HomeMy WebLinkAboutDoc 085 - La Pine CWPP UpdateDeschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 -Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
For Board Business Meeting of January 26, 2015
DATE: 1/21115
FROM: Ed Keith Forestry (Administration) 541-322-7117
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2015-085, the 2015 Update ofthe La Pine
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)
PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS DATE? No
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The La Pine CWPP was first drafted in 2005, and last revised in 2010. Keeping on schedule for having
up to date and relevant CWPP's throughout the County the plan is due to be updated to capture work
that has been completed, update the risk assesment update the action action plan.
Several meetings were held with a steering committee to incoorporate input into this updated version of
the plan throughout the fall and early winter in 2014. This document will guide work in the Greater La
Pine area for the next 5 years. The Healthy Forest Restoration Act requires signatures of CWPP's by
local governments, the local fire district and the State forest management agency (ODF).
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
This plan does not obligate the County to any expenditures, however having an up to date CWPP
allows the County and other entities to seek funding for projects that are identified in the CWPP.
RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REQUESTED:
Move Board approval and signature of document 2015-085, the 2015 update of the La Pine
Community Wildfire Protection Plan.
ATTENDANCE: Ed Keith, County Forester; Alison Green, Project Wildfire Director
DISTRIBUTION OF DOCUMENTS:
Alison Green
Burgess Road Fire, La Pine, Oregon 2013
Greater La Pine Community
Wildfire Protection Plan
2015 Update
Prepared by
Alison Green
Project Wildfire
61150 SE 27th Street
Bend, OR 97702
(541) 322-7129
projectwildfire.pw@gmail.com
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
ii
Executive Summary
Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPPs) are documents that are designed to be
developed by local group of stakeholders who are invested in the wildland fire threat to
their area. The group of stakeholders typically consists of a representative from the fire
department, the state, any governing bodies and especially property owners. Each of
these representatives should bring their concerns regarding wildland fire to the
discussion and propose solutions to their concerns.
Although reducing the risk of high intensity wildland fire is the primary motivation
behind this plan, managing the larger landscape to restore forest health and more
resilient conditions and improving fire response by all fire agencies are also discussed
and addressed in this plan. Continued efforts have been made by county, state and
federal land management agencies to reduce the threat of high intensity wildland fires
through education and fuels reduction activities on public lands. In addition, private
residents have responded enthusiastically to the defensible space and preparation
guidelines and recommendations to reduce hazardous fuels on their own properties by
participating in programs such as Firewise and FireFree. All of these activities allow
the Greater La Pine Area to become a more Fire Adapted Community.
Wildland fire is a natural and necessary component of ecosystems across the country.
Central Oregon is no exception. Historically, wildland fires have shaped the forests
and wildlands valued by residents and visitors. These landscapes however, are now
significantly altered due to fire prevention efforts, modern suppression activities and a
general lack of large scale fires, resulting in overgrown forests with dense fuels that
burn more intensely than in the past. In addition, the recent increase in population has
led to a swell in residential development into forested land, in the wildland urban
interface (WUI).
The 2015 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan will assist all agencies
and La Pine area residents in the identification and prioritization of surrounding lands,
including federal and state lands, that are at risk from high intensity wildland fire. The
Greater La Pine CWPP identifies priorities and strategies for reducing hazardous
wildland fuels while improving forest health, supporting local industry and economy
and improving fire protection capabilities.
Addressing these goals in a cooperative, collaborative manner maintains alignment
with the goals; outlined in the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy
(Cohesive Strategy)–resilient landscapes, fire adapted communities and safe and
effective wildfire response. For more information on Cohesive Strategy, visit
http://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
iii
The Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan was developed by and for the
community members to enhance their understanding of their local surroundings and
how their landscape determines their risk of wildland fire. Each risk assessment and
recommendation in this plan has been made after careful consideration by the Steering
Committee. Specific recommendations for homeowners to reduce their risk can be
found on pages 35 and 36 of this CWPP. The Steering Committee’s recommendations
to achieve more fire resilient landscapes can be found on pages 31 and 40 of this
CWPP.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015 iv
Declaration of Agreement
The Healthy Forests Restoration Act requires that the applicable local government, the
local fire department, and the state entity responsible for forest management agree to the
Community Wildfire Protection Plan. The Greater La Pine Country Community Wildfire
Protection Plan was originally completed and signed on December 13th, 2005. The La
Pine City Council accepted a second revision of this plan on May 20th, 2010. As directed
by this CWPP, fuels reduction activities have been completed on public and private
lands. Recent wildland fires have also impacted the landscape. Combined, these events
have changed the priorities outlined in the two previous documents. The Deschutes
County Board of Commissioners accepted this plan on .
_______________________________________________________ __________
Mike Supkis, Fire Chief Date
La Pine Rural Fire Protection District
_______________________________________________________ __________
Kristin Dodd, Unit Forester Date
Oregon Department of Forestry
_______________________________________________________ __________
Alan Unger, Vice-Chair Date
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
_______________________________________________________ __________
Tony DeBone, Chair Date
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
_______________________________________________________ __________
Tammy Baney, Commissioner Date
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
______________________________________________________ __________
Ken Mulenex, Mayor Date
La Pine City Council
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
v
Acknowledgements
In the true spirit of collaboration, the following people are acknowledged for their
participation and commitment resulting in the 2015 Update of the Greater La Pine
Community Wildfire Protection Plan.
Albert Bauer Resident, Newberry Estates
Darrel Bennett Resident, Ponderosa Pines
Lanell Bennett Resident, Ponderosa Pines
Dan Daugherty Assistant Chief, La Pine Rural Fire Protection District
Kathryn DeBone Business Owner
Tony DeBone Deschutes County Commissioner
Jeff Dillon Deschutes National Forest
Ben Duda Oregon Department of Forestry
Alex Enna Deschutes National Forest
Shannon Evans Deschutes National Forest
Gordon R. Foster Oregon Department of Forestry
Ann Gawith La Pine Chamber of Commerce
Alison Green Project Wildfire
Don Hazeltine Resident, Ponderosa Pines
Michelle Hazeltine Resident, Ponderosa Pines
Chris Johnson Cascade Timberlands LLC
Doug Johnson Deschutes National Forest
Ed Keith Deschutes County Forester
Henry Kelly Resident, Forest View Acres
Karen Miller La Pine Parks & Recreation
Gary Mose Resident, Ponderosa Pines
Sue Mose Resident, Ponderosa Pines
Lorna Nolte Real Estate Agent, Nolte Properties
Stu Otto Oregon Department of Forestry
Sheldon Rhoden Bureau of Land Management
Mike Supkis Fire Chief, La Pine Rural Fire Protection District
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
vi
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ ii
Declaration of Agreement .............................................................................................................................................. iv
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................................................... v
Contact information ........................................................................................................................................................ viii
Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Planning Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... 3
Collaboration ................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Updated Background information ................................................................................................................................ 6
Private & Public Accomplishments ............................................................................................................................... 7
US Forest Service & Bureau of Land Management .................................................................................... 7
Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) ........................................................................................................ 10
Oregon Forestland-Urban Interface Fire Protection Act 1997 ........................................................ 10
Deschutes County ............................................................................................................................................ 12
Firewise ............................................................................................................................................................ 12
Fire Adapted Communities (FAC) ................................................................................................................ 12
Upper Deschutes River Coalition (UDRC) ................................................................................................... 13
Community Base Maps ................................................................................................................................................... 13
Wildland Urban Interface descriptions ........................................................................................................ 13
Fuel Hazards and Ecotypes ........................................................................................................................... 15
Communities at Risk ....................................................................................................................................... 18
Community Assessment of Risk .................................................................................................................................... 20
ODF Assessment of Risk Factors ................................................................................................................... 20
Risk of Wildfire Occurrence .................................................................................................................. 20
Hazard ...................................................................................................................................................... 20
Values Protected ...................................................................................................................................... 21
Other Community Values ...................................................................................................................... 21
Protection Capability .............................................................................................................................. 21
ODF Assessment of Risk ................................................................................................................................ 25
ODF Assessment of Risk Summary with Ranking ...................................................................................... 27
Areas of special concern ................................................................................................................................. 28
Prioritized Hazard Reduction Recommendations
and Preferred Treatment Methods ...................................................................................................................... 30
Prioritized Communities at Risk ................................................................................................................... 30
Priorities and Goals ........................................................................................................................................ 30
Federal and State owned lands ...................................................................................................................... 31
Industrial and non-industrial private timberlands ...................................................................................... 32
Private and County owned lands ................................................................................................................... 33
Recommendations to Reduce Structural Ignitability .................................................................................................. 35
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
vii
Structural vulnerability hazards and recommendations ............................................................................ 36
Defensible space check list .............................................................................................................................. 37
Other Recommendations – Education .......................................................................................................................... 38
Action Plan and Implementation. .................................................................................................................................. 39
Priorities ........................................................................................................................................................... 39
Improving Fire Protection Response ............................................................................................................ 39
Working Toward a More Fire-Adapted Community .................................................................................. 40
Restoring Fire Resilient Landscapes ............................................................................................................. 41
Fire Regime – Condition Class .......................................................................................................... 41
Evaluation and Monitoring ............................................................................................................................................ 44
Appendix A – Community Base Maps .......................................................................................................................... 46
Appendix B – Community Assessments ........................................................................................................................ 49
Appendix C – Detailed Structural Vulnerability Risk Assessment ............................................................................ 76
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
viii
Contact Information
Copies of this CWPP may be found and downloaded at:
www.projectwildfire.org
Mike Supkis, Fire Chief
La Pine Rural Fire Protection District
51550 Huntington Road
La Pine, OR 97739
(541) 536-2935
Ed Keith, County Forester
Deschutes County
61150 SE 27th Street
Bend, OR 97702
(541) 322-7117
Kristin Dodd, Unit Forester
Oregon Department of Forestry
PO Box 670
3501 NE 3rd Street
Prineville, OR 97754
(541) 447-5658
Sheldon Rhoden, Fire Management Specialist
Prineville District, Bureau of Land Management
3050 NE 3rd St
Prineville, OR 97754
(541) 416-6780
Doug Johnson, Fire Management Officer
Central Oregon Fire Management Service-Newberry Division
63095 Deschutes Market Road
Bend, OR 97701
(541) 383-4000
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
ix
Shannon Evans, Fire Management Officer
Central Oregon Fire Management Service-Crescent Division
136471 Highway 97 North
Crescent, OR 97733
(541) 433-3200
Alison Green, Program Director
Project Wildfire
61150 SE 27th Street
Bend, OR 97702
(541) 322-7129
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
1
Greater La Pine Community
Wildfire Protection Plan
2015 Update
Purpose
Since its creation in December 2005, the Greater La Pine Community Wildfire
Protection Plan has been revised twice (2010 and 2015) by a local steering committee
to be applied as it was intended by a wide variety of private landowners and public
agencies to decrease the risks of high intensity wildland fire in the La Pine Basin.
The mission of the Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan is to protect
against loss of life, property and natural resources as the result of wildland fire. The
Plan has met its mission and continues to serve as the leading document providing
direction and guidance to those seeking to protect the resources of the La Pine Basin.
The Greater La Pine CWPP Steering Committee reassembled in September 2014 to
review events, projects and activities that have occurred in the planning area that may
have influenced or otherwise changed the original priorities of the 2005 Plan and the
2010 update.
Although reducing the risk of high intensity wildland fire is the primary motivation
behind this plan, managing the forests and wildlands for hazardous fuels reduction and
fire resilience is only a part of the larger picture. Residents and visitors desire healthy,
fire-resilient forests and wildlands that provide habitat for wildlife, recreational
opportunities, and scenic beauty. By establishing a more fire-adapted community
through work on private property and a more fire-resilient landscape, the local fire
response will be more successful.
The Steering Committee further refined the purpose of the Greater La Pine Community
Wildfire Protection Plan:
• To protect lives and property from wildland fires;
• To instill a sense of personal responsibility and provide steps for taking
preventive actions regarding wildland fire;
• To increase public understanding of living in a fire-adapted ecosystem;
• To increase the community’s and fire personnel’s ability to prepare for, respond
to and recover from wildland fires;
• To restore fire-adapted ecosystems; and
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
2
• To improve the fire resilience of the landscape while protecting other social,
economic and ecological values.
This update outlines the revised priorities, strategies and action plans for fuels
reduction treatments in the wildland urban interface. The update again addresses
special areas of concern such as evacuation routes, and makes recommendations for
reducing structural vulnerability in prioritized communities at risk. This update is
designed as an addendum to the original 2005 CWPP which remains a living vehicle
for fuels reduction, educational, and other projects to decrease overall risks of loss from
wildland fire.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
3
Planning Summary
The La Pine City Council adopted the most recent update of the Greater La Pine
Community Wildfire Protection Plan on May 20th, 2010. Continued efforts have been
made by county, state and federal land management agencies to reduce the threat of
high intensity wildland fires through education and fuels reduction activities on public
lands. In addition, private residents have responded enthusiastically to the defensible
space and preparation guidelines and recommendations to reduce hazardous fuels on
their own properties.
In keeping with the strategy of the original Greater La Pine CWPP, the Steering
Committee revisited the planning outline in Preparing a Community Wildfire
Protection Plan: A Handbook for Wildland-Urban Interface Communities
(Communities Committee, Society of American Foresters, National Association of
Counties, and National Association of State Foresters 2005); and Deschutes County
Resolution 2004-093.
Eight steps are outlined to help guide Steering Committees through the planning
process:
Step one: Convene the decision makers.
The Greater La Pine CWPP Steering Committee reconvened in September 2014 to
review the work completed within and adjacent to the WUI boundaries on public and
private lands; and reevaluate the priorities for future fuels reduction treatments. The
Steering Committee is comprised of the Program Director from Project Wildfire; Fire
Chief from La Pine Rural Fire District; representatives from Oregon Department of
Forestry (ODF); representatives from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the
US Forest Service (USFS), the Deschutes County Forester, other stakeholders and
members of the public.
Step two: Involve state and federal agencies.
The Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) directed communities to collaborate with
local and state government representatives, in consultation with federal agencies and
other interested parties in the development of a CWPP. The Steering Committee
recognized the importance of this collaboration and involved not only members from
the USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management (BLM) but Oregon
Department of Forestry (ODF) and Deschutes County representatives as well. Each
agency brought a wealth of information about fuels reduction efforts planned and
completed along with educational information based on current research across the
nation.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
4
Step three: Engage interested parties.
Representatives from the Communities at Risk participated on the Steering Committee.
The Steering Committee also included members of local businesses, road districts,
homeowner/neighborhood associations, and other organizations and individuals. The
Steering Committee encouraged a collaborative environment for the stakeholders to
accomplish the 2015 revision of the Greater La Pine CWPP. Collaboration and
coordination between agencies, community members and landowners is the
fundamental goal of the Cohesive Strategy.
Step four: Establish a community base map.
The Steering Committee reviewed the previous maps and boundaries from the 2010
CWPP. The group approved the 2015 CWPP boundary, which now has nine (9) rating
areas that replaced the previous eight (8). The Steering Committee was able, with this
change to the base map, to include, the City of La Pine, additional structures and lands
in the risk assessment process.
Step five: Develop a community risk assessment.
The Steering Committee relied on the ODF Assessment of Risk Factors and the
Structural Vulnerability factors for each of the nine (9) Communities at Risk.
Step six: Establish community hazard reduction priorities and recommendations
to reduce structural ignitability.
Based on the assessments, the Steering Committee produced three groups of priorities
for fuels reduction treatments on public and private lands. The Steering Committee
also made recommendations to reduce structural ignitability based on information in
the assessments and local knowledge.
Step seven: Develop an action plan and assessment strategy.
The Steering Committee identified an action plan for key projects; roles and
responsibilities for carrying out the mission of the CWPP; potential funding needs and
the evaluation process for the CWPP itself.
Step eight: Finalize the Community Wildfire Protection Plan.
A draft of the Greater La Pine CWPP was available for public comment for 30 days
prior to the final signing and approval of the plan. The Greater La Pine Community
Wildfire Protection Plan was mutually approved by the La Pine Rural Fire District, the
Oregon Department of Forestry, the City of La Pine, and the Deschutes County Board
of Commissioners as demonstrated in the Declaration of Agreement.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
5
Collaboration
In 2002, President George Bush established the Healthy Forests Initiative (HFI) to
improve regulatory processes to ensure more timely decisions, greater efficiency and
better results in reducing the risk of catastrophic wildfire.
In 2003, the US Congress passed historical bi-partisan legislation: the Healthy Forests
Restoration Act (HFRA). This legislation directs federal agencies to collaborate with
communities in developing hazardous fuels reduction projects, and in the prioritization
of treatment areas as defined by a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). It
further provides authorities to expedite the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
review and approval process for fuels reduction projects on federal lands. The Act
further requires that 50% of funding allocated to HFRA projects be used to protect
communities at risk of wildland fire.
