Know Your Zone

The basic facts:

In 2020, California enacted Assembly Bill 3074, mandating the creation of an “ember-resistant zone”—referred to as “Zone 0”—within five feet of structures in designated high fire hazard areas. This initiative aims to reduce the risk of homes igniting from wind-driven embers during wildfires, a leading cause of multiple-structure fires.

Despite the law’s passage, implementation has faced delays. Originally set to take effect in 2023, the regulations have not been finalized, leaving fire control districts, municipalities, builders, and homeowners uncertain about compliance requirements for new construction and remodels.

In response, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-18-25 in February 2025, directing the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection to expedite the adoption of Zone 0 regulations. The intent is to have these regulations in place by the end of 2025.

Key Aspects of Zone 0:

• Scope: Zone 0 encompasses the area within five feet of a structure, including courtyards, attached decks and stairs.

• Requirements: The regulations could limit or prohibit combustible materials such as wooden fences, mulch, and vegetation within this zone. Exceptions for certain vegetation and trees depends on the final language of the regulations.

• Applicability: Once finalized, the rules will apply immediately to new constructions - and permitted improvements - in State Responsibility Areas and Local Responsibility Areas with Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone ratings. Existing structures will have three years to achieve compliance.

• This is an unfunded mandate with no assurances given for enforcement costs, municipal expenses, low-income assistance, or tax breaks for homeowners.

Stakeholders:

The development of Zone 0 regulations has involved collaboration among certain stakeholders, including CAL FIRE, the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, the Office of the State Fire Marshal, local fire agencies, insurance lobbyists, electricity generators, and government/industry funded fire nonprofits. This approach was supposed to ensure that the regulations were practical and considered the diverse needs of California’s communities. What’s missing from this list? Homeowners! and Wildland ecologists!

Addressing Concerns:

Many experts have raised objections to the accuracy of the science behind the recommendations. Homeowners have expressed concerns about the potential costs and quality of life impacts of complying with Zone 0 requirements. To address these concerns, community members here and elsewhere are asking to have concerns taken seriously.

Our Take: (Zone Zero-Conejo Valley)

A one-size-fits-all approach fails to recognize the vast differences between homes in rural and forested environments and the relatively small lots found in suburban communities which are often close to brush and grasses of the chaparral open space. The new risk mitigation regulations should reflect these differences.

The Board of Forestry wants homeowners and communities to accept the Zone 0 regulations as a necessary sacrifice. They are minimizing the harms, ignoring scientific input that interferes with their goals, and hoping to push these regulations through before the public understands what is happening.

We are questioning the science behind the mandated removal of well irrigated, high moisture plants from Zone 0. Videos circulated by CAL FIRE and insurance companies were conducted using very low moisture vegetation, creating the impression that well irrigated plants are a major reason for ember ignited house fires. It appears that millions of Southern California homes will be forced to make expensive, potentially harmful modifications to their properties if these regulations are adopted.

Moving Forward:

Implementation of common sense Zone 0 regulations is an important step toward enhancing community fire resilience. Homeowners will cooperate if they are included in a process that has good science behind the mandates and flexibility in implementation that takes costs, protection of the environment, enjoyment of nature, and reasonable use of property into account.

We want up-to-date science, regulations that recognize the risks to health and safety when vegetation is removed - Heat, Pollution, Financial Stress from soaring costs for electricity as communities lose shade and landscape removal costs, all added to the climate change consequences of drought and extreme weather events. The BOF portrays removal of green, irrigated vegetation as Safety vs. Esthetics. That's a false construct. There are better ways to protect communities.

“We understand the need to take science-based steps to reduce risk of structure loss and to ensure the safety of firefighters during a wildland fire. These steps, however, must be balanced against their costs, and the supporting evidence must be strong when drastic changes are being proposed.”

Explore this website for more information about common sense approaches to managing fire risk in the Wildland Urban Interface. Start with the Speak Up! Page