JPSS and GOES-R Activities Supporting 2013 Fire Outbreaks presentation.https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.goes-r.gov/users/sci-sem/2014_04_21.html

The Fire Services Act, 1981 sets out the rules and regulations for that the fire service works to. The NDFEM provides support to the Local Authorities to make sure these rules and regulations are put in place and that health and safety is prioritised. We provide funding to the fire service for the purchase of appliances and equipment. We also support the fire service by running a national training programme and by publishing guidance on relevant matters and by setting general policy.

The Fire Services Act, 1981 sets out the rules and regulations for that the fire service works to. The NDFEM provides support to the Local Authorities to make sure these rules and regulations are put in place and that health and safety is prioritised. We provide funding to the fire service for the purchase of appliances and equipment. We also support the fire service by running a national training programme and by publishing guidance on relevant matters and by setting general policy. There have been some changes to data collected, as follows; Arva (P) gone from Cavan 2011. 3 Offaly Stations gone 2011. Daingean * gone from 2011. Kilcormac * gone from 2011. Banagher * gone from 2011. Balla (gone from 2010 return) Ballycastle (gone from 2010 return) Keel (gone from 2009 return) Knock (gone from 2009 return) Newport (gone from 2010 return)

The Fire Services Act, 1981 sets out the rules and regulations for that the fire service works to. The NDFEM provides support to the Local Authorities to make sure these rules and regulations are put in place and that health and safety is prioritised. We provide funding to the fire service for the purchase of appliances and equipment. We also support the fire service by running a national training programme and by publishing guidance on relevant matters and by setting general policy. Dangerous Substances Regulations, 1979

The Fire Services Act, 1981 sets out the rules and regulations for that the fire service works to. The NDFEM provides support to the Local Authorities to make sure these rules and regulations are put in place and that health and safety is prioritised. We provide funding to the fire service for the purchase of appliances and equipment. We also support the fire service by running a national training programme and by publishing guidance on relevant matters and by setting general policy. Dangerous Substances Regulations, 1979

The Fire Services Act, 1981 sets out the rules and regulations for that the fire service works to. The NDFEM provides support to the Local Authorities to make sure these rules and regulations are put in place and that health and safety is prioritised. We provide funding to the fire service for the purchase of appliances and equipment. We also support the fire service by running a national training programme and by publishing guidance on relevant matters and by setting general policy. Dangerous Substances Regulations, 1979

The Fire Services Act, 1981 sets out the rules and regulations for that the fire service works to. The NDFEM provides support to the Local Authorities to make sure these rules and regulations are put in place and that health and safety is prioritised. We provide funding to the fire service for the purchase of appliances and equipment. We also support the fire service by running a national training programme and by publishing guidance on relevant matters and by setting general policy.

The Fire Services Act, 1981 sets out the rules and regulations for that the fire service works to. The NDFEM provides support to the Local Authorities to make sure these rules and regulations are put in place and that health and safety is prioritised. We provide funding to the fire service for the purchase of appliances and equipment. We also support the fire service by running a national training programme and by publishing guidance on relevant matters and by setting general policy.

