Space and airborne sensors have been used to map area burned, assess characteristics of active fires, and characterize post-fire ecological effects. Confusion about fire intensity, fire severity, burn severity, and related terms can result in the potential misuse of the inferred information by land managers and remote sensing practitioners who require unambiguous remote sensing products for fire management. The objective of the present paper is to provide a comprehensive review of current and potential remote sensing methods used to assess fire behavior and effects and ecological responses to fire. We clarify the terminology to facilitate development and interpretation of comprehensible and defensible remote sensing products, present the potential and limitations of a variety of approaches for remotely measuring active fires and their post-fire ecological effects, and discuss challenges and future directions of fire-related remote sensing research.

Natural resource managers have used natural variability concepts since the early 1960s and are increasingly relying on these concepts to maintain biological diversity, to restore ecosystems that have been severely altered, and as benchmarks for assessing anthropogenic change. Management use of natural variability relies on two concepts: that past conditions and processes provide context and guidance for managing ecological systems today, and that disturbance-driven spatial and temporal variability is a vital attribute of nearly all ecological systems. We review the use of these concepts for managing ecological systems and landscapes.We conclude that natural variability concepts provide a framework for improved understanding of ecological systems and the changes occurring in these systems, as well as for evaluating the consequences of proposed management actions. Understanding the history of ecological systems (their past composition and structure, their spatial and temporal variability, and the principal processes that influenced them) helps managers set goals that are more likely to maintain and protect ecological systems and meet the social values desired for an area. Until we significantly improve our understanding of ecological systems, this knowledge of past ecosystem functioning is also one of the best means for predicting impacts to ecological systems today.These concepts can also be misused. No a priori time period or spatial extent should be used in defining natural variability. Specific goals, site-specific field data, inferences derived from data collected elsewhere, simulation models, and explicitly stated value judgment all must drive selection of the relevant time period and spatial extent used in defining natural variability. Natural variability concepts offer an opportunity and a challenge for ecologists to provide relevant information and to collaborate with managers to improve the management of ecological systems.

The purpose of this paper is to promote a broad and flexible perspective on ecological restoration of Southwestern (U.S.) ponderosa pine forests. Ponderosa pine forests in the region have been radically altered by Euro‐American land uses, including livestock grazing, fire suppression, and logging. Dense thickets of young trees now abound, old‐growth and biodiversity have declined, and human and ecological communities are increasingly vulnerable to destructive crown fires. A consensus has emerged that it is urgent to restore more natural conditions to these forests. Efforts to restore Southwestern forests will require extensive projects employing varying combinations of young‐tree thinning and reintroduction of low‐intensity fires. Treatments must be flexible enough to recognize and accommodate: high levels of natural heterogeneity; dynamic ecosystems; wildlife and other biodiversity considerations; scientific uncertainty; and the challenges of on‐the‐ground implementation. Ecological restoration should reset ecosystem trends toward an envelope of “natural variability,” including the reestablishment of natural processes. Reconstructed historic reference conditions are best used as general guides rather than rigid restoration prescriptions. In the long term, the best way to align forest conditions to track ongoing climate changes is to restore fire, which naturally correlates with current climate. Some stands need substantial structural manipulation (thinning) before fire can safely be reintroduced. In other areas, such as large wilderness and roadless areas, fire alone may suffice as the main tool of ecological restoration, recreating the natural interaction of structure and process. Impatience, overreaction to crown fire risks, extractive economics, or hubris could lead to widespread application of highly intrusive treatments that may further damage forest ecosystems. Investments in research and monitoring of restoration treatments are essential to refine restoration methods. We support the development and implementation of a diverse range of scientifically viable restoration approaches in these forests, suggest principles for ecologically sound restoration that immediately reduce crown fire risk and incrementally return natural variability and resilience to Southwestern forests, and present ecological perspectives on several forest restoration approaches.

Wildfires across western North America have increased in number and size over the past three decades, and this trend will continue in response to further warming. As a consequence, the wildland-urban interface is projected to experience substantially higher risk of climate-driven fires in the coming decades. Although many plants, animals, and ecosystem services benefit from fire, it is unknown how ecosystems will respond to increased burning and warming. Policy and management have focused primarily on specified resilience approaches aimed at resistance to wildfire and restoration of areas burned by wildfire through fire suppression and fuels management. These strategies are inadequate to address a new era of western wildfires. In contrast, policies that promote adaptive resilience to wildfire, by which people and ecosystems adjust and reorganize in response to changing fire regimes to reduce future vulnerability, are needed. Key aspects of an adaptive resilience approach are (i) recognizing that fuels reduction cannot alter regional wildfire trends; (ii) targeting fuels reduction to increase adaptation by some ecosystems and residential communities to more frequent fire; (iii) actively managing more wild and prescribed fires with a range of severities; and (iv) incentivizing and planning residential development to withstand inevitable wildfire. These strategies represent a shift in policy and management from restoring ecosystems based on historical baselines to adapting to changing fire regimes and from unsustainable defense of the wildlandurban interface to developing fire-adapted communities. We propose an approach that accepts wildfire as an inevitable catalyst of change and that promotes adaptive responses by ecosystems and residential communities to more warming and wildfire.wildfire | resilience | forests | wildland-urban interface | policy

