Wildfire Hazard Assessment
by Tim Wallace (President) and Bill McClung (Vice President)
To meet a commitment of our 2001 BLM/Sacramento Regional Foundation Community-based Wildfire Prevention Grant, the Conservancy offers this assessment of the potential for wildfires in Claremont Canyon, and of current efforts designed to prevent such fires. We are not fire fighters or fire experts, but we have together many years of practical experience with fire and vegetation management, we have read or listened to many fire professionals, and attended many meetings on fire-based issues since the 1991 Oakland/Berkeley fire. We issue this report in the spirit of cooperation with the principal agencies whose job it is to fight fire and who own land in Claremont Canyon, but also with a sense of urgency: time is of the essence in respect to wildfire hazards in Claremont Canyon. (For full report click here.)
AUGUST 15, 2002
CLAREMONT CANYON: 2002 WILDFIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT
By Tim Wallace (President) and Bill McClung (Vice President)
THE CLAREMONT CANYON CONSERVANCY
INTRODUCTION
Since the 1970s, there has been a significant build up of wildfire fuels in Claremont Canyon. The south-facing slopes on University and Park District land, untouched in the last two major fires, now have dense stands of Dry North Costal Scrub and invasive exotics some 10-15 feet high. The same is true of Gwin Canyon though to a lesser extent due to the 1991 fire there. And Garber Park contains much undergrowth and ladder fuels that need management. In sum, almost 400 acres of public land is 90 percent covered with woody brush, often with a high dead-to-live ratio. Thousands of eucalyptus trees have regrown after being cut in the early 70s. Now these "firestorm trees" often have dense French broom and other ladder fuels below them, as can be seen along most of Claremont Avenue. The potential for roadside ignitions rapidly spreading into the eucalyptus crowns is great. The road edges are dense with flammable weeds, as are the few fire lane roads. There are few, if any, places within the Canyon where fire fighters could confront a fire that has gained scale and momentum.
On private land in the Canyon about 150 acres there has been substantial fuel reduction on many properties as required by the Oakland Fire Department, but homes and residential vegetation are also a part of the total fuel load, and some private properties remain poorly maintained.
The combination of wildland and urban fuels, and the lack in most areas of fuel breaks or buffer zones, as recommended by the 1995 Vegetation Management Consortium's report FIRE HAZARD MITIGATION PROGRAM & FUEL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE EAST BAY HILLS, presents a substantial risk of large-scale, catastrophic fires developing in and spreading from Claremont Canyon.
We make the following observations based on the Conservancy's work this year:
(1)
The state of vegetation within Claremont Canyon is approximately what it was a year ago at this time with several important, but limited, exceptions:
The state of vegetation within Claremont Canyon is approximately what it was a year ago at this time with several important, but limited, exceptions:(a) The University during late summer 2001 hired a private contractor to cut and chip about 230 eucalyptus trees along approximately 400 yards on Grizzly Peak Blvd to the south of Claremont Avenue. This created a valuable fuel-reduction zone of about 150 feet downhill. This area has now spawned large areas of annual weeds especially Italian thistle and poison hemlock that need to be managed this summer. The Conservancy has now undertaken to do this in agreement with Tom Klatt of the University.
(b) At Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Fish Ranch Road EBMUD managed (by cutting and burning) approximately five acres of mature coyote brush, French broom, and poison oak on their land across the corner from the University Project. This was a cooperative effort with CDF Chief John Elliff, Amber Bach of the Diablo Fire Safe Council, Steve Abbors and Scott Hill of EBMUD, and CDC Delta Crews who did most of the field work. EBMUD has already twice cut the weed growth in this area this summer. The Conservancy was pleased to help facilitate this exemplary project.
(c) The Marg Family has substantially thinned the eucalyptus forest and reduced French broom on its 14 acres near the top of the Canyon with the help of a $9,000 BLM/Sacramento Regional Foundation grant secured with support from the Diablo Fire Safe Council and the Conservancy.
These three projects have greatly increased the potential to fight fires coming toward Claremont Canyon from the EBMUD land to the east. We regard this as the most significant improvement in the Canyon over the last year. The remaining unmanaged roadside eucalyptus stand on University property along Grizzly Peak is perhaps the most significant fire hazard in the Canyon, and UC has indicated that completing removal of eucalyptus is their highest priority in 2002. We are eager to see the completion of that project.
(d) The City of Oakland has cleared about 15 feet from the roadside along Claremont Avenue and has begun some work in Garber Park with the East Bay Conservation Corp as of August 15.
(e) EBRPD has done some eucalyptus and pine felling and some trail maintenance work within Gwin Canyon, and maintains an important large fuelbreak along the edge of Panoramic Hill.
We regard the vegetation growth in Gwin Canyon which burned in 1946, 1970, and 1991 as a significant wildfire hazard in need of fuel-reduction efforts now.
(e) PRIVATE LANDOWNERS, under pressure from the Oakland Fire Department, have created a major buffer zone below houses on Chancellor Place and Drury Court. This area of approximately ten acres on steep north and west facing slopes is the best example (although with excessive treatments in our opinion on some properties) in the Canyon of a 500-foot buffer zone, as recommended by the 1995 VMC report.
Annual maintenance is essential, and further removal of pines in this area is recommended.
(f) VOLUNTEER PROJECTS, organized by the Conservancy, have on about 25 occasions this year done fuel reduction on Park District, City of Oakland, and University lands on a total of perhaps 3 acres. The most visible and largest of these projects is on University land in the upper canyon north of Claremont Avenue in the Ecological Study Area near a parking turnout.
