Does Seeding After Wildfires in Rangelands Reduce Erosion or Invasive Species?

Pyke, David A.; Wirth, Troy A.; Beyers, Jan L.

doi:10.1111/rec.12021

Cited by 73 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…4B) relative to burned areas where no rehabilitation was attempted. These results are consistent with a recent meta-analysis conducted by Pyke et al (2013) where they found post-fire rehabilitation efforts (either aerial or drill seeding) reduced cover of invasive species in only 26% of cases studied. It is possible some of the rehabilitation approaches applied following the MFF were more successful than others; however the low number of BR plots and variety of rehabilitation approaches applied does not allow us to compare among rehabilitation approaches here.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Rehabilitation Successsupporting

confidence: 82%

Evaluating rehabilitation efforts following the Milford Flat Fire: successes, failures, and controlling factors

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Uncontrolled wildfire in arid and semiarid ecosystems has become an increasing concern in recent decades. Active rehabilitation of fire-affected areas is often quickly initiated to minimize long-term ecosystem damage. However, the complex soil-geomorphic-vegetation patterns and low and variable moisture conditions in these regions makes restoration challenging. To further inform these post-fire management decisions, we present results from 5 years of vegetation and sediment flux monitoring following the Milford Flat Fire in west-central Utah, USA. Our sampling design includes monitoring plots in areas not burned, areas burned but where no rehabilitation was attempted, and burned areas where various rehabilitation approaches were implemented. At each of the 25 plots, vegetation cover and composition data were collected annually, and wind-driven sediment flux was measured using passive dust traps. To evaluate effectiveness of post-fire rehabilitation treatments in establishing desired species and limiting dominance of undesired species, we analyzed the temporal response of individual species and functional groups as well as community-level multivariate responses. The warm and dry conditions that persisted for approximately 12 months post-treatment, coupled with the surface disturbing rehabilitation approaches used, resulted in near-surface dust fluxes several orders of magnitude higher in treated areas than in unburned or burned areas where no rehabilitation occurred. These dry conditions and high surface sediment flux limited the establishment of seeded species in rehabilitation areas for nearly 3 years. Post-fire rehabilitation did not limit dominance by invasive annual species of concern. Perennial species composition in the areas burned but not subject to post-fire rehabilitation was relatively similar to unburned throughout the study period. In contrast, the burned plots where rehabilitation was attempted were characterized by no (,3%) perennial cover or, in response to moister conditions, seeded forage species. These results suggest the post-fire rehabilitation efforts conducted in the lower elevation regions affected by the Milford Flat Fire were not generally successful. Though dry conditions are likely to blame for the lack of success, the low and variable precipitation characteristic of these regions suggest future post-fire rehabilitation decisions must assume that precipitation is going to be insufficient and plan rehabilitation efforts that are resilient to dry conditions.

show abstract

Section: Evaluation Of Rehabilitation Successsupporting

confidence: 82%

Evaluating rehabilitation efforts following the Milford Flat Fire: successes, failures, and controlling factors

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Part 1, Literature Review (Pyke et al 2013) Nineteen published studies specifically measured the abundance of invasive plant species following postfire seeding, and eight measured soil erosion. All these studies were at least medium quality, i.e., had adequate unseeded controls.…”

Section: Key Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Part 1, Literature Review (Pyke et al 2013) This review was conducted using methods described in Pullin and Stewart (2006). We searched for literature dealing with postfire seeding of rangelands worldwide.…”

Section: Study Description and Locationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesis of current knowledge on post-fire seeding for soil stabilization and invasive species control

