Recovery of small pile burn scars in conifer forests of the Colorado Front Range

Rhoades, Charles C.; Fornwalt, Paula J.; Paschke, Mark W.; Shanklin, Amber; Jonas, Jayne L.

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2015.03.026

Cited by 26 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The higher residual O horizon cover is likely to have contributed to the marginally higher water infiltration ( Figure 6) and plant-available N in those areas ( Figure 5) relative to B areas. The initial pulse of soil N in BC areas may have resulted from the combustion of accumulated post-harvest fuels; similar to N dynamics after pile burning, it began to recede after one year [66]. After the first year of sampling, soil nitrate was similar between B and BC areas relative to UU and C areas ( Figure 5).…”

Section: Implications Of Post-bark Beetle Salvage Logging On Wildfirementioning

confidence: 87%

Overlapping Bark Beetle Outbreaks, Salvage Logging and Wildfire Restructure a Lodgepole Pine Ecosystem

Rhoades

Pelz

Fornwalt

et al. 2018

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The 2010 Church's Park Fire burned beetle-killed lodgepole pine stands in Colorado, including recently salvage-logged areas, creating a fortuitous opportunity to compare the effects of salvage logging, wildfire and the combination of logging followed by wildfire. Here, we examine tree regeneration, surface fuels, understory plants, inorganic soil nitrogen and water infiltration in uncut and logged stands, outside and inside the fire perimeter. Subalpine fir recruitment was abundant in uncut, unburned, beetle-killed stands, whereas lodgepole pine recruitment was abundant in cut stands. Logging roughly doubled woody fuel cover and halved forb and shrub cover. Wildfire consumed all conifer seedlings in uncut and cut stands and did not stimulate new conifer regeneration within four years of the fire. Aspen regeneration, in contrast, was relatively unaffected by logging or burning, alone or combined. Wildfire also drastically reduced cover of soil organic horizons, fine woody fuels, graminoids and shrubs relative to unburned, uncut areas; moreover, the compound effect of logging and wildfire was generally similar to wildfire alone. This case study documents scarce conifer regeneration but ample aspen regeneration after a wildfire that occurred in the later stage of a severe beetle outbreak. Salvage logging had mixed effects on tree regeneration, understory plant and surface cover and soil nitrogen, but neither exacerbated nor ameliorated wildfire effects on those resources.

show abstract

Section: Implications Of Post-bark Beetle Salvage Logging On Wildfirementioning

confidence: 87%

Overlapping Bark Beetle Outbreaks, Salvage Logging and Wildfire Restructure a Lodgepole Pine Ecosystem

Rhoades

Pelz

Fornwalt

et al. 2018

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies have suggested that burn scars can contribute to the establishment of non‐native plant species (Haskins & Gehring ; Korb et al ; Owen et al ) while others have found very little or no invasion of non‐native plants inside burn scars (Creech et al ; Halpern et al ; Rhoades & Fornwalt ). A study in the Colorado Front Range showed a fast recovery of burn scars, with no differences in native graminoid and forb cover between burn scars and unburned exteriors 2 years after burning (Rhoades et al ). In other studies, recovery takes multiple years: Creech et al () and Halpern et al () found that it took 7 years after burning before finding no significant differences in plant cover inside and outside burn scars.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understory responses to restoration in aspen‐conifer forests around the Lake Tahoe Basin: residual stand attributes predict recovery

Dagley

Berrill

Coppeto

et al. 2020

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The removal of conifers from aspen (Populus tremuloides) stands is being undertaken throughout the western United States to restore aspen for local-and landscape-level biodiversity. Current practices include mechanically removing conifers or hand thinning, piling, and burning cut conifers in and adjacent to aspen-conifer stands. To evaluate the effectiveness of restoration treatments, we examined tree regeneration and herbaceous vegetation cover in thinned, thinned and pile burned, and nonthinned control stands. Growth rates of small conifer saplings threatening to outcompete and replace aspen were also measured. Two to four years after pile burning, herbaceous vegetation cover within the footprint of burned piles (i.e. burn scars) was 35-73% of that in adjacent areas. Aspen was more likely to regenerate inside burn scars where fewer surrounding trees were true firs. Conifer seedlings were more likely to regenerate in burn scars where more of the surrounding trees were conifers (pine or fir) as opposed to aspen. Fir saplings had much slower growth than did aspen saplings. Overall, our findings show that restoration treatments are promoting desirable outcomes such as enhancing aspen regeneration but that follow-up treatments will be needed to remove numerous conifer seedlings becoming established after restoration activities. Eliminating conifers, while they are small, growing slowly, and contributing little to fuel loads may be an economical way to prolong restoration treatment effectiveness.

show abstract

“…These fires can have dramatic impacts [3][4][5][6][7][8][9]. Slash pile burning consumes soil organic material exposing mineral soil [8] and alters soil chemical characteristics. As a consequence of pile burning, the water repellency of soils increases, reducing water infiltration [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Exotic plants that invade burned areas can continue to dominate the community years after initial establishment [9]. However, the effects on vegetation are not absolute and may depend on the amount of invasion pressure by exotic plants and the size of the pile as the fire intensity increases with the pile size [4,8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Slash Pile Burn Scar Restoration: Tradeoffs between Abundance of Non-Native and Native Species

Sexton

Turk

Ringer

et al. 2020

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The accumulation of live and dead trees and other vegetation in forests across the western United States is producing larger and more severe wildfires. To decrease wildfire severity and increase forest resilience, foresters regularly remove excess fuel by burning woody material in piles. This common practice could also cause persistent ecosystem changes such as the alteration of soil physical and chemical properties due to extreme soil heating, which can favor invasion by non-native plant species. The abundance and species richness of native plant communities may also remain depressed for many years after burning has removed vegetation and diminished propagules in the soil. This adds to the vulnerability of burned areas to the colonization and dominance by invasive species. Research into the use of revegetation techniques following pile burning to suppress invasion is limited. Studies conducted in various woodland types that investigated revegetation of pile burn scars have met with varying success. To assess the effectiveness of restoring pile burn scars in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado, we monitored vegetation in 26 scars, each about 5 m in diameter, the growing season after burning. Later that summer, we selected 14 scars for restoration that included soil scarification, seed addition, and pine duff mulch cover. We monitored the scars for four years, pre-restoration, and three years post-restoration and found that the cover of seeded species exceeded the surrounding unburned areas and unseeded controls. The restoration seeding suppressed cover of non-native species as well as native species that were not seeded during restoration. Our results suggest that restoration of pile burn scars could be a useful tool to retard the establishment of invasive plant species when there are pre-existing infestations near scars. However, this must be weighed against the simultaneous suppression of native species recruitment. Monitoring for periods more than three years will help us understand how long the suppression of native and non-native species by restoration species may persist.

show abstract

Recovery of small pile burn scars in conifer forests of the Colorado Front Range

Cited by 26 publications

References 28 publications

Overlapping Bark Beetle Outbreaks, Salvage Logging and Wildfire Restructure a Lodgepole Pine Ecosystem

Overlapping Bark Beetle Outbreaks, Salvage Logging and Wildfire Restructure a Lodgepole Pine Ecosystem

Understory responses to restoration in aspen‐conifer forests around the Lake Tahoe Basin: residual stand attributes predict recovery

Slash Pile Burn Scar Restoration: Tradeoffs between Abundance of Non-Native and Native Species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About