- -
Best Management Practices for Fuel Treatments in Ponderosa Pine Ecosystems in the Black Hills, SD, the Front Range, CO, and the Southwestern United States
Table of Contents
Section 1 - Introduction Spatial scales Page 1 Integrated approaches Page 1 Background. Page 2
Section II - Fire and Fuels Issues Past land uses and management activities Page 3 Fire regimes Page 5 Impacts of altered fire regimes Page 14
Section III - Fuel Treatment Objectives Monitoring . Page 19 Prescribed fire objectives Page 19 Mechanical treatment objectives Page 21 Biological treatment objectives Page 24 Chemical treatment objectives Page 24
Section IV - Fuel Treatment Techniques Landscape perscpetive Page25 Prescribed fire techniques Page 25 Thinning techniques Page 29 Understory fuel reduction/alteration techniques Page 35 Biological treatment techniques Page 38 Chemical treatment techniques Page 38
Section V - Fuel treatment requirements Prescribed fire Page 39 Thinning Page 43 Understory biomass alteration/removal Page 45 Biological treatments Page 47 Chemical treatments Page 47
Section VI - Fuel treatment impacts and mitigation Monitoring Page 48 Prescribed fire Page 48 Thinning Page 53 Understory biomass alteration/removal Page 56 Biological treatments Page 58 Chemical treatments Page 58 -
Case study 1: Monitoring protocols Page 59 Case study 2: Landscape fuel treatment planning Page 60 Case study 3: Wildland fire use Page 61 References Page 62 Appendix A: Equipment Page 83 Appendix B: Models Page 87 Appendix C: Species referenced Page 89 Appendix D: Managers consulted Page 90 - -
Section I - Introduction
Spatial scales
Restoration and fuel reduction treatments in ponderosa pine systems should be focused on reducing the likelihood of catastrophic wildfire impacting values at risk while improving or maintaining the ecological integrity ofthe system. To effectively achieve this, restoration and fuel reduction treatments should be conceptualized at multiple scales from stands to landscapes. On the stand level, treatment prescriptions should be designed to reduce fuel loading to a level that will reduce the potential for spread of crown fire. To also assure long-term ecosystem sustainability, this is best achieved in the context of the historical stand structure and processes. Even though many areas across ponderosa pine landscapes may have deviated from historical conditions and thus be in need of restoration or fuel management, there are likely to be significant economic and logistical restraints to treating all areas. In addition, other management objectives, such as protection of sensitive wildlife habitat or structures in urban settings, may necessitate prioritization of restoration and fuel treatments across landscapes. Thus, planning at multiple scales is critical for effectiveness in restoration, hazardous fuel reduction, and meeting other resource management objectives across ponderosa pine landscapes. In this best management practices guide, we include effective strategies for planning and implementing restoration and fuel reduction treatments at both landscape and stand scales. While the information in this guide is specific to the ponderosa pine type in the southwest, the Front Range of Colorado, and the Black Hills of South Dakota, many aspects would be applicable in ponderosa pine forests found in other regions.
Integrated approach
While a wealth of information on various aspects of restoration and fuel reduction treatments is available in peer-reviewed literature, government reports, and other publications, to our knowledge this information has yet to be summarized in a comprehensive guide to restoration and fuel reduction treatments in ponderosa pine forests. In addition, many effective strategies for restoration and fuels reduction commonly used by managers remains undocumented and known only by the practitioners who use them. We attempt to capture and document this information through a series of discussions with fire and fuel managers from various state and federal agencies throughout Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and South Dakota. To obtain a broad range of perspectives, we spoke with managers in federal (USDA Forest Service, NPS) and state (CSFS) agencies, researchers with universities (NMSU), government agencies (USGS), and non-profit groups (The Four Corners Institute), and people in environmental advocacy groups (The Center for Biological Diversity, The Forest Guild, TNC). We used information gained from the literature, discussions with practitioners and interested parties, and our own expertise to develop recommendations for best management practices for restoration and fire hazard reduction in ponderosa pine forests of the southwest, the Front Range, and the Black Hills.
1 - -
Background
Ponderosa pine forests in many western states currently have the potential to burn with much higher fire intensity than they would have 100 years ago (Covington et al. 1994; Kaufmann et al. 2003; Brown and Cook 2006). This is largely because of management and land use practices throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, particularly those that lead to alteration of natural fire regimes, although changes in climate may have also played a role in altering the current fire regime (We sterling et al. in press). Knowledge of the historical fire regime and resultant forest structure is thus important as it represents the conditions under which plants and animals in these forest communities have evolved, and provides a benchmark for restoration (Swetnam et al 1999). While a complete return to pre-Euro-American settlement conditions may not be possible given a changing climate, presettlement forest structure provides a guide that should be more sustainable than current conditions and safer for reintroducing fire. The historical fire regime, the past land use and management activities, and the current forest structure and its implications for current fire regimes and other ecological attributes are all presented in Section II - Fire and Fuels Issues. Prescribed fire, mechanical, chemical, and biological treatments can all be used to reduce fuel loading and thus the potential for severe fire spread. These tools can also be used to implement forest restoration, an objective that can be conducive to hazardous fuel reduction in ponderosa pine forests. Other natural resource objectives, such as wildlife habitat improvement or protection, can also be met with these tools. The specific objectives common to restoration and fuel treatments are presented in Section III - Fuel Treatment Objectives. Even with a good treatment plan with clear objectives, implementation of the plan to achieve desired results can be challenging. The actual techniques and tools used to successfully achieve fuel treatment, restoration, and other resource objectives are presented in Section IV - Fuel Treatment Techniques. While restoration and fuel treatments are often meant to improve the health of forested systems, they can also have adverse effects on other resources or values, or they may not be effective in achieving their goals if not implemented correctly. In addition, certain treatments may not be feasible because of resource limitation or other logistical restraints. Thus, there are many limitations on the use of certain kinds of treatments in certain situations. The effectiveness of various treatments, the resources needed to complete treatments, and the limitations on use of various treatments are presented in Section V - Fuel Treatment Requirements. Techniques for mitigating various undesirable consequences of fuel treatment activities are presented in Section VI - Fuel Treatment Impacts and Mitigation.
2 - -
Section II - Fire and fuels issues
Past land uses and management activities
Southwest Humans began settling the southwestern United States at least 12,000 years ago, but their populations probably did not reach large numbers until 2000 to 1000 B.C., when cultivated plants spread throughout the region and societies shifted from nomadic to agrarian (Allen 2002). It has been estimated that 100,000 Native Americans occupied the upper Rio Grande Valley of New Mexico at the height of their population (Allen 2002). Similar numbers ofpeople settled in other population centers throughout the southwest (Parker 2002). Native Americans may have had substantial impacts on forest structure around large settlements. For example, as many as 200,000 trees of ponderosa pine, Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir, harvested up to 75 km from the population center, were used for construction of pueblos at Chaco Canyon, a large settlement in northern New Mexico (Betancourt et al. 1986). This indicates that Native Americans in large population centers may have had significant impacts on structure of forests in this region. However, the imprint Native Americans had on forest structure in general would have been mostly limited to areas in the immediate vicinity of their communities. Native Americans did venture into ponderosa pine forests throughout the region for hunting and gathering. Many historical accounts suggest that Native Americans intentionally set fires to these forests for purposes of herding game, clearing travel routes, improving forage production, or warfare. While these actions certainly increased the frequency with which fires burned in some areas (Baisan and Swetnam 1997; Kaye and Swetnam 1999), it is not likely that these human ignitions significantly altered the natural fire regime over landscape or regional scales given the high frequency of lightning caused fires in this region (Allen 2002). Euro-American and Hispanic settlers left a much bigger imprint on the landscape when they began settling in the region in large numbers in the late 1800's. Upon their arrival, they introduced sheep and cattle to the ponderosa pine forests to take advantage of the abundant forage in the forest understory. While limited grazing began in earlier in the 19th century in certain areas (Savage and Swetnam 1990), the number of livestock on the range exploded throughout the region around 1880 (Dutton 1953; Denevan 1967). There was an estimated 4 million sheep in the state ofNew Mexico by 1880 (Denevan 1967) and 200,000 in the San Francisco Peaks area ofNorthern Arizona in 1887 (Friederici 2003). With the rangeland largely open and unregulated, overgrazing became rampant (Cooper 1960; Denevan 1967; Kaufmann et al. 1998). The ubiquitous overgrazing coupled with a severe drought lasting several years in the 1890's, caused substantial reductions in grass cover and changes in species composition in the understory of ponderosa pine forests throughout the region (Arnold 1950; Weaver 1951; Dutton 1953; Cooper 1960). By the 1910's, grazing became more regulated with the creation of the Forest Service (Allen 1989; Kaufmann el al. 1998). While sheep grazing has declined, cattle grazing has continued 0!l public and private lands in the southwest with 0.5 million head in Arizona and 1.2 million head in New Mexico grazing annually in the 1990's (Dahms and Geils 1997). Other significant land use and management activities throughout the 20th century include commercial logging and fire suppression. Commercial logging began in the region around the same time that large scale livestock grazing was initiated (Allen 1989; Kaufmann el al. 1998;
3 w - -
Friederici 2003). The level of timber extraction increased steadily throughout the 20 th century and peaked in the 1990's with roughly 433 million board feet extracted from public and private forests in Arizona and New Mexico in one year (Covington 2003). Due to lack oflarge trees, changing economic conaitions, and increasing environmental concerns, commercial timber harvest levels have declined in much of the region since 1990 (Covington 2003), but have remained high in certain areas (Allen 1989; Friederici 2003). Organized fire suppression began in the southwest with the creation of the forest service in the 1910's (Pyne 2004). The road network created to aide timber harvest throughout the 20 th century has greatly improved firefighting efficiency (Dahms and Geils 1997). With the exception ofthe Gila wilderness in New Mexico and their extensive wildland fire use program (Webb and Henderson 1985), most wildland fires in the sOl~thwest continue to be suppressed (Covington 2003).
Front Range Nomadic Native Americans traveled through the Rocky Mountains of Colorado beginning 10,000-15,000 years ago (Buchholtz 1983). However, it was not until 650-1000 A.D. that the Ute, Arapahoe, and Cheyenne began settling in the Front Range more permanently, returning to the mountains from the plains each summer to take advantage of the abundant game (Peet 1981; Buchholtz 1983). While Native American populations throughout the Rocky Mountains reached up t9 30,000 (Baker 2002), populations were much smaller in Colorado, probably peaking around 2,500-10,000 in the 1700's (Buchholtz 1983; Baker 2002). Early Euro American settlers of Colorado recounted widespread intentional burning by Native Americans (Veblen 2000). However, the reliability of these accounts has been questioned (Baker 2002). While Native Americans certainly used fire for herding game in this region (Peet 1981; Buchholtz 1983), given their low population density, they were not likely to have had a significant impact on the historical fire regime in the ponderosa pine forests of the Front Range (Baker 2002). Euro-American ~ettlers were first lured to Colorado by the discovery of gold in the late 1850' s (Buchholtz 1983; Rueth et al. 2002). Thousands of prospectors from all over the country descended upon Colorado and towns such as Boulder, Golden, and Denver boomed overnight. Extensive cattle grazing and logging soon followed in the Front Range to support the rapidly growing population and industry (Veblen and Lorenz 1986; Veblen 2000). Historical photographs reveal that disturbance in the Front Range forests during this period was severe and extensive (Veblen and Lorenz 1991). Forests in the montane zone (including ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forests) were extensively logged, and miners routinely set fires to these forests to facilitate prospecting (Veblen and Lorenz 1986; 1991). As a result, few old-growth forests remain in the montane zone of the Front Range today (Kaufmann et al. 2000). With the creation of the Forest Service and the Park Service in the early 1900's, sustainable management of natural resources became a priority. Effects of rampant logging, human caused fires, and over-grazing started to improve with tighter regulation of these activities and the era of fire suppression began (Veblen and Lorenz 1991; Brown et al. 2000). Since the 1960's both logging and cattle grazing have decreased dramatically throughout the region (Veblen and Lorenz 1991). Prescribed fire programs began in the 1970' s but have been limited in extent (Pyne 1997). Suppression of wildfires has occurred throughout the 20th century and most wildfires continue to be suppressed in the region. With the proximity to the largest cities in Colorado, the montane zone of Colorado has been one of the most heavily used timbered regions in Colorado for recreation (Myers 1974).
4 - -
Black Hills Native Americans inhabited the Dakotas in large numbers as early as 1500, although there is no evidence ofthese cultures living in the Black Hills (Froiland 1990). Many groups lived near the Black Hills in the 1600's and 1700's including the Cheyenne, the Kiowa and the Arapaho (Froiland 1990). However, they were likely to have only occasionally ventured into the forests ofthe Black Hills to harvest minimal amounts of timber (Gartner and Thompson 1973; Froiland 1990). They most likely preferred the open habitat and abundant game in the nearby plains (Gartner and Thompson 1973), and thus are not likely to have had an impact ofthe fire regime of the Black Hills. These groups left the region in the 1780's when they were forced westward by the Sioux (Froiland 1990). The Sioux likely used the interior ofthe Black Hills to a greater extent, as early explorers found evidence ofNative American presence in the Black Hills in the 1870's (Progulsh 1974). There is some evidence that suggests the Sioux disrupted the natural fire regime in the foothills of the Black Hills by intentionally setting fires to heard game (Fisher et al. 1987). Native Americans were forced out of the Black Hills when Euro-American settlers arrived in the region in the 1870' s (Froiland 1990). Word ofthe discovery of gold in the Black Hills in 1874 quickly spread to Euro Americans in the east and they soon migrated to the region in large numbers. In addition to mining resources, the region also offered abundant timber, game, and forage for livestock, and these resources were soon extracted to support the growing population (Raventon 1994). With no regulatory agency in place, these resources quickly were at risk ofdepletion. Many large game animals including Bison, pronghorn, and elk were eliminated from the Black Hills around this time (Raventon 1994). By the early 20th century, much of the Black Hills had been logged (Raventon 1994) and as a result very few old growth forests remain today (Boldt and Van Deusen 1974). To curb the rampant use of resources by early settlers and regulate resource extraction, in 1897 the Black Hills forest reserve was created (Raventon 1994). With the creation of this reserve, the first of its kind in the United States, suppression of wildfires began in the Black Hills (Raventon 1994). Today the Black Hills National Forest has the highest allowable timber sale quantity than any forest in the Rocky Mountain region and livestock grazing continues to be extensive (Froiland 1990; Raventon 1994). The method and degree of resource extraction has changed dramatically since the days ofthe early explorers. Unregulated logging, grazing, and hunting were common practice in the late 1800's and early 1900's (Froiland 1990; Raventon 1994) while more selective cutting is practiced today and livestock numbers are regulated (USDA Forest Service 1994). Some ofthe game species that were eliminated in the early 1900's have been reintroduced to parts ofthe Black Hills (Raventon 1994) and management ofthese populations is a priority for land management agencies (USDA Forest Service 1994). Fire suppression continues to be practiced, but acknowledgement of the ecological importance offire and its potential for management ofdifferent resources has led to increasing use ofprescribed fire (USDA Forest Service 1994).
Fire regimes
The historical fife regime and resultant forest structure of ponderosa pine forests prior to major disruptions in ecosystem structure and function with Euro-American settlement is a useful
5 - - reference as it reflects the states and processes under which these forests have evolved (Swetnam et al. 1999). Thus, restoring the historical structure and processes ofecosystems to the extent possible provides the best hope for sustainable ecosystem management. Since these forests historically burned with low to mixed severity fire regimes, restoring historical fire regimes should also reduce the risk of high severity wildfires. In forested systems, dendroecology is the most widely used tool for reconstructing historical fire regimes. Dendroecology applies dendrochronology, or the dating of tree rings, to ecological problems (Fritts and Swetnam 1989). Ponderosa pine trees are able to grow new rings over injuries caused by fire, or fire scars. By examining fire scars on individual trees and comparing them with established tree ring chronologies, the years and in some cases the season in which a fire burned can be determined. By examining fire scars on multiple trees within a stand or in several stands, mean fire return intervals (MFI), or the mean number ofyears between recorded fires, can be calculated at multiple scales. Dendroecology can also be used to assess the historical stand structure that resulted from the fire regime (Moore et al. 2004; Brown and Cook 2006). Historical accounts and photographs of early settlers can also be used to assess historical forest structure when lack of old-growth trees makes dendroecology studies difficult. Such accounts can also be used to augment findings from tree rings. Fire history studies in ponderosa pine forests have found disturbance patterns that are synchronous across broad spatial scales (Swetnam and Baisan 1996). These disturbances are likely driven by regional climatic patterns that influence fuel accumulation and fuel moisture. However, deviations from regional scale patterns have also been seen on local scales (Madnay and West 1983; Touchan et al. 1996). A higher or lower historical fire frequency or intensity can be a function ofNative American burning, isolation ofridge tops, or other factors (Madnay and West 1983; Kay and Swetnam 1999). To fully capture the historical fire regime and the range of variability in ponderosa pine forests it is important to study both regional and local scale patterns in fire history.
Southwest Prior to major Euro-American and Hispanic settlement ofthe region in the late 19th century, the fire regime 'ofponderosa pine forests in the southwest was characterized by frequent occurrence of low-intensity fires (Weaver 1951; Cooper 1960; Covington and Moore 1994a). Such fires would have burned mainly through the understory, consuming grasses, forbs, shrubs, litter, and tree seedlings, and caused little damage to larger trees. Crown fires were not a component of the historical fire regime (Cooper 1960). Across the region, less conservative estimates ofhistoric MFI ranged from 2-12 years (fires recorded by a few trees in a stand), while more conservative estimates ranged from 5-23 years (fires recorded by at least 25% of trees in a stand) (Table 1). While MFI estimates varied across the region, fire regimes in all locales were characterized by frequent low intensity fire and an absence of crown fire. In all regions, the majority of fires occurred in late spring and early summer, prior to the summer monsoon storms that occur July-August (Brown et al. 2001b; Fule et al. 2003b).
Table 1: Mean fire intervals (MF!) and their range estimated in fire history studies at different elevations throughout the southwest. The table includes conservative (25% oftrees in a stand scarred) and less conservative (a few trees in a stand scarred) estimates ofMFI. Site Elevation (m) MFI (years) Range MFI (years) Range Conservative Southern AZa 1970-2100 8.0 1-31 13.1 4-31
6 - -
Southern AZa 2270-2400 6.6 2-18 9.6 2-30 Southern AZa 2330-2530 5.5 1-15 7.3 2-16 Southern AZa 2260-2840 3.0 1-9 7.3 2-13 Southern NMa 2400-2600 5.5 1-23 13.7 3-20 Southern NMa 2550-2600 3.5 1-10 6.9 2-26 Southern NMa 2600-2730 2.9 1-15 7.8 4-31 Southern NMa 2670-2800 5.4 1-16 16.5 4-41 Southern NMa 2800-3100 3.0 1-15 13.1 2-21 Northern AZo 2130 3.7 2-8 6.5 2-15 Northern AZa 2300 2.5 1-12 5.4 2-24 Northern AZc 2300-2370 3.7 1-11 6.4 2-11 Northern AZa 2440-2480 2.6 1-13 7.1 2-22 Northern AZc 2427-2537 5.5 1-15 9.0 4-21 Northern AZa 2930-2970 3.9 1-23 9.3 4-16 Northern NMa 2220-2250 8.3 1-25 17.1 3-42 Northern NMa 2430-2470 9.2 2-38 19.0 3-30 Northern NMa 2500 12.0 2-31 16.3 8-37 Northern NM d 2600 5.5 1-12 8.4 3-18 Northern NM d 2700 5.0 1-16 11.5 5-19 Northern NMa 3040-3070 10.1 2-29 23.0 7-35 aFrom (Swetnam and Balsan 1996) bFrom (Fule et al. 1997) cFrom (Fule et al. 2003b) dFrom (Touchan et al. 1996)
While most fire history studies have reported MFI's that fall within the regional average, certain deviations from the mean exist on a local scale due to numerous local factors that can influence the fire regime. Longer fire free intervals were found in areas that were geographically isolated (i.e. mesa tops) which would have impeded fire spread into such areas (Madany and West 1983; Touchan et al. 1996). Fire occurrence also tends to be less frequent at higher elevations and on more northerly aspects where fuel moisture tends to be higher (Baisan and Swetnam 1990; Swetnam and Baisan 1996; Brown et al. 2001 b). The condition of the forests on ridge tops, where lightning is most likely to strike and cause fires, can also be an important factor determining the historical fire frequency. For example, fire may be more likely to ignite and spread on forested ridge tops compared to rocky ridge tops (Baisan and Swetnam 1990). In certain areas, intentional burning by Native Americans may have significantly increased the historical fire frequency on a local scale (Baisan and Swetnam 1997; Kaye and Swetnam 1999). At regional and landscape scales, long- and short-term climatic fluctuations influenced the frequency and extent of fires. Historically, large fire years, or years in which fires occurred throughout much ofthdandscape, occurred in conjunction with severe droughts (Grissino Mayer and Swetnam 2000). In particular, large fire years occurred in drought years which were preceded by one or two wet years, a pattern consistently seen with EI Nino/Southern Oscillation cycles. This pattern has been observed in several studies throughout the southwest (Swetnam and Baisan 1996; Swetnam and Betancourt 1998; Grissino-Mayer and Swetnam 2000; Brown et al. 2001 b; Fule et al. 2003a). The wet years allowed for high grass production. This grass would have then dried considerably during the drought years and provided a fuel source conducive to ignition and surface fire spread. Many fire history studies also report an unusually long fire-free
7 - -
interval in the 1820's and 1830's, most likely due to the wetter than average conditions seen during this period (Swetnam and Dieterich 1985; Brown et al. 2001b). The historical fire regime led to a very characteristic forest structure in ponderosa pine forests ofthe southwestern United States. Studies of historical forest structure in northern Arizona reveal that these forests were fairly open with clumps of even- or uneven-aged forests interspersed with large tree-free opening where grasses were dominant (Cooper 1960; White 1985). The clumps oftrees were typically no more than half an acre in size (Cooper 1960). The grasses in the openings"particularly when dry, would have provided an ideal fuel for carrying low intensity surface fires. Higher fuel loadings of larger fuels would have occurred near and in the clumps of trees. This would have resulted in an occasional high intensity fire on a local scale near tree clumps which created microsites that favored pine regeneration (Arnold 1950; Cooper 1960). This likely led to the persistence of the clumping tree pattern as tree seedlings would have had difficulty establishing in the grassy opening (Cooper 1960; White 1985). Overall, tree density would have been very low (65 to 77 trees per hectare) and stands would have been dominated by medium to large diameter (mean quadratic diameter 27-55 cm) ponderosa pine trees (Fule et al. 1997; Moore et al. 2004). Historical forests were likely anything but homogenous. On a landscape scale, forests were likely dominated by open woodlands with open meadows and more dense forested stands interspersed throughout (Savage 1991). With the onslaught ofovergrazing and drought in the late 19th century, cover of grasses decreased considerably in ponderosa pine forests throughout the southwest (Arnold 1950; Denevan 1967). Concurrent with the reduction of this fine fuel that would readily carry surface fire, an abrupt decline in fire frequency began around 1880 (Dieterich 1980; Baisan and Swetnam 1990; Covington and Moore 1994a; Swetnam and Baisan 1996; Brown et al. 200 1b). Fire frequency was further reduced with the practice of fire suppression which began with the creation of the Forest Service in the early 20th century (Pyne 2004). Novel human disturbances, fire suppression, and climatic conditions throughout the 20th century resulted in altered forest structure and that has much higher tree density than historical forests (Savage 1991). The current forest structure has led to an altered fire regime such that forests are now more likely to burn with infrequent stand replacing fires. This has been shown with increasing occurrence of large and severe fires in the southwest since the middle ofthe 20th century (Swetnam 1990).
Front Range Prior to the start of Euro-American settlement in the mid-19th century, the fire regime of ponderosa pine forests of the Front Range was characterized as mixed severity, with both surface and stand-replacing crown fires occurring at intervals anywhere between 5 and 118 years (Goldblum and Veblen 1992; Hadley 1994; Brown et al. 1999; Brown et al. 2000; Veblen et al. 2000; Donnegan et al. 2001). The mean fire interval (MF!) historically varied throughout the Front Range depending on latitude, elevation, and aspect (Table 2). Across the region, the less conservative estimates ofMFI varied from 8-64 years (fires recorded by a few trees in a stand), while more conservative estimates ranged from 14-59 years (fires recorded by at least 25% of trees in a stand) (Table 2). In general the historical MFI increased with elevation from the grassland/forest ecotone to higher elevation forests (Table 2). The historical MFI also increased with latitude from southern Colorado to Southern Wyoming (Table 2). Fires were also likely more frequent on south-, east-, and west-facing slopes, where conditions were more xeric and stands less dense (Goldblum and Veblen 1992; Veblen 2003). Historically, fires occurred
8 - - throughout the growing season but occurred slightly earlier in the southern portion of the range (Brown et al. 1999; BroWn and Shepperd 2001; Veblen and Kitzberger 2002; Baker 2003).
Table 2: Summary of historical mean fire intervals (pre-1850) and their range of variability found in fire history studies at different elevations throughout the Front Range. The table includes conservative estimates ofMFI (25% of trees in a stand scarred) and less conservative estimates of MFI (a few trees in a stand scarred). Region Elevation (m) MFI (years) Range MFI (years) Range small fires large fires Southern WVa 192()'-1960 26-33.5 8-82 n/a n/a Northern COD 2090-2200 16.0 3-50 n/a n/a Northern COD 2220-2250 25.5 4-52 n/a n/a Northern COb 2420-2590 29.5 8-79 n/a n/a Northern COb 2600-2230 29.0 11-69 n/a n/a Northern COD 2610-2630 21.5 3-54 n/a n/a Central Cae 1996 9.0 1-51 n/a n/a Central COd 1884-2015 8.3 1-29 14.4 2-46 Central COd 2048-2177 13.4 1-47 23.6 14-47 Central COd 2189-2432 17.7 1-63 19.3 1-63 Central COd 2440-2488 22.4 1-125 43.4 7-125 Central Cae 2100-2520 9.2 1-29 59.2 27-128 Central COT 2375-2685 15.2 2-49 n/a n/a Central COD 2380- 2390 22.5 2-72 n/a n/a Central COb 2390- 2410 7.5 2-82 n/a n/a Central cog 2500-2800 20.9 11-145 41.7 5-63 Central Can 2450.-2750 22.4 8-38 n/a n/a Central Cae 2621 18.0 4-76 48.0 4-102 Central COb 2630-2670 64.0 24-79 n/a n/a Central Cae 2743 31.0 2-116 n/a n/a Central Cae 2865 23.0 1-88 n/a n/a Southern cal 2100-2500 7.5 2-37 n/a n/a Southern COa 2590-2640 9.5 2-41 n/a n/a Southern COb 2670-2690 10.0 4-41 n/a n/a Southern COb 2720-2740 19.0 4-54 n/a n/a a Brown et al. 2000 b Brown and Shepperd 2001 c Donnegan et al. 2001 d Veblen et al. 2000 e Brown et al. 1999 f Goldblum and Veblen 1992 h Hadley 1994 g Laven et al. 1980 i Wieder and Bower 2004
Currently, ponderosa pine forests in the Front Range are often composed of openings with few or no trees, and stands with age caps (Brown et al. 1999; Brown et al. 2000; Kaufmann et al. 2000; Huckaby et al. 2001; Ehle and Baker 2003). Both of these are indicative of past stand-replacing disturbance events and imply that small-scale crown fires were an important part ofthe historical fire regime in ponderosa pine forests of the Front Range. The nature of mixed
9 -- - severity fire regimes, and the extensive logging and burning in the Front Range during the 19th century, makes assessment of the historical crown fire component ofthis fire regime extremely difficult. Thus, the historical extent and frequency of stand-replacing fires in the Front Range is not well understood (Baker and Ehle 2003). However, it is likely that stand-replacing fires were more common in mesic sites at higher elevations and on north-facing aspects where tree density is typically high and shade-tolerant species such as Douglas-fir are more common (Romme et al. 2000; Veblen et al. 2000). Historically, fire frequency, severity and extent varied with long- and short-term climatic fluctuations. As in the southwest, large fire years (years where fires occurred across much of the landscape) tended to occur when the growing season was drier than average and was preceded by 1-3 wetter than average years, a common pattern when EI Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) years (wet) are followed by La Nina years (dry) (Veblen 2000; Veblen et al. 2000; Donnegan et al. 2001). Live fine fuels (grasses) likely accumulated during wet years which subsequently died during dry years, providing an abundant dry fuel source conducive to ignition and fire spread. However, this pattern was less pronounced in the northern portion ofthe Front Range, where sensitivity to ENSO patterns is weaker (Veblen 2000). Long-term climatic changes may also have been responsible for decadal shifts in the historical fire regime. Increased fire activity was observed during decades with pronounced ENSO activity and decreased fire activity was observed for decades when ENSO activity was weak (Veblen 2000; Donnegan et al. 2001). The mixed severity fire regime likely resulted in a complex forest structure composed of opening with no trees, persistent old growth, patches with nearly pure ponderosa pine, and patches with a mixture of ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir (Kaufmann et al. 2001). Both high and low intensity fires would have resulted in tree mortality and would have created openings with no trees and stands with low tree density (Kaufmann et al. 2001; Kaufmann et al. 2003). Old growth forests likely persisted in areas where intervals between stand-replacing events were long. In the central portion ofthe Front Range, tree recruitment followed stand-replacing disturbance events with some delay, which would have allowed for openings and low density stands « 30% canopy cover) to persist across the landscape (Huckaby et al. 2003; Kaufmann et al. 2003). These openings may have accounted for up to 25% ofthe landscape (Kaufmann et al. 2001). However, others have argued that dense forests may have historically made up a significant portion ofthe montane forests in the Front Range (Ehle and Baker 2003). Forests likely had naturally higher tree density on more mesic sites on north aspects and at higher elevations (Kaufmann et al. 2000). The historical fire regime changed dramatically with the onslaught of Euro-American settlement in the mid-l Qth century. Because miners routinely set fires to forests to aid in prospecting, fire frequency increased in much of the Front Range from 1850-1910 (Table 3). However, increases in fire frequency during this period were not ubiquitous across the region (Brown and Shepperd 2001). Documented increases in fire frequency may have also been a function ofheightened ENSO activity that also began in the mid-19th century (Veblen et al. 2000). A sharp reduction in fire frequency (increase in MFI) occurred with the beginning of fire suppression in the early 1900' s (Table 3) (Brown et al. 1999; Brown et al. 2000; Veblen 2000; Veblen et al. 2000; Brown and Shepperd 2001; Donnegan et al. 2001). However, this observed decrease in fire frequency in the beginning ofthe 20th century was not seen in some parts ofthe region (Ehle and Baker 2003). Human induced changes in disturbance regimes coupled with favorable climatic conditions led to increases in tree regeneration throughout the region and thus current forest structure contains much higher tree density than historical levels (Kaufmann et al.
10 - -
2000). The altered forest structure has led to an altered fire regime such that wildfires today are more likely to bum infrequently and with high fire intensity. This is evidenced in several high severity wildfires that have occurred in the Front Range in recent years, including the 100,000+ acre Hayman Fire (Graham 2003).
Table 3: Mean fire return intervals for different periods in the Front Range in Central Colorado. MFI (years) Study Pre-1850 1850-1910 Post-1910 (Goldblum and Veblen 1992) 31.8 8.1 28.0 (Hadley 1994) 29.0 20.7 15.3 (Laven et al. 1980) 66 17.8 27.3
Black Hills While only a few studies have been conducted on the historical fire regime of the Black Hills, current evidence suggests that prior to Euro-American settlement, the fire regime of the Black Hills would have been of mixed severity, with both surface and crown fires being important components of the ecosystem (Shinneman and Baker 1997; Brown and Sieg 1996; Brown 2003). However, most fire history studies in this region have focused on finding evidence for small-scale surface fires. With mean annual precipitation increasing from south to north in the Black Hills, historical surface fire frequency was lower in the southern portion compared to the northern and central portions (Shinneman and Baker 1997; Brown 2003). Less conservative estimates of the mean fire interval (MFI) ranged from 10-15 in the southern Black Hills to 30-33 in the central and northern Black Hills (Table 4). In Devils Tower National Monument, MFI varied through time with a higher MFI occurring from 1600-1770 (MFI = 27) compared to 1779 1900 (MFI = 14) (Fisher et al. 1987). The author attributed this to the presence The Sioux who may have intentionally set fires to herd game (Fisher et al 1987). Historical MFI also increased with elevation (Table 4). Most studies also report evidence of a crown fire component in this system. Evidence for this comes from historical accounts and photos from early Euro-American explorers. Journals from early explorers reveal that large treeless areas with charred snags were commonly encountered (Kime 1996; Parrish et al. 1996; Shinneman and Baker 1997). This is also revealed in historical photographs (Progulske 1974; Grafe and Horsted 2002). Pine regeneration can be prolific in the Black Hills, especially after high intensity disturbance (Brown et al. 2000; Lundquist and Negron 2000; Lentile 2004; Bonnet et al. 2005). Thus, dense stands of ponderosa pine seedlings or saplings with little or no overstory can be indicative that a high intensity disturbance event occurred. Early explorers to the Black Hills commonly found dense, even-aged stands of ponderosa pine seedlings or saplings (Progulske 1974; Kime 1996; Grafe and Horsted 2002). While such stands can be a result of a variety of disturbance agents (wind, disease, insects), other evidence (charred snags) suggests that wildfire was the cause (Kime 1996; Grafe and Horsted 2002). However, one study has shown that pulses of pine recruitment may be driven more by climate rather than by disturbance (Brown 2003). Unlike ponderosa pine forests in other parts of the United States, long fire-free periods were historically common in the Black Hills (Brown and Sieg 1996),' which may have led to fuel build up and high tree density, and thus conditions conducive to crown fire spread. Because much of the Black Hills have been logged at
11 - - least once during the 20 th century (Boldt and Van Deusen 1974; Raventon 1994), it is difficult to determine the historical extent and frequency of crown fires in this system. Much of the precipitation in the Black Hills falls as rain from April to September (Brown 2003). Thus, historically, most wildfires burned in the late summer and early fall, when fuels would have been sufficiently dry to promote fire spread (Brown and Sieg 1996; 1999). In the higher elevations in the northern and central portions of the Black Hills fires occurred more rarely and may have spread mostly in years that were drier than average (Brown 2003). Fires did not typically occur in years that were wetter than average (Brown 2003). Unlike ponderosa pine forests in other regions, there appears to be no effect of EI Nino/La Nina cycles on the historical fire regime (Brown 2003). The occurrence of surface fires and stand-replacing fires, coupled with other disturbance agents, led to a complex mosaic of forest structure composed of dense forests, moderately stocked forests, and tre~less openings. In 1899, Henry S. Graves conducted an extensive inventory oftimber resources in the Black Hills for the US Geological Survey. While this assessment occurred after substantial logging had occurred in certain areas, it still provides an invaluable insight into the historical forest structure of the Black Hills. Graves identified three classes of timber, 1) less than 2,000 board feet per acre, 2) 2,000-5,000 board feet per acre, and 3) 5,000 to 10,000 board feet per acre (Graves 1899). The first class was the most common in the Black Hills and the third class was the least common (Graves 1899). Evidence of disturbance was not seen in the third class and the dense forest structure was likely a result of long fire-free periods (Graves 1899). pensity oftrees in classes one and two was probably limited by frequent disturbance from fire and insects. In the absence of disturbance, stands in class three would have become very dense and more susceptible to high intensity disturbance. Most of the forest was likely uneven-aged in structure, although there is evidence that the patches of dense forests were even-aged (Brown and Cook 2006).
Table 4: Summary of historical mean fire intervals (MFI) and their range of variability for a given time period, aspect and elevation found in fire history studies in the northern, central and southern portions of the, Black Hills. Table includes more conservative (25% of trees in a stand scarred) and less conservative (a few trees in a stand scarred) estimates of MFI, although most studies only report the less conservative estimate. Region Elevation Aspect MFI (study period) Range MFI (study period) Range (m) Conservative Northerna n/a n/a 27 (1600-1770) n/a n/a n/a Northerna n/a n/a 14 (1770-1900) n/a n/a n/a Northerna n/a n/a 42 (1900 - present) n/a n/a n/a NorthernD 1520-1550 S 22 (1700-1900) 11-41 n/a n/a NorthernD 1520-1500 N 11 (1700-1900) 3-30 n/a n/a Northernb 1350-1390 E 16 (1700-1900) 4-34 n/a n/a NorthernD 1830-1860 S 13 (1700-1900) 22-42 n/a n/a NorthernD 1850-1890 E 21 (1700-1900) 4-64 n/a n/a Northernb 1840-1880 W 31 (1700-1900) 14-64 n/a n/a Northernb 1870-1910 SE 13 (1700-1900) 8-19 n/a n/a Northernb 1730-1760 E 20 (1700-1900) 7-37 n/a n/a Northernb 1740-1780 SW 17 (1700-1900) 2-33 n/a n/a Northern! 1200-1280 n/a 13 (1450-1897) 1-43 15 (1450-1897) 4-42
12 - -
CentralC 1660-1690 n/a 23 (1650-1890) 11-74 n/a n/a Centralc 1670-1720 n/a 22 (1650-1890) 13-72 n/a n/a Centrald 1585-1768 n/a 16 (1388-1900) 1-45 16 (1576-1890) 1-45 Centralb 2070-2090 S 24 (1700-1900) 10-41 n/a n/a Centralb 1660-1690 E 27 (1700-1900) 15-42 n/a n/a Centralb 1670-1720 S 27 (1700-1900) 15-46 n/a n/a CentralD 1670-1710 N 20 (1700-1900) 1-47 n/a n/a Centralb 1720 n/a 23 (1700-1900) 6-45 n/a n/a Centralb 1680-1740 S 20 (1700-1900) 1-47 n/a n/a Centralb 1580-1670 SW 19 (1700-1900) 7-37 n/a n/a Southerne 1100-1530 n/a 12 (1564-1896) 3-32 n/a n/a Southerne 1100-1530 n/a 10 (1528-1912) 2-23 n/a n/a Southernc 1100-1530 n/a 12 (1652-1910) 3-34 n/a n/a Southernb 1470-1510 E 11 (1700-1900) 3-29 n/a n/a Southernb 1340-1350 E 10 (1700-1900) 2-18 n/a n/a SouthernD 1220-1260 N 12 (1700-1900) 3-34 n/a n/a a Fisher et al. 1987 bBrown 2003 CBrown et al. 2000 d Brown and Sieg 1996 e Brown and Sieg 1999 f Wienk et al. 2004 .
