Potential wildfire and carbon stability in frequent‐fire forests in the Sierra Nevada: trade‐offs from a long‐term study

Forest restoration and fuels reduction work: Different pathways for achieving success in the Sierra Nevada

Fire suppression and past selective logging of large trees have fundamentally changed frequent-fire-adapted forests in California. The culmination of these changes produced forests that are vulnerable to catastrophic change by wildfire, drought, and bark beetles, with climate change exacerbating this vulnerability. Management options available to address this problem include mechanical treatments (Mech), prescribed fire (Fire), or combinations of these treatments (Mech + Fire). We quantify changes in forest structure and composition, fuel accumulation, modeled fire behavior, intertree competition, and economics from a 20-year forest restoration study in the northern Sierra Nevada. All three active treatments (Fire, Mech, Mech + Fire) produced forest conditions that were much more resistant to wildfire than the untreated control. The treatments that included prescribed fire (Fire, Mech + Fire) produced the lowest surface and duff fuel loads and the lowest modeled wildfire hazards. Mech produced low fire hazards beginning 7 years after the initial treatment and Mech + Fire had lower tree growth than controls. The only treatment that produced intertree competition somewhat similar to historical California mixed-conifer forests was Mech + Fire, indicating that stands under this treatment would likely be more resilient to enhanced forest stressors. While Fire reduced modeled wildfire hazard and reintroduced a fundamental ecosystem process, it was done at a net cost to the landowner. Using Mech that included mastication and restoration thinning resulted in positive revenues and was also relatively strong as an investment in reducing modeled wildfire hazard. The Mech + Fire treatment represents a compromise between the desire to sustain financial feasibility and the desire to reintroduce fire. One key component to long-term forest conservation will be continued treatments to maintain or improve the conditions from forest restoration. Many Indigenous people speak of "active stewardship" as one of the key principles in land management and this aligns well with the need for increased restoration in western US forests. If we do not use the knowledge from 20+ years of forest research and the much longer tradition of Indigenous cultural practices and knowledge, frequent-fire forests will continue to be degraded and lost.

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

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 the following: (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 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.