An evaluation of contemporary savanna fire regimes in the Canastra National Park, Brazil: Outcomes of fire suppression policies

Batista, Eugênia Kelly Luciano; Russell‐Smith, Jeremy; França, Helena; Figueira, José Eugênio Côrtes

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.09.053

Cited by 39 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a global consensus among savanna ecologists that burning is essential for maintaining heterogeneity and biodiversity of tropical savannas (Coutinho, 1982(Coutinho, , 1990Bond and Keeley, 2005;Andersen et al, 2012;Maravalhas and Vasconcelos, 2014;Durigan and Ratter, 2016;Pivello, 2017;Schmidt et al, 2018). On the other hand, fire suppression has shown to be ecologically and economically unsustainable (Bowman et al, 2013), eventually resulting in catastrophic firestorms that cause huge carbon emissions and biodiversity losses (Silveira et al, 1999;Bond and Archibald, 2003;França, 2010;Pivello, 2011;Batista et al, 2018;Fidelis et al, 2018). In the last years, fire experiments have increased in Brazil (Dias and Miranda, 2010;Rissi et al, 2017;Schmidt et al, 2018), including our experiment presented here.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No Net Loss of Species Diversity After Prescribed Fires in the Brazilian Savanna

Durigan

Pilon

Abreu

et al. 2020

Front. For. Glob. Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although savannas are fire-adapted ecosystems, prescribing fire for biodiversity conservation remains controversial at least in some regions where savannas occur. Faced with uncertainty, many decision makers and even scientists are still reluctant to prescribe fire for conservation purposes in fire-prone ecosystems, invoking the precautionary principle. Knowledge gaps on the ideal fire regime, such as how and when to burn, and especially the fear of biodiversity losses, are among the main arguments against fire management applied to remnants of native savanna vegetation. To inform this debate, we assessed the impact of prescribed fires on diversity of plants (different growth forms), ants, frogs, lizards, birds, and small mammals, in savannas and grasslands of the Brazilian Cerrado. We assessed the existing species richness, composition, and abundance in areas subjected to long periods of fire suppression and compared to that observed over a short period after prescribed dry-season fires, within each group of plants and animals. Whenever possible, we carried out separate analyses for grassland and savanna. Burning did not significantly reduce species richness of any of the groups analyzed, but had a positive effect on richness of graminoids in grassland. When analyzed at the species level, abundance of most animal groups did not show consistent responses to fire, except for a decrease in some frog populations in grasslands. Forbs, graminoids, and subshrubs increased in abundance after fire in grassland areas, though in savanna areas, abundance of forbs, and subshrubs tended to decline after fire. Species composition changed little in response to fire as indicated by low levels of dissimilarity between burned and unburned areas. These results confirm the high resilience of Cerrado biota to fire, as expected for savanna ecosystems in general. Besides, we demonstrate here that the risk of biodiversity losses cannot justify the objections to the use of prescribed fire for conservation purposes in the Cerrado.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No Net Loss of Species Diversity After Prescribed Fires in the Brazilian Savanna

Durigan

Pilon

Abreu

et al. 2020

Front. For. Glob. Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3A). In the short term, fire exclusion can lead to increased fire intensity, due to the accumulation of biomass that would have historically been consumed in more frequent, lower intensity fires (Batista et al, 2018). Over longer time scales (i.e.…”

Section: (3) Fire Exclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilience and restoration of tropical and subtropical grasslands, savannas, and grassy woodlands