Conservation planning in the Great Plains often depends on understanding the degree of fragmentation of the various types of grasslands and savannas that historically occurred in this region. To define ecological subregions of the Great Plains, we used a revised version of Kuchler’s (1964) map of the potential natural vegetation of the United States. The map was digitized from the 1979 physiographic regions map produced by the Bureau of Land Management, which added 10 physiognomic types. All analyses are based on data sources specific to the United States; hence, we only analyze the portion of the Great Plains occurring in the United States.We sought to quantify the current amount of rangeland in the US Great Plains converted due to 1) woody plant encroachment; 2) urban, exurban, and other forms of development (e.g., energy infrastructure); and 3) cultivation of cropland. At the time of this analysis, the most contemporary measure of land cover across the United States was the 2011 NLCD (Homer et al. 2015). One limitation of the NLCD is that some grasslands with high rates of productivity, such as herbaceous wetlands or grasslands along riparian zones, are misclassified as cropland. A second limitation is the inability to capture cropland conversion occurring after 2011 (Lark et al. 2015). Beginning in 2009 (and retroactively for 2008), the US Department of Agriculture - NASS has annually produced a Cropland Data Layer (CDL) for the United States from satellite imagery, which maps individual crop types at a 30-m spatial resolution. We used the annual CDLs from 2011 to 2017 to map the distribution of cropland in the Great Plains. We merged this map with the 2011 NLCD to evaluate the degree of fragmentation of grasslands and savannas in the Great Plains as a result of conversion to urban land, cropland, or woodland. We produced two maps of fragmentation (best case and worst case scenarios) that quantify this fragmentation at a 30 x 30 m pixel resolution across the US Great Plains, and make them available for download here. Resources in this dataset: Resource title: Data Dictionary for Figure 2 derived land cover of the US portion of the North American Great Plains File name: Figure2_Key for landcover classes.csv Resource title: Figure 1. Potential natural vegetation of US portion of the North American Great Plains, adapted from Kuchler (1964). File name: Figure1_Kuchler_GPRangelands.zip Resource description: Extracted grassland, shrubland, savanna, and forest communities in the US Great Plains from the revised Kuchler natural vegetation map Resource title: Figure 2. Derived land cover of the US portion of the North American Great Plains. File name: Figure2_Key for landcover classes.zip Resource description: The fNLCD-CDL product estimates that 43.7% of the Great Plains still consists of grasslands and shrublands, with the remainder consisting of 40.6% cropland, 4.4% forests, 3.0% UGC, 3.0% developed open space, 2.9% improved pasture or hay fields, 1.2% developed land, 1.0% water, and 0.2% barren land, with important regional and subregional variation in the extent of rangeland loss to cropland, forests, and developed land. Resource title: Figure 3. Variation in the degree of fragmentation of Great Plains measured in terms of distance to cropland, forest, or developed lands. File name: Figure3_bestcase_disttofrag.zip Resource description: This map depicts a “best case” scenario in which 1) croplands are mapped based only on the US Department of AgricultureNational Agricultural Statistics Service Cropland Data Layers (2011e2017), 2) all grass-dominated cover types including hay fields and improved pasture are considered rangelands, and 3) developed open space (as defined by the National Land Cover Database) are assumed to not be a fragmenting land cover type. Resource title: Figure 4. Variation in the degree of fragmentation of Great Plains measured in terms of distances to cropland, forest, or developed lands. File name: Figure4_worstcase_disttofrag.zip Resource description: This map depicts a ‘worst case’ scenario in which 1) croplands are mapped based on the US Department of AgricultureNational Agricultural Statistics Service Cropland Data Layers (2011e2017) and the 2011 National Land Cover Database (NLCD), 2) hay fields and improved pasture are not included as rangelands, and 3) developed open space (as defined by NLCD) is included as a fragmenting land cover type.

Emergency Response Boundaries have been extracted from the WA (Enhanced) E911 system. They represent the response boundaries of emergency service providers across Washington State. Includes individual layers for Emergency Medical Services (EMS), Fire Services (Fire), and Law Enforcement Services (Law).

Emergency Response Boundaries have been extracted from the WA (Enhanced) E911 system. They represent the response boundaries of emergency service providers across Washington State. Includes individual layers for Emergency Medical Services (EMS), Fire Services (Fire), and Law Enforcement Services (Law).

The Fire Services Act, 1981 sets out the rules and regulations for that the fire service works to. The NDFEM provides support to the Local Authorities to make sure these rules and regulations are put in place and that health and safety is prioritised. We provide funding to the fire service for the purchase of appliances and equipment. We also support the fire service by running a national training programme and by publishing guidance on relevant matters and by setting general policy.