Since the enactment of this legislation, communities have had the opportunity to direct
where federal agencies place their fuels reduction efforts. HFRA also allows
community groups to apply for federal funding to make communities safer against the
threat of wildland fire.
Although some of the authorities under HFI and HFRA have been subsequently
challenged in federal courts, all have been successfully appealed and the original intent
and authorities under each remain the same.
In 2009, Congress passed the Federal Land Assistance, Management, and Enhancement
(FLAME) Act and called for a National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy
to address wildland fire related issues across the nation in a collaborative, cohesive
manner. The Cohesive Strategy was finalized in 2014 and represents the evolution of
national fire policy:
To safely and effectively extinguish fire, when needed; use fire where allowable;
manage our natural resources; and as a Nation, live with wildland fire.
The primary, national goals identified as necessary to achieving the vision are:
Resilient landscapes: Landscapes across all jurisdictions are resilient to fire-related
disturbances in accordance with management objectives.
Fire-adapted communities: Human populations and infrastructure can withstand a
wildfire without loss of life and property.
Wildfire response: All jurisdictions participate in making and implementing safe,
effective, efficient risk-based wildfire management decisions.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
6
As a Steering Committee, community members from the Greater La Pine area came
together with representatives from La Pine Rural Fire Protection District, the City of La
Pine, Oregon Department of Forestry, the USDA Forest Service, the USDI Bureau of
Land Management, Deschutes County and Project Wildfire to revise the Greater La
Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan.
Updated Background Information
Incorporated in 2006, the City of La Pine is located approximately 30 miles south of
Bend along US Highway 97. The greater La Pine area also includes the unincorporated
southern portion of Deschutes County. Situated primarily among thick forests of
lodgepole and ponderosa pine, the City of La Pine is home to 1,708 residents with a
total estimated population of 6,101 residents in the greater La Pine CWPP area.
Situated in a classic wildland urban interface environment, the La Pine area is also
home to abundant wildlife including deer, elk, mountain lion, and many species of birds
and fish. Within the planning area there is also a significant amount of public land with
developed and dispersed recreation sites, which provide valuable recreation
opportunities to both residents and visitors. In the summer months, the County
estimates an additional transient population of up to 10,000 people that occupy these
areas creating a seasonal challenge for those agencies responsible for fire suppression
and evacuation.
Historically, the La Pine basin was predominately meadow with scattered tracts of
lodgepole and ponderosa pine. Following logging in the first half of the 1900’s many
of these stands naturally regenerated to lodgepole pine. Lodgepole pine is a species
that lives and dies by high intensity and active crown fires. It is therefore less desirable
from a wildland fire standpoint because of the risk these stands pose to the communities
of the La Pine basin. Today, with less stand management, logging activity and highly
effective wildland fire suppression, the forestland is predominantly dense lodgepole
pine with some mixed stands of lodgepole and ponderosa pine. Much of the understory
consists of dense Bitterbrush and Manzanita with some areas of native bunchgrasses.
Due to the lack of disturbance, these stands continue to become more and more
overcrowded.
The Greater La Pine community presents a unique challenge for the wildfire planning
process. Not only are the core city business and residential areas at significant risk
from wildfire, so too are the many subdivisions outside the city limits that have been
developed in the thick of nearby forests. Dense stands of trees, topographical
challenges and thick ground vegetation contribute to the overall wildland fire risk in the
Greater La Pine planning area.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
7
The climate in La Pine is typical of the east slopes of the Cascade Mountains, with
most of the annual precipitation coming as winter snow or fall and spring rains.
Summers are dry and prone to frequent thunderstorms. These thunderstorms frequently
cause multiple fire ignitions.
The City of La Pine rests along US Highway 97, a major transportation route through
the state. As central Oregon grows, more residents and tourists crowd the highway and
increase congestion, particularly during the summer months when fire season reaches
its peak. As part of the central community, transportation routes are included in the
consideration of the WUI boundary due to their critical role as roads and travel
corridors that link communities together and serve as evacuation routes.
Public & Private Accomplishments
As part of the ongoing wildland fire risk management of the surrounding public and
private forestlands, the US Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, Oregon
Department of Forestry, Deschutes County and private landowners are engaged in
hazardous fuels treatment projects across the planning area.
US Forest Service & Bureau of Land Management
Currently, under the combined management of the Central Oregon
Fire Management Service (COFMS), the US Forest Service and the
Bureau of Land Management are involved in multiple fuels projects
in WUI areas hat stretch across this planning area to reduce
hazardous fuels and the likelihood of high intensity wildfire.
It is important to note that each project area requires multiple types of
fuels reduction activities to achieve the desired result including mechanical shrub mowing,
tree thinning, hand piling, and under burning. Therefore, multiple entries are required in
order to adequately restore forest ecosystem health and reduce hazardous fuels. The
ultimate goal for these projects is to reduce the potential for high intensity fire that can
spread to tree crowns, requiring costly suppression efforts and causing large losses on the
landscape as well as in and around communities.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
8
Table 1 — Current Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Projects on Public Land
Project Name
Total
Acres
Treatment Types
Status
Completion
Date
Burgess Road Completed 2009
Riverview 594
Pre-Commercial
thinning, hand piling
& burning, mowing Completed 2011
Byway* 2,636
Pre-Commercial
thinning, hand piling,
burning & Mowing Completed 2012
Darlene 1,460
Pre-Commercial
thinning, hand piling,
burning & Mowing
Completed 2010
Wildcat 66
Commercial thinning,
biomass utilization,
pre- commercial
thinning, hand piling
& burning
Completed 2013
Doghair 3,018
Commercial thinning,
biomass utilization,
pre- commercial
thinning, hand piling
& burning
Active 2015
Prairie
2014*
2,690
Commercial thinning,
biomass utilization,
pre- commercial
thinning, hand piling
& burning
Planning
TBD
Total
10,464
*Byway and Prairie both will be implemented in both La Pine & UDRC CWPP boundaries.
The following map shows BLM projects in the La Pine planning area.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
9
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
10
The US Forest Service is currently implementing the Ogden Project, which is located in
and around the Newberry National Volcanic Monument. The Ogden project area has
approximately 4 timber sales in the project area. The Forest Service will be finishing up
the Dillman project this fall with prescribed burning. Flat Project Area is now in the
planning phase and well as the Upper Deschutes River Coalition Categorical Exclusion
(UDRC-CE) Project Area. This project aims to capture many small parcels that have
been missed in previous fuel treatments in the area. There is a parcel near Ponderosa
Pines that will be treated in the UDRC-CE. Finally, there is project area near Masten
Road called Ringo that is now in the planning phase to determine the treatment timeline
for that project area.
Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF)
Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) has been focusing on
improving the Highway 97 corridor, which is critical in a large
wildfire situation. ODF will continue to work with private
landowners to accomplish fuel reduction on lots throughout the
Greater La Pine CWPP boundary. In the last five years, there have
been many grants that have allowed for chipping of the material
removed in fuel reduction projects on private lands. ODF has
also conducted many voluntary Senate Bill 360 re-certifications for residents
throughout the Greater La Pine CWPP Boundary.
Oregon Forestland-Urban Interface Fire Protection Act of 1997
While not utilized as one of the assessment tools for this update, the Steering
Committee offers and promotes the standards for private lands outlined under this
legislation so it is noted here for reference.
The Oregon Forestland-Urban Interface Fire Protection Act, also known as Senate Bill
360, enlists the aid of property owners toward the goal of turning fire-vulnerable urban
and suburban properties into less volatile zones where firefighters may more safely and
effectively defend homes from wildfires. The law requires property owners in
identified forestland-urban interface areas to reduce excess vegetation around structures
and along driveways. In some cases, it is also necessary to create fuel breaks along
property lines and roadsides.
The process of identifying forestland-urban interface areas follows steps and definitions
described in Oregon Administrative Rules. Briefly, the identification criteria include:
• Lands within the county that are also inside an Oregon Department of Forestry
protection district.
• Lands that meet the state’s definition of “forestland.”
• Lands that meet the definition of “suburban” or “urban”; in some cases, “rural”
lands may be included within a forestland-urban interface area for the purpose
of maintaining meaningful, contiguous boundaries.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
11
• Lots that are developed, that are 10 acres in size or smaller, and which are
grouped with other lots with similar characteristics in a minimum density of
four structures per 40 acres.
A classification committee identifies forestland-urban interface areas in each county.
Once areas are identified, a committee applies fire risk classifications to the areas. The
classifications range from “low” to “high density extreme," and the classification is
used by a property owner to determine the size of a fuel break that needs to be
established around a structure. The classification committee reconvenes every five
years to review and recommend any changes to the classifications.
The Oregon Department of Forestry is the agency steward of this program. It supplies
information about the Act’s fuel-reduction standards to property owners. ODF also
mails each of these property owners a certification card, which may be signed and
returned to ODF after the fuel reduction standards have been met. Certification relieves
a property owner from the act’s fire cost recovery liability. This takes effect on
properties that are within a forestland-urban interface area and for which a certification
card has not been received by the Department of Forestry. In these situations, the state
of Oregon may seek to recover certain fire suppression costs from a property owner if
a fire originates on the owner's property, the fuel reduction standards have not been
met, and ODF incurs extraordinary suppression costs. The cost-recovery liability under
the Oregon Forestland-Urban Interface Fire Protection Act is capped at $100,000.
The specific recommendations under Senate Bill 360 for private lands are outlined
under Prioritized Hazard Reduction Recommendations and Preferred Treatment
Methods in this CWPP.
Deschutes County
Deschutes County offers a Sweat Equity program to private
landowners who wish to reduce hazardous fuels on their properties.
There have been multiple Sweat Equity projects completed in the
Greater La Pine area. Deschutes County has partnered with the Parks
District to treat a strategic parcel located near the La Pine High
school. Finally, a maintenance mow has been completed near the Crescent Creek
neighborhood in the 2014 summer before fire season.
Firewise Communities USA
The Firewise Communities USA program is a national
recognition program which highlights communities that
have chosen to complete and maintain defensible space;
ensure adequate access, water and signage; promote
ongoing fire prevention education, and build or retro-fit
structures with non-combustible building materials such as
siding, decks and roofing. Adequate water availability and
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
12
access are also required. Firewise Communities USA now recognizes Ponderosa Pines
as a Firewise Community in the La Pine CWPP area.
The Firewise Communities program recognizes communities who have demonstrated
their commitment to wildfire preparedness. Through these steps, the Ponderosa Pines
neighborhood has effectively lowered their wildfire risk. They have fostered
collaboration between neighbors, increased awareness and their communities’ ability to
respond to wildfire. Their neighborhood provide a safe and effective location for fire
professionals to work and Ponderosa Pines residents’ have dramatically decreased their
odds of losing their homes to wildfire.
Fire Adapted Communities (FAC)
This CWPP contributes to the over-arching framework and goal of the national Fire-
Adapted Communities (FAC) program. The FAC program acknowledges that people
and nature are increasingly threatened by fire, despite fire’s natural, beneficial role. At
the same time, firefighting costs are escalating and diverting money away from
proactive land management. The solution is to make
natural areas and communities more fire-ready so
that we can allow fire to play its natural role at a
meaningful scale. This program is in direct
alignment with the Cohesive Strategy goal of
creating fire adapted communities.
The Fire Adapted Communities (FAC) initiative and the FAC Learning Network are
also helping homeowners, communities and land managers in fire-prone areas prepare
for inevitable fires -- to “live with fire” safely. A fire-adapted community
acknowledges and takes responsibility for its wildfire risk, and implements appropriate
actions at all levels. Actions address resident safety, homes, neighborhoods, businesses
and infrastructure, forests, parks, open spaces and other community assets. There is no
end-point in becoming a fire-adapted community. Sustaining, growing and adapting
strategies, partnerships and capacity through time are key. Visit www.fireadapted.org
for more information.
US Forest Service/UDRC Participating Agreement: Collaboration
in Action
The Forest Service has recently entered into a participating
agreement with the Upper Deschutes River Coalition (UDRC). This
is a new concept for both the Forest Service and the UDRC. The
Forest Service will provide financial assistance, skilled workforce
and specialized equipment the UDRC does not have for activities
like brush mowing, prescribed burning, hazard tree falling and
ladder fuel reduction thinning. This is an opportunity for everyone
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
13
to take measures to reduce wildfire risk regardless of the landownership. This is an
excellent example of all stakeholders working across jurisdictional lines to accomplish
effective fuel reduction in high risk WUI areas.
Newberry Country: A Plan for Southern Deschutes
County
Deschutes County developed an amendment to its
Comprehensive Plan in 2012 to formally recognize an area
specific plan titled Newberry Country: A Plan for Southern
Deschutes County. The Plan encompasses the rural areas south
of Lava Butte except Sunriver and La Pine, which are
governed separately. It addresses the area’s unique assets,
local values and preferences for growth and development, the
environment, natural hazards, transportation and more.
The plan provides a framework for implementing a vision for
building a stronger, more resilient rural community in Southern Deschutes County by
managing growth to 2032. It recognizes the realities facing rural Deschutes County,
while acknowledging what governments can and cannot influence. It is part of the
County’s Comprehensive Plan, but has more geographically specific goals and policies.
It also contains a vision statement conveying the expectations of South County
residents for the future, an inventory of existing conditions in the area, and the results
of the public involvement process. It is being developed with significant public input
and calls for collaboration among all sectors: government, businesses, non-profits, and
residents to achieve a shared vision. For the copy of the full South Deschutes County
Plan, visit Deschutes South County Plan.
Community Base Maps
The Steering Committee agreed to utilize the best available information and data from
the US Forest Service, Oregon Department of Forestry, the Fire Learning Network and
Deschutes County databases. Using this data, the Steering Committee relied on the
following maps and GIS data (Appendix A) to complete the updated risk assessment
process:
• Greater La Pine WUI and CWPP boundaries with Communities at Risk;
• 2014 Deschutes County tax lot and population data;
• Fire starts in the last ten years
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
14
Wildland Urban Interface Description
The Healthy Forests Restoration Act defines wildland urban interface (WUI) as an area
within or adjacent to an at risk community that has been identified by a community in
its wildfire protection plan or, for areas that do not have such a plan, as an area:
• extending ½ mile from the boundary of an at risk community,
• extending 1½ miles from the boundary of an at risk community when other
criteria are met such as a sustained steep slope or a geographic feature that
creates an effective firebreak, or is classified as fire condition class 3 land,
• or that is adjacent to an evacuation route.
The WUI was refined and adjusted to better reflect the definition of community as
outlined in this document and included considerations of community growth, seasonal
recreation areas, and access and egress corridors that were not identified in the initial
plan.
The committee then expanded the definition of the WUI based on the three categories
of community as defined in the 2001 Federal Register. Those categories include:
Category 1. Interface Community
The Interface Community exists where structures directly abut wildland fuels. There is
a clear line of demarcation between residential, business, and public structures and
wildland fuels. Wildland fuels do not generally continue into the developed area. The
development density for an Interface Community is usually three or more structures per
acre, with shared municipal services. Fire protection is generally provided by a local
government fire department with the responsibility to protect the structure from both an
interior fire and an advancing wildland fire. An alternative definition of the Interface
Community emphasizes a population density of 250 or more people per square mile.
Category 2. Intermix Community
The Intermix Community exists where structures are scattered throughout a wildland
area. There is no clear line of demarcation; wildland fuels are continuous outside of and
within the developed area. The development density in the Intermix ranges from
structures very close together to one structure per 40 acres. Fire protection districts
funded by various taxing authorities normally provide life and property fire protection
and may also have wildland fire protection responsibilities. An alternative definition of
Intermix Community emphasizes a population density of between 28-250 people per
square mile.
Category 3. Occluded Community
The Occluded Community generally exists in a situation, often within a city, where
structures abut an island of wildland fuels (e.g., park or open space). There is a clear
line of demarcation between structures and wildland fuels. The development density for
an Occluded Community is usually similar to those found in the Interface Community,
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
15
but the occluded area is usually less than 1,000 acres in size. Fire protection is normally
provided by local government fire departments.
For planning purposes in the 2015 Greater La Pine CWPP, the Steering Committee
agreed that the defined wildland urban interface boundary will include all three
categories of community as defined above.
The Steering Committee reviewed and approved the WUI boundaries of the 2010
CWPP. The Deschutes County line marks the southern edge of the WUI and the Upper
Deschutes River Coalition CWPP borders the WUI to the north. The vast majority of
land adjacent to the identified communities is federal land. The Greater La Pine
wildland urban interface boundary is approximately 100 square miles. See maps in
Appendix A.