The historical fire regime has been disrupted as a result of human influence in the Black Hills. While Native Americans were likely to have little effect on the fire regime, there is some evidence that their burning practices increased the fire frequency in certain portions of the Black Hills (Fisher et al. 1987). The biggest disruption in the fire regime was a sharp decrease in the fire frequency as a result of suppression of wildfires, logging and grazing by Euro-Americans beginning around 1900 (Brown and Sieg 1996; 1999). Given the naturally long fire-free periods in some parts of the Black Hills (Brown and Sieg 1996), the historical fire regime may not have changed on a local scale. However, across the Black Hills landscape fires have become less frequent during the 20th century. In addition, the current fire free periods are longer than the longest fire free periods found in fire history studies (Brown and Sieg 1996; 1999). The altered fire regime has been partly responsible for an increase in forest tree density throughout the Black Hills. Despite naturally dense forest structure, and continued logging practices throughout the 20th century, forest tree density estimates today are greater than those conducted by Graves in.1899 (Raventon 1994; McAdams 1995; Parrish et al. 1996). In areas where tree density would have been naturally high (north-facing slopes and higher elevation forests), forest structure may not have been significantly altered since fire suppression. However, comparisons of historical photos to more recent photos reveal higher cover of pine trees, less cover of aspen, and fewer openings in current forests throughout the Black Hills region (Progulske 1974; Grafe and Horsted 2002). Thus, the landscape of the Black Hills likely consists of more homogenous and dense forests today than in the past. The average size of trees is also likely much lower today than historically (Brown and Cook 2006). While historically much of the Black Hills would have been composed of a mosaic of stands with even-aged and uneven
13 •, - -
aged structure, much ofthe Black Hills today is managed as even-aged shelterwoods (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). The increases in fuel loads and tree density, and the homogenous nature of the current Black Hills forests has changed the fire regime such that the forests are now more likely to burn with infrequent large stand-replacing fires. This has been evidenced by the several large wildfires that have occurred in the Black Hills in the 20th century (Raventon 1994). This includes the largest fire to occur in recorded history in the Black Hills; the Jasper fire which burned 33,800 ha in 2000 (Lentile 2004). The decrease in average trees size may make forests less resistant to wildfires as larger trees tend to be more fire resistant.
Impacts of altered fire regimes
Southwest With the absence offire, other land use practices, and an explosive pine regeneration event in 1919 and 1920, tree density increased to a great degree throughout the southwestern ponderosa pine forests (Pule et al. 1997; Moore et al. 2004). As a result, the current forest structure deviates a great deal from the historical structure. In northern Arizona, estimates of number oftrees per hectare has increased from 56-65 in the early 1900's to 276-720 currently (Covington and Moore 1994b; Fule et al. 1997). When averaged across the region, number of trees per hectare has increased from 77 in the 1910's to 519 in the 1990's (Moore et al. 2004). Tree species composition has changed from dominance of shade-intolerant ponderosa pine trees to more shade-tolerant species such as white fir and Douglas-fir (Covington and Moore 1994b; Fule et al. 1997). Tree size class distribution has changed from a system with few large to medium diameter trees (mean quadratic diameter 27-55 cm) to many small diameter trees (mean quadratic diameter 19-46 cm) (Fule et al. 1997; Moore et al. 2004). There are also more standing dead trees and higher surface fuel loading in the current forests compared to historic levels, although there is no data available on the size of snags present in historical forests (Moore et al. 2004). On a landscape scale, forests lost much oftheir natural heterogeneity in forest structure (Savage 1991). The change in forest structure and composition has led to a change in the fire regime such that forests which historically burned with frequent low-intensity fire are now more likely to burn with infrequent and severe crown fires (Covington and Moore 1994a; Covington 2003). According to fire atlases, there is some indication that since the mid-20th century, fires across the region have in fact become larger and more severe (Swetnam 1990). This is likely due to the build up of fuels that have resulted from land use and climatic changes that occurred throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. Since high fuel loading is becoming more continuous across the landscape, this altered fire regime is likely to continue into the future (Covington 2003). High tree density and homogenous forest structure across the landscape has detrimental impacts on other ecological factors including, insect and disease outbreaks, hydrology, forage production, and biodiversity. Insect outbreaks, particularly from bark beetles, are likely to be more severe and widespread with more dense and homogenous forest structure. In dense forests, trees are generally weaker as a result of increased intra-specific competition, and thus are generally more susceptible to beetle attack (Hadley 1994; Negron and Popp 2004). Homogenous forest structure may also cause insect outbreaks to be more synchronous across the landscape (Swetnam and Lynch 1993). Other pathogens such as dwarf mistletoe and root decay fungus
14 - - have likely increased as a result of increased tree density (Dahms and Geils 1997). Increased evapotranspiration and Interception resultant from increased tree density can significantly reduce the water yield from watersheds, limiting supply for humans and riparian communities (Stednick 1996; Keane et al. 2002). Increased canopy cover and accumulations of duff limits opportunities for establishment and growth ofplant species in the forest understory, which has negative impacts on both forage production and biodiversity (Keane et al. 2002; Laughlin et al. 2004, 2005). By some estimates, the increase in forest canopy cover throughout the 20th century has led to as much as a 92% reduction in forage production in some pine stands in Arizona (Dahms and Geils 1997). Forests with high tree density may also reduce habitat quality for species adapted to forest openings and stands with large trees and snags (Dahms and Geils 1997). Threatened and endangered species such as the Mexican spotted owl and the northern goshawk may also be negatively impacted by some aspects of the altered forest structure (Reynold et al. 1996; Sheppard and Farnsworth 1997). The large and severe wildfires, which are likely to occur as a result of the current forest structure, have more extreme negative consequences for hydrology, non-native species establishment, biodiversity, and community and firefighter safety relative to fires of low severity. Severe wildfires result ip. sudden and extreme reductions in vegetative cover, which leads to increased water runoff and soil erosion (DeBano et al. 1998). Such changes in hydrology can be severe enough to significantly reduce site fertility, reduce water quality, and degrade stream communities (DeBano 1991; Landsberg and Tiedemann 2000; Keane et al. 2002). Full recovery of soil microbial communities can take up to two years or longer following intense wildfire and this can have detrimental impacts on availability of soil carbon and nitrogen (Choromanska and DeLuca 2001). The barren post-fire landscape also creates ample opportunities for establishment of non-native invasive plants (Hobbs and Huenneke 1992; Crawford et al. 2001; Keeley et al. 2003). The spread of non-native species and fire-induced damage to threatened and endangered species can have negative consequences for biodiversity (Keane et al. 2002). High intensity fires are more likely to damage overstory trees which can make them more susceptible to bark beetle attack (Wallin et al. 2003). Finally, severe wildfires pose greater threats to community and fire fighter safety and are considerably more costly to suppress and rehabilitate than low intensity fires (Snider et al. 2003). According to coarse scale assessments, much of the ponderosa pine forests in the southwest are considered to be outside of their historical range ofvariability in terms of fire disturbance and forest structure (Aplet and Wilmer 2003). Currently, an estimated 61 % of ponderosa pine/dry Douglas-fir forests in New Mexico have high potential for crown fire spread (Fiedler et al. 2002). These areas should benefit from fuel treatments for purposes of restoration or fire hazard reduction. Given the vast areas in need of treatments, and the restraints on available resources, priorities need to be made for areas to be considered for fuel reduction treatments. There are several innovative approaches underway to that develop guidelines for prioritizing treatment areas across landscapes (see Case Study 2). Priorities are often based on spatial assessments ofthings like wildland urban interface areas, sensitive watersheds, and sensitive species habitat.
Front Range Large-scale human disturbance in the mid-19th century (logging, grazing, burning), along with favorable climatic conditions, prompted synchronized tree regeneration events that occurred across the region (Kaufmann et al. 2003; Veblen et al. 2000; Ehle and Baker 2003). This resulted
15 - -- in a rather even age and size distribution of ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir trees in forests throughout the Front Range. As fire suppression in the 20th century limited mortality of trees in these recruitment pulses, current forests have much higher tree density than historical forests (Kaufmann et al. 2000; Veblen et al. 2000). Tree species composition has changed from dominance of shade-intolerant ponderosa pine trees to more shade-tolerate species such as Douglas-fir (Kaufmann et al. 2000). Forest structure has changed from a mosaic of dense forests, openings, and old growth, to a homogenous forest structure of dense trees of similar age and size classes, and higher tree canopy cover (Veblen and Lorenz 1991; Kaufmann et al. 2000; Huckaby et al. 2003). The change in forest structure and composition has led to a change in the fire regime such that forests which historically burned with mixed severity fires are now more likely to bum with infrequent, severe, and extensive crown fires (Brown et al. 1999; Kaufmann et al. 2000; Veblen et al. 2000; Huckaby et al. 2003). In areas were tree density is naturally high (north-facing slopes, higher elevation forests), the historical forest structure and thus the fire regime may not have changed significantly (Ehle and Baker 2003). However, on a landscape scale, the fire regime is likely altered as forests have become more dense and homogenous in nature (Kaufmann et al. 2000; Veblen et al. 2000; Huckaby et al. 2003). With continuous dense forest structure across the lan~scape and few openings to limit the spread of fire, crown fires are now less localized and more extensive (Huckaby et al. 2003). High tree density and homogenous forest structure across the landscapes has detrimental impacts on various ecological factors including, insect and disease outbreaks, hydrology, forage production, and biodiversity. Insect outbreaks, particularly from bark beetles, are likely to be more severe and widespread with more dense and homogenous forest structure. In dense forests, trees are generally weaker as a result of increased intra-specific competition, and thus are generally more susceptible to beetle attack (Hadley 1994; Negron and Popp 2004). Homogenous forest structure may als9 cause insect outbreaks to be more synchronous across the landscape (Schmid and Mata 1996; Kaufmam1 et al. 2000). Increased evapotranspiration and interception resultant from increased tree density can significantly reduce the water yield from watersheds, limiting supply for human use (Stednick 1996; Keane et al. 2002) and for species in riparian communities (Colorado State Forest Service 2004). Increased canopy cover limits opportunities for establishment and growth of plant species in the forest understory, which has negative impacts on both forage production and biodiversity (Keane et al. 2002). Habitat quality for species adapted to open forest structure, also degrades as tree density increases. In addition to impacting common animal species, this can have negative consequences for threatened and endangered species. For example, the Pawnee montane skipper, a threatened butterfly found in the Colorado Front Range, is adapted to forest openings and thus its population may be threatened by the current dense forest structure (Colorado State Forest Service 2004). The large and severe wildfires, which are likely to occur as a result of the current forest structure, also have negative consequences for hydrology, non-native species establishment, biodiversity, and community and firefighter safety relative to historic fires of mixed severity. Serve wildfires result in sudden and extreme reductions in vegetative cover, which leads to increased water runoff and soil erosion (DeBano et al. 1998). Such changes in hydrology can be severe enough to significantly reduce site fertility, reduce water quality, and degrade stream communities (DeBano 1991; Landsberg and Tiedemann 2000; Keane et al. 2002). Recovery of soil microbial communities can be slow following intense wildfire, which has impacts on the availability of soil nitrogen and carbon (Choromanska and DeLuca 2001). The barren post-fire
16 - - landscape also creates ample opportunities for establishment of non-native invasive plants (Hobbs and Huenneke 1992; Crawford et al. 2001; Keeley et al. 2003). The spread of non-native species and fire-induced damage to threatened and endangered species (Colorado State Forest Service 2004) can have .negative consequences for biodiversity (Keane et al. 2002). High intensity wildfires can result in excessive tree scorch which may lead to tree mortality (Harrington 1987) or increase the susceptibility of trees to attack by bark beetles (Wallin et al. 2003). Finally, large wildfires of high severity pose greater threats to community and fire fighter safety and are considerably more costly to control relative to low or mixed severity fires (Colorado State Forest Service 2004). According to coarse scale assessments, much of the ponderosa pine forests in the Front Range are considered to be outside of their historical range of variability in terms of fire disturbance and forest structure (Aplet and Wilmer 2003). Thus all areas would theoretically benefit from fuel treatments for purposes of restoration or fire hazard reduction. Given the vast areas in need of treatments, and the restraints on available resources, priorities need to be made for areas to be considered for fuel reduction treatments. With 1,274 communities in Colorado lying within one mile of fire-prone ponderosa pine forests, many suggest that mechanical fuel treatments should focus on reducing wildfire threats to communities in the wildland-urban interface and prescribed fire should be used in more remote areas (DellaSala and Frost 2001; Aplet and Wilmer 2003). High intensity wildfires in the wildland urban interface threaten people and personal property and pose greater risk to firefighter safety than wildland fires (Colorado State Forest Service 2004). According to the Colorado State Forest Service, 510,000 acres of fire prone forests fall in the wildland urban interface in the Front Range of Colorado and are thus a high priority for treatment (Front Range Fuel Treatment Partnership 2004). 70,000 ofthese acres are on non-federal lands. However, other resources such as sensitive watersheds and endangered species habitat may also benefit from restoration and fire hazard reduction treatments. Innovative efforts for prioritizing treatment areas based on the wide range of values at risk are underway in the southwest (see Case Study 2). Similar efforts certainly have the potential to be useful in the Front Range.
Black Hills The altered fire regime, along with other human disturbances, has led to dramatic changes in forest structure in the Black Hills since the end ofthe 19th century (Progulske 1974; McAdams 1995; Grafe and Horsted 2002). On a regional scale, ponderosa pine density is much higher today compared to conditions when Euro-American's first settled in the region (Progulske 1974; McAdams 1995; Grafe and Horsted 2002). While dense second growth forests would historically have been common, old-growth forests, openings, and frequently disturbed forests of low density also made up significant components of the landscape (Parrish et al. 1996). As a result of extensive logging, old-growth forests have been almost completely removed from the Black Hills landscape (Boldt and Van Deusen 1974). Early explorers accounted large tree-free areas presumably resultant from crown fires (Progulske 1974; Kime 1996; Grafe and Horsted 2002). Fewer of these areas exist today as a result of fire suppression (Progulske 1974; Grafe and Horsted 2002). Also because of fire suppression, the frequently disturbed stands with historically low tree density are now very dense stands (Progulske 1974; McAdams 1995; Grafe and Horsted 2002; USDA Forest Service 1994). There is also some evidence to suggest that current average tree size is lower than historic levels (Brown and Cook 2006).
17 - -
High tree density and homogenous forest structure across landscapes can have detrimental impacts on various ecological factors including, insect and disease outbreaks, hydrology, forage production, wildlife habitat and biodiversity. Insect outbreaks, particularly from mountain pine beetles, are common in the Black Hills, but are likely to be more severe and widespread with more dense and homogenous forest structure (Boldt and Van Deusen 1974; Schmid et al. 1994; USDA Forest Service 1994). In stands with high tree density, trees are generally weaker as a result of increased intra-specific competition, and thus are generally more susceptible to beetle attack (Schmid et al. 1994). Homogenous forest structure may also cause insect outbreaks to be more synchronous across the landscape (Lundquist and Negron 2000). Increased evapotranspiration and interception resultant from increased tree density can significantly reduce the water yield from watersheds, limiting supply for human use (Orr 1975; Alexander 1987) and for species in riparian communities (Knight 1994). Increased canopy cover limits opportunities for establishment and growth of plant species in the forest understory, which has negative impacts on both forage production and biodiversity (Alexander 1987; Severson and Uresk 1988; Uresk and Severson 1988). Many game species use a variety of forest habitats for different purposes, including openings and areas with dense forest cover (Knight 1994; Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). A more homogenous landscape creates less wildlife habitat. Populations of some species in the Black Hills have likely declined as a result of reduced habitat availability (Deperno et al. 2002). The large and severe wildfires, which are likely to occur as a result of the current forest structure, also have more extreme negative consequences for hydrology, non-native species establishment, biodiversity, and community and firefighter safety relative to historic fires of mixed severity. Serve wildfires result in sudden and extreme reductions in vegetative cover, which leads to increased water runoff and soil erosion (DeBano et al. 1998). Such changes in hydrology can be severe enough to significantly reduce site fertility, reduce water quality, and degrade stream communities (DeBano 1991; Landsberg and Tiedemann 2000; Keane et al. 2002). Recovery of soil microbial communities can be slow after severe wildfires, reducing availability of carbon and nitrogen (Choromanska and DeLuca 2001). The barren post-fire landscape also creates ample opportunities for establishment of non-native invasive plants (Hobbs and Huenneke 1992; Crawford et al. 2001; Keeley et al. 2003). The spread of non-native species and fire-induced damage to native species can have negative consequences for biodiversity (Keane et al. 2002). High intensity fire can cause excessive tree scorch which can cause tree mortality (Harrington 1987) or increase the susceptibility of such trees to attack from bark beetles (Wallin et al. 2003). Finally, large wildfires of high severity pose greater threats to community and fire fighter safety and are considerably more costly to control relative to low or mixed severity fires. To reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire, managers in the Black Hills estimate that 15,000 to 20,000 acres per year should be burned in the Black Hills using prescribed fire (USDA Forest Service 1994). Currently fewer acres are actually burned in a given year (USDA Forest Service 2004a). Up to 44,000 acres which are commercially thinned are in need of additional fuel treatment every year and up to 13,000 acres of natural fuels are in need of mechanical fuel treatment per year in the Black Hills (USDA Forest Service 1994). About 5,000 parcels of private land are intermingled within the Black Hills National Forest, making up 19% of the area within the forest boundary (USDA Forest Service 1994). Thus, wildfire entering the wildland urban interface poses significant challenges for managers.
18 -
Section III - Fuel Treatment Objectives
Monitoring Various resource management objectives can be met with restoration and fuel reduction treatments. However, monitoring of treatment effects is vital in order to determine if treatment and resource objectives .are met with any given treatment. In addition, monitoring oftreatment effects is needed to determine if treatments result in other unintended consequences. Thus, a monitoring protocol should be an integral part of any restoration or fuel reduction treatment. It is not uncommon for managers to feel overwhelmed by monitoring responsibilities or to feel there is no time for monitoring in the face ofother tasks. However, simple monitoring protocols can be developed that capture whether objectives are met without requiring large investments in time or money (see Case Study 1).
Prescribed fire objectives
Hazardous fuel reduction Surface fuels - Surface fuels include litter, duff, and woody debris that lie on the soil surface, as well as standing grasses, forbs, shrubs and small trees. Heaving loading ofthese fuels contributes to the potential for high intensity surface fire which can have adverse effects on soil through elimination ofprotective organic matter and soil organisms, and vegetation through heat damage to roots and stems. Thus, reduction ofhigh surface fuel loads or maintenance of low surface fuel loads is often an objective ofprescribed fires. Controlling growth of small shrubs and tree seedlings may be desirable because these can eventually develop into ladder fuels which can increase the potential for torching oftrees and crown fire spread. Thus, limiting tree regeneration or shrub sprouting may be another objective of prescribed fires. These objectives can be achieved with relatively low intensity prescribed fire in the southwest (Kallander 1969; Ffolliott et al. 1977; Sackett 1980; Harrington 1981; Bastian 2001), the Black Hills (Bosworth 1999; Wienk et al. 2004), and the Front Range (Massman et al. 2003). Ladder fuels - Ladder fuels include large woody debris, larger shrubs, small trees, and lower branches on large' trees, all ofwhich act to carry fire from the surface up into the canopy of trees (Brown et al. 2004; Agee and Skinner 2005). Occasional torching may be a valid treatment objective, but excessive torching can lead to active crown fire spread. Thus, reduction of ladder fuels may also be an objective of a prescribed fire treatment. However, it can be difficult to remove these fuels with prescribed fire without damaging larger trees. Depending on the size of the material, low to moderate intensity prescribed fire can be used to reduce ladder fuels through consumption of shrubs, small trees, and scorch of lower braches on large trees, which effectively increases the canopy to base height (Gaines et al. 1958; Biswell et al. 1973; Graham et al. 2004; Arno and Fiedler 2005): Prescribed fire with higher intensity has been successfully used to reduce density of smaller trees (John Lissoway pers. commun.; Orlando Romero pers. commun.) and shrubs (Harrington 1985) without excessive damage to large trees .. Canopy fuels - Canopy fuels include branches, leaves, and other material that occurs in the forest canopy. Reductions in canopy bulk density reduce the potential for active crown fire spread (Agee and Skinner 2005). Canopy fuels can be reduced by prescribed fires through reductions in density of larger trees, although this often requires very high fire intensity (Biswell et al. 1973; Bock and Bock 1984; Wyant et al. 1986; Harrington and Sackett 1990; Bastian 2001; Fule et al. 2004). Even repeated low intensity fires are generally not effective in significantly
19 - - reducing tree density (Covington et al. 2000). However, multiple low to moderate intensity fires burning as wildland fire use fires, have been effective in reducing tree density on the Gila National Forest (see Case Study 3). Use ofprescribed fire to reduce canopy fuels may be more appropriate in remote areas where lack of roads restricts use of mechanical equipment and risk of intense fire to structures is minimal (DellaSalla and Frost 2001; Allen et al. 2002; Fule et al. 2002b; Aplet and Wilmer 2003). Because ofthe proximity ofponderosa pine forests to populated areas, opportunities for use of high intensity prescribed fire to reduce canopy fuels in the southwest, the Front Range, and the Black Hills are limited. However, successful use of high intensity prescribed fire has been achieved in ponderosa pine forests in the southwest (Craig Goodell pers. commun.; Toby Richards pers. commun. Scott Spleiss pers. commun.). Such projects are generally successful if they are relatively small (John Lissoway pers. commun.; Orlando Romero pers. commun.).