Emergency Response Boundaries have been extracted from the WA (Enhanced) E911 system. They represent the response boundaries of emergency service providers across Washington State. Includes individual layers for Emergency Medical Services (EMS), Fire Services (Fire), and Law Enforcement Services (Law).

Multiple research and management partners collaboratively developed a multiscale approach for assessing the geomorphic sensitivity of streams and ecological resilience of riparian and meadow ecosystems in upland watersheds of the Great Basin to disturbances and management actions. The approach builds on long-term work by the partners on the responses of these systems to disturbances and management actions. At the core of the assessments is information on past and present watershed and stream channel characteristics, geomorphic and hydrologic processes, and riparian and meadow vegetation. In this report, we describe the approach used to delineate Great Basin mountain ranges and the watersheds within them, and the data that are available for the individual watersheds. We also describe the resulting database and the data sources. Furthermore, we summarize information on the characteristics of the regions and watersheds within the regions and the implications of the assessments for geomorphic sensitivity and ecological resilience. The target audience for this multiscale approach is managers and stakeholders interested in assessing and adaptively managing Great Basin stream systems and riparian and meadow ecosystems. Anyone interested in delineating the mountain ranges and watersheds within the Great Basin or quantifying the characteristics of the watersheds will be interested in this report. For more information, visit: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/61573Metadata and Downloads

Multiple research and management partners collaboratively developed a multiscale approach for assessing the geomorphic sensitivity of streams and ecological resilience of riparian and meadow ecosystems in upland watersheds of the Great Basin to disturbances and management actions. The approach builds on long-term work by the partners on the responses of these systems to disturbances and management actions. At the core of the assessments is information on past and present watershed and stream channel characteristics, geomorphic and hydrologic processes, and riparian and meadow vegetation. In this report, we describe the approach used to delineate Great Basin mountain ranges and the watersheds within them, and the data that are available for the individual watersheds. We also describe the resulting database and the data sources. Furthermore, we summarize information on the characteristics of the regions and watersheds within the regions and the implications of the assessments for geomorphic sensitivity and ecological resilience. The target audience for this multiscale approach is managers and stakeholders interested in assessing and adaptively managing Great Basin stream systems and riparian and meadow ecosystems. Anyone interested in delineating the mountain ranges and watersheds within the Great Basin or quantifying the characteristics of the watersheds will be interested in this report. For more information, visit: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/61573Metadata and Downloads

Multiple research and management partners collaboratively developed a multiscale approach for assessing the geomorphic sensitivity of streams and ecological resilience of riparian and meadow ecosystems in upland watersheds of the Great Basin to disturbances and management actions. The approach builds on long-term work by the partners on the responses of these systems to disturbances and management actions. At the core of the assessments is information on past and present watershed and stream channel characteristics, geomorphic and hydrologic processes, and riparian and meadow vegetation. In this report, we describe the approach used to delineate Great Basin mountain ranges and the watersheds within them, and the data that are available for the individual watersheds. We also describe the resulting database and the data sources. Furthermore, we summarize information on the characteristics of the regions and watersheds within the regions and the implications of the assessments for geomorphic sensitivity and ecological resilience. The target audience for this multiscale approach is managers and stakeholders interested in assessing and adaptively managing Great Basin stream systems and riparian and meadow ecosystems. Anyone interested in delineating the mountain ranges and watersheds within the Great Basin or quantifying the characteristics of the watersheds will be interested in this report. For more information, visit: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/61573Metadata and Downloads

Multiple research and management partners collaboratively developed a multiscale approach for assessing the geomorphic sensitivity of streams and ecological resilience of riparian and meadow ecosystems in upland watersheds of the Great Basin to disturbances and management actions. The approach builds on long-term work by the partners on the responses of these systems to disturbances and management actions. At the core of the assessments is information on past and present watershed and stream channel characteristics, geomorphic and hydrologic processes, and riparian and meadow vegetation. In this report, we describe the approach used to delineate Great Basin mountain ranges and the watersheds within them, and the data that are available for the individual watersheds. We also describe the resulting database and the data sources. Furthermore, we summarize information on the characteristics of the regions and watersheds within the regions and the implications of the assessments for geomorphic sensitivity and ecological resilience. The target audience for this multiscale approach is managers and stakeholders interested in assessing and adaptively managing Great Basin stream systems and riparian and meadow ecosystems. Anyone interested in delineating the mountain ranges and watersheds within the Great Basin or quantifying the characteristics of the watersheds will be interested in this report. For more information, visit: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/61573Metadata and Downloads

Multiple research and management partners collaboratively developed a multiscale approach for assessing the geomorphic sensitivity of streams and ecological resilience of riparian and meadow ecosystems in upland watersheds of the Great Basin to disturbances and management actions. The approach builds on long-term work by the partners on the responses of these systems to disturbances and management actions. At the core of the assessments is information on past and present watershed and stream channel characteristics, geomorphic and hydrologic processes, and riparian and meadow vegetation. In this report, we describe the approach used to delineate Great Basin mountain ranges and the watersheds within them, and the data that are available for the individual watersheds. We also describe the resulting database and the data sources. Furthermore, we summarize information on the characteristics of the regions and watersheds within the regions and the implications of the assessments for geomorphic sensitivity and ecological resilience. The target audience for this multiscale approach is managers and stakeholders interested in assessing and adaptively managing Great Basin stream systems and riparian and meadow ecosystems. Anyone interested in delineating the mountain ranges and watersheds within the Great Basin or quantifying the characteristics of the watersheds will be interested in this report. For more information, visit: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/61573Metadata and Downloads

Multiple research and management partners collaboratively developed a multiscale approach for assessing the geomorphic sensitivity of streams and ecological resilience of riparian and meadow ecosystems in upland watersheds of the Great Basin to disturbances and management actions. The approach builds on long-term work by the partners on the responses of these systems to disturbances and management actions. At the core of the assessments is information on past and present watershed and stream channel characteristics, geomorphic and hydrologic processes, and riparian and meadow vegetation. In this report, we describe the approach used to delineate Great Basin mountain ranges and the watersheds within them, and the data that are available for the individual watersheds. We also describe the resulting database and the data sources. Furthermore, we summarize information on the characteristics of the regions and watersheds within the regions and the implications of the assessments for geomorphic sensitivity and ecological resilience. The target audience for this multiscale approach is managers and stakeholders interested in assessing and adaptively managing Great Basin stream systems and riparian and meadow ecosystems. Anyone interested in delineating the mountain ranges and watersheds within the Great Basin or quantifying the characteristics of the watersheds will be interested in this report. For more information, visit: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/61573Metadata and Downloads

Multiple research and management partners collaboratively developed a multiscale approach for assessing the geomorphic sensitivity of streams and ecological resilience of riparian and meadow ecosystems in upland watersheds of the Great Basin to disturbances and management actions. The approach builds on long-term work by the partners on the responses of these systems to disturbances and management actions. At the core of the assessments is information on past and present watershed and stream channel characteristics, geomorphic and hydrologic processes, and riparian and meadow vegetation. In this report, we describe the approach used to delineate Great Basin mountain ranges and the watersheds within them, and the data that are available for the individual watersheds. We also describe the resulting database and the data sources. Furthermore, we summarize information on the characteristics of the regions and watersheds within the regions and the implications of the assessments for geomorphic sensitivity and ecological resilience. The target audience for this multiscale approach is managers and stakeholders interested in assessing and adaptively managing Great Basin stream systems and riparian and meadow ecosystems. Anyone interested in delineating the mountain ranges and watersheds within the Great Basin or quantifying the characteristics of the watersheds will be interested in this report. For more information, visit: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/61573Metadata and Downloads