Fuel Hazards and Ecotypes
The Greater La Pine area is a mosaic of vegetation types including:
• Ponderosa pine
• Lodgepole pine
• Manzanita
• Bitterbrush
• Riparian areas
Ponderosa pine is currently found in meadows and in scattered tracts of lodgepole pine
stands. There are relatively few pure stands of ponderosa pine remaining in the La Pine
basin.
Historically, ponderosa pine forests contained more understory grasses and shrubs than
are present today. These plants combined with fallen pine needles, formed fast-burning
fuels that led to recurrent widespread burning. Frequent low-intensity ground fires that
occurred every 11-15 years characterize the fire regime for ponderosa pine. The pattern
of low ground fires and stand dynamics resulted in the open park-like conditions that
early inhabitants and visitors found in the region.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
16
Less stand management, logging activity and highly effective wildland fire suppression,
have significantly altered the ponderosa pine forest type. Removal of the larger
“yellow belly” pines has dramatically decreased clumpy open forests, replacing them
with more evenly spaced and smaller “black-bark” forests. Similar to other species of
conifer forest types, the suppression of fire has greatly increased the stocking levels
(number of trees) and density of trees, creating ladder fuels and putting the stands at
risk of attack from insects and disease. These factors have contributed to more intense
fires in ponderosa pine forests in recent years.
Mature lodgepole pine in central Oregon is characterized by dense, uniform stands, an
absence of other species, and a general lack of understory shrub or herbs (although
bitterbrush is often found with mature lodgepole pine). Lodgepole pine forests exhibit
a moderate severity fire regime with a fire return interval between 60 and 80 years.
Fire in lodgepole pine stands can be low, moderate, or severe over time and often result
in full stand replacement.
In addition to fire, mountain pine beetles are worth noting as a
significant disturbance agent as the two processes are linked. The
fire cycle in lodgepole pine is 60-80 years and occurs as follows: a
stand replacement fire leads to stand regeneration è Dead snags
from the fire fall to the forest floor and fuels begin to accumulate è
Windstorms blow more trees to the ground è Forest fires burn
some of the downed logs and lead to heart rot in the standing trees
è The heart rot stresses the stands and makes it vulnerable to attack by the mountain
pine beetle è A major outbreak of the mountain pine beetle causes significant
mortality and soon the conditions are ripe for another stand replacement fire. In recent
years, the mountain pine beetle has moved from at risk forests in the northern part of
Deschutes County near Sisters and Black Butte Ranch to those in the southern parts
including Sunriver, La Pine and area in between.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
17
Manzanita is a shrub that occurs throughout the Greater La Pine area, usually mixed
with other shrub species such as bitterbrush. Manzanita is established both through
sprouts and seeds that are stimulated by fire. Fires in Manzanita are conducive to rapid
and extensive fire spread due to both physical and chemical characteristics. Manzanita
is particularly susceptible to fire due to its stand density, presence of volatile materials
in the leaves, low moisture content of the foliage and persistence of dead branches and
stems.
Bitterbrush occurs throughout the Greater La Pine area on all aspects and elevations.
Fire severely damages bitterbrush, especially if rain is not received shortly after a burn.
Bitterbrush is fire dependent, but not fire resistant. It regenerates mostly from seed after
a fire and is often from caches of seeds made by rodents. Bitterbrush will sprout after
burning regardless of the severity of the burn and matures relatively quickly.
Consequently, the greater La Pine wildland-urban interface area is rich with patches of
bitterbrush that provide fire-ready ladder fuels for taller tree stands.
A riparian area is defined as the strip of moisture-loving vegetation growing along the
edge of a natural water body. The exact boundary of the riparian area is often difficult
to determine because it is a zone of transition between the water body and the upland
vegetation. The Little Deschutes River and Paulina Creek flow through the greater La
Pine WUI boundary creating large riparian areas along the middle and northeastern
portions of the planning area. Vegetation types in these riparian areas vary from
grasses, forbs and willows. The primary concern from a wildland fire perspective is
during the spring and autumn when the vegetation has either cured or “greenup” has not
begun.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
18
The result of the fuel hazards and forest types in the greater La Pine area is an
overgrowth of trees, forest floor fuels and an abundance of dead or dying vegetation
that contribute to a substantially elevated risk of wildland fires that are difficult to
control. These overly dense conditions lead to fire behavior that produce flame lengths
over eight feet with crowning and torching that can result in stand replacement severity
fires.
Not only have large, stand replacement fires not occurred, but also the more frequent
low intensity fires have not been allowed to burn either. This practice of fire exclusion
along with insufficient vegetation/fuels reduction has resulted in the buildup of
excessive live and dead fuels.
Fires too, have significantly impacted the La Pine landscape. The table below
recognizes the large fires that have endangered the Greater La Pine area since 2000. All
of these large wildfires have threatened residents and prompted evacuations within
multiple neighborhoods and La Pine State Park.
Fire Name Fire Size (acres) Year Occurred
Crane Complex 713 2001
Pine Forest 120 2001
Davis Lake 21,181 2003
Park Fire 139 2005
Burgess Road 168 2013
Communities at Risk
The Healthy Forest Initiative (HFI) and the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA)
define a “community at risk” from wildland fire as one that:
• is a group of homes and other structures with basic infrastructure and
services (such as utilities and collectively maintained transportation routes)
in or adjacent to federal land;
• has conditions conducive to large-scale wildland fire; and
• faces a significant threat to human life or property as a result of a wildland
fire.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
19
The Steering Committee revised the base map to identify the following nine (9)
Communities at Risk, which incorporate several neighborhoods within the Greater La
Pine’s Planning Area. The Steering Committee defined these Communities at Risk by
using major roadways, county boundaries and city limit distinctions.
• Day Road Corridor – 5,181 acres with 1,988 structures
including named developments: Deschutes River Recreation Sites, Terra De
Oro Estates, Parkway Acres, Meadowcrest Acres, Tall Pines, Ammon
Estates, Crane Prairie, Pine Meadows Tracts, Bieler Boys Estates,
Danielle’s Acres, Los Pinos, Alpine Meadows, Jacobsen’s North Addition,
Forest View, CW Reeve Resort, Lynne Acres, Anderson Acres, Jacobsen’s
South Addition, Evergreen Park, and Ahern Acres.
• 6th & Dorrance Meadow – 5,540 acres with 887 structures
including named developments: Conifer Acres, Lechner Acres, Sand Lilly
Estates, Woodland Park Homesites, Safari Acres, Glenwood Acres,
Newberry Neighborhood, Timber Haven, Rosland Vacation Plat, Ponderosa
Pines East, Deschutes River Acres, Rio Land, Bluewood, CL & D Ranch,
Singing Pines, South Park, Pierce Tracts, and Dora’s Acres.
• Finley Butte – 17,794 acres with 62 structures limited structural fire
protection and Oregon Department of Forestry provides wildland protection
to the private lands in this rating area. Includes named neighborhoods Roan
Park and Darlene Way.
• Newberry – 9,147 acres with 209 structures including the named
development Newberry Estates.
• City of La Pine – 4,502 acres with 826 structures this rating area includes
the incorporated City of La Pine and immediately surrounding
neighborhoods within city limits.
• Ponderosa Pines – 5,430 acres with 374 structures including the named
development Ponderosa Pines.
• Masten – 8,968 acres with 146 structures including named developments:
Wagon Trail North, Hockman, The South Forty, and Deer Forest Acres.
• Wickiup – 11,126 acres with 26 structures – no fire protection from La Pine
RFPD, the private lands within this rating area have wildland fire protection
provided by Oregon Department of Forestry.
• Little Deschutes River – 4,830 acres with 380 structures
including named developments: Summit Acres, Lazy River, Pine Crest
Ranchettes, Holmes Acres, Bradcomb, Potters Estates, Cagle Subdivision,
La Pine Meadows, Sundown Park, and Wickiup Commercial.
Although the above rating areas are located within the overall WUI acreage, they are
also assessed separately under this CWPP.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
20
Community Assessment of Risk
For the 2015 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan the Steering
Committee used the Oregon Department of Forestry Assessment of Risk Factors to
determine numerical value for the nine (9) Communities at Risk.
ODF Assessment of Risk Factors
The ODF Assessment of Risk Factors is based on five categories of evaluation that
include a variety of information designed to identify and evaluate wildland fire risk
across Oregon: risk of wildfire occurrence, hazard, protection capability, human and
economic values protected and structural vulnerability.
Risk of Wildfire Occurrence
The risk of wildfire occurrence refers to the likelihood of a fire occurring based on
historical fire occurrence, home density and ignition sources. The risk is based on
historical evidence of fire starts as well as ready ignition sources like abundant dry
lightning storms, debris burning, equipment use, juveniles, widespread camping, and
arson.
The current condition of the vegetation on the federal and private lands within the
greater La Pine WUI poses an extreme risk of high intensity wildland fire. La Pine is
also threatened by the likely possibility of a crown fire sweeping into the community,
or by embers falling on the community from an adjacent wildland fire.
Hazard
The hazard rating describes resistance to control once a fire starts based on weather,
topography (including slope, aspect and elevation), vegetation and crown fire potential.
As stated earlier, less logging activity and effective wildland fire suppression has led to
a forestland of dense lodgepole pine with some mixed stands of lodgepole and
ponderosa pine. Much of the understory consists of dense bitterbrush and manzanita
with some areas of native bunchgrasses. Due to the lack of disturbance these stands
continue to become more and more overcrowded.
A wildland fire could start within the communities or in any of the forested areas
adjacent to and/or surrounding the communities. With a fire of any significance, it
could be difficult to assemble the resources necessary to adequately address all of the
fire and life safety issues that could arise in the early stages of emergency operations.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
21
Values Protected
The human and economic values protected in the Greater La Pine planning area are
based on home density per ten acres and community infrastructure such as power
substations, transportation corridors, water and fuel storage, etc.
There are approximately 4,900 homes in the unincorporated area of La Pine, with an
appraised value of $331 million. In addition, there are approximately 29,430 acres of
private land with an appraised value of $402 million. The essential infrastructure
includes utilities, roads, water and sewer systems and has an approximate replacement
value of $275,000 per mile for electrical transmission lines; $150,000 per mile of
electrical distribution lines; and $2 million per electrical sub-station. Loss to roads,
water and sewer systems would be minimal because most are underground or otherwise
not flammable.
If a large wildland fire occurs in this area which resulted in the closure of US Highway
97, the economic loss to local businesses and central Oregon in general would amount
to more than $3 million each day for multiple areas throughout central Oregon
including Sunriver, Bend and Sisters. The medical needs of the local residents would
be significantly impacted with the closure of Highway 97; there are limited local
medical services in the Greater La Pine area. Currently, the City of La Pine only houses
one medical clinic that could be quickly overwhelmed in the event of a large wildfire.
Other Community Values
Of high importance to residents and business owners in La Pine is the value placed on
scenic beauty and recreational opportunities that exist on public lands both within and
adjacent to the planning area.
The loss of recreational use by visitors to the area as a result of scenic quality,
specifically large “burn over” areas, will have an unknown economic impact not only to
the La Pine area, but to the remainder of Deschutes County and neighboring cities like
Bend, Redmond and Sisters. If a large wildland fire occurs in this area, the result will
be catastrophic loss to both the developed and dispersed recreational opportunities in
the greater La Pine area.
Protection capability
Fire protection capability in the Greater La Pine planning area ranges from low to high
with an average ranking of moderate. The ratings are based on fire protection
capability and resources to control and suppress wildland and structural fires. The
ratings also consider response times and community preparedness.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
22
La Pine Rural Fire Protection District
The La Pine Rural Fire Protection District provides first response structural and
wildland fire coverage within its 115 square mile fire service district supported by local
taxpayers. The District provides Emergency Medical Services, including Advanced
Life Support paramedic transport, within a 1,000 square mile service area.
A five-member elected board of directors manages La Pine Rural Fire Protection
District. The District consists of 23 career and 21 volunteer reserve and student
scholarship positions involved directly in fire and EMS Operations. The resident
students participate in the Fire/EMS program at Central Oregon Community College.
There are two administrative personnel and 12 support volunteers who provide off-line
support services. All firefighting personnel receive training in wildland urban interface
firefighting practices, structural fire protection and suppression techniques, and other
related topics. The District uses the National Incident Management Systems (NIMS)
Incident Command System and all personnel have received training and continue to
train in its use. The District works out of three fire stations located on Huntington Road
(downtown La Pine), Burgess and Day Road, and South Century Drive. It maintains a
fleet of three structural fire engines, three Advanced Life Support paramedic
ambulances, three heavy brush engines, three water tenders, two light brush engines,
and three staff/utility vehicles.
The District is a party to the Central Oregon Fire Department Mutual Aid Agreement.
In the event of a major fire the department may request assistance from all other fire
departments that are signatory to the agreement. In addition to Central Oregon Fire
Departments, the District cooperates with wildland fire protection agencies in the area
including Oregon Department of Forestry, Walker Range Fire Protection Association,
the US Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management.
Oregon Department of Forestry
Within the Greater La Pine planning area, private forestland is protected by the Central
Oregon District of the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF). ODF provides wildland
fire response for fires burning on, or threatening private forestlands paying a Forest
Patrol Assessment. There are some areas within the Greater La Pine WUI that receive
dual protection from ODF and the Fire Districts because they are located within the
rural fire protection district and are also classified as private forestland within the ODF
district. In those cases the fire district provides initial response and transfers fire
command to ODF upon their arrival.
During fire season, typically June through October, ODF provides ten engines, one
five-person hand crew and one dozer, all are available for initial attack response in the
Prineville-Sisters unit. Statewide resources are also available to ODF including initial
attack hand crews, dozers, water tenders, helicopters, air tankers, and overhead staff
positions, depending on statewide needs. During fire season these resources are in high
demand and may not always be available. In addition to Oregon Department of Forestry
suppression capabilities, ODF cooperates with wildland fire protection agencies in the
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015 23
area including La Pine Rural Fire Protection District, Walker Range Fire Protection
Association, the US Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management.
USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management
The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) provide wildland fire
protection on the federal lands within the Greater La Pine planning area. Together,
they are identified as the Central Oregon Fire Management Service (COFMS).
COFMS includes the Deschutes National Forest, the Ochoco National Forest, the
Crooked River National Grassland, and the Prineville District of the BLM. These four
units are managed cooperatively under combined leadership, with an Interagency Fire
Management Officer, two Deputy Fire Management Officers, and a Board of Directors
including decision makers from both agencies, with Forest Service District Rangers and
BLM Field Managers. COFMS has a central dispatching facility in partnership with
the Oregon Department of Forestry that serves as a Coordination Center for fire and
fuels operations, as well as safety and training issues for COFMS.
In total, COFMS provides the following resources: 26 engines, six initial attack hand
crews, six prevention units, two dozers, two water tenders, one Type 3 helicopter, 35
smoke jumpers, two interagency Hotshot Crews (Redmond & Prineville), one Type 2
helicopter with 20 rappellers, one Type 1 helicopter, Central Oregon Dispatch Center
(COIDC), Redmond Air Center, an air tanker base, a regional fire cache and required
overhead staff positions. During fire season these resources are in high demand and
may not always be available. Anytime an incident grows beyond the capability of the
local resources a request may be made to ODF and to the Pacific Northwest
Coordination Center for additional wildland fire fighting resources.
Law Enforcement
Police services are provided by Deschutes County Sheriff in the La Pine basin. The
Sheriff’s Office has responsibility for ensuring the safe and orderly evacuation of the
community in the event of a major emergency. A number of resources have been
allocated to accomplish this task including hi/lo sirens on vehicles; emergency
notification via radio and television; reverse 9-1-1 capability; Sheriff’s Office staff; La
Pine Rural Fire Protection District staff and community-wide volunteers. Any other
issues relative to a major emergency are addressed by the Countywide Disaster Plan
and the County Department of Emergency Services.
Oregon State Police assists the federal agency law enforcement efforts and cooperates
with Deschutes County for protection in the greater La Pine area.
Community Preparedness
Also under the category of Protection Capabilities, the ODF Assessment of Risk
examines a community’s level of organization and preparedness to respond in an
emergency situation. The assessment looks at whether the area has an organized
stakeholder group that looks out for its own area through mitigation efforts, a phone
tree, etc. Or, does the area only receive outside efforts such as newsletters, mailings or
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
24
FireFree information from other groups? In the Greater La Pine WUI, the
Communities at Risk varied from having a high level of organization to not having any.
The Steering Committee used local knowledge to determine the level of preparedness.
The American Red Cross offers a gamut of tools to boost community preparedness
such as community presentations on emergency preparedness kits. The Red Cross gives
presentations to church groups, HOAs, citizen groups, etc. Red Cross plays a vital in
emergency response during large wildfire events. At any time of day or night, trained
Red Cross volunteers respond to the scene of structural or wildland fires and provide
food, shelter, and emotional support to those affected.
