|
|
| Fig. 1: On the way to the Palisade Glacier out of Big Pine, California in August 2020. This area is at high risk for a conflagration. (Photo Credit: M. Scott) |
The wildfires in California are causing unprecedented economic and health risks. There are 33 million acres of forest in California. [1] Much of this forest, such as the 10 million acres in the Sierra Nevada mountain range, are at high risk for wildfires. [1] (See Fig. 1.)
The worsening wildfires can be traced back to three primary sources: (1) drought and disease, leading to dead, dry, fire-ready fuel, (2) rising average temperatures, and (3) increasing urbanization into forest areas. [1] (See Fig. 2.) The critical amounts of fire ready fuel can be traced back in part to the misguided fire control efforts by the federal and state governments. For the last century, the government's response to a wildfire was simple: put it out. Unfortunately, small fires play an outsized role in reducing the chance of a massive fire primarily by reducing the fuel load, especially the aerated foliage that acts as fire kindling. [2] It is the difference between trying to start a campfire with a match and big logs, compared to a fire replete with dry, small sticks that serve to light the larger, denser wood.
The history of mandated fire suppression can be traced back to 1911, when the federal government passed the Weeks Act. [3] The Weeks Act explicitly funded fire prevention, and was quickly followed by Forest service guidelines, such as those passed in 1926 that stated that all fires should be controlled before they grew larger than 10 acres. [4] The result of this policy was that between 1950 and 1999, the average annual burn acreage hovered around 102,000 ha. [5] In comparison, the historical average of annual burned acres is estimated to be around 1.8 million ha, a 94.4% drop in fire activity. [5] The result of these policies was an abnormal overgrowth in forests across the state of California.
 |
| Fig. 2: Factors contributing to the high risk status of California forests. WUI: Wildfire-Urban Interface. (Image credit: M. Scott) |
Many solutions to the wildfire crisis in California have been proposed. Recognizing the mistakes of absolute fire suppression, California has recognized the critical need for prescribed burns. In 1981, California established the Vegetation Management Program (VMP) as part of Cal Fire, which has burned on average 22,000 acres annually. [1]
However, these efforts take a huge amount of manpower, planning and funding, as the overcrowded forest increases the risk that a prescribed burn spins out of control. The resulting smoke is additionally unpopular with local residents. Liability is another enormous issue. Many of the high-risk fire areas are close to the wildlife-urban interface, and any damage incurred by a prescribed burn would fall on Cal Fire. The result of these obstacles is that number of acres burned in prescribed fires has decreased in the past five years. In 2017, Cal Fire burned only 14,000 acres, not meeting its goal 20,000 acres. [1]
Mechanical thinning is another strategy employed to remove the overgrown underbrush. Although less dangerous than prescribed fires, it is nearly three times more expensive than prescribed burns due to the logistics of biomass removal. Additionally, after mechanical removal, herbicides are needed to suppress regrowth.
Another solution, first proposed in the 1980s, is to use goats to clear underbrush. [6] This solution has been revisited as fires have become increasingly devastating. The current rule of thumb is that 10 goats will clear an acre in one month. [6] In particular, the Spanish goat is hardy, large, and preferentially eats brush. Goats chew down plants to 3 inches, which does not disrupt the soil integrity, in contrast to sheep which eat the entire plant, including the roots. This grazing pattern has the additional benefit of limiting the death of plants; thus, native species, while trimmed, are not lost to the environment. Goats have been used to control invasive species, as their digestive system destroys seeds. [7] One study in the Mark Twain forest in Missouri reported that grazing goats resulted in an 80% reduction in quantity and seed production of invasive plant species. In California, goats are primarily considered for maintaining fuel breaks after mechanical clearance. [8]
The catastrophic wildfires from 2016-2020 have had one upside: a dramatic increase in funding. Facing public pressure, a new joint Federal-State agreement, the Shared Stewardship of California's Forest and Rangeland, was signed on August 12, 2020, with the ambitious goal of sustainably treating one million acres of land by 2025. [9] A key tenant of the Shared Stewardship agreement is the focus on sustainable vegetation treatments; grazing was specifically listed as a viable option. Further, this mutual agreement expands the ability of the State to prevent fire on Federal land. The Federal government owns 57% of California's forests, while State and local governments owns only around 3%. [10] There is money behind this proposal as well: as much as a billion dollars, thanks to the Great American Outdoors Act. Great American Outdoors Act was signed into law on August 4th, 2020, and allocates 9.5 billion dollars to maintain public lands, including wildfire prevention in California's forests. [11] The beaurocratic hurdles have been recently diminished as well. The Emergency Wildfire and Public Safety Act of 2020 outlines recommendations for accelerated environmental review and litigation protections. [12] However, even with these promising developments, there are many economic considerations regarding the use of goats for brush control.