Multiple research and management partners collaboratively developed a multiscale approach for assessing the geomorphic sensitivity of streams and ecological resilience of riparian and meadow ecosystems in upland watersheds of the Great Basin to disturbances and management actions. The approach builds on long-term work by the partners on the responses of these systems to disturbances and management actions. At the core of the assessments is information on past and present watershed and stream channel characteristics, geomorphic and hydrologic processes, and riparian and meadow vegetation. In this report, we describe the approach used to delineate Great Basin mountain ranges and the watersheds within them, and the data that are available for the individual watersheds. We also describe the resulting database and the data sources. Furthermore, we summarize information on the characteristics of the regions and watersheds within the regions and the implications of the assessments for geomorphic sensitivity and ecological resilience. The target audience for this multiscale approach is managers and stakeholders interested in assessing and adaptively managing Great Basin stream systems and riparian and meadow ecosystems. Anyone interested in delineating the mountain ranges and watersheds within the Great Basin or quantifying the characteristics of the watersheds will be interested in this report. For more information, visit: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/61573Metadata and Downloads

Multiple research and management partners collaboratively developed a multiscale approach for assessing the geomorphic sensitivity of streams and ecological resilience of riparian and meadow ecosystems in upland watersheds of the Great Basin to disturbances and management actions. The approach builds on long-term work by the partners on the responses of these systems to disturbances and management actions. At the core of the assessments is information on past and present watershed and stream channel characteristics, geomorphic and hydrologic processes, and riparian and meadow vegetation. In this report, we describe the approach used to delineate Great Basin mountain ranges and the watersheds within them, and the data that are available for the individual watersheds. We also describe the resulting database and the data sources. Furthermore, we summarize information on the characteristics of the regions and watersheds within the regions and the implications of the assessments for geomorphic sensitivity and ecological resilience. The target audience for this multiscale approach is managers and stakeholders interested in assessing and adaptively managing Great Basin stream systems and riparian and meadow ecosystems. Anyone interested in delineating the mountain ranges and watersheds within the Great Basin or quantifying the characteristics of the watersheds will be interested in this report. For more information, visit: https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/61573Metadata and Downloads

The Forest Service's Natural Resource Manager (NRM) Forest Activity Tracking System (FACTS) is the agency standard for managing information about activities related to fire/fuels, silviculture, and invasive species. FACTS is an activity tracking application for all levels of the Forest Service. The application allows tracking and monitoring of NEPA decisions as well as the ability to create and manage KV trust fund plans at the timber sale level. This application complements its companion NRM applications, which cover the spectrum of living and non-living natural resource information. This layer represents activities of hazardous fuel treatment reduction that are polygons. All accomplishments toward the unified hazardous fuels reduction target must meet the following definition: Vegetative manipulation designed to create and maintain resilient and sustainable landscapes, including burning, mechanical treatments, and/or other methods that reduce the quantity or change the arrangement of living or dead fuel so that the intensity, severity, or effects of wildland fire are reduced within acceptable ecological parameters and consistent with land management plan objectives, or activities that maintain desired fuel conditions. These conditions should be measurable or predictable using fire behavior prediction models or fire effects models. Metadata

Note: This is a large dataset. To download, go to ArcGIS Open Data Set and click the download button, and under additional resources select the shapefile or geodatabase option. The Forest Service's Natural Resource Manager (NRM) Forest Activity Tracking System (FACTS) is the agency standard for managing information about activities related to fire/fuels, silviculture, and invasive species. FACTS is an activity tracking application for all levels of the Forest Service. The application allows tracking and monitoring of NEPA decisions as well as the ability to create and manage KV trust fund plans at the timber sale level. This application complements its companion NRM applications, which cover the spectrum of living and non-living natural resource information. This layer represents activities of hazardous fuel treatment reduction that are polygons. All accomplishments toward the unified hazardous fuels reduction target must meet the following definition: Vegetative manipulation designed to create and maintain resilient and sustainable landscapes, including burning, mechanical treatments, and/or other methods that reduce the quantity or change the arrangement of living or dead fuel so that the intensity, severity, or effects of wildland fire are reduced within acceptable ecological parameters and consistent with land management plan objectives, or activities that maintain desired fuel conditions. These conditions should be measurable or predictable using fire behavior prediction models or fire effects models. Go to this url for full metadata description: https://data.fs.usda.gov/geodata/edw/edw_resources/meta/S_USA.Activity_HazFuelTrt_PL.xml