The following table is an updated summary of the nine Communities at Risk, the value
ratings and total score for each community in each category. The higher the total score
in this assessment, the higher the overall risk. The specific definitions for the point
values in the ODF risk ratings are below.
Risk: Describes the likelihood of a fire occurring based on historical fire occurrence
and ignition sources.
Hazard: Describes resistance to control once a fire starts based on weather, topography
and fuel.
Protection capability: Describes fire protection capability and resources based on type
of protection, response times and community preparedness.
Values protected: Describes the human and economic values in the community based
on home density per ten acres and community infrastructure such as power substations,
transportation corridors, water and fuel storage, etc.
Structural vulnerability: Describes the likelihood that structures will be destroyed by
wildfire based on roofing and building materials, defensible space, separation of homes,
fire department access and street signage.
Total score: A sum of all the points from each category surveyed.
Rank: An ordered numerical ranking based on the total points.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
25
Table 1 – ODF Assessment of Risk
6 th
&
Do
r
r
a
n
c
e
Da
y
R
o
a
d
Co
r
r
i
d
o
r
Ci
ty
o
f
L
a
Pi
n
e
Wi
c
k
i
u
p
Ma
s
t
e
n
Fi
n
l
e
y
Bu
t
t
e
Li
t
t
l
e
De
s
c
h
u
t
e
s
Ne
w
b
e
r
r
y
Po
n
d
e
r
o
s
a
Pi
n
e
s
Likelihood of
fire occurring
Fire occurrence 20 20 20 10 20 10 20 20 20
Ignition risk -
home density 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 5 5
Ignition risk -
other factors 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Total 35 35 35 20 30 20 30 35 35
Rating High High High Mod High Mod High High High
Hazards
Weather 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
Slope 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aspect 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Elevation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Vegetation 18 18 10 15 15 18 5 10 10
Crown fire
potential 5 5 0 5 5 5 0 5 5
Total 67 67 54 64 64 67 49 49 59
Rating Extreme Extreme High Extreme Extreme Extreme High High High
Protection
capabilities
Fire response 8 8 0 15 10 10 8 8 8
Community
preparedness 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 2 0
Total 12 12 4 19 12 14 12 10 8
Rating Mod Mod Low High Mod Mod Mod Low Low
Values
protected
Home density 15 15 15 2 2 2 2 15 15
Community
infrastructure 10 20 20 0 0 15 0 10 10
Total 25 35 35 2 2 17 2 25 25
Rating Mod High High Low Low Mod Low Mod Mod
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
26
Table 1 –ODF Assessment of Risk, continued.
Structural vulnerability
6 th
&
Do
r
r
a
n
c
e
Da
y
R
o
a
d
Co
r
r
i
d
o
r
Ci
t
y
o
f
L
a
Pi
n
e
Wi
c
k
i
u
p
Ma
s
t
e
n
Fi
n
l
e
y
Bu
t
t
e
Li
t
t
l
e
De
s
c
h
u
t
e
s
Ne
w
b
e
r
r
y
Po
n
d
e
r
o
s
a
Pi
n
e
s
Flammable roofing
non wood - 0 0
wood - 30 2 2 5 5 5 2 2 5
Defensible space
Meets SB 360 - 0
Non compliant - 30 24 24 15 15 15 24 15 18 10
Ingress - egress
Two or more roads - 0 0 0 0 0 0
One road - 7 4 4 7 4
Road width
Greater than 24 feet - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 - 24 feet - 2 2 2
Less than 20 feet - 4
All season road condition
surfaced, < 10% grade - 0
surfaced, > 10% grade - 1 2 2
Non surfaced, <10% grade -
1 1 1
Non surfaced, >10% grade -
3 3 3 3 3 3
Other than all season - 4
Street signs
Present - 4" reflective letters
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Absent - 5 5 2
Fire Service Access
< 300 ft. with turnaround - 0 0 0 0
> 300 ft. with turnaround - 2 2
< 300 ft. w/o turnaround - 4 4 4 4 4 4
> 300 ft. w/o turnaround - 5
Total 33 33 21 30 29 44 30 21 20
Rating Mod Mod Low Low Low Mod Low Low Low
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
27
Table 2 provides a summary of the ODF Assessment of Risk and the total score for
each rating area.
Table 2 – ODF Assessment of Risk Summary with Ranking
Likelihood of
fire occurring Hazard
Protection
capability
Values
Protected
Structural
Vulnerability Total Rank
Day Road
Corridor
35
High
67
Extreme
12
Moderate
35
High
33
Moderate 182 1
6th &
Dorrance
35
High
67
Extreme
12
Moderate
25
Moderate
33
Moderate 172 2
Finley Butte 20
Moderate
67
Extreme
14
Moderate
17
Moderate 44 Moderate 162 3
Newberry 35
High
59
High
10
Low
25
Moderate
21
Low 150 4
City of La
Pine
35
High
54
High
4
Low
35
High
21
Low 149 5
Ponderosa
Pines
35
High
59
High
8
Low
25
Moderate
20
Low 147 6
Masten 30
High
64
Extreme
12
Moderate
2
Low
29
Low 137 7
Wickiup 20
Moderate
64
Extreme
19
High
2
Low
30
Low 135 8
Little
Deschutes
30
High
49
High
12
Moderate
2
Low
30
Low 123 9
The Steering Committee presents the following groups of priorities for consideration
under this CWPP:
Highest Priority Areas:
Day Road Corridor
6th & Dorrance
Finely Butte
Next Highest Priority (Higher) Areas:
Newberry
City of La Pine
Ponderosa Pines
High Priority Areas:
Masten
Wickiup
Little Deschutes
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
28
Areas of special concern
Critical transportation routes
Critical Transportation Routes do not have a standard definition in Deschutes County.
For purposes of the Greater La Pine CWPP, the Steering Committee defines Critical
Transportation Routes as:
• all routes necessary for the support of routine flow of commerce to
and/or through the greater La Pine area,
• all routes that could be used for potential evacuation of citizens and/or
visitors from a wildland fire threat to public safety,
• routes needed for emergency ingress and egress to a wildland fire
incident, not including unimproved or “two-track” roads,
• and, all routes needed to protect and support critical infrastructure
(power substations, communication transmission lines, water and fuel
storage, public service facilities, recreation facilities, etc).
As noted in previous revisions of this CWPP, the Steering Committee is concerned with
the lack of maintained roads leading in and out of the high risk areas in the WUI
boundary. Should an evacuation be necessary, the Steering Committee expressed great
concern over the quality of the evacuation routes. Many of the egress routes in the La
Pine area are dirt roads that contribute to substantial dust and debris clouds as vehicles
attempt to use them. During the summer months, after a few cars travel the road, the
dust is so dense that it is not safe for vehicles to continue using the road until the dust
settles. Lack of maintenance has led to deteriorated road surfaces with large potholes,
ruts and washboards that slow evacuation efforts and cause some vehicles to break
down, further complicating a mass departure from the area. The current condition of
the evacuation routes is a life safety issue.
Working with Deschutes County and Project Wildfire, the Ponderosa Pines and
Newberry Estates Communities at Risk have taken advantage of a signage program to
increase visibility of evacuation route signs along roads. The signs are made from high
intensity reflective material and indicate proper exit routes from these neighborhoods.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
29
The Steering Committee expressed great concern over the need to identify, develop and
protect critical transportation routes as part of this planning process. A detailed look at
specific ingress/egress issues for each Community at Risk is included under
Recommendations to Reduce Structural Vulnerability. This issue is also highlighted
under Action Plan and Implementation.
Vacant lots
Within the Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan boundary,
approximately one third of the private lands are vacant lots. Many of those are owned
by “absentee owners”. In general, vacant lots owned by absentee owners present a
specific threat to neighborhoods in that owners have no connections to the
neighborhoods and in most cases do not recognize their responsibility to contribute to
the safety of the entire neighborhood by reducing the hazardous vegetation on their
properties. The risk of destructive wildland fires is thereby greater inside these
neighborhoods due to the lack of owner attention on vacant lots. A detailed look at
plans for vacant lots in the Greater La Pine CWPP boundary are highlighted under
Action Plan and Implementation.
Deschutes County is the property owner for approximately 700 acres of half-acre or
larger lots. Deschutes County has worked diligently to reduce hazardous fuels on these
lots. Deschutes County will continue to pursue fuels reduction projects with the goal of
treating and maintaining all the county owned lands in the greater La Pine area.
Crown Fire Potential
The potential for a fire to reach tree crowns and travel rapidly through canopies is
recognized in each of the nine Communities at Risk due to the lodgepole pine
component throughout the Greater La Pine WUI. Crown fires in lodgepole pine are
usually stand replacement fires and are considered high intensity events that can cause
catastrophic results to homes and property located within those stands.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
30
Prioritized Hazard Reduction Recommendations
and Preferred Treatment Methods
The Steering Committee agreed that the Greater La Pine Community Wildfire
Protection Plan and this Update to the Plan are tools that can be used for many
outcomes. The following is an outline of the priorities and preferred treatments under
the Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan.
Prioritized Communities at Risk
Based on the combined assessment as shown in Table 2 and group consensus the
Steering Committee has identified the following prioritized Communities at Risk for
hazardous fuels reduction treatments on public and private lands in the Greater La Pine
WUI:
Highest Priority Areas:
Day Road Corridor
6th & Dorrance
Finely Butte
Next Highest Priority (Higher) Areas:
Newberry
City of La Pine
Ponderosa Pines
High Priority Areas:
Masten
Wickiup
Little Deschutes
Priorities and goals
With critical needs assessed and priority areas listed, the Steering Committee identified
the following goals to meet the purpose of the Greater La Pine CWPP:
• Reduce hazardous fuels on public lands
• Reduce hazardous fuels on private lands (both vacant and occupied)
• Reduce structural vulnerability
• Increase education and awareness of wildfire threat
• Identify, improve and protect critical transportation routes
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
31
Federal and State owned lands
Federal lands make up a majority of the Greater La Pine CWPP and each of the nine
Communities at Risk is adjacent to public land managed by either the Forest Service or
the Bureau of Land Management. State owned lands represent only a small percentage
of the lands within the plan area.
The state also bears fire protection responsibility for the La Pine State Park which
borders the Greater La Pine WUI boundary. Although it is outside the greater La Pine
WUI, the Steering Committee expresses great concern over the significant threat to
adjacent neighborhoods and recommends that it be recognized as a priority area for
fuels treatment.
It is the intent of the Steering Committee that the Greater La Pine WUI is subject to
expedited measures for hazardous fuels treatment and allocation of funds to protect the
communities and neighborhoods as stipulated by the Healthy Forests Restoration Act.
The Steering Committee recognizes the effectiveness and value of maximizing
treatment efforts in areas that are adjacent to federal, state, or private projects and
recommends that future projects consider these benefits when selecting areas for
treatment.
The standard of the Greater La Pine CWPP is to decrease the risk of high intensity
wildland fire behavior by reducing and maintaining fuel loads to that which can
produce flame lengths of less than four feet in the areas within the ¼ mile buffer of
each community at risk. This enables safe and effective initial attack. This standard
will be achieved by the federal and state landowners through a variety of treatment
methodologies such as prescribed burning and mechanical treatments.
Based on the combined risk assessments shown in Table 3, the priorities of the Greater
La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan with regard to federal and state owned
lands within the WUI are as follows:
§ Within ¼ mile of each Community at Risk of the WUI utilizing the most current
risk assessment priorities.
§ Within 300 feet of any evacuation route from each Community at Risk.
Specific treatment should address fuels issues on a landscape scale rather than
acre by acre.
§ All areas beyond ¼ mile of each prioritized community at risk, in ¼ mile
increments until the WUI boundary is reached.
§ For mixed conifer, Ponderosa Pine and Lodgepole stands which have missed
typical fire cycles and still pose threats of potential crown fires to communities,
specific fuels treatments shall be accomplished on federal and state lands to
reduce and maintain fuel loads to that which can produce flame lengths of less
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
32
than four feet to provide for effective initial attack and minimize the resistance
to control.
§ Although the treatments should focus on the highest priority areas, maintenance
of previously treated lands is also a top priority where treatment is critical to
maintain this status within the CWPP area. Treatment and maintenance of
previously treated lands before treatment begins again in other places is an
important component of keeping communities safe.
In general, the dominant strategy in all areas should be thinning from below, in an
effort to restore large tree, open park-like ponderosa pine dominated forests. In
exclusively lodgepole pine stands where site conditions are favorable to ponderosa
pine, a strategy to restore a proper ratio, of lodgepole to ponderosa pine, as determined
by the agency prescription. Excessive dead/down fuels should be removed followed by
understory maintenance.
The Steering Committee also encourages federal land managers to work with local
landowners to minimize road closures that could be used as alternate evacuation routes
from Communities at Risk.
Industrial and non-industrial private timberlands
The Steering Committee recommends continued partnerships with private timberland
owners that encourage the following standard and treatments.
The standard of the Greater La Pine CWPP is to decrease the risk of uncharacteristic
wildland fire behavior by reducing and maintaining fuel loads to that which can
produce flame lengths of less than four feet in the areas within the ¼ mile buffer of
each identified Community at Risk. This enables safe and effective initial attack. This
standard will be achieved by the industrial and non-industrial timberland owners
through a variety of treatment methodologies such as prescribed burning and
mechanical treatments.
The priorities of the Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan with regard
to industrial and non-industrial timberlands within the WUI are as follows:
§ Within ¼ mile of each Community at Risk of the WUI utilizing the most current
risk assessment priorities.
§ Within 300 feet of any evacuation route from each Community at Risk.
Specific treatment should address fuels issues on a landscape scale rather than
acre by acre.
§ All areas beyond ¼ mile of each prioritized community at risk, in ¼ mile
increments until the WUI boundary is reached.
§ For mixed conifer, Ponderosa Pine and Lodgepole stands which have missed
typical fire cycles and still pose threats of potential crown fires to communities,
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
33
specific fuels treatments shall be accomplished on federal and state lands to
reduce and maintain fuel loads to that which can produce flame lengths of less
than four feet to provide for effective initial attack and minimize the resistance
to control.
§ Although the treatments should focus on the highest priority areas, maintenance
of previously treated lands is also a top priority where treatment is critical to
maintain this status within the CWPP area. Treatment and maintenance of
previously treated lands before treatment begins again in other places is an
important component of keeping communities safe.
In general, the dominant strategy in all areas should be thinning from below, in an
effort to restore large tree, open park-like ponderosa pine dominated forests. In
exclusively lodgepole pine stands where site conditions are favorable to ponderosa
pine, a strategy to restore a proper ratio, of lodgepole to ponderosa pine, as determined
by the landowner. Excessive dead/down fuels should be removed followed by
understory maintenance.
Private and County owned lands
The Steering Committee recommends that County owned lands be treated in the same
manner as privately owned lands.
Private lands with structural improvements
On private lands with structural improvements, the goal is for each structure to meet the
specific standards for classified lands as identified in the Oregon Forestland – Urban
Interface Fire Protection Act of 1997, also known as Senate Bill 360. This statute
outlines standards and requirements for defensible space on private property that
receives fire protection from Oregon Department of Forestry.
The Oregon Department of Forestry provides wildland fire protection in the Greater La
Pine planning area and the Steering Committee supports the goals and standards of
Senate Bill 360. Five classifications are possible under the Act – Low, Moderate, High,
Extreme and High Density Extreme. East of the Cascades however, only three are
possible due to an automatic rating for weather. The Steering Committee agreed that
the required standards under each classification from Senate Bill 360 are the goal to
achieve on private and county owned lands throughout the Greater La Pine WUI.
A detailed description of the standards is available from the Oregon Department of
Forestry in the handbook for the Oregon Forestland – Urban Interface Fire Protection
Act of 1997. This information is also available at www.oregon.gov/ODF/fire/SB360.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
34
The minimum Default Standards under the Oregon Forestland – Urban Interface Fire
Protection Act of 1997 are:
§ Establish a primary fuel break of 30 feet around structures;
§ Create fuel breaks around driveways longer than 150 feet;
§ Remove tree branches within 10 feet of chimneys;
§ Remove any dead vegetation that overhangs a roof;
§ Remove flammable materials from under decks and stairways;
§ Move firewood 20 feet away from structures;
If a property is classified as High, the standard includes the above requirements and a
secondary fuel break around structures up to 20 feet if the structure has a flammable
roof. For properties rated Extreme or High Density Extreme, secondary fuel breaks
around structures up to an additional 70 feet are required if the structure has a
flammable roof. The Steering Committee strongly encourages property owners to
identify their own property classifications and follow defensible space guidelines for
High, Extreme and High Density Extreme.
