Fuel Reduction on Private Land

Whitmore, CA
W. M. Beaty & Associates
Submitted by Bob Rynearson and Phillip Battaglia, W. M. Beaty & Associates
    
  
Project ID: 1019

1. Name - Clancy Fuel and Bug Pile Removal

Context | Objectives | Treatment Specifics | Utilization | Targets | Pre Treatment data | Post Treatment data | Links 

 
 

W. M. Beaty & Associates manages approximately 280,000 acres of private timberland in northeastern California. In the eastside pine and mixed conifer stand, fire is a major concern. Beaty & Associates has been using biomass utilization to reduce fire threat since 1989. To date, the fuel chips generated from these operations have covered the costs of the thinnings.

This case study covers three treatments:

  1. Biomass thinning that only removed wood fuel chips but not sawlogs from a plantation
  2. Thinning from below in which biomass (wood fuel chips) and small diameter sawlogs were removed from a "natural" stand
  3. Understocked brushfields that were cleared and then planted with follow-up weed control to facilitate survival and growth and reduce future brushy fuel loads

The first treatment occurred in an overstocked ponderosa pine stand planted about 20 years ago after wildfire, which became interlaced with tall manzanita. Trees were thinned, and much of the brush was crushed incidentally by the thinning and yarding equipment. Had total brush and slash removal been required as a regulatory condition of the thinning operation, it would have been too expensive and no treatment would have been done.

The second low thinning treatment removed 37 tons per acre, 24 tons chips and 13 tons sawlogs, primarily as ladder fuels and weaker crown trees. The third treatment, brush rehabilitation, removed 34 tons per acre, primarily brush and some weak trees. For this treatment a D7 bulldozer with a brush rake was used to clear 15 to 20 foot tall manzanita from the site. Beaty & Associates negotiated with thinning contractors to pay landowners for the material generated through thinning operations, which the contractors were initially reluctant to do.



This thinning project was put to the test when a wildfire burned through the area. The Whitmore Fire was started by an illegal campfire and grew to 1,000 acres before running into the thinned area. Once the fire hit the treated area, it dropped out of the crowns, and fire agencies were able to get an upper hand on the blaze. Once the fire reached the thinned area west of Bateman Road, it went from a column-driven crown fire (with 100 to 200 foot flame lengths) to a ground fire with occasional individual tree flare-ups. Fire fighting forces were able to go from indirect to direct attack and eventually pinch off the front of the fire before it destroyed any homes or buildings in the community of Whitmore. Although about 10,000 MBF were lost to the fire, no structures were burned.


The fire moved from the right side of photograph (unthinned area that had crown fire) across the road to the left side of the photograph (thinned area). As it did so, the fire dropped from the crown level to the ground.

Links
 

 2Land Ownership
Private

 
 3Location
California
 
4Forest Type
Mixed conifer

 
 Context
 5Is this project a part of a landscape plan?
No

 
 6In a Wildland Urban Interface (WUI)?
Yes

 
 7Acreage treated

 
 8Type of contract
Timber sale
 
 9Funding source

 
 10Collaborators and partners

 
 11Project start date

 
12Project completion date

 
 Treatment Goals
 13Restoration, watershed, or habitat improvement

 
 14Reduce fuel load

 
 15Fire break

 
 16

 
17Forest Stand Improvement

 
 Treatment Specifics
 18Primary treatment objective

 
 19How does biomass removal fit with other objectives?

 
 20Treatment description

 
 21Description of contractors

 
 22Travel distance for contractors

 
 23Type of equipment used

 
 24Treatment of residual slash if any

 
 25Treatment cost per acre

 
26Trucking costs

 
 Utilization
 27Products from project

 
 28Price for products 

 
 29Date of Sale

 
 30Did biomass markets exist previous to project?

 
 31Type of utilization

 
 32How well did the woody biomass match the utilization options?

 
33Distance to utilization

 
 Treatment guidelines, targets, limitations
 34Diameter limit

 
 35Basal area reduction

 
 36Crown coverage

 
 37Fuel loading

 
 38Retention guidelines

 
 39Treatment of snags and downed logs

 
 40Soil impacts

 
41Other ecological impacts monitored

 
 Pre Treatment
 42Fuel load

 
 43Stem density (stems/ac)

 
 44Basal area (ft2/ac)

 
 45Canopy closure (%)

 
 46Height to live crown base

 
 47Snags and downed woody material

 
 48Size class distribution

 
 49Tree species composition

 
 50Presence/absence of invasive species

 
51Soil and other ecological data

 
 Post Treatment
 52Fuel load

 
 53Stem density (stems/ac)

 
 54Basal area (ft2/ac)

 
 55Canopy closure (%)

 
 56Height to live crown base

 
 57Snags and downed woody material

 
 58Size class distribution

 
 59Tree species composition

 
 60Presence/absence of invasive species

 
 61Soil and other ecological data

 

 
PDFPrintE-mail
 
< Prev   Next >