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite growing recognition of the conservation values of grassy biomes, our understanding of how to maintain and restore biodiverse tropical grasslands (including savannas and open‐canopy grassy woodlands) remains limited. To incorporate grasslands into large‐scale restoration efforts, we synthesised existing ecological knowledge of tropical grassland resilience and approaches to plant community restoration. Tropical grassland plant communities are resilient to, and often dependent on, the endogenous disturbances with which they evolved – frequent fires and native megafaunal herbivory. In stark contrast, tropical grasslands are extremely vulnerable to human‐caused exogenous disturbances, particularly those that alter soils and destroy belowground biomass (e.g. tillage agriculture, surface mining); tropical grassland restoration after severe soil disturbances is expensive and rarely achieves management targets. Where grasslands have been degraded by altered disturbance regimes (e.g. fire exclusion), exotic plant invasions, or afforestation, restoration efforts can recreate vegetation structure (i.e. historical tree density and herbaceous ground cover), but species‐diverse plant communities, including endemic species, are slow to recover. Complicating plant‐community restoration efforts, many tropical grassland species, particularly those that invest in underground storage organs, are difficult to propagate and re‐establish. To guide restoration decisions, we draw on the old‐growth grassland concept, the novel ecosystem concept, and theory regarding tree cover along resource gradients in savannas to propose a conceptual framework that classifies tropical grasslands into three broad ecosystem states. These states are: (1) old‐growth grasslands (i.e. ancient, biodiverse grassy ecosystems), where management should focus on the maintenance of disturbance regimes; (2) hybrid grasslands, where restoration should emphasise a return towards the old‐growth state; and (3) novel ecosystems, where the magnitude of environmental change (i.e. a shift to an alternative ecosystem state) or the socioecological context preclude a return to historical conditions.

show abstract

“…Landscape scientists from many disciplines highlight the importance of traditional burning of patch mosaics for (1) biodiversity conservation, (2) wildfire control and prevention, and (3) mitigation of carbon emissions in many kinds of ecosystem (Batista et al, 2018;Cordeiro et al, 2014;Eloy et al, 2018;Higgins et al, 2007;Russell-Smith et al, 2013;Welch et al, 2013). Even in fire-sensitive ecosystems, like tropical rain forest, recent changes in fire regimes call for a better incorporation of fire management into environmental policies in light of the much increased vulnerability of tropical forest to fires as they become more fragmented, air temperatures become hotter, and human incursions more varied (Alencar et al, 2006(Alencar et al, , 2015Anderson et al, 2015;Armenteras et al, 2013;Barlow et al, 2012;Vayda, 2010).…”

Section: Old and New Political Ecologies Of Fire In Latin Americamentioning

confidence: 99%

Firing up: Policy, politics and polemics under new and old burning regimes

Eloy

Hecht

Steward

et al. 2019

Geographical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changing fire regimes in the context of climate change call for new understandings of their diversity, use, policies, practices and politics. While catastrophic fires are redoubling calls for suppression, new political ecologies debate fire prohibition politics and emphasise understanding and incorporating local knowledge into management decisions. Latin American countries are characterised by strong regional tensions associated with environmental policies, agriculture and infrastructure development that often compete with local livelihoods, traditional management and a range of resource use practices. Landscape knowledge systems that inform customary use, access and resource interventions have become a new node of contestation; these are added to the perennial question of land rights, especially as carbon politics and other environmental services become more important in the structuring of autonomy over land uses. This themed section presents research conducted in different countries and biomes in Latin America and explores the historical and current tensions around the development of the science of burning by local populations. Research outlines the contradictions and tensions between fire control policies and rural livelihoods, and the emergent political factors and ideologies that inherent in fire conflicts and could help shape solutions. Our four case studies in different regions of south America (Amazon, Cerrado, Chiquitana), explore the production, application and circulation of knowledge about fire and its consequences using an array of methods: classical descriptive models, analytics from political ecology, and the complex arena of science and technology studies. The latter help us to understand the conflictual dynamics associated with “new fire management,” which relies on more technological means of fire control as well as legislation, payments, and new governmentalities to transform traditional practices. Overall, the papers place fire management in its new active political and ecological framing, namely at the heart of current development debates in the Latin American tropics.

show abstract

An evaluation of contemporary savanna fire regimes in the Canastra National Park, Brazil: Outcomes of fire suppression policies

Cited by 39 publications

References 50 publications

No Net Loss of Species Diversity After Prescribed Fires in the Brazilian Savanna

No Net Loss of Species Diversity After Prescribed Fires in the Brazilian Savanna

Resilience and restoration of tropical and subtropical grasslands, savannas, and grassy woodlands

Firing up: Policy, politics and polemics under new and old burning regimes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About