Property owners can also achieve the Senate Bill 360 standards by taking advantage of
FireFree and Firewise suggestions to create and/or maintain defensible space, a fire-
resistant buffer that allows for effective first-response firefighting and a significantly
reduced risk of the spread of fire. These national education programs promote a variety
of fire safe actions to help prevent the spread of fire to protect individual homes and
neighborhoods. Information about these programs can be found at www.firefree.org
and www.firewise.org. More information is also listed in this plan under
Recommendations to Reduce Structural Vulnerability.
Vacant lots
Within the Greater La Pine WUI, approximately one third of the private land is
considered vacant, or lots with no structural improvements. Many of those are owned
by “absentee owners”. In general, vacant lots owned by absentee owners present a
specific threat to neighborhoods in that owners have little to no connections to the
neighborhoods and in most cases do not recognize their responsibility to contribute to
the safety of the entire neighborhood by reducing the hazardous vegetation on their
properties. The risk of destructive wildland fires is thereby greater inside these
neighborhoods due to the lack of owner attention on vacant lots.
The Steering Committee recommends that those vacant lots and acreages that are
dominated by hazardous wildland fuels follow the guidelines under Senate Bill 360 for
“High Density Extreme” which includes the standard of a 20-foot fuel break around
each vacant lot. On private and County owned lands that are vacant lots, the goal is for
each lot to have an established and maintained 20-foot fuel break along property lines
and the sides of every road, or adhere to any subsequent county ordinance that
addresses vacant lots.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
35
Recommendations to Reduce Structural
Vulnerability
Structural Vulnerability
Since the adoption of the 2005 Greater La Pine CWPP, many neighborhoods have
taken steps to decrease the vulnerability of structures to wildland fire. It is a goal of
this CWPP that all structures within the plan area are as fire safe as possible; and that
all neighborhoods and structures survive in the event of a wildland fire.
The Steering Committee utilized the Structural Vulnerability risk assessment based on
the NFPA 1144 survey. The following updated table identifies the main hazards for
structures and communities at risk in Greater La Pine. For each hazard or risk listed, an
action is recommended to address the threat or decrease the risk. The communities are
listed in priority order from Table 2.
Table 5 summarizes recommendations to reduce structural vulnerability in the nine (9)
Communities at Risk.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
36
Table 5 – Structural Vulnerability Hazards & Recommendations
Priority Rating Area Primary Hazards Recommended Actions
1
Day Road
Corridor
Defensible space – hazardous vegetation FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Structural composition FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Some high structural density FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
No water supply Develop water supply
Poor condition of interior roads Identify, upgrade and maintain
2 6th &
Dorrance
Defensible space – hazardous vegetation FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Structural composition FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Some high structural density FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
No water supply Develop water supply
3
Finley
Butte
Defensible space – hazardous vegetation FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Structural composition FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
No water supply Develop water supply
Insufficient evacuation routes Establish route(s), sign and maintain
Absent reflective road signs Upgrade address & road signs to
reflective material.
Poor condition of roads Identify, upgrade and maintain
4
Newberry
Defensible space – hazardous vegetation Continue FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360
compliance educational outreach
Structural composition FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
No water supply Develop water supply
Poor condition of interior roads Identify, upgrade and maintain
5 City of La
Pine
Defensible space – hazardous vegetation FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
surrounding values protected
High structural density FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Insufficient evacuation routes Establish route(s), sign and maintain
Fire service access Identify, upgrade and maintain
6 Ponderosa
Pines
Maintain Firewise Status Reapply annually, FireFree activities
Structural composition FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
High structural density FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Insufficient water system Upgrade to support structural fire flow
Poor condition of interior roads Identify, upgrade and maintain
7 Masten
Defensible space – hazardous vegetation FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Structural composition FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
No water supply Develop water supply
Insufficient evacuation routes Establish route(s), sign and maintain
Poor condition of interior roads Identify, upgrade and maintain
8 Wickiup
Defensible space – hazardous vegetation FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Structural composition FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
No water supply Develop water supply
Absent reflective road signs Upgrade road & address signs to
reflective material
Poor condition of interior roads Identify, upgrade and maintain
9 Little
Deschutes
Defensible space – hazardous vegetation FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Structural composition FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
High structural density FireFree, Fire Wise, SB 360 compliance
Insufficient water supply Develop draft sites
Insufficient evacuation routes Establish route(s), sign and maintain
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
37
Table 6 provides a checklist for residents seeking to reduce the risk of major losses to
their homes and properties. The list is compiled from tips and suggestions from the
FireFree and Firewise programs, which promote homeowner responsibility for reducing
fire hazards on their property. The Steering Committee approves this combined
checklist. More information about these programs can be found at www.firefree.org
and www.firewise.org.
Table 6 – Defensible Space Checklist
þ What can I do to help prevent losses to my property and my
neighborhood?
q If you are interested in a free home assessment – call La Pine Fire Department or ODF
q Post easy-to-read address signs so emergency crews can find your home.
q Reduce the density of nearby trees.
q Clear wood piles and building materials at least 30 feet away from your home.
q Remove low tree branches and shrubs. Trim up trees at least 4 feet from the ground.
Remove “ladder fuels” among trees.
q Keep grass and weeds cut low.
q Remove all branches and limbs that overhang roofs.
q Remove leaves & needles from gutters, roofs and decks.
q Remove dead plants and brush.
q Maintain 30-100 feet of defensible space around your home.
q Screen vents and areas under decks with 1/8” metal mesh or fire resistant siding.
q Keep decks free of flammable lawn furniture, toys, doormats, etc.
q Choose fire-resistant roofing materials like metal, tile or composition shingles.
q Trim vegetation along driveways a minimum distance of 14’ wide x 14’ high for fire
trucks.
q Choose fire resistant plants. Visit www.extension.oregonstate.edu/deschutes to view
Fire-Resistant Plants for the Home Landscape.
q Use alternatives to burning debris like composting or chipping.
q
Burning debris (dry vegetation only allowed; no garbage or man made materials)
requires a permit. Obtain from the La Pine Fire District or online at www.lapine.org.
Call the Burn Line (541) 536-9056 to see if burning is allowed.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
38
Other Recommendations
Education
As stated in the Purpose of the Greater La Pine CWPP, three of the goals for this
planning effort are to:
• Instill a sense of personal responsibility for taking preventative actions
regarding wildland fire,
• Increase public understanding of living in a fire-adapted ecosystem, and
• Increase the community’s ability to prepare for, respond to and recover from
wildland fires.
With these goals in mind, education and outreach are top priorities for the Greater La
Pine CWPP. The rapid influx of new residents is just one reason the Steering
Committee places high value on the education of La Pine area residents and
landowners. Many new residents are unfamiliar with wildland fire and have limited
experience with issues like defensible space. Residents and visitors will continue to
benefit from clear examples of what a fire resilient forest and community look like as
well as easy access to resources that help them take action.
The La Pine Rural Fire Protection District maintains active membership in the Central
Oregon Fire Prevention Cooperative, the Central Oregon FireFree Program and
routinely partners with Project Wildfire for educational efforts in each area. The
Steering Committee for the Greater La Pine CWPP is committed to maintaining and
enhancing these partnerships.
Some neighborhoods in the greater La Pine area are well organized through
homeowners associations, road districts and other organized groups. These groups
provide valuable ongoing education to their populations about the risks of catastrophic
wildland fire and ways to reduce those risks. The Steering Committee supports these
groups and encourages the formation of them in the greater La Pine area to address the
educational needs of current and incoming residents about living in a fire adapted
environment and increasing personal responsibility for creating defensible space.
Local residents are encouraged to contact the La Pine Rural Protection Fire District for
information. Residents may also find additional information on how they can reduce
hazards and protect themselves from loss due to wildland fires at www.firefree.org and
www.firewise.org.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
39
Action Plan and Implementation
The Steering Committee recognizes that the Greater La Pine CWPP is a living tool with
multiple applications. The following priority actions are intended to assist individuals
and agencies in the implementation of this CWPP across the Greater La Pine area.
Priorities
The Greater La Pine CWPP identifies priorities and strategies for reducing hazardous
wildland fuels while improving forest health, supporting local industry and economy
and improving fire protection capabilities. Addressing all three of these goals maintains
local resident’s commitment to aligning with national goals, which are outlined in the
Cohesive Strategy.
Improving Fire Protection Capabilities
The Steering Committee is again charged with the task of engaging community
members to review the Structural Vulnerability Assessment in this CWPP and identify
projects that will strengthen the potential for the neighborhoods to survive a high
intensity wildland fire within the Greater La Pine WUI. Homeowners can utilize
tables 5 and 6 as a resource to improve the fire resistance of their homes on an
individual basis.
The Steering Committee is also charged with the task of working with the La Pine
Rural Fire Protection District to identify and assess the water resources available for
fire suppression in the Communities at Risk. The Steering Committee will make
recommendations for projects to ensure adequate water resources are available for fire
suppression.
The Steering Committee will work with the La Pine Rural Fire Protection District,
Deschutes County, and Oregon Department of Transportation to identify and map
existing transportation and evacuation routes in each Community at Risk. The Steering
Committee will assist in conducting further assessments to determine the evacuation
needs of each Community at Risk and identify potential projects developing new routes
and/or improving existing routes.
The Steering Committee will continue to encourage federal land managers to work with
local landowners to minimize closures of roads that could be used as alternate
evacuation routes from Communities at Risk.
Oregon Department of Forestry is currently in the planning phase of installing smoke
detection cameras in the La Pine Basin. The smoke detection camera should be
installed by the next revision of this plan. These cameras will aid in effective
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
40
suppression response by the wildland agency resources by allowing for more accurate
reporting on smoke size and location. The hope is that local fire lookouts and Central
Oregon Interagency Dispatch Center (COIDC) can use multiple perspectives provided
by the camera to effectively communicate smoke locations to resources.
Working Toward a More Fire-Adapted Community
The intention of the Steering Committee is to engage in continued discussions with
landowners to facilitate fuels reduction projects on private lands utilizing the list of
prioritized Communities at Risk. These actions can be accomplished through education
activities or grants for specific projects on private lands. Members of the Steering
Committee listed some specific locations for fuel reduction on private lands they would
like to see accomplished before the next revision:
• Treatment of lands surrounding the schools in the City of La Pine. The group
especially focused on any lands that are located near the Burgess Road Fire
scar.
• Strategic fuel breaks in a parcel that has been newly acquired by the City of La
Pine from the BLM. The parcel is almost 800 acres and borders the Newberry
rating area.
• Strategic fuels break in a parcel that has been newly acquired by La Pine Park &
Recreation from the BLM. The parcel is approximately 300 acres and located in
the 6th & Dorrance rating area.
• A Sweat Equity project in the Cagle Subdivision, which is, located the Day
Road Corridor.
• Identify and recognize two (2) new Firewise Communities in the Greater La
Pine area by the next revision of this plan. The group encourages any residents
who may be interested in Firewise to contact Project Wildfire or Oregon
Department of Forestry for more information.
The Steering Committee has expressed the vital role of educating vacant lot owners in
the Greater La Pine CWPP Boundary. The group will work on strengthening the
relationships between residents and local leadership so that they can collaboratively
develop an educational campaign that will target out-of-area owners. The Steering
Committee will also partner with La Pine Parks & Recreation to establish a volunteer
pool or local resource list for absentee owners to utilize for fuel reduction. Education
was an overarching theme highlight as a paramount priority throughout the revision
process. The Steering Committee suggested some specific educational opportunities for
the local agencies to feature with specific outreach in the Greater La Pine Community:
• Partner with local schools, the senior centers and La Pine Parks and Recreation
to include defensible space messaging in their newsletters.
• Contact Rosland Elementary School to reserve space at the annual
Environmental Week to provide education to students and their parents.
• Partner with a local program named Project Ponderosa to further the educational
reach to more local children and families.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
41
• Reserve space at the local back to school nights at all schools to extend the
educational reach to all age groups and their parents.
• Partner with the Chamber of Commerce to plan wildfire preparedness
presentations to local business owners.
• Partner with ODF to conduct a Senate Bill 360 re-certification the Greater La
Pine Area. With the neighborhoods needing a central point of contact, ODF
could act as the unified educational entity for the surrounding rural areas within
the CWPP Boundary. Having a common educational thread for wildfire
preparedness, the impact on the call to action participation could be substantial.
The Steering Committee will pursue funding for demonstration lots for local residents
to use as examples in visible, strategic locations throughout the CWPP boundary. An
area that was suggested as an ideal parcel for a demonstration area is a 10-acre parcel
adjacent to La Pine High School. The Steering Committee will encourage and assist
community groups in seeking funding for fuels reduction, educational, and other
projects to decrease overall risks of loss from wildland fire.
Restoring Resilient Landscapes
Immediately following the acceptance and signed approval of this plan, the Steering
Committee will make copies of the 2015 Update to the Greater La Pine CWPP
available to all federal and state land managers including the Deschutes National
Forest, the Bureau of Land Management, and the Oregon Department of Forestry. The
intention of the Steering Committee is to engage in continued discussions with the La
Pine community and adjacent landowners to implement the CWPP and accomplish
hazardous fuels reduction projects that address the prioritized Communities at Risk in
the most expeditious manner possible.
The Steering Committee recognizes the effectiveness and value of maximizing
treatment efforts in areas that are adjacent to federal, state or private projects and
recommends that future projects consider these benefits when selecting areas for
treatment.
Fire Regime - Condition Class
Fire Regime - Condition Class considers the type of vegetation and the departure from
its natural fire return interval. Fire Regime-Condition Class can be used on a landscape
scale to evaluate land managers progress in restoration efforts.
Five natural (historical) fire regimes are classified based on the average number of
years between fires (fire frequency) combined with the severity of the fire on dominant
overstory vegetation. Fire regimes I through IV are each represented on the landscape
in the greater La Pine planning area. Lodgepole pine for example has a 60-80 year fire
interval with the potential for full stand replacement fires. Lodgepole pine therefore
falls within Fire Regime IV which describes species with fire return intervals between
35 – 100 years. Ponderosa pine has an 11-15 year natural fire interval with a low
potential for stand replacement fires. Therefore, ponderosa pine falls under Fire Regime
I which describes species with fire return intervals between 0-35 years.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
42
Table 3 summarizes Fire Regimes.
Table 3 – Fire Regimes
Condition Class categorizes a departure from the natural fire frequency based on
ecosystem attributes. In Condition Class 1, the historical ecosystem attributes are
largely intact and functioning as defined by the historical natural fire regime. In other
words, the stand has not missed a fire cycle. In Condition Class 2, the historical
ecosystem attributes have been moderately altered. Generally, at least one fire cycle has
been missed. In Condition Class 3, historical ecosystem attributes have been
significantly altered. Multiple fire cycles have been missed. The risk of losing key
ecosystem components (e.g. native species, large trees, soil) is low for Class 1,
moderate for Class 2, and high for Class 3.
Table 4 summarizes Condition Class.
Fire Regime Group Fire Frequency Fire Severity Plant Association Group
I 0 – 35 years Low severity Ponderosa pine,
manzanita, bitterbrush
II 0 – 35 years Stand replacement Western juniper
III 35 – 100+ years Mixed severity Mixed conifer dry
IV 35 – 100+ years Stand replacement Lodgepole pine
V > 200 years Stand replacement Western hemlock,
mixed conifer wet
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
43
Table 4 – Condition Class
Condition Class Attributes
Condition Class 1
§ Fire regimes are within or near an historical range.
§ The risk of losing key ecosystem components is low.
§ Fire frequencies have departed from historical frequencies (either
increased or decreased) by no more than one return interval.
§ Vegetation attributes are intact and functioning within an historical
range.
Condition Class 2
§ Fire regimes have been moderately altered from their historical range.
§ The risk of losing key ecosystem components has increased to
moderate.
§ Fire frequencies have departed (either increased or decreased) from
historical frequencies by more than one return interval. This change
results in moderate changes to one or more of the following: fire size,
frequency, intensity, severity or landscape patterns.
§ Vegetation attributes have been moderately altered from their historic
ranges.
Condition Class 3
§ Fire regimes have been significantly altered from their historical range.
§ The risk of losing key ecosystem components is high.
§ Fire frequencies have departed (either increased or decreased) by
multiple return intervals. This change results in dramatic changes to one
or more of the following: fire size, frequency, intensity, severity, or
landscape patterns.
§ Vegetation attributes have been significantly altered from their historic
ranges.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
44
Evaluation and Monitoring
The Steering Committee faced a complex task in the comprehensive update of the
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Implementing and sustaining
these efforts will require a significant commitment. Building a collaborative and
cooperative environment with La Pine Rural Fire Protection District, community-based
organizations, local government and the public land management agencies has been the
first step in reducing the risk of loss from wildland fire. The Steering Committee
pledges to maintain this cooperation with the public over the long-term with the
commitment of all the partners involved. Maintaining and cultivating new cooperative
relationships will be vital to this plans success in the future.
