SWIF Operators Manual

The  Southwest Wildfire Impact Fund  (SWIF) was initially conceptualized in 2019 by a team led by  Mountain Studies Institute , with support from Quantified Ventures, Ellen Roberts, Collins Cockrel and Cole, and the San Juan National Forest. It is a cross-boundary collaborative approach to funding and implementing a landscape-scale forest treatment program to reduce wildfire risk in Southwest Colorado. The SWIF has been successful in southern Colorado because of the history of collaborative work in the region, and the lasting partnerships between land management agencies and private landowners.

The SWIF arose from an elevated risk of wildfire for the people, resources and industries of Southwest Colorado. Like many other places in the American west, a history of land management practices that have created dense, fuel-heavy forests and increasing drought conditions are driving the threat of uncharacteristic and devastating wildfires. Communities in Southwest Colorado have come together to identify shared values across the landscape and to learn how they can coexist with fire. The SWIF provides a financial pathway to complement forest management work on public lands with coordinated work on private lands.

SWIF-like funds could be successful elsewhere for implementing landscape scale treatment programs to prepare for wildfire and improve forest and watershed health. Use this story map to learn more about the structure and implementation of this fund.

For additional information, see the full  Operators Manual .

Forest health treatments like thinning and prescribed burning have shown to reduce the risk of wildfire. In order to maximize the benefit of forest health treatments, a well-funded landscape-scale treatment program is needed to avert the threat of wildfire on communties. This involves coordinating efforts between all present land management agencies and private landowners.

Using a science-based approach that incorporates a holistic understanding of forest ecosystems, including community values on the landscape, a community can plan some resilience to wildfire that supports fire's role on the landscape while also considering economic and social ramifications of pre-fire planning and post-fire impacts.

Fuel reduction treatments need to be prioritized in key strategic areas to facilitate wildfire adaptation in the modern era (Moritz et al. 2014, Schoennagel et al. 2017). The following is required in order to prioritize vegetation treatments:

• Map highly valued resources and assest in relation to burn probability and fire spread models (Scott et al. 2013).
• Map where treatment is feasible and likely to reduce risk.
• Land managers should also consider the possibility that global change scenarios may bring changes in wind speed that could alter the location of wind-dominated fires and make extreme fire scenarios more common (Jeong and Sushama 2019). Planning for this may include the following:
  • Creating formal evacuation plans
  • Utilizing fire resistant building materials
  • Educating homeowners
  • Developing new building and development codes

The SWIF team created and used the following process in designing a treatment program for Southwest Colorado and recommends this or a similar process for other communities:

• Engage local stakeholders and regional experts
• Develop/articulate key outputs and outcomes
• Identify values on the landscape
• Allow communities to reflect on map outputs and calibrate as needed
• Identify priority areas
• Develop metrics and monitoring protocols around key values
• Identify key partners and funding opportunities
• Implement projects in the treatment plan
• Monitor and assess metrics around key values
• Incorporate community into review of monitoring results
• Learn from results and apply adaptive management as needed

The SWIF team used the above process for designing a treatment program. They found that reviewing proposed areas of work and understanding the suite of mitigation opportunities can help a community apply a combination of mitigation strategies that will prepare it for living with fire.

Several key watersheds were identified by the SWIF team and the community as high priorities. This analysis excluded some areas that had recently experienced wildfire and are therefore no longer a treatment priority because the fuel load was burnt in the fire and thus reduced naturally. Focusing on the area around the City of Durango and the primary watershed for municipal water revealed a subset of watersheds with varying risk to values on the landscape.

Of those watersheds, only a subset of lands within them were identified as suitable for treatment based on steepness of slopes, ability to access, and cost of treatments. Of the highest priority watersheds, 16,589 acres were identified as being cost-effective and priorities for reducing risk. At $2,000/acre, the median cost between defensible space work and mechanical treatment costs ($1,500/acre and $2,500/acre respectively), the estimated cost of treatment would be $33,178,800.

In the map below, purple represents areas that provide a feasible risk reduction by thinning. Targeting a subset of the most cost-effective acres can make the largest amount of influence for a given dollar amount.

