Fuels and Fuel Treatments

Background

Accurate estimates of available live crown fuel loads are critical for understanding potential wildland fire behavior. Existing crown fire behavior models assume that available crown fuels are limited to all tree foliage and half of the fine branches less than 6 mm in diameter (1 h fuel). They also assume that this relationship is independent of the branchwood moisture content.

Anthropogenic climate change is altering the state of worldwide fire regimes, including by increasing the number of days per year when vegetation is dry enough to burn. Indices representing the percent moisture content of dead fine fuels as derived from meteorological data have been used to assess geographic patterns and temporal trends in vegetation flammability.

Increased understanding of how mechanical thinning, prescribed burning, and wildfire affect subsequent wildfire severity is urgently needed as people and forests face a growing wildfire crisis. In response, we reviewed scientific literature for the US West and completed a meta-analysis that answered three questions: (1) How much do treatments reduce wildfire severity within treated areas?

Fire suppression is the primary management response to wildfires in many areas globally. By removing less-extreme wildfires, this approach ensures that remaining wildfires burn under more extreme conditions.

Disturbances cause rapid changes to forests, with different disturbance types and severities creating unique ecosystem trajectories that can impact the underlying soil microbiome. Pile burning—the combustion of logging residue on the forest floor—is a common fuel reduction practice that can have impacts on forest soils analogous to those following high-severity wildfire.

Fuel-treatments targeting shrubs and fire-prone exotic annual grasses (EAGs) are increasingly used to mitigate increased wildfire risks in arid and semiarid environments, and understanding their response to natural factors is needed for effective landscape management.

Background

Understanding and quantifying the resilience of forests to disturbances are increasingly important for forest management. Historical fire suppression, logging, and other land uses have increased densities of shade tolerant trees and fuel buildup in the western United States, which has reduced the resilience of these forests to natural disturbances.

Wildland fire incident commanders make wildfire response decisions within an increasingly complex socio-environmental context. Threats to human safety and property, along with public pressures and agency cultures, often lead commanders to emphasize full suppression.