At a minimum, the Steering Committee shall include: the Program Director from
Project Wildfire; a Chief Officer from La Pine Rural Fire Protection District; a
representative from Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF); a representative from
Central Oregon Fire Management Service (COFMS), the City of La Pine and
Deschutes County along with members of the La Pine area public.
The Steering Committee agrees that the Greater La Pine Community Wildfire
Protection Plan will be a living document, intended to promote fuels reduction,
educational, and other projects to decrease overall risks of loss from wildland fire;
updated and revisited at least annually to address its Purpose.
La Pine Fire Protection District will work with Project Wildfire to convene the Steering
Committee as often as the Steering Committee deems necessary to implement and
review the Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Topics for discussion
can include:
• Identification and assessment of new or treated risks.
• Evaluation and tracking of progress toward goals.
• Updating of maps.
• Adoption of new and/or revised priorities.
• Identification of specific projects.
• Discussion of grant opportunities and determination of projects
eligible for funding.
• Writing of grants.
• Identification of appropriate projects to address additional items
as outlined in the Action Plan for Structural Vulnerability,
Education and Critical Transportation Routes.
• Coordination of additional items, projects and assessments.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
45
La Pine Rural Fire Protection District and Project Wildfire will ensure that the
evaluation and monitoring activities listed above are addressed by the Steering
Committee each year. As members of the Steering Committee change, La Pine Rural
Fire Protection District and Project Wildfire will ensure that it maintains a balanced
representation of agency and public members, with a continued focus on inviting
interested parties to participate in the review and planning process.
3 23 2 3 33 3 3 43 4
0 90 9 1 01 0
1 61 6 1 51 5
2 02 0 2 12 1 2 22 2
2 62 6 2 92 9 2 82 8 2 72 7
3 53 5 3 33 3 3 43 4 3 53 5 3 63 6 3 13 1 3 23 2 3 43 4 3 53 5 3 63 6 3 13 1
2 92 9 2 82 8 2 72 7
3 23 2 3 33 3 3 43 4
0 50 5 0 40 4 0 30 3
1 01 0 1111 1 21 2 0 70 7 0 80 8 1 01 0 1111 1 21 2 0 70 7
1 51 5 1 41 4 1 81 8 1 61 6 1 51 51 71 7 1 41 4 1 31 3 1 81 8
2 22 2 2 32 3 2 42 4 1 91 9 2 02 0 2 12 1 2 22 2 2 32 3 2 42 4 1 91 9
2 52 5 3 03 0 2 92 9 2 82 8 2 72 7 2 62 6 2 52 5 2 92 9 2 82 8 2 62 6 2 52 5 3 03 0
3 63 6 3 13 1 3 23 2
1 61 6 1 51 5
2 12 1 2 22 2 2 32 3
2 82 8 2 72 7 2 62 6
1 31 3 1 81 8
2 42 4 1 91 9
2 52 5 3 03 0
3 33 3 3 43 4 3 53 5 3 63 6 3 13 1
0 50 5 0 40 40 60 6 0 30 3 0 20 2 0 10 1 0 60 6
0 80 8
T 2 2 S R 1 0 ET 2 2 S R 1 0 E
T 2 2 S R 11 ET 2 2 S R 11 E
H
W
Y
3
1
HWY
9
7
FinleyButte
City ofLa Pine
LittleDeschutes
Day RoadCorridor
PonderosaPines
Wickiup
Newberry
Masten
6th &Dorrance
L
A
P
I
N
E
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
W
I
L
D
F
I
R
E
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
N0241MilesMap Prepared by Deschutes CountyForestryEd Keith61150 SW 27th St.Bend, OR 97702541-322-7117 Date: 12/1/2014Document Name: lapine_cwpp_rating_areas_11x17
La Pine CWPP Boundary NAME
6th & Dorrance
City of La Pine
Day Road Corridor
Finley Butte
Little Deschutes
Masten
Newberry
Ponderosa Pines
Wickiup
3 232 3 333 3 434
0 909 1 010
1 717 1 616 1 515
2 020 2 121 2 222
2 626 2 929 2 828 2 727
3 535 3 333 3 434 3 535 3 636 3 131 3 232 3 434 3 535 3 131
2 929 2 828 2 727
3 232 3 333 3 434
0 505 0 404 0 303
1 010 1 111 1 212 0 808 0 909 1 010 1 111 1 212 0 707
1 515 1 414 1 313 1 818 1 515 1 414 1 313 1 818
2 121 2 222 2 323 2 424 1 919 2 020 2 121 2 222 2 323 2 424 1 919
2 525 3 030 2 929 2 828 2 727 2 626 2 525 2 929 2 828 2 626 2 525 3 030
3 636 3 131 3 232
1 414
2 323
1 313 1 818
1 919
2 525 3 030
3 333 3 434 3 535 3 636 3 131
0 606 0 101 0 606
0 808
T 2 2 S R 1 0 ET22SR10E
T 2 2 S R 1 1 ET22SR11E
Potter'sEstates
AhernAcres
AlpineMeadows
AmmonEstates
AndersonAcres
C,L&DRanch
C.W. ReeveResort
CagleSubdivision
ConiferAcres
CranePrairie
Danielle'sAcres
DeerForestAcres
DeschutesRiver Acres
DeschutesRecHomesites
EvergreenPark
ForestView
GlenwoodAcres
Hockman
Holmesacres
HuningtonMeadows
Jacobsen'sNorthAddition
La Pine
La PineIndustrial
La PineMeadows
LechnerAcres
LosPinos
MeadowCrestacres
NewberryBusinessPark
NewberryEstates
NewberryNeighborhood
ParkwayAcres
PierceTracts
Pine CrestRanchettesPineMeadowtracts
PonderosaPines
Rio Land
RoanPark
RoslandVacationPlat
SafariAcres
SingingPines
SouthPark
SummitAcres
TallPines
Terra DeOro Estates
The SouthForty
TimberHaven
WickiupCommercial
WickupAcres
Woodland ParkHomesites
221036Subdivision
LazyRiver
H
W
Y
3
1
H W Y 9 7
L
A
P
I
N
E
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
W
I
L
D
F
I
R
E
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
N0241MilesMap Prepared by Deschutes CountyForestryEd Keith61150 SW 27th St.Bend, OR 97702541-322-7117 Date: 12/1/2014Document Name: lapine_cwpp_SB360_11x17
La Pine CWPP Boundary
La Pine Subdivisions
SB360 ratings
RATING
High Density Extreme
Extreme
High
3 23 2 3 43 4
0 90 9 1 01 0
1 71 7 1 61 6 1 51 5
2 02 0 2 12 1 2 22 2
2 62 6 2 92 9 2 82 8 2 72 7
3 53 5 3 33 3 3 43 4 3 53 5 3 63 6 3 13 1 3 23 2 3 43 4 3 53 5 3 13 1
2 92 9 2 82 8 2 72 7
3 23 2 3 33 3 3 43 4
0 50 5 0 30 3
1 01 0 1111 1 21 2 0 80 8 0 90 9 1 01 0 1111 1 21 2 0 70 7
1 51 5 1 41 4 1 81 8 1 51 5 1 41 4 1 31 3 1 81 8
2 12 1 2 22 2 2 32 3 2 42 4 1 91 9 2 02 0 2 12 1 2 22 2 2 32 3 2 42 4 1 91 9
2 52 5 3 03 0 2 92 9 2 72 7 2 52 5 2 92 9 2 82 8 2 62 6 2 52 5 3 03 0
3 63 6 3 13 1 3 23 2
1 41 4
2 32 3
1 31 3 1 81 8
1 91 9
2 52 5 3 03 0
3 33 3 3 43 4 3 53 5 3 63 6 3 13 1
0 60 6 0 10 1 0 60 6
0 80 8
T 2 2 S R 1 0 ET 2 2 S R 1 0 E
T 2 2 S R 11 ET 2 2 S R 11 E
Potter'sEstates
AhernAcres
AmmonEstates
AndersonAcres
C,L&DRanch
C.W. ReeveResort
CagleSubdivision
ConiferAcres
CranePrairie
Danielle'sAcres
DeerForestAcres
DeschutesRiver Acres
DeschutesRecHomesites
EvergreenPark
ForestView
Hockman
Holmesacres
HuningtonMeadows
Jacobsen'sNorthAddition
La Pine
La PineIndustrial
La PineMeadows
LechnerAcres
LosPinos
LynneAcres
MeadowCrestacres
NewberryBusinessPark
NewberryEstates
NewberryNeighborhood
ParkwayAcres
PierceTracts
Pine CrestRanchettesPineMeadowtracts
PonderosaPines
Rio Land
RoanPark
RoslandVacationPlat
SafariAcres
SingingPines
SouthPark
SummitAcres
TallPines
Terra DeOro Estates
The SouthForty
TimberHaven
WickupAcres
Woodland ParkHomesites
221036Subdivision
LazyRiver
H
W
Y
3
1
HWY
9
7
DorranceMeadow1916
White1922
CountyLine1919
RoundSwamp1908 HanerButte WPRA1992
Newberry 22000
OGDEN1994
FinleyButte1919
BurgessRoad2013
L
A
P
I
N
E
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
W
I
L
D
F
I
R
E
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
N0241MilesMap Prepared by Deschutes CountyForestryEd Keith61150 SW 27th St.Bend, OR 97702541-322-7117 Date: 12/1/2014Document Name: lapine_cwpp_basemap_11x17
La Pine CWPP Boundary
La Pine Subdivisions
City Limit
8 fires 2004-2013
LARGE FIRES BY DECADE
1900
1910
1920
1980
1990
2000
2010
Public Ownership
BLM
ODSL
OPRD
PRIVATE
USFS
DESCHUTES COUNTY
49 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
Day Road Corridor
5,181 acres 1,988 structures 4,970 population
1. What is the likelihood of a fire occurring?
2015
Other factors: power lines or stations, logging, construction, debris burning, mining, dispersed or developed camping, off-
road vehicle use, flammables, fireworks, dry grass mowing, woodcutting, equipment use, target shooting, military training,
arson, cultural activities, railroad, highways, county or public access road, camps/resorts/stables, schools, business, ranch or
farm, lightning prone, dumping
Fire occurrence (per 1000 acres per 10 years)
0 – 0 .1 (low) 5 points
0.1 – 1.1 (moderate) 10 points
1.1+ (high) 20 points
20
(2.3)
Ignition Risk – Home Density (homes per 10 acres)
0 - 0 .9 (rural) 0 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 5 points
5.1+ (urban) 10 points
5
(3.84)
Ignition Risk – Other Factors Present
< 1/3 present 0 points
1/3 – 2/3 present 5 points
> 2/3 present 10 points
10
Total points: 35
Risk category rating:
0 – 13 points = Low
13 – 27 points = Moderate
27 – 40 points = High
Rating: High
50 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
2. Hazards Day Road Corridor
2015
Weather
Zone 3 40
Topography - Slope
0 – 25% 0 points
26 – 40% 3 points
41% + 5 points
0
Topography - Aspect
N, NW, NE 0 points
W, E 3 points
S, SW, SE 5 points
3
Topography - Elevation
5001 feet + 0 points
3501 – 5000 feet 1 point
0 – 3500 feet 2 points
1
Vegetation (SB 360 definition)
Non-forest 0 points
HV 1 5 points
HV 2 15 points
HV 3 20 points
18
Crown Fire Potential
Passive - Low 0 points
Active – Moderate 5 points
Independent – High 10 points
0
Total points: 67
Risk category rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 40 points = Moderate
41 – 60 points = High
61 – 80 points = Extreme
Rating: Extreme
HV 1 – produces flame lengths up to 5 feet with very little spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 2 – produces flame lengths 5-8 feet high with sporadic spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 3 – produces flame lengths over 8 feet with frequent spotting, torching and crowning.
51 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
3. Protection Capabilities Day Road Corridor
2015
Fire response
Organized structural response < 10 minutes 0 points
Inside fire district, response > 10 minutes 8 points
No structural protection, only wildland response 15 points
No structural or wildland protection 36 points
8
Community Preparedness
Organized stakeholder group, community fire plan,
phone tree, or mitigation efforts 0 points
Primarily agency efforts (mailings, FireFree, etc.) 2 points
No efforts 4 points
4
Total points: 12
Protection Capability Category Rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 16 points = Moderate
17 – 40 points = High
Rating: Moderate
4. Values Protected: Human and economic
Homes (density per 10 acres)
0.1 – 0.9 (rural) 2 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 15 points
5.1 + (urban) 30 points
15
(3.84)
Community Infrastructure
None 0 points
One present 10 points
More than one present 20 points
20
Total points: 35
Values Protected Category Rating:
0 – 15 points = Low
16 – 30 points = Moderate
31 – 50 points = High
Rating: High
Community infrastructure – Power substations and corridors, transportation corridors, municipal watersheds, water
storage and distribution, fuel storage, health care facilities, landfills and waste treatment, schools, churches, community
centers, and stores.
2015 update:
• Day Road Corridor was given an 18 out of the 20 points for the vegetation component by the group because of
some high fuel loading but also due to the lack of area coordination.
• For fire response this area was given an 8 since La Pine Fire response would be longer than 10 minutes.
• For the community preparedness component the group gave this area a 4, which dictates that there has not
been a community wide effort to be prepared for wildfire.
• The Day Road Corridor has many churches, community buildings and a store. The group gave the area a 20 in
the values protected component.
52 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
6th & Dorrance
5,540 acres 887 structures 2,218 population
1. What is the likelihood of a fire occurring?
2015
Fire occurrence (per 1000 acres per 10 years)
0 – 0 .1 (low) 5 points
0.1 – 1.1 (moderate) 10 points
1.1+ (high) 20 points
20
(4.0)
Ignition Risk – Home Density (homes per 10 acres)
0 - 0 .9 (rural) 0 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 5 points
5.1+ (urban) 10 points
5
(1.60)
Ignition Risk – Other Factors Present
< 1/3 present 0 points
1/3 – 2/3 present 5 points
> 2/3 present 10 points
10
Total points: 35
Risk category rating:
0 – 13 points = Low
13 – 27 points = Moderate
27 – 40 points = High
Rating: High
Other factors: power lines or stations, logging, construction, debris burning, dispersed or developed camping, off-road
vehicle use, flammables, fireworks, dry grass mowing, woodcutting, equipment use, target shooting, arson, cultural
activities, highways, county or public access road, ranch or farm, lightning prone, dumping
53 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
2. Hazards 6th & Dorrance
2015
Weather
Zone 3 40
Topography - Slope
0 – 25% 0 points
26 – 40% 3 points
41% + 5 points
0
Topography - Aspect
N, NW, NE 0 points
W, E 3 points
S, SW, SE 5 points
3
Topography - Elevation
5001 feet + 0 points
3501 – 5000 feet 1 point
0 – 3500 feet 2 points
1
Vegetation (SB 360 definition)
Non-forest 0 points
HV 1 5 points
HV 2 15 points
HV 3 20 points
18
Crown Fire Potential
Passive - Low 0 points
Active – Moderate 5 points
Independent – High 10 points
5
Total points: 67
Risk category rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 40 points = Moderate
41 – 60 points = High
61 – 80 points = Extreme
Rating: Extreme
HV 1 – produces flame lengths up to 5 feet with very little spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 2 – produces flame lengths 5-8 feet high with sporadic spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 3 – produces flame lengths over 8 feet with frequent spotting, torching and crowning.
54 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
3. Protection Capabilities 6th & Dorrance
2015
Fire response
Organized structural response < 10 minutes 0 points
Inside fire district, response > 10 minutes 8 points
No structural protection, only wildland response 15 points
No structural or wildland protection 36 points
8
Community Preparedness
Organized stakeholder group, community fire plan,
phone tree, or mitigation efforts 0 points
Primarily agency efforts (mailings, FireFree, etc.) 2 points
No efforts 4 points
4
Total points: 12
Protection Capability Category Rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 16 points = Moderate
17 – 40 points = High
Rating: Moderate
4. Values Protected: Human and economic
Homes (density per 10 acres)
0.1 – 0.9 (rural) 2 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 15 points
5.1 + (urban) 30 points
15
(4.0)
Community Infrastructure
None 0 points
One present 10 points
More than one present 20 points
10
Total points: 25
Values Protected Category Rating:
0 – 15 points = Low
16 – 30 points = Moderate
31 – 50 points = High
Rating: Moderate
Community infrastructure – Power substations and corridors, transportation corridors, municipal watersheds, water
storage and distribution, fuel storage, health care facilities, landfills and waste treatment, schools, churches, community
centers, and stores.
2015 Update:
• 6th & Dorrance was given an 18 out of the 20 points for the vegetation component by the group because of
some high fuel loading but also due to the lack of area coordination.
