Reptile and Amphibian Responses to Large-Scale Wildfires in Southern California

Rochester, Carlton J.; Brehme, Cheryl S.; Clark, Donald R.; Stokes, Drew C.; Hathaway, Stacie A.; Fisher, Robert N.

doi:10.1670/08-143.1

Cited by 50 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our analyses suggested that the lack of an effect of fire on the majority of vegetation effects on mammals and reptiles may be due to these taxa having less strong associations with these variables in the first place. However, we did detect strong effects of fire per se, which might be due to direct mortality, changed food availability or elevated predation rates in the immediate post-fire environment (Erwin & Stasiak 1979;Rochester et al 2010). The increase in captures of reptiles immediately after fire, however, might be due to a combination of increased mobility as they search for more scarce resources, or release from predation by birds or small mammals that decreased in these areas (Lindenmayer et al 2008c).…”

Section: T H E E F F E C T O F F I R E O N H a B I T A T -B A S E D Smentioning

confidence: 61%

“…However, we did detect strong effects of fire per se , which might be due to direct mortality, changed food availability or elevated predation rates in the immediate post‐fire environment (Erwin & Stasiak ; Rochester et al . ). The increase in captures of reptiles immediately after fire, however, might be due to a combination of increased mobility as they search for more scarce resources, or release from predation by birds or small mammals that decreased in these areas (Lindenmayer et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Robustness of habitat‐based surrogates of animal diversity: a multitaxa comparison over time

Barton

Westgate

Lane

et al. 2014

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary1. Many animal taxa respond strongly to spatial and temporal variation in vegetation structure and floristic composition, suggesting that changes in vegetation could be a cheap and readily observable surrogate for changes in animal assemblages. Yet there is considerable uncertainty about how different taxa respond to vegetation over time, potentially limiting the application of habitat-based surrogates to many areas of applied ecology. 2. We examined the strength and temporal consistency of habitat-based surrogates of three different vertebrate taxa in a landscape with multiple vegetation types. We used regression models to quantify the relationships between six vegetation attributes (species richness and percentage cover of overstorey, midstorey and understorey) and three measures of bird, mammal and reptile assemblages (abundance, species richness and composition). 3. We found that overstorey richness and cover had both consistent and strong positive effects on bird assemblages. Vegetation effects were generally weaker and more variable for mammals and reptiles compared with birds. Each taxon displayed different temporal dynamics following fire, with negative effects on birds and mammals, but positive short-term effects on reptiles. Surprisingly, fire increased vegetation effects on birds, but did not consistently alter vegetation effects on mammals or reptiles, indicating a lack of concordant responses among taxa. 4. Synthesis and applications. Empirical testing of habitat-based surrogates of multiple animal taxa is needed to identify reliable and consistent management proxies. Our study suggests that habitat-based surrogates could be useful metrics for quantifying changes in bird assemblages through time and after fire, but that the same metrics could not be applied to mammal and reptile assemblages. The absence of both strong and consistent effects of vegetation attributes across the three groups of vertebrates suggests that taxon-specific habitat surrogates may be required to detect changes over time and after disturbance within heterogeneous landscapes.

show abstract

Section: T H E E F F E C T O F F I R E O N H a B I T A T -B A S E D Smentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Robustness of habitat‐based surrogates of animal diversity: a multitaxa comparison over time

Barton

Westgate

Lane

et al. 2014

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some species depend on dense habitat cover for denning and protection, and given fire reduces vegetation cover, some predators were found to have negative relationships with burned areas (although in almost all significant cases these relationships were inferred from a single study). Eastern racers C. constrictor rely on vegetation cover to avoid predation; therefore, they avoid burnt habitat (Rochester et al, ), and this likely explains the significant negative responses to fire by this species across two studies. By contrast, the reduction in habitat cover caused by fire can favour predators such as snakes (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predator responses to fire: A global systematic review and meta‐analysis

Geary

Doherty

Nimmo

et al. 2020

Journal of Animal Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge of how disturbances such as fire shape habitat structure and composition, and affect animal interactions, is fundamental to ecology and ecosystem management. Predators also exert strong effects on ecological communities, through top‐down regulation of prey and competitors, which can result in trophic cascades. Despite their ubiquity, ecological importance and potential to interact with fire, our general understanding of how predators respond to fire remains poor, hampering ecosystem management. To address this important knowledge gap, we conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effects of fire on terrestrial, vertebrate predators world‐wide. We found 160 studies spanning 1978–2018. There were 36 studies with sufficient information for meta‐analysis, from which we extracted 96 effect sizes (Hedges' g) for 67 predator species relating to changes in abundance indices, occupancy or resource selection in burned and unburned areas, or before and after fire. Studies spanned geographic locations, taxonomic families and study designs, but most were located in North America and Oceania (59% and 24%, respectively), and largely focussed on felids (24%) and canids (25%). Half (50%) of the studies reported responses to wildfire, and nearly one third concerned prescribed (management) fires. There were no clear, general responses of predators to fire, nor relationships with geographic area, biome or life‐history traits (e.g. body mass, hunting strategy and diet). Responses varied considerably between species. Analysis of species for which at least three effect sizes had been reported in the literature revealed that red foxes Vulpes vulpes mostly responded positively to fire (e.g. higher abundance in burned compared to unburned areas) and eastern racers Coluber constrictor negatively, with variances overlapping zero only slightly for both species. Our systematic review and meta‐analysis revealed strong variation in predator responses to fire, and major geographic and taxonomic knowledge gaps. Varied responses of predator species to fire likely depend on ecosystem context. Consistent reporting of ongoing monitoring and management experiments is required to improve understanding of the mechanisms driving predator responses to fire, and any broader effects (e.g. trophic interactions). The divergent responses of species in our study suggest that adaptive, context‐specific management of predator–fire relationships is required.

show abstract

“…In southern California, human-caused ignitions at the wildlandurban interface have increased fire frequency well beyond the historical baseline (Keeley 2006, Syphard et al 2007a, Safford and Van de Water 2014, and many native shrublands cannot withstand repeated fires. Furthermore, when shrublands are extirpated by too much fire, they often are replaced with fire-prone exotic annual grasses that can withstand and even promote additional fire (Zedler et al 1983, Lippitt et al 2012) and support lower species diversity (Rochester et al 2010). Thus, not only could clustered development reduce the number of human-caused ignitions, but it could also protect biodiversity by preventing some expansion of exotic grasses that would likely accompany expanding exurban development.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Setting priorities for private land conservation in fire-prone landscapes: Are fire risk reduction and biodiversity conservation competing or compatible objectives?

Syphard¹,

Butsic²,

Bar‐Massada³

et al. 2016

E&S

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Although wildfire plays an important role in maintaining biodiversity in many ecosystems, fire management to protect human assets is often carried out by different agencies than those tasked for conserving biodiversity. In fact, fire risk reduction and biodiversity conservation are often viewed as competing objectives. Here we explored the role of management through private land conservation and asked whether we could identify private land acquisition strategies that fulfill the mutual objectives of biodiversity conservation and fire risk reduction, or whether the maximization of one objective comes at a detriment to the other. Using a fixed budget and number of homes slated for development, we simulated 20 years of housing growth under alternative conservation selection strategies, and then projected the mean risk of fires destroying structures and the area and configuration of important habitat types in San Diego County, California, USA. We found clear differences in both fire risk projections and biodiversity impacts based on the way conservation lands are prioritized for selection, but these differences were split between two distinct groupings. If no conservation lands were purchased, or if purchases were prioritized based on cost or likelihood of development, both the projected fire risk and biodiversity impacts were much higher than if conservation lands were purchased in areas with high fire hazard or high species richness. Thus, conserving land focused on either of the two objectives resulted in nearly equivalent mutual benefits for both. These benefits not only resulted from preventing development in sensitive areas, but they were also due to the different housing patterns and arrangements that occurred as development was displaced from those areas. Although biodiversity conflicts may still arise using other fire management strategies, this study shows that mutual objectives can be attained through land-use planning in this region. These results likely generalize to any place where high species richness overlaps with hazardous wildland vegetation.

show abstract

Reptile and Amphibian Responses to Large-Scale Wildfires in Southern California

Cited by 50 publications

References 48 publications

Robustness of habitat‐based surrogates of animal diversity: a multitaxa comparison over time

Robustness of habitat‐based surrogates of animal diversity: a multitaxa comparison over time

Predator responses to fire: A global systematic review and meta‐analysis

Setting priorities for private land conservation in fire-prone landscapes: Are fire risk reduction and biodiversity conservation competing or compatible objectives?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About