Forest Restoration and Fuels Reduction: Convergent or Divergent?

Stephens, Scott L.; Battaglia, Mike A.; Churchill, Derek J.; Collins, Brandon M.; Coppoletta, Michelle; Hoffman, Chad; Lydersen, Jamie M.; North, Malcolm P.; Parsons, Russell A.; Ritter, Scott; Stevens, Jens T.

doi:10.1093/biosci/biaa134

Cited by 59 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 122 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Long-term forest conservation may require integrating the lower range of historical variation in tree density, basal area, and AGLB to adapt to novel ecological conditions. While this approach may converge with forest conservation and fire hazard reduction goals (Stephens et al 2020a), it will require adjusting expectations regarding the contribution of forests toward greenhouse gas reduction goals. We found that the Sierra Nevada/ southern Cascade region may be unable to support AGLB >40 Mg ha −1 by 2069, a value approximately 25% of current AGLB stocks (supplementary table 3).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomass stocks in California’s fire-prone forests: mismatch in ecology and policy

Bernal

Stephens

Collins

2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restoration of fire-prone forests can promote resiliency to disturbances, yet such activities may reduce biomass stocks to levels that conflict with climate mitigation goals. Using a set of large-scale historical inventories across the Sierra Nevada/southern Cascade region, we identified underlying climatic and biophysical drivers of historical forest characteristics and projected how restoration of these characteristics manifest under future climate. Historical forest conditions varied with climate and site moisture availability but were generally characterized by low tree density (∼53 trees ha−1), low live basal area (∼22 m2 ha−1), low biomass (∼34 Mg ha−1), and high pine dominance. Our predictions reflected broad convergence in forest structure, frequent fire is the most likely explanation for this convergence. Under projected climate (2040–2069), hotter sites become more prevalent, nearly ubiquitously favoring low tree densities, low biomass, and high pine dominance. Based on these projections, this region may be unable to support aboveground biomass >40 Mg ha−1 by 2069, a value approximately 25% of current average biomass stocks. Ultimately, restoring resilient forests will require adjusting carbon policy to match limited future aboveground carbon stocks in this region.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomass stocks in California’s fire-prone forests: mismatch in ecology and policy

Bernal

Stephens

Collins

2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Forest management interventions to increase the resilience of these ecosystems to expected global changeinduced disturbances (e.g., wildfires, droughts, and/or insects/disease) may need to explicitly address live tree density reduction across strategic-scales 40 . Without large-scale disturbances, improved low grade fiber markets, and/or forest management policy initiatives, we can expect the current trends of increasing RD to carry on as more stands continue their progression through stand development into high RD conditions (i.e., selfthinning-induced mortality) unless disturbances occur.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative density of United States forests has shifted to higher levels over last two decades with important implications for future dynamics

Woodall,

Weiskittel

2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tree size-density dynamics can inform key trends in forest productivity along with opportunities to increase ecosystem resiliency. Here, we employ a novel approach to estimate the relative density (RD, range 0–1) of any given forest based on its current size-density relationship compared to a hypothetical maximum using the coterminous US national forest inventory between 1999 and 2020. The analysis suggests a static forest land area in the US with less tree abundance but greatly increased timber volume and tree biomass. Coupled with these resource trends, an increase in RD was identified with 90% of US forest land now reaching a biologically-relevant threshold of canopy closure and/or self-thinning induced mortality (RD > 0.3), particularly in areas prone to future drought conditions (e.g., West Coast). Notably, the area of high RD stands (RD > 0.6) has quintupled over the past 20 years while the least stocked stands (RD < 0.3) have decreased 3%. The evidence from the coterminous US forest RD distribution suggest opportunities to increase live tree stocking in understocked stands, while using density management to address tree mortality and resilience to disturbances in increasingly dense forests.

show abstract

“…Fuel treatments that modify within-stand structure to remove small trees and reduce surface fuels while retaining large, more fire-resistant trees and variable stand structure (Stephens et al 2021) are most appropriate in dry pine, dry to moist mixed-conifer forests and oak woodlands, particularly where there is evidence that older fire-resistant species have been or are being replaced by younger fire-sensitive species (e.g., Yocom-Kent et al 2015). This mirrors the fine-to meso-scale (i.e., 1-10,000 ha) heterogeneity in forest structure that characterized these frequent-fire forest types historically (Hessburg et al 2019.…”

Section: Box 1 Defining Restorative and Adaptive Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adapting western North American forests to climate change and wildfires: 10 common questions

Prichard

Hessburg

Hagmann

et al. 2021

Ecological Applications

178

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We review science-based adaptation strategies for western North American (wNA) forests that include restoring active fire regimes and fostering resilient structure and composition of forested landscapes. As part of the review, we address common questions associated with climate adaptation and realignment treatments that run counter to a broad consensus in the literature. These include: (1) Are the effects of fire exclusion overstated? If so, are treatments unwarranted and even counterproductive? (2) Is forest thinning alone sufficient to mitigate wildfire hazard? (3) Can forest thinning and prescribed burning solve the problem? (4) Should active forest management, including forest thinning, be concentrated in the wildland urban interface (WUI)? ( 5) Can wildfires on their own do the work of fuel treatments? (6) Is the primary objective of fuel reduction treatments to assist in future firefighting response and containment? (7) Do fuel treatments work under extreme fire weather? (8) Is the scale of the problem too great -can we ever catch up? (9) Will planting more trees mitigate climate change in wNA forests? and (10) Is post-fire management needed or even ecologically justified? Based on our review of the scientific evidence, a range of proactive management actions are justified and necessary to keep pace with changing climatic and wildfire regimes and declining forest successional heterogeneity after severe wildfires. Science-based adaptation options include the use of managed wildfire, prescribed burning, and coupled mechanical thinning and prescribed burning as is consistent with land management allocations and forest conditions. Although some current models of fire management in wNA are averse to short-term risks and uncertainties, the long-term environmental, social, and cultural consequences of wildfire management primarily grounded in fire suppression are well documented, highlighting an urgency to invest in intentional forest management and restoration of active fire regimes.

show abstract

Forest Restoration and Fuels Reduction: Convergent or Divergent?

Cited by 59 publications

References 122 publications

Biomass stocks in California’s fire-prone forests: mismatch in ecology and policy

Biomass stocks in California’s fire-prone forests: mismatch in ecology and policy

Relative density of United States forests has shifted to higher levels over last two decades with important implications for future dynamics

Adapting western North American forests to climate change and wildfires: 10 common questions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About