Collection of presentations: GOES-R Proving Ground Status: CIMSS/ASPB Participation; GOES-R Proving Ground: CIRA/RAMMB Progress Report; GOES-R Proving Ground: SPoRT Update; JPSS Proving Ground and Risk Reduction; Overview of Satellite and Above-Boundary Layer Observations

The Fire Services Act, 1981 sets out the rules and regulations for that the fire service works to. The NDFEM provides support to the Local Authorities to make sure these rules and regulations are put in place and that health and safety is prioritised. We provide funding to the fire service for the purchase of appliances and equipment. We also support the fire service by running a national training programme and by publishing guidance on relevant matters and by setting general policy.

Emergency Response Boundaries have been extracted from the WA (Enhanced) E911 system. They represent the response boundaries of emergency service providers across Washington State. Includes individual layers for Emergency Medical Services (EMS), Fire Services (Fire), and Law Enforcement Services (Law).

Wildfires pose a risk to our environment, human health and biodiversity. Following catastrophic wildfires flooding causes sediment to flow into our rivers and streams; polluting our drinking water and damaging riparian ecosystems. The smoke from wildfires can negatively affect the respiratory system; so using personal protective equipment may be necessary when traveling outdoors during a wildfire.

This dashboard application, known as the NWS Wildfire-Situational Awareness For Emergency Response (SAFER) Dashboard, shows the 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hour rainfall totals near evolving current and post-wildfire burn scars across the United States. Its layout shows the legend of all the operational layers, the options of turning on and off the operational layers in the layer list, and the capability for an external user to add their own data. The external data can be added via AGOL online web map services or their own respective files. Note that this data will not be saved in the map extent if the window is refreshed or closed. The dashboard application also allows for a user to change the basemap and draw on the application. Lastly, a user can export the map extent for greater ease in sharing with partners and other agencies.

Snags continue to pose an ever-present hazard to responders, and recent increases in fire activity have resulted in an accumulation of these hazards across forested landscapes of the American West. National Snag Hazard is intended to provide a landscape-level view of existing snag hazard to firefighters and other field going employees. National Snag hazard is based on estimated density and median height of snags greater than or equal to 7.9 inches in diameter at breast height. Snag density and median snag height are classified into hazard levels using the breakpoints from Dunn et al. 2019, which are based on the logic that hazard increases with snag density and height. Dunn CJ, O’Connor CD, Reilly MJ, Calkin DE, Thompson MP (2019) Spatial and temporal assessment of responder exposure to snag hazards in post-fire environments. Forest Ecology and Management 441, 202-2014. DOI:10.1016/j.foreco.2019.03.035 This is a strategic landscape level decision support tool intended to help firefighters consider the magnitude and spatial distribution of snag hazard in their incident response strategy planning. Valid uses include identifying areas of higher snag hazard locations on landscape that may require extra mitigation for safe operation or could be avoided to reduce risk to responders. The snag hazard map is not meant to identify individual dead trees or for tactical planning. A rating of low snag hazard does not mean that no overhead hazards are present and should not be interpreted as judgement that an area is safe to occupy. Conditions should always be verified in the field. High levels of awareness for overhead hazards are always recommended regardless of the snag hazard rating.