Beyers¹,

Pyke²,

Wirth³

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The General Accounting Office has identified a need for better information on the effectiveness of post-fire emergency stabilization and rehabilitation methods used by the U.S. Forest Service and Department of Interior (DOI) agencies. Since reviews were published on treatment effectiveness in the early 2000s, treatment choices have changed and increased monitoring has been done. Greater use of native species has added substantially to burned area emergency response (BAER) treatment costs, for example, but quantitative data on this treatment were scarce in earlier reviews. We synthesized current information on the effectiveness of post-fire seeding for both soil stabilization and for prevention of the spread of invasive species in rangelands. We reviewed published literature (peer-reviewed and "gray") and agency monitoring reports, as well as compiled and analyzed quantitative data in agency files. Products of this review include a web-accessible database of monitoring reports and published information, a scientific journal paper summarizing findings of scientific studies, an annotated bibliography of peer-reviewed papers, a summary report published as a General Technical Report that will be available online (in progress), and presentations to scientific meetings and BAER/ESR team training sessions and workshops. By combining results from studies done by Forest Service and DOI agency personnel with research studies published since the initial reviews, we presented a comprehensive synthesis of seeding effectiveness knowledge that complements the review of other hillslope treatments published by other researchers. This information will help federal land managers make more cost-effective decisions on post-fire stabilization and rehabilitation treatments. Background and Purpose

show abstract

“…As expected, there is heated debate as to the overall environmental benefit and ecological ethics associated with using nonnatives for revegetation projects (Davison and Smith 1996;Pyke et al 2013). Researchers acknowledge that many ecological habitats cannot return to the traditional native reference states that often form the basis of restoration project designs (e.g., Egan and Howell 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rapid establishment rate of nonnatives is useful for erosion control in high-stress environments where soil destabilization is typical or revegetating landscapes exposed to intense wildfire (Pyke et al 2013). The presence and persistence of nonnatives might also be facilitated more by changing environmental conditions than natives through, for example, altered introduction mechanisms (Hellmann et al 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Practitioner perspectives on using nonnative plants for revegetation

Gornish¹,

Brusati²,

Johnson³

2016

Calif Agr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restoration practitioners use both native and nonnative plant species for revegetation projects. Typically, when rehabilitating damaged working lands, more practitioners consider nonnative plants; while those working to restore habitat have focused on native plants. But this may be shifting. Novel ecosystems (non-analog communities) are commonly being discussed in academic circles, while practical factors such as affordability and availability of natives and the need for more drought tolerant species to accommodate climate change may be making nonnative species attractive to land managers. To better understand the current use of nonnatives for revegetation, we surveyed 192 California restoration stakeholders who worked in a variety of habitats. A large portion (42%) of them considered nonnatives for their projects, and of survey respondents who did not use nonnatives in vegetation rehabilitation, almost half indicated that they would consider them in the future. Across habitats, the dominant value of nonnatives for vegetation rehabilitation was found to be erosion control, and many respondents noted the high cost and unavailability of natives as important drivers of nonnative use in revegetation projects. Moreover, 37% of respondents noted they had changed their opinion or use of nonnatives in response to climate change. R evegetation is a key restoration technique to address environmental damage and increase the ecological value of degraded habitat. It involves the active re-establishment of plant communities through seeding and planting, and is undertaken usually in response to a natural disturbance, such as wildfire, or another restoration activity such as the removal of invasive plants.The design and deployment of effective revegetation requires a practitioner to set project goals, choose plant species and determine methods to reach the desired final state for a site. Species selection is important because plants can modify the physical attributes of a site, land use, community composition and invasive plant species dominance (e.g., Meli et al. 2014).Often, a fundamental requirement of a candidate plant species for revegetation is its classification as a native species. Native plants facilitate plant community trajectories toward a reference site condition, augment nutrient cycling, enhance wildlife habitat and reverse biodiversity loss (e.g., Bullock et al. 2011). In addition to the clear value of using native species to re-establish plant communities, however, there are several limitations of a natives-only requirement for revegetation projects. For example, native plant materials can be financially prohibitive (sometimes costing more than $1,000 per acre; Gornish 2015) and difficult to acquire.The high cost of plant materials is one of the leading obstacles to effective revegetation nationwide (Brodt et al. 2009;Clewell and Rieger 1997;Stanturf et al. 2001). The exclusive use of native plants

show abstract

Does Seeding After Wildfires in Rangelands Reduce Erosion or Invasive Species?

Cited by 73 publications

References 44 publications

Evaluating rehabilitation efforts following the Milford Flat Fire: successes, failures, and controlling factors

Evaluating rehabilitation efforts following the Milford Flat Fire: successes, failures, and controlling factors

Synthesis of current knowledge on post-fire seeding for soil stabilization and invasive species control

Practitioner perspectives on using nonnative plants for revegetation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About