• For fire response this area was given an 8 since La Pine Fire response would be longer than 10 minutes.
• For the community preparedness component the group gave this area a 4, which dictates that there has not
been a community wide effort to be prepared for wildfire.
• 6th & Dorrance received a 10 for the existence of churches in the values protected category.
55 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
Finely Butte
17,794 acres 62 structures 155 population
1. What is the likelihood of a fire occurring?
2015
Fire occurrence (per 1000 acres per 10 years)
0 – 0 .1 (low) 5 points
0.1 – 1.1 (moderate) 10 points
1.1+ (high) 20 points
10
(0.9)
Ignition Risk – Home Density (homes per 10 acres)
0 - 0 .9 (rural) 0 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 5 points
5.1+ (urban) 10 points
0
(0.03)
Ignition Risk – Other Factors Present
< 1/3 present 0 points
1/3 – 2/3 present 5 points
> 2/3 present 10 points
10
Total points: 20
Risk category rating:
0 – 13 points = Low
13 – 27 points = Moderate
27 – 40 points = High
Rating: Moderate
Other factors: power lines or stations, logging, construction, debris burning, dispersed or developed camping, off-road
vehicle use, flammables, fireworks, dry grass mowing, woodcutting, equipment use, target shooting, arson, cultural
activities, county or public access road, ranch or farm, lightning prone, dumping
56 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
2. Hazards Finley Butte
2015
Weather
Zone 3 40
Topography - Slope
0 – 25% 0 points
26 – 40% 3 points
41% + 5 points
0
Topography - Aspect
N, NW, NE 0 points
W, E 3 points
S, SW, SE 5 points
3
Topography - Elevation
5001 feet + 0 points
3501 – 5000 feet 1 point
0 – 3500 feet 2 points
1
Vegetation (SB 360 definition)
Non-forest 0 points
HV 1 5 points
HV 2 15 points
HV 3 20 points
18
Crown Fire Potential
Passive - Low 0 points
Active – Moderate 5 points
Independent – High 10 points
5
Total points: 67
Risk category rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 40 points = Moderate
41 – 60 points = High
61 – 80 points = Extreme
Rating: Extreme
HV 1 – produces flame lengths up to 5 feet with very little spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 2 – produces flame lengths 5-8 feet high with sporadic spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 3 – produces flame lengths over 8 feet with frequent spotting, torching and crowning.
57 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
3. Protection Capabilities Finley Butte
2015
Fire response
Organized structural response < 10 minutes 0 points
Inside fire district, response > 10 minutes 8 points
No structural protection, only wildland response 15 points
No structural or wildland protection 36 points
10
Community Preparedness
Organized stakeholder group, community fire plan,
phone tree, or mitigation efforts 0 points
Primarily agency efforts (mailings, FireFree, etc.) 2 points
No efforts 4 points
4
Total points: 14
Protection Capability Category Rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 16 points = Moderate
17 – 40 points = High
Rating: Moderate
3. Values Protected: Human and economic
Homes (density per 10 acres)
0.1 – 0.9 (rural) 2 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 15 points
5.1 + (urban) 30 points
2
(0.03)
Community Infrastructure
None 0 points
One present 10 points
More than one present 20 points
15
Total points: 17
Values Protected Category Rating:
0 – 15 points = Low
16 – 30 points = Moderate
31 – 50 points = High
Rating: Moderate
Community infrastructure – Power substations and corridors, transportation corridors, municipal watersheds, water
storage and distribution, fuel storage, health care facilities, landfills and waste treatment, schools, churches, community
centers, and stores.
2015 Update:
• Finley Butte has quite a bit of private property that could benefit from fuel reduction and there is limited
structural protection in this rating area. The group felt an 18 was appropriate.
• Finely Butte also received a 10 and this is due to limited structural response in this area.
• For the community preparedness component the group gave this area a 4, which dictates that there has not
been a community wide effort to be prepared for wildfire.
• Even though this area is sparsely populated in some areas, the group felt that this area should score at least a
15 due to the water storage, major highway (Highway 31) and many communication sites that would be vital
in a large wildfire situation.
58 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
Newberry
9,147 acres 209 structures 523 population
1. What is the likelihood of a fire occurring?
2015
Fire occurrence (per 1000 acres per 10 years)
0 – 0 .1 (low) 5 points
0.1 – 1.1 (moderate) 10 points
1.1+ (high) 20 points
20
(2.1)
Ignition Risk – Home Density (homes per 10 acres)
0 - 0 .9 (rural) 0 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 5 points
5.1+ (urban) 10 points
5
(0.23)
Ignition Risk – Other Factors Present
< 1/3 present 0 points
1/3 – 2/3 present 5 points
> 2/3 present 10 points
10
Total points: 35
Risk category rating:
0 – 13 points = Low
13 – 27 points = Moderate
27 – 40 points = High
Rating: High
Other factors: power lines or stations, logging, construction, debris burning, dispersed or developed camping, off-road
vehicle use, flammables, fireworks, dry grass mowing, woodcutting, equipment use, target shooting, arson, cultural
activities, county or public access road, ranch or farm, lightning prone, dumping
59 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
2. Hazards Newberry
2015
Weather
Zone 3 40
Topography - Slope
0 – 25% 0 points
26 – 40% 3 points
41% + 5 points
0
Topography - Aspect
N, NW, NE 0 points
W, E 3 points
S, SW, SE 5 points
3
Topography - Elevation
5001 feet + 0 points
3501 – 5000 feet 1 point
0 – 3500 feet 2 points
1
Vegetation (SB 360 definition)
Non-forest 0 points
HV 1 5 points
HV 2 15 points
HV 3 20 points
10
Crown Fire Potential
Passive - Low 0 points
Active – Moderate 5 points
Independent – High 10 points
5
Total points: 49
Risk category rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 40 points = Moderate
41 – 60 points = High
61 – 80 points = Extreme
Rating: High
HV 1 – produces flame lengths up to 5 feet with very little spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 2 – produces flame lengths 5-8 feet high with sporadic spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 3 – produces flame lengths over 8 feet with frequent spotting, torching and crowning.
60 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
3. Protection Capabilities Newberry
2015
Fire response
Organized structural response < 10 minutes 0 points
Inside fire district, response > 10 minutes 8 points
No structural protection, only wildland response 15 points
No structural or wildland protection 36 points
8
Community Preparedness
Organized stakeholder group, community fire plan,
phone tree, or mitigation efforts 0 points
Primarily agency efforts (mailings, FireFree, etc.) 2 points
No efforts 4 points
2
Total points: 10
Protection Capability Category Rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 16 points = Moderate
17 – 40 points = High
Rating: Low
4. Values Protected: Human and economic
Homes (density per 10 acres)
0.1 – 0.9 (rural) 2 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 15 points
5.1 + (urban) 30 points
15
(0.23)
Community Infrastructure
None 0 points
One present 10 points
More than one present 20 points
10
Total points: 25
Values Protected Category Rating:
0 – 15 points = Low
16 – 30 points = Moderate
31 – 50 points = High
Rating: Moderate
Community infrastructure – Power substations and corridors, transportation corridors, municipal watersheds, water
storage and distribution, fuel storage, health care facilities, landfills and waste treatment, schools, churches, community
centers, and stores.
2015 Update:
§ In the Newberry Rating Area there has been significant work and reduction within the Newberry Estates
subdivision but there is large amounts of federal lands do have fuel that require maintenance.
§ This area was given an 8 since La Pine Fire response would be longer than 10 minutes.
§ This rating area received a 2 in Community Preparedness, most of the outreach has occurred in the Newberry
Estates subdivision.
§ This area has a unique situation with the recreational site near it and major power lines that run through the
rating area. The group gave Newberry a 10 in this category.
61 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
City of La Pine
4,502 acres 826 structures 2,065 population
1. What is the likelihood of a fire occurring?
2015
Fire occurrence (per 1000 acres per 10 years)
0 – 0 .1 (low) 5 points
0.1 – 1.1 (moderate) 10 points
1.1+ (high) 20 points
20
(5.6)
Ignition Risk – Home Density (homes per 10 acres)
0 - 0 .9 (rural) 0 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 5 points
5.1+ (urban) 10 points
5
(1.83)
Ignition Risk – Other Factors Present
< 1/3 present 0 points
1/3 – 2/3 present 5 points
> 2/3 present 10 points
10
Total points: 35
Risk category rating:
0 – 13 points = Low
13 – 27 points = Moderate
27 – 40 points = High
Rating: High
Other factors: power lines or stations, logging, construction, debris burning, dispersed or developed camping, off-road
vehicle use, flammables, fireworks, dry grass mowing, woodcutting, equipment use, target shooting, arson, cultural
activities, highways, county or public access road, camps/resorts/stables, business, ranch or farm, lightning prone, dumping
62 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
2. Hazards City of La Pine
2015
Weather
Zone 3 40
Topography - Slope
0 – 25% 0 points
26 – 40% 3 points
41% + 5 points
0
Topography - Aspect
N, NW, NE 0 points
W, E 3 points
S, SW, SE 5 points
3
Topography - Elevation
5001 feet + 0 points
3501 – 5000 feet 1 point
0 – 3500 feet 2 points
1
Vegetation (SB 360 definition)
Non-forest 0 points
HV 1 5 points
HV 2 15 points
HV 3 20 points
10
Crown Fire Potential
Passive - Low 0 points
Active – Moderate 5 points
Independent – High 10 points
0
Total points: 54
Risk category rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 40 points = Moderate
41 – 60 points = High
61 – 80 points = Extreme
Rating: High
HV 1 – produces flame lengths up to 5 feet with very little spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 2 – produces flame lengths 5-8 feet high with sporadic spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 3 – produces flame lengths over 8 feet with frequent spotting, torching and crowning.
63 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
3. Protection Capabilities City of La Pine
2015
Fire response
Organized structural response < 10 minutes 0 points
Inside fire district, response > 10 minutes 8 points
No structural protection, only wildland response 15 points
No structural or wildland protection 36 points
0
Community Preparedness
Organized stakeholder group, community fire plan,
phone tree, or mitigation efforts 0 points
Primarily agency efforts (mailings, FireFree, etc.) 2 points
No efforts 4 points
4
Total points: 4
Protection Capability Category Rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 16 points = Moderate
17 – 40 points = High
Rating: Low
3. Values Protected: Human and economic
Homes (density per 10 acres)
0.1 – 0.9 (rural) 2 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 15 points
5.1 + (urban) 30 points
15
(1.83)
Community Infrastructure
None 0 points
One present 10 points
More than one present 20 points
20
Total points: 35
Values Protected Category Rating:
0 – 15 points = Low
16 – 30 points = Moderate
31 – 50 points = High
Rating: High
Community infrastructure – Power substations and corridors, transportation corridors, municipal watersheds, water
storage and distribution, fuel storage, health care facilities, landfills and waste treatment, schools, churches, community
centers, and stores.
2015 Update:
§ The rating area for the city, the group agreed that flame lengths and intensity would not be very high but some
of the land south & north of Burgess Road has some fuel that could contribute to higher flame lengths within
the City of La Pine
§ The response time would be within 10 minutes; the City of La Pine did not receive any points in this category.
§ The group gave this area a 4, which dictates that there has not been a community wide effort to be prepared
for wildfire.
§ Due to the nature of this rating area the City of La Pine, received the full 20 points.
64 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
Ponderosa Pines
5,430 acres 374 structures 935 population
1. What is the likelihood of a fire occurring?
2015
Fire occurrence (per 1000 acres per 10 years)
0 – 0 .1 (low) 5 points
0.1 – 1.1 (moderate) 10 points
1.1+ (high) 20 points
20
(1.1)
Ignition Risk – Home Density (homes per 10 acres)
0 - 0 .9 (rural) 0 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 5 points
5.1+ (urban) 10 points
5
(0.69)
Ignition Risk – Other Factors Present
< 1/3 present 0 points
1/3 – 2/3 present 5 points
> 2/3 present 10 points
10
Total points: 35
Risk category rating:
0 – 13 points = Low
13 – 27 points = Moderate
27 – 40 points = High
Rating: High
Other factors: power lines or stations, logging, construction, debris burning, dispersed or developed camping, off-road
vehicle use, flammables, fireworks, dry grass mowing, woodcutting, equipment use, target shooting, arson, cultural
activities, highways, county or public access road, ranch or farm, lightning prone, dumping
65 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
2. Hazards Ponderosa Pines
2015
Weather
Zone 3 40
Topography - Slope
0 – 25% 0 points
26 – 40% 3 points
41% + 5 points
0
Topography - Aspect
N, NW, NE 0 points
W, E 3 points
S, SW, SE 5 points
3
Topography - Elevation
5001 feet + 0 points
3501 – 5000 feet 1 point
0 – 3500 feet 2 points
1
Vegetation (SB 360 definition)
Non-forest 0 points
HV 1 5 points
HV 2 15 points
HV 3 20 points
10
Crown Fire Potential
Passive - Low 0 points
Active – Moderate 5 points
Independent – High 10 points
5
Total points: 59
Risk category rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 40 points = Moderate
41 – 60 points = High
61 – 80 points = Extreme
Rating: High
HV 1 – produces flame lengths up to 5 feet with very little spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 2 – produces flame lengths 5-8 feet high with sporadic spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 3 – produces flame lengths over 8 feet with frequent spotting, torching and crowning.
66 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
3. Protection Capabilities Ponderosa Pines
2015
Fire response
Organized structural response < 10 minutes 0 points
Inside fire district, response > 10 minutes 8 points
No structural protection, only wildland response 15 points
No structural or wildland protection 36 points
8
Community Preparedness
Organized stakeholder group, community fire plan,
phone tree, or mitigation efforts 0 points
Primarily agency efforts (mailings, FireFree, etc.) 2 points
No efforts 4 points
0
Total points: 8
Protection Capability Category Rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 16 points = Moderate
17 – 40 points = High
Rating: Low
4. Values Protected: Human and economic
Homes (density per 10 acres)
0.1 – 0.9 (rural) 2 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 15 points
5.1 + (urban) 30 points
15
(0.69)
Community Infrastructure
None 0 points
One present 10 points
More than one present 20 points
10
Total points: 25
Values Protected Category Rating:
0 – 15 points = Low
16 – 30 points = Moderate
31 – 50 points = High
Rating: Moderate
Community infrastructure – Power substations and corridors, transportation corridors, municipal watersheds, water
storage and distribution, fuel storage, health care facilities, landfills and waste treatment, schools, churches, community
centers, and stores.
2015 Update:
• This rating area was similar to Newberry; There has been significant work and reduction within the
subdivision but there is large amounts of federal lands do have fuel that require maintenance.
• This area was given an 8 since La Pine Fire response would be longer than 10 minutes.
• This area was given a 0 due to the heavy community involvement.
• Ponderosa Pines neighborhood has a water storage plant that could be important during a wildfire. This area
was given a 10 in the values protected category.
67 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
Masten
8,968 acres 146 structures 365 population
1. What is the likelihood of a fire occurring?
2015
Fire occurrence (per 1000 acres per 10 years)
0 – 0 .1 (low) 5 points
0.1 – 1.1 (moderate) 10 points
1.1+ (high) 20 points
20
(1.6)
Ignition Risk – Home Density (homes per 10 acres)
0 - 0 .9 (rural) 0 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 5 points
5.1+ (urban) 10 points
0
(0.16)
Ignition Risk – Other Factors Present
< 1/3 present 0 points
1/3 – 2/3 present 5 points
> 2/3 present 10 points
10
Total points: 30
Risk category rating:
0 – 13 points = Low
13 – 27 points = Moderate
27 – 40 points = High
Rating: High
Other factors: power lines or stations, logging, construction, debris burning, dispersed or developed camping, off-road
vehicle use, flammables, fireworks, dry grass mowing, woodcutting, equipment use, target shooting, arson, cultural
activities, highways, county or public access road, ranch or farm, lightning prone, dumping
68 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
2. Hazards Masten
2015
Weather
Zone 3 40
Topography - Slope
0 – 25% 0 points
26 – 40% 3 points
41% + 5 points
0
Topography - Aspect
N, NW, NE 0 points
W, E 3 points
S, SW, SE 5 points
3
Topography - Elevation
5001 feet + 0 points
3501 – 5000 feet 1 point
0 – 3500 feet 2 points
1
Vegetation (SB 360 definition)
Non-forest 0 points
HV 1 5 points
HV 2 15 points
HV 3 20 points
15
Crown Fire Potential
Passive - Low 0 points
Active – Moderate 5 points
Independent – High 10 points
5
Total points: 64
Risk category rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 40 points = Moderate
41 – 60 points = High
61 – 80 points = Extreme
Rating: Extreme
HV 1 – produces flame lengths up to 5 feet with very little spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 2 – produces flame lengths 5-8 feet high with sporadic spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 3 – produces flame lengths over 8 feet with frequent spotting, torching and crowning.