We believe volunteers can make small contributions to vegetation management challenges of Claremont Canyon. The Conservancy intends to continue organizing and managing such work in the future.
(2)There are very few places to fight fires in the Canyon.
There are very few places to fight fires in the Canyon. We have been told this repeatedly over the years. Parts of Grizzly Peak Boulevard, as indicated above, are now managed so that firefighters and equipment could make a stand against a fire from the east. But if a fire enters the Canyon from the northeast on Diablo winds, or starts within the Canyon, it would spread through continuous wildfire fuels for 1.5 miles before it reaches the homes on Stonewall, Claremont Avenue, Rispin, Gypsy Lane, Evergreen, Slater, and Alvarado in the lower canyon and on the south side. Such a fire would be large and complex. With multiple flame fronts, high surface flame heights in many areas, and the potential for crowning in Garber Park and the eucalyptus stands behind the Clark Kerr campus and above houses on Stonewall and lower Claremont Avenue.
Claremont Avenue, which is the major road from which a large fire might be fought, has not been managed as a place to make fire-fighting stands. Both sides of Claremont Avenue, with the exception of narrow roadside strips managed by Oakland in August, are dense with weeds, broom, and unmanaged Eucalyptus from top to bottom. This is an extreme and unacceptable wildfire hazard.
The Oakland Fire Department asked last year that roadsides be managed for 100 feet on each side. We believe 250-foot management zones along both sides of Grizzly Peak Boulevard and Claremont Avenue are needed, and that they can be accomplished without destroying the considerable scenic and ecological values in these areas through strategic, well planned, mosaic treatments of vegetation management.
(3)In most areas there are not adequate Buffer Zones close to houses.
In most areas there are not adequate Buffer Zones close to houses.The need for Defensible Space to protect homes from wildfires is nationally and locally recognized. The 1995 VMC recommended 500-foot Buffer Zones near "values-at-risk" in the East Bay Hills, with variable prescriptions depending on slopes and vegetation types.
On the residential streets in Claremont Canyon next to undeveloped land, such management zones exist only in two places: the EBRPD fuel break above Dwight Way on the edge of Panoramic Hill goat-grazed each year and the privately maintained buffer zone below Chancellor Place.
Many homes on Stonewall Road, Claremont Avenue, Rispin, Gypsy Lane, Alvarado Road, Siler Place, and Evergreen are juxtaposed to essentially unmanaged public lands where fuel loads are heavy and intense fires will likely jump the 30-foot "clearance" required of homeowners.
This lack of management zones close to houses means, in the event of a large fire passing down the Canyon, that hundreds of houses might be burning within a very short time, as happened in 1991.
(4)These conditions, in sharp contrast to areas of Strawberry Canyon or Tilden Park where vegetation has been managed for many years, leave the communities in or near Claremont Canyon vulnerable to catastrophic fires fires that cannot be effectively fought.
These conditions, in sharp contrast to areas of Strawberry Canyon or Tilden Park where vegetation has been managed for many years, leave the communities in or near Claremont Canyon vulnerable to catastrophic fires fires that cannot be effectively fought.CONCLUSIONS
The major obstacles for reducing fire hazards in Claremont Canyon seem first to be the shortage of available funds for such work and second, the organizational "turf" considerations, managerial priorities, and the usual political concerns that accompany any publicly managed visible work projects.
(The Conservancy applied for five large BLM grants in 2001 and 2002 to help remedy this condition on University and Park District land. All of these applications were rejected.)
Almost every thinking person fire fighting, environmental groups, public land managers, and lay citizens knows the present dangers of fire from Claremont Canyon. It is no surprise to anyone. What is mystifying is the delay in taking appropriate actions to reduce the fire hazards by appropriate vegetation management programs well thought out, widely publicized for input, and then acted upon.
We are encouraged by the fact that the Hills Emergency Forum has been studying Claremont Canyon over the last year and that the funds from 1995 FEMA grants for fire mitigation may, after seven years of environmental and other reviews, be released next year. We are also encouraged by the cooperative spirit with which the principal public land managers Tom Klatt at the University; Jerry Kent at the Park District; Steve Abbors and Scott Hill of EBMUD; Ed Gebelein and Martin Matarrese of the City of Oakland have discussed these issues with us.
Still, very little has actually gotten done in 2002 to address known problems on the public lands. At the same time, the Oakland Fire Department has imposed requirements "to clear" private parcels of land in Claremont Canyon that appear to us extreme likely to result in soil erosion and strong environmental objections.
CDF/CDC Delta crews have been used by EBMUD and by the Park District in the past for fuel management programs: this year on EBMUD land as mentioned, and in October 1999 after the fire above Stonewall Road on Park District land. The Conservancy is going to press for wider use of this important and socially beneficial source of labor in Claremont Canyon. Use of these crews means much more fuel-reduction work could get done using public monies already allocated.
While little vegetation management has actually been done this year, much has been accomplished in laying a foundation for work in the following years. The Conservancy has spent this year mostly in attempting to inventory agency participation and commitment to vegetation management. Good working relationships have been developed with the UC, the Parks District, and with the City of Oakland personnel responsible for Garber Park and for monitoring possible fire risk from private lands.
There is much that needs doing before Claremont Canyon can be said to be reasonably safe from uncontrollable wildfires.