The largest cost when using goats for brush control are the expenses related to fencing. [8] Permanent fencing can cost up to $2500 per mile. [8] However, progress in the realm of electric fencing has reduced the cost of a portable electric fence to around $600/mile. [8] Still, there is the issue of erecting and moving fences, especially on the rugged terrain found in fuel breaks. Water can be an issue on fuel breaks, and needs to be manually brought in if there is no natural source present. [6] One solution is to initially employ goats on fuel breaks near major bodies of water, such as along the Sacramento river. [13] There will be goat loss due to predators, which is unavoidable but potentially managed through a successful combination of electric fencing and herding dogs. [6] There can be further issues when goats are allowed to roam too close to urban environments. In Salem, Oregon, 75 goats were employed to eat invasive species in a 9.1-acre park. [14] The total cost was much higher than what the city typically pays for inmate labor to do the same job, and left behind unwanted goat waste that offended the citizens in the park. [14] Further, the goats were likely overstocked as they decimated the native plants and tree bark, which has been shown to occur when their preferred food source of young brush has been eaten. [8] Herders are advised to carry liability insurance to cover any damages incurred by their goats; some counties require insurance. For example, San Diego requires goat herders carry a minimum of a million dollars in insurance to be employed for brush control. [15]
In summary, the largest obstacles facing the use of goats in brush management is the physical labor and specialized skillset to effectively manage a herd of goats in the wild. While there are more than two dozen goat brush companies in California, the sheer scale of the goat operation needed to make progress toward fire control is non-trivial. However, with even a portion of the funding available in the Shared Stewardship of California's Forest and Rangeland Agreement, it is possible to make goats a viable option to controlling brush in California.
© Madeleine Scott. The author warrants that the work is the author's own and that Stanford University provided no input other than typesetting and referencing guidelines. The author grants permission to copy, distribute and display this work in unaltered form, with attribution to the author, for noncommercial purposes only. All other rights, including commercial rights, are reserved to the author.
[1] "Fire on the Mountain: Rethinking Forest Management in the Sierra Nevada," Little Hoover Commission, Report No. 242, February 2018.
[2] P. M. Fernades and H. S. Botelho, "A Review of Prescribed Burning Effectiveness in Fire Hazard Reduction," Int. J. Wildland Fire 12, 117 (2003).
[3] L. Southard, "The History of Cooperative Forest Fire Control and the Weeks Act," Forest History Today, Spring/Fall 2011, p. 17.
[4] R. W. Gorte and K. Bracmort, "Forest Fire/Wildfire Protection," Congressional Research Service, RL30755, March 2012.
[5] S. L. Stephens, R. E. Martin, and N. E. Clinton, "Prehistoric Fire Area and Emissions from California's Forests, Woodlands, Shrublands, and Grasslands," Forest Ecol. Manag. 251, 205 (2007).
[6] L. R. Green and L. A. Newell, "Using Goats to Control Brush Regrowth on Fuelbreaks," U.S. Forest Service, General Technical Report PSW-59, September 1982.
[7] "Prescriptive Grazing and Prescribed Fire on the Mark Twain National Forest," U.S. Forest Service, October 2019.
[8] S. P. Hart, "Recent Perspectives in Using Goats for Vegetation Management in the USA," J. Dairy Sci. 84, E. Suppl., E170 (2001).
[9] G. Newsom et al., "Agreement for Shared Stewardship of California's Forests and Rangelands," U.S. Forest Service, 12 Aug 20.
[10] "California's Forest Resources: Forest Inventory and Analysis, 2001-2010," U.S. Forest Service, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-913, February 2016.
[11] "Great American Outdoors Act," Pub. L. 116-152, 134 Stat. 682 (2020).
[12] "Emergency Wildfire and Public Safety Act of 2020," S.4431, 116th Congress, 4 Aug 20.
[13] "Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation," U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, July 2015.
[14] K. Brulliard, "Goat Landscaping Crew is Fired by Oregon City," Washington Post, 26 Feb 16.
[15] "Application for Use of Goats for Brush Management Permit," City of San Diego Fire-Rescue Department, December 2005.