Forest resilience to climate change is a global concern given the potential effects of increased disturbance activity, warming temperatures and increased moisture stress on plants. We used a multi-regional dataset of 1485 sites across 52 wildfires from the US Rocky Mountains to ask if and how changing climate over the last several decades impacted post-fire tree regeneration, a key indicator of forest resilience. Results highlight significant decreases in tree regeneration in the 21st century. Annual moisture deficits were significantly greater from 2000 to 2015 as compared to 1985-1999, suggesting increasingly unfavourable post-fire growing conditions, corresponding to significantly lower seedling densities and increased regeneration failure. Dry forests that already occur at the edge of their climatic tolerance are most prone to conversion to non-forests after wildfires. Major climate-induced reduction in forest density and extent has important consequences for a myriad of ecosystem services now and in the future.

No abstract

Fire is a keystone process in many ecosystems of western North America. Severe fires kill and consume large amounts of above‐ and belowground biomass and affect soils, resulting in long‐lasting consequences for vegetation, aquatic ecosystem productivity and diversity, and other ecosystem properties. We analyzed the occurrence of, and trends in, satellite‐derived burn severity across six ecoregions in the Southwest and Northwest regions of the United States from 1984 to 2006 using data from the Monitoring Trends in Burn Severity project. Using 1,024 fires from the Northwest (4,311,871 ha) and 497 fires from the Southwest (1,434,670 ha), we examined the relative influence of fine‐scale topography and coarse‐scale weather and climate on burn severity (the degree of change from before the fire to one year after) using the Random Forest machine learning algorithm. Together, topography, climate, and weather explained severe fire occurrence with classification accuracies ranging from 68% to 84%. Topographic variables were relatively more important predictors of severe fire occurrence than either climate or weather variables. Predictability of severe fire was consistently lower during years with widespread fires, suggesting that local control exerted by topography may be overwhelmed by regional climatic controls when fires burn in dry conditions. Annually, area burned severely was strongly correlated with area burned in all ecoregions (Pearson's correlation 0.86–0.97; p < 0.001), while the proportion of area burned severely was significantly correlated with area burned only in two ecoregions (p ≤ 0.037). During our short time series, only ecoregions in the Southwest showed evidence of a significant increase (p ≤ 0.036) in annual area burned and area burned severely, and annual proportion burned severely increased in just one of the three Southwest ecoregions. We suggest that predictive mapping of the potential for severe fire is possible, and will be improved with climate data at the scale of the topographic and Landsat‐derived burn severity data. Although severity is a value‐laden term implying negative ecosystem effects, we stress that severity can be objectively measured and recognize that high severity fire is an important ecological process within the historical range of variability in some ecosystems.

Context More than a century of forest and fire management of Inland Pacific landscapes has transformed their successional and disturbance dynamics. Regional connectivity of many terrestrial and aquatic habitats is fragmented, flows of some ecological and physical processes have been altered in space and time, and the frequency, size and intensity of many disturbances that configure these habitats have been altered. Current efforts to address these impacts yield a small footprint in comparison to wildfires and insect outbreaks. Moreover, many current projects emphasize thinning and fuels reduction within individual forest stands, while overlooking large-scale habitat connectivity and disturbance flow issues. Methods We provide a framework for landscape restoration, offering seven principles. We discuss their implication for management, and illustrate their application with examples. Results Historical forests were spatially heterogeneous at multiple scales. Heterogeneity was the result of variability and interactions among native ecological -015-0218-0 patterns and processes, including successional and disturbance processes regulated by climatic and topographic drivers. Native flora and fauna were adapted to these conditions, which conferred a measure of resilience to variability in climate and recurrent contagious disturbances. Conclusions To restore key characteristics of this resilience to current landscapes, planning and management are needed at ecoregion, local landscape, successional patch, and tree neighborhood scales. Restoration that works effectively across ownerships and allocations will require active thinking about landscapes as socio-ecological systems that provide services to people within the finite capacities of ecosystems. We focus attention on landscape-level prescriptions as foundational to restoration planning and execution.Landscape Ecol (2015) 30:1805-1835 DOI 10.1007/s10980