Other treatment objectives Other than reduced potential for catastrophic fire, several other resource objectives can be met with fuel reduction treatments using prescribed fire. Regeneration o/ponderosa pine - Ponderosa pine is well-adapted to disturbance and typically needs contact with mineral soil in order to germinate (Haase 1986). Prescribed fire is an effective tool for removing forest floor fuels that may inhibit recruitment of ponderosa pine seedlings (Brown and Davis 1973; Graham et al. 2004). Ponderosa pine seedling establishment and survival is often higher in burned areas in the southwest (Ffolliott et al. 1977; Haase 1986; Sackett et al. 1996) and in the Black Hills (Bonnet et al. 2005). This may be partly because availability of soil water, nitrogen, and light is often higher in burned areas (Haase 1986; Ryan and Covington 1986). In southwestern Colorado, dense thickets of Gambel oak are thought to inhibit establishment of ponderosa pine seedlings. Thus, prescribed fire has been used to reduce oak density and encourage ponderosa pine regeneration (Harrington 1985). Reduced tree density - Prescribed fire can be used to reduce density of trees, particularly "dog hair" thickets, alleviating many ecological problems that are associated with dense forests stands. These problems include increased susceptibility to insects and disease outbreaks (Boldt and Van Deusen 1974; Covington et al. 1994; McCambridge and Stevens 1982; 1994; Hadley 1994; Dahms and Geils 1997; Negron and Popp 2004; Wallin et al 2004); stunted tree growth (Morris and Mowat 1958; Boldt and Van Deusen 1974; Sackett et al. 1996; Shepperd and Battaglia 2002; Skov et al. 2005), and reduced water yield from watersheds (Cooper 1961 b; Covington et al. 1994; Orr 1975; Alexander 1987; Dahms and Geils 1997). Less dense stands are also generally considered more aesthetically pleasing and create more opportunities for recreation (Myers 1974; Anderson et al. 1982; Shepperd et al. 1983; Alexander 1987). Forage production and understory diversity - Prescribed fire can be used in management of understory vegetation. Production and nutritional quality of grasses and shrubs, important for the diet of many wildlife species and domesticated animals, often increases after fire in ponderosa pine forest (Harris and Covington 1983; Sieg and Severson 1996; Sieg and Wright 1996). This is likely a result ofthe increased availability of nutrients and water (Covington and Sackett 1984; Ryan and Covington 1986), reduced canopy cover (Arnold 1950; Dahms and Geils 1997), and reductions in duff accumulations immediately after fire (Laughlin et al. 2004). Thus fire has often been used to improve grass quality and quantity southwest and Front Range (Biswell et al. 1973; Kristy Berggren pers. commun.) and to encourage shrub resprouting of mountain mahogany in the Front Range (Young and Baily 1975) and bur oak in the Black Hills
20 - -
(Sieg and Severson 1996). In southwestern Colorado and northern New Mexico, dense thickets ofGambel oak have been thought to suppress grass forage and thus prescribed fire has been used to reduce oak density (Harrington 1985). There is also some evidence to suggest that frequent, low intensity fires can maintain high levels ofbiodiversity of forest understory species (Laughlin et al. 2004,2005). However, in areas where the native soil seed bank has been depleted, seeding with native species following treatments may be needed to achieve high levels of native species diversity (Covington et al. 2000). Wildlife habitat improvement - Prescribed burning can be used to improve wildlife habitat. Many species utilize a variety offorest age and structure classes. More open stands are important for hunting and foraging (Larson et al. 1986; Severson and Rinne 1990; Deperno et al. 2002), while dense stands can provide thermal cover or protection from predators (Smith et al. 1997; Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). Old growth stands with large trees, snags, and downed logs are particularly important for cavity nesting birds (Reynolds et al. 1996; Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). Because different types of stands are used by the same or different species, overall heterogeneity in stand structure on the stand and landscape scale is important to sustain wildlife habitat. Prescribed fire may be used to maintain openings, to create openings, promote growth of large trees, to reduce the density of stands, and to achieve greater landscape heterogeneity (Brown and Davis 1973; Fuller 1991; Skov et al. 2005) which may ultimately create more suitable habitat for wildlife (Severson and Rinne 1990; Sieg and Severson 1996). In some cases, current ponderosa pine forests may provide critical habitat to species whose historical habitat has been lost. For example, pine-oak forests now provide important habitat for Mexican spotted owl that may have lost historical habitat as riparian forests in the southwest have declined throughout the 20th century (USDI Fish and Wildlife Service 1995). In such cases it may be desirable to limit certain prescribed fire activities to maintain pine-oak forests outside of historical conditions to provide habitat to a threatened species, at least in areas where the species is know to exist.
Mechanical treatment objectives
Thinning Hazardous fuel reduction Tree thinning trt::atments for hazardous fuel reduction generally focus on removal of ladder and canopy fuels. Reducing ladder fuels and the crown to base height can reduce the potential for torching (Brown et al. 2004; Agee and Skinner 2005). Reductions in canopy bulk density reduce the potential for active crown fire spread (Agee and Skinner 2005). Thinning operations that focus on reductions of hazardous fuels generally focus on removal of small diameter trees and retention of the largest and most fire resistant trees (Covington et al. 1997; DellaSalla and Frost 2001; Allen et al. 2002; Kauffman et al. 2003; Brown et al. 2004; Arno and Fiedler 2005). Surface fuels can actually increase after thinning treatments if tree tops and limbs from cut trees (slash or ~ctivity fuel) are left on the site (Brown and Davis 1973; Fuller 1991; Graham et al. 1999; Arno and Fiedler 2005). These fuels should be removed or altered either mechanically or with prescribed fire to assure the treatment results in lower fire hazard. Treatments that leave these fuels on site (i.e. lop and scatter) will not necessarily result in reduced fire severity of a wildfire (Cram et al. 2006).
Other treatment objectives
21 -
Although reduced potential for catastrophic fire is often the primary objective of thinning treatments, several other resource objectives can be met with fuel reduction treatments. Commercial revenue - Maximizing commercial revenue should not be the primary goal of forest fuel reduction and restoration treatments as this would mean cutting the largest, most fire resistant trees, which is contrary to wildfire risk reduction and other resource management objectives (Covington et al. 1997; Graham et al. 1999; Allen et al. 2002; Kauffman et al. 2003; Brown et al. 2004; Arno and Fiedler 2005). Silvicultural treatments that maximize commercial gain such as overstory removal and individual tree selection are generally not effective in reducing the potential for extreme fire behavior (Scott 1998; Graham et al. 1999; Martinson and Omi 2003; Stephens and Mogahhadas 2005a). However, commercial timber can be gained from treatments designed for restoration or hazardous fuel reduction. In some cases, larger, commercially viable trees need to be removed in order to create openings or to reduce canopy bulk density to levels that would significantly reduce the probability of active crown fire spread (Scott 1998; Lynch et al. 2000; Hollenstein et al. 2001; Arno and Fiedler 2005). The money made from commercially viable trees can then be used to offset the cost of removing non commercially viable trees and slash. Thinning stands - Reducing tree density, particularly "dog hair" thickets, alleviates many ecological problems that are associated with dense forests stands. Stands with high tree density are generally more susceptible to outbreaks of insects and disease. Thinning can reduce susceptibility of stands to Mountain pine beetle in the Black Hills (Boldt and Van Deusen 1974; McCambridge and Stevens 1982) and to other bark beetle and dwarf mistletoe outbreaks in the southwest (Heidmann 1968; Wilson and Tkacz 1994; Dahms and Giels 1997; Zausen et al. 2005). Spruce budworm, bark beetle, and dwarf mistletoe outbreaks may be reduced by thinning in the Front Range (Myers 1974; Hadley and Veblen 1993; Schmid and Mata 1996; Negron and Popp 2004). When many trees are removed, water yield from watersheds can increase (Cooper 1961 b; Covington et al. ·1994; Orr 1975; Alexander 1987; Dahms and Geils 1997). Thinned stands are also generally considered more aesthetically pleasing and create more opportunities for recreation (Myers 1974; Shepperd et al. 1983; Alexander 1987; Scott 1998). Wildlife habitat improvement - Many species of wildlife utilize a variety of forest age and structure classes that include openings, dense stands, and old gro"Wih (Severson and Rinne 1990; Deperno et al 2002; Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). Because different types of stands are used by the same or different species, overall heterogeneity in stand structure on the stand and landscape scale is important to sustain wildlife habitat. Thinning may be used to create openings, promote growth of large trees, or to reduce the density of stands to achieve greater landscape heterogeneity (Brown and Davis 1973; Fuller 1991; Skov et al. 2005) which may ultimately create more suitable habitat for wildlife (Severson and Rinne 1990; Sieg and Severson 1996). Restoration treatments involving thinning have shown the potential for creating habitat for certain species of birds and butterflies in the southwest (Germaine and Germaine 2002; Meyer and Sisk 2001). Reducing overstory cover can encourage production of understory grasses and shrubs, providing important forage for wildlife (Uresk and Severson 1988; 1989; Uresk et al. 2000). Thinning of smaller trees can release larger trees from competition and increase growth rates of residual trees, ultimately leading to stands with large trees and old-growth characteristics (Morris and Mowat 1958; Boldt and Van Deusen 1974; Sackett et al. 1996; Shepperd and Battaglia 2002; Skov et al. 2005). In some cases, current ponderosa pine forests may provide critical habitat to species whose historical habitat has been lost. For example, pine-oak forests now provide important habitat for Mexican spotted owl that may have lost historical habitat as
22 - - riparian forests in the southwest have declined throughout the 20th century (USDI Fish and Wildlife Service 1995). In such cases it may be desirable to limit thinning operations and maintain pine-oak forests outside ofhistorical conditions to provide habitat to a threatened species, at least in areas' where the species is know to exist.
Understory biomass reduction/alteration Hazardous fuel reduction Mechanical equipment can be used to reduce loading of surface and ladder fuels or alter their structure. Mechanical equipment can be used to move surface fuels off site or into piles which can later be burned (Windell and Bradshaw 2000). This results in reduced surface fuel loading and thus the potential for high intensity surface fires and torching. Mechanical equipment can also be used to alter fuel structure through mastication/mowing, chipping/grinding, and crushing of slash, brush or small trees (Windell and Bradshaw 2000; USDA Forest Service 2003c; Jones and Stokes 2004; Nakamura 2005). This equipment can target surface woody debris or standing shrubs and small trees. These treatments result in reduction of ladder fuels and increased compaction of surface fuel. Reduction of ladder fuels reduces the potential for torching. Increased compaction of surface fuel results in reduced potential for fire spread as oxygen supply is limited in compact fuel beds. Use of mechanical treatments to remove surface fuels is particularly useful when prescribed fire is not an option because of air quality restrictions, limited prescription windows, excessively high fuel loads, or high risk of escape fire in the wildland-urban interface (USDA Forest Service 2003c). Alternatively, mechanical alteration of understory fuels can be used prior to a broadcast burn to reduce ladder fuels and the potential for torching and thus fire-induced mortality of large trees (Chandler et al. 1983; Jerman et al. 2004).
Other treatment objectives Although reduced potential for catastrophic fire is often the primary objective of understory biomass reduction/removal treatments, several other resource objectives can be met with these treatments. Wood products - There is some potential to use non-merchantable material (small trees, tree tops, branches and shrubs) for bioenergy or other wood products such as particle board or paper (Harrison 1975; Graham et al. 1998; Hollenstein et al. 2001; Le Van-Green and Livingston 2003). With careful planning, development of a sustainable long-term biomass harvest cycle may be compatible with increasing forest fire resistance while maintaining ecological integrity (Hollenstein et al. 2001j. However, selling biomass for energy is often not economically feasible when other sources of energy are inexpensive, processing plants are scarce, and access to biomass is restricted (Stokes 1992). Chipped material can also be sold for garden mulch, but again the economical feasibility ofthis depends on available markets (USDA Forest Service 2003c). Understory production and diversity - In southwestern Colorado and northern New Mexico, dense thickets of Gambel oak can limit recruitment opportunities for ponderosa pine (Harrington 1985; John Lissoway pers. commun.). Gambel oak can also limit establishment opportunities for grasses and forbs, ultimately having negative impacts on understory diversity (Lauver et al. 1989). In areas where use of prescribed fire is tenuous or costly, mechanical
23 - - equipment can be used to reduce density of Gambel oak and encourage tree regeneration and growth of understory species (Craig Goodell pers. commun.). Wildlife habitat improvement - Dense thickets of shrubs can create impediments to wildlife movement and can limit forage production in the understory (Harper et al. 1985). Thinning dense thickets' of oak can improve wildlife habitat and create foraging opportunities for domesticated animals. Disturbing small Gambel oak can also stimulate sprouting, creating browse for deer and elk (Ffolliott 1997). Coarse woody fuel provides important habitat for a variety of organisms (Larson et al. 1986; Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). Thus, at times a few slash piles may be left on site to create wildlife habitat, particularly for small mammals (Jeff Thumm pers. commun.).
Biological treatment objectives
Control of Gambel oak Certain shrub species can grow to such heights and densities that they create ladder fuels and increase the possibility of torching in ponderosa pine systems (Harrington 1985). Dense shrub thickets can also limit understory forage production and ponderosa pine tree recruitment (Harington 1985; Lauver et al. 1989). This is especially true for dense thickets of Gambel oak that occur in southwest~rn Colorado and northern New Mexico. Gambel oak provides important forage and habitat for deer and elk (Kufeld 1983). However, when stands become old and overly dense, they are impenetrable by wildlife and provide poor browse quality (Kufeld 1983). There is potential to reduce loading of this fuel and improve wildlife habitat through introduction of grazing animals that thin dense stands. However, this method is not likely effective in older stands were shrubs are large enough such that grazers can't reach a majority ofthe foliage.
Chemical treatment objectives
Control of Gambel oak Certain shrub species can grow to such heights and densities that they create ladder fuels and increase the possibility of torching in ponderosa pine systems (Harrington 1985). Dense shrub thickets can also limit understory forage production and ponderosa pine tree recruitment (Harington 1985; Lauver et al. 1989). This is especially true for dense thickets of Gambel oak that occur in southwestern Colorado and northern New Mexico. Gambel oak provides important habitat for deer and elk (Kufeld 1983). However, when stands become old and overly dense, they are impenetrable by wildlife and provide poor browse quality (Kufeld 1983). In addition, they provide ladder fuels which can increase the potential for torching and crown fire initiation. There is potential to reduce loading of this fuel and improve wildlife habitat through herbicide application on the shrubs.
24 -- -
Section IV - Treatment techniques
Landscape perspective Even though most fuel treatments occur on a stand level, it is important to consider each treatment in a landscape context, especially since current wildfires dwarf the size of individual fuel treatment projects (Sisk et al. 2004). Since historical ponderosa pine forests were not homogenous in structure (Savage 1991), managers should strive to achieve greater landscape heterogeneity within the bounds of the historical range of variability in forest structure. This will ultimately provide more diverse habitat for a variety of wildlife species. In addition, it is not likely that resources will be available to treat all areas of a management unit that could benefit from treatment. Thus, landscape scale strategies are needed to assure that fuel treatments are designed in such a way to maximize benefits (See Case Study 2). Some have suggested implementing treatment's where risk to values such as structures or sensitive species habitat is highest. For example, treatments can be implemented in areas near communities, in watersheds used for municipal purposes, on soils where risk of wildfire induced erosion would be high, or in areas where fuels are excessively high. Once sensitive areas are protected, there may be more opportunities to utilize natural fire starts (wildland fire use) to reduce fuel loading (Scott Spleiss pers. commun.). Fuel treatments can also be placed strategically across the landscape to limit spread of wildfires. For example, randomly placed fuel treatments may not be effective in preventing wildfire spread (Bevers et al. 2004; Loehle 2004). Instead, fuel treatments arranged in patches that overlap in the heading fire direction may be most effective in reducing rate of spread and fire intensity, even in areas outside the treatment units (Finney 2001). Alternatively, if fuel treatments are small and scattered, their potential for reducing wildfire spread on a landscape scale is likely to be low (Brown et al. 2004). Several innovative approaches are underway to develop strategies for landscape scale fuel treatments that reduce wildfire hazard, protect values at risk, and restore ecosystem integrity (see Case Study 2).
Prescribed fire techniques
Differing levels of fire intensity may be desirable in a prescribed bum depending on the amount and type of fuel targeted for reduction, and different secondary resource objectives that may be considered (DeBano et al. 1998). Fire intensity can be controlled partly by environmental conditions in the prescription window. For example, higher fire intensity can be expected when fuel moisture is low, temperature is high, or winds are strong (Pyne et al. 1996). Fire intensity can also be controlled to/0ugh ignition techniques.
Low intensity fire prescribed fire Objectives - Low intensity prescribed fire is often sufficient for reducing loading of surface fuels including litter, duff and woody debris (Cooper 1961a; Davis et al. 1968; Biswell et al. 1973; Sackett 1980; Harrington 1981; Covington and Sackett 1984; Bastain 2001). Low intensity surface fires can also be used to consume tree seedlings, and thus slow development of ladder fuels (Harrington 1981; Arno and Harrington 1997; Arno and Fiedler 2005). Low intensity surface fire cal) be used to scorch the lower limbs of trees and saplings, ultimately
25 - - increasing crown base height and the potential for torching of trees (Gaines et al. 1958; Agee and Skinner 2005). Low intensity prescribed bums may also be used to reduce unusually large accumulations of surface fuels, for example slash loadings after a thinning operation. However the high fuel loading can lead to high fire intensity and undesirable fire effects. To prevent this, a broadcast burn can be used to reduce slash loading within a year of the thinning operation, when larger diameter fuels and duff are sufficiently wet to prevent high intensity fire but red needles attached to branches will facilitate fire spread (Biswell et al. 1973; Orozoco and Carrillo 1992-93). These fires generally consume only 1- and 10-hour fuels, limiting fire intensity and damage to trees (Biswell et al. 1973; Orozco and Carrillo 1992-93). Consumption of remaining slash and duff can be achieved with subsequent burns (Orozco and Carrillo 1992-93). Burning of red slash can occur in the summer (Orozco and Carrillo 1992-93). Alternatively the excess material can be put into piles which can then be burned. This generally carries less risk than broadcast burning, as piles can be burned in the winter when conditions are relatively benign. Burning interval - The burning cycle conducted by managers should be consistent with the historical range ofvariability in fire frequency ofa site to prevent excessive accumulation of surface fuels and establishment of shade-tolerant tree species (Arno and Fiedler 2005). Since surface fuels accumulate at relatively rapid rates in southwestern ponderosa pine forests (Ffolliott et al. 1977; Ffolliott and Guertin 1988), researchers have recommended burning every three to ten years, consistent with the historic range of variability in fire frequency (Allen et al. 1968; Biswell et al. 1973; Harrington and Sackett 1990; Sackett et al. 1996). In the Black Hills and the Front Range, where natural fire was historically less frequent, prescribed fire can be repeated with longer intervals between fires. In the Black Hills, it is recommended to conduct low intensity prescribed fire' every 15-25 years in the lower elevation forests (Bachelet et al. 2000). In the Front Range, it is recommended that low intensity prescribed fires be conducted with intervals of 3-20 years or more, consistent with the historical fire return interval (City of Boulder 1999; Kaufmann et al. 2005).
High intensity fire prescribed fire Objectives - Prescriptions with higher fire intensity may be appropriate in certain situations to meet speci{ic treatment or management objectives. For example high intensity prescribed fire may be used to thin dense stands oftrees (Morris and Mowat 1958; Lindenmuth 1960; Woodridge and Weaver 1965; Biswell et al. 1973; Harrington and Sackett 1990; Fule et al. 2002b; Fule et al. 2004) This type of treatment may be appropriate when use of mechanical equipment to thin trees is not feasible because of limited access or other restrictions (DellaSalla and Frost 2001; Fule et al. 2002b; Aplet and Wilmer 2003). However, in the southwest, the Front Range, and the Black Hills there are limited opportunities for used of high intensity prescribed fire because ofthe proximity of ponderosa pine forests to population centers. However, use of high intensity fire has b~en achieved successfully in limited areas in southwestern ponderosa pine forests (Craig Goodell pers. commun.; Scott Spleiss pers. commun.). Higher intensity fires are more easily conducted on smaller treatment units (Orlando Romero pers. commun.). Fires with high intensity may also be more effective in reducing dwarf mistletoe infection on trees in the southwest and Front Range (Alexander and Hawksworth 1976; Conklin and Armstrong 2001), and for stimulating shrub sprouting (Young and Baily 1975; Bock and Bock 1984; Harrington 1985; Sieg and Wright 1996). Higher intensity prescribed fire may also be needed to control dense thickets of gambel oak (Harrington 1985).
26 - -
Burning interval - Once reduced tree density is achieved with a fire of high intensity, repeated fires are generally conducted to keep surface fuel loading low, and thus can be oflow intensity. However, because prescribed fire is relatively ineffective in reducing canopy bulk density (Sackett et al. 1996; Fule et al. 2002b; Agee and Skinner 2005), multiple high to moderate intensity fires may be needed to sufficiently reduce tree density, before low intensity fires can be used exclusively (USDA Forest Service 2003c). If reduction of shrub fuels is the objective, prescribed burns should be conducted with greater frequency to keep up with shrub sprouting (Harrington and Sackett 1990). For gambel oak, control burns should be conducted every other year in the summer (Harrington 1985). Stimulation of new shrub sprouts may be desirable for wildlife forage. To stimulate shrub sprouting, prescribed burns generally need to be conducted in the dormant season, when carbohydrate reserves that are stored in the root should facilitate sprouting (Young and Baily 1975; Bock and Bock 1984; Harrington 1985; Sieg and Wright 1996).
Controlling fire intensity Prescription window - Fire intensity can be controlled by burning under certain conditions of fuels, weather, and topography. Iflower fire intensity is desired, burns can be conducted when relative humidity and fuel moisture contents are high and wind speeds are low. Burning on a steep slope will result in faster rate of spread and fire intensity compared to burning on a gentle slope. The more heavy fuel available to burn, the more likely a fire will burn with higher intensity. Fuel loading or arrangement can be altered through various mechanical means discussed in this publication. Less intensive actions can also be taken to alter fuel loading or structure. For example, managers on the Colorado State Forest often hand remove heavy fuels from a burn unit prior to burning to prevent high fire intensity around sensitive areas (i.e. old trees, fire lines, etc.) (Andy Perri pers. commun.). This occurs when they conduct low intensity burns in open ponderosa pine forests with grassy understories. It is also recommended to develop a wide prescription window as possible using a range ofvalues for relative humidity, wind, temperature, and fuel moisture to assure prescription windows can be met (Walker Thornton pers. commun.). Ignition techniques - Fire intensity can be controlled on the ground through use of various ignition techniques. Although many ignition techniques are available (Brown and Davis 1973; Chandler et al. 1983; Kilgore and Curtis 1987; Pyne et al. 1996), the most commonly used techniques are back fires and strip head fires. Back fires are set along a fuel break and allowed to spread against the wind or down a moderate slope (Brown and Davis 1973; Chandler et al. 1983; Kilgore and Curtis 1987; Pyne et al. 1996). Backing fires generally results in a slow moving fire with minimal intensity, but more complete combustion of fuels. This technique requires a strong and steady wind and is often not suitable for very steep slopes. Back fires are not often used exclusively as it takes a considerable amount oftime to burn a large unit using this method. It can be used to create black lines or burn portions of units where extreme fire behavior poses a threat. Head fires are set so that the flaming front spreads in the direction of the wind or slope (Brown and Davis 1973; Chandler et al. 1983). Typically, a broad firebreak is burned at the top ofthe unit before a head fire is set, or a natural firebreak can be used. Head fires tend to be very intense and burn with a rapid rate of spread. For more control, head fires can be set in portions (strips). For example, a head fire can be lit somewhere below the fire break at the top of the unit (in the middle of the unit) and allowed to burn to the fire break. This process can then be repeated until the entire unit is burned. Fire intensity can be controlled by the interval between
27 - - the strips. Shorter intervals result in faster moving fires and higher fire intensity (Craig Goodell pers. commun.). In the San Juan National Forest, intervals between strips range from 30 to 200 feet (Craig Goodell pers. commun.). In the Coconino National Forest, intervals between strips range from 60 to 160 feet (Walker Thornton pers. commun.). For hotter fires strip intervals of 10 to 20 feet would be used in Bandelier National Monument (John Lissoway pers. commun.). Different ignition techniques such as jackpot and spot firing can also be used to create higher fire intensity to thin stands (Orlando Romero pers. commun.). Higher fire intensity can also be achieved when aerial ignition devices are used as lots of fire can be placed on th~ ground in a short amount of time (Brown 1984). Such treatments can be implemented when fuel moisture is higher. This is advantageous as it lengthens the burning window and reduces the chances that fire will spread into adjacent units. Limited risk of escape fire also reduces the need for larger holding crews. Aerial ignition tends to be more cost effective when large units are burned. In the San Juan National Forest, aerial ignition devices are used when burn units are greater than 500 acres (Craig Goodell pers. commun.).
Tools used Burning andfuel break tools - Most prescribed fire treatments can be accomplished with hand crews using drip torches. For larger areas, aerial ignition devices may be used. These include delayed aerial ignition devices (DAID) or ping-pong ball system, and the helitorch or flying drip torch system. Aerial systems reduce the amount of time it takes for an area to burn out. The ping-pong ball system is particularly useful when a mosaic burn pattern is desirable. In northern Arizona, the gentle terrain allows for frequent use of ATV's with mounted drip torches. For building fuel breaks, hoses, foam, hand crews, or dozers can be used. Dozers are generally only needed to create fuel breaks if fuels are conducted in heavy timber and there value at risk near the treatment area . .In northern Arizona, smaller fuel breaks are constructed using an A TV dragging rubber tire filled with cement. This technique is more productive than hand crews yet doesn't cause as much damage as dozers (Lowell Kendall pers. commun.). However, this equipment is more easily used on gentle terrain. At least one engine and dozer may be needed on hand in case a fire goes out of its prescription. Engines and hand crews are also commonly used in the mop-up portion of the burn. It is imperative to have enough resources available to hold a fire should it go out of prescription (Lawrence Garcia pers. commun.). Models - The fire behavior prediction systems BEHAVE and NEXUS can be used to evaluate the effects of a.range of fuel, weather and topography characteristics on surface and crown fire behavior characteristics such as flame lengths, rate of spread, and fire intensity (Burgan and Rothermel 1984; Scott 1999). For larger fires and for planning purposes, FlamMap can be used to assess potential fire behavior characteristics over a landscape (Stratton 2004). However, nothing can substitute for practitioner experience in anticipating fire behavior based on local conditions of weather, fuels, and topography (Scott Wagner pers. commun.). The effects of the projected fire behavior on first order factors such as tree mortality, fuel consumption, smoke production, and soil heating can be evaluated using the First Order Fire Effects Model (FOFEM) (Reinhardt et al. 1997).The effects of projected fire behavior on second order factors such as forage production, wildlife habitat improvement, and wildfire mitigation should be evaluated based on monitoring results from previous treatments, expertise, or published literature. See Appendix B for a listing of models commonly used in fire and fuels management.
28 -
Thinning techniques
There are six general methods of thinning developed in silviculture. While these methods were originally developed for management of commercial timber, they can be adapted for restoration and to promote reduced crown fire potential. Use of traditional silvicultural methods is practical for fuels reduction because prescriptions can be communicated effectively across disciplines and agencies (Arno and Fiedler 2005). These methods include crown thinning or thinning from above, low thinning or thinning from below, selection thinning, free thinning, geometric thinning, and variable density thinning (Smith et al. 1997; Graham et al. 1999; Peterson et al. 2005). Incrown thinning, trees in the upper crown classes are targeted for removal to release trees in the same size class from competition and increase growth rates. In low thinning, trees in the lower crown classes are mostly targeted for removal, although some co dominant trees can be targeted depending on the intensity of the treatment. Free thinning is a highly variable treatment in which individual trees are targeted for removal for the purposes of releasing desirable trees from competition. In selection thinning, the most economically viable trees are removed to stimulate growth of suppressed and intermediate trees in the understory. In geometric thinning, tree removal is based on spacing or geometric pattern. Variable density thinning utilizes low thinning in combination with at least one of the other methods. While all these treatments result in reductions in canopy fuels, they will not all be effective in reducing the potential for torching and crown fire spread nor will they all be appropriate for restoring historical conditions (Graham et al. 1999; Peterson et al. 2005). Thinning treatments that use low, free, or variable density thinning methods are most likely to result in reduced potential for crown fire spread (Smith et al. 1997; Scott 1998; Graham et al. 1999; Peterson et al. 2005; Stephens and Moghaddas 2005a). These methods can effectively increase canopy base height, decrease canopy bulk density, and decrease canopy continuity, factors that are needed to reduce the potential for torching, crown fire initiation, and crown fire spread (Agee and Skinner 2005). Crown, selection, and geometric thilming may result in reductions in canopy bulk density and continuity, and thus can be effective in reducing the potential for active crown fire spread. However, often these reductions occur only in the upper levels of the canopy. Thus, crown fire spread may still be a factor in lower portions of the canopy. In addition, these treatments often are not effective in increasing canopy base height as smaller trees and lower limbs are not removed. Thus, the potential for torching is generally not reduced after treatments that utilize crown, selection, or geometric thinning teclmiques. Silvicultural teclmiques.that encouraged uneven-aged forest structure are more appropriate for creating conditions that mimic historical forest structure while being effective in reducing the potential for severe fire behavior (Stephens and Moghaddas 2005a). Depending on resource management objectives, uneven- or even-aged management techniques may be applied in a fuel reduction or restoration treatment. Uneven-aged management is more appropriate when general restoration is a goal, as ponderosa pine stands in the Black Hills, the Front Range and the southwest likely developed an uneven-aged structure historically. Even-aged cuts such as shelterwoods and seed tree methods are relatively easy to implement have been widely used in the Black Hills (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). Uneven aged management methods are a bit more complicated. Control of stocking in an uneven-aged system can be controlled using the BDQ method or Stand Density Index (SDI) (Alexander and Edminster 1977; Long 1995). In both methods, one needs to determine the range of diameters and the residual basal area desirable for a given stand. The techniques differ in their method for
29 - determining the distribution of trees in different size classes. In the BDQ method, the defined Q ratio determines the ratio of trees in one size class to another (Alexander and Edminster 1977). A higher Q ratio allows for higher tree density of smaller trees.
Developing thinning targets Pre-settlement forest structure Pre-Euro-American settlement forest structure provides a useful reference for thinning targets (Landers et al. 1999). Since pre-settlement ponderosa pine forests in the southwest, the Front Range and the Black Hills generally burned under low to mixed-severity fire regimes, restoring historical forest structure should reduce the potential for such forests burning in an infrequent crown fire regime (Brown et al. 2000; Brown et al. 2001a; Fule et al. 2001; Allen et al. 2002; Fiedler and Keegan 2003; Kaufmann et al. 2003; Wienk et al. 2004). In addition, restoring forests to their historical structure and reintroducing important ecological processes, such as fire, should promote viability of species that evolved with the historical forest conditions (Landers et al. 1999; Swetnam et al. 1999; Allen et al. 2002; Brown et al. 2004). To the extent possible, restoration treatments should attempt to restore the historical species composition, density, age and biomass distribution, and tree pattern (Moore et al. 1999; Allen et al. 2002; Kaufmann et al. 2003). Fire should then be reintroduced with intervals that mimic the historical fire regime (Moore et al. 1999; Allen et al. 2002) or naturally ignited fires should be allowed to burn under certain circumstances. There are limitations in use of historical data in that site specific information is often not available (Landers et al. 1999; Swetnam et al. 1999). However, general knowledge of the range of variability in historical forest structure and disturbance processes is often known (Landers et al. 1999). No one treatment prescription should be developed for a given region. Instead treatment prescriptions should be designed to create heterogeneity on the stand and landscape scale while remaining within the historical range of variability of forest structure. Southwest - When evidence of historical forest structure exists in a stand, such as pre settlement trees, downed logs, stumps, and snags, it is recommended that these be used to restore historical structure in southwestern ponderosa pine forests. All pre-settlement trees should be retained in a thinning operation. To restore the historical spatial pattern of trees, it has been recommended to retain one to three post-settlement trees around pre-settlement trees (Covington et al. 1997; Moore et al. 1999; Fule et al. 2002b). This should restore the clumping nature of trees in historical forest stands. More post-settlement trees can be retained if there is evidence to suggest that historical tree density was higher (Moore et al. 1999). It has also been recommended that post-settlement trees should also be retained around large downed logs, stumps, or snags, which provide evidence' as to where pre-settlement trees existed in the stand (Covington et al. 1997; Moore et al. 1999; Fule et al. 2002b). However, some managers have found it difficult to achieve a clumping pattern using these strict guidelines (Russ Copp pers. commun.). In addition, some have expressed concern over the aggressive approach to this treatment prescription (Allen et al. 2002). A more conservative approach in which the resultant basal areas is higher also results in substantially reduction in the potential for crown fire (Fule et al. 2002b). In addition, in other areas of the southwest where historical tree density may have been higher or where sensitive species currently exist, higher basal area targets may be more appropriate (Allen et al. 2002). It is imperative to consult with local experts to understand the historical conditions in a given treatment area.
30 - --
In many cases restoration options may be limited because of lack of old-growth trees and site specific historical data. In such cases information from similar forests on historical tree density, species composition, and other attributes can be used as a guide. For example, historical tree density in the northern Arizona ranged from 25 to 100 trees per acre and basal area varied from 34 to 125 ft2 per acre (Fule et al. 1997; Fule et al. 2002b; Moore et al. 2004). Trees would have been aggregated into 0.05-0.7 acre clumps of2-40 trees (White 1985; Covington et al. 1997). While historical forest structure likely varied throughout the southwest at local and landscape scales, these numbers provide a useful guide for restoration activities throughout the region. For example, target basal areas (40-70 ft2/acre) and tree density (35-110 trees/acre) for restoration treatments throughout the southwest often fall within the range of historical values found in northern Arizona (Edminster and Olsen 1996; Fiedler and Keegan 2003; Fight et al. 2004; Schumann 2004). To mimic historical forest structure as best possible, most treatment prescriptions involve re~aining the largest trees and leaving trees that form a clumping pattern. In areas where tree density would likely have been higher historically, such as on north aspects or in canyon bottoms, basal area targets may be higher. Treatment prescriptions should also be designed to mimic the historical uneven-aged structure. To aid in planning and communication and implementation of targets, the BDQ method, commonly used in uneven-aged management, can be used by adjusting the Q-ratio to result in a stand consistent with historical forest structure (Edminster and Olsen 1996). Front Range - Based on historical forest structure and composition of a forested areas in central Colorado, Kaufll1ann et al. (2003) recommends treatments that will create openings of various sizes such that they account for 15-25% of the landscape, reduce tree density such that canopy cover is 10-30% across the landscape, remove Douglas-fir trees except on north aspects, and retain old-growth trees. Managers in the Front Range often take these recommendations into account for fuel reduction projects (USDA Forest Service 2004b, 2004c). Patch cuts are used to create openings up to five acres in size. Between patch cuts, stands are thinned from below to reduce tree density by 20-30%. Managers focus on achieving stand structure with a variety of age classes and spatial patterns, as forests were historically uneven-aged in structure. The BDQ method with adjustable Q-ratios can be used to develop targets for numbers of trees in various age or size classes (Brown et al. 2001a). To promote development of old growth conditions large and old-growth trees should be retained (Brown et al. 2001a; Kaufmann et al. 2003; USDA Forest Service 2004b, 2004c). Managers can use the guide developed by Huckaby et al. (2003) to identify old ponderosa pine trees. Black Hills - The historical forest structure of the Black Hills included dense stands that may have been conducive to crown fire spread (Graves 1899; Progulske 1974; Parrish et al. 1996). Given that crown fires were a component of the historical fire regime (Brown and Sieg 1996; Shinneman and Baker 1997), complete forest restoration is not realistic for the Black Hills as it would conflict with objectives of reducing catastrophic wildfires. However some aspects of historical forest structure can be used as a guide in fuel reduction projects. Restoring some aspects of historical forest structure and processes is likely to benefit native species that evolved with historical forest conditions. The current condition of the Black Hills has deviated from historic conditions in a variety of ways. The landscape of the Black Hills is likely more homogonous today than it was historically (Progulske 1974; Parrish et al. 1996), thus thinning treatments can be designed to make the landscape more heterogeneous with stands of varying age structures interspersed throughout the landscape. In some instances, particularly in the drier portions of the Black Hills and in meadows, tree density is higher than it was historically
31 - -
(Progulske 1974; McAdams 1995; Parrish et al. 1996). In such cases restoring historical forest structure would be consistent with reduced potential for large crown fires. Across the Black Hills, average tree size is lower today than in was historically (McAdams 1995; Brown and Cook 2006). Recruitment of large trees would not only reduce the potential for catastrophic wildfire, as large trees are more resistant to fire-induced mortality and have higher crown base heights, but it would be beneficial to many wildlife species that prefer large diameter trees and snags. This is particularly important fGr the northern goshawk, the brown creeper, the northern flying squirrel and many woodpecker species (Shepperd and Battaglia 2002; USDA Forest Service 2003b).
Other treatment targets Full restoration treatments may not be feasible or desirable in certain situations. For example, restoration of historical forest structure may not be consistent with objectives of reducing wildfire potential, aesthetics, or protecting sensitive species. The treatment objectives of fuel reduction activities can be altered to benefit other resources such as wildlife, aesthetics, insect and disease control, and commercial gain, without sacrificing reduced potential for catastrophic wildfire. Wildlife habitat - Thinning targets can be altered to create openings and retain patches of dense trees, which may be desirable to create forage or cover for wildlife species, particularly those that use a variety of habitat types (Larson et al. 1986; Alexander 1987; Fiedler and Cully 1995; Reynolds et al. 1996; Deperno et al. 2002). In the southwestern states, leaving clumps of three or more trees with interlocking crowns is particularly important for Abert's squirrel (Larson et al. 1986). This allows for protection from weather and alternate escape routes (Patton 1975). In a restoration treatment, this clumping tree pattern would often be consistent with historical conditions. Fuel reduction and restoration treatment objectives are generally altered in Mexican Spotted Owl Protected Activity Centers as this species generally prefers more densely forested stands (Kaufman 1995). Northern goshawks tend to utilize a variety ofvegetation structural stages, all of which should be maintained across a landscape to assure long-term survival of goshawk populations (Reynolds et al. 1992). In nest areas, stocking levels should be relatively high (BA = 120-140 ft2/acre). Insects and disease - Heavier thinning targets may be justified when there are severe infestations of dwarf mi'stletoe (Heidmann 1968; Myers 1974) or mountain pine beetle (McCambridge and Stevens 1982). The Flagstaff Fire Department treats mistletoe infested stands by completely removing small pockets of infestation (less than V4 acre) or by isolating larger patches with a barrier of 50 feet to reduce further spread (Farnsworth and Summerfelt 2001). Pockets of stands that are infested with mountain pine beetle or ips beetles are often targeted for heavier thinning treatments (Scott Spleiss pers. commun.; USDA Forest Service 2003a). Commercial revenue - Commercial gain can be achieved in a thin-from-below operation if some dominant and co-dominant trees are harvested (Scott 1996, 1998; Hollenstein et al. 2001; Arno and Fiedler 2005): This may be necessary if revenue is needed to pay for the cost of removing non-commercially viable fuels (i.e. surface fuels, small diameter trees). However, commercial gain should not be the primary objective of fuel reduction treatments. Treatments designed to maximize commercial revenue (i.e. overstory removal) will not be conducive to reducing severe wildfire risk in ponderosa pine forests. Water yield - Trees and shrubs generally transpire more water than forbs and grasses. Thus reducing the dominance of woody species in systems can increase the amount of water that is yielded from a waters,hed, increasing water availability for human use and riparian
32 - - communities (Stednick 1996). Heavy cutting of trees in patches or strips has been shown to increase water yield from watersheds (Orr 1975; Ffolliott and Malchus 2001). Under some circumstances, these treatments may also be conducive to wildland fire risk reduction. Understory effects - Regeneration of tree and shrub species in the forest understory may be a concern for land managers when the canopy is opened up. This can be particularly important for shrub species like Gambel oak and Rocky Mountain juniper. These species act as ladder fuels, increasing fire ha~ard in open ponderosa pine stands. When the canopy is opened in a thinning operation, these species can be encouraged to grow. To prevent this, some managers maintain higher basal area targets in a thinning operation. For example, foresters in the Colorado State Forest often used higher residual stocking levels (100 stems per acre) when there are many shrubs in the understory and lower stocking levels (50 stems per acre) when there is mostly grass in the understory (Kristy Berggren and Andy Perry, pers. commun.). Wildland urban interface - The level oftree removal may be more intensive in the wildland-urban interface, where community protection is the primary objective. Definitions of wildland urban interface vary, but it generally extends to at least 200 feet from structures and in some cases up to 1.5 miles from communities (Gatewood and Summerfelt 2005). In this region, particularly in areas within 200 feet of structures, thinning treatments may be designed to reduce the potential for crown fire spread and to create "defensible space" that provide firefighters safe conditions for battling oncoming wildfires (Nowicki 2001; Gatewood and Summerfelt 2005). Treatment recommendations in the defensible zone include removal of ladder fuels and thinning such that tree canopy spacing is a minimum often feet (Dennis 1999; Nowicki 2001).
Harvest methods Trees can be cut, processed, and removed from the forest using whole-tree harvesting, cut-to-Iength systems, or cable yarding (Hartsough et al. 1998; Fight et al. 1999; Windell and Bradshaw 2000). Processing involves removing the limbs and tops oftrees and cutting them into merchantable lengths. With each method, a variety of equipment can be used to cut and remove the trees (Holtzscher and Lanford 1997). In whole-tree harvesting, trees are felled and immediately removed to a landing or roadside where they are processed. In cut-to-Iength systems, trees are felled and processed at the stump, before being transported to a landing. In cable yarding, trees are felled and removed via a skyline cable system. In this case, trees can be processed at the stump or at the landing. This treatment is generally reserved for steep slopes, where use of other types of mechanical equipment is restricted (Fiedler et al. 1999). Smaller trees can be removed using masticators. These machines grind trees to the stump and disperse the resulting small material on the site.
Tools used Equipment Felling of trees of many different sizes can be accomplished effectively using chainsaws (Larson and Hallman 1980; Scott 1998; Arno and Fiedler 2005; Stephens and Moghaddas 2005b). Use of chainsaws is advantageous as it requires very little capital investment in equipment and they can be used in areas that are not accessible to mechanical equipment (i.e. steep slopes, remote areas). However, use of hand crews in thinning operations is inherently dangerous as crews are directly exposed to the hazards of logging. In addition, hand crews are generally not as productive as mechanical equipment making use of mechanical equipment economically justified, especially on large treatment units (Wang et al. 1998). Thus, for large
33 - - treatments accessible by. road and in operable topography, mechanical equipment may be appropriate. The Flagstaff Fire Department also likes using hand crews because it allows onlookers to approach crews conducting projects in the wildland urban interface (Paul Summerfelt pers. commun.). This provides an excellent outreach and education opportunity. Trees can be harvested mechanically using feller-bunchers or tree shears. Feller-bunchers use grapple arms to hold the tree while it is cut. A gathering device makes it possible to cut and collect several trees before they are dropped in a bunch. Tree shears cut trees and carry them one at a time. The feller-buncher cutting head can be attached to an articulating arm or boom, or directly to a prime mover. A boom allows the machine to reach into stands to collect trees and minimizes travel over the site. Smaller machines, appropriate for small diameter material, are generally more maneuverable and apply less ground pressure than large machines. Use of larger machines is generally only appropriate if large diameter material is being removed. F eller bunchers with self-leveling cabs have the capacity to work on steeper slopes. Several models are available from a variety of companies (see Appendix A). It is important to contact the manufacturer to assure a head is matched with an appropriate prime mover that will provide sufficient power. Windell and Bradshaw (2000) and Jones and Stokes (2004) provide a summary of commonly used feller-bunchers and tree shears their specifications. Trees can also be felled using tree harvesters (Larson and Hallman 1980). Use of these machines is advantageous because they can also delimb, sort and buck logs. A disadvantage of harvesters is that they often have limited maneuverability and thus can cause considerable residual stem damage. Also, they are generally not effective in delimbing trees with large branches (Hartsough et al. 1998) and often are not as productive as other methods (Holtzscher and Lanford 1997; Wang et al. 1998). Several manufacturers make tree harvester heads and prime movers (Appendix A). Again, it is important to research machines before they are purchased to assure the chosen tree harvester head can be used on a given prime mover. Windell and Bradshaw (2000) and Jones and Stokes (2004) provide a summary of commonly used tree harvesters and their specifications. Tree processing involves removal of limbs, tree tops and cutting logs to merchantable lengths. This can be accomplished at the stump or at the landing. Tree processing can be accomplished effectively using hand crews with chain saws. Alternatively processing of trees can be achieved using a mechanized processor. Using chainsaws is advantageous as it requires little capital investment, however it posses a safety risk for hand crews and it is often not as productive as mechanical processors (Holtzscher and Lanford 1997). Mechanized equipment may be more appropriate for treating large areas. Numerous companies manufacture tree processors and delimbers designed for trees of all sizes (Appendix A). Some mastication equipment can also be used to remove small trees. This equipment is generally only feasible for trees less than 10 inches in diameter. Commonly used mastication equipment is described in the understory biomass reduction/alteration techniques section and listed in Appendix A. Once trees are felled they need to be removed to a landing. This can be achieved through skidding, forwarding, or cable yarding. In skidding, logs or whole trees are dragged on the ground in bunches by a tractor or crawler. Skid trails should be strategically placed to minimize soil disturbance over the site. If disturbance is a concern logs can be removed with a forwarder. Forwarders pick up material and carry it to a landing. Forwarders can generally carry much more material than skidders, thus fewer passes across the site are needed. In cable yarding, trees are removed via a skyline cable system. Because this treatment is expensive, it is generally reserved
34 - - for removing commercial material from steep slopes or where use ofmechanical equipment is restricted (Fiedler et al. 1999). At the landing trees are loaded onto trucks or trailers using log loaders. Several companies manufacture log removal and loading systems (Appendix A). Several agencies in northern Arizona use a windrow piling method developed on the Mormon Lake Ranger District of the Coconino National Forest (Farnsworth and Summerfelt 2001). In this method, trees are directionally felled into a windrow and are then pushed into large piles by a dozer during a single pass. Few ruts are made because the dozer is not constantly spinning and turning. This results in fewer piles per acre that can be ignited under snowier and wetter conditions than traditional hand piles. This method is also more productive than hand piling.
Models The fire and fuels extension of the forest vegetation simulator (FFE-FVS) can be used to asses the impacts ofvarious stand treatment options on potential fire behavior and fire effects (Reinhardt and Crookston 2003). This mdoel can also be used to assess how different fuels, including trees, snags, and coarse woody debris, will change over time. FSVeg can also be used to assess how many trees need to be removed from a site (Russ Truman pers. commun.). Both of these models require reliable stand exam data. When this is not available, the nearest neighbor analysis in INFORMS can be used to asses stand condition (Russ Copp pers. commun.). FMAPlus can then be used to assess potential fire behavior of a treated stand (Russ Truman pers. commun.). Models commonly used in fuel treatment projects are listed in Appendix B.
Understory biomass reduction/alteration techniques
Piling and burning One of the most'common methods of reducing or altering understory biomass is moving surface fuels into piles which are then individually burned. This mostly occurs with logging slash that is generated from thinning operations (Brown and Davis 1973; Fuller 1991). Relative to a broadcast burn, the potential for an escape fire is low and the prescription window is wide as piles can be kept dry by covering with plastic and burned when environmental conditions are likely to prevent fire spread (fall or winter). The piles should be strategically placed such that fire induced damage to trees is minimized (Allen et al. 1968). Depending on the amount of fuel, the average size of fuel, the size of the treatment unit, and the accessibility of the site, fuels can be piled by hand or with a machine. Use ofmechanical equipment is generally more appropriate for large units with large diameter material (USDA Forest Service 1973; Windell and Bradshaw 2000; Jones and Stokes 2004). Hand crews are also more appropriate when accessibility limits use ofmechanical equipment, either because oflack of roads or steep slopes (USDA Forest Service 1973; Windell and Bradshaw 2000; Jones and Stokes 2004). The Flagstaff Fire Department has developed very specific guidelines for constructing slash piles to be burned in the wildland urban interface (Flagstaff Fire Department, 2005). According to their best management practices guide, piles should be between five and eight feet in height and diameter. Smaller branches and tree tops should be on the bottom, followed by larger branches in the middle of the pile, and small diameter material on the top. Piles should be in the shape of a cone. In the wildland urban interface, hand piles can be burned any time of year,
35 - - but larger machine piles are typically burned when there is some snow on the ground (Paul Summerfelt pers. commun.).
Removal Understory biomass in the form of slash can also be removed from a site mechanically. Merchantable trees can be removed from a site before removing tree tops and limbs via whole tree-skidding or cable yarding (Scott 1996; Windell and Bradshaw 2000). Tree tops and limbs can then be removed from harvested trees at a landing rather than on site. This material can then be piled and burned at the landing. This may be appropriate when burning on site is not feasible. If markets are available, this material can also be used for bioenergy or chipped and used for garden mulch (Stokes 1992; Graham et al. 1998; Hollenstein et al. 2001; LeVan-Green and Livingston 2003; Jones 'and Stokes 2004). Ifmaterial is to be sold commercially it is generally more cost efficient to collect material at a landing (Stokes 1992).
Chipping, mowing, and mastication In mowing or mastication treatments, mechanical equipment is used to cut understory biomass into small chunks or chips which are then left on site (USDA FOREST SERVICE 2003c; Windell and Bradshaw 2000; Jones and Stokes 2004). Depending on the type of equipment used, slash or standing small trees and shrubs can be targeted in mastication/mowing treatments (Jones and Stokes 2004). Generally mechanical equipment is effective for material averaging 10 inches in diameter however some equipment can be used on material up to 18 inches in diameter (Jones and Stokes 2004). The residual material can vary in size depending on the equipment used. Slower moving equipment with rapidly rotating blades will result in smaller material (Busse et al. 2005). Mastication and mowing can be used to prepare sites for broadcast burns, as the treatments result in reduced ladder fuels (Bradley et al. 2003; Busse et al. 2005; Stephens and Moghaddas 2005b). Crushing understory biomass involves driving over material with heavy machinery t9 compact understory fuels (Windell and Bradshaw 2000; Jones and Stokes 2004). This is generally useful for treatment of slash or very brittle brush species but is not effective in treating tree seedlings and saplings. Crushing generally results in reduced fuel bed depth and increased compactness.
Tools used Mechanical equipment used for mastication/mowing or piling of material involves a prime mover and a head or cutting/moving attachment (Ryans and Cromier 1994; Jones and Stokes 2004). The prime mover is the power source and the carrier. A head can be attached directly to the prime mover or can be attached via an articulating arm or boom. Cutting heads can be classified according to the orientation of the main power shaft, vertical or horizontal, and the type of cutter, fixed or free swinging/pivitol. Other heads include those that are designed to move material such a grapples, forks and rakes. Some brush-cutting equipment is built for specific carriers while other equipment is sold as attachments for multi-purpose carriers (Appendix A). It is important to check with the manufacturer to assure a given head will be appropriate for a prime mover. There are advantages and disadvantages of using vertical vs. horizontal cutting heads and fixed versus free-swinging cutters for changing the fuel structure of small trees, brush, and slash. These trade offs should be carefully evaluated before a decision is made on which type of equipment is to be used. Windell and Bradsaw (2000) and Jones and Stokes (2004) provide a
36 - - summary of common equipment used in fuel reduction treatments. In addition, companies that manufacture this equipment are listed in Appendix A. Prime movers generally include excavators, all surface vehicles, or four-wheel drive tractors. Prime movers can have rubber tires, rubber track, steel tracks, or can be stationary. It is important that the prime mover have enough power capability to move effectively at slow speeds while supplying adequate hydraulic or mechanical power to the cutting head (Ryans and Cromier 1994; McKenzie 1991). A machine with a single engine with a transmission is generally desirable over a machine with an auxiliary engine because it minimizes the weight and size of the machine (McKenzie 1991). Tracked machines are advantageous because they apply less ground pressure than wheeled machines and they can operate on steeper slopes (McKenzie 1991; Windell and Bradshaw 2000). However, excessive soil compaction does not seem to be a problem on many of the soil types in the Front Range and the southwest (Kristy Berggren pers. commun.; Melissa Sava'ge pers. commun.). Tracked machines are also generally more maneuverable than wheeled machines. However, wheeled machines are generally less expensive and more productive (Windell and Bradsahw 2000). Vertical shaft cutting heads are generally lighter, and thus require less energy than horizontal shaft cutting heads (Ryans and Cromier 1994; Windell and Bradshaw 2000). Use of vertical shaft cutting heads requires a large safety zone because debris tends to be ejected in all directions. Thus, vertical shaft cutting heads may not be appropriate for use near structures (McKenzie 1991; Windell and Bradshaw 2000). Vertical shaft cutting heads can be attached to an articulating arm on an excavator which allows the machine to process material standing higher off the ground than horizontal-shaft machines. Standing trees can be ground to stumps with little damage to desirable trees and vegetation, The articulating arm also minimizes travel across the site (Windell and Bradshaw 2000). Mulching can be improved on vertical shaft cutters by reducing the size of rock guards on the shaft or increasing the rotating speed. Horizontal shaft cutting heads provide more mulching action than vertical shaft cutting heads but are also more sensitive to wear and the blades often require frequent sharpening. Horizontal shaft cutting,heads are generally attached to a tracked machine or tractor. These can be used to walk over brush, small trees, and slash. In general front-mounted machine attachments provide better operator visibility than rear-mounted attachments (McKenzie 1991; Ryans and Cromier 1994). Horizontal shaft cutting heads are able to cut material close to the ground and are generally more maneuverable than vertical shaft cutting heads (McKenzie 1991). Fixed cutters are typically circular saws and discs with fixed teeth (Ryans and Cromier 1994). Free swinging cutters consist of pivoted knives mounted on a central disc or bar. Fixed cutters generally have less mulching capability, but improved mulching often comes at a cost of higher energy requirem{(nts and possibly lower productivity (McKenzie 1991). Fixed cutters often require frequent sharpening as the blades easily dull with frequent contact with rocks and soil. Damage to knives is less likely with free swinging cutters. Fixed cutters don't throw material as far than free swinging cutters (McKenzie 1991). Pruning, piling of slash, and lop and scattering of slash can be accomplished effectively with hand crews (USDA Forest Service 1973; Jones and Stokes 2004). Hand pruning saws and loppers can be used to prune the lower branches oftrees. No more than 50% ofthe live crown should be removed. Chainsaws can be used to cut material (USDA Forest Service 1973; Jones and Stokes 2004). Biomass can then be placed into piles or scattered across the site by hand. If material is to be burned, it is important to place piles and scattered material away from residual trees. When lots of large diameter material is on site, piling by hand can be difficult. In such
37 -- cases piling can be accomplished with a tractor, loader, or dozer with rake or grapple attachments (Appendix A). Grapples attached to excavators can also be used if tree spacing limits movement of other equipment (Cammack 1978). With certain types of equipment considerable amounts of dirt can be piled with the debris making the piles more difficult to burn (Cammack 1978). Less dirt tends to accumulate in piles when material can be picked up with rakes rather than dragged across the ground. Understory biomass and slash can also be fed into chippers. Material can be processed at a landing where the chips can be loaded into trucks or trailers. This is appropriate if chips are to be sold as garden mulch or bioenergy product. Alternatively chips can be processed on site and distributed over the area. Whole tree chippers or hand fed chippers, made by a variety of manufacturers, are generally used at landings (Appendix A). Machines like mountain goats that chips standing material can be used on site.
Biological treatments techniques
Gambel oak treatment methods and tools Goats have been used successfully to control dominance of Gambel oak in dense shrub thickets in southwestern Colorado (Davis et al. 1975). Goats are generally better to use than cattle or sheep because they will preferentially browse on Gambel oak. Use of 1,300 to 1,800 goat days per hectare in the summer for two seasons was successful in defoliating oak (Riggs and Urness 1989). Since Gambel oak has low carbohydrate reserves in June and August, this may be the best time to graze g~ats (Davis et al. 1975). Generally, more than one grazing season is needed to successfully control oak sprouts (Davis et al. 1975; Riggs and Urness 1989). Alternatively, goats can be used following some other treatment such as mechanical removal, herbicides or prescribed fire (Davis et al. 1975). This is particUlarly useful when much of the oak foliage is tall and not within reach of goats. However, long-term data on the effectiveness of biological management of gam bel oak is not available.
Chemical treatment techniques
Gambel oak treatment method and tools Several herbicides have been tested on Gambel oak to control dominance in dense shrub thickets in southwestern Colorado, including Silvex (2,4,5-T and 2,4,5-TP), Picloram, and glyphosate and glyphosate:triclopyr-picloram combinations (Lauver et al. 1989). Foliar application of Tordon has also been effective (Marquiss 1973). Foliar applications are effective while soil treatments an~ generally not effective (Van Epps 1974). However, treatment results tend to be highly variable year to year (Harper et al. 1985). Applications in July may be effective as this is when plants begin storage of carbohydrates and herbicides may be more easily transported through the plants (Kufeld 1983). Long-term data on the effectiveness of chemical treatments on managing gambel oak is not available.
