Hypotheses that megafires, very large, high-impact fires, are caused by either climate effects such as drought or fuel accumulation due to fire exclusion with accompanying changes to forest structure have long been alleged and guided policy, but their physical basis remains untested. Here, unique airborne observations and microscale simulations using a coupled weather-wildland-fire-behavior model allowed a recent megafire, the King Fire, to be deconstructed and the relative impacts of forest structure, fuel load, weather, and drought on fire size, behavior, and duration to be separated. Simulations reproduced observed details including the arrival at an inclined canyon, a 25-km run, and later slower growth and features. Analysis revealed that fire-induced winds that equaled or exceeded ambient winds and fine-scale airflow undetected by surface weather networks were primarily responsible for the fire's rapid growth and size. Sensitivity tests varied fuel moisture and amount across wide ranges and showed that both drought and fuel accumulation effects were secondary, limited to sloped terrain where they compounded each other, and, in this case, unable to significantly impact the final extent. Compared to standard data, fuel models derived solely from remote sensing of vegetation type and forest structure improved simulated fire progression, notably in disturbed areas, and the distribution of burn severity. These results point to self-reinforcing internal dynamics rather than external forces as a means of generating this and possibly other outlier fire events. Hence, extreme fires need not arise from extreme fire environment conditions. Kinematic models used in operations do not capture fire-induced winds and dynamic feedbacks so can underestimate megafire events. The outcomes provided a nuanced view of weather, forest structure, fuel accumulation, and drought impacts on landscape-scale fire behavior-roles that can be misconstrued using correlational analyses between area burned and macroscale climate data or other exogenous factors. A practical outcome is that fuel treatments should be focused on sloped terrain, where factors multiply, for highest impact.

Altered fuel conditions coupled with changing climate have disrupted fire regimes of forests historically characterised by high-frequency and low-to-moderate-severity fire. Managers use fuel treatments to abate undesirable fire behaviour and effects. Short-term effectiveness of fuel treatments to alter fire behaviour and effects is well documented; however, long-term effectiveness is not well known. We evaluated surface fuel load, vegetation cover and forest structure before and after mechanical and fire-only treatments over 8 years across 11 National Forests in California. Eight years post treatment, total surface fuel load returned to 67 to 79% and 55 to 103% of pretreatment levels following fire-only and mechanical treatments respectively. Herbaceous or shrub cover exceeded pretreatment levels two-thirds of the time 8 years after treatment. Fire-only treatments warranted re-entry at 8 years post treatment owing to the accumulation of live and dead fuels and minimal impact on canopy bulk density. In general, mechanical treatments were more effective at reducing canopy bulk density and initially increasing canopy base height than prescribed fire. However, elevated surface fuel loads, canopy base height reductions in later years and lack of restoration of fire as an ecological process suggest that including prescribed fire would be beneficial.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract