active

219,181

23.5%

Passive

420,282

43.5%

Surface

99,207

10.5%

No Prediction

201,066

21.5%

TOTAL

939,736

100%

Active Fire Behavior

=

% of Total

Fires readily transition into tree crowns and actively moves through the
canopy, with large group tree torching common: associated long-range
(≥ .5 mile) spotting is common.

Passive Fire Behavior

=

Fires will transition into tree crowns, but does not move through the
canopy and only small-group or individual tree torching common:
associated long-range spotting (≥ .5 miles) can occur.

Surface Fire Behavior

=

Fires stay on the ground, with little tendency to transition into tree crowns
except in isolated cases: short-range spotting (≤ ¼ mile) can occur.

No Prediction

=

No data were available in the ForestERA format that allowed a fire
behavior prediction to be made

C W P P

f o r

1 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 3

Legend

-

0

Highways
Interface zone
Predicted fire behavior
Surface fire
Passive crown fire
Active crown fire

5

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

ANALYSIS AREA - PREDICTED FIRE BEHAVIOR, CURRENT
CONDITIONS

C W P P

f o r

1 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

As depicted in Tables 4 and 5, and Map 4,

and greater Flagstaff areas. Topography and

the Threat Level was divided into three categories:

other resource issues may restrict the ability to

High, Moderate, and Low. Three important items

conduct large-scale treatments in this corridor,

to understand in reviewing this Map are:

but reinforces the need to implement effective

1. Based upon this analysis, an indication of High

FireWise

building

Threat did not appear around the communities

property,

and

of Parks or Mormon Lake. However, a ground

downwind, where fire will exit the canyon and

assessment of the site reveals that a High
Threat does indeed exist. (This reinforces the

standards
to

on

conduct

private

treatments

threaten either Munds Park or Flagstaff.
3. This analysis is based upon a landscape-scale

concept that the ForestERA approach requires

study:

site-specific evaluation prior to implementation

Winona, City of Flagstaff) are not clearly

of any recommended treatment.) To ensure

depicted but all threat levels are known to

inclusion of protection for all communities, a

exist. Site-specific interpretation is required by

1½ mile buffer on the upwind side of

local

communities and a ½ mile buffer on the

agencies.

downwind side was included.

threats

experts,

to

some

owners,

areas

and

the Sedona area with both the Munds Park

separate maps listed above (Values, Risk, Other)
that were utilized to conduct this analysis.

Table 4
Threat Level Acreage
Analysis Area
Threat Level

Acres

% of Total

High

135,041

14.5%

Moderate

355,192

38.0%

Low

279,243

30.0%

Data Unavailable

170,260

17.5%

TOTAL

939,736

100%

f o r

jurisdictional

Appendix 3 contains a complete set of the five

2. Oak Creek Canyon is a “corridor” which links

C W P P

(Sedona,

1 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 4

Legend

-

0

Highways
Communities
Threat index
Low
Moderate
High

5

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

ANALYSIS AREA - THREAT LEVEL

C W P P

f o r

1 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Acreage for each Threat Level by Ownership/Jurisdiction within the entire Analysis Area is shown below:

Table 5
Threat Level Acreage by Ownership/Jurisdiction
Analysis Area
THREAT LEVEL
Ownership/Jurisdiction

Moderate

High

Low

TOTAL

Federal:
Flagstaff area Monuments
(NPS)

0

94

3,888

3,982

109,652

274,701

235,401

619,754

355

13,657

14,559

28,571

Land Department

6,687

13,933

6,687

27,307

Camp Navajo (Division of
Military and Emergency
Affairs)

8,523

11,391

6,346

26,260

Private/Other (includes local
government)

9,824

41,416

12,362

63,602

135,041

355,192

279,243

769,476

Coconino National Forest
Kaibab National Forest
State:

TOTAL

WILDLAND/URBAN INTERFACE
The Wildland/Urban Interface for Flagstaff and

state and federal land.

Overall, this plan

incorporates these at-risk communities and their
associated

infrastructure

sites

into

a

single

surrounding communities at-risk encompasses

regional CWPP, rather than separate plans for

multiple jurisdictions and ownerships within a

each.

relatively large geographical area. It extends for

The “interface” is often defined as an easily

some distance outside the City of Flagstaff

identified

corporate boundaries, the largest metropolitan

directly abut wildland fuels.

community in Northern Arizona.

the “interface” is confined to a relatively narrow

unincorporated

Coconino

County

Areas within
include the

area

a

geographic

set-distance

area

from

where

structures

In this perspective,
neighborhoods

or

communities of Munds Park, Kachina Village,

communities. Some view it strictly as the “Home

Mountainaire, Forest Highlands, Mormon Lake,

Ignition Zone”, a distance of roughly 100-200 ft.

Bellemont, Timberline-Fernwood, Doney Park,

from a structure. Others view it in a somewhat

Lower Lake Mary, Flagstaff Ranch, Baderville-Ft.

larger context: the Healthy Forests Restoration Act

Valley, Mt Elden, Westwood, and Pine Dell Fire

(HFRA) identifies it, in the absence of a CWPP, as

Districts (contract entities served by the Flagstaff

a distance of a half mile or 1½ miles from an at-

Fire Department), Cosnino, Winona, Upper Oak

risk community, depending on local conditions.

Creek Canyon, and Sedona, as well as substantial

C W P P

f o r

Limiting treatments to a pre-set distance from

1 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

structures, while important to individual structure

therefore chosen to include a 1½ mile buffer on

and/or

the upwind side of each community and a half mile

infrastructure

protection,

does

not

recognize that a community is more than a

buffer on the downwind side.

collection of structures, and fails to understand the

When the Threat Map (Map 4) and community

dynamic nature of fire behavior. Further, a strict

and infrastructure buffers were combined, the

distance definition does not adequately address

Wildland/Urban Interface for this CWPP was

the ecological needs of an area.

established as depicted on Map 5, with acreage

The Wildland/Urban Interface for Flagstaff and

breakouts shown in Table 6.

surrounding communities, as allowed by the
HFRA, is identified as an area where public safety
is the over-riding goal: it is sufficiently large to:
1. Reduce the potential of a high intensity fire
from entering the community,
2. Create an area whereby fire suppression
efforts will be successful,
3. Limit large amounts of wind-driven embers or
“fire brands” from settling on the community,
and
4. Protect critical infrastructure.
Infrastructure

outside

of

identified

at-risk

communities was also incorporated into the
Wildland/Urban Interface zone.

We chose to

buffer infrastructure, such as is listed below, by a
quarter mile treatment zone (1/8 mile either side):
§

NOPI Research Facility – Anderson Mesa

§

Utilities:
High voltage overhead powerlines
El Paso Natural Gas aboveground stations

§

Transportation:
Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railroad
Interstate 17 and 40
State Highways 3, 89A, and 180

§

Communication:
Cell Phone Towers
Mt. Elden Tower Sites
Mormon Mountain Tower Sites
Schnebly Hill Tower Sites

In addition, ForestERA data does not exist for
the Sedona and Cosnino/Winona areas. We have
C W P P

f o r

1 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 5

-

0

5

Legend
Communities
Highways
Interface zone

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

WILDLAND/URBAN INTERFACE ZONE

C W P P

f o r

1 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Table 6
Ownership/Jurisdiction – Wildland/Urban Interface zone
Ownership/Jurisdiction

Acres

% of Total

Federal:
Flagstaff Monuments

146

.1%

215,166

76.7%

8,633

3.1%

15,665

5.6%

8,963

3.0%

Private/Other (includes local
government)

32,082

11.5%

TOTAL

80,655

100%

Coconino National Forest
Kaibab National Forest
State:
Land Department
Camp Navajo (Division of Military
& Emergency Affairs)

We recognize that several smaller clusters of homes exist outside the identified at-risk communities and
designated Wildland/Urban Interface zone but within the overall Analysis Area. Their exclusion in no way
diminishes the need for those owners to undertake appropriate mitigation efforts or cooperative ventures
between themselves and the adjacent landowner and/or jurisdictional authority.

However, to include every

parcel of private land within the Wildland/Urban Interface is to enlarge it beyond realistic treatment
capabilities.

C W P P

f o r

1 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT
FUEL HAZARD
Prior to European settlement in the 1860’s, the
forest around Flagstaff was comprised of relatively
open stands of large-diameter ponderosa pine
with scattered oaks, aspen, and other species,
and intermingled with denser forests in canyons
and on steep slopes, and with open meadows and
grasslands common. Tree numbers averaged 3050 per acre, with these trees arranged in small
groups.

While some young thickets and open

meadows were undoubtedly present, a savanna
community structure dominated the landscape.
Fires were frequent, returning every 2-7 years,
and were relatively low-intensity in nature

Beginning in the 1880’s, and extending until
fairly recently, area forests were subjected to
societal demands that resulted in intense livestock
grazing, harvesting of large-diameter trees, and a
policy of fire suppression that embraced fire
exclusion. These actions led to profound changes
within the forest and set-the-stage for the intense
wildfires common today.
From 1917-1920, a period of relatively wet
weather, in combination with the exceptional 1919
cone crop, resulted in the establishment of millions
of new seedlings. These trees are the very fuels
which stoke the wildfires common today.

Photo 4: A common scene in today’s forest

C W P P

f o r

1 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 6

Legend

-

0

Highways
Communities
Dominant Overstory Vegetation
Open
Ponderosa Pine
Aspen
Mixed conifer
Pinyon - Juniper
Juniper Dominated Mix
Pine - Aspen Mix
Pine - Oak Mix
Conifer - Aspen Mix

5

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

ANALYSIS AREA - DOMINANT OVERSTORY VEGETATION

C W P P

f o r

2 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 7

Legend

-

0

Highways
Communities
Tree density (trees per acre)

0 - 60
60 - 130
130 - 200
200 - 300
> 300

5

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

ANALYSIS AREA - TREE DENSITY

C W P P

f o r

2 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

As a result, many pine stands are presently

southwest to northeast. We also experience two

overstocked with small and mid-sized second-

other fire weather factors on a fairly routine basis

growth trees. Basal areas commonly range from

that, like wind, are beyond our ability to control:

150 to well over 200 and tree density from several

low relative humidity and high temperature. The

hundred to over a thousand per acre.

Canopy

southwest is also in the midst of a persistent

closure typically varies from 50% to 70% but often

drought that has greatly increased vegetation

approaches 100%.

mortality, thus increasing fire potential.

An occasional juniper, pinyon

pine, Douglas fir, white fir, Gambel oak, limber

Topography –

pine or aspen occurs among the pine stands.

down.

Insect and disease problems in these stands

wind. South facing slopes dry quicker and burn

include dwarf mistletoe and periodic episodes of

more readily. Steep slopes present challenges for

various bark beetles and other insects and

treating hazardous fuels, thus reinforcing the need

disease.

to treat adjacent, more easily accessible areas, in

Ponderosa

pine

sites,

the

overwhelming

Fires burn faster upslope than

Canyons, ridges, and drainages funnel

a more intensive manner and at a greater scale.

majority of the entire area, are best represented by

Wildfires teach valuable lessons:

Fire Behavior Prediction System (FBPS) Fuel

1. They occur in any season of the year.

Model #9 - closed-canopy pine stand with needle

Although the primary concern (both in number

understory. In the few open areas, ground cover

and severity) is during the April - July

is a mix of grasses and forbs. Logging residue

timeframe, fire agencies in the area respond

from the early 1900’s such as pitchy high stumps

to

and remaining cull trees contribute to the fire
hazard and fuel laddering potential.

wildfires

virtually

year-round

when

appropriate weather conditions exist.
2. They can be any size. Both small and large

Fires are natural events, have been present

fires can be destructive.

since before humans occupied this area, and will

3. They occur in any fuel type. Timber fires have

continue to occur. What has changed, however, is

the biggest flames, and offer the most

the severity of fires we now experience.

Our

resistance to control, but grass fires can be

ponderosa pine ecosystem did not evolve with the

just as frightening to residents, and result in

fire intensity of today’s fires, whether natural or

significant

human caused.

damage/loss

to

homes

and

4. They can burn with incredible speed.

Most

infrastructure.

Three factors influence the spread of wildfire:
fuel, weather, and topography. Of these, we can

damage within developed areas occurs within

only manage fuel to reduce the intensity and

a relatively short timeframe. Once a wildfire

spread of wildfire.

encroaches upon a community, it is too late to

Fuel – The area around Flagstaff is part of the

implement

largest continuous ponderosa pine forest in the

mitigation measures.

world. Natural fuel amounts have increased
dramatically in the past 80 years.

Homes and

widespread,

highly

effective

5/ Generally, there are seldom enough resources
to

protect

every

home,

structure,

or

flameable structures are simply another source of

improvement during a large, catastrophic

fuel.

wildfire.

Weather – Historically, due to prevailing wind

forced to decide which homes to protect and

pattern, our local fire spread pattern is from the

which

C W P P

f o r

2 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

Emergency responders are often
to

abandon.

Mitigation

C o m m u n i t i e s

actions

recommended

and/or

required

and

implemented now will make a tremendous
difference in the survival of homes and
property and the protection of community
values-at-risk.

actions alone are not the answer.
8. The question is not “if” a wildfire will occur, it is
“when” and “where” it will happen.
To achieve community protection, forest
treatments and FireWise standards focused on

6. The trend in wildfire size and intensity,

public safety must begin in the Wildland/Urban

coupled with increasing awareness of other

Interface. First priority should be given to treating

values-at-risk, is resulting in growing pressure

areas of dangerous fuels adjacent to communities,

to place firefighters in areas of greater-and-

and then working outward in the W/UI. The overall

greater risk. Firefighter and public safety are

scope-of-work is immense and the need to act

the absolute first priority, but it is not

quickly and decisively in this priority area is

find

paramount. For community benefit, treatments

themselves at-odds with non-fire personnel

in the Analysis Area focused on ecological needs

who insist on dangerous and unsafe actions of

and forest health, but reflecting the need to reduce

questionable

fire threat, should also occur.

uncommon

for

fire

managers

value.

to

Responsible

fire

managers understand that permitting such

Important community protection and forest

actions violates their first priority and are

health restoration work has been implemented

obliged to refuse.

throughout the Analysis Area during the past

7. Wildfires

do

jurisdictions,

not

respect

and

they

boundaries
have

or

become

increasingly destructive and expensive.

several years, and plans are underway to continue
treatments.

As

one

example,

treatments

A

completed in-and-around the City of Flagstaff as of

multi-agency, inter-departmental, and multi-

July 2004 are depicted in Map 8, which was

faceted program approach is necessary to

compiled by the Flagstaff Fire Department.

reduce risk prior to ignition; suppression

C W P P

f o r

2 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 8

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

COMPLETED TREATMENTS - City of Flagstaff Area – July 2004
RISK OF IGNITION AND OCCURRENCE
Wildfire is the #1 fire threat to Flagstaff and surrounding communities. The greater Flagstaff area
averages around 150 ignitions per year (Map 9), while within the City of Flagstaff alone, there are roughly 6080 wildfires each year.
Statistics from the entire Coconino National Forest (#1- #3 below), which includes areas outside the Analysis
Area, illustrate both risk and occurrence:
1. Total Fires - 1970 thru 2003:
Lightning Fires
Human Caused Fires
Total Fires (1970-2003)

C W P P

10,377
6,131
16,508

Average per year (Lightning)

314

Average per year (Human)

185

Average per year (Total)

499

f o r

2 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

2. Growing trend of Stand-Replacement fires:

Graph 1

3.

Closures/restrictions by lengths (based on fire danger):
1996

6 weeks

2000

3 weeks

2003

9 weeks

MAP 9

C W P P

f o r

2 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

-

Legend
Fire risk
High
Low
Communities
Highways

0

5

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF &
SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

ANALYSIS AREA - FIRE RISK

C W P P

f o r

2 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

illustration of the extensive impacts a large fire

COMMUNITY VALUES AT RISK

like this might have on our area – communities

The greater Flagstaff area is dependent upon

from Doney Park to Williams devastated,

a healthy forest for community well being.

wildlifie

Catastrophic

fuel

stripped of their vegetative cover, decades to

amounts, on-going drought, and devastating insect

rebuild lives and centuries for ecosystem

attacks, threaten a myriad of community values.

restoration. The scope of values that could be

These values may include scenic vistas, emotional

impacted is truly significant and just the

and spiritual attachments, cultural resources,

potential for that type of wildifre occurrence is

watershed values, wildlife habitat, old-growth

a primary driving force for creation of this

forests, recreational opportunities, public health,

CWPP - to ameliorate the threat of such a fire

firefighter

to the Flagstaff and surrounding communities.

wildfire,

safety,

infrastructure,

fed

by

structures

and

public

excessive

and
confidence

other

habitat

and

critical

in

government. (A description of these can be found
in the article “The Wildland Urban Interface:
What’s Really At Risk?” at the following web site:
www.flagstaff.az.gov/fuelmanagement.)
Two other community impacts not commonly
considered include the following:
1) The economic shock of catastrophic fires to a
local economy is an important, and often
overlooked impact. A recent study conducted
by

the

Flagstaff

Fire

Department,

with

information supplied by the Greater Flagstaff
Economic

Council,

the

Chamber

of

Commerce, and the City’s Sales Tax Division,
andutilizing

information

from

other

communities affected by large fires, revealed
that a fire which damaged and/or destroyed
300 homes in early summer – at the onset of
the tourist and visitor season – would have a
first-year economic impact to the greater
community in excess of $60 million.
2) The Rodeo-Chediski fire (2002) was the
largest wildfire in Arizona’s recorded history
and was visible from Flagstaff. Even though it
was more than 80 miles away, it prompted
tremendous public concern as evidenced by
the large increase and tone of calls into the
Flagstaff 911 Emergency Dispatch Center. By
overlaying the boundary and footprint of that
460,000 fire on Flagstaff and the northern area
of the CWPP (Map 10), we get a dramatic
C W P P

f o r

2 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

watersheds

MAP 10

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

OVERLAY OF THE BOUNDARY/FOOTPRINT OF THE RODEOCHEDISKI FIRE ON FLAGSTAFF AND THE NORTHERN CWPP
ANALYSIS AREA
COMMUNITY PREPAREDNESS AND PROTECTION CAPABILITY
Two primary aspects of the existing readiness-level are found in the Appendices to this plan. Each has
been slightly modified from their original document to better fit within the context of this plan.
Appendix 4 –

Initial and Extended Attack Wildland Fire Operations Plan for the PFAC
Response Area (Also known as the “PFAC Ops Plan”). This documents
operational procedures to be utilized by all PFAC members for wildfires
which do not exceed the complexity of a Type 3 incident.

Appendix 5 –

Community Smoke Management Plan for the PFAC Response Area (Also

C W P P

2 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

f o r

C o m m u n i t i e s

known as the “PFAC Smoke Management Plan”). This documents actions to
both minimize smoke impacts and educate the public regarding smoke from
prescribed fire operations.
Each will be reviewed and revised on an annual basis by PFAC as part of that organization’s annual work
plan.

C W P P

f o r

2 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

COMMUNITY MITIGATION PLAN
FUEL HAZARD REDUCTION

ecological process.

As indicated in the Introduction section, the
CWPP is both a strategic plan and action plan: it
provides a broad operating framework for all
agencies and ownerships – private, city, county,
state, and federal – within the area and identifies
priority areas and treatments.

Specific site

prescription planning and implementation is the
responsibility of each JHA, acting in consideration
of the guidelines expressed within this plan.
Mitigation

actions

designed

to

reduce

dangerous fuel accumulations within the Analysis
Area are based, in part, on the “Guiding Principles
for Forest Ecosystem Restoration and Community
Protection”

promulgated

by

the

Governor’s

Arizona Forest Health Advisory Council (Appendix
2). These principles include:
1. The overall strategy is dynamic, adaptive, and
coordinated. Given the current continuing
decline in forest health, and the increasing
threat of catastrophic wildfire, our actions to
reverse this trend must be bold, large-scale,
and undertaken immediately. All actions must
be considered against the certain results of
inaction, and must be continually monitored
and revised as necessary.
2. A sustainable community, with associated
values-at-risk, is linked to a sustainable
ecosystem.

Appropriate treatments must be

based on social and ecological needs, and be
geared toward reducing risk of destructive
wildfire and restoring functioning ecosystems.
Restoration efforts should be directed toward
protecting and promoting development of oldgrowth and large trees, but not – if such a
case should exist – at the expense of
adequate fire protection to communities atrisk.

Fire hazard reduction must be linked to

the reintroduction of fire as a keystone
C W P P

f o r

An active program of

prescribed fire, including maintenance burns,
and natural fire use, with implementation by
land-managers on a site-specific need and
basis, is essential. Vegetative treatments, and
the pace of their implementation, will vary
across the landscape, thereby creating an
opportunity

for

biodiversity

to

exist

and

flourish.
3. The immediate, but not exclusive, focus is on
protecting

communities.

A

fire-resistive

condition will be accomplished by modifying
forest

fuels

at

sufficient

distances

from

structures and communities so as to reduce
severe fire behavior, establishing defensible
neighborhoods, and widespread use of fire
resistant

construction

materials

and

architectural design.
4. Necessary treatments, both-first entry efforts
and maintenance activities, implemented and
continued on site-specific needs, require a
sustained
political

commitment
will,

and

of

public

financial

interest,

investment.

Reducing wildfire risk and improving forest
health is a long-term process measured in
decades: because we are dealing with a living
and dying ecosystem, it is one that will
essentially be required forever.

DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS
Actions and treatments will leave both the
landscape and at-risk communities resistant to
catastrophic fire.
generally

range

Ponderosa pine stands will
from

30-100

larger-diameter

trees/acre and/or basal area of 40-80/acre, be
found in groups in varying degrees of interlocking
canopy, and be separated by openings of various
sizes. This pattern of tree clumps and openings
will be variable and provide for a diverse, rich,

3 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

robust and healthy ecosystem that supports a

found scattered throughout the larger area

variety of butterflies, songbirds, mycorrhizae,

Specific objectives related to fire behavior in

carabib beetles, pollinators, grasses, flowers,

ponderosa pine forest ecosystems (designed to

shrubs and herbaceous plants.

Further, it will

make suppression actions easier, safer, and less

avoid a homogenous, plantation appearance.

costly, and to facilitate prescribed fire use), are as

Thicker groupings of trees, including all sizes, are

follows:

Table 7
Principles of Fire Resistant Forests
(Adapted from “Forest Restoration and Fire-Principlesin the Context of Place”,
R.T. Brown et al, 2002)
Objective

Effect

Advantage

Issues

Reduce Surface
Fuels

Reduces potential
flame lengths

Less resistance to
control

Less surface disturbance with fire
than other techniques

Increase Canopy

Requires longer
flame lengths to
produce torching

Less torching and
resulting spotting

Opens understory: may allow
surface winds to increase
somewhat

Makes active crown
fire less probable

Reduces crown fire
potential

Surface wind may increase, with
associated drying of fuels

Increase Proportion Thicker bark, taller
of Fire–Resistant
crowns, higher
Trees
canopy base height

Increases
survivability of trees

Removing smaller trees is
economically less profitable

Base Heights
Decrease Crown
Density

These principles address only forested ecosystems. One quarter of the Analysis Area, such as areas around Sedona and
Cosnino/Winona, is composed of other vegetation types, primarily pinon/juniper woodlands and chaparral. As better data
becomes available on fire behavior and treatment effects in these vegetation types, this plan will be amended to address fire
behavior within these habitats.

Openings created by the clumpy leave-tree

TREATMENT GUIDELINES

pattern allow a fire to either drop to the ground
for

or stay on the ground permitting effective

successful outcomes, and not prescriptive options

suppression action. Clumps can vary from

for treatment of ponderosa pine forests.

The

1/10 acre up to as large as 1 or more acres

following discussion is intended to serve as a

in size. The number of trees in a clump may

general guide and framework within which specific

range from as few as two to 15 or more, with

prescriptions should be developed. Modification of

30 or more occurring in a limited number of

these concepts, by the JHA based upon specific

clumps throughout specific project areas.

conditions and objectives for that specific parcel,

Trees, including the crown area, will generally

existing

legal

occupy areas ranging from 20-50% of the

be

area. Openings will range from 1/10 to 1-2

This

plan

land

requirements,

provides

recommendations

management
and

other

plans,

standards,

will

th

th

acres in size and constitute a variable of 50-

required and is encouraged.
Tree Selection - Selective thinning from below,

80% of the area.

initially focusing on over-topped pines, is a

In general, trees designated for removal exhibit

priority. If possible, “leave” trees are left in a

one-or-more of the following characteristics:

clumped pattern rather than evenly spaced.

1. Contributes to crown-fire behavior: ladder

C W P P

f o r

3 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

effect into the overstory canopy, low crown-

avoided unless cutting is required to adequately

base heights, dense interlocking canopies,

reduce fire risk, provide for public safety or

etc.

protection of improvements (ex: trees leaning over

2. Are vulnerable to drought or insect infestation:
suppressed, reduced vigor, etc.

home, play area, power line, road, or hiking trail),
or for some other ecological benefit. (Removal of

3. Currently infested with insects that threaten to

“large” trees is a significant issue for many groups

spread to other trees, unless the tree is to

and individuals. The GFFP has been discussing

remain for other benefits.

this issue for several years and is currently

4. Infected with dwarf mistletoe: Stands with high

considering adoption of “A Management Policy for

infestation levels of dwarf mistletoe can be

Ponderosa Pine Forest Structure in the Flagstaff

thinned or pruned to reduce crown fire

Wildland/Urban Interface”.

potential during the inevitable wildfire. Small

adopted, should be incorporated into revisions of

pockets of mistletoe can be Isolated from non-

this CWPP to address this issue.)

Such a policy, when

infected trees by a barrier of fifty feet (to

When

reduce further spread of the parasite), or

personnel

removed.

alignments such as prevailing wind direction,

Conversely, trees considered for retention, will

shading, slope, fuel arrangement and continuity,

designating
must

be

trees

aware

of

for

removal,

fire

behavior

be those, unless other issues or benefits prevail,

including

which are often:

suppression strategy and tactics best-suited to the

1. Clustered around evidences of historic forest

individual site.

interlocking

crowns,

and

potential

structure (ex: downed logs, stumps, stump-

Wind-driven fires are not uncommon in our area.

pits, etc) or, alternatively, based on best

To provide optimal protection, treatments are

existing forest structure.

required upwind of at-risk communities – south

2. The largest diameter, exhibit high crown-base
heights, and are the most fire resistant:

and west in our area – to a greater distance to
provide

3. Old trees exhibiting yellow bark.

adequate

protection.

Conversely,

treatment distance north and east of at-risk

4. Oaks, aspen, or other species of wildlife or
ecological value

communities

can

be

reduced

circumstances dictate otherwise.

unless

However, one

should be mindful that plume dominated fire
NOTE

behavior results in extreme fire spread from

Some variation is needed: trees may vary in-

spotting of several miles in all directions and

height.

should be expected.

Stands

intermediate

size

should

include

trees,

saplings

small
and

Topographic features – such as canyons –

seedlings, but none of these should threaten

directly influence fire behavior, but may be

larger, older trees during a fire.

impractical to treat due to slope, soil sensitivity,

In the absence of prescribed fire, clumps may

safety, expense, and other values such as critical

be prone to loss due to high surface fuel

wildlife habitat. This lends emphasis to enlarging

loadings: retention of clumps requires periodic

treatments where fire is expected to emerge from

use of fire.

a canyon and where firefighting forces have the
best opportunity for control

Removal of the larger diameter trees in a
stand, including standing dead snags, is to be

C W P P

f o r

Overall, this approach is considered to be an
intermediate-intense modification of most existing
stands, involving removal of 50-75% of the

3 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

existing trees.

Experience has shown that over

wildfire protection, including transportation and

the entire area, many, but not all, of the trees to be

handling of raw material, are often quite high even

removed will be smaller diameter.

where larger, high-value trees can be harvested.

Cutting Techniques - The type of mechanized
operation is obviously important when conducting

These costs can be prohibitive for smaller
businesses.

treatments. A traditional harvesting operation may

The difficulty in finding suitable markets for

be the preferred method in some areas, while in

this small diameter material is magnified by poor

others it may not.

For the later, a “micro”

mechanical properties that make it unsuitable for

harvesting approach may be required: trees are

all but the least demanding structural uses. It is

cut either using hand-crews with power saws or by

characterized by suppressed growth with low

a small shear, and wood can be moved by an All-

tension and strength due to a high ratio of juvenile

Terrain-Vehicle (ATV) with a trailer or some other

wood and difficulty in product drying. Finding

small-equipment approach.

Such an approach,

suitable markets is further complicated by the fact

however, will likely lengthen the time required to

that currently there are virtually no outlets for the

treat the parcel, and may result in higher costs and

types of timber that will be harvested. New

pose an increased risk to the operator.

processing facilities will have to match the types of

Restricting hours of operation in response to
local conditions and neighborhood concerns may
be warranted.

wood

material

available

with

the

use

of

contemporary utilization techniques.

For example, if an operation is

Northern Arizona and Flagstaff is uniquely

immediately adjacent to homes or a neighborhood,

situated

activity may need to be restricted to normal

opportunities

to

capitalize

working hours within a reasonable distance to

utilization. (See Appendix 6 for a complete

lessen the impact to residents. However, doing so

description of this topic.) Solid wood applications

should be done with the realization the operation

in which businesses are actively exploring or have

will extend further into the future.

already invested in the Flagstaff area, include

for

solid

on
wood

contemporary
and

biomass

Stumps should be cut as low to the ground

roundwood construction, composite products like

and as level as possible. This not only improves

oriented strand board (OSB) and wood/plastic

post-treatment visual quality, but permits easy

materials, and engineered lumber like glu-laminate

access for wood removal and other subsequent

beams

land management needs.

However, potential

applications include wood chips for baseload

adverse impacts from unrestricted post-treatment

energy production, densified fuel pellets for

access (ex: soil compaction, erosion, etc) should

heating,

be addressed in the planning phase of a project,

products for which small diameter pine is currently

and subsequently managed.

being used in the region include firewood, posts

Utilization - The majority of material available
for wood production from the greater Flagstaff
for

using

biochemical

Biomass

extractives.

Other

mulch, pallet manufacturing, and crafts.
Slash

Treatment

–

Four

general

slash-

disposal methods exist and each may be utilized

constrained by a number of factors including high

under the appropriate circumstances. Regardless

harvesting costs, structural properties associated

of the method chosen, the required work (such as

with juvenile wood, and a lack of consistent

piling) should be completed as soon as possible

markets and processing facilities. Harvesting costs

after it is generated.

associated with forest restoration and community

§

f o r

material

and

lumber.

are

C W P P

this

finger-jointed

and poles, landscaping timbers, ground covers or

area will be small diameter ponderosa pine.
Opportunities

and

Hand Piles:

3 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

This is a common practice of

C o m m u n i t i e s

handling slash.

Hand piles should be a

minimum of six feet tall and six feet wide.
Piles should be located in openings to
minimize scorching leave trees when the piles
are later burned.

Likewise, placing piles on

top of old stumps or logs should be avoided to
reduce both the amount of smoke and the
chance for “creep” when the piles are later
burned.
§

Machine Piles: This method is feasible and
widely utilized. It is particularly appropriate on
larger projects and in more open areas. Piles

Photo 5 – “Traditional” harvesting operation

are typically much larger than those created
by hand-piling. Whole tree skidding may also
be used with the piles created at the landings.
Windrows may also built using dozers: this
technique has been successfully utilized in the
area.
§

Chip or Grind:

Although occasionally used,

this technique is comparatively expensive and
chips decompose slowly in our area. If future
under-burning is anticipated for the site, chips
may add to smoke management problems.
The material can, however, be used for mulch
or decorative landscaping. Hauling chips to a

Photo 6 – “Micro” harvesting: cutting with a small shear

disposal site is expensive.
§

Lop-and-Scatter: This method, where material
is cut so it is less than 12-24 inches above
ground-level and then left on-site, should be
carefully considered on sites immediately
adjacent to structures. If the amount of slash
is light and the manager can complete a
broadcast burn as soon as the material has
dried, it may be effective. However, due to the
increased fire hazard, as well as visual
concerns, this method is not as common as it
once was, and adjacent to homes, it should
never be left in-place for an extended period.
Pile Burning - Piles should be burned only

when consumption will be greater than 90%. All
pile burns should be conducted under conditions

Photo 7 – “Micro” harvesting: Skidding wood with an
ATV (Roll-over protection recommended for this type
operation)

intended to minimize scorch and smoke impacts.

C W P P

f o r

3 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Because

the

ultimate

intent

for

many

been thinned and the slash has been treated, or

treatment sites is to conduct a broadcast burn,

where a burn only treatment is designated, the site

some existing dead-and-downed material can be

can be broadcast burned.

piled during the thinning operation.

Firelines are usually

These piles

constructed by hand or with a drag pulled by an

could then be burned alongside thinning-material

ATV, or the burn crew can use natural breaks or

slash piles. Although there are financial costs of

roads/trails as a containment line.

doing so, which may be prohibitive depending

Where site objectives dictate that standing

upon the site, removing these materials during the

dead trees and large downed woody material need

pile burn phase does result in decreased smoke

to be protected, they can be either hand lined or

emissions during the subsequent broadcast burn.

otherwise excluded from the burn block.

Extra

Hand Piles: As a standard practice, these piles

protection measures may not be necessary for

are burned either when snow cover exists or

many fire-tolerant cultural or archaeological sites:

during an extended wet weather episode. Once

treating these areas with prescribed fire has the

ignited and as they burn-down, the piles can be

advantage of protecting them from emergency

periodically consolidated to ensure complete and

suppression activities during a wildfire..

timely consumption. Ignited piles should, if at all
possible, burn-down by nightfall to minimize
smoke impacts to area residents.
Machine Piles: Like pile burns, this type
operation requires either snow or an extended wet
weather episode.

These type piles typically are

larger than hand-piles, and will therefore burn
longer once ignited. The advantage is that there
are fewer piles per acre and they can often be
burned under wetter conditions than possible for
hand-pile burning.
Photo 9: Broadcast burning can be successfully
implanted both in the forest and adjacent to homes

Deep duff and needle accumulation at the
base of the larger older trees will often smolder for
days. This essentially bakes the cambium layer
and can lead to tree death 1-2 years, or more,
after the burn. To avoid this potential loss, the site
should be evaluated prior to ignition. If necessary,
duff and needle material can be raked-away from
high-risk trees: usually raking to a distance of one
foot from the bole is sufficient.
Historically, large-scale broadcast burning has

Photo 8: Pile burn operation

occurred in the fall, and to a lesser extent, during

Broadcast Burning- Treating ground fuels is a

breaks in the summer monsoon season. Within

critical component of any effort designed to reduce

the past few years, however, in response to

fire threat, and it has added ecological benefits,

smoke management objectives, burning is also

such as recycling nutrients.

occurring in the spring. As the demands to boost

C W P P

f o r

Once an area has

3 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

prescribed fire use increase, one option to enlarge

for a day, but after 2-3 days, patience wears thin.

the burn ”window” is to shift more burns into the

If a particular log, stump, or site within a burn unit

spring and summer months to recreate the

becomes a major concern to nearby resident(s),

historical fire regime.

the responsible fire manager may decide to

This, however, is a more

challenging time to use prescribed fire and will

extinguish it the first night.

depend on the availability and preparedness of

Burn units should be designed so they can be

appropriate resources at the local, regional and

dispersed throughout the area so as to not

national levels. Summer burning should become

constantly impact the same neighborhood(s).

easier, from a fire behavior standpoint, once a site

Neighborhood air sheds, indicated by diurnal

has

smoke flows, are key to managing nighttime

been

previously

burned

and

excessive

accumulations of fuel are removed.

smoke impacts.

Under-burning in pine stands generally calls

Maintenance: Once thinning, slash treatment,

for target flame lengths of 1 to 3 ft, although some

and first under-burning have been completed, the

sites require a “hotter” burn to achieve resource

treated area constitutes an effective fuel-break for

objectives.

the next several years.

Ignition by hand with drip torches or with ATVmounted torches is preferred.

Burn operations

maintenance

burns

Follow-up thinning and

must

be

scheduled

as

necessary to ensure the treated areas remain free

usually begun by mid-morning following the break-

of the risk of catastrophic wildfire.

up of the night time temperature inversion and the

access must be assured, not only to conduct

establishment of the day time wind pattern.

needed follow-up treatments, but also to permit

Completion of ignition should be targeted early

rapid response of fire suppression forces. As part

enough to ensure adequate smoke dispersal prior

of a long-term maintenance and fire management

to the onset of cooler nighttime temperatures.

program, fire containment and wildland fire use

Every burn is to have a completed burn plan.
Among many items in this plan are specific
objectives for the burn. These may include, but
are not limited to, such items as:
1. Fuel

Reduction

(fuel

should

be

emphasized

Adequate

as

appropriate

management options for fire restoration.
Community Involvement - Throughout any
treatment operation, the Project Manager must

size

classes,

percentages, etc)

maintain

contact

with

potentially

affected

residents. Input and concerns from such persons

2. Tree Mortality

must

be

considered,

and

where

3. Scorch

incorporated into the overall effort.

possible,
Treatments

Extensive public notification is an essential

bordering neighborhoods should be explained to

element of the program. This can be achieved by

residents: one approach would be to go door to

posting signs in the area announcing the proposed

door to each residence, explain the project, and

burn, news releases, and in many cases, door to

gather

door

contact

throughout

the

first-hand

comments.

In

particular

nearby

instances, a “case-officer”, assigned to a specific

neighborhood(s). A continuing education program

resident, may be desired so that one person deals

through talks to civic groups, service clubs, and

with that individual throughout the life-of-the

others to inform the community of the importance

project.

and benefits of the program are important as they
generate understanding and support for the effort.

Costs - Individual project expenses vary
tremendously

from

site-to-site

based

on

Local experience has shown that a previously

ownership, size, complexity, and need. It is difficult

notified neighborhood is willing to tolerate smoke

to compare one site to another, especially initial

C W P P

f o r

3 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

treatment vs. maintenance requirements. Table

of hiding cover necessary for transient camps and

presents “average” costs associated with CWPP

party spots.

treatment recommendations in order to establish a

Recommendations and Guidelines – Experience

ball-park figure of what it may cost to achieve the

with

fire behavior modifications described in this plan.

development of the following procedures:

Interface

Zone

treatments

has

led

to

1. Involve those potentially impacted or affected
from the very beginning.
2. Once the project is started, commit to
complete it in a timely manner.
3. Use

signs,

news

releases,

and

other

appropriate methods to update people on the
status of the project.
4. When mistakes occur, which can and will
happen, immediately

notify

adjacent

residents, explain what happened and why,
and advise them of what is being done to
correct

the

situation.

Assume

full-

responsibility: allow on-site personnel to make
Photo 10: Public involvement is critical to success

commitments to address a problem.
5. Document and follow-up special concerns or

What should also be considered is the cost of
doing nothing.

For our area, it is no longer a

question of “if” a wildfire will occur, but “when”,
“where”, and “how much damage” will result.
Working with residents before the wildfire, not
during or after it, is preferred.

treated

areas

demonstrates

the

§

Improved

is an absolute necessity.
always

strive

access

for

to

fire

fighters

and

All involved must

establish

and

maintain

professionalism, integrity and credibility.
6. Project staff must stay focused on the ultimate
requires

the

active and on-going involvement of all.
7. Success leads to success. Recent history has
demonstrated

following:
§

concerned individual. Personal “client” service

goal. Reduction of fire risk

Benefits – Experience with wildfires burning in
previously

small details that may be important to a

that

many

landowners

throughout the community have seen ongoing

apparatus

and completed

Increased

implemented similar treatments on their own

efficiency

when

locating

and

treatments

and

have

land.

constructing firelines
§

Easier detection and suppression of spot fires

§

Decreased mop up time and effort

§

Reduced fire intensity, torching and mortality

§

Improved public safety

§

Reduction of loss

contribute greatly to community protection. They

§

Reduction of air emissions

include:

Another benefit, particularly in interface areas,

Coconino NF Prevention Management Plan –

is reduced trash accumulation through elimination

See Appendix 7. Only a few pages of the plan are

WILDFIRE PREVENTION AND FIRE LOSS
MITIGATION
Two documents and one area-of-emphasis

included to demonstrate the ongoing prevention
C W P P

f o r

3 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

efforts of the USFS. For detailed annual activities

site, is the recommended and preferred method.

under

Doing less simply creates the illusion of home or

the

plan,

visit

their

web

site

at:

www.fs.fed.us/r3/coconino.

neighborhood protection.

Volunteer Agreement – Within the past month,

Treatments include selective thinning, brush

an agreement between the USFS and various fire

disposal, and prescribed fire.

departments and districts, has been finalized. A

treatment can occur on the property based on

long-sought objective of PFAC, the agreement

density and species of vegetation present, and

allows fire departments and districts to volunteer

location in relation to topography (ridge top, slope,

personnel and equipment to USFS prescribed

aspect, presence of steep drainages, etc).

burn operations. This promises to permit effective
hands-on

training

and

greater

treatment

accomplishment than previously possible.
Structure

Ignitability

measures

to

–

reduce

fire

and

of

improve

community protection are not restricted to federal,
state, county, or city lands: they must also occur
on private property.

The interested reader is

encouraged to visit www.firewise.org for additional
details,

or

contact

either

the

State

Land

Department or the appropriate fire department or
district (see Section 5).
preparing

and

fire on the ground, and limit flame exposure to
1. Thin to reduce crown density with canopy
breaks to eliminate crown fire spread,
2. Eliminate

low-hanging

branches

and

other

material which allows a ground fire to climb into
trees (ie - ladder fuels), and
3. Reduce excess fuel accumulations through
removal or prescribed fire.
Depending upon the property, these actions
can generate large amounts of material that

Wildfire suppression will always be needed,
but

The goal is to keep fire intensity low, keep the
structures. This can be accomplished as follows:

Implementation
risk

Varied levels of

equipping

homes

and

require disposal.

Methods utilized are often

dependent

such

upon

factors

as

amount

neighborhoods to live in a fire-environment is just

produced, property location, and any restrictions

as critical. Developers and property owners can

currently in-effect.

greatly enhance protection of their investments by

bulk curbside pick-up, transport to a waste

establishing

management facility, or transformation into a

a

FireWise

property

and

neighborhood. This is done by:

Techniques include burning,

useful product: examples of the later approach

A. Development Standards – Working with both

include removal for firewood or chipping for

Planning

Departments

and

landscape use.

property

owners

incorporate

developers

and

FireWise

C. Fire Resistive Materials and Construction

techniques prior to construction can significantly

Techniques – Incorporation of these items into the

reduce fire threat and improve public safety.

design and construction phases of a building

Efforts undertaken with a single owner prior to

project directly contribute to structure survivability.

individual lot development is very efficient and

Examples include:

greatly preferred. Fire Departments and Districts

1. Non-combustible roof material: Minimum of

to

can provide fuel reduction, access, water source,
and street width and slope standards, along with
bridge load limits and other fire protection

Class B or better.
2. Limited combustible siding: large logs, stucco,
rock, etc.

needs/requirements during the planning stage,

3. Enclosed soffits

prior to actual development.

4. Screened

B. Hazard Fuel Reduction – Treatment of an entire
property, rather than a narrow strip or portion of a
C W P P

f o r

roof

and

crawl

space

vents:

minimum of ¼ inch wire screen.
5. Limited

3 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

combustible

decking

C o m m u n i t i e s

material:

to

further promote FireWise efforts, enclose

from other existing vegetation by removal of

and/or keep areas underneath clear of debris.

adjacent plants. Favor plants which naturally

6. Double paned windows.

have a high moisture content as evidence by

7. Glass skylights (rather than plastic).

leaves which are often thick, soft, and pliable.

8. Home suppression systems: several types are

Ignition can still occur, but it will take longer

now entering the marketplace.

Activated in

and they will not burn as hot.

advance of an approaching wildfire, they are a

3. Amount and Arrangement: Large plants are

viable form of home defense. However, they

acceptable, provided they are not crowded

do not replace the need to create a FireWise

together in a continuous planting.

home environment utilizing all the techniques

branches should not interlock and form a

described in this section of the plan.

closed, continuous canopy overhead.

Tree
Such

D. Landscaping – Outdoor plantings are an

an arrangement allows heat and fire to be

important component of our community. They add

easily transmitted from one plant to another.

shade and beauty, buffer noise, provide privacy

Shorter plants should not be placed where

and inspiration, and supply habitat for wildlife.

their presence could provide a “ladder” for a

Proper selection, placement, and maintenance of

ground fire to climb higher into adjacent

landscape plants can provide the desired benefits

vegetation,

and not increase the risk to home and property.

Consider plants that are low growing: If

However, improper selection, poor placement, or

ignited, there will be less material to burn. Be

deficient maintenance of plantings can directly

sure to inspect these plants regularly and

contribute to the destruction of a home during a

remove any fallen leaves and needles that

wildfire event. PFAC has produced a brochure on

might collect in or under them.

FireWise landscaping – consult their web site for

dead material in plants should be removed

details.

during routine maintenance.

There are four attributes of vegetation that
should be considered when purchasing, planting,
or conducting maintenance:

thus

endangering

the

home.

In addition,
Weeds and

grass should be routinely mowed to a height of
two inches or less.
4. Vigor: Healthy plants are better able to

1. Location: Vegetation can be close or even

withstand the challenges of our environment.

adjacent to a home, provided it is of the right

Plants

kind and not part of a continuous “fuel-bed”

Consider use of native plants, many of which

leading up to the house. Adjacent to a home,

require less water than exotics. Mulch should

“specimen” type shrub and tree plantings

also be utilized to reduce watering needs:

should be considered. These plantings should

wood chips are OK provided they are placed

be isolated from others through both horizontal

so not to form a continuous fuel bed leading

and

directly to the house.

vertical

separation:

grass,

flowers,

should

be

watered

as

required.

cinders, or mulch can be used to fill-in the

E. Annual Maintenance – Maintaining a FireWise

gaps.

property will decrease yearly fuel accumulations

2. Type: Highly flammable plants high in oils or
resins

should

not

be

planted

close

to

and limit potential ignition sources that could
cause structures to ignite. These include:

structures. These plants will ignite easier and

1. Eliminate readily-combustible materials (ex:

burn hotter than other types of vegetation. If

needles, hay bales, firewood, etc) to a

such plants are already in-place, consider

distance at least 30 feet from structures.

removal. If unable to do so, separate them
C W P P

f o r

2. Clean

3 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

needles,

leaves,

C o m m u n i t i e s

or

any

other

combustibles from roofs, raingutters, and

leadership

under decks.

equipment, and treatments standards.

3. Remove tree limbs which overhang fireplace

with

standardized

training,
In

addition to mitigation and prevention efforts,
the crew could be available within the local

chimneys.
4. Clear vegetation around propane tanks.

area for fire suppression needs throughout the

5. Remove dead vegetation.

year

6. Mow weeds and grass to less than 2 inches in

3. Increased

public

education

activities:

Utilization of new outreach methods to prepare

height.
7. Remove branches and limbs that are within six

the community to receive fire. Currently, there
are a number of education initiatives and

feet of the ground.
F. Home Assessments – Fire departments and

outreach methods underway by area partners.

districts

home/property

These include public meetings, presentations

assessment, upon request, to educate owners

to service clubs, civic organizations and

about fire threat and provide recommended

homeowner

mitigation methods.

periodic

G. Neighborhood Coordination – Individual home

development/distribution

protection is a necessary first step, but to achieve

participation in community events such as the

community protection, defensible neighborhoods

Forest Festival, Science In-The-Park, and the

are critical.

County Fair.

will

conduct

a

free

Recent fires have conclusively

associations,
workshops

media
and

of

notices,
symposia,

material,

and

Future activities might include

demonstrated that an approaching wildfire can

involvement in the Northern Arizona Home

ignite

a

Show, public service announcements, airing of

neighborhood conflagration beyond the response

informational videos on Public Access TV and

capability of firefighters.

Interested individuals,

public service announcements on commercial

home owner associations and others, such as

TV, recognition of FireWise communities by

Block-Watch or Woods-Watch groups, can be the

the

needed catalyst to spur neighborhood action to

development and maintenance of a joint-

reduce fire threat.

agency website devoted to this issue.

individual

structures,

triggering

IMPROVED PROTECTION CAPABILITIES
Several potential activities and efforts should
be

initiated

or

further

developed,

thereby

national

FireWise

4. Develop/adopt/implement

ensure proper and timely application. Items of

but are by no means limited to, the following:

Federal:

prioritize

neighborhoods

for

neighborhood-wide home ignitibility reduction.
2. Establishment of a regional fuels crew. This

&

fund and/or support, with sufficient oversight to
current interest include:

and

Legislation

and

Appropriations (State/Federal) – Adequately

increasing community protection. These include,
1. Survey existing neighborhoods. Identify, map,

program,

National Fire Plan (particularly those
areas having to do with assistance to local
government via the State Fire Assistance
grants and other mechanisms),

would involve many different partners and

Healthy Forests Restoration Act (chiefly

require sufficient funding. Principle among the

to ensure professional planning and an

partners would be PFAC members, but it

increased

could also involve NAU-ERI and GFFP as

implementation, tied to appropriate plans),

well.

Forest

The consolidated crew, larger than

current separate efforts, would be under single
C W P P

f o r

Program

4 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

level

of

forest

Landowner
(a

highly

treatment

Enhancement
effective

C o m m u n i t i e s

forest

treatment cost-share program for private

amounts of biomass that must be removed

landowners).

from area forests is critical to success. This

Ecological

Restoration

Institute

of

Northern Arizona University (provides

issue is covered elsewhere in this Section
(See Utilization.)

the scientific foundation and academic

5. Fire district formation. Some outlying homes

credibility to our efforts, as well as a

within the CWPP are outside existing fire

source of student interns and seasonal

districts.

employees), and

seriously consider formation of Fire Districts –

Local Community Partnerships/

via the County – to facilitate emergency

Collaboratives

(provide

interface

for

federal agencies to address community

Owners within these areas should

response, prevention, and mitigation efforts.
6. Compatible data-layers for the Sedona and
Winona area to facilitate analysis of the entire

needs)

CWPP area.

State:

Key information used in the

Implementation of HB 2549, comprised

development of this plan is lacking for the

of the following five actions:

Sedona and Winona areas and/or not in the

Healthy

Forest

Program

Assistance

same format as that for the remainder of the

(Incentives for wood-based

Enterprise

area. This somewhat complicated our use of

businesses)
State

the work of the NAU-ForestERA project.

Forester

(establishes

office

Comparable data for areas with gaps should

w/associated duties)

be developed to make future revision of this

Biomass Energy (Directs State to

plan easier.
7. Develop a standardized Neighborhood Wildfire

purchase)
Safety

Assessment format. The City of Flagstaff has

Committee (establishes 12-member

recently received a donation from Allstate

committee w/associated duties)

Insurance Foundation for just such an effort.

Interface Code (Permits adoption of

Once developed, it can be readily transferred

code, per Wildland

to other jurisdictions within the CWPP area.

Urban-Wildland

Fire

Fire Safety

Committee)

The information derived from this effort can

Adopt the remainder of the Governor’s

augment the threat matrix data contained in

Arizona

this plan, as well as become an educational

Forest

Health

Advisory

&

Oversight Councils recommendations,
provided spring 2004. Among others:

outreach tool to residents.
8. Incorporation of CWPP into on-going activities

Increase local planning & zoning

and

authority

agency plans. Both PFAC and the GFFP

Require real estate disclosure

intend to utilize this document to prioritize

Revise

the

Portfolio

current

Standard

Environmental
(AZ

established

land-management

and

actions, secure funding, coordinate activities,

Corporation

implement treatments, and monitor desired

Commission) to eliminate the expiration

outcomes. The CWPP also provides guidance

date, include a larger total percentage of

to private citizens in their effort to reduce their

renewable energy, and emphasize use of
biomass energy production.
4. Recruitment of small-diameter, sustainable
wood-based industry. Utilization of the large
C W P P

f o r

exposure to wildfire.
9. Identification

of

equipment need.
responsible

4 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

to

additional

resource

and

Individual agencies are
provide

C o m m u n i t i e s

appropriate

administration

and

planning

their

that will document forest treatments, CWPP

In addition, and to

status, grant receipts, etc. Forest treatments

facilitate joint discussion and interoperability,

within the Flagstaff area have been used to

respective organization.

for

PFAC, on an annual basis and with any

develop a prototype map.

needed assistance from GFFP, will host a

this effort, as it develops, will ensure our area

multi-party discussion of current fire response

remains at the forefront of statewide activities.

capability within the CWPP area. Centered on

13. Coordination

with

Involvement with

adjacent

areas

during

the goal of reviewing and revising the PFAC

development of their respective CWPP. Two

Operations Plan (Appendix 4), the discussion

adjacent areas where future plans may be

will include all facets of fire management

developed

resources and other topics that may be

Williams/Parks-Bellemont. Both Sedona and

appropriate.

Parks-Bellemont are included in this plan:

are

Sedona/Verde

Valley

and

10. Funding. This plan, and implementation of the

inclusion in another plan is encouraged, but

identified activities, is intended to demonstrate

synchronization will be required to ensure

our intent to implement and provide general

management conflicts do not occur.

information to appointed and elected officials

14. Adoption/implementation

of

the

Coconino

and grant-funding organizations and agencies.

County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation

Our coordinated effort to protect the greater

Plan (MJHMP) and the Coconino County

Flagstaff community is a key ingredient to

Emergency

attracting

Wildfire has been identified as one-of-five

additional

funding

to

further

implementation efforts.

Management

Plan

(EMP).

priority hazards within the County.

11. Wood distribution networks. Establishment of

MJHMP,

upon

approval

the

Federal

Agency

(FEMA)

on-going relationships with individuals and

Emergency

organizations on both the Hopi and Navajo

opens-the-door

Reservations, as well as with large charity

funding and facilitates post-disaster mitigation

organizations with interest and capability in

and recovery efforts.

wood

currently under development, will ensure

delivery/distribution

efforts,

important utilization initiative.
tremendous
primarily

need

for

firewood

throughout both areas.

an

There is

wood

and

is

products

–

posts-and-poles

It is estimated that

Management

by

The

consistency
mitigation,

for

in

pre-disaster

The all-risk EMP,

emergency

response

mitigation

(including

prevention,
evacuation

protocols), and recovery efforts throughout the
entire county.

over 75% of all homes on the Reservations

15. PFAC Operations and Smoke Management

have no electricity and require wood for

Plans – On an annual basis, a review and

heating and cooking.

revision of each plan will occur.

Creation of a steady

“wood-pipeline” will not only benefit those who

16. Development of a PFAC Prevention Plan. On

receive the wood, but also assist in reducing

an annual basis, a comprehensive prevention

fire threat in our area by removal/utilization of

plan, using and incorporating the existing

excess small-diameter trees.

Coconino National Forest plan as a template

12. Statewide mapping effort. The "Arizona Fuels,
Information,

Restoration,

and

Education

(see Appendix 7), will be developed to
coordinate activities, messages, etc.

or

17. Adoption and enforcement of appropriate

ARIZONA FIRE MAP, is designed to establish

codes throughout the Greater Flagstaff Area.

and maintain a GIS-based mapping system

Such action will ensure consistency on fire

Mapping

and

Assessment

C W P P

f o r

Program"

4 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

resistive construction, access, water, and
addressing

requirements,

mitigation efforts, etc.

hazard

fuel

(The adoption of the

remainder of the Governor’s “Arizona Forest
Health

Advisory

&

Oversight

Councils”

recommendations, identified in this plan, will
assist with this need.)
18. Implement an appropriate monitoring program.
Designed to track both accomplishments and
effects of treatments, this will lend credibility to
the effort and provide information necessary
for the adaptive management of the plan.
Perhaps this could be a project for an
interested student or volunteer.
19. Support the USFS in:

a)

Encouraging

development/use of a Wildland Fire Use Plan
for application in appropriate wildland areas,
b) Application of the Appropriate Management
Response for area wildfires, c)

Planning,

preparation, and implementation of prescribed
fire projects
Both GFFP and PFAC can provide leadership
and assist with public educational needs to ensure
community support of these two items.

C W P P

f o r

4 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING
pruning, along with surface fuel removal,

COMMUNITY MITIGATION TREATMENTS
The

combined

effects

of

fuel

occurs: even then, individual and small groups
of trees may ignite.

reduction

treatments implemented through past projects with

2. Treatment action in areas currently rated as

proposed treatments identified and prioritized in

Surface Fire will be as follows:

this plan will not create a completely “Fire Safe”

A. Within the Interface Zone → Low Thinning

community, nor eliminate the need for suppression

Intensity, (if needed), followed byLight
Prescribed Burn (Maintenance).

operations. Due to conditions outside our control,
such as drought or extreme weather conditions, no

B. Outside the Interface Zone, but within the

one can guarantee total safety from wildfire.

Analysis Area → Light Prescribed Burn

However, this plan is based upon both science

only, unless other factors or objectives

and experience, and implementation will greatly

dictate

reduce

Thinning.

fire

threat

and

create

a

FireWise

need

for

Low

Intensity

3. Protection of wildlife habitat (such as Mexican

environment.
Rather

the

than

recommending

Spotted

specific

Owl

and

Northern

Goshawk),

treatments, we have chosen to present, as found

municipal or other critical watersheds (such as

in Section 3, Desired Future Conditions and

Lake Mary and Rio de Flag), and specially

general Treatment Guidelines. Variations of these

designated areas (such as Kachina and Red

guidelines have been successfully utilized by

Rock Secret Mountain Wilderness Areas and

property owners and land managers in the area for

San Francisco Peaks and Oak Creek Canyon

a number of years.

Research Natural Areas) were considered and
included in the analysis.

In this section, we have also chosen to
present Treatment-Types utilizing the “coarse-

The exact location of the various potential

filter” approach and vocabulary available with

Treatment Types may need to be slightly adjusted

ForestERA data: We recognize that site-specific

to take advantage of topographic or access

planning will need to occur prior to implementation

features in order to facilitate effective and safe

of any treatment, and that the application of tree

suppression actions when a major fire threatens

cutting, prescribed fire, etc, may differ somewhat

the

from that described herein and must reflect

adjustment and refinement as the effort moves

silviculturally-accurate

and

forward, and we encourage treatments that have

terminology. Factors considered in defining these

as their goal the reduction of fire risk and the

potential

improvement of overall forest ecosystem health.

Treatment

methodology
Types

included

(see

“Treatment Types” in Glossary for definitions of

area.

Adaptive

management

requires

Five treatment types are recommended - three

terms):

utilizing mechanical removal of trees followed by

1. Overall reduction of predicted fire behavior

prescribed (broadcast) burning, and two burn-only

from Active Crown Fire to Passive Crown Fire.

treatments. They include:

It is extremely difficult to move predicted fire

Mechanical Thinning Followed by Prescribed Burn

behavior to Surface Fire with just initial

Low Intensity = Light thinning followed by

treatment unless significant tree removal and

prescribed fire; representative of a maintenance

C W P P

f o r

4 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

fuel reduction or light restoration.

areas of predicted active crown fire behavior

Intermediate Intensity = Moderate thinning

adjacent to communities or infrastructure.

In

followed by prescribed fire; representative of a

addition,

is

moderate fuels reduction or moderate restoration.

predicted, these areas can be treated more quickly

High Intensity = Heavy thinning followed by
prescribed fire; representative of a heavy fuels
reduction or full restoration.

anywhere

surface

fire

behavior

and at much lower cost with prescribed fire and
may also be emphasized.
Over the long term, treatment of the remaining
acreage within the Analysis Zone will need to be

Prescribed Fire Only:
Light Burn = No mechanical thinning (not

implemented.

However, sites within this area

required); maintenance burn (one goal is low tree

should reflect other values: public safety may not

mortality) on sites with light fuels.

be the over-riding emphasis, and treatments must

Heavy

Burn

=

No

mechanical

thinning

reflect

those

other

values

and

resource

(restricted or impractical); thin with fire (one goal is

management objectives. Opportunities may arise

higher tree mortality) on sites with heavy fuels.

where appropriate treatments within this area are
fuel

desirable prior to treatments in the Wildland/Urban

treatments and how they were used in the analysis

Interface: if this occurs, and the work will not

to

jeopardize priority projects within the W/UI, the

For

additional

modify

discussion

predicted

fire

of

these

behavior,

visit

the

ForestERA web site.

opportunity should not be missed.

Work in this

In addition to vegetation treatments, FireWise

area will require the JHA to review and refine any

building techniques and standards are required.

treatments in close collaboration with various

The Uniform Fire Code (UFC) and various

stakeholders.

Wildland Interface Fire Codes all provide the

Maps 11A (Wildland/Urban Interface) and 11B

necessary framework, but not all areas can now

(Analysis Area), depict recommended locations of

adopt

where the treatments should be located.

such

codes

based

upon

population,

statutory authority, etc. (This issue is addressed

indicated

in Section 3 - Improved Protection Capabilities, p.

prescriptions will be the responsibility of the JHA,

52.)

Currently, within the CWPP area, only the

and must be consistent with statutory authority

City of Flagstaff has requirements that all new

and applicable land and resource management

developments implement a Fuel Management

plans, be based on detailed knowledge of site

program prior to construction and that use of

conditions,

limited-combustible building material is mandatory

management objectives.

in selected areas.

priority

and

development

address

of

specific

detailed

resource

Table 8 identifies the acreage of each
treatment type within the Wildland/Urban Interface

PRIORITY AREAS AND TREATMENT
COSTS
The

earlier,

As

area

for

implementation

and the remaining Analysis Area excluding the
W/UI.
of

The table also provides an estimate of

potential costs associated with applying the

appropriate vegetative treatments is the entire

recommended

Wildland/Urban Interface zone (Map 5). Achieving

acres. Based on best estimates of typical costs

public safety and community protection through

associated with planning and implementation of

treatment of the most severe fuel accumulations

the five treatments in earlier projects, an “average”

nearest

per/acre cost was determined and applied. This

objectives.

communities

are

the

over-riding

Therefore, within the W/UI priority

zone, emphasis should be placed on treating
C W P P

f o r

data

treatments

dramatically

to

the

illustrates

the

appropriate

financial

commitment required to treat the recommended

4 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

acres.

This cost demonstrates that from a

critical if we are to succeed.

strategic perspective, small-diameter wood-based

Needed capital can take many different forms:

enterprise development (including infrastructure

subsides, low-interest loans, cost-share, profit-

development,

technology,

sharing ventures, and direct payments. Funding

capital

sources may include numerous federal, state,

sustained

wood

supply,

and

utilization
sufficient

for

business establishment and operating), all geared

local

government,

and

private

toward the establishment of a sustainable and

ventures, and should include the entire gamut:

effective industry that can offset some of the costs

planning, design, implementation, and monitoring.

associated with hazardous fuel treatment, is

C W P P

f o r

4 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

corporation

MAP 11A

Legend

-

0

Highways
Communities
Potential treatment actions
No treatment action specified
Light burn
Low int. thin/burn
Intermediate int. thin/burn
High int. thin/burn

5

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

WILDLAND/URBAN INTERFACE - POTENTIAL TREATMENT TYPE
(Requires Site-Specific Analysis and Refinement)

C W P P

f o r

4 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 11B

Legend

-

0

5

Highways
Communities

Potential treatment actions
No treatment specified
Light burn
Heavy burn
Low int. thin/burn
Intermediate int. thin/burn
High int. thin/burn

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

ANALYSIS AREA - POTENTIAL TREATMENT TYPE
(Requires Site-Specific Analysis and Refinement)

C W P P

f o r

4 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Table 8
Acreage & Estimated Initial Treatment Costs
POTENTIAL TREATMENT TYPE

LOCATION

Low
Intensity
Thin

Intermediate
Intensity
Thin

High
Intensity
Thin

Light
Burn

Heavy
Burn

TOTAL

Wildland/Urban
Interface
Acres

97,693

45,930

21,191

32,519

0

197,333

$63.5 M

$36.7 M

$21.2 M

$2.4 M

0

$123.8 M

164,420

15,979

104

318,030

43,429

541,962

$106.9 M

$12.8 M

$0.1 M

$23.4 M

$5.4 M

$148.6 M

ACRES *

262,113

61,909

21,295

350,549

43,429

739,295

COST ($)

$170.4 M

$49.5 M

$21.3 M

$25.8 M

$5.4 M

$272.4 M

Cost ($)

Analysis Area
Less W/UI
Acres
Cost ($)

* No treatment specified on 200,441 acres of Analysis Area due to lack of data

Estimated Treatment Types Costs:
Thinning Intensity:

Low
= $650/acre
Intermediate = $800/acre
High
= $1000/acre
Prescribed Burn:
Light
Heavy
NOTES:
1)
2)
3)

= $75/acre
= $200/acre

Costs shown above are for initial treatment only an annual maintenance budget
will be required.
Estimates include planning costs.
Total Acres and Cost ($) are low as the above figures do not reflect areas
(200,441 acres) where ForestERA data does not exist (ex: Sedona,
Cosnino/Winona).

C W P P

f o r

4 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

PREDICTED TREATMENT EFFECTS

concomitant potential “slowing down” of projects

When proposed treatments are applied to the

due to stakeholders’ concerns, appeals, and

appropriate acres as recommended in this plan,

lawsuits, it is imperative that a targeted, efficient

the ForestERA model is capable of predicting and

and effective monitoring program be integrated

displaying

behavior

into land management actions. However, to best

Maps 12A and 12B

use the information gathered by such monitoring

potential

effects

resulting from treatment.
depict

the

response

of

on

fire

fire

behavior

to

efforts, it is also imperative that we, as stewards of

implementing the recommended treatments in the

the land, use a decision making process that is

Wildland/Urban Interface and in the entire Analysis

adaptive, or able to alter the course of actions

Area. Although these are predicted effects, it does

based on the best available information. This is

serve to illustrate the potential impacts of fuel

what is intended by the process of adaptive

reduction treatments on one of the parameters of

management.

most concern in protecting communities from
catastrophic wildfire.

To coordinate tracking and monitoring of the

For comparison purposes,

implementation of this CWPP, a Review Team

Map 13 presents three maps side by side:

should be established to include, at a minimum,

predicted fire behavior under current conditions,

representatives from GFFP, PFAC, Forest ERA,

predicted fire behavior after all recommended

the USFS, local government, the environmental

treatments are implemented in the W/UI, and

community, and citizens at large.

predicted post-treatment fire behavior in entire

activities right after formal approval of the CWPP

Analysis Area.

Table 9 provides acreage and

and utilizing input from various sources, the

percent change in predicted fire behavior based

Review Team should evaluate and report on the

on these maps.

accomplishments and challenges in meeting the

MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT PLAN

overall goal of this plan:

In

our

efforts

uncharacteristic

to

wildfire

reduce
to

the

threat

communities

To
of

and

protect

communities,

Flagstaff

and

and

associated

Initiating

surrounding
values

and

infrastructure, from catastrophic wildfire by means

restore fire to fire adapted ecosystems, we

of:

recognize that we do not fully understand the

1. An educated and involved public,

consequences

options.

2, Implementation of forest treatment projects

Similarly, we do not yet fully realize or appreciate

designed to reduce wildfire threat and improve

the consequences of traditional treatment options

long-term forest health, in a progressive and

in all areas or ecosystems.

prioritized manner, and

uncertainty

of

all

regarding

management

the

In the face of
social,

ecological,

economic, and actual fire behavior changes as a
result

of

fuels

reduction

C W P P

f o r

efforts,

and

3. Utilization of FireWise building techniques and
principles.

the

5 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 12A

-

0

Legend
Interface zone
Highways
Predicted fire behavior
No predicted effects
Surface fire
Passive crown fire
Active crown fire

5

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

WILDLAND/URBAN INTERFACE – PREDICTED POSTTREATMENT EFFECTS ON FIRE BEHAVIOR

C W P P

f o r

5 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MAP 12B

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES
ANALYSIS AREA – PREDICTED POST-TREATMENT EFFECTS ON FIRE BEHAVIOR

C W P P

f o r

5 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Table 9
Post Treatment Predicted Fire Behavior
Fire
Behavior

Location
W/UI

Post
Treatment
Acres

Pre
Treatment
Acres

% Change of
Total

Active

68,248

3,606

- 94%

Passive

105,353

169,834

+ 61%

Surface

23,757

25,765

0

0

0%

No Prediction

+

8%

Analysis Area

Active

150,933

47,610

- 69%

(Less W/UI)

Passive

314,929

416,405

+ 32%

Surface

75,450

75,450

0%

No Prediction

201,066

201,066

0%

939,736

939,736

TOTAL
ACRES

C W P P

f o r

5 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

B

-

MAP 13

Legend
Interface zone
Highways
Predicted fire behavior
No predicted effects
Surface fire
Passive crown fire
Active crown fire

Legend

-

Highways
Interface zone
Predicted fire behavior
Surface fire
Passive crown fire
Active crown fire

0

A

5

10

Miles
20

0

5

10

Legend
Highways
Interface zone
Predicted fire behavior
No predicted effects
Surface fire
Passive crown fire
Active crown fire

Miles
20

C

0

5

10

Miles
20

CWPP FOR FLAGSTAFF & SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES

COMPARISON OF PRE-TREATMENT AND POST-TREATMENT
FIRE BEHAVIOR
Map A shows predicted fire behavior under current conditions. Map B shows
predicted fire behavior if all potential treatment actions were to be implemented
within the Wildland/Urban Interface zone. Map C shows predicted fire behavior if all
potential treatment actions were to be implemented within the Analysis Area.

C W P P

f o r

5 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

It is proposed that the Review Team also be
tasked

with

designing

implementation

of

a

and

multi-party

coordinating
monitoring

goal above will be evaluated based upon the four
criteria described below.

program to acquire real data with which to

may be added. They include:

accomplish their evaluation and reporting activities

1. Implementation

and implement adaptive management.

The

Not all may be

applicable for each item, and additional criteria

measuring

–

A

success

crucial
will

aspect
be

of

actual

monitoring program will need to address diverse

implementation of needed treatments: Did

areas such as fuel reduction and fire behavior,

they occur and in what locations? Treatment

ecosystem restoration, ecological impacts, and

Maps (For example: Map 8) will be updated

social and economic issues, and should be based

annually and shared with the community and

on existing monitoring protocols. A framework of

all responsible parties.

goals, objectives, and measurement methods,

2. Effectiveness – Of equal importance is the

such as the “GFFP Monitoring & Research Teams

question of how effective are the various

Adaptive Management Framework” and which is

treatments:

included as Appendix 9, should be considered for

anticipated in terms of fire risk reduction?

inclusion in CWPP projects, based on the

Where possible, pre-and-post treatment fuel

management objectives and potential impacts of

transects will be inventoried to determine

each project. Not every project will have the same

actual change in fuel amounts.

degree of uncertainty, and not every project has

from subsequent wildfires will be evaluated to

the same number of factors that are potentially

refine future treatments and the results shared

impacted. The Review Team (or other appropriate

with the community.

have

they

done

what

was

Fire affects

body) may need to assess each project, and

3. better understanding of how fuels reduction

decide the level of monitoring that should be

and forest restoration actions affect the plants,

accomplished

based

details,

animals, soils, watersheds, and ecosystems

management

objectives

existing

within project areas.

on

site-specific
specific

to

If we are to be

conditions, desired future conditions, and the

successful in restoring forests, we must

management options available to accomplish

understand the ecological effects of our

those objectives.

various restoration strategies and actions,

All CWPP projects must allocate funds to
accomplish monitoring (approximately 5-10% of
project costs is a target), and establish a formal
process

for

integrating

the

results

of

that

both at the project scale, and at the landscape
scale.
4. Social Monitoring – Public attitudes toward
both on-going and proposed treatments, and

monitoring through time back into the land

the

management decision-making process.

agencies/organizations

promoting

and

One of

implementing them, is critical to success.

the major benefits of monitoring projects and the

Assessment of these attitudes will be on-

cumulative effects of projects at the landscape

going, and will include review of the following

level is that the process serves as a tremendous

indicators:

tool for public education and involvement, and as

Editorials and other media coverage

we learn from our failures and successes, there is

Letters to editor

greater agreement about how to proceed into the

Requests for assistance

future.

At some point, it may be beneficial to engage

At a minimum, each of the three items in the
C W P P

f o r

the Behavioral Sciences Lab at Northern

5 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Arizona University (or another source) to

convening of the Team should also be scheduled

conduct a scientific poll or survey to further

for six months after adoption of the CWPP to

refine treatments and guide education and

complete a comprehensive review of the Plan and

planning efforts.

develop any recommended revisions. Thereafter,

5. Economic Impacts - If we are to achieve

the Team should meet at least annually to review

success, a sustainable utilization component

progress

is essential. Of importance will be the success

appropriate revisions to the document.

in attracting viable small diameter wood-based

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF
STAKEHOLDERS

businesses into the area and evaluating their
resulting economic impact.

Once in place,

evaluation of this aspect will be coordinated

As

and

make

depicted

on

recommendations

Table

10,

for

successful

with the Greater Flagstaff Economic Council.

implementation of the CWPP cannot be done

The Review Team should hold their initial

without major cooperation from all.

Without

meeting as soon as the CWPP is approved and

continued collaboration and mutual assistance,

establish

facilitate

this plan will only provide a false sense of security.

implementation of the plan among the various land

Wildfire does not recognize property boundaries,

management

and neither can we.

a

process
agencies

to
and

help
to

design

implement the monitoring program.

C W P P

f o r

and

A formal

5 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Table 10
Roles and Responsibilities of Key Stakeholders

Stakeholder
Private:
Citizens
Businesses
Service Clubs
Homeowner Groups
City:
Officials/Departments
Fire Departments
County:
Officials/Departments
Fire Districts
Rural Environmental
Conservation Corps
State:

Dept of Emergency & Military
Affairs (Camp Navajo)
Land Dept – Fire Management
Dept of Transportation
Dept of Corrections
Game & Fish Dept

Dept of Environmental Quality
Cooperative Extension Service
Northern AZ University:

Ecological Restoration Institute
School of Forestry
Forest ERA
Centennial Forest
Federal:
Naval Observatory
Forest Service
Fish & Wildlife Service
National Park Service
Other:
Utilities –
El Paso Natural Gas
AZ Public Service
Greater Flagstaff Forests Partnership
Ponderosa Fire Advisory Council

C W P P

f o r

Planning
Design
Implementation

Education
Information
Transfer

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X

X
X

X
X

X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X

X
X

X

X

X

X
X
X
X

X

X

X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X

5 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

Advisory

Regulatory
Permitting

X
X

C o m m u n i t i e s

X
X

X
X

ASSISTANCE
Development of the CWPP is a new initiative established under the HFRA of 2003.

Since very few

communities have completed plans – per guidelines set forth by the National Association of State Foresters,
Communities Committee of the Seventh Forest Congress, Society of American Foresters, National Association
of Counties, and Western Governors’ Association – reference material from other communities or groups
regarding both specific plan content and process was limited. Nonetheless, we believe we have developed a
community supported CWPP that meets the intent of the HFRA.
Important documents utilized during development of this plan include:
“Preparing a Community Wildfire Protection Plan: A Handbook for Wildland-Urban Interface Communities”
(www.safnet.org/policyandpress/cwpp.cfm)
“Federal Agency Implementation Guidance for the Healthy Forest Initiative and the Healthy Forests Restoration
Act” (www.fs.fed.us/projects/hfi/field-guide)
“Field Guidance for Identifying and Prioritizing Communities at Risk”
www.stateforests.org/reports/COMMUNITIESATRISK.pdf)
Several websites also provided valuable information. They include:
Arizona Cooperative Extension Service (http://ag.arizona.edu/extesion/fh/)
Arizona Fire Management Division (www.azstatefire.org)
Arizona FireWise Communities (www.cals.arizona.edu/firewise)
Arizona Forest Health Council (www.governor.state.az.us/FHC/)
Forest Ecosystem Restoration Analysis Project (ForestERA) (www.forestera.nau.edu)
Flagstaff Fire Department (www.flagstaff.az.gov/fuelmanagement)
Fire Safe Council (www.firesafecouncil.org)
Grants:

Foundation (www.fdncenter.org)
Federal (www.grants.gov)

Greater Flagstaff Forests Partnership (www.gffp.org)
Northern Arizona University Forest Health (www.forestfire.nau.edu/)
Southwest Area Fire & Drought (www.swstrategy.org/fire.html)
The National Fire Plan (www.fireplan.gov)
Western Governor’s Association (www.westgov.org)
For recommendations regarding treatments and/or site-specific FireWise information, contact:
AZ State Land Department

-

928-774-1425

Flagstaff Fire Department

-

928-779-7688

Highlands Fire District

-

928-525-1717

Mormon Lake Fire District

-

928-

Parks-Bellemont Fire District

-

928-635-5311

C W P P

f o r

5 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Pinewood Fire District

-

928-286-9885

Sedona Fire District

-

928-

Summit Fire District

-

928-526-9537

For information regarding specifics of this plan, contact either of the following:
Paul Summerfelt

Steve Gatewood

FMO-Flagstaff Fire Depatment

Program Director - GFFP

211 W. Aspen

1300 S. Milton #218

Flagstaff AZ 86001

Flagstaff AZ 86001

(928) 779-7685 x 7283

(928) 226-0644

psummerfelt@ci.flagstaff.az.us

steveg@gffp.org

C W P P

f o r

5 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

GLOSSARY
Glossary terms come from several sources including:
Arizona Forest Health Advisory Council. 2003. Guiding Principles for Forest Ecosystem Restoration and
Community Protection. September 2003.
Ecological Research Institute. 2004. Western Mogollon Plateau Adaptive Landscape Assessment Draft
Report on Initial Workshop Outcomes. June 2004

Basal Area (BA): The area of the cross-section of a tree trunk near its base, usually 4½ feet above the ground.
Basal area is a way to measure how much of a site is occupied by trees. The term basal area is often
used to describe the collective basal area of trees per acre.

Biodiversity (biological diversity): The variety of life and its process, including the variety in genes, species,
ecosystems, and the ecological processes that connect everything in the ecosystem.

Coarse-filter analysis: An analysis of aggregates of elements such as cover type or plant community.
Community protection: Actions or programs undertaken for the purpose of protecting human lives, property,
and infrastructure.

Conservation: The careful protection, utilization and planned management of living organisms and their vital
processes to prevent their depletion, exploitation, destruction, or waste.

Critical habitat: According to Federal Law, the ecosystem upon which endangered and threatened species
depend.

Crown fire: This is a fire that travels from one crown (or tree top) to another in dense stands of trees, killing
most trees in its path. However, even in intense crown fires, unburned strips may be left due to
powerful, downward air currents. A passive (or dependent) crown fire relies upon heat transfer from a
surface fire burning below crowns. An active (or independent) crown fire does not require transfer of
heat from below the crowns,

Defensible space: This is the area around a structure where fuels and vegetation are treated, cleared or
reduced to slow the spread of wildfire towards the structure. It also reduces the chance of a structure
fire moving from the building to the surrounding forest. Defensible space provides room for the
firefighters to do their jobs. Many communities are taking a more holistic approach of creating
defensible neighborhoods rather than jus individual properties.

Disturbance: A discrete event, either natural or human induced, that causes a change in the existing condition
of an ecological system.

Ecosystem: Living organisms interacting with each other and with their physical environment, usually described
as an area for which it is meaningful to address these interrelationships.

Ecological restoration: The process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded,
damaged, or destroyed.

Fire Behavior: As utilized throughout this plan -

Active Fire Behavior = Fires readily transition into tree crowns, with large group tree torching

C W P P

f o r

6 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

common: associated long-range (≥ .5 mile) spotting is common
Passive Fire Behavior = Fires will transition into tree crowns, but only small-group or
individual tree torching common: associated long-range spotting (≥ .5 miles) can occur
Surface Fire Behavior = Fires stay on the ground, with little tendency to transition into tree
crowns except in isolated cases: short-range spotting (≤ ¼ mile) can occur
Fire Frequency (Fire Return Interval): How often fire burns a given area; often expressed in terms of fire
return intervals (e.g., fire returns to a site every 5-15 years). (see also Fire Regime Group).

Forest ecosystem health: A condition where the parts and functions of an ecosystem are sustained over time
and where the system’s capacity for self-repair is maintained, allowing goals for uses, values, and
services of the ecosystem to be met.

Forest ecosystem restoration: Holistic actions taken to modify an ecosystem to achieve desired, healthy, and
functioning conditions and processes. Generally refers to the process of enabling the system to resume
acting, or continue to act, following the effects of a disturbance. Restoration management activities can
be active (such as control of invasive species, thinning of over-dense tree stands, or redistributing
roads) or more passive (more restrictive, hands-off management direction that is primarily conservation
oriented). Frequently, a combination or number of actions is used sequentially to achieve restoration
goals.

Hazard: To place something of value in a risky or dangerous situation
Hazardous fuel: Excessive live and dead trees and other vegetation and organic debris that increase the
potential for uncharacteristically intense wildland fire and decrease the capability to protect life,
property, and natural resources.

Healthy ecosystem: An ecosystem in which structure and functions allow the maintenance of the desired
condition of biological diversity, biotic integrity, and ecological processes over time.

Old growth tree; This is an old tree, one that exhibits the complex structural characteristics associated with the
oldest age class of trees in a group, clump or stand. In today’s forests, an old growth tree in one that
has been present since before the onset of commercial logging and fire exclusion. These trees are
sometimes referred to as pre-settlement trees. These trees typically have orange or yellow platy bark.

Prescribed fire: A management fire ignited to meet specific fuel reduction or other resource objectives. All
prescribed fires are conducted in accordance with prescribed fire plans.

Risk to communities: The risk associated with adverse impacts to communities resulting from unwanted
wildfire.

Reference conditions: Conditions characterizing ecosystems composition, structure, and their variability.
Restoration: Actions taken to modify an ecosystem in whole or in part to achieve a desired condition.
Surface fire: A fire that burns over the forest floor, consuming litter, killing aboveground parts of herbaceous
plants and shrubs, and typically scorching the bases and crowns of trees.

Sustainability: The ability of an ecosystem to maintain ecological processes and functions, biological diversity,
and productivity over time.

Threat: An indication that an undesirable event or catastrophe may occur. For this plan, a Threat matrix, using
three items, was developed to permit focus upon the Interface Zone.
Value – The measure of how strongly something is desired, expressed in terms of effort, money, etc

C W P P

f o r

6 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

one is willing to expend to attain or preserve it. Two issues (Communities and Infrastructure,
and Municipal Watersheds) were identified in this plan.
Risk – The possibility of danger, injury, or loss. Two issues (Predicted Fire Behavior and Post-Fire
Flooding) were identified in this plan.
Other – Further or additional issues. One item (Areas upwind from at-risk communities (permitting fire
spread into at-risk communities) was identified in this plan.

Treatment Types (potential): These are general descriptor terms only, not silvilcultural termsThinning Intensity:
Low

= Simple thinning, w/prescribed fire

Intermediate = Moderate thinning, w/prescribed fire
High

= Heavy thinning w/prescribed fire

Prescribed Fire only (Rx):
Light = No mechanical thinning: maintenance burn (one goal is lower tree mortality) or sites
w/light fuels (less intense fire)
Heavy = No mechanical thinning (required or practical): thin with fire (one goal is higher tree
mortality) or sites w/heavy fuels (more intense fire

Watershed: An area of land with a characteristic drainage network that contributes surface or ground water to
the flow at that point: a basin or a major subdivision of a drainage basin.

Wildland fire use: The management of naturally ignited wildland fires to accomplish specific pre-stated
resource management objectives in pre-defined geographic areas outlined in Fire Management Plans.

C W P P

f o r

6 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Appendix 1
GFFP and PFAC Membership

C W P P

f o r

6 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

GFFP PARTNERSHIP ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS – September 2004
Arizona Game & Fish
Arizona Public Service
Arizona State Land Department – Fire Management Division
City of Flagstaff – Fire Department
Coconino County – Community Development Department
Coconino County Farm Bureau / Cattle Growers Association
Coconino Natural Resource Conservation District
Coconino Rural Environment Corps
Cocopai Resource Conservation & Development District
Ecological Restoration Institute at Northern Arizona University
Flagstaff Chamber of Commerce
Flagstaff Native Plant & Seed
Grand Canyon Trust
Greater Flagstaff Economic Council
H & K Consulting
Highlands Fire District (Communities of Kachina Village, Forest Highlands and Mountainaire)
Indigenous Community Enterprises
Northern Arizona University - College of Engineering
Northern Arizona University - School of Forestry
Perkins Timber Harvesting
Ponderosa Fire Advisory Council
Practical Mycology
Southwest Environmental Consultants
Society of American Foresters - Northern Arizona Chapter
The Arboretum at Flagstaff
The Nature Conservancy
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Cooperators
USDA Coconino National Forest
USDA Rocky Mountain, Pacific NW and Southern Research Stations
USDA Forest Products Lab

PONDEROSA FIRE ADVISORY COUNCIL MEMBERS – September 2004
Arizona State Land Department
Camp Navajo Fire Department
Coconino County Emergency Services
Coconino National Forest
Coconino Sheriff Department
Flagstaff Fire Department
Flagstaff Police Department
Flagstaff Ranch Fire Department
Highlands Fire Department
Kaibab National Forest
Mormon Lake Fire Department
Parks/Bellemont Fire Department
Pinewood Fire Department
Sedona Fire Department
Summit Fire Department
Walnut Canyon-Wapatki-Sunset Crater National Monuments

C W P P

f o r

6 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Appendix 2
Guiding Principles for Forest Restoration
and Community Protection

C W P P

f o r

6 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR FOREST ECOSYSTEM
RESTORATION AND COMMUNITY PROTECTION
Arizona Forest Health Advisory Council
September 2003
Steve Campbell ~ Navajo County Cooperative Extension
Dr. Wally Covington ~ Northern Arizona University Ecological Restoration Institute
Dr. Carl Edminster ~ USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station
Lori Faeth ~ State of Arizona
Don Falk ~ University of Arizona Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research
Deb Hill ~ Coconino County
John Kennedy ~ Arizona Game and Fish Department
Robert Lacapa ~ Bureau of Indian Affairs
Taylor McKinnon ~ Grand Canyon Trust
Dr. Marty Moore ~ Eastern Arizona Counties Organization
Brian Nowicki ~ Center for Biological Diversity
Kirk Rowdabaugh ~ Arizona State Land Department
Karl Siderits ~ USDA Forest Service Tonto National Forest
Ed Smith ~ The Nature Conservancy
Dr. Tom Swetnam ~ University of Arizona Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research
Richard Van Demark ~ Southwest Forestry

Beth Zimmerman ~ Arizona Division of Emergency Management

Preamble to the Guiding Principles
Arizona’s high country is home to magnificent forests harboring a diversity of biological,
cultural, and economic values. Yet many of Arizona’s forests—especially Arizona’s
extensive ponderosa forests—have undergone a dramatic transformation during the past
century due to land use, climate, and other factors. These changes have increased
insect and disease outbreaks, abnormally severe fires, and adversely affected biological,
cultural, and economic values. The unacceptable risk posed by these conditions requires
immediate and strategic action.
Recognizing these factors, Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano convened a Governor’s
Conference on Forest Health and Safety in March 2003. Findings from this conference
led to the development of an Action Plan for Arizona, and a call for the creation of a
broad, science-based Forest Health Advisory Council to provide recommendations on
how to improve the health of Arizona’s forests.
The Arizona Forest Health Advisory Council has developed these Guiding Principles to
provide an overall framework for planning and implementing forest ecosystem restoration and
community protection projects statewide. In presenting these Guiding Principles, the Council
emphasizes the following:
Different forest types have different natural disturbance regimes. For example, where
crown fire is unnatural, thinning and prescribed burning may be needed to safely
reestablish more natural surface fire regimes. But in forest types where crown fire is
natural, such treatments may not be needed, at least from an ecological standpoint.
C W P P

f o r

6 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Understanding these differences is fundamental to restoring more natural disturbance
regimes in our forests.
Community stakeholders must take the lead to implement these principles and make the
decisions for their communities at risk. The Council stresses the immediate and urgent
need to adequately reduce the risk to communities. This will require a comprehensive
effort to reduce hazardous fuels in and around at-risk communities regardless of the
adjacent ecosystem type. Fire research and recent fires demonstrate that fuels reduction
treatments in and around communities may not prevent the loss of homes. Homeowners
must do their part to create defensible space and replace or mitigate flammable building
materials.
Although Arizona’s forest and woodland ecosystems need restoration, it is important to
understand that restoration is a young science whose long-term outcomes are uncertain.
The Council urges employing a diversity of restoration strategies that fit local ecological,
social, political, and economic circumstances. A “one size fits all” approach is not
appropriate.
Learning about restoration should be an active and ongoing process. A serious
commitment to monitoring and adaptive management is critical to understanding the
ecological, social, and economic dimensions of restoration. The Guiding Principles
should be viewed as dynamic and adaptable to evolving conditions and experiences.
The costs of restoration must be weighed against the costs of inaction. Though
restoration may seem a weighty investment, it pales in comparison to the immediate and
long-term costs and risks of allowing current forest conditions to persist. Restoration is a
process of recovery requiring a substantial and sustained investment of funds, and
political and public support.
The Guiding Principles urge us to think big. Arizona’s forests and the ecological
processes that sustain them span landscapes. Assessing needs, identifying priorities,
and charting progress toward community protection and forest ecosystem restoration
goals must occur within an appropriately large landscape context.
The Council’s ultimate hope is that the Guiding Principles will help guide our movement
toward sustainable and reciprocal relationships between human communities and forest
ecosystems – relationships that sustain the biological, cultural, and economic values that
contribute to a healthy democratic society, both now and into the future.

Guiding Principles
Integration
The overall strategy for restoring forest ecosystem health and protecting
communities must be dynamic, comprehensive and integrated. A primary
component of the overall strategy is to perform a statewide forest health evaluation to
identify high-priority communities, critical infrastructure, habitats, and watersheds at risk.
This evaluation can also provide the framework for monitoring individual projects and
cumulative effects.

C W P P

f o r

6 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Sustainable Communities and Economies
Sustainable economies are linked to sustainable ecosystems. We should be
building a sustainable future for Arizona’s forests and communities
The immediate focus should be on protecting human communities at risk, critical
infrastructure, along with key watersheds and habitats. Distinguishing between
forest ecosystem restoration and community protection, and focusing on community
protection within the entire community—private, public and tribal lands and the wildlandurban interface—will improve the likelihood of success.
Close collaboration among all stakeholders is essential to a community-based
approach to forest ecosystem restoration and community protection. Encourage
and empower community-based collaborations to demonstrate and implement effective
community protection and forest ecosystem restoration. Be sensitive and responsive to
the diversity of individuals and communities who value and/or depend on the forest and
its resources.
Decision-making about forest ecosystem restoration and community protection
must occur with a serious commitment to rigorous adaptive management. Such an
approach should include baseline data, short and long-term monitoring, and a
transparent mechanism for tracking results, evaluating and incorporating findings into
the decision-making process.

Ecological Integrity
Appropriate restoration methods are based on ecological need. These methods are
further defined by the importance of the site in the watershed or landscape, and the
timing, techniques and resources needed to restore ecological integrity. Restoration
needs to be designed with a clear understanding of desired and ecologically appropriate
future conditions.
Effective forest ecosystem restoration should reestablish fully functioning
ecosystems. A primary goal of forest restoration is to enhance ecological integrity,
natural processes and resiliency to the greatest extent possible. Fire hazard reduction
must be linked to the reintroduction of fire as a keystone ecological process. An active
program of prescribed and maintenance burns and natural fire use is essential.
Forest ecosystem restoration and community protection treatments should
protect and enhance water and soil resources. The development and implementation
of forestry best management practices will serve to protect these resources.
Forest ecosystem restoration should protect and promote development of oldgrowth trees and large trees needed to restore ecosystem structure and function.
Landscape scale forest ecosystem restoration should maintain native plant and
wildlife populations and habitat features. A key consideration is the need to maintain
and restore movement corridors and refugia to avoid biodiversity bottlenecks.

C W P P

f o r

6 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Project work should be based upon landscape assessments of risks to and status
of aquatic and terrestrial resources and of the potential for restoration to be
successful. The assessment is used to identify the root causes of ecosystem
degradation at the eco-regional, intermediate and site level scales, determine
appropriate methods for restoring degraded systems and create a spatially-explicit
prioritization of restoration needs.

Land Use and Planning
Forest ecosystem restoration must include evaluating and changing public land
use practices that are scientifically demonstrated to contribute to forest health
degradation.
Forest ecosystem problems and solutions exist in a context of land use. In fire
prone areas community officials must develop, adopt, and enforce comprehensive land
use plans, zoning regulations and building codes for community protection, forest
restoration, ecosystem health requirements and long-term fire management. Zoning and
land use have a major impact on fire management, and can make a significant
contribution to restoring forest health and protecting communities.
Forest ecosystem restoration requires effective community protection to establish
and maintain a fire-resistive condition for structures, improvements and
vegetation. Methods for accomplishing this condition are based on public safety needs,
fire hazard, and local capability and creativity. A fire-resistive condition will be
accomplished by removing and modifying forest fuels, establishing defensible space,
and use of fire-resistant construction materials and architectural design.

Funding and Compliance
Forest ecosystem restoration and community protection requires a sustained
investment of federal, tribal, state, local and private resources. Restoration is a
long-term process requiring a sustained commitment of funding. Adequate, sustained
investment in forest ecosystem restoration and community protection is more cost
effective and socially desirable than fire suppression and rehabilitation.
Forest ecosystem restoration and community protection actions should comply
with all applicable environmental laws and regulations.

Practices
Forest ecosystem restoration and community protection programs should use the
lowest impact techniques that will be effective and efficient. Explore, develop and
utilize low impact technologies to sustain and enhance ecosystem integrity and
productivity, and minimize negative cumulative effects.
All forest ecosystem restoration and community protection treatments should use
locally adapted native plant materials to the greatest extent possible. Non-invasive,
non-native species may be considered for emergency rehabilitation.

C W P P

f o r

6 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

GLOSSARY
Adaptive Management
A type of natural resource management in which decisions are made as part of an
ongoing process. Adaptive management combines planning, implementing, monitoring,
research, evaluating, and incorporating new knowledge into management approaches
based on scientific findings and the needs of society. Results are used to modify future
management methods and policy.
Biodiversity
The variety of life forms and processes including complexity of species, communities,
gene pools, and ecological functions.
Biodiversity Bottleneck
A bottleneck in this context is the assemblage of environmental and/or human-caused
factors or ecological “threats” that hamper the ability of ecosystems to support
biodiversity at its current level through time. The bottleneck analogy is that fewer
organisms (and their genes) in the bottle (current conditions) may be able to emerge on
the other side (future conditions) due to resource limitations. (Source: this council.)
http://www.usembassy.it/file2001_04/alia/a1041704.htm;
http://www.clat.psu.edu/biodiversity/defined/populations/populations-p04.html
Community Protection
Actions or programs undertaken for the purpose of protecting human lives, property, and
infrastructure. (Source: this council)
Crown fire
This is a fire that travels from one crown (or treetop) to another in dense stands of trees,
killing most trees in its path. However, even in intense crown fires, unburned strips may
be left due to powerful, downward air currents. A passive (or dependent) crown fire relies
upon heat transfer from a surface fire burning below the crowns. An active (or
independent) crown fire does not require transfer of heat from below the crowns. Source:
Barnes, Burton V., Donald R. Zak, Shirley R. Denton, and Stephen H. Spurr. 1997.
th

Forest Ecology (4 Edition). John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, NY. p. 282. (See also
Surface Fire)
Cumulative Effects
Individual actions when considered alone may not have a significant impact on the
quality of the human environment. Groups of actions, when added together may have
collective or cumulative impacts that are significant. Cumulative effects that occur must
be considered and analyzed without regard to land ownership boundaries. Consideration
must be given to the incremental effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
related future actions of the Forest Service, as well as those of other agencies and
individuals. Source: CEQ Regulations applied to US Forest Service regulations
http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nepa/includes/epp.htm#c151

C W P P

f o r

7 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Defensible Space
This is an area around a structure where fuels and vegetation are treated, cleared or
reduced to slow the spread of wildfire towards the structure. It also reduces the chance
of a structure fire moving from the building to the surrounding forest. Defensible space
provides room for the firefighters to do their jobs.(New Mexico State Forestry) Many
communities are taking a more holistic approach of creating defensible neighborhoods
rather than just individual properties.
Ecosystem
A spatially explicit, relatively homogeneous unit of the earth that includes all interacting
organisms and components of any part of the natural environment within its boundaries.
An ecosystem can be of any size-a log, pond, field, forest, range or grassland, or even
the earth' s biosphere. (Society of American Foresters, 1998.)
Ecosystem Function
The process through which the constituent living and nonliving elements of ecosystems
change and interact, including biogeochemical processes and succession.
Ecosystem/Ecological Integrity
The completeness of an ecosystem that at multiple geographic and temporal scales
maintains its characteristic diversity of biological and physical components, spatial
patterns, structure, and functional processes within its approximate range of historic
variability. These processes include: disturbance regimes, nutrient cycling, hydrologic
functions, vegetation succession, and species adaptation and evolution. Ecosystems
with integrity are resilient and sustainable.
Ecosystem Process
The actions or events that link organisms and their environment, such as predation,
mutualism, successional development, nutrient cycling, carbon sequestration, primary
productivity, and decay. Natural disturbance processes often occur with some periodicity
(From Webster's dictionary, adapted to ecology).
Ecosystem Resilience
The ability of a system to respond to disturbances. Resiliency is one of the properties
that enable the system to persist in many different states or successional stages.
Fire Frequency (Fire Return Interval)
How often fire burns a given area; often expressed in terms of fire return intervals (e.g.,
fire returns to a site every 5-15 years). (see also Fire Regime Group).
Fire Regime Group
A generalized description of the role fire plays in an ecosystem. It is characterized by fire
frequency, predictability, seasonality, intensity, duration, and scale (patch size), as well
as regularity or variability. (See also Fire Frequency)

C W P P

f o r

7 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Forest Ecosystem Health
A condition where the parts and functions of an ecosystem are sustained over time and
where the system's capacity for self-repair is maintained, allowing goals for uses, values,
and services of the ecosystem to be met.
Forest Ecosystem Restoration
Holistic actions taken to modify an ecosystem to achieve desired, healthy, and
functioning conditions and processes. Generally refers to the process of enabling the
system to resume acting, or continue to act, following the effects of a disturbance.
Restoration management activities can be active (such as control of invasive species,
thinning of over-dense tree stands, or redistributing roads) or more passive (more
restrictive, hands-off management direction that is primarily conservation oriented).
Frequently, a combination or number of actions is used sequentially to achieve
restoration goals.
Hazardous Fuel
Excessive live or dead trees and other vegetation and organic debris that increase the
potential for uncharacteristically intense wildland fire and decrease the capability to
protect life, property, and natural resources.
Invasive or Noxious Weed (also applies to animals and other organisms)
Any species of plant which is, or is liable to be, detrimental or destructive and difficult to
control or eradicate and shall include any species that the director, after investigation
and hearing, shall determine to be a noxious weed. Arizona Revised Statutes 3-201
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/3/00201.htm
Landscape
An area composed of interacting and inter-connected patterns of habitats (ecosystems)
that are repeated because of the geology, landform, soils, climate, biota, and human
influences throughout the area. Landscape structure is formed by patches (tree stands
or sites), connections (corridors and linkages), and the matrix. Landscape function is
based on disturbance events, successional development of landscape structure, and
flows of energy and nutrients through the structure of the landscape. A landscape is
composed of watersheds and smaller ecosystems. It is the building block of biotic
provinces and regions.
Natural Disturbance Regime
A natural disturbance (e.g. fire, insect outbreak, flood) with a characteristic frequency,
intensity, size, and type that has influence on an ecosystem over evolutionary time.
Old Growth Tree
This is an old tree, one that exhibits the complex structural attributes associated with the
oldest age class of trees in an old growth stand. In today’s forests, an old-growth tree is
one that has been standing since before the onset of commercial logging and fire
exclusion. These trees are sometimes referred to as pre-settlement trees. Old-growth
ponderosa pine trees typically have orange, platy bark. Source: Schubert, G.H. 1974.
Silviculture of southwestern ponderosa pine: the status of our knowledge. USDA Forest
Service General Technical Report RM , http://www.ancienttrees.org/cfogqa.php#1

C W P P

f o r

7 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Prescribed Fire
Any fire ignited by management actions to meet specific objectives. All prescribed fires
are conducted in accordance with prescribed fire plans. (See also Wildland Fire Use)
Risk to Communities
The risk associated with adverse impacts to communities resulting from unwanted
wildland fire.
Surface fire
A fire that burns over the forest floor, consuming litter, killing aboveground parts of
herbaceous plants and shrubs, and typically scorching the bases and crowns of trees.
Source: Barnes, Burton V., Donald R. Zak, Shirley R. Denton, and Stephen H. Spurr.
th

1997. Forest Ecology (4 Edition). John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, NY p. 281 (See
also Crown Fire)
Sustainable (Sustainability)
Meeting the needs of the current generation without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their needs. Ecological sustainability entails maintaining the
composition, structure and processes of a system, as well as species diversity and
ecological productivity. The core element of sustainability is that it is future-oriented.
(Committee of Scientists Report, 1999.)
Wildland Fire Use
The management of naturally ignited wildland fires to accomplish specific pre-stated
resource management objectives in pre-defined geographic areas outlined in Fire
Management Plans. (See also Prescribed Fire)
Wildland-Urban Interface
The area or zone where structures and other human development meet or intermingle
with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuel.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unless noted, all definitions come from: “RESTORING FIRE-ADAPTED ECOSYSTEMS
ON FEDERAL LANDS - A COHESIVE STRATEGY FOR PROTECTING PEOPLE AND
SUSTAINING NATURAL RESOURCES” USDI/USDA Draft unpublished document, pp.
74-78, 12/19/2001.

C W P P

f o r

7 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Appendix 3
Attributes Utilized in Development of the Threat Map

C W P P

f o r

7 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

COMMUNITY BUFFER

-

0

5

Legend
Highways
Communities
Buffer zones

10

Miles
20

1½ miles Around At-Risk Communities

C W P P

f o r

7 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MUNICIPAL WATERSHED
Legend

-

Highways
Communities
Municipal watershed values
High
Low

0

5

C W P P

10

f o r

Miles
20

7 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

PREDICTED FIRE BEHAVIOR

Legend

-

0

Highways
Interface zone
Predicted fire behavior
Surface fire
Passive crown fire
Active crown fire

5

C W P P

10

f o r

Miles
20

7 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

FLOODING POTENTIAL

Legend

-

Highways
Communities
Flooding Potential
High
Low

0

5

C W P P

10

f o r

Miles
20

7 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

AREAS UPWIND FROM AT-RISK COMMUNITIES

Legend

-

0

5

Highways
Communities
Areas upwind of communities

Miles
20

10

Six-mile Buffer

C W P P

f o r

7 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Appendix 4
PFAC Operating Plan

C W P P

f o r

8 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

A Partnership of Emergency Services
In the Greater Flagstaff Area

Initial and Extended Attack
Wildland Fire Operations Plan
for the PFAC Response Area
** MODIFIED **

May 1, 2004

C W P P

f o r

8 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.

Initial Incident Notification and Dispatch Procedures
1) Call comes into an Alarm Center
2) Call comes into Flagstaff
3) Call comes into Arizona State Land

II. Dispatch Model for Fire Danger Levels
1) Single Jurisdiction Fire
2) Multi-jurisdictional Fire
III. Emergency Scene Operational Responsibilities
1) Aviation Operations in the Urban Interface / Congested Areas
2) Temporary Flight Restrictions
IV. When Initial Attack Fire becomes an Extended Attack Fire
V. Joint Information Center
VI. Law Enforcement
1) Evacuation
2) Traffic Control
3) Security

Purpose
The purpose of this document is to prepare an organized operations plan that will be in place in the
event of any initial or extended attack fires within the PFAC response area. This area includes the
cities of Flagstaff and Sedona as well as the following fire districts; Flagstaff Ranch, Highlands,
Mormon Lake, Parks-Bellemont, Pinewood, Sedona and Summit Fire. This area also includes all of
the State and Federal lands throughout this area. This plan is meant to deal with incidents that do not
exceed the complexity level of a Type 3 incident. This plan builds on the current Mutual Aid
Agreement amongst all PFAC members and will help to maximize effectiveness and efficiency in
providing safe and professional responses to wildland fire incidents throughout our area.

Initial Incident Notification and Dispatch Procedures

C W P P

f o r

8 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

In order to clearly understand our dispatch procedures, please understand the distinctions between
the three primary dispatch centers we will be dealing with.
“Flagstaff”- This dispatch center is run by the Coconino National Forest and will be the primary
dispatch center for all wildland incidents. While it is not always staffed 24 hours a day, there is an
answering service that will begin the activation process if any call is made to the Fire Reporting
number, 526-0600.
“Alarm” (Flagstaff/Coco Co. 911) - This dispatch center is run by the City of Flagstaff Police
Department and also dispatches for the Coconino County Sheriff’s Office. “Tones” will be given by
this center to initiate a wildland fire dispatch to all northern fire departments, which will then
transfer to Channel 10 and have all further communications with “Flagstaff”.
“Alarm” (Sedona FD, Pinewood FD) - This dispatch center is run by the Sedona Fire Department.
“Tones” will be given by this center to initiate a wildland fire dispatch to all southern fire
departments, which will then transfer to the Flagstaff Coconino 1 Channel and have all further
communications with “Flagstaff”.

1) Call comes into an Alarm Center
Alarm locates jurisdictional responsibility and dispatches those resources. After agency
notification, Alarm will immediately notify Flagstaff of the incident and which units are
responding. Flagstaff will dispatch any additional or requested resources based upon the
predetermined Dispatch Model for Fire Danger Levels.

2) Call comes into Flagstaff
Flagstaff will immediately determine jurisdictional responsibility and dispatch closest
available state or federal resources based upon the Dispatch Model for Fire Danger Levels.
Flagstaff will contact an Alarm Center if the closest available resources are not state or
federal units and Alarm will initiate dispatch. Initial dispatching of resources will be based
upon the predetermined Dispatch Model for Fire Danger Levels.

3) Call comes into Arizona State Land
In the case of Initial Attack fires, all dispatches for SLD will go through Flagstaff. Flagstaff
will dispatch appropriate agencies as indicated in the Dispatch Model for Fire Danger
Levels. The ASLD will provide to the responding agency or agencies the authority to make
appropriate requests for resources until their arrival.

All dispatch duties after the initial dispatch will be done by Flagstaff.

C W P P

f o r

8 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Dispatch Model for Fire Danger Levels
(These are minimum dispatch levels and may be adjusted accordingly).
Flagstaff will dispatch resources based on fire danger levels. They are L=Low, M=Moderate,
H=High, VH=Very High, and E=Extreme.

1) Single Jurisdiction Fire:
L-H

The agency of jurisdiction will be dispatched to this incident. Adjacent
jurisdiction(s) who feel their jurisdiction could be threatened may also
respond.

VH- E

Flagstaff will automatically dispatch an additional two (2) engines, water
tender, and two (2) overhead above the normal dispatch of resources as
available. A dozer will be dispatched as requested by the IC or at the
discretion of Flagstaff.

2. Multi-jurisdictional Fire:
L-H

Primary Jurisdiction/Closest Available Resources respond as appropriate.
(USFS & FD) Adjacent jurisdiction(s) who feel their jurisdiction could be
threatened may also respond.

VH-E

Flagstaff will automatically dispatch an additional two (2) engines, water
tender, and two (2) overhead above the normal dispatch of resources as
available. A dozer will be dispatched as requested by the IC or at the
discretion of Flagstaff.

The purpose of identifying a Dispatch Model for Fire Danger Levels, especially during Very High to
Extreme conditions, is to keep small fires from getting large. We encourage fire agencies to monitor
USFS Channel 1 and if a ‘fire flash’ is in your jurisdiction to initiate a response. It is imperative
that if a response is initiated in this manner or if a report comes directly into an agency, contact with
Flagstaff and Alarm should be done immediately. If Flagstaff gets notification of an incident
during Very High to Extreme conditions, they will immediately dispatch closest available
resources as identified in the Fire Order Model for Dispatch.
Please note that all non-jurisdictional companies will be released as soon as possible to become
available back in their home areas. Also, the response request can be denied by the requested
agency if they can not meet the demands of the request.

C W P P

f o r

8 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Contact with both Flagstaff and Alarm will also be made when any agency is involved in an
incident(s) that removes all of their resources from availability. If this notification is made, a time
frame should be given for unavailability. When units become available, contact will be made to both
Flagstaff and Alarm of their availability.
After the initial dispatch, all units will use Forest Service Channel 1 to communicate with all units
responding to a wildland incident. Upon arrival at the incident, the use of a tactical channel(s) will
be used as designated by the IC. The following channels will be identified as Group 2 for Initial
Attack (IA) in those radios that are capable of multiple groups or are field programmable. Please
note: The City of Flagstaff Fire Department does not have multiple group radios and use of our
standard group one channels will be necessary. It is only at the request of the IC that the use of the
pre-identified Group 2 frequencies will be used.
As this Operations Plan is a supplement to our existing PFAC Mutual Aid Agreement, all agencies
agree to allow the use of their frequencies to other agencies while involved in the mitigation of an
incident.

Emergency Scene Operational Responsibilities
Regardless of jurisdiction, first on scene unit will assume Incident Command. IC will communicate
with Flagstaff the following:
a.
Initial size-up to include size, IC, fire name, etc. (use IRPG)
b.
Location/Jurisdiction
c.
Additional resource requirements
d.
Immediate concerns, exposures, access, etc.
At this time, command of the incident may be transferred to the appropriate jurisdictional personnel
or may be transferred due to the level of complexity of the incident.

2) Aviation Operations in the Urban Interface / Congested Areas
All aircraft use will be ordered and coordinated through the Flagstaff Zone Dispatch Office
in accordance with established procedures in the Southwest Area Mobilization Guide.
The following will apply to determine air-tanker use when dispatched to congested areas:
1. A Lead Plane will be ordered any time an air-tanker has been requested for use in a
congested area. Air Tanker Drops may precede before the Lead Plane arrives if
communications are established between the aircraft and Incident Commander,
authorization is granted from the IC, and the line is cleared of personnel and
equipment prior to commencing retardant operations.

C W P P

f o r

8 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

2. Aerial supervision (Air Tactical Group Supervisor) is recommended when there are
more that two aircraft or a mix of aircraft (fixed/rotor-wing) over the incident at the
same time.
3. An Air Operations Branch Director will be ordered for any fire requiring continuous
air-tanker or helicopter operations within the congested area to coordinate with the
Flagstaff Airport Manager and/or Control Tower in the designing and implementation
of Temporary Flight Restrictions and aviation operations. The AOBD may also assist
in the establishment of dip-sites and heli-base operations.

3) Temporary Flight Restrictions
When fires occur, there may be a need to request Temporary Flight Restrictions to secure
airspace over the incident for aviation operations. These restrictions will be requested by
the Incident Commander, Air Tactical Group Supervisor, or the Air Operations Branch
Director through the Flagstaff Zone Dispatch Center. The request will be made to the
Southwest Coordination Center, who will advise when the TFR goes into effect. This may
take 2-4 hours. When the restriction is no longer needed, it should be rescinded as soon as
possible.
The TFR will need to be configured and closely coordinated with the Flagstaff Airport
Manager and Control Tower as nearly every portion of our urban interface areas have the
potential to impact airport operations. A guide for Incident Commanders in determining
the need for a TFR includes:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Type and number of aircraft operating (Air Tactical, air-tanker, helicopter) within the
incident and their aeronautical requirements including orbit dimensions horizontally
and vertically.
Entry and exit points and routes for incident aircraft.
Multiple incidents in close proximity.
When the extent and complexity of the operation creates a hazard to non-participating
aircraft.
Incident is expected to attract sight-seeing aircraft.
Operations are being conducted near or in the dimensions of a military training areas
Incident is being conducted in or near a Victor flyway.
"See and Avoid" capabilities are reduced or compromised.

When Initial Attack Fire becomes Extended Attack
When it is determined by the IC that this Initial Attack Fire has become an Extended Attack Fire, a
request will be made by the IC for an activation of the Flagstaff Zone Type 3 team, or a Type 1 or
Type 2 IMT based upon the Coconino National Forest’s Complexity Analysis.

C W P P

f o r

8 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

When the Type 3 Team is called for, Flagstaff will begin the notification process for the Type 3
Team. The County Emergency Services Coordinator and/or City Manager will be notified
immediately by Flagstaff through the appropriate Alarm Center. It will be the County Emergency
Coordinator or City Manager’s decision to activate the EOC.

Joint Information Center
If an EOC is established a Joint Information Center will also be established at the EOC. If an EOC
is not established, the Joint Information Center will be located at the Peaks Ranger District, the
Flagstaff Law Enforcement Administrative Facility (LEAF) or Sedona Fire Station #1.

Law Enforcement
Law enforcement is recognized as a needed and essential part of any IA fire of any consequence.
The appropriate LE agency having jurisdiction in the area of a fire will be notified immediately. The
Law Enforcement Representative will meet with either the Liaison Officer or IC. As needed, a Law
Enforcement Branch will be established.
Responsibilities for Law Enforcement will be determined by their representative and the Incident
Commander.

1) Evacuation
Upon determination by the Incident Commander and/or the Sheriff that evacuation procedures
are warranted, the Coconino County Sheriff's Office, the City of Flagstaff Police Department,
the Sedona Police Department, the Arizona Department of Public Safety, the Arizona
Department of Transportation, or any other appropriate law enforcement agencies shall be
responsible for implementing an appropriate evacuation. The Law Enforcement Liaison shall
report evacuation progress to the Incident Commander, on a regular basis. CCEM must be
notified early in this process, to provide appropriate reception areas/shelters.

2) Traffic Control
The Coconino County Sheriff's Office, City of Flagstaff Police Department, and other law
enforcement agencies shall be responsible for implementing a traffic control plan.
Continued communication with the Liaison or the IC is essential.
It is important that a law enforcement liaison be established early in the incident (at the
Command Post) in order to minimize traffic congestion and maintain safety to the public.

C W P P

f o r

8 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

3) Security
It shall be the responsibility of the jurisdictional law enforcement agency to establish, when
appropriate, a security patrol for evacuated areas yet to be immediately threatened by fire (precautionary evacuation mode), in conjunction with the law enforcement coordinator assigned to
the command staff. The appropriate LE agency will assist in securing the perimeter of the
incident to allow authorized persons only into and out of the area.

C W P P

f o r

8 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Appendix 5
PFAC Smoke Management Plan

C W P P

f o r

8 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

A Partnership of Emergency Services
In the Greater Flagstaff Area

Community Smoke
Management Plan for the PFAC
Response Area

** MODIFIED **
May 12, 2004

C W P P

f o r

9 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Purpose: Catastrophic wildfire is the #1 threat to the greater Flagstaff area. A wide range of
community values – documented elsewhere – are impacted by these type wildfires. Reducing
overabundant natural fuel accumulations and improving forest health within and adjacent to
communities must occur.
One method to do so is the application of prescribed (Rx) fire. Rx fires reduce slash accumulations
produced during fuel reduction projects, as well as forest surface fuels that have accumulated during
the past decades. Restoring fire to the ecosystem improves forest health increases community
protection capability.
Background: Smoke is a natural result of fire: the issue we must focus on is not if we should have
smoke - we have no choice: it will either be wildfire or prescribed – but when, where, and under
what conditions it will occur. The only way we can focus on, and manage, these issues, is with
application of Rx fire and implementation of a Community Smoke Management Plan (CSMP).
Components: The three primary components of this plan are:
Emission Reduction Techniques: These include, but are no means limited to –
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Removing wood products (firewood, post-and-pole, etc)
Allowing sufficient time for material to dry
Avoiding stumps, downed logs, snags
Restricting piles or acreage
Limiting consecutive burn days in same area
Utilizing proper ignition patterns
Timing ignitions to coincide with favorable weather events
Scheduling to avoid special event days or high-occupancy sites

Public Awareness: Three separate areas require continuing attention 1) On-Going: Brochures, website information, special presentations, and media interviews
are valuable techniques to establish the purpose of Rx fire, methodology of planning,
ERT’s and control efforts, future plans, agency coordination practices, and results of
previous burns. Together, these will serve to reduce concerns associated with Rx fire.
2) Pre-Fire: These announcements must inform the public of project locations, dates and
times of implementation, and homeowner mitigation measures they can implement to
reduce impacts to their own health, property, and daily activities. They can be distributed
through the media, posting specific project information on agency websites; notifying
homes and neighborhoods immediately adjacent to burns as well as areas which will be
significantly impacted (both day and night), and personal contacts to individuals with high
health concerns. Fire managers must provide a common message including project goals
and smoke mitigation efforts.

C W P P

f o r

9 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

3) During Burn: Techniques during an on-going Rx fire could include empowering each
person on-site to act as an Information Officer if approached by the public, placement of a
designated person at a site easily accessible to the public and within site of the burn to
answer questions, or leading field tours for interested people. If unexpected conditions
occur during the operation, efforts to minimize impacts should be announced, what is
being done to mitigate the impacts, and responsibility stated to ensure continued public
acceptance of the program.
Agency Coordination: A culture of open-and-continuing communication and coordination
between land management agencies, fire management professionals, public health organizations,
and air quality regulators is critical for an efficient and effective Rx fire program. Project
planning, treatment priorities, coordination with adjacent Rx fires, resource sharing, public
notification, and potential smoke impacts and mitigation efforts require discussion and joint
involvement.
Monitoring day and night smoke movements through personal observations, mapping, and
photographs will enable local fire managers to document and share information on smoke-travel
patterns, effectiveness of smoke mitigation efforts, and potential accuracy of forecasted weather
information. Instrument-based air-quality monitoring, the responsibility of regulatory agencies,
can help determine visual and health impacts, compliance with air quality standards, and provide
information necessary to refine future Rx fire efforts. In addition, post-Rx fire reviews are
beneficial so lessons can be identified and shared with others.
Permits: Local Fire Depts and Fire Districts are allowed, through an agreement with the AZ Dept
of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), to issue permits for small debris burns within their jurisdiction.
State and Federal agencies, and larger burns within the Fire Dept/Fire District jurisdictions, require a
permit from ADEQ. Permit information is available at:
www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/air/assess/smp.html
Public Notification Contacts:
1) Contact information for PFAC agency personnel can be found in PFAC
Operating Plan (Appendix 1 to the CWPP)
2) Each agency will maintain their own individual homeowner/business contact list
Result: Effectiveness of the CSMP will be determined by level of public awareness, including
acceptance of reasonable smoke, the success of agency coordination, and the continued-and-timely
application of ERT’s. Efforts to further the Rx fire program will pay dividends in the future: the
wise use of Rx fire will reduce fire threat, improve forest health, and protect our community.

C W P P

f o r

9 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Appendix 6
Utilization: GFFP UET Accomplishments & Work Plan

C W P P

f o r

9 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

STATUS REPORT
Small Diameter Timber Utilization

July 15, 2004

GREATER FLAGSTAFF FORESTS
PARTNERSHIP ECONOMIC VISION
Twenty years from now, the greater Flagstaff area
will be home to a small but thriving sector of
businesses based on the ecologically sustainable
utilization of forest products. Revenues created
through the sale of these forest products will provide the economic engine for ecosystem restoration
efforts in the region's forests.
Businesses will include primary producers of forest products and "value-added" processors
employing technologies that maximize the value of forest products. Availability of these forest
products will be based on long-term forest management planning, and healthy ecosystem
functioning, seeking a sustainable and stable flow of products to users, which in turn will provide
stable jobs and benefits for local workers and the community.
PARTNERSHIP ENDORSED PROJECTS
The Arboretum at Flagstaff: The Arboretum applied for and received $50,000 from the Southwest
Sustainable Forests Partnership for the purchase and installation of a wood pellet boiler system for
district heating. Preliminary engineering studies have been completed by Forest Energy, Corp., and
marketing and interpretation plans are being developed.
Arizona Corporation Commission: Consultation with the Corporation Commission regarding the
inclusion of woody biomass as an energy option in the revision of the Environmental Portfolio
Standard.
Arizona Governor's Office: Consultation with the Governor’s staff and the Greater Flagstaff
Economic Council on a pending executive order requiring consideration of wood/pellet heating in
state facilities.
Arizona Public Service: Three locations have been identified in the Flagstaff area for the siting of
biomass energy power plants. Preliminary feasibility and air quality studies have been completed by
APS. Projects are on hold pending financing and final approval.
Indigenous Community Ventures (ICV): ICV is the recipient of $95,000 from the Partnership to
purchase an LT300 Wood-Mizer to expand business operations to log home construction. ICV is
currently producing log hogans in partnership with Indigenous Community Enterprises and has hired
marketing consultants to expand production to off-reservation log homes.

C W P P

f o r

9 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Northern Arizona University: University officials are exploring the installation of a district wood
pellet heating system for the central campus in conjunction with Forest Energy, Corp. Meetings and
negotiations are on-going with project partners to initiate a feasibility study.
Savannah Pacific Corp., LLC: Company officials are proposing the location of a glulam plant and
small diameter sawmill facility in the Flagstaff area capable of processing 25 million board feet
annually. Preliminary site assessment has been completed and a conditional use permit has been
approved for the glulam operation. Project is currently on hold pending financing for the Flagstaff
area operation.
Total Timber: Total Timber is the recipient of $100,000 from the Partnership to purchase
equipment and initiate business operations for a commercial firewood processing plant in Flagstaff.
The business is currently in production and meeting targeted first year sales.
PROJECT MONITORING
Arizona Lumber Industries, Inc.: Proposed location of an oriented strand board (OSB) facility in
the greater Flagstaff area capable of processing small diameter ponderosa pine. Project is currently
in the due diligence phase.
City of Tusayan: The city has hired a bioenergy consultant to assess the feasibility of a fluidized
bed (gasification system) for converting woody biomass and municipal solid wastes to energy.
Forest Energy, Corp., LLC: Proposed location of a wood pellet processing facility in the Flagstaff
area to manufacture densified fuels for commercial heating systems. Project is in the due diligence
phase.
Mogollon Brewery, Co.: Proposed location of biomass ethanol facility in Flagstaff. Project is
currently in the scoping phase to assess feasibility of ethanol production.
National Relief Charities: The non-profit organization is developing partnerships among the Hopi
Nation, High Desert Investments, and the Coconino National Forest to provide approximately 400
cords of donated firewood to tribal members over 65 years of age.
BIOgen Power Group, LLC: Proposed location of 10MW biomass energy plant in Prescott
Dakota Hauling and Timber, Inc.: Sawlog processing in Humboldt within the Prescott basin
Fred Merritt Sawmill: Sawlog processing in Ash Fork
LB International, Inc.: Heating and camping log production at Eco-Lena, LLC in Winslow
Perkins Sawmill, Co.: Sawlog and firewood processing in Williams
Twin Mountain Ranch: Pallet Division: Wood pallet operations in Williams
Zellner’s Firewood: Mobile firewood operations in Williams

C W P P

f o r

9 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

PARTNERSHIP MARKETING & REPORTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Small Diameter Timber Utilization & Marketing Brochure (2004)
In-Woods MicroMill Economic Assessment (2004)
Coordinated Resource Offering Protocol – CROP (2003)
Enterprise Development Fund for Small Wood Utilization in the Greater Flagstaff Region
(2003)
Preliminary Feasibility Assessment for a Biomass Power Plant in Northern Arizona (2002)
Small Log Sawmill Site Assessment Study for Northern Arizona (2002)
Small Diameter Sawmill and Small Log Processing Mill Run (2002)
Small Diameter Wood Utilization Strategy (2002)
Lumber Recovery From Small Diameter Ponderosa Pine From Flagstaff, Arizona (2001)
Log Sort Yard Model and Commentary (2001)
Does a Log Sort Yard Make Sense for Forest Restoration? (2000)
Market & Utilization Options for Low-Value Wood Products: Preliminary Assessment of
Markets (1999)
Southwest U.S. Regional Wood Products Industry Survey: Summary of Findings (1999)
Northern Arizona Post and Pole Enterprise Feasibility Assessment (1999)
Feasibility Assessment for Development of a Log Merchandising & Manufacturing Center in N.
AZ (1999)
Feasibility of Producing Commercial Products From Pinon-Juniper Woodlands (1997)
Potential for Using Small Diameter Ponderosa Pine Resources in Arizona: A Feasibility
Study (1997)

PARTNERS IN UTILIZATION
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Greater Flagstaff Economic Council
Small Business Development Center
Coconino County
City of Flagstaff
Coconino National Forest, USFS
Rocky Mountain Research Station, USFS
Pacific Northwest Research Station, USFS
Forest Products Laboratory, USFS
Arizona Sustainable Forests Partnership
Southwest Sustainable Forests Partnership
Four Corners Sustainable Forests Partnership
Northern Arizona Forest Products Association
AZ Dept. of Commerce, Industries of the Future
Arizona Governor’s Office

C W P P

f o r

9 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Utilization and Economics Annual Work Plan
Guiding Principles
- Providing information and resources to existing and prospective small businesses.
- Getting small companies to relocate or expand to Flagstaff.
- Keeping the momentum going with the Utilization & Economics Team.
- Seeking expanded utilization of Pinyon-Juniper in addition to Ponderosa Pine.
- Seeking economically feasible ways to do forest thinnings.
- Seeking funding to conduct research and product development.
- Identifying and expanding markets for small diameter material.
- Finding suitable markets to reduce the costs of service contracts.
- Strengthening partnerships in light of rapidly changing regulatory situations.
- Matching of utilization options to community needs and capacities.
- Regional coordination of partners.
- Positioning partnership for national priorities in regard to utilization.
2004 UET Projects & Strategies (Proposed)
1)
Continue efforts focused on biomass and expand focus on district heating systems
- Continuing to work with the AZ Corporation Commission on the Environmental
Portfolio Standard (EPS) – write letters of support, seek expansion of EPS to include
biomass from forest thinnings, seek expansion of EPS beyond 2012 deadline.
- Seek thermal credits for using wood heating.
- Conduct a feasibility or demonstration study on a wood-heating district leading to private
and commercial investment.
- Continued identification of viable biomass technologies.
- Encourage local wood pellet consumption and market expansions – pursue wood pellet
manufacturing in or near Flagstaff.
2)

Continue efforts focused on forest supply issues
- Expansion of the CROP pilot project to include more suppliers, levelization of supply,
and out-year planning and coordination among suppliers. Seek a 5-year funded project to
coordinate local supply based on projected sustainability (GFFP-led).
- Encourage Forest Service to use stewardship authorities for levelized supply.

3)

Formalize relationships between key UET partners and establish protocols for the
sharing of information – Staff & UET partners
- Formalize relationships among key UET partners (GFFP, GFEC, SBDC, County, etc.).
- Establish protocols for sharing information sharing with similar/ related organizations.
- Provide a clearinghouse of UET-related information in coordination with the SBDC.
- Project development and management – point of contact to assist business development.
- Display and promote past accomplishments – the list of pubs in the PowerPoint posted on
the web and able to download.
- Small business outreach and coordinate with Southwest Strategy (SWSFP, Region 3)

C W P P

f o r

9 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

4)

Increase and expand efforts to develop grant opportunities and other means of
financial support for existing and prospective businesses
- Secure funding for continuation of the Enterprise Development Fund (EDF)
- Work closely with the GFEC and SBDC to identify and provide financial support to
existing and prospective businesses.
- Establishing a revolving loan fund, perhaps with the sale of GFFP purchased stumpage.
- Host workshop(s) to assist landowners, contractors, and small businesses to better use
grant opportunities (NRCS, ASLD, SBDC, etc.). Provide technical assistance to aid them
in finding and applying for financial assistance.

5)

Provide market assistance to existing businesses (UET partners)
- Provide technical assistance and counseling to businesses in identifying markets,
developing marketing strategies, and understanding market drivers.
- Provide assistance to small businesses to develop effective business plans (SBDC).
- Create a database of raw material users and producers for the greater Flagstaff region.
- Develop marketing materials for prospective businesses to include existing studies,
ongoing research, and other pertinent information and resources.
- Improve capacity of private sector small businesses by providing technical support.

