there are many ways you can assist the alliance. we welcome you
comparative Household costs
* Woodmont block household: $8000
* Creston block household: $7200
* Grizzly Peak block household: $6500
* Wildcat Canyon household: $12,750
* Sunset block household: $5300
* Vistamont block household: $12,500
Average household cost: $8,700
Plants are not the Enemy
CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT LIST
https://firesafesdcounty.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Comprehensive-Fire-Resistant-Plant-List.pdf
"“Findings indicate that properly selected, irrigated, located, and maintained urban vegetation is not always complicit in building loss during fire events.”
A Less Flammable Plant Will Have:
- Large and broad leaves rather than needle and blade-like leaves.
- Moist and easily bent leaves instead of stiff and leather-like leaves.
- Thick leaves instead of fine or thin leaves.
- A low amount of litter rather than a lot of duff.
- Sap that looks more like water opposed to thick, gummy or resinous sap.
- Leaves and stems without a fragrance, opposed to strong aromatic qualities.
- Leaves that are silver or gray.
- Leaves without hair (cilia)..
overall housing density and characterises (i.e. patterns) were more influential than local-scale vegetation in determining building loss outcomes (Schmidt 2022; Syphard et al., 2021). However, our parcel- level study complements other studies from California such as Kramer et al, (2019) and Syphard et al. (2021), by focusing on factors that have previously been little studied, specifically vegetation composition, type, moisture and location relative to burned buildings (Tables 2). . . our study is one of the first to specifically analyze the influence of parcel-level 3.0 m resolution: vegetation type, densities, and moisture as well as its distance and direction relative to DSB and building loss (Figs. 5, 6 and 7). . . . Findings indicate that properly selected, irrigated, located, and maintained urban vegetation is not always complicit in building loss during fire events. Furthermore, we corroborate how dense urban or suburban developments (i.e. 2–9 structures within 30 m; Tables 4 and 5) are more susceptible to widespread building damage during wildfire events; regardless of parcel-level or landscape-level vegetation fuel characteristics. And as expected, burning buildings likely acted as sources of not only embers, but direct flame contact and radiant heat that can ignite nearby structures as shown by Suzuki et al. (2014). . .
Specifically the use of well-maintained urban vegetation types near homes for climate regulation, aesthetics, and human well-being versus the increased risk of wildfire and home ignition due to increased fuels adjacent to homes. . . We also document how tree, shrub, and herbaceous moisture in yards are better predictors of building loss – or survival − than just percent vegetation cover alone. Indeed according to our urban chaparral model, homes with nearby trees with higher NDWI moisture content were more likely to survive. This influential role of high moisture tree cover – relative to other factors- in home survival has rarely been documented."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169204625001288?via%3Dihub
"A postdoc study analysis has discovered some quick numbers out of the new CALFIRE tree canopy cover dataset
"Unfortunately Berkeley already saw a tree canopy cover decrease in Zone 0 in the last few years.
An analysis of 21,318 buildings in the city, gathered this summary:
- 627 buildings are in High Fire Risk
- 727 buildings in Moderate Fire Risk
- 1,422 buildings in Very High Fire Risk
Across all risk categories, even in Non-Wildlands areas, vegetation cover decreased over these four years.
These results are only for Zone 0 (the first 5 feet surrounding buildings), so we’re already getting a sense of how much vegetation would need to be removed to comply with the new regulations (87.6 acres more and less 66 American football for some reference).
While canopy cover loss is a general trend across CA and elsewhere, we need to ensure that new policies are sensible and grounded in science and hard evidence."
RELEVANT STUDIES
