Changes to simulated fire behaviour and societal benefits after two levels of thinning in a mixed-conifer wildland-urban interface community

Proceedings of the Royal Society of Queensland

Volumn 115, Issue , 2009, Pages 37-44

  Dicus, Christopher A ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONIFEROPHYTA;

EID: 66449133781     PISSN: 0080469X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. AMERICAN FORESTS. 2003. Urban Ecosystem Analysis, San Diego, California. (December 1, 2006)
2. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE. 2004. Population Projections by Race/Ethnicity for California and Its Counties 2000-2050. (3-15-2007)
3. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY & FIRE PROTECTION. 2007a. 20 Largest California Wildland Fires (By *Acreage Burned). , <3-15-07>.
4. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY & FIRE PROTECTION. 2007b. 20 Largest California Wildland Fires (By Structures Destroyed). , <3-15-07>.
5. COHEN, D. 2000. Preventing disaster: home ignitability in the wildland-urban interface. Journal of Forestry 98(3): 15-21.
6. DICUS, C.A. 2006. Essential elements of sustainable fire management in the wildland-urban interface. Proceedings of 3rd International Fire Ecology and Management Congress, San Diego, California.
7. DICUS, C.A. & ZIMMERMAN, M.P. 2007. Quantifying fire behavior vs. community benefits of southern California shrublands and grasslands. Pages 214-221 in R.E. Masters and K.E.M. Galley (eds.). Proceedings of the 23rd Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference: Fire in Grassland and Shrubland Ecosystems. Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, FL.
8. DICUS, C.A. & SCOTT, M.S. 2006. Reduction of potential fire behavior in wildland-urban interface communities in southern California: a collaborative approach. P. 729-738 in Andrews, Patricia L.; Butler, Bret W., comps. Fuels Management-How to Measure Success: Conference Proceedings. 28-30 March 2006; Portland, OR. Proceedings RMRS-P-41. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
9. MCCAFFREY, S.M. 2004. Fighting fire with education: what is the best way to reach out to homeowners. Journal of Forestry 102(55):12-19.
10. NOWAK, D.J. & CRANE, D.E. 2000. The Urban Forest Effects (UFORE) Model: quantifying urban forest structure and functions. In: Hansen, M. and T. Burk (Eds.) Integrated Tools for Natural Resources Inventories in the 21st Century. Proc. Of the IUFRO Conference. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NC-212. North Central Research Station, St. Paul, MN. pp. 714-720.
11. ROWNTREE, R.A. & NOWAK, D.J. 1991. Quantifying the Role of Urban Forests in Removing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. Journal of Arboriculture 17(10):269-275.
12. SANDERS, R.A. 1986. Urban vegetation impacts on the hydrology of Dayton, Ohio. Urban Ecology 9(3-4):361-376.
13. SCOTT, J.H. & BURGAN, R.E. 2005. Standard fire behaviour fuel models: a comprehensive set for use with Rothermel's surface fire spread model. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-153. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 72 p.
14. SCOTT, J.H. & REINHARDT, E.D. 2005. Stereo photo guide for estimating canopy fuel characteristics in conifer stands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-145. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 49 p. plus stereoscope.
15. SCHWAB, J. & MECK, S. 2005. Planning for wildfires. American Planning Association PAS Report 529/530. 124 pp.
16. TAHA, H., DOUGLAS, S. & HANEY, J. 1997. Mesoscale meteorological and air quality impacts of increased urban albedo and vegetation. Energy and Buildings 25:169-177.
17. U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. 1995. Morro Bay Watershed, Section 319, National Monitoring Program Project.