Principal short-term findings of the National Fire and Fire Surrogate study

McIver, James D.; Erickson, Karen L.; Youngblood, Andrew

doi:10.2737/pnw-gtr-860

Cited by 17 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 278 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thinning alone can reduce risk of extreme fire behavior by reducing canopy density, increasing height to the live crown and reducing ladder fuels when small‐diameter trees are removed (Agee and Skinner ). However, the lack of any significant long‐term trend in soil or ecosystem processes from thinning alone in this study suggests it is not an effective fire surrogate, as supported by McIver ().…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Forest restoration treatments have subtle long‐term effects on soil C and N cycling in mixed conifer forests

Ganzlin

Gundale

Becknell

et al. 2016

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decades of fire suppression following extensive timber harvesting have left much of the forest in the intermountain western United States exceedingly dense, and forest restoration techniques (i.e., thinning and prescribed fire) are increasingly being used in an attempt to mitigate the effects of severe wildfire, to enhance tree growth and regeneration, and to stimulate soil nutrient cycling. While many of the short-term effects of forest restoration have been established, the long-term effects on soil biogeochemical and ecosystem processes are largely unknown. We assessed the effects of commonly used forest restoration treatments (thinning, burning, and thinning + burning) on nutrient cycling and other ecosystem processes 11 yr after restoration treatments were implemented in a ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa var. scopulorum)/Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca) forest at the Lubrecht Fire and Fire Surrogates Study (FFS) site in western Montana, USA. Despite short-term (<3 yr) increases in soil inorganic nitrogen (N) pools and N cycling rates following prescribed fire, long-term soil N pools and N mineralization rates showed only subtle differences from untreated control plots. Similarly, despite a persistent positive correlation between fuels consumed in prescribed burns and several metrics of N cycling, variability in inorganic N pools decreased significantly since treatments were implemented, indicating a decline in N spatial heterogeneity through time. However, rates of net nitrification remain significantly higher in a thin + burn treatment relative to other treatments. Short-term declines in forest floor carbon (C) pools have persisted in the thin + burn treatment, but there were no significant long-term differences among treatments in extractable soil phosphorus (P). Finally, despite some short-term differences, long-term foliar nutrient concentrations, litter decomposition rates, and rates of free-living N fixation in the experimental plots were not different from control plots, suggesting nutrient cycles and ecosystem processes in temperate coniferous forests are resilient to disturbance following long periods of fire suppression. Overall, this study provides forest managers and policymakers valuable information showing that the effects of these commonly used restoration prescriptions on soil nutrient cycling are ephemeral and that use of repeated treatments (i.e., frequent fire) will be necessary to ensure continued restoration success.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…, Boerner et al. , McIver ); our study is among the first to consider responses after more than 10 years. We argue for the importance of continued monitoring and repeated treatments at the FFS sites with the goal of producing a comprehensive data set with a longer‐term perspective.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Forest restoration treatments have subtle long‐term effects on soil C and N cycling in mixed conifer forests

Ganzlin

Gundale

Becknell

et al. 2016

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mechanical treatments that remove understory fuels and thin the density of trees has two advantages over prescription burning: it can be done over a greater portion of the year and potentially can pay for itself through timber sales. Perhaps the major limitation is the ability to balance the harvesting so that trees of sufficient size attract commercial companies with the need to remove the smaller fuels and retain larger trees in order to reduce fire hazard (McIver et al 2012). Balancing these two needs varies with forest types and location and is far from solved for much of the Sierra Nevada.…”

Section: Managing Fuel-dominated Fire Regimesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Twenty-first century California, USA, wildfires: fuel-dominated vs. wind-dominated fires

Keeley

Syphard²

2019

fire ecol

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the beginning of the twenty-first century California, USA, has experienced a substantial increase in the frequency of large wildfires, often with extreme impacts on people and property. Due to the size of the state, it is not surprising that the factors driving these changes differ across this region. Although there are always multiple factors driving wildfire behavior, we believe a helpful model for understanding fires in the state is to frame the discussion in terms of bottom-up vs. top-down controls on fire behavior; that is, fires that are clearly dominated by anomalously high fuel loads from those dominated by extreme wind events. Of course, this distinction is somewhat artificial in that all fires are controlled by multiple factors involving fuels, winds, and topography. However, we believe that fires clearly recognizable as fuel-dominated vs. wind-dominated provide interesting case studies of factors behind these two extremes. These two types of fires differ greatly in their (1) geographical distribution in the state, (2) past fire history, (3) prominent sources of ignition, (4) seasonal timing, (5) resources most at risk, and (6) requirement for different management responses.

show abstract

“…Changes in stand structure can alter ecosystem components such as vegetative diversity (Hutchinson 2006), fire behavior and return interval (Phillips et al 2006, Waldrop et al 2010, and soil processes . McIver et al (2012aMcIver et al ( , 2012b summarized the national study by stating that treatments significantly modified stand structure and fuels, making post-treatment stands much more resistant to moderate wildfire. However, for the great majority of ecosystem components, short-term response to treatments were subtle and, over time, ecosystem effects dampened and fire risk increased.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeated Application of Fuel Reduction Treatments in the Southern Appalachian Mountains, USA: Implications for Achieving Management Goals

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Principal short-term findings of the National Fire and Fire Surrogate study

Cited by 17 publications

References 278 publications

Forest restoration treatments have subtle long‐term effects on soil C and N cycling in mixed conifer forests

Forest restoration treatments have subtle long‐term effects on soil C and N cycling in mixed conifer forests

Twenty-first century California, USA, wildfires: fuel-dominated vs. wind-dominated fires

Repeated Application of Fuel Reduction Treatments in the Southern Appalachian Mountains, USA: Implications for Achieving Management Goals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About