Restoration of fire in managed forests: a model to prioritize landscapes and analyze tradeoffs

Ecosphere - Tập 4 Số 2 - Trang 1-19 - 2013
Alan A. Ager1, Nicole M. Vaillant1, Andrew McMahan2
1USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Prineville, Oregon 97754 USA
2Softec Solutions, Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 USA

Tóm tắt

Ongoing forest restoration on public lands in the western US is a concerted effort to counter the growing incidence of uncharacteristic wildfire in fire‐adapted ecosystems. Restoration projects cover 725,000 ha annually, and include thinning and underburning to remove ladder and surface fuel, and seeding of fire‐adapted native grasses and shrubs. The backlog of areas in need of restoration combined with limited budgets requires that projects are implemented according to a prioritization system. The current system uses a stand‐scale metric that measures ecological departure from pre‐settlement conditions. Although conceptually appealing, the approach does not consider important spatial factors that influence both the efficiency and feasibility of managing future fire in the post‐treatment landscape. To address this gap, we developed a spatial model that can be used to explore different landscape treatment configurations and identify optimal project parameters that maximize restoration goals. We tested the model on a 245,000 ha forest and analyzed tradeoffs among treatment strategies as defined by fire behavior thresholds, total area treated, and the proportion of the project area treated. We assumed the primary goal as the protection and conservation of old growth ponderosa pine trees from potential wildfire loss. The model located optimal project areas for restoration and identified treatment areas within them, although the location was dependent on assumptions about acceptable fire intensity within restored landscapes, and the total treated area per project. When a high percentage of stands was treated (e.g., >80%), the resulting project area was relatively small, leaving the surrounding landscape at risk for fire. Conversely, treating only a few stands with extreme fire behavior (<20%) created larger projects, but substantial old growth forests remained susceptible to wildfire mortality within the project area. Intermediate treatment densities (35%) were optimal in terms of the overall reduction in the potential wildfire mortality of old growth. The current work expands the application in spatial optimization to the problem of dry forest restoration, and demonstrates a decision support protocol to prioritize landscapes and specific areas to treat within them. The concepts and model can be applied to similar problems in spatial ecology.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1016/j.foreco.2005.01.034

10.1016/j.foreco.2007.03.070

10.1016/j.foreco.2010.01.032

10.1016/j.foreco.2011.11.021

10.2737/PNW-GTR-859

10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[1418:EROSPP]2.0.CO;2

Andrews P. L, 2007, BehavePlus fire modeling system: past, present, and future, Proceedings of 7th Symposium on Fire and Forest, 13

10.1038/scientificamerican0807-46

10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.01.059

10.1139/x03-204

Carroll A. L, 2004, Effects of climate change on range expansion by the mountain pine beetle in British Columbia, Mountain pine beetle symposium: challenges and solutions, 223

Christensen V, 2004, Trade-offs in ecosystem-scale optimization of fisheries management policies, Bulletin of Marine Science, 74, 549

Collins B. M, 2010, Challenges and approaches in planning fuel treatments across fire-excluded forested landscapes, Journal of Forestry, 108, 24, 10.1093/jof/108.1.24

10.1071/WF08132

10.2737/RMRS-GTR-254

FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 2007, Fire management—global assessment 2006. Forestry Paper No. 151

10.1071/WF06063

Finney M. A, 2009, Modeling large fire containment using generalized linear mixed model analysis, Forest Science, 55, 249, 10.1093/forestscience/55.3.249

10.1071/WF06064

Fitzgerald S. A, 2005, Fire ecology of ponderosa pine and the rebuilding of fire-resilient ponderosa pine ecosystems. PSW-GTR-198

Franklin J. F, 2003, Forging a science-based national forest fire policy, Issues in Science and Technology, 20, 59

Franklin J. F, 1986, Interim definitions for old-growth Douglas-fir and mixed-conifer forests in the Pacific Northwest and California. RN-PNW-447

10.1016/j.foreco.2010.10.017

Graham R, 2012, Fourmile Canyon fire findings. RMRS-GTR-289, USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA

Hann W. J, 2003, Fire regime condition class and associated data for fire and fuels planning: methods and applications, Fire, fuel treatments and ecological restoration. RMRS-P-29. USDA Forest Service, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA, 397

10.1111/j.1523-1739.2003.00381.x

10.7312/hof-12544

Holsinger L, 2006, Chapter 11: Using historical simulations of vegetation to assess departure of current vegetation conditions across large landscapes, LANDFIRE Prototype Project: nationally consistent and locally relevant geospatial data for wildland fire management. RMRS-GTR-175. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA, 315

10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02295.x

10.1139/x11-032

10.1007/BF01867377

10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.02.005

10.1016/j.ejor.2008.05.025

10.1139/X09-176

10.3368/le.84.3.449

10.1016/j.foreco.2011.11.038

10.1016/j.foreco.2007.03.071

10.1016/S0378-1127(98)00546-5

Moilanen A, 2009, Spatial conservation prioritization: quantitative methods and computational tools, 10.1093/oso/9780199547760.001.0001

National Geospatial Data, 2009, MTBS Project, USDA Forest Service and US Geological Survey

NIFMID, 2011, National Interagency Fire Management Integrated Database at the National Information Technology Center in Kansas City, Missouri

10.1111/j.1526-100X.2006.00099.x

10.1890/1540-9295(2006)4[481:MFFITW]2.0.CO;2

Noss R, 2009, Chapter 12: prioritizing ecosystems, species and sites for restoration, Spatial conservation prioritization: Quantitative methods and computational tools, 158, 10.1093/oso/9780199547760.003.0012

10.1071/WF06060

Rebain S. A, 2010, The fire and fuels extension to the forest vegetation simulator: updated model documentation. Internal Report

10.2737/INT-GTR-344

10.1016/j.foreco.2008.09.016

10.1071/WF06120

10.1071/WF08088

Rollins M. G, 2006, The LANDFIRE Prototype Project: nationally consistent and locally relevant geospatial data for wildland fire management. RMRS-GTR-175

Ryan K, 1994, Interactions between fire-injured trees and insects in the Greater Yellowstone area, Plants and their environments: Proceedings of the First Biennial Scientific Conference on the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. NPS/NRYELL/NRTR-93/xx. USDI National Park Service, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, USA, 259

10.1139/x88-199

10.1016/j.foreco.2012.02.013

10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.10.003

10.3375/043.030.0302

USDA-USDI (United States Department of Agriculture and United States Department of Interior), 2001, National Fire Plan: A collaborative approach for reducing wildland fire risks to communities and the environment

10.1139/X07-162

10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.01975.x

10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00057-9

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Ecosphere

Tập 4 Số 2

1-19

Thông tin tác giả