6)

Seek GFFP staff support for UET functions
- Hire a utilization and marketing staff person to carry out UET priorities.
- Out-source for project implementation.
- Share tasks with SWSFP on intern basis and overlap with other partner functions.
- Separate UET priorities from the work individual partners are doing. Share and elaborate
that information. Identify GFFP capabilities to do remaining work.

7)

Develop political strategies for all of the above priorities
- Track funding priorities of the Healthy Forest Act.
- Focus on locating sources of funding.
- Advocate in state, local, and federal government for support for forest restoration,
development and program funding.

Long-Range UET Projects & Strategies (Proposed)
8)
Education of small diameter timber utilization terms and practices
- Educate public and the GFFP partnership on local issues including technological
advances in harvesting and feasibility of small diameter timber uses.
- Public awareness is high but there is deep mistrust of the wood products industry and the
Forest Service relationship with private industry.
- Educate public on the ecological aspects of small diameter timber, its sustainability, and
linkages to economic practices, community health, and related environmental impacts.
- Educate the public on the need to manage forests, wood products and the wood product
industry as a cohesive unit with sustainability emphasized.

C W P P

f o r

9 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

9)

Experiment with the GFFP purchasing stumpage from Coconino NF to sell to
others.

10)

Serve as a catalyst for a sustained yield-type unit

11)

Continuation of Savannah-Pacific type mills – focus on economies of scale and
ramping up volume processed

12)

Develop strategies for linking healthy forests to healthy communities with
appropriately scaled industries providing living wages and ecologically driven forest
based products.
- Continue community involvement in decisions regarding matching scale of restoration
efforts and value-added, technically suitable utilization options with community needs.
- Can we play a role in creating the framework for ecologically and economically sustained
use of our forest? We need to replace the boom-bust cycle of extractive industries.

13)

Invasive species and erosion from harvesting and wildfires

14)

Portable, in-woods processing feasibility to reduce processing costs

15)

Monitoring of community benefits from restoration projects and utilization
- Social and economic impacts
- Ecological impacts of project implementation

16)

Explore green certification for local processors and National Forest lands

17)

Create strategies to work with private landowners
- Establish protocol to work with private landowners with less than 40 acres

18)

Seek long-term strategy to add value to small diameter timber linked to stumpage

C W P P

f o r

9 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Appendix 7
Coconino National Forest Prevention Management Plan

Only a few pages of the plan are included here. For details on
compartment assessment rankings, which may change on a regular basis,
please consult the USFS/Coconino NF web page:
www.fs.fed.us/r3/coconino

C W P P

f o r

1 0 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Coconino National Forest
Prevention Management Plan

February 11, 2004

** ABBREVIATED **

C W P P

f o r

1 0 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Contents
Introduction & Management Objectives
Fire Prevention Compartment Listing
Compartment Detail
Compartment Assessment Rankings
Fuels Hazard
Protection Capability
Ignition Risk
Fire History
Values
Catastrophic Fire Potential
Composite Compartment Assessment Ranking
Prevention Responsibilities
Prevention Work
Prevention Specific and General Actions

Introduction
This Plan has been prepared for the Coconino National Forest using the Risk Assessment and
Mitigation Strategies (RAMS) planning process. RAMS was developed for fire managers to be a
holistic approach to analyzing wildland FUELS, HAZARD, RISK, VALUE, and SUPPRESSION
CAPABILITY. It considers the effects of fire on unit ecosystems by taking a coordinated approach
to planning at a landscape level, and allows users to develop fire prevention and/or fuels treatments
programs.
The steps involved in this process included:
Listing Management Objectives for the Coconino National Forest
Identification of spatial Compartments for study
Assessment of significant issues within each Compartment
Identification of Management Objectives within each Compartment
Identification of Fire Management Zones (FMZs) and Sub-Units
Development of Alternative Fire Prevention Program Options
Creation of Personnel and other Expense Prevention Budgets
Identification of detailed Prevention Work Programs
Development of a total Fire Prevention Program and budget

C W P P

f o r

1 0 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Management Objectives
The following Management Objectives are identified for the Coconino National Forest:
1. Maximize firefighter and public safety
2. To reduce resource loss due to human caused fires.
3. Cooperate with agencies in a combined wildfire and public fire education effort
4. Implement Fire Prevention Plan in a cost-effective manner
Fire Prevention Compartment Listing

Code Description___________________________
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

C W P P

Anderson
Kendrick
Kachina
Sunset
Flagstaff
Ponderosa
Rim

f o r

8
9
10
11
12
13

Secret - Sycamore
Oak Creek
Sedona – Verde
Beaver Creek
Long - Stone
Blue - Mor - Pine

1 0 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

C W P P

f o r

1 0 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ EXAMPLE OF A COMPARTMENT LISTING ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Compartment 5: Flagstaff

- Catastrophic Fire: Likely

Fuels Hazard characteristics are rated:
Fuels (flame length produced): High
Crowning Potential: Moderate
Slope Percent: Moderate
Aspect: High
Elevation: Moderate
Protection Capability ratings are:
Initial Attack: 0 - 20 minutes (Low)
Suppression Complexity: Complex (High)
Ignition Risk factors include:
Population Density - Wildland Urban Interface
Power Lines & Sub-station
Maintenance/service contracts
Active timber sale
Construction project
Debris/slash burning
Off highway vehicle use
Developed camping areas & Dispersed camping areas
Gas pumps or storage
Gas or oil wells/transmission
Electronic installations
Incendiary
Government operations
Woodcutting area, power equipment
Dump
Fireworks, children with matches
Cultural Activities
Shooting/target
Railroads
Public Access Road(s)
County road(s)
State/Federal highway(s)

C W P P

f o r

1 0 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Compartment Assessment Ranking
Fuels Hazard
Rating
High
High
Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod

Compartment__________________________________________
8: Secret – Sycamore
Low
2: Kendrick
9: Oak Creek
Low
11: Beaver Creek
Low
1: Anderson
13: Blue - Mor – Pine
Low
4: Sunset
12: Long – Stone
6: Ponderosa
5: Flagstaff
10: Sedona - Verde
3: Kachina
7: Rim

Compartment Assessment Ranking
Protection Capability
Rating
High
High
High
High
High

Compartment__________________________________________
8: Secret – Sycamore
Low
9: Oak Creek
7: Rim
Low
5: Flagstaff
3: Kachina
Low
12: Long - Stone
13: Blue - Mor - Pine
1: Anderson

Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod

10: Sedona - Verde
6: Ponderosa
2: Kendrick
11: Beaver Creek
4: Sunset

Compartment Assessment Ranking
Ignition Risk
Rating
High
High
High
High
High

Compartment__________________________________________
5: Flagstaff
Low
1: Anderson
6: Ponderosa
Low
2: Kendrick
10: Sedona – Verde
Low
3: Kachina
13: Blue - Mor – Pine
Low
8: Secret – Sycamore
9: Oak Creek

Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod

12: Long - Stone
11: Beaver Creek
4: Sunset
7: Rim

Compartment Assessment Ranking
Fire History
Rating
High
High
High
High
High

Compartment__________________________________________
5: Flagstaff
Low
2: Kendrick
4: Sunset
Low
1: Anderson
6: Ponderosa
Low
11: Beaver Creek
7: Rim
Low
8: Secret - Sycamore
9: Oak Creek

Mod
Mod
Mod

13: Blue - Mor – Pine
10: Sedona - Verde
12: Long – Stone

C W P P

f o r

Mod

3: Kachina

1 0 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Compartment Assessment Ranking
Values
Rating
High
High
High
High
High

Compartment__________________________________________
5: Flagstaff
Low
12: Long - Stone
10: Sedona – Verde
Low
4: Sunset
9: Oak Creek
Low
2: Kendrick
7: Rim
Low
1: Anderson
6: Ponderosa

Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod

8: Secret - Sycamore
13: Blue - Mor - Pine
11: Beaver Creek
3: Kachina

Compartment Assessment Ranking
Catastrophic Fire Potential
Rating
High
High
High
High
High
High

Compartment__________________________________________
13: Blue - Mor – Pine
Low
2: Kendrick
12: Long – Stone
Low
1: Anderson
9: Oak Creek
7: Rim
6: Ponderosa
5: Flagstaff

Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod

11: Beaver Creek
10: Sedona - Verde
8: Secret - Sycamore
4: Sunset
3: Kachina

Compartment Assessment Ranking
Composite Compartment Assessment Rating
Rating
High
High
High
High
High

Compartment__________________________________________
9: Oak Creek
Low
11: Beaver Creek
7: Rim
Low
1: Anderson
6: Ponderosa
Low
2: Kendrick
13: Blue - Mor - Pine
5: Flagstaff

Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod

10: Sedona - Verde
8: Secret - Sycamore
3: Kachina
12: Long - Stone
4: Sunset

C W P P

f o r

1 0 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Appendix 8
After the Fire

C W P P

f o r

1 0 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

AFTER THE FIRE…
Returning Resident
Safety
Tips
Ponderosa Fire Advisory Council
Fire Recovery Contacts
American
Red Cross

928-779-4594

AZ Department of Public Safety

928–773-3600

Arizona Public Service

928-779-6911

Citizen’s Arizona Gas

928 774-4592

Coconino County Animal Shelter

928-526-1076

Coconino County Emergency Services

928-526-2735

Coconino County Sheriff Department

928-774-4523

Coconino National Forest

928-527-3600

FEMA Help Line

1-800-621-FEMA

Flagstaff Clean & Green (Haz Waste)

928-779-7622

Flagstaff Fire Department

928-779-7688

Flagstaff Medical Center

928-779-3366

Flagstaff Police Department

928-774-1414

Flagstaff Water/Sewer

928-779-7646

Highlands Fire Department

928-525-1717

Parks-Bellemont Fire District

928-635-5311

Pinewood Fire District

928-286-9885

Summit Fire District

928-526-9537

US West (residential)

800-244-1111

C W P P

f o r

1 0 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Table Of Contents
Electrical………………………………………………………4
Electric Safety Facts

Electric Safety Tips
Electric locations to avoid
Special Info. on Fuses and Circuit Breakers
Emergency Procedures on Electrical Fire
To Restore a fuse
To Reset a Circuit Breaker
Drinking Water…………………………….…………..6
Restoring Water Systems
Solid Waste……..………………………………………6
Removing Debris
Heating Fuels……………………….………………….7
Checking Propane Tanks
Checking Home Heating Oil Tanks
Miscellaneous Safety Awareness……………….…….7
Ash Pits
Evaluation of Trees Damaged by Fire
Residual Smoke in Fire Interior

Fire Recovery Safety Tips
REMEMBER – use caution and good judgment. Hazards may still exist, even though the fire is controlled.

ELECTRICAL
Electrical Safety Facts
General: An important part of the disaster recovery is hazard recognition. Should you come across
damaged or fallen power poles or lines, contact your local electrical power authorities. DO NOT
TOUCH THE DOWNED WIRES. In the cleanup area, be especially careful when cutting trees and
operating heavy equipment around power lines. Vegetation and power poles may have lost stability
due to fire damage.
If a power line or pole should fall next to you while working in the area, do not walk – hop out of the
area. (Using this technique, you will be less likely to be a conductor of electricity).

C W P P

f o r

1 1 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Electricity is always trying to go somewhere. It goes easily through conductors; it does not go easily
through non-conductors.
Conductors
Metal
Water
Wet Things
Things In Water (including animals/pets)

Non-Conductors
Rubber
Glass
Plastic

One of the most important fixtures in the conduction of electric current are utility poles. The fire or
fire suppression actions may have dislodged or broken some of these poles, causing the wires to sag or
break, resulting in extremely hazardous conditions. Do not touch anything at the scene.
Trees can also be dangerous conductors of electricity. When a tree falls or grows into contact with
power wires, the electric power diverts and finds a path to the ground through the branches and the
trunk. Anyone who comes into contact with these trees is subject to tragic consequences, since electric
power can easily jump from the tree to the person.

•

Electrical Safety Tips

•

Do not overload circuits; don’t operate several large appliances at the same time on the same
circuit.
Do not use extension cords to plug in many items on one outlet.
Turn off appliances when you finish using them. Provide adequate air circulation around all
appliances to prevent over-heating. Keep appliances clean, repaired and serviced.
Check wires and plugs regularly. Replace worn or frayed wires. Do not run cords under
carpets or across doorways.
Be careful when replacing fuses or breakers. Keep the area near the circuit box dry and turn
the main switch off before changing the fuse/breaker.
Temporary lines should be removed from service.

•
•
•
•

Electrical meters and service lines coming into the home or other outbuildings.
Any power supply line which appears to sag, show bare wire, or have insulation missing.
Secured power sub-stations or any area identified as high voltage.
Downed power lines.

•
•
•
•

•
•

Electrical Locations To Avoid

Emergency Procedures for an Electrical Fire
Call the fire department.
Shut off power supply at the breaker if possible.

Restoring Electric Power
If, upon returning to your residence, there is no electrical power, please check to make sure the main
breaker is on. If the breakers are on and power is still not present, please call to report the power
outage to your local electrical power authorities. Reporting problems like a down or broken wire will
speed up the process of power restoration.

C W P P

f o r

1 1 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

•
•
•

Stand off to one side of the breaker box when turning on the main breaker. Do not stand
directly in front of the box.
If any smells of hot electrical insulation or sparking occurs, turn of the breaker immediately and
call an electrician.
If electrical lights or appliances appear brighter than normal, turn off main breaker. The
service entrance needs to be checked.

To Change A Fuse
Try to find the cause of the blown fuse, and correct it by disconnecting the defective appliance or
appliances causing the overload or short circuit. Shut off the main power switch when you change the
fuse.
Do not replace fuses with a higher amp rating fuse than you removed.
Turn on the main switch to restore the power.
If the fuse blows again, leave it alone and contact a certified electrician. Other problems
may exist and should be investigated to remove the possibility of an electrical fire.

To Reset A Circuit Breaker
Try to find the cause of the overload or short circuit and correct it by disconnecting the defective
appliance or appliances. Turn the switch to “on” to reset and restore power. If breaker trips again
leave it alone, and contact a certified electrician. Other problems may exist and should be found to
remove the possibility of an electrical fire.

Special Information of Fuses & Circuit Breakers
Fuses and circuit breakers shut off the current whenever too much current tries to flow through a wire
because of:
•
•
•

A short circuit, possibly caused by a bare wire touching the ground;
Overloading, possibly caused by too many lights or appliances on one circuit; or
By defective parts in an appliance.

Know where the main circuit or fuse box is located in your house. Be sure you can locate the main
switch; it controls all of the power coming into the house and is usually inside the circuit box. In some
cases, however, it may be located outside of the house. Fuse or circuit boxes generally are labeled to
designate which area of the house the circuits or fuses serve.

DRINKING WATER
Restoring Water Systems
Unless impacted by a fuel spill, the fire should not have affected wells at undamaged homes. If your
house was damaged, your water system may potentially have become contaminated with bacteria due
to loss of water pressure. In this case it is recommended that the well be disinfected and the water be
tested before consumption. To disinfect your water system, pour ½ - 1 cup of chlorine bleach inside the

C W P P

f o r

1 1 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

well casing and turn on all faucets until a chlorine scent in noticed. Allow the chlorine solution to
remain in the system overnight. The following morning, open all faucets and flush the system until free
of chlorine smell.
If you have a public use well or water system, contact the County Health Department for specifics on
testing prior to consumption of any water.

SOLID WASTE
Removing Debris
Cleanup of your property can expose you to potential health problems from hazardous materials. Wet
down any debris to minimize health impacts from breathing dust particles. The use of a two-strap dust
particulate mask with nose clip and coveralls will provide the best minimal protection. Leather gloves
should be worn to protect your hands from sharp objects while removing debris.
Hazardous materials such as kitchen and bathroom cleaning products, paint, batteries, contaminated
fuel and damaged fuel containers must be handled properly. Contact the City of Flagstaff or Coconino
County for specific handling restrictions and disposal options.
All hazardous materials should be labeled as to their contents if known!

HEATING FUELS
Checking Propane Tanks
Propane suppliers recommend homeowners contact them for an inspection prior to reusing their
system. If the fire burned the tank, pressure relief valve probably opened and released the contents of
the tank. Tanks, brass and copper fittings, and lines may be heat-damaged and unsafe. Valves should
be turned off and remain closed until the propane suppliers inspect the system.

Checking Home Heating Oil Tanks
Heating oil suppliers recommend homeowners contact them for an inspection prior to reusing their
system. The tank may have shifted or fallen from the stand and fuel lines may have kinked or
weakened. Heat from the fire may have caused the tank to warp or bulge. Non-vented tanks are more
likely to bulge or show signs of stress. The fire may have loosened or damaged fittings and filters. If
the tank is in tact and heating oil remains in the tank, the heating oil should still be good. If you have
questions on the integrity of the tank, fuel lines, tank stand, or the fuel, or need assistance in moving the
tank or returning it to service, contact your fuel supplier.

C W P P

f o r

1 1 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

MISCELLANEOUS SAFETY AWARENESS
Ash Pits
Holes created by burned trees and stumps create ash pits, which are full of hot ashes. Mark them for
your safety, as they can stay hot for many days following the fire, causing serious burns. Warn your
family and neighbors, especially children. Tell them to watch for ash pits and to not put hands or feet
in these holes—they are hot!

Evaluation of Trees Damaged by Fire
The following information will assist you in evaluating any trees that have been scorched or burnt by
the fire. Identification of the type of tree affected is important and can easily be done. Two basic types
of trees exist in this area: deciduous and evergreen. Deciduous trees are broad leaf trees that lose their
leaves in the fall.
In this area we have quaking aspen (deciduous). Evergreen trees have needles and in this area we have
ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir and Rocky Mountain juniper.
First: visually check the tree stability. Any tree weakened by fire may be a hazard. Winds are normally
responsible for toppling weakened trees. The wind patterns in your area may have changed as a result
of the loss of adjacent tree cover.
If the tree looks stable:
• Visually check for burnt, partially burnt or broken branches and tree tops that may fall.
•

Check for burns on the tree trunk. If the bark on the trunk of the tree has been burned off or
scorched by very high temperatures completely surround the tree’s circumference,
the tree will not survive. This is because the living portion of the tree (cambium) was
destroyed. The bark of the tree provides protection to the tree during fire. Bark thickness
varies based upon tree species: check carefully to see if the fire or heat penetrated the bark.
Where fire has burnt deep into the tree trunk, the tree should be considered unstable until
checked.

•

Check for burnt roots by probing the ground with a rod around the base of the tree and out
away from the base several feet. The roots are generally six to eight inches below the surface.
If you find that the roots have been burned you should consider this tree very unstable; it could
easily be toppled by wind.

If the tree is scorched
A scorched tree is one that has lost part or all of its needles. Leaves will be dry and curled.
Needles will be a light red or straw colored. Healthy deciduous trees are resilient and may
possibly produce new branches and leaves, as well as sprouts at the base of the tree. Evergreen
trees, particularly long-needled trees, may survive when partially scorched. An evergreen tree
that has been damaged by fire is subject to bark beetle attack. Please seek professional
assistance concerning measures for protecting evergreen trees from bark beetle attack.
Seek professional assistance before felling trees near power lines, houses or other improvements.

C W P P

f o r

1 1 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Residual Smoke In Fire Interior
Smoke may be present on the interior of the fire for several days following containment. This occurs as
a result of stumps, roots, and other surface materials being exposed to changing temperatures and wind
conditions. Smoke volume from these materials may fluctuate depending on weather conditions. This
activity should not pose a risk and smoke will continue to dissipate until materials are fully consumed
or extinguished by fire crews or weather.

C W P P

f o r

1 1 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Appendix 9
GFFP Monitoring & Research Team
Adaptive Management Framework

C W P P

f o r

1 1 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

GFFP Monitoring & Research Team
Adaptive Management Framework
Discussion Draft 10/01/04

The following tables were developed by the Greater Flagstaff Forests Partnership (GFFP) Monitoring and
Research Team as the initial makings of a monitoring and research plan for the 180,000 acre project area of the
GFFP (see www.gffp.org). This framework could be applied to a smaller or larger landscape. The following five
broad areas of concern reflect the monitoring needs categories of this partnership, and are divided into fuels
reduction, ecosystem restoration, social issues, economic health, and institutional health. This is a very
broad framework of what areas COULD be monitored within the larger area. The actual application of what
SHOULD be monitored within individual projects may be a much smaller, and more focused subset of these
variables. Decisions about which goals are desirable for individual projects should be decided by the actual project
designers (e.g., ID team), and determined based upon very specific project objectives, the specific landscape that
is affected by the project, the desired conditions for that landscape, and how those desired conditions are proposed
to be achieved. Also, an explicit relationship needs to be developed between an analysis of the outcomes of the
monitoring, and how those outcomes affect future management.

GOAL: Reduce threat of uncharacteristic* fire)
Objective

Indicator

Metric

What are known
thresholds?

Frequency

Create conditions
that are conducive
to the increased use
of frequent, low
intensity fire* in
the fire-adapted
landscape,
including fires
resulting from both

1. Forest Vegetation
Simulator (FVS)
with Fire & Fuels
Extension.
2. Fire model (e.g.
NEXUS or
FLAMMAP) runs
indicate that fuels
reduction treatments

Canopy cover
Stand height
Crown base height
Crown bulk density
Deadwood fuel
loading
Litter, dead, and
live fuels moisture
levels.

Depends on fuel
model, but
thresholds exist
for surface or
ground fire,
passive canopy
fire, and active
canopy fire.

Before and after
treatments.
FVS uses stand data
typically collected by
USFS personnel.
FLAMMAP gives
predictive ability;
factor in continued
treatment.