The SWIF team modelled fire behavior based on conditions before and after forest health treatments in three representative parcels within the SWIF area of focus. These areas were selected to demonstrate the value and cumulative impact of conducting treatments across boundaries, working on a mix of public and private land using a variety of treatment strategies. The areas are:

1. Animas City Mountain: in the town of Durango and important recreational resource for the community.
2. Forest Lakes: special district and residential subdivision near two key water resources for the region (Lemon and Vallecito Reservoirs).
3. Adjacent to transmission line near Yellowjacket Pass: critical powerline and the sole power source for Archuleta County.

This model shows the spread of a simulated fire in each of the three parcels before (orange) and after (yellow) the treatments.

The value of benefits from the treatments can be estimated at $4,982,608, including avoided property and infrastructure damage, avoided suppression costs, and avoided sedimentation of water resources. This value reflects a nearly 300% benefit-cost ratio over the estimated treatment cost of of $1,661,300. This estimation suggests that performing forest health treatments could reduce a fire's severity by over 75%.

The cost of forest health treatments are outweighed by the benefits of their ability to reduce wildfire risk in southwest Colorado, which has undoubtedly contributed to the success and public acceptance of the SWIF in this region.

The SWIF is a fund and an Authority that can finance or otherwise attract and coordinate funding for large scale forest health treatment programs in Southwest Colorado. The collaborative element of SWIF, and of an Authority to govern SWIF, recognizes that the treatment program can be cost prohibitive for any one beneficiary to fully fund, but by pooling resources, multiple beneficiaries can work together to implement the program for their mutual benefit.

After forming a SWIF-like Authority, local beneficiaries (cities, counties, tribes, conservation districts, water districts, etc.) would review the treatment program and costs proposed in the Operators Manual and determine their target timeframe for implementing the treatments based on an assessment of risk. This target timeframe would drive the funding strategy for the program, which will likely draw from four sources.

Funding sources for SWIF:

• Financing: backed by local commitments
• Grants and appropriations: federal, state and philanthropic sources
• Local approprations: determined annually or committed to repaying financing
• Property owner cost share: percentage TBD, option to finance
  • Some of the cost should be covered by the landowner to show their commitment to individual and community risk reduction.
  • Property owners may work with the NRCS, EQIP, WAP, or a similar organization in coordination with SWIF.

The SWIF recommends that two or more interested governmental parties sign an agreement to form and staff a separate legal entity in order to conduct forest and watershed improvement projects and establish a revolving loan fund for this work. An Authority provides the flexibility to add new members in subsequent phases. Non-governmental entities would participate in SWIF in advisory roles. The Coordinator or Director should interface with the Advisory Board and synthesize its input for Authority members. The Advisory Board should include the following perspectives (includes examples from SWIF):

• Forester to provide scientific forest health expertise
  • US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station
• Local conservation organization
  • Mountain Studies Institute
• Modelling expertise to demonstrate pre- and post-treatment impact
  • Colorado Forest Restoration Institute, Mountain Studies Institute
• Public lands mangers conducting treatments in conjunction with SWIF
  • San Juan National Forest, Bureau of Land Management
• Landowner outreach and networks
  • Wildfire Adapted Partnership, Colorado State Forest Service, Association of Consulting Foresters, American Forest Foundation, National Resource Conservation Service
• Private business (mitigation planning, wood products businesses)
  • Region 9, La Plata Economic Development Alliance
• State agency managing forest health programs
  • Colorado State Forest Service
• Workforce development organizations and educational institutions
  • Southwest Conservation Corps, local education institusions (high schools, career technical education, community college, higher education)
• Fire districts
  • Durango Fire Protection District

Generally, the Authority will conduct work in the following areas:

• Fund Management and Organizational Finance
• Forest Health Treatment Program
• Administration, Communications, and Compliance

Staffing for the SWIF Authority will depend on the scale of treatment program that its members approve; a larger treatment program will require more support across all functions. Staffing needs for the Authority can be filled via direct hire or via contractual relationship and likely include:

• Coordinator to organize Authority members, oversee fund management and any necessary contracts.
• Legal counsel to advise the authority on contracts, regulations, Authority governance, and other issues.
• Program manager to oversee implementation of the approved treatment program, as well as the monitoring and modelling of program impact.
• Outreach coordinator to work with parners who engage private property owners, as well as investors and other contributors.
• Auditor to assist the Authority in completing and filing the annual state audit.
• Accountant to manage the Authority's bookkeeping.
• Administrative assistant to support program administration, communication and compliance.