38 _. -
Section V - Fuel Treatment Requirements
Prescribed fire
Effectiveness Prescribed fires have been shown to be effective in reducing the severity of subsequent wildfires in ponderosa pine forests. Computer simulation studies have shown that prescribed fire is effective in mitigating wildfire severity (Fernandes and Bothelo 2003). In empirical studies, prescribed fire has been shown to reduce the overall size of an area burned by wildfire, fire severity, and the ecological effects of subsequent wildfires in ponderosa pine forests in Arizona, California, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico and Washington (Kallander 1969; Wage I and Eakle 1979; Choromanska and DeLuca 2001; Pollet and Omi 2002; Omi et al. 2005). Prescribed fires can even be effective in reducing wildfire severity under extreme conditions (Martinson et al. 2003; Finney et al. 2005), although this may not always be the case (Martinson et al. 2003). Ultimately this may reduce the costs associated with suppressing and rehabilitating wildfires (Snider et al. 2003). While small prescribed fires (less than 100 acres) are generally easier to implement and carry less risk of escaped fires, larger prescribed fires (greater than 800 acres) are more likely to be effective in reducing the potential for wildfire spread (Martinson et al. 2003; Finney et al. 2005). Larger prescribed bums also generally cost less on a per acre basis (Wood 1988; Cleaves et al. 2000). Smaller fires can be more costly than large fires because, even though the required crew sizes are smaller, the same level of holding equipment (engines, dozers) are needed (Wood 1988). In addition, the proportion of fireline created per bum area, a factor that can have significant effects of prescribed fire cost, is higher for smaller fires (Wood 1988). The cost of burning can be reduced substantially if fire line construction is minimized by using natural or existing fuel breaks. For example, extensive costs were accrued on a prescribed fire in the Prescott National Forest when fuel breaks had to be constructed by hand crews working over the course of several weeks (Scott Spleiss pers. commun.). Distance traveled to a bum site can also substantially increase the cost of prescribed fire treatments. If units are far away, care should be taken to assure that the prescribed bum can be completed in the fewest number of days possible to minimize travel time and costs. This can be achieved by increasing the size of crews or using aerial ignition. Use of prescribed fires requires sustained management as prescribed fires tend to loose their effectiveness as they age (Finney et al. 2005). Prescribed fires were most effective in reducing subsequent wildfire severity when they were less than four years old in Arizona and New Mexico (Ffolliott and Guertin 1988; Finney et al. 2005; Omi et al. 2005) and less than six years old in Colorado (Omi et al. 2005). Prescribed fires are less likely to be effective in reducing fuel loads ifth~y are conducted when fuels are too wet (Fernandes and Betelho 2003). In some cases, multiple prescribed fires or fires of high intensity may be justified to reduce fuel loads to levels that would significantly impact wildfire behavior (Harrington and Sackett 1990; Windell and Bradshaw 2000; Fule et al. 2002b; Fule et al. 2004).
Needs The number of personnel required on a prescribed fire is highly variable and dependent on the complexity of the bum, the level of experience of the personnel, and the perception of risk among other things. For. example, only 10-12 people may be needed on 100-500 acre bums if
39 - they are experienced, the treatment area is far away from sensitive areas, and the fuels and weather do not promote a complex bum (Walker Thornton pers. commun.). However, up to 100 people may be needed for smaller but complex treatment units that are near communities at risk (Gary Kemp pers. commun.). Most prescribed bums are done with an engine either on site or on call. It is imperative to have enough resources on hand to hold a fire should it go out of prescription (Lawrence Garcia pers. commun.). Costs of prescribed burning can be highly variable depending on the complexity ofthe bum, the experience oqhe crews, the level of risk to communities, and the amount oftime needed for burn preparation. Cost ofprescribed burning can be kept low if agencies utilize volunteer fire departments (Kristy Berrgren pers. commun.). Maximizing the number of acres burned in a given day and using natural or preexisting fuel breaks can greatly decrease the cost per unit area of a prescribed fire (Wood 1988). Wildland fire use fires tend to be much less expensive than management ignited prescribed fires (see Case Study 3). Since wildland fire use fires tend to bum over multiple days or weeks, more acres are generally burned in a given event relative to a prescribed fire. As the number of acres burned increases in an event, the cost per acre generally decrease~ as the same level of resources are used. Wildland fire use fires also don't generally require construction of fuel breaks, which can be costly.
Limitations One benefit ofusing prescribed fire to reduce fuel loading is that it generally requires little capital investment in equipment, which can keep costs low relative to mechanical treatments. However, it often requires more personnel with advanced training. Use of prescribed fire is generally not restricted by accessibility or terrain. It often becomes more difficult to use prescribed fire closer to human population centers as the potential for damage to structures increases. Near communities, it also becomes a greater challenge to manage smoke, which is subject to regulation under federal, state, and local laws (Mahaffey and Miller 1994; USDA Forest Service 2003c). Use of prescribed fire is also restricted to time periods when weather conditions are relatively benign and where fuel loadings are not excessively high. Burning under extremely dry, warm, or windy conditions, or in areas with high fuel loading increases the likelihood of extreme fire behavior and escape fires which can pose threats to fire fighter safety, structures, and watersheds (USDA Forest Service 2003c). Prescribed fire may also be restricted in sensitive wildlife habitat. Prescription windows - Prior to conducting a prescribed fire, managers need to define a set of objectives (i.e. percent tree mortality or percent black) and fire behavior characteristics (i.e. flame length, rate of spread) that will allow objectives to be met without severe risk of escape fire or extreme fire behavior. Managers then define a bum prescription window, or a range ofvalues for relative humidity, temperature, wind, and slope that will result in the desired fire behavior. It can be very difficult to complete prescribed bums if a prescription window is very narrow and there are few days during a burning season when a prescription window can be met. This is particularly problematic in areas with high fuel loading which often have narrower prescription windows (Scott Spleiss pers. commun.). Managers have learned to overcome these obstacles by designing their prescription windows to be as wide as possible. The general approach of managers on the San Juan National Forest for example is to start with desired fire behavior (from BEHAVE output) and work backwards to find a wide range ofweather parameters that will allow the desired fire behavior (Craig Goodell pers. commun.). Another
40 - approach is to burn as many acres as possible when you are in prescription. For example, managers in northern Arizona sometimes will burn piles concurrent with a broadcast burn if prescription windows are very narrow (Russ Truman pers. commun.). Widening the prescription window can also be achieved by expanding the burning season into summer and winter (Scott Wagner pers. commun.). Another technique is to break a treatment area into sections to be burned with several smaller prescribed fires and use topography dictate prescriptions. For example, while one portion of a unit (i.e. south aspect) may not be in prescription, another portion of the unit (i.e. north aspect) may be safe to burn. Burning a unit in pieces decreases the likelihood that a bum will be cancelled because the conditions do not fit in the prescription window. Under this system, managers on the Santa Fe National Forest were typically able to burn up to 1250-100 acre burns in a year with minimum cost (Orlando Romero pers. commun.). Wildlife habitat - While it is recognized that high severity wildfire poses a serious threat to threatened and endangered species habitat, there is also some concern for the impacts of fuel treatments on these species (Ganey et al. 1999). Thus, there are often restrictions on use of some treatments in sensitive wildlife habitat. In some forests of the southwest, burning is restricted in Mexican spotted owl Protected Activity Centers (PAC's) during the breeding season (March August) (Kaufman 1995). Although, it has been documented that owls or their habitat are not negatively impacted by low intensity fires that do not significantly alter forest structure (USDA Forests Service 1995) thus, wildland fire use fires are allowed to burn in MSO PACs under certain conditions in the Gila National Forest (see Case Study 3) (Toby Richards pers. commun.). When burning does occur, measures generally have to be made to save important wildlife habitat components (i.e. large snags, logs, oaks) from prescribed burning. This can take a considerable amount of time and thus cost of treatment in PAC's can be very expensive (Russ Truman pers. commun.). In the southwest, the Front Range and the Black I-Iills, burning is restricted in nesting areas and post-fledging family areas of northern goshawk during the breeding season (March - September) (Reynolds et al. 1992). High fuel loading - Prescribed fire should be restricted in areas where risks of high fire intensity having adverse impacts on ecological values is high because of high fuel loads (DellaSalla and Frost 2001; Fule et al. 2002c; USDA Forest Service 2003c). This is especially problematic when high fuel loads are in or adjacent to sensitive resources. In such cases, prescribed fire may be implemented only after significant amounts of fuel are removed or rearranged mechanically (Allen et al. 2002). Ladder fuels in the form of small trees and shrubs can be removed in thinning operations. Surface fuels can be piled and burned if loading is particularly high. In northern Arizona, managers may be comfortable using prescribed fire alone if tree canopy cover is less than 50% and fuel bed depth is less than one foot (Walker Thornton and Russ Truman pers. commun.). In the wildland urban interface in Colorado, managers will only conduct broadcast burns in grassy fuels with very low loading of heavy fuels (Kristy Berggren pers. commun.). In more remote areas, prescribed fire or wildland fire use may not be restricted by fuel loading (Toby Richards pers. commun.). On small treatment areas burning can be used successfully to thin trees in dense stands (Orlando Romero pers. commun.; John Lissoway pers. commun.). Wildland urban interface - The risk of escaped prescribed fire threatening structures is higher when burning in the wildland urban interface (WUI). This often makes managers uncomfortable conducting prescribed burns in these areas. However, management agencies around Flagstaff, Arizona have been very successful in conducting both broadcast and pile burns
41 - -- near structures (Gatewood and Summerfelt 2005). This is typically done only in fuels that promote very low intensity fire. Thus almost all treatments require some mechanical treatment prior to burning. A typical treatment in ponderosa pine forests near Flagstaff include a thinning operation, followed by pile burning, and then broadcast burning, all completed within a year (Paul Summerfelt pers. commun.). The perception of risk ofthe managers is low because the fire practitioners have a great deal of experience and they are burning in relatively uniform fuels. They also may have higher crews on projects compared to treatment areas further away from structures. Having an extensive outreach and public education program seems to be successful in gaining public support for mechanical fuel treatments and prescribed fire in the wildland urban interface. Smoke - The public's dissatisfaction with smoke can be a significant limitation to prescribed burning. In addition, the amount of smoke that can be produced in a day is regulated by state and federal agencies. Both of these factors limit the number of acres that can be burned in a given day. Recognizing this limitation, managers from different agencies in northern Arizona coordinate burn plans to assure that certain areas don't receive excessive smoke impacts in any given period of time (Paul Summerfelt pers. commun.). Several agencies also have extensive public outreach programs aimed to contend with the public dissatisfaction with smoke. Both the City of Flagstaff and the Forest Service have extensive calling lists of people in the community to contact several days before they are to conduct a prescribed fire. If people are forewarned, they have found that there is generally tolerance for smoke for one day but people begin to complain after two or three days (Farnsworth and Summerfelt 2001). The potential for adequate smoke dispersal can limit burning in certain seasons. For example, in the fall in northern Arizona high pressure systems and cold nights can cause smoke to linger in valley bottoms (Walker Thornon pers. commun.). Having good signs for prescribed burns on highways for example can help decrease the public concern for smoke (Lowell Kendall pers. commun.). Once a burning program begins, it is important to maintain it year after year so that the public gets used to the idea of burning and smoke. If there is a break in burning, public education programs often need to start over from scratch (Orlando Romero pers. commun.). Puhlic and agency resistance - The general public and agency representatives can often be resistant to use of prescribed fire because of the perceived risk to structures in urban areas and other resources such as wildlife habitat. This resistance can create substantial barriers to use of prescribed fire. Managers are more successful in gaining acceptance for prescribed fire when they actively engage the public and agency officials in the entire fuel treatment or restoration process, from planning ~o implementation (Lawrence Garcia pers. commun.; Orlando Romero pers. commun.). While collaborative projects often require a lot of investment in time in building relationships, these efforts generally payoff in reducing overall resistance to prescribed fire, and ultimately resulting in treatments with better results (Melissa Savage pers. commun.). Another im portant aspect of acceptance of prescribed fire is the level of trust that is given to those implementing and planning treatments. Trust in agency officials is generally not given easily, and often only develops over time and with a substantial commitment to creating and sustaining relationships with the public and other resource managers. It is also imperative to maintain trust by following through with what you initially tend to accomplish in a treatment, as once trust is lost it is extremely difficult to regain it (Craig Goodell pers. commun.).
42 - -
Thinning
Effectiveness Different thinning treatments are not equally effective in reducing the potential for wildfire spread and intensity. Treatments that focus on removal of smaller trees will be more effective than treatments that focus on over story removal (Scott 1998; Graham et al. 1999; Martinson and Omi 2003; Arno and Fiedler 2005). Although some commercial gain can be made from fuel reduction treatments without sacrificing the objective of reducing fire hazard (Scott 1998; Arno and Fiedler 2005). Thinning treatments are generally not effective in reducing fire potential ifthe resultant slash is not subsequently treated (Graham et al. 1999; Martinson et al. 2003; Peterson et al. 2005). When slash is burned under severe conditions it can result in very extreme fire behavior, even in heavily thinned stands (Martinson et al. 2003). Salvage logging.is often justified after severe wildfires to prevent accumulations of down fuels and subsequent wildfire hazard (McIver and Starr 2001). This practice may not be necessary in the southwest. Studying a chronosequence of wildfires 3-27 years old in ponderosa pine forests in northern Arizona, Passovoy and Fule (2006) found that levels of coarse woody debris in all fires fell within ranges recommended for wildlife habitat (Brown et al. 2003) and did not pose significant threats to fire hazard. While salvage logging may be justified for other reasons (i.e. safety, insect outbreaks) (McIver and Starr 2001) it is not likely to impact future fire behavior. However, post-fire fuel flammability is likely to vary by environmental factors such as elevation, aspect, etc., factors that were not considered in this study. The effects of salvage logging on potential fire behavior should be weighted against other ecological factors as it may have adverse impacts on soil erosion, wildlife habitat, and non-native species establishment (McIver and Starr 2001).
Needs The costs associated with thinning treatments are a function of the type of equipment used, the size of the area, and the type and amount of material removed (Wang et al. 1998; Fight et al. 1999; Fight et al. 2003). Thinning stands with hand crews requires little capital investment in equipment, which can minimize costs. However, it often requires more personnel with advanced training. While mechanical equipment is expensive, the capital investment in the equipment may eventually be recuperated with the increased production rate relative to hand crews. It is generally better to use mechanical equipment in large, accessible treatment areas where increased production rates can have a substantial impact on costs of treatment (Bolding et al. 2003; Arno and Fiedler 2005). The costs of the treatment may be reduced somewhat if some commercially viable trees are harvested. The potential for commercial gain is a function the proportion of material removed that is sawlog versus product other than logs (POL) (Lynch 2001). In southwestern Colorado, restoration treatments that removed no more than 60% ofPOL resulted in a net profit (Lynch 2001). Other factors can substantially impact cost of treatments. If material removed needs to be transported long distances, this can limit any commercial gain (Lynch 2001). In addition, using inappropriate equipment or treating areas during adverse weather conditions can substantially increase the costs of treatment (Lynch 2001).
Limitations Access and topography- Mechanical equipment is much more restricted by access and terrain than hand crews. Use of mechanical equipment is generally not feasible on slopes greater
43 - - than 35% (Fight et al. 1999). Some machines can be used on steeper slopes, but such machines generally require greater capital investment which can be recuperated only if substantial financial gain is obtained from treatments (Fight et al. 1999; Fight et al. 2003). Mechanical treatments are also restricted by access. Costs of treatments increase as distance to roads increases, yet constructing new roads to facilitate mechanical fuel treatments may have detrimental effects on other ecological resources (Hartsough et al. 1998; Trombulak and Frissell 2000; DellaSalla and Frost 2001). Even on gentle slopes, road access or landings should be downhill of the treatment area. Skidding or forwarding logs uphill can result in substantial soil erosion and treatment costs (Fight et al. 2003). Ecological effects - Mechanical equipment can have adverse impacts on ecological attributes and this may restrict their use. Mechanical equipment can result in significant soil compaction which can ultimately have negative impacts on water holding capacity and plant growth (Greacean and Sands 1980). Some agencies have specific guidelines on the amount of allowable soil compaction from a logging operation (USDA Forest Service 1997). However, not all soil types are subject to significant levels of soil compaction. For example, soils with high levels of silt and low levels of organic matter are generally highly susceptible to compaction, while dry, sandy, or clay soils are less susceptible to compaction (Lull 1959; Greacean and Sands 1980). Surface rock fragments and the presence of slash or litter can also minimize compaction (Poff 1996; Minard 2003). This may be why many ofthe soil types in the southwest and the Front Range do not seem to be prone to compaction (Kristy Bergrenn pers. commun.; Melissa Savage pers. commun.). However, the potential for soil compaction can vary substantially even across a site, and thus ifmay be desirable to design prescriptions to limit soil compaction. It is often preferred to use mechanical equipment in the winter when the soil is frozen as this will minimize the surface pressure exerted on the soil (Windell and Bradshaw 2000). Minimizing the number of passes a machine travels over a site will also reduce the potential for severe soil compaction (Lull 1959; Greacean and Sands 1980). Trees should be felled such that skidding distances are minimized (Minard 2003). Use of equipment that distributes weight over larger areas, such as tracked machines, will also minimize soil compaction (Lull 1959). Economics - Limitation of funds is often a significant restriction to mechanical treatments. The cost of treatments can be offset if some commercially viable material is removed. The ability to utilize merchantable material from fuel reduction treatments is often limited by availability ofprocessing plants and consistent long-term markets (Hollenstein et al. 2001; Le Van-Green and Livingston 2003; USDA Forest Service 2003c). Whether or not a profit is made from a restoration or fuel reduction treatment is also a function of the proportion of material removed that is sawlog versus product other than logs (POL). In southwestern Colorado treatments have been profitable when a maximum of 60% of the material removed from a site is POL (Lynch 2001). Wildlife restrictions - The Mexican spotted owls is a federally threatened species that occurs throughout the southwest as is a significant focus of management efforts. They typically breed from March - August in mixed conifer forests and pine-oak forests. Because they are thought to have a low tolerance for heat, they generally prefer closed canopy forests with old growth characteristics such as large trees, snags and down woody material. The primary threats to the long-term survival ofthe species are listed as timber harvest, particularly even-aged harvest methods, and catastrophic wildfire. Yet, the objectives of thinning to reduce wildfire hazard need to be balanyed against the need to maintain critical owl habitat, which consists of rather dense forests stands. Guidelines developed in the Mexican spotted owl recovery plan
44 - -
(USDI Fish and Wildlife Service 1995) are aimed at maintaining Mexican spotted owl habitat and protecting it from catastrophic wildfire. Since Mexican spotted owls generally do not nest in pure ponderosa pine stands, the restrictions on fuel treatments in owl habitat generally apply to pine forests that have a gambel oak component and in steep canyons (slope >40%). The guidelines suggest restricting thinning operations in 100 acre areas surrounding identified nest sites. In addition in 600 acre areas surrounding designated nest sites, or protected activity centers (PACs), thinning should be limited to trees that are less than 9 inches dbh and restricted to the non-breeding season (Sept. - Feb.). Pine forests with a significant gambel oak component are considered "restricted habitat" and carry their own restrictions. In these areas thinning should be limited to trees less than 24 inches dbh and thinning of trees between 18 inches and 24 inches dbh should be minimal. Large oak trees should be protected and canopy cover should be at least 40%. Treatment of stands directly adjacent to PAC's or critical habitat should be a priority in order to minimize the chance that a catastrophic wildfire will spread into owl habitat. Silvicultural activities can also be restricted in post fledging-family area (PF A) of northern goshawks during the breeding season (March to Sept.) (Reynolds et al. 1992). Public and agency resistance - The general public and agency representatives can often be resistant to use of mechanical treatments because of the perceived effects on other resources such as wildlife habitat and aesthetics. This resistance can create substantial barriers to use of mechanical treatments. Managers are more successful in gaining acceptance for mechanical treatments when they actively engage the public and agency officials in the entire fuel treatment or restoration process, from planning to implementation (Lawrence Garcia pers. commun.; Orlando Romero pers. c,ommun.). While collaborative projects often require a lot of investment in time in building relationships and achieving consensus, these efforts generally payoff in reducing overall resistance to fuel treatments, and ultimately resulting in treatments with better results (Melissa Savage pers. commun.). Another important aspect of acceptance of mechanical treatments is the level of trust that is given to those implementing and planning treatments. Trust in agency officials is generally not given easily, and often only develops over time and with a substantial commitment to creating and sustaining relationships with the public and other resource managers. It is also imperative to maintain trust by following through with what you initially intend to accomplish in a treatment, as once trust is lost it is extremely difficult to regain it (Craig Goodell pers. commun.).
