Committee Hears Cost-Saving Post-Fire Mitigation Alternatives to Helicopter Mulch

Mark Morgan presented a series of technical options for post-fire mitigation and fuels work that aim to reduce per-acre costs compared with helicopter-applied mulch. Morgan said mechanical approaches — including harvesters with processing heads, mastication, tethered machines and roller-chopping — can leave material on site, stabilize soils and avoid high transport and helicopter costs.

He described modern tethering and cable-control systems that allow heavy equipment to operate on steep slopes and said those methods have produced similar erosion-control products at a fraction of the cost of helicopter-delivered mulch. Morgan cautioned that transportation infrastructure limits removal of large biomass in many mountain areas and argued that leaving processed material on site is often preferable.

He also proposed an educational outreach: sending property-specific risk notifications to landowners using the State Forest Service’s computerized risk survey, to prompt public demand for mitigation work. “What would it cost to send every one of those landowners notification in their mailbox as to their risk factor?” Morgan asked, urging the committee to consider scaled, affordable solutions rather than pursuing only the most expensive options.

Committee members praised the practical suggestions and asked staff to retain mechanical methods and public outreach as items in the parking lot for further development, including potential legislative or programmatic supports to scale lower-cost approaches.