Wildfires—Response

North, Malcolm P.; Stephens, Scott L.; Collins, Brandon M.; Agee, James K.; Aplet, Greg; Franklin, Jerry F.; Fulé, Pete

doi:10.1126/science.350.6263.920-c

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The logic behind the Wildfire Only scenario was that under "business-as-usual" wildfire suppression actions, where the worst 1-2% of wildfires that burn under extreme fire weather conditions evade suppression and account for the vast majority of area burned (Calkin et al, 2005;Cova et al, 2023). The remainder are typically suppressed (Calkin et al, 2015;North et al, 2015). For the Wildfire + Treatment scenario, management actions were assigned to restore climate adapted forest conditions and bolster resilience to wildfires.…”

Section: Management Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Informing climate adaptation strategies using ecological simulation models and spatial decision support tools

Furniss,

Povak,

Hessburg

et al. 2023

Front. For. Glob. Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionForest landscapes offer resources and ecosystem services that are vital to the social, economic, and cultural well-being of human communities, but managing for these provisions can require socially and ecologically relevant trade-offs. We designed a spatial decision support model to reveal trade-offs and synergies between ecosystem services in a large eastern Cascade Mountain landscape in Washington State, USA.MethodsWe used process-based forest landscape (LANDIS-II) and hydrology (DHSVM) models to compare outcomes associated with 100 years of simulated forest and wildfire dynamics for two management scenarios, Wildfire only and Wildfire + Treatments. We then examined the strength and spatial distribution of potential treatment effects and trends in a set of resources and ecosystem services over the simulation period.ResultsWe found that wildfire area burned increased over time, but some impacts could be mitigated by adaptation treatments. Treatment benefits were not limited to treated areas. Interestingly, we observed neighborhood benefits where fire spread and severity were reduced not only in treated patches but in adjacent patches and landscapes as well, creating potential synergies among some resource benefits and services. Ordinations provided further evidence for two main kinds of outcomes. Positive ecological effects of treatments were greatest in upper elevation moist and cold forests, while positive benefits to human communities were aligned with drier, low- and mid-elevation forests closer to the wildland urban interface.DiscussionOur results contribute to improved understanding of synergies and tradeoffs linked to adaptation and restoration efforts in fire-prone forests and can be used to inform management aimed at rebuilding resilient, climate-adapted landscapes.

show abstract

Section: Management Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%