Understory biomass removal/alteration
Effectiveness Treatments that alter the structure of understory biomass, including mastication and chipping treatments, can be effective in reducing the risk of torching, crown fire, and tree mortality by reducing the height ofladder fuels (Jerman et al. 2004). However, if these altered fuels are left on site, they may not be effective in reducing the negative ecological effects associated with wildfire. Chipped and masticated fuels in particular can burn completely with relatively high intensity during prescribed fires and this has been shown to have adverse effects on soil properties and tree mortality (Bradley et al. 2003; Busse et al. 2005; Stephens and Moghaddas 2005b). Fuels that are scattered or crushed have not shown to have the same effect, perhaps because these fuels generally do not burn completely during a prescribed fire (Jerman et al. 2004). On the Prescott National Forest, they have found that burning masticated fuels with
45 - -
equipment and burning of slash piles can be restricted in post fledging-family area (PF A) of northern goshawks during the breeding season (March to Sept.) (Reynolds et al. 1992). This can impact fuel treatment activities in the southwest (Jeff Thumm pers. commun.), the Front Range (USDA Forest Service 2003a), and the Black Hills (USDA Forest Service 2001). Fuel treatment activities are also restricted in drainages in the southwest to preserve wildlife habitat (Lowell Kendall pers. commun.). Smoke - The public's dissatisfaction with smoke can be a significant limitation to prescribed burning. In addition, the amount of smoke that can be produced in a day is regulated by state and federal ageJ;1cies. While burning slash piles don't create as much smoke as broadcast bums, the amount of smoke produced in a given day from pile bums need to be considered, particularly in the wildland urban interface. For example, the city of Flagstaff Fire Department recommends burning no more than 150 piles per day no more than once a week in a neighborshed, which they define as an area within a neighborhood or geographic area in the city where smoke will accumulate and remain visible for at least four hours following the bum (Flagstaff Fire Department 2005).
Biological treatments
Gambel oak treatment effectiveness, needs, and limitations Grazing goats have been shown to be effective in controlling dense thickets of Gambel oak when the appropriate numbers of goats are used in the right season for multiple years (Davis et al. 1975; Harper et al. 1985; Riggs and Urness 1989). However, there are no studies that have examined the impact of goat grazing on subsequent potential for severe wildfire spread. Wildlife use oftreated areas has improved for up to ten years following treatment (Kufeld 1983). Ability to use goats is dependent on the availability of goats which is generally highly variable by location. Cost of using goats can be considerably high in the absence of a viable market (Lauver et al. 1989).
Chemical treatments
Gambel oak treatment effectiveness, needs, and limitations Various herbicides have been shown to be effective in controlling dense thickets of Gambel oak when the timing and application of the herbicide is done appropriately (Lauver et al. 1989; Marquiss 1973; Van Epps 1974). However, there are no studies that have examined the impact of herbicide treatments on subsequent potential for severe wildfire spread. One study has shown that spraying treatments are not very effective in improving habitat for elk and deer (Kufeld 1983). Costs of using herbicide can be considerable (Lauver et al. 1989). Use of herbicides is generally only recommended for small treatment areas (Harper et al. 1985). Certain herbicides, like Picloram, have very high soil retention times and thus may have adverse ecological effects (Kufeld 1983). Tordon has been effective in controlling Gambel oak, but it also sterilizes the soil (Kufeld 1983).
47 - -
Section VI - Fuel Treatment Impacts and Mitigation
Monitoring
Monitoring of treatment effects is vital to assure that restoration and fuel reduction treatments do not result in significant undesirable effects. When undesirable effects do occur, the monitoring data allows one to document the effect and adapt the treatment prescription so that the undesirable effect does not occur in future treatments. Thus, monitoring of treatment effects should be an integral part of any restoration or fuel reduction treatment. It is not uncommon for managers to get bogged' down with monitoring requirements or to neglect monitoring because of restraints on time and resources. However, simple monitoring protocols can be developed that capture important information without significant investments in time or resources (see Case Study 1).
Prescribed fire
Tree mortality Protection of old growth trees is often a priority of restoration treatments because they provide important wildlife habitat, opportunities for large snag recruitment, greater genetic diversity, and enhance the aesthetics of a stand. Under certain conditions, smoldering duff can damage tree roots or can ultimately cause high levels of mortality of old growth trees (Lindenmuth 1960; Sackett et al. 1996; Graham et al. 2004) as high amounts of fine roots are found in duff and litter layers (Swezy and Agee 1991). Some researchers have suggested mechanical removal of duff around the base of old-growth tress before prescribed fire is initiated (Covington et al. 1997) while others have achieved appropriate mortality levels without duff removal (Davis et al. 1968; Harrington 1981; Swezy and Agee 1991; Bastain 2001). Burning stands with high loading of surface fuels can also result in excessive tree scorch which can result in tree mortality (Wyant et al. 1986; Harrington 1987; Swenzy and Agee 1991; Jerman et al. 2004; Weink et al. 2004) or leave trees more susceptible to bark beetle attack (Wallin et al. 2003). Altering the timing of prescribed fire (Swezy and Agee 1991; Kaufmann and Covington 2001), changing fuel structure prior to burning (Jerman et al. 2004) or burning under conditions that promote very low fire intensity (Fiedler et al. 1996; Sackett et al. 1996; Harrington 1987) may be enough to limit tree mortality from scorch. In recent years many managers in northern Arizona have noticed increased mortality of residual ponderosa pine trees following thinning and burning treatments (Scott Spleiss and Russ Truman pers. commun.). This has been seen even though behavior from prescribed fires is not noticeably different from fires in the past that have not resulted in excessive mortality of trees. It is possible that tree mortality is increasing as a result of the added stress of the extensive drought that has occurred in the southwest for the past few years (Breshears et al. 2005). Use of prescribed fire can be tenuous when there is high density of saplings. Under safe burning conditions, it is often difficult to achieve fire behavior under dense forest canopies hot enough to kill tree seedfings and saplings (Sackett et al. 1996; Agee and Skinner 2005). However, burning under more extreme conditions can lead to undesirable ecological effects. If smaller trees ignite, they can act as ladder fuels, carrying fire into the canopy of larger trees. In order to successful kill tree saplings without killing desirable overstory trees, multiple low intensity prescribed fires may be needed (Fule et al. 2002b). However, there seems to be some
48 - - potential to use high intensity prescribed fire as a management tool in the southwest (Harrington and Sackett 1990; Fule et al. 2004). High intensity prescribed fires have been successfully used on the Prescott National Forest and the San Juan National Forest to reduce tree density (Craig Goodell and Scott Spleiss pers. commun.). However this requires large expanses of forest far away from communities. Alternatively, mechanical thinning of trees may be needed before prescribed fire can be used safely (Covington et al. 1997; Fule et al. 2001; Graham et al. 2004; Wallin et al. 2004). This may be particularly important in areas where human and ecological communities are particularly vulnerable to high intensity wildfire (Allen et al. 2002; Aplet and Wilmer 2003; Wienk et al. 2004).
Non-native species Broadcast burns' and burning of slash piles create establishment opportunities for non native plant species that are adapted to disturbance (Keane et al. 2002; Arno and Fiedler 2005). Increased cover or frequency of non-native plants has been found following prescribed fires in the southwest (Korb et al. 2004; Fule et al. 2005) and in the Black Hills (Wienk et al. 2004). Non-native plants are more likely to successfully establish after fires that burn with high intensity (Crawford et al. 2001; Griffis et al. 2001; Keeley et al. 2003; Hunter et al. in press). On a broad scale this includes wildfires, but on a small scale it can also include slash pile burns (Korb et al. 2004; Wolfson et al. 2005). Non-native plant establishment is particularly problematic after burning of large machine piles (Craig Goodell and Paul Summerfelt pers. commun.). Amending burned slash pile scars with native plant seeds and soil inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and other important soil biota may decrease the probability of non native plant establishment through increasing cover of competitive native species (Korb et al. 2004). However, native seed mixes should be used with caution as they have been know to be contaminated with seeds of non-native plants (Springer et al. 2001; Hunter et al. in press). Establishment of non-native plants after prescribed fires is also likely to be a function of the history of human di~turbance at a site. There tend to be more non-native species in the seed bank in areas that have historically experienced intense human disturbance relative to very remote and relatively pristine areas (Korb et al. 2005). This may explain why non-native species have not been found in high numbers after fires in remote wilderness areas in northern Arizona (Laughlin et al. 2004, 2005). When prescribed fire is used in sites with a significant disturbance history, the sites should be carefully monitored for non-native species and new populations should be quickly controlled before they become large. One could even consider adding seeds of native grasses, shrubs and forbs after treatments to increase native species diversity and reduce the potential for spread pf non-native species (Covington et al. 2000). If possible, seeds of native species should be collected from local populations (Covington et al. 2000). It is also important to monitor burned areas for non-native species in the first couple years after the burns so that newly established populations can be quickly controlled before they spread. This is practiced by the Jefferson County Open Space with some success (Kristy Berggren pers. commun.). In areas where non-native plant populations are present, care can be taken to avoid these areas for briefings, fuel breaks, or landings to limit spread ofthe species (Scott Spleiss pers. commun.).
Risks to structures Use ofprescribed fire is tenuous for fuel treatment in or near the wildland urban interface where risk ofescape fire harming structures is high. An example of a worst case scenario is the Cerro Grande Fire, a prescribed fire that escaped and burned over 200 structures in Los Alamos,
49 - -
New Mexico (National Interagency Fire Center 2000). However, management agencies around Flagstaff, Arizona have been very successful in conducting broadcast bums near structures in the wildland urban interface to remove accumulations of litter and duff (Gatewood and Summerfelt 2005). This is accomplished partly because of availability of very experienced fire crews, but also because of an extensive public outreach and education program conducted by the city of Flagstaff Fire Department (Paul Summerfelt pers. commun.). They use pile bums or very low intensity broadcast bums to remove accumulated fuel. Use of higher intensity broadcast bums to consume larger amounts of fuel or reduce tree density is tenuous in the wildland urban interface. It is generally more appropriate to use mechanical equipment or hand crews to thin trees and remove/alter understory biomass prior to broadcast or pile burns.
Air quality Smoke produced from prescribed fires is problematic because it can pose threats to human health and can impair visibility and thus is regulated under state and federal laws. In addition, the public's negative reaction to smoke can threaten prescribed fire programs. When fuels burn efficiently, the smoke is composed mostly of carbon dioxide and water (Mahaffey and Miller 1994; DeBano et al. 1998). While these are greenhouse gasses, they are not considered pollutants and thus are not regulated as such. Fuels bum efficiently when most ofthe fuel is combusted in the flaming stage (Mahaffey and Miller 1994; DeBano et al. 1998). When fuels are combusted during a smoldering fire, fuels bum inefficiently, more smoke is produced and other pollutants such as particulates, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen and sulfur oxides are released with the smoke. These pollutants are subject to regulation under federal and state laws. Problems associated with smoke can be alleviated by burning under conditions that result in more efficient combustion of fuels (Mahaffey and Miller 1994; DeBano et al. 1998). The efficiency ofcombustion can be controlled partly by ignition techniques. For example, head fires. tend to be fast moving while back fires move much more slowly. Little fuel is burned in the flaming front of a fast moving head fire compared to a slow moving backing fire. More fuels tend to bum in a smoldering manner after the flaming front has passed in a heading fire. Thus, head fires tend to produce more smoke and pollutants than back fires. Fuel structure also determines the amount of smoke and pollutants produced in a fire (Mahaffey and Miller 1994). Fine fuels tend to burn efficiently while large diameter fuels tend to smolder. Tightly packed fuels tend to smolder more than loosely packed fuels. Dry fuels tend to bum more completely than wet fuels. The amount of smoke produced from a fire can be controlled by burning when certain fuels are available to bum and others are not. For example, if fine fuels are the primary target for fuel reduction, a fire can be set when fuel moisture of the fine fuels is low and fuel moisture ofthe large fuels is high. Smoke production would be lessened if larger fuels were not available to bum. When large amo"unts of smoke production are inevitable from a prescribed fire, care should be taken to assure that smoke does not drift into sensitive areas such as scenic vistas, urban areas, or road corridors (Mahaffey and Miller 1994; DeBano et al. 1998). This can be accomplished by burning when wind is not blowing in the direction ofthe sensitive area. If smoke is to drift into sensitive areas, care should be taken to assure that the smoke plume mixes with substantial amounts of air before it reaches the sensitive area. This can be accomplished by burning when the atmosphere is unstable and will promote rapid mixing. However, bums should not be conducted when the atmosphere is extremely unstable as this can promote extreme fire behavior. Mixing of the smoke with air can also be encouraged by creating burning conditions
50 - - that promote development of a convection column which allows smoke to rise rapidly to the upper atmosphere. For example mass ignitions are more likely to create convective conditions than line ignitions. The Flagstaff Fire Department has been very successful in managing smoke production from prescribed fires in the wildland urban interface by adhering to several best management practices (Flagstaff Fire' Department 2005). In general, prescribed burns are avoided adjacent to sensitive areas such as medical centers and nursing homes. If burns are conducted near schools, they are done when school is not in session. If possible, burns are conducted in the summer, when day lengths are long. This reduces the risk of nighttime smoke inversions. Burns are also conducted when forecasts for ventilation are good or excellent. To reduce smoke emission, backing fires are mostly used and some woody material may be removed or isolated prior to burning. Managers adhere to maximum burn guidelines by burning no more than 150 piles per day no more than once a week in a neighborshed and no more than 50 acres per week in a broadcast burn in a neighborshed. In addition, managers notify the media and the public about planned prescribed fires and possible smoke impacts before burns are conducted. One of the reasons the program is so successful is the time and energy put into the extensive public outreach and education program (Paul Summerfelt pers. commun.). Smoke management is an integral part of the prescribed fire planning process. With careful planning and experience, problems associated with smoke can be avoided. Several models are available to help predict the amount of smoke likely to be released from a fire and the direction the smoke should spread although they have had varying success. A relatively new model, the Smoke Impact Spreadsheet (SIS), has shown some success in accurately predicting particulate matter emissions from prescribed fires and is being increasingly used by managers (Wickman and Acheson 2005). This model incorporates the First Order Fire Effects Model (FOFEM) and CONSUME to predict downwind emissions of particulate matter from wildfires, broadcast burns, and pile burns (Wickman and Acheson 2005).
Aesthetics There are several aspects of prescribed fire that should be considered from a stand point of aesthetics. This is particularly important for treatment areas that are readily visible by the public as public acceptance of fuel treatment programs is vital for long-term support of fuel treatment programs and public acceptance is closely tied to resultant aesthetics of landscapes treated for fuels reduction (Winter et al. 2002). In general the public tends to not support prescribed fire efforts when they result in excessive tree scorch or mortality, particularly of large trees (Paul Summerfelt pers. commun.). The Flagstaff Fire Department burns slash piles in the wildland urban interface as quickly as possible as the public generally does not like to see lots of slash piles on the landscape (Farnsworth and Summerfelt 2001). Often times the public doesn't like the way burned areas look immediately after prescribed fires, but find the aesthetics acceptable one or two years later (Craig Goodell pers. commun.). Managers on the San Juan National Forest have found that it is imperative to clearly communicate to the public what treatments will look like one, two and three years after treatment (Craig Goodell pers. commun.). This can be effectively communicated when one has photos of different types of treatments of different ages.
Wildlife habitat
51 - -
Prescribed fire can have negative impacts on many important components of wildlife habitat including snags, down logs, and old-growth or large trees (Horton and Mann 1988; Randall-Parker and Miller 2002). Snags are particularly important for cavity nesting birds, down logs provide habitat for small mammals, reptiles, amphibians and insects, and large trees are used by a variety of wildlife species for nesting, feeding, foraging, and roosting. Prescribed fires tend to consume snags and down logs and can cause mortality of large trees through damage to fine roots. While some snags can be recruited through killed trees and down logs can result from fallen snags, the gain in'snags and down logs generally does not offset the loss from prescribed burning (Randall-Parker and Miller 2002). This is particularly true for large snags (Horton and Mann 1988). The impacts of multiple prescribed fires on snags and down logs are not well understood. However, Holden et al. (2006) found that even after multiple burns, snag density was within the range adopted by the forest service as necessary to maintain viable populations of cavity nesting birds. Brown et al. (2003) recommend leaving 5-10 tons/acre of woody material on the forest floor in warm/dry pond~rosa pinelDouglas fir forests. This should sustain long-term site productivity and wildlife habitat without causing excessive fire hazard. However, some wildlife species prefer habitat with higher levels of woody biomass. An alternative management strategy is to provide a range of woody biomass loads across a landscape (Brown et al. 2003). The current guidelines for snag densities in southwestern ponderosa pine forests suggest that 6.2 snags per hectare are needed to provide sufficient habitat for cavity nesting birds. This is largely based on work done by Balda (1975). However, it has been suggested that this level is unreasonably high and rarely met (Ganey 1999; Boucher et al. 1998). This has been controversial in areas where snags have been intentionally removed for purposes of fire management or safety (Boucher et al. 1998). In the Black Hills, forest guidelines are to leave approximately four snags per acre on north facing slopes and two snags per acre on south and east facing slopes (USDA Forest Service 2001). Snags should be at least 10 inches in diameter with 25% being greater than 20 inches in diameter. While there are currently many snags on the landscape, density of larger snags does not meet current forest guidelines (Spiering and Knight 2005). This may be problematic for cavity nesting birds as they tend to prefer larger snags (Spiering and Knight 2005). Measures can be taken to assure prescribed burns to not result in excessive loss ofthese important wildlife habitat components. Burning of snags can be prevented by removing fuels from the base of snags prior to burning (Anderson 1994; Randall-Parker and Miller 2002). Large diameter snags, which are often preferred by cavity nesting birds, may be in particular need of protection as there is little potential for large snag recruitment given the lack of large diameter trees in many areas (Horton and Mann 1988). The same can be done to large or old growth trees to prevent mortality. Foresters on the Colorado State Forest occasionally removed fuels around large pieces ofcoarse woody debris to protect them in prescribed fires (Kristy Berggren pers. commun.). Burns can also be conducted when moisture contents offuels are such that only small diameter fuels will bum and large fuels will be sparred (Anderson 1994; Randall-Parker and Miller 2002). If surface fuels are to be removed through burning of piles, large diameter logs can be intentionally left out of the piles to create wildlife habitat. While control ofdense thickets of Gambel oak is sometimes desirable (see Biological and Chemical control sections) large and isolated Gambel oak trees provide very important wildlife habitat in ponderosa pine forests of the southwest (Harper et al. 1985). Bird diversity tends to be higher in ponderosa pine forests that have some Gambel oak component (Rosenstock 1998) and small mammals tend to prefer large Gambel oaks (Chambers 2002). There is some indication
52 - -
that prescribed burning may increase mortality of large and old Gambel oak trees (Randall Parker and Miller 2002). To limit mortality of large oak trees during prescribed fire, managers in northern Arizona often line large oak trees prior to burning (Lowell Kenall pers. commun.). In addition, oak litter isn't ignited directly. Instead fire is allowed to creep through oak litter.
Cultural resources Preservation of prehistoric and historic sites and artifacts is important for understanding past societies and our cultural heritage. Such sites and resources litter the western landscape. Prehistoric cultural resources include artifacts, ceremonial or residential sites, and rock art panels including pictographs and petroglyphs (Hanes 1994). Historical resources include old cabins, homesteads, logging camps, battlegrounds, trails, mining claims and artifacts from such sites (Hanes 1994). Prescribed fire