Using erosion barriers for post-fire stabilization

Fire Effects on Soils and Restoration Strategies

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 337-352

  Robichaud, Peter R ^a  

^a ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85014962262     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (14)

1. Dean, A.E. 2001. Evaluating effectiveness of watershed conservation treatments applied after the Cerro Grande Fire, Los Alamos, New Mexico. Masters thesis, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
2. deWolfe, V.G., P.M. Santi, J. Ey, and J.E. Gartner. 2008. Effective mitigation of debris flows at Lemon Dam, La Plata County, Colorado. Geomorphology, 96: 366-377.
3. Gartner, J.D. 2003. Erosion after wildfire: the effectiveness of log erosion barrier mitigation. Masters thesis, University of Colorado, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
4. McCammon, B.P. and D. Hughes. 1980. Fire rehab in the Bend Municipal Watershed. 252-259. In Proceedings of the 1980 Watershed Management Symposium, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, USA.
5. Miles, S.R., D.M. Haskins, and D.W. Ranken. 1989. Emergency burn rehabilitation: cost, risk, and effectiveness. pp. 97-102. In N.H. Berg [tech. coord.]. Proceedings of the Symposium on Fire and Watershed Management. General Technical Report PSW-109. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Berkeley, California, USA.
6. Robichaud, P.R. 2000. Fire and erosion: evaluating the effectiveness of a post-fire rehabilitation treatment, contour-felled logs, 1-11. In M. Flug, D. Frevert, and D.W. Watkins Jr. [eds.]. Proceedings of the ASCE Watershed Management & Operations Management Conference, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, USA.
7. Robichaud, P.R. 2005. Measurement of post-fire hillslope erosion to evaluate and model rehabilitation treatment effectiveness and recovery. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 14: 475-485.
8. Robichaud, P.R. and R.E. Brown. 1999, revised 2000. What happened after the smoke cleared: onsite erosion rates after a wildfire in eastern Oregon, 419-426. In D.S. Olsen and J.P. Potyondy [eds.]. Proceedings of the Wildland Hydrology Conference. American Water Resource Association, Herndon, Virginia, USA.
9. Robichaud P.R., J.L. Beyer and D.G. Neary. 2000. Evaluating the effectiveness of postfire rehabilitation treatments. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-63. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
10. Robichaud, P.R., F.B. Pierson, R.E. Brown, and J.W. Wagenbrenner. 2008a. Comparing the postfire effectiveness of three hillslope erosion barrier treatments using simulated and natural rainfall. Hydrological Processes, 22: 159-170.
11. Robichaud, P.R., J.W. Wagenbrenner, R.E. Brown, P.M. Wohlgemuth, and J.L. Beyers. 2008b. Evaluating the effectiveness of contour-felled log erosion barriers as a post-fire runoff and erosion mitigation treatment in the western United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 17: 255-273.
12. Spigel, K.M. and P.R. Robichaud. 2006. First-year post-fire erosion rates in Bitterroot National Forest, Montana. Hydrological Processes, 21: 998-1005.
13. Wagenbrenner, J.W., L.H. MacDonald, and D. Rough. 2006. Effectiveness of three post-fire rehabilitation treatments in the Colorado Front Range. Hydrological Processes, 20: 2989-3006.
14. Wohlgemuth, P.M., K.R. Hubbert, and P.R. Robichaud. 2001. The effects of log erosion barriers on post-fire hydrologic response and sediment yield in small forested watersheds, southern California. Hydrological Processes, 15: 3053-3066.