69 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
3. Protection Capabilities Masten
2015
Fire response
Organized structural response < 10 minutes 0 points
Inside fire district, response > 10 minutes 8 points
No structural protection, only wildland response 15 points
No structural or wildland protection 36 points
10
Community Preparedness
Organized stakeholder group, community fire plan,
phone tree, or mitigation efforts 0 points
Primarily agency efforts (mailings, FireFree, etc.) 2 points
No efforts 4 points
2
Total points: 12
Protection Capability Category Rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 16 points = Moderate
17 – 40 points = High
Rating: Moderate
4. Values Protected: Human and economic
Homes (density per 10 acres)
0.1 – 0.9 (rural) 2 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 15 points
5.1 + (urban) 30 points
2
(0.16)
Community Infrastructure
None 0 points
One present 10 points
More than one present 20 points
0
Total points: 2
Values Protected Category Rating:
0 – 15 points = Low
16 – 30 points = Moderate
31 – 50 points = High
Rating: Low
Community infrastructure – Power substations and corridors, transportation corridors, municipal watersheds, water
storage and distribution, fuel storage, health care facilities, landfills and waste treatment, schools, churches, community
centers, and stores.
2015 Update:
• There has been some defensible space work in Wagon Wheel subdivision and on BLM land but the majority
of the area has fuel that dictated a 15 in the vegetation category.
• The group gave Masten a 10 due to the high response time of La Pine Fire Department.
• This rating area received a 2 for Community Preparedness, which shows there has been some communication
mostly in the Wagon Wheel area in the Masten rating area.
• With no established infrastructure this rating area received a 0 for values protected.
70 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
Wickiup
11,126 acres 26 structures 65 population
1. What is the likelihood of a fire occurring?
2015
Fire occurrence (per 1000 acres per 10 years)
0 – 0 .1 (low) 5 points
0.1 – 1.1 (moderate) 10 points
1.1+ (high) 20 points
10
(0.9)
Ignition Risk – Home Density (homes per 10 acres)
0 - 0 .9 (rural) 0 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 5 points
5.1+ (urban) 10 points
0
(0.02)
Ignition Risk – Other Factors Present
< 1/3 present 0 points
1/3 – 2/3 present 5 points
> 2/3 present 10 points
10
Total points: 20
Risk category rating:
0 – 13 points = Low
13 – 27 points = Moderate
27 – 40 points = High
Rating: Moderate
Other factors: power lines or stations, logging, construction, debris burning, dispersed or developed camping, off-road
vehicle use, flammables, fireworks, dry grass mowing, woodcutting, equipment use, target shooting, arson, cultural
activities, highways, county or public access road, ranch or farm, lightning prone, dumping
71 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
2. Hazards Wickiup
2015
Weather
Zone 3 40
Topography - Slope
0 – 25% 0 points
26 – 40% 3 points
41% + 5 points
0
Topography - Aspect
N, NW, NE 0 points
W, E 3 points
S, SW, SE 5 points
3
Topography - Elevation
5001 feet + 0 points
3501 – 5000 feet 1 point
0 – 3500 feet 2 points
1
Vegetation (SB 360 definition)
Non-forest 0 points
HV 1 5 points
HV 2 15 points
HV 3 20 points
15
Crown Fire Potential
Passive - Low 0 points
Active – Moderate 5 points
Independent – High 10 points
5
Total points: 64
Risk category rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 40 points = Moderate
41 – 60 points = High
61 – 80 points = Extreme
Rating: Extreme
HV 1 – produces flame lengths up to 5 feet with very little spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 2 – produces flame lengths 5-8 feet high with sporadic spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 3 – produces flame lengths over 8 feet with frequent spotting, torching and crowning.
72 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
3. Protection Capabilities Wickiup
2015
Fire response
Organized structural response < 10 minutes 0 points
Inside fire district, response > 10 minutes 8 points
No structural protection, only wildland response 15 points
No structural or wildland protection 36 points
15
Community Preparedness
Organized stakeholder group, community fire plan,
phone tree, or mitigation efforts 0 points
Primarily agency efforts (mailings, FireFree, etc.) 2 points
No efforts 4 points
4
Total points: 19
Protection Capability Category Rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 16 points = Moderate
17 – 40 points = High
Rating: High
4. Values Protected: Human and economic
Homes (density per 10 acres)
0.1 – 0.9 (rural) 2 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 15 points
5.1 + (urban) 30 points
2
(0.02)
Community Infrastructure
None 0 points
One present 10 points
More than one present 20 points
0
Total points: 2
Values Protected Category Rating:
0 – 15 points = Low
16 – 30 points = Moderate
31 – 50 points = High
Rating: Low
Community infrastructure – Power substations and corridors, transportation corridors, municipal watersheds, water
storage and distribution, fuel storage, health care facilities, landfills and waste treatment, schools, churches, community
centers, and stores.
2015 Update:
• There has been quite a bit of Forest Service fuel reduction completed in the Wickiup area but the group gave
them a higher score in the vegetation component due to the lack of structural protection in this area.
• This area received a 15 due to no structural response. The Wickiup rating area only has wildland fire response.
• The group gave this area a 4, which dictates that there has not been a community wide effort to be prepared
for wildfire.
• With no established infrastructure this rating area received a 0 for values protected.
73 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
Little Deschutes
4,830 acres 380 structures 950 population
1. What is the likelihood of a fire occurring?
2015
Fire occurrence (per 1000 acres per 10 years)
0 – 0 .1 (low) 5 points
0.1 – 1.1 (moderate) 10 points
1.1+ (high) 20 points
20
(2.5)
Ignition Risk – Home Density (homes per 10 acres)
0 - 0 .9 (rural) 0 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 5 points
5.1+ (urban) 10 points
0
(0.79)
Ignition Risk – Other Factors Present
< 1/3 present 0 points
1/3 – 2/3 present 5 points
> 2/3 present 10 points
10
Total points: 30
Risk category rating:
0 – 13 points = Low
13 – 27 points = Moderate
27 – 40 points = High
Rating: High
Other factors: power lines or stations, logging, construction, debris burning, dispersed or developed camping, off-road
vehicle use, flammables, fireworks, dry grass mowing, woodcutting, equipment use, target shooting, arson, cultural
activities, highways, county or public access road, ranch or farm, lightning prone, dumping
74 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
2. Hazards Little Deschutes
2015
Weather
Zone 3 40
Topography - Slope
0 – 25% 0 points
26 – 40% 3 points
41% + 5 points
0
Topography - Aspect
N, NW, NE 0 points
W, E 3 points
S, SW, SE 5 points
3
Topography - Elevation
5001 feet + 0 points
3501 – 5000 feet 1 point
0 – 3500 feet 2 points
1
Vegetation (SB 360 definition)
Non-forest 0 points
HV 1 5 points
HV 2 15 points
HV 3 20 points
5
Crown Fire Potential
Passive - Low 0 points
Active – Moderate 5 points
Independent – High 10 points
0
Total points: 49
Risk category rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 40 points = Moderate
41 – 60 points = High
61 – 80 points = Extreme
Rating: High
HV 1 – produces flame lengths up to 5 feet with very little spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 2 – produces flame lengths 5-8 feet high with sporadic spotting, torching or crowning.
HV 3 – produces flame lengths over 8 feet with frequent spotting, torching and crowning.
75 Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
3. Protection Capabilities Little Deschutes
2015
Fire response
Organized structural response < 10 minutes 0 points
Inside fire district, response > 10 minutes 8 points
No structural protection, only wildland response 15 points
No structural or wildland protection 36 points
8
Community Preparedness
Organized stakeholder group, community fire plan,
phone tree, or mitigation efforts 0 points
Primarily agency efforts (mailings, FireFree, etc.) 2 points
No efforts 4 points
4
Total points: 12
Protection Capability Category Rating:
0 – 9 points = Low
10 – 16 points = Moderate
17 – 40 points = High
Rating: Moderate
4. Values Protected: Human and economic
Homes (density per 10 acres)
0.1 – 0.9 (rural) 2 points
1 – 5 (suburban) 15 points
5.1 + (urban) 30 points
2
(0.79)
Community Infrastructure
None 0 points
One present 10 points
More than one present 20 points
0
Total points: 2
Values Protected Category Rating:
0 – 15 points = Low
16 – 30 points = Moderate
31 – 50 points = High
Rating: Low
Community infrastructure – Power substations and corridors, transportation corridors, municipal watersheds, water
storage and distribution, fuel storage, health care facilities, landfills and waste treatment, schools, churches, community
centers, and stores.
2015 Update:
• Little Deschutes rating area was given a lower number than the other rating areas due to the high number of
riparian areas in this rating area and there is a low brush component in the Little Deschutes Corridor.
• This area was given an 8 since La Pine Fire response would be longer than 10 minutes.
• The group gave the Little Deschutes area a 4, which dictates that there has not been a community wide effort
to be prepared for wildfire.
• With no established infrastructure this rating area received a 0 for values protected.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
76
Detailed Structural Vulnerability Risk Assessment
Structural Vulnerability: In regards to flammable roofing the group mentioned that there
are a few wood shake roofs in each rating area and they scored the areas accordingly.
However, due to the weather in the Greater La Pine CWPP area most homes have some
other roofing that can accommodate high snow levels instead. For the table with the
numerical values please see page 24 in the Community Wildfire Protection Plan.
• Day Road Corridor:
§ Flammable Roofing:
o Out of 30 points this rating area received a 2.
§ Defensible Space
o The group suggested that about 20% were complaint according to
Senate Bill 360. So the area was given a 24 out of 30.
§ Ingress – Egress
o This rating area has multiple roads in and out, so it was given a 0
out of 7.
§ Road Width
o All roads were determined to be greater than 24 feet wide, so it
was given a 0 out of 4.
§ All season road condition:
o This area received a 3 due to the roads not being surfaced
throughout. However, the grade is less than 10%.
§ Street Signs (this does not address property address signs)
o This area was given a 0 out of 5 for the presence of reflective road
signs.
§ Fire Service Access:
o The group gave this area a 4 due to a large majority of short
driveways lacking turnarounds.
• 6th & Dorrance:
§ Flammable Roofing:
o Out of 30 points this rating area received a 2.
§ Defensible Space
o The group suggested that about 20% were complaint according to
Senate Bill 360. So the area was given a 24 out of 30.
§ Ingress – Egress
o This rating area has multiple roads in and out, so it was given a 0
out of 7.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
77
§ Road Width
o All roads were determined to be greater than 24 feet wide, so it
was given a 0 out of 4.
§ All season road condition:
o This area received a 3 due to the roads not being surfaced
throughout. However, the grade is less than 10%.
§ Street Signs (this does not address property address signs)
o This area was given a 0 out of 5 for the presence of reflective road
signs.
§ Fire Service Access:
o The group gave this area a 4 due to a large majority of short
driveways lacking turnarounds.
• Finley Butte:
§ Flammable Roofing
o Out of 30 points this rating area received a 5.
§ Defensible Space
o The group suggested that about 20% were complaint according to
Senate Bill 360. So the area was given a 24 out of 30.
§ Ingress – Egress
o This rating area has one main road for access, however other
roads that might be needed for access are small and
unmaintained. This rating area received a 4 out of 7 points.
§ Road Width
o Some of the roads in this area are under 24 feet wide. This rating
area received a 2 out of 4.
§ All season road condition:
o This area received a 3 due to the roads not being surfaced
throughout. However, the grade is less than 10%.
§ Street Signs (this does not address property address signs)
o This area was given a 2 out of 5 points due to some reflective
signs present in the rating area.
§ Fire Service Access:
o The group gave this area a 4 out of 5 points due to long driveways
(longer than 300 feet) that lack a turnaround for large fire
apparatus.
• Newberry:
§ Flammable Roofing:
o Out of 30 points this rating area received a 2.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
78
§ Defensible Space
o The group suggested that about 40% were complaint according to
Senate Bill 360. So the area was given an 18 out of 30.
§ Ingress – Egress
o This rating area has multiple roads for access. The Newberry
rating area was given a 0 out of 7 points.
§ Road Width
o All roads were determined to be greater than 24 feet wide, so it
was given a 0 out of 4.
§ All season road condition:
o This area received a 1 due to some roads not being surfaced.
§ Street Signs (this does not address property address signs)
o This area was given a 0 out of 5 points due to the presence of
reflective signs in the rating area.
§ Fire Service Access:
o The group gave this area a 0 out of 5 points due to short driveways
with adequate turnarounds for fire apparatus.
• City of La Pine:
§ Flammable Roofing
o Out of 30 points this rating area received a 0.
§ Defensible Space
o The group suggested that about 50% were complaint according to
Senate Bill 360. So the area was given a 15 out of 30.
§ Ingress – Egress
o This rating area has multiple roads in and out, so it was given a 0
out of 7.
§ Road Width
o All roads were determined to be greater than 24 feet wide, so it
was given a 0 out of 4.
§ All season road condition
o This area received a 2 due to some roads having a steeper grade
but the roads are maintained.
§ Street Signs (this does not address property address signs)
o This area was given a 0 out of 5 for the presence of reflective road
signs.
§ Fire Service Access
o The group gave this area a 4 due to a large majority of short
driveways lacking turnarounds.
• Ponderosa Pines:
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
79
§ Flammable Roofing:
o Out of 30 points this rating area received a 5.
§ Defensible Space
o The group suggested that about 30% were complaint according to
Senate Bill 360. So the area was given a 10 out of 30.
§ Ingress – Egress
o This rating area has one main road for access, however other
roads that might be needed for access are small and
unmaintained. This rating area received a 4 out of 7 points.
§ Road Width
o All roads were determined to be greater than 24 feet wide, so it
was given a 0 out of 4.
§ All season road condition
o This area received a 1 due to some roads not being surfaced.
§ Street Signs (this does not address property address signs)
o This area was given a 0 out of 5 points due to the presence of
reflective signs in the rating area.
§ Fire Service Access
o The group gave this area a 0 out of 5 points due to short driveways
with adequate turnarounds for fire apparatus.
• Masten:
§ Flammable Roofing:
o Out of 30 points this rating area received a 5.
§ Defensible Space
o The group suggested that about 50% were complaint according to
Senate Bill 360. So the area was given a 15 out of 30.
§ Ingress – Egress
o This rating area has one main road for access, however other
roads that might be needed for access are small and
unmaintained. This rating area received a 4 out of 7 points.
§ Road Width
o All roads were determined to be greater than 24 feet wide, so it
was given a 0 out of 4.
§ All season road condition
o This area received a 3 due to the roads not being surfaced
throughout. However, the grade is less than 10%.
§ Street Signs (this does not address property address signs)
o This area was given a 0 out of 5 point due to the presence of
reflective road signs.
§ Fire Service Access:
o The group gave this area a 2 out of 5 points due to long driveways
(longer than 300 feet) with turnaround available for large fire
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
80
apparatus.
• Wickiup:
§ Flammable Roofing
o Out of 30 points this rating area received a 5.
§ Defensible Space
o The group suggested that about 50% were complaint according to
Senate Bill 360. So the area was given a 15 out of 30.
§ Ingress – Egress
o This rating area has multiple roads in and out, so it was given a 0
out of 7.
§ Road Width
o Some of the roads in this area are less than 24 feet wide. This
rating area received a 2 out of 4.
§ All season road condition
o This area received a 3 due to the roads not being surfaced
throughout. However, the grade is less than 10%.
§ Street Signs (this does not address property address signs)
o This area was given a 5 out of 5 point due to the absence of
reflective road signs.
§ Fire Service Access
o The group gave this area a 0 out of 5 points due to short
driveways with turnaround available for large fire apparatus.
• Little Deschutes Corridor:
§ Flammable Roofing:
o Out of 30 points this rating area received a 2.
§ Defensible Space
o The group suggested that about 50% were complaint according to
Senate Bill 360. So the area was given a 15 out of 30.
§ Ingress – Egress
o This rating area has only one road for access to the community.
This rating area received a 7 out of 7 points.
§ Road Width
o All roads were determined to be greater than 24 feet wide, so it
was given a 0 out of 4.
§ All season road condition:
o This area received a 2 due to some roads having a steeper grade
but the roads are maintained.
§ Street Signs (this does not address property address signs)
o This area was given a 0 out of 5 points due to the presence of
reflective signs in the rating area.
Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2015
81
§ Fire Service Access:
o The group gave this area a 4 out of 5 points due to long driveways
(longer than 300 feet) that lack a turnaround for large fire
apparatus.
DATED this ____day 5 for the
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners.
ANTHONY DEBONE, Chair
ALAN UNGER, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
TAMMY BANEY, Commissioner