Register      Login
International Journal of Wildland Fire International Journal of Wildland Fire Society
Journal of the International Association of Wildland Fire
RESEARCH ARTICLE

The efficacy of fire and fuels reduction treatments in a Sierra Nevada pine plantation

Leda N. Kobziar A C , Joe R. McBride B and Scott L. Stephens B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A School of Forest Resources and Conservation, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, PO Box 110410, Gainesville, FL 32611-0410, USA.

B Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Managements, University of California, Berkeley, 137 Mulford Hall, Berkeley, CA 94702-3114, USA.

C Corresponding author. Email: lkobziar@ufl.edu

International Journal of Wildland Fire 18(7) 791-801 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF06097
Submitted: 22 June 2006  Accepted: 9 September 2008   Published: 27 October 2009

Abstract

Plantations are the most common means of reforestation following stand-replacing wildfires. As wildfires continue to increase in size and severity as a result of fire suppression or climate change, establishment of plantations will likely also increase. Plantations’ structural characteristics, including dense, uniform spacing and abundant ladder fuels, present significant wildfire hazards. Large-scale fuels reduction techniques may be necessary to reduce potential fire behavior in plantations and to protect surrounding forests. In the present study, four different manipulations aimed at reducing potential fire behavior in a Sierra Nevada pine plantation are compared. The treatments include: mechanical shredding, or mastication, of understorey vegetation and small trees; mastication followed by prescribed fire; fire alone; and controls. Fire behavior modeling shows that mastication is detrimental whereas prescribed fire is effective in reducing potential fire behavior at moderate to extreme weather conditions. Predicted fire behavior was compared with actual values from the prescribed burns in an effort to explore the limitations of fire modeling. Fire behavior predictions were similar to field observations in the more structurally homogeneous stands, but differed greatly where mastication created forest openings and patchy fuels distributions. In contrast to natural stands, the homogeneity of pine plantations make the results of the present work applicable to other regions such as the south-eastern US, where similar fuels reduction techniques are used to increase fire-resistance and stand resilience.

Additional keywords: fire behavior, fire modeling, mastication, Pinus jeffreyi, Pinus ponderosa, prescribed fire, thinning.


Acknowledgements

This research was supported by funding from the USDA/USDI Joint Fire Science Program, which is responsible for this partnership between the Stanislaus National Forest and the University of California, Berkeley. For helpful reviews of the manuscript, thanks to Kevin O’Hara. Thanks to John Swanson, Kathi Stillwell, Linda Johnstone, Allen Johnson, Dave McMenimen, Mike Lanier, and everyone at the Groveland Ranger District for supporting this research and bringing the burns to light. Thank you to Hetch-Hetchy Water and Power for lodging. Domenico Caramango, Vincent Causse, Tim Vastine, Suzanne LaVoie, Lana Schide, and many others provided assistance during field sampling.


References


Agee JK , Skinner CN (2005) Basic principles of forest fuel reduction treatments. Forest Ecology and Management  211, 83–96.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Brown JK (1974) Handbook for inventorying downed woody material. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experimental Station, General Technical Report GTR-INT-16. (Ogden, UT)

Byram GM (1959) Combustion of forest fuels. In Forest Fire: Control and Use’. (Ed. D Kenneth) (McGraw-Hill Book Company: New York)

Carlton D (2004) Fuels Management Analyst plus software, version 3.8.19. (Fire Program Solutions, LLC: Estacada, OR)

Cleaves DA, Martinez J, Haines TK (2000). Influences on prescribed burning activity and costs in the national forest system. USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, General Technical Report SRS-37. (Athens, GA)

Donovan GH , Brown TC (2005) An alternative incentive structure for wildfire management on National Forest land. Forest Science  51(5), 387–395.
HFRA (2003) Healthy forest restoration act. HR 1904. (United States Congress, Washington DC) Available at http://www.healthyforests.gov/ [Verified 7 March 2006]

Kalabokidis KD , Omi PN (1998) Reduction of fire hazard through thinning/residue disposal in the urban interface. International Journal of Wildland Fire  8(1), 29–36.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Landram M (1996) Status of reforestation on National Forest lands within the Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project Study Area. In ‘Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final Report to Congress, vol. III, Assessments and Scientific Basis for Management Options’. (Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, University of California: Davis, CA)

Main WA, Paananen DM, Burgan RE (1990) Fire Family Plus. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, General Technical Report GTR-NC-138. (Saint Paul, MN)

Martin RE, Dell JD (1978) Planning for prescribed burning in the inland northwest. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report GTR-PNW-66. (Portland, OR)

Miliken GA, Johnson DE (2002) ‘Analysis of Messy Data, vol. III: Analysis of Covariance.’ (Chapman and Hall/CRC: London)

Millar CI, Stephenson NL , Stephens SL (2007) Climate change and forests of the future: managing in the face of uncertainty. Ecological Applications  17, 2145.

Crossref | PubMed | Omi PN, Kalabokidis KD (1998) Fuels modification to reduce large fire probability. In ‘Third International Conference on Forest Fire Research, 14th Conference on Fire and Forest Meteorology’, Vol. II, 16–20 November 1998, Luso, Portugal. pp. 2073–2088. (University of Coimbra: Coimbra, Portugal)

Rothermel RC (1972) A mathematical model for predicting fire spread in wildland fuels. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station General Technical Report INT-115. (Ogden, UT)

Safford HD, Schmidt DA , Carlson CH (2009) Effects of fuel treatments on fire severity in an area of wildland–urban interface, Angora Fire, Lake Tahoe Basin, California. Forest Ecology and Management  258, 773–787.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Sall J, Lehman A, Creighton L (2001) ‘JMP Start Statistics. A Guide to Statistics and Data Analysis Using JMP and JUMP IN Software.’ 2nd edn. (Duxbury: Pacific Grove, CA)

Schmidt DA, Taylor AH , Skinner CN (2008) The influence of fuels treatment and landscape arrangement on simulated fire behavior, Southern Cascade range, California. Forest Ecology and Management  255, 3170–3184.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Scott JH, Reinhardt ED (2001) Assessing crown fire potential by linking models of surface and crown fire behavior. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Research Paper RMRS-RP-29. (Fort Collins, CO)

Stephens SL (1998) Evaluation of the effects of silvicultural and fuels treatments on potential fire behavior in Sierra Nevada mixed conifer forests. Forest Ecology and Management  105, 21–35.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | USDA (1981) Soil survey, Stanislaus National Forest Area, California. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region.

Vaillant NM, Fites-Kaufman JA , Stephens SL (2009) Effectiveness of prescribed fire as a fuel treatment in Californian coniferous forests. International Journal of Wildland Fire  18, 165–175.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | van Wagtendonk JW (1996) Use of a deterministic fire model to test fuel treatments. In ‘Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final report to Congress Volume II’. pp. 1155–1167. (Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, University of California: Davis, CA)

van Wagtendonk JW, Benedict JM , Sydoriak WM (1996) Physical properties of woody fuel particles of Sierra Nevada conifers. International Journal of Wildland Fire  6, 117–123.
Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Weatherspoon PC (1996) Fire–silviculture relationships in Sierra forests. In ‘Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final report to Congress Volume II’. pp. 1167–1176. (Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, University of California: Davis, CA)

WRCC (Western Regional Climate Center) (2003) Cherry Valley Dam, CA. Available at http://www.wrcc.dri.edu [Verified 21 December 2005]