C W P P

f o r

1 1 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Scale
Cost
(spatial and L - <$1000/yr
temporal)
M - $1K-10K/yr
H - >$10K/yr
Project and H
roll up to
landscape

human and natural
ignitions.

are effective in
reducing the risk of
active and passive
canopy fire*.
3. Cumulative acres in
characteristic and
uncharacteristic fire
condition
4. Fire Regime
Condition Class
5. # of acres in Fire Use
plans.
6. # of acres where
“monitoring” or
containment is
considered an
appropriate
suppression tactic.
Ditto above

Annual reports of
acres treated.
ForestERA analysis
process.

Reduce risk of
uncharacteristic*
fire for community
protection and
other special areas.
• For terms marked with an asterisk, please see glossary at end of document for current definitions and
references, or click on hyperlink.
References: Brown 1974, Anderson 1978, Scott 1999, http://fire.org/nav.mas?pages=fire&mode=14; http://www.frcc.gov/
•

GOAL: Restore Forest Ecosystem Health
Objective

Indicator

Method or Metric

Frequency

Increase use of
frequent, low intensity

1. Number of acres that
will support a surface

USFS, State/Private,
county, and city review

Annual & cumulative

C W P P

f o r

1 1 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

Scale (spatial and
temporal)
Project & Landscape
Short & Long-term

C o m m u n i t i e s

Cost
L if fuels reduction
monitoring is done

fire in the landscape
(or ponderosa pine and
associated
ecosystems). Improve
fire regime*.

Create conditions that
are conducive to the
increased use of
frequent, low intensity
fire in the landscape.
Retain, enhance, and
develop old and large
trees*, both living and
dead, and mature
ecosystems.

Conserve and enhance
native species*’
populations and their
habitat and reduce
invasive, nonnative
species*.

fire.
2. Number of acres
burned by
characteristic* surface
fire (both Rx and
wildfire individ. And
combined).
3. Number of Rx fires.
1. Number of acres that
will support a surface
fire.

of accomplishments
(units in ac/ha and # of
burns). List by FY and
CY.

See above in Fuels
Reduction

Annual & cumulative

1. Number of old/large
trees/acre.
2. Number and decay
class of snags &
dead/down trees/acre.
3. Number of acres of
existing and developing
old growth* ecosystems.
1. Abundance,
distribution &
diversity of selected
native species.
2. Abundance,
distribution &
diversity of
nonnative selected
species.
3. Number of acres of
intact native
habitat*.

USFS and Partner
surveys of trees per
acre by stand.
Cumulative survey of
OG areas.

Before and after projects

Project scale rolled
up to landscape level.

L at project
H at landscape

Species transects and
quadrats, point-intercept

Before and after
treatment/projects,
annual/seasonal.

Project scale rolled
up to landscape level.

H

C W P P

f o r

data and time-constrained
sampling in selected
areas and for selected
species.

L

USFS surveys

1 1 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Conserve soil
resources.
Maintain and improve
watershed function.

1. Degree of erosion
2. Amount of bare
ground.
1. Amount of water
flow, timing
(hydrograph), and
water quality.
2. Degree of erosion &
sedimentation.

Field surveys

Before and after projects

M?

Stream gages, direct
water sampling,
geomorphology
measures.

Before and after projects,
Annually

M

*For words underlined and marked with an asterisk, please see glossary.
References: Harrington, Michael G.; Sackett, Stephen S. 1992, Coconino LMP 1987; Pellant et al. 2000, Pyke et al. 2002;
Herrick et al. 2002 (Jornada experimental range); Taylor 1999, O’Dea 2003;

C W P P

f o r

1 2 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

GOAL: Improve Social Understanding & Acceptance of Land Management Practices
Sub goal: MAINTAIN QUALITY OF LIFE
Objective

Indicator

Reduce the perceived risk
of uncharacteristic (high
intensity) fire.

Perceived risk/threat of
uncharacteristic (high
intensity) wildfire that will
directly or indirectly affect
residents’ quality of life.

Increase the perceived
benefits of characteristic
(frequent, low-intensity)
prescribed and natural
fires.

Perceived benefit of
characteristic (frequent, lowintensity) prescribed and
natural fires that will directly
or indirectly affect residents’
quality of life.

Reduce the risk of
uncharacteristic (high
intensity) fire.

1. Fire model
2. Defensible space.

Increase/maintain
public’s perception of
recreational
opportunities, in the
context of restoration
activities, in the local
community.
Protect/promote the
aesthetic value of the

Public perception of access
and level of use for
recreational activities in the
forests in and around the local
community (in the context of
restoration activities).
Public perception that
restoration projects will/are
C W P P

f o r

Metric
Measured as baseline
data
for pre-treatment and
measured at posttreatment
1. Survey residents to
determine the perceived
risk/threat of
uncharacteristic (high
intensity) fire.
2. Focus groups during
GFFP field
trips/presentations.
1. Survey residents to
determine the perceived
benefit of characteristic
(frequent, low-intensity)
prescribed and natural fires.
2. Focus groups during
GFFP field
trips/presentations.
1. See “Fuels Reduction”
metrics
2. Amount of defensible
space around
neighborhoods/homes.
Survey residents to
determine perception of
recreational opportunities in
the forests in and around the
local community (in the
context of restoration
activities).
1. Survey residents to
determine perception of the

Frequency

Scale
Project vs. GFFP Area

Cost
(H, M, L)

Pre- and Post-treatment
surveys/focus groups

Short term-Project
Long term-GFFP area

M

Pre- and Post-treatment
surveys/focus groups

Short term-Project
Long term-GFFP area

M

Pre- and Post-treatment;
Seasonally (bi-annually or
quarterly)

Short term-Project
Long term-GFFP area

H

Pre- and Post-treatment
surveys

Short term-Project
Long term-GFFP area

M

Pre- and Post-treatment
surveys/focus groups

Short term-Project
Long term-GFFP area

M

1 2 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

forest.

preserving and promoting
forest aesthetics in and around
their community.

Protect/promote spiritual
value of the forest.

Public perception that
restoration projects will/are
preserving and promoting the
spiritual value of the forest.

Reduce the number of
unplanned human-caused
forest fires in the GFFP
area.
Public’s perception of
forest closures.

Number of human-caused fires
in the forest in the GFFP area.

Public’s knowledge of the
reasons for forest closures.

Public’s perception of
forest restrictions.

Public’s knowledge of the
reasons for forest restrictions.

effects of restoration efforts
on forest aesthetics in and
around their community.
2. Focus groups during
GFFP field
trips/presentations.
1. Survey residents to
determine perception of
restoration efforts in
protecting the spiritual value
of the forest. Over sample
Native American members
of the community. Conduct
personal interviews/focus
groups with Native
American members of the
community.

Pre- and Post-treatment
surveys/focus groups

Short term-Project
Long term-GFFP area

M

Forest Service logs of fire
occurrences and the ignition
sources.

Pre- and Post- program
implementation

Long term-GFFP area

M

Survey residents to
determine knowledge of
why forest closures occur;
does the public link it to
restoration activities?
Survey residents to
determine knowledge of
why forest restrictions
occur; does the public link it
to restoration activities?

Pre- and Post-program
survey

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

M

Pre- and Post-program
survey

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

M

Sub Goal: INCREASE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN RESTORATION EFFORTS

Objective

Indicator

Metric
Measured as baseline data

Scale
Project vs. GFFP Area

for pre-treatment and
measured at post-treatment
C W P P

f o r

1 2 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Frequency

Cost
(H, M, L)

Increase the knowledge/
perception of “Fire Wise”
principles/communities
and implementation of
defensible space.

1. Amount of public
knowledge/perceptions of
“Fire Wise”
principles/communities.
2. Public
knowledge/perceptions of
implementing “defensible
space” (space near and around
homes).

Survey residents to
determine the
knowledge/perceptions of
“Fire Wise”
principles/communities and
implementation of
defensible space.

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Post-program
implementation

M

Increase the number of
communities* that are
recognized as “Fire Wise”
in the GFFP area.

Number of communities in the
GFFP geographic area
designated as “Fire Wise.”

Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Post-program
implementation

H

Increase the number of
neighborhoods/household
s that are implementing
“Fire Wise” principles
around their homes.

1. Number of households that
are implementing (the degree
of) “Fire Wise” principles
around their homes.
2. Number of neighborhoods
that are implementing “Fire
Wise” principles.

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Post-program
implementation

M

Increase community
involvement in
restoration activities. Pay
special attention to youth
service corps programs
that include middle-high
school age students.

1. Number of GFFP sponsored
workshops, field trips, etc.
2. Number of youth programs
established by GFFP that
promote involvement &
education with restoration
efforts.
3. Number of participants
and/or groups attending GFFP
events.
4. Number of service groups

Determine number of
communities in the GFFP
region that are recognized as
“Fire Wise” through
certification of
Firewise/Communites/USA.
(Currently in AZ Timber
Ridge)
1. Survey residents to
determine their level of
implementing “Fire Wise”
principles around their
homes.
2. Interview fire station
personnel in
neighborhood/home
assessments.
3. Review fire station field
survey logs.
1. Review GFFP logs.
2. Review event coordinator
logs.

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Post-program
implementation

M

C W P P

f o r

1 2 3
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Improve public access
and participation in
forest restoration.

participating in GFFP events.
5. Attendance of GFFP
meetings - public and GFFP
members.
1. Public’s perception of the
ability to participate in
restoration activities and forest
planning.
2. Public’s access to
information pertaining to
restoration activities.
3. Media types utilized to
disseminate GFFP
information.
4. Most common media
sources used by the public to
access restoration information.

C W P P

f o r

1. Survey residents to assess
their perceived ability to
participate and obtain
information regarding
restoration activities and
forest planning.
2. Review number and type
of GFFP public
announcements for
restoration activities.
3. Survey public to
determine most desirable
media source(s) to access
the information.

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

1 2 4
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

Pre- and Post-program
implementation

C o m m u n i t i e s

M

Sub goal: INCREASE PUBLIC INFORMATION/SUPPORT FOR RESTORATION PROJECTS
Objective

Indicator

Increase perceptions of
“healthy forests”
resulting from forest
restoration activities that
include characteristic
wildfire, wildlife habitat
and watershed function in
and around
communities/GFFP
geographic areas.
Increase
awareness/support/notific
ation for restoration
projects.

Public perception of
restoration activities resulting
in “healthy forests” in and
around their community.

1. Campaigns that are in place
as informational tools for
restoration projects.
2. Number of public
notifications that include:
prescribed burns-posting
signs, new releases, door-todoor in neighborhoods, public
meetings, presentations to
service clubs/organizations,
press releases, development
and distribution of material
and participation of GFFP in
community events.

C W P P

f o r

Metric
Measured as baseline
data
for pre-treatment and
measured at posttreatment
Survey residents to
determine perceptions of
restoration activities
resulting in a “healthy
forest.”

1. Review number of GFFP
sponsored workshop, field
trips, etc.
2. Review of the number of
community participants in
the events.
3. Review number of public
notifications for prescribed
burns-posting signs, new
releases, door-to-door in
neighborhoods, public
meetings, presentations to
service clubs/organizations,
press releases, development
and distribution of material
and participation of GFFP in
community events.
4. Perform content analysis
of campaign types and
messages.
5. Conduct focus groups to
assess perceived messages

Scale
Project vs. GFFP Area

Frequency

Cost
(H, M, L)

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Post-program
implementation

M

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Post-program
surveys/focus groups

M

1 2 5
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

of GFFP literature.
1. Content analysis: review
number and content of local
publications, editorials and
letters in to the editor
regarding restoration efforts.
2. Content
analysis/frequency of public
comments submitted to the
USFS

Increase
awareness/support for
restoration projects.

1. Number and content of
local publications, editorials
and letters to the editor
regarding restoration efforts
(Non-GFFP members)
2. Number and content of
USFS public comments.

Increase public support
for mechanical thinning,
road construction, and
smoke as necessary tools
for ecological restoration.

1. Number of complaints to
authorities regarding thinning,
road construction and smoke
resulting from a restoration
project(s).
2. Number of complaints to
authorities for faster and more
efficient implementation of
restoration efforts.

Improve awareness and
public attitude towards
partners & cooperators
involved in restoration
projects (e.g., USFS, ERI,
NPS, GCT, TNC, Flagstaff
Fire Dept., etc.).

Public’s awareness and
perceptions of GFFP partners
and cooperators.

Decrease number of
appeals and lawsuits filed
against GFFP projects.

1. Number of appeals of GFFP
supported
projects.
2. Number of lawsuits of
GFFP supported projects.
3. Number of acres analyzed
C W P P

f o r

1. Examine local fire
department and police logs.
• Review type and
number of
complaints filed
per restoration
project.
• Review number
and type of
requests to initiate
or complete
restoration
projects.
1. Survey residents to
determine attitudes towards
GFFP partners and
cooperators in regards to
their involvement in
restoration efforts.
2. Focus groups of residents
to determine attitudes
towards GFFP partners and
cooperators.
1. Review appeals to
determine number filed
against GFFP projects.
2. Review lawsuits to
determine number filed
against GFFP supported

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Posttreatment/implementation

M

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Postprogram/treatment
implementation

M

Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Post-treatment
surveys/focus groups

M

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Post-program
implementation or annual

M

1 2 6
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

and treated through the NEPA
process.

Increase public’s
knowledge of
ecologically-based fuels
reduction.

projects.
3. Review the results of the
appeal. Was it upheld?
4. Length of time it took the
agency to process the
appeal.
1. Survey residents to
determine knowledge of
ecological-based fuels
reduction.
2. Focus groups during
GFFP filed
tips/presentations

Public’s knowledge of
ecologically-based fuels
reduction.

Short term-Program
Long term-GFFP area

Pre- and Post-program
surveys/focus groups

Steps in the Evaluation Process
Longitudinal Study – Process Evaluation – assess changes over time.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Collect baseline data-establish an understanding of what currently exists; before intervention (treatments or programs).
Collect data at stages as projects progress; either at regular time intervals or after major interventions.
What is the change from pre- to post-test? Analyze the data.
Answer the question – Have goals been met? Establish criteria for successful outcomes.
Recommendations – refine treatments and programs; guide planning and education efforts.
A sustainable community is linked to a sustainable ecosystem.
Healthy forest

Community well-being.

Areas to explore
1. Insurance industry – current status of homeowner insurance for forest fire loss.

C W P P

f o r

1 2 7
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

M

2. USFS and congressional representatives – determine public pressure thresholds to either suspend or omit restoration prescriptions.

References
Greater Flagstaff Forest Partnership and The Ponderosa Fire Advisory Council. 2004. Greater Flagstaff Community Wildfire Protection
Plan. Retrieved July 26, 2004 (http://www.gffp.org/docs/June_draft.htm).
United States Forest Service and Ecological Restoration Institute. 2004. The Multiparty Monitoring Handbook Series.
“Monitoring Social and Economic Effects of
(http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/spf/cfrp/monitoring/index.shtml).

Forest

Restoration.”

Handbook

Five.

Retrieved

July

8,

2004

Firewise Communities/USA. Retrieved August 3, 2004. (http://www.firewise.org/usa/).
Royse, David, Bruce A. Thyer, Deborah K. Padgett and T. K. Logan. 2001. Program Evaluation. 3d ed., Belmont,
CA:Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2004. “At Home in the Woods. Lessons Learned in the Wildland/Urban
Interface.” Retrieved July 30, 2004 (http://www.fema.gov/regions/viii/athome_woods.shtm).

C W P P

f o r

1 2 8
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

GOAL: Improve Economic Health of Community
Indicator

Objective

Metric /Method

Scale
Project vs. GFFP Area
Multiple: local, GFFP, &
w/in 150 miles.

Ensure the availability of forest
material at a sustainable and
constant level to support
appropriate forest product
industries.

1) # of acres and total
volume in long-term (10
years or greater) contracts
in the Flagstaff region.

Annual review of
acres/total volumes in
long-term contracts
provided by public
agencies (USFS and
State).

Provide employment
opportunities to Flagstaff area
residents in forest restoration
projects & forest product or
other related industries.

1) # of employees in forestrestoration & product
related companies in
Flagstaff region.
2) Proportion of Flagstaff
area residents (as % of
total) employed by forest
product and restorationrelated companies.
3) Proportion of permanent
to temporary employees
in …
4) Number of locally owned
businesses.
1) Number and duration of
training events and
programs per year.
2) # of participants in
training events &
programs/year.
3) Level of training
(professional, technical,
accredited, on the job).

Annual
surveys/questionnaire
s with all forest
product companies
utilizing small
diameter material.
GFEC collected data.
NAU College of
Business (Bank 1
center).

GFFP area of
product/material
distribution

Identify all area
institutions providing
professional training
related to forest
products and
restoration. Annual
survey of those
institutions to count
events, level of
training, and
participants.

GFFP area of
product/material
distribution. Need help
from economist on scale
decision.

Provide technical and
professional training to
Flagstaff area residents to work
on forest restoration projects.

C W P P

f o r

1 2 9
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Frequency

Cost
(H, M, L)

Annual

L

Annual

L

L

1) Total number, size, and
longevity of operational
businesses utilizing small
diameter material in
Flagstaff area.
2) Total # of products and
uses for SDM and
biomass.
3) Total volume (cords) of
small diameter material
processed locally in
Flagstaff area by
businesses.

Expand uses and products
associated with small diameter
material (SDM) and biomass.

Annual
surveys/questionnaire
with all forest
product companies
utilizing small
diameter material &
biomass. GFEC,
NAU, etc.

M

Flagstaff area = 150 mile radius
Small diameter material = <16”
Need to define*

GOAL: Institutional Health
Objective

Indicator

Method/Metrics

Annual budget of GFFP, with operations
as %.
Increase annual
budget to facilitate
forest ecosystem
restoration

# of donors, gifts, grants & contracts
awarded (public & private) reported by
category.

# of 5-6 figure project budgets/grants by
category

Increase
satisfaction among
partners with GFFP
operations

partner satisfaction (strategic direction,
conflict resolution, consensus building,
etc)

C W P P

f o r

Scale
Project vs. GFFP Area
All GFFP Area

Frequency

Cost
(H, M, L)

Annual

L

All GFFP Area

Annual

L

All GFFP Area

Annual

L

All GFFP Area

Annual

M

review of annual
budget
review of
development
database
review of annual
budget and/or
development
database
Survey (D.
Hospodarsky)

1 3 0
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Maintain & enhance
collaborative effort
among partners

Achieve annual
objectives &
develop long term
strategy

Implement MOUs
developed with
USFS Cooperators
(RMRS PNWRS,
SRS, FPL, CNF)
Increase
communication
among GFFP
partners and
cooperators

Increase visibility of
GFFP at regional &
national level

# of PAB members; PAB and work team
participation and attendance;
content analysis of meetings.
# of independent projects between
partners fostered by GFFP.

Proportion of annual goals & objectives
achieved

Long term strategic plan development
and perception among members of its
implementation.

All GFFP Area

Annual

L,

All GFFP Area

Annual

M
L

All GFFP Area

Annual

L

All GFFP Area

Annual

M

All GFFP Area

Annual

L

All GFFP Area

Annual

L

All GFFP Area

Annual

M
L

meeting minutes
review
reports from
partners
annual objectives
review and
cumulative
achievement of
goals
creation of
document, survey
of members

% of “shalls” in MOUs followed
MOU annual
reviews
Project updates are current
Minutes are shared betw/ BOD and
PAB, and among work teams
Partners’ perception of communication
# of visits to website, project areas,
media hits
requests for GFFP documents,
presentations

Survey of minutes,
website and
partners

web log,
interviews, elected
officials meeting,
GFFP records

Partial Glossary for Greater Flagstaff Forests Partnership
Research and Monitoring Team
C W P P

f o r

1 3 1
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s

Characteristic & Uncharacteristic– In ecological systems, this refers to whether or not a variable or condition of
the ecosystem or its parts is included in what is known about its historic or natural range of variability, which may be specific
to a given geographic area. E.g., we know from tree ring studies around Flagstaff that the historic range of variability for low
intensity fires for the period of 1500 to 1872 was 2-15 years. Thus fires that currently occur within that range are characteristic
in frequency (see Fire Regime).
Crown Fire, Active and Passive -- This is a fire that travels from one crown (or treetop) to another in dense stands of trees,
killing most trees in its path. However, even in intense crown fires, unburned strips may be left due to powerful, downward air
currents. A passive (or dependent) crown fire relies upon heat transfer from a surface fire burning below the crowns. An
active (or independent) crown fire does not require transfer of heat from below the crowns. Source: Barnes, Burton V., Donald
R. Zak, Shirley R. Denton, and Stephen H. Spurr. 1997. Forest Ecology (4th Edition). John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York,
NY. p. 282. (see also Surface Fire)
Fire Regime -- A fire regime is defined according to fire characteristics such as intensity, frequency, severity, season, extent,
duration, behavior, spatial distribution, and type of fire (see Crown Fire).
Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC)-- - http://www.frcc.gov/
Surface Fire -- A fire that burns over the forest floor, consuming litter, killing aboveground parst of herbaceous plants and
shrubs, and typically scorching the bases and crowns of trees. Source: Barnes, Burton V., Donald R. Zak, Shirley R. Denton,
and Stephen H. Spurr. 1997. Forest Ecology (4th Edition). John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, NY p. 281 (se also Crown
Fire).

Monitoring Cost Categories
L – Low = $1-1,000 per year or monitoring period/effort
M – Medium = $1,000 – 10,000
H – High = $10,000 - $100

C W P P

f o r

1 3 2
F l a g s t a f f & S u r r o u n d i n g
J a n u a r y 2 0 0 5

C o m m u n i t i e s