"When you're implementing projects and doing treatments that are not within a couple of miles of even a single house, then, that's an improper project to call a wildland-urban interface project."
And here in Flagstaff, we have currently several projects going on that are being done in the name of wildland-urban interface. And one in particular that has been relatively high profile was the Fort Valley Ecosystem Project. And that is a 9,100-acre analysis area, of which I believe about half has been treated. And within that analysis area there's a large meadow and lots of private property that is cleared. So of the entire 9,100 acres, I believe that 4,500 acres or so are being treated. And of the areas that are being treated, some of them stretch seven miles out of the town of Flagstaff proper. The areas that are being treated within that project that are over two miles from a single structure—meaning a single house—that not even one of the homes that are out there are within two miles of some of the areas that are being treated.
And the problem that Forest Alliance has been bringing up, and the problem that we have with that, is that there is a need for forest restoration projects, and there's a need to be doing work within the forest. But when you're implementing projects and doing treatments that are not within a couple of miles of even a single house, then, that's an improper project to call a wildland-urban interface project. To me, for the Southwest Forest Alliance, "wildland-urban interface project" refers only to those projects that have the specific goal of protecting communities and houses from fire. Now, there are some houses out there, some scattered houses within the Fort Valley project, and those would certainly be appropriate for protection with wildland-urban interface. But again, there are areas that I know aren't near any of those.
Now, the general idea that has been expressed to me by the proponents of the project is that the viewshed—that is, the view of the mountain, because you can see it from all sorts of places in town—but the view of the mountain actually is part of the wildland-urban interface, because if we can see it burn from town, then it's part of town, and seeing that side of the mountain burn would severely impact town, therefore that's an urban issue, and that project to protect it would be wildland-urban interface treatment. Well, I don't really go for that, and I think it sets a really bad precedent for using money that is meant for community protection, and also just leaves the door wide open for pretty much anything—saying that, "Well, if you can see it from anywhere that's developed or have a house, then it must be wildland-urban interface"— I think it's just extremely too general and gets way off the point. Wildland-urban interface means protection of communities and houses and the people that are in them.