by Michael Howell
Time is running out for public comment on the latest update to the Ravalli County Community Wildfire Protection Plan. The plan has gone through a few major iterations since it was adopted in 2006. Significant changes were made in an update that was prepared in 2009 but not adopted. Litigation between the Bitterroot National Forest and the county has also played a role. On Tuesday, November 21, Ravalli County Forester Andrew Amidon presented an overview of the draft plan to the Ravalli County Commissioners.
Notable updates developed for the 2024 CWPP, stated in the documents summary, include: an updated definition of the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI), revised WUI mapping, prioritized areas within the WUI, a detailed implementation plan and action table, and recommendations to reduce structural ignitability. These elements of the 2024 CWPP meet regulatory requirements and provide decision-makers and stakeholders with a useful and current tool to address the local risk of wildfire. Updated WUI mapping is also necessary to access grant funding for eligible projects that reduce wildfire risk, increase wildfire response capacity, or provide public education regarding wildfires and associated risk.
The 2024 CWPP also summarizes the regulatory environment surrounding the development of a CWPP along with a characterization of Ravalli County including demographics, government structure, land use, and the fire environment. An overview of the WUI featuring an updated conceptual definition and detailed description of the methodology for defining and mapping the WUI is included along with discussion regarding the integration of wildfire risk into the WUI.
The implementation plan developed for the 2024 CWPP consists of goals, objectives, strategies, and projects that align with federal, state, and local goals while also meeting the unique needs of Ravalli County. The implementation plan interfaces directly with a detailed action plan, consisting of individual projects collaboratively developed by the CWPP Core Team, the public, and stakeholders. The projects within the action plan are subject to prioritization processes that evaluate location, project type, wildfire risk, and other priority elements in order to assign a prioritization value and map priority areas within the WUI for future planning efforts.
The 2024 CWPP is a comprehensive resource that characterizes current conditions and available resources, identifies and interprets wildfire risk, and provides next steps intended to mitigate that risk and provide the public with recommendations to reduce structural ignitability. The updated elements developed throughout the process also facilitate access to a variety of funding opportunities to implement the goals, objectives, and strategies outlined within the 2024 CWPP.
The concept of the WUI has a variety of definitions ranging widely in detail and extent according to federal, state, and local sources. At its simplest, the WUI has been described as the area where wildland fuels meet human development, representing an area of increased risk to life, property, and infrastructure. However, the definition of the WUI has evolved in various ways to encompass local community characteristics and values.
“Ravalli County has developed a WUI definition that encompasses the unique needs of the community. The current Ravalli County WUI definition was developed with close consideration of existing, general HFRA WUI definitions in order to maintain consistency across jurisdictions while also ensuring the WUI meets the unique needs of Ravalli County,” it states in the plan.
According to Amidon, nine communities in the Bitterroot valley have been identified in the Federal Registry as being “at risk” communities including Hamilton, Stevensville, Darby, Corvallis, Victor, Florence, Sula, Conner, and Pinesdale.
Also included in the WUI are buffer zones stretching roughly from the national forest on the flanks of the Bitterroot Mountains to the west across the entire river bottom to forested lands on the flanks of the Sapphire Mountains on the east.
The WUI also has “bulges” that stretch up various roadways, identified as having “highly valued resources and assets,” including Lost Horse Corridor Road and Lost Horse to Como Loop, Skalkaho-Rye and Paint Creek Roads, Three Mile Road, and several Forest Service roads. It includes the major highways and interstates, and other secondary roads that serve to connect structures to primary roads. It also includes roads identified as important ingress and egress roads including Hughes Creek Road, Nez Perce Road, French Basin Road, Pasture Draw, Lowman Creek Road, Rye Creek Road, North Fork Rye Creek Road, Sleeping Child Road, and Eight Mile Creek Road.
Key water resources are also included in the WUI, such as Lake Como, Painted Rocks Reservoir, Lost Trail Ski Resort and Lost Trail Hot Springs.
Commissioner Jeff Burrows said that he disagreed with the results of the litigation that led to the removal of large areas in the forest that were at high risk of burning. Addressing the inclusion of the entire river bottom in the WUI which drew some objections from people worried about the impacts to homeowners about insurance rates going up and other regulations, he noted that right now in this plan there are no regulatory teeth and no consequences. He also acknowledged that, with or without a plan, insurance rates were going up in the area and across the West based on fire risk assessments, but that these decisions were being made on statewide and region-wide assessments made by the insurance companies themselves without regard to any local plans.
Amidon said that the decision to keep the valley bottom in the WUI was mainly about infrastructure and not about fuel loading or high vegetative risk, but was to keep homeowners eligible for funding from federal grants enabling them to do things such as replacing wood shingle roofs and other such protective measures and include ingress and egress issues in case of fire, as well as doing work on culverts and such things.
Commissioner Greg Chilcott noted that there was no way to address the area in detail and that it was necessarily a “broad brush approach.”
Amidon said that the main pushback from the public has not been about the inclusion of structures, but about how far the WUI extends into the forest.
In public comment, Laura Jackson, who lives up Lost Horse Road, noted that Lost Horse Road was not included in the WUI in the proposed 2009 update and should not be included in this one. She said this plan includes it under “high value assets,” that need protection, but that including it in the WUI would likely lead to the opposite by destroying its highest value as a wildland corridor. She agreed that it was a high use roadway, but that it was one leading deep into the forest to access Twin Lakes for recreation. She noted that the stream was on a list to be designated a “Wild and Scenic” waterway and that area had already been designated as potential wilderness.
“These designations point to what is really the high value of that area,” she said.
Jackson went on to note that there were high fuels in the area and some structures such as the historic Forest Service cabin that she cherishes, and the Shoemaker Campground. “If these things burned it would be sad, but they could be replaced. What can’t be replaced, at least in my lifetime and probably yours, is the unique ecosystem.” She said that under WUI designation those ecosystem values could be destroyed without any public participation in the decision-making process.
Jackson also noted that all the most recent research on fires specific to our area substantiates the fact that the best most effective defense against wildfire was to treat the ignition zone around structures at risk primarily within 5 feet of the structure and then another zone extending to 30 feet and a further zone stretching 100 feet. She said the research also shows that treatments further into the forest have been shown to be largely ineffective. She said that climate change was making the forest drier and also creating stronger winds and that the area is likely to burn someday.
“Wider ranging fuel density is not a major factor,” she said. “Perhaps we could insert something into the plan emphasizing that the real priority for high risk needs to be around homes, not way out in the forest.”
Bruce Suenrum also made public comment, stating that he was in favor of including the whole river bottom in the WUI. He said that the recent fires in Spokane and Cheney, Washington burned in a landscape very similar to that between Florence and Stevensville. He also noted that there were a lot of “to be determined” with respect to treatment priorities in the plan with no dates. “If there is no date,” he said, “we will never get around to it.” He said the dates may end up changing but that the plan could then be amended but it would at least keep us focused on the needed projects, especially the access routes.
Deadline for public comment on the plan is December 1. Public comments may be submitted at the Commissioners’ Office at 215 S. 4th Street, Hamilton or by email to commissioners@rc.mt.gov. The Commissioners are holding a public meeting on December 18 to consider adopting the plan.
Updated versions of the 2024 CWPP and associated maps can be found at the Ravalli County CWPP Online Story Map, which is a central location to find the most updated version of all CWPP material. The online story map can be accessed either by following the linked web address: https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/aa38224061e342f788159d779e1c8529