This has been a sort of Holy Grail since way before I retired.
Now, we know that there are many ways of calculating, and in fact, thinking about wildfire risk, including many ways already researched by folks at the Rocky Mountain Research Station and elsewhere. Maybe the bill should pick one or make sure that both Secs pick the same one?
Also fuel treatment effectiveness, in fact many bucks were sent to CSU and NAU for fuel treatment effectiveness monitoring, which perhaps has devolved into this ReShape effort.. Plus there was the FS’s own Region 6 FTEM that we covered here and seems to have stopped. I’d sure like to hear the history of all this.
Again, WUI, many different definitions. Perhaps the bill should pick one?
What do you think of this approach?
***********************************
SEC. 302. Accurate hazardous fuels reduction reports.
(a) Inclusion of hazardous fuels reduction report in materials submitted in support of the President’s budget.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Beginning with the first fiscal year that begins after the date of enactment of this Act, and each fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary concerned shall include in the materials submitted to Congress in support of the President’s budget pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, a report on the number of acres of Federal land on which the Secretary concerned carried out hazardous fuels reduction activities during the preceding fiscal year.
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—For purposes of the report required under paragraph (1), the Secretary concerned shall—
(A) in determining the number of acres of Federal land on which the Secretary concerned carried out hazardous fuels reduction activities during the period covered by the report—
(i) record acres of Federal land on which hazardous fuels reduction activities were completed during such period; and
(ii) record each acre described in clause (i) once in the report, regardless of whether multiple hazardous fuels reduction activities were carried out on such acre during such period; and
(B) with respect to the acres of Federal land recorded in the report, include information on—
(i) which such acres are located in the wildland-urban interface;
(ii) the level of wildfire risk (high, moderate, or low) on the first and last day of the period covered by the report;
(iii) the types of hazardous fuels activities completed for such acres, delineating between whether such activities were conducted—
(I) in a wildfire managed for resource benefits; or
(II) through a planned project;
(iv) the cost per acre of hazardous fuels activities carried out during the period covered by the report;
(v) the region or system unit in which the acres are located; and
(vi) the effectiveness of the hazardous fuels reduction activities on reducing the risk of wildfire.
(3) TRANSPARENCY.—The Secretary concerned shall make each report submitted under paragraph (1) publicly available on the websites of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior, as applicable.
(b) Accurate data collection.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary concerned shall implement standardized procedures for tracking data related to hazardous fuels reduction activities carried out by the Secretary concerned.
(2) ELEMENTS.—The standardized procedures required under paragraph (1) shall include—
(A) regular, standardized data reviews of the accuracy and timely input of data used to track hazardous fuels reduction activities;
(B) verification methods that validate whether such data accurately correlates to the hazardous fuels reduction activities carried out by the Secretary concerned;
(C) an analysis of the short- and long-term effectiveness of the hazardous fuels reduction activities on reducing the risk of wildfire; and
(D) for hazardous fuels reduction activities that occur partially within the wildland-urban interface, methods to distinguish which acres are located within the wildland-urban interface and which acres are located outside the wildland-urban interface.
(3) REPORT.—Not later than 2 weeks after implementing the standardized procedures required under paragraph (1), the Secretary concerned shall submit to Congress a report that describes—
(A) such standardized procedures; and
(B) program and policy recommendations to Congress to address any limitations in tracking data related to hazardous fuels reduction activities under this subsection.
Oregon fires create more fuel than they consume, as the steep aspect results in crown fires killing trees of any age.
That federal lands have had no new roads nor salvage logging from prior fires (“fire salvage logging is mugging a burn victim”). 1 minute to 1 hour flash fuels, wind, heat rises, and green needles all destroyed by heat, and ground fire in deep mast of the forest floor burns for days deep and takes out the majority of roots shutting off water flow to now missing needles. Only defoliated trees I saw growing new green needles were yews on the fringe of Mt
St Helens blast zone, among old growth blasted and broken off 20 or more feet from ground level. Understory yews were putting out new green needles from under the bark of the bole. Nothing on any remnant limbs. Just new green needles looking like scales on a fish.
Private land fast rotation forestry that addresses REIT finance corporate form to avoid taxation of “unrealized capital gains” which is, of course, the goal of the corporate construct: growing unrealized capital gains. What is NOT said, is that all expenses that be “capitalized” are not deductible from quarterly tax reporting and payments of estimated taxes. Only harvesting the timber will allow the capital expenses be used to reduce the gross revenue to net revenue. It starts from day one of planting trees to their harvest and end. Pay capital gains taxes and hope to have money enough left to site prep and plant anew.
Commercial forestry is primarily based in the modes of taxation. IRS is The Chief Forester. Congress structured it that way.
Oregon had ad valorem taxation on timber until the 1960s. The State Dept of Revenue had the largest contingent of graduate foresters in the state. Every 5 years the entire 10 million acres of private forest land was sample cruised by DoR cruisers. All trees 12″ DBH and larger were tallied and cruised. The ad valorem tax was collected on that basis. One old character in my area, Wilson Bump, had over 1000 acres of foothills in the Luckiamute river drainage, mostly flat timberland. He logged all the trees that had reached taxable size on a schedule to have income to pay property taxes and any assessed ad valorem taxes owed. He could squeeze a penny to copper foil. Lovely guy and acquaintance.
I agree with your question about WUI. The point should be to establish priorities for treatment and report on how well those priorities have been followed. Whatever the agency thinks the “values at risk” are should be part of accounting for risk reduction.