{{description}}

The Fire Services Act, 1981 sets out the rules and regulations for that the fire service works to. The NDFEM provides support to the Local Authorities to make sure these rules and regulations are put in place and that health and safety is prioritised. We provide funding to the fire service for the purchase of appliances and equipment. We also support the fire service by running a national training programme and by publishing guidance on relevant matters and by setting general policy.

Simulated rainfall and overland-flow experiments are useful for enhancing understanding of surface hydrologic and erosion processes, quantifying runoff and erosion rates, and developing and testing predictive quantitative models. This extensive dataset (1021 experimental plots) consists of rainfall simulation (1300 plot runs, 0.5 m2 to 13 m2 scales) and overland flow (838 plot runs, ~9 m2 scale) experimental plot data coupled with associated measures of vegetation, ground cover, and surface soil properties across point to hillslope scales. The data were collected at three woodland-encroached sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) rangelands in the Great Basin, USA, under undisturbed/untreated conditions and 1 yr to 9 yr following fire and/or mechanical tree-removal treatments. The methodology employed and resulting experimental data contribute to quantifying and understanding scale-dependent surface hydrologic and erosion processes for Great Basin woodlands and sagebrush rangelands before and after tree removal and for sparsely vegetated sites elsewhere. The dataset is a valuable source for developing and testing hydrology and erosion models for applications to diverse vegetation and ground cover conditions. Lastly, the series of repeated measures in the dataset for some sites over time provides a valuable dataset for exploring long-term landscape vegetation and hydrologic and erosion responses to various land management practices and disturbances. The resulting collective dataset of 1021 experimental plots contains vegetation, ground cover, soils, hydrology, and erosion data collected across multiple spatial scales, diverse cover and surface conditions, three study sites, and five different study years. The collective dataset contains 57 plots at the hillslope scale (site characterization plots), 528 small-rainfall plots, 146 large-rainfall plots, and 290 overland-flow plots. The hydrology and erosion experiments yielded time series datasets for small-rainfall plot, large-rainfall plot, and overland-flow plot simulations. Some time series hydrographs and sedigraphs from rainfall and overland flow simulations were excluded due to various equipment failures. The final time series datasets consist of 1020 small-rainfall, 280 large-rainfall, and 838 overland-flow plot run hydrographs and sedigraphs, not excluding plots without runoff. Restricting the data to plots that generated runoff results in 749 small-rainfall, 251 large-rainfall, and 719 overland-flow plot simulation hydrographs and sedigraphs. Overall, the hydrology and erosion time series dataset amounts to 2138 hydrographs/sedigraphs including plots with zero runoff and 1719 hydrographs/sedigraphs for plots that generated runoff. Field experiments and data management were conducted as part of the Sagebrush Steppe Treatment Evaluation Project (SageSTEP, (www.sagestep.org) funded by the US Joint Fire Science Program, US Department of Interior (USDI) Bureau of Land Management, and US National Interagency Fire Center. This dataset is contribution number 134 of the Sagebrush Steppe Treatment Evaluation Project. See README file for information regarding experimental design and methods.

ORS 93.270(4) enacted by the 1993 legislature and changes to Oregon's Building Code encourage local governments to voluntarily designate those portions of their jurisdictions subject to catastrophic fire as Wildfire Hazard Zones. The purpose of these zones is to define those areas where buildings need to be made more survivable from fires spreading through adjacent wildlands.This analysis and map are designed to address the statute and identify areas which are Wildfire Hazard Zones within the City of Portland.

This layer represents the Washington Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) as mapped for 2019 by WA State Dept. of Natural Resources - Wildfire & Forest Health Divisions under consultation from the USFS Rocky Mtn Research Station. The Dept was required by SB 6109 to map the WUI in WA State for the purpose of county-based building code adoptions. The WUI depicts areas of WA where structures and wildland overlap with specific structure densities. For more information about the WUI, please contact: ashley.blazina@dnr.wa.govDownload *.TIF and File Geodatabase objects