• The sharing of knowledge and information is only as effective as the trustworthiness of the messenger.
• Stakeholder and community engagement takes concerted time and resources, but it is essential to a cross-boundary treatment program.
• Successful community engagement requires dedicated staff and resources as well as a committed organization to serve as a third party, objective faciliator to coordinate efforts. This role in southwest Colorado is filled by Mountain Studies Institute, a non-profit organization committed to supporting the conveyance and incorporation of science into local decision making and advancing community enagement in utilizing science to inform management of community values. This helps to advance a shared vision and outcomes for the landscape.
• Building social acceptance for a cross-boundary treatment program can be challenging, but knowledge of ecological benefits can decrease concerns about adverse impacts of treatments.

• Be sure to relay cost avoidance to existing budgets and lean on local experience and other community experiences with fire.
• Existing partnerships like the RMRI can help ensure all partners are communicating effectively.

• Because treatment on private lands is the keystone of a successful treatment program that complements Federal treatment efforts, outreach to private property owners to get their conceptrual and financial support for conducting treatments is an essential element of SWIF.
• A SWIF Authority should work with existing organizations to outreach to and conduct work with private property owners.

To support a SWIF-like program, local elected officials must

• see a difference in value between incremental forest health work and a large-scale treatment program
• believe that the treatment of a large number of acres in a short period of time will significantly reduce wildfire risk for their communities
• feel that this greater risk reduction is worth the political action needed to commit to the repayment of financing the treatments.

To operationalize this support, local elected officials need

• Legal support
• Technical capacity

In building a treatment plan designed to address wildfire risk, it is important to consider what happens to the wood removed from the landscape. Much of what presents wildfire risk is smaller diameter, and new technologies are needed to make products other than logs (POL) marketable.

Creative solutions that are being explored across Southwest Colorado for the use of wood material:

•  Timber Age Systems, Inc.  is utilizing smaller diameter ponderosa pine to develop panels of cross laminated timber, used for the constrution of homes and facilities.
• The Forest Health Company in Pagosa Springs uses small diameter wood and debris to create a cleaner chip that can be converted into biochar, a form of charcoal that can be spread on agricultural fields and mining sites to maintain soil moisture and improve growing conditions. It can also be incorporated into feed for cattle, helping to improve digestion.
•  Table to Farm , a composting company, has a curbside pickup service for household compost materials. They compost the materials and incorporate wood chips into the compost process to add needed carbon. The materials can then be used for soil reclamation.

• Long-term stewardship contracts for conducting treatments and offtake of materials are one way public land managers can help develop a wood products workforce and regional economy.
• A significant volume of usable material, either small diameter timber or woddy biomass, has been key to growing the forest products industry in Southwest Colorado.
• Increasing the ability of small businesses to compete for a government contract may allow them to secure capital needed to develop and retain a knowledgeable workforce and necessary equipment. In Southwest Colorado, Region 9 and First Southwest Bank partnered to facilitate programs that teach businesses how to sugn up to be government contrators and successfully win bids.
• A commitment to long-term supply is essential for innovation in the forest services and products industry, which will support long-term forest health.

In its feasibility report, the SWIF team explained several possible features of the SWIF, including the issuing of individual loans and the repayment of those loans based on modelled risk reduction achieved. Given the complexity of the SWIF even without this feature, and the effort required to structure the SWIF and manage all stakeholders, future implementors of a SWIF-like concept should consider beginning with the simplest form of a fund, ensure all stakeholders are bought in, and then introduce features that could be added, contingent on partner interest.

For additional information, see the full  Operators Manual .