Reexamining fire suppression impacts on brushland fire regimes

Science

Volumn 284, Issue 5421, 1999, Pages 1829-1832

  Keeley, Jon E ^a   Fotheringham, C J ^b,d   Morais, Marco ^c,e  

^a Western Ecological Research Center   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c NATIONAL PARK SERVICE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FUEL;

ARTICLE; FIRE; FIRE PROTECTION; HISTORY; INCIDENCE; POPULATION DENSITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK FACTOR; UNITED STATES; DESTRUCTION; NONHUMAN; URBAN RURAL DIFFERENCE;

EID: 0033546213     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.284.5421.1829     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. T. M. Bonnicksen and R. G. Lee, J. Environ. Manag. 8, 277 (1979). Since 1990, two brushland fires have each exceeded $1 billion in losses (http://frap.cdf. ca.gov/projects/fire_mgmt/fm_main.html).
2. J. A. Zivnuska and K. Arnold [Calif. Agric. 4, 8 (1950)] warned "it is known that one of the significant trends in recent population changes has been the increase in number of residences in the flash-fuel types adjacent to primary watersheds."
3. M. Dodge, Science 177, 139 (1972); T. M. Bonnicksen, Environ. Manag. 4, 35 (1980); H. H. Biswell, Prescribed Burning in California Midland Vegetation Management (Univ. of California Press, Berkeley, 1989); S. J. Pyne, World Fire (Holt, New York, 1995).
4. M. Dodge, Science 177, 139 (1972); T. M. Bonnicksen, Environ. Manag. 4, 35 (1980); H. H. Biswell, Prescribed Burning in California Midland Vegetation Management (Univ. of California Press, Berkeley, 1989); S. J. Pyne, World Fire (Holt, New York, 1995).
5. M. Dodge, Science 177, 139 (1972); T. M. Bonnicksen, Environ. Manag. 4, 35 (1980); H. H. Biswell, Prescribed Burning in California Midland Vegetation Management (Univ. of California Press, Berkeley, 1989); S. J. Pyne, World Fire (Holt, New York, 1995).
6. M. Dodge, Science 177, 139 (1972); T. M. Bonnicksen, Environ. Manag. 4, 35 (1980); H. H. Biswell, Prescribed Burning in California Midland Vegetation Management (Univ. of California Press, Berkeley, 1989); S. J. Pyne, World Fire (Holt, New York, 1995).
7. R. C. Rothermel and C. W. Philpot, J. For. 71, 640 (1973); C. W. Philpot, U.S. Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-3 (1977), pp. 12-16.
8. R. C. Rothermel and C. W. Philpot, J. For. 71, 640 (1973); C. W. Philpot, U.S. Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-3 (1977), pp. 12-16.
9. R. A. Minnich, Science 219, 1287 (1983). This study did not demonstrate any statistical differences, and the mapped comparison (Fig. 1 of that study) was biased by presentation of two massive fires (1932 and 1970) that were outside the Landsat comparison (1972-1980) period and were based on records available only for southern California. More importantly, the conclusion that fire suppression policy is the only difference between southern California and Baja California has never been rigorously demonstrated and ignores landscape, climate, and land-use differences.
10. R. A. Minnich and R. J. Dezzani, in California Watersheds at the Urban Interface, J. J. DeVries and S. G. Conard, Eds. (Water Resources Center Report 75, University of California, Davis, 1991), pp. 67-83; R. A. Minnich, in Brushfires in California Wildlands: Ecology and Resource Management, J. E. Keeley and T. Scott, Eds. (International Association of Wildlife Fire, Fairfield, WA, 1995), pp. 133-158.
11. R. A. Minnich and R. J. Dezzani, in California Watersheds at the Urban Interface, J. J. DeVries and S. G. Conard, Eds. (Water Resources Center Report 75, University of California, Davis, 1991), pp. 67-83; R. A. Minnich, in Brushfires in California Wildlands: Ecology and Resource Management, J. E. Keeley and T. Scott, Eds. (International Association of Wildlife Fire, Fairfield, WA, 1995), pp. 133-158.
12. California Department of Forestry, Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP), Sacramento, CA. Small fires are not recorded; for example, the U.S. Forest Service records only fires over 16 ha. However, the threshold limit varies with the agency.
13. Fires recorded here burned predominantly in chaparral, which sometimes forms a mosaic with coastal sage scrub, grassland, oak woodland, and coniferous forests. Early in the century, there may be a deficit of small fires because of incomplete reporting, but total area burned is not likely to be affected because small fires are a minor portion and large fires are less likely to have been missed.
14. Adjacent counties were combined for presentation purposes; statistical tests discussed in the text were performed on counties both separate and combined. Data for the 1990 decade were standardized by dividing the average for the first 8 years by 0.8.
15. For population density statistics, see www.census. gov/population/cencounts/ca190090.txt
16. For these counties, natural lightning-ignited fires typically make up less than 5% of all fires [J. E. Keeley, U.S. Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-58 (1982), pp. 431-437].
17. M. A. Morita, Ecol. Appl. 7, 1252 (1997); P. J. Gee, thesis, University of California, Berkeley (1974).
18. M. A. Morita, Ecol. Appl. 7, 1252 (1997); P. J. Gee, thesis, University of California, Berkeley (1974).
19. Techniques introduced in the 1950s increased fire suppression potential [S. J. Pyne et al., Introduction to Wildland Fire (Wiley, New York, ed. 2, 1996)]. Additionally, because of low rates of decomposition in these ecosystems, if fire suppression were to result in fuel accumulation, the magnitude of this impact would be cumulative with time and be greatest in the latter half of the century.
20. Compare B. D. Malamud, G. Morein, D. L. Turcotte, Science 281, 1840 (1998).
21. F. W. Davis and D. A. Burrows [in Patch Dynamics, S. A. Levin et al., Eds. (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993), pp. 247-259) predicted that anthropogenically driven landscape fragmentation would increase the fire return interval; their model is sensitive to ignition frequency and most applicable to central-coastal counties, which have not experienced marked increases in fire frequency.
22. Fires over 40 ha from 1925 to 1996; Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, U.S. National Park Service.
23. Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project Final Report to Congress (Centers for Water and Wildlife Resources, University of California, Davis, 1996), vol. II, pp. 1033-1202.
24. J. E. Keeley, in North American Terrestrial Vegetation, M. G. Barbour and W. D. Billings, Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1999), pp. 201-251.
25. C. M. Countryman, U.S. Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-7 (1974).
26. S. G. Conard and D. R. Weise [Tall Timb. Fire Ecol. Conf. Proc. 20, 342 (1998)] found no evidence that fire suppression affected fire size in the San Bernardino National Forest and recommended strategically placed fuel management zones in the wildland areas (that is, fuel breaks) coupled with intensive fire risk management zones to protect the wildland-urban interface.
27. T. D. Bradshaw, U.S. Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-107 (1977), pp. 15-25; J. B. Davis, Fire Manag. Notes 50, 22 (1989).
28. T. D. Bradshaw, U.S. Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-107 (1977), pp. 15-25; J. B. Davis, Fire Manag. Notes 50, 22 (1989).
29. R. Z. Callaham, California's Shrublands (Wildlife Resource Center Report 5, University of California, Davis, 1985).
30. We thank C. Gray, M. Moritz, and J. Woods for assistance and J. Agee, M, Borchert, F. Davis, J. Greenlee, C. Skinner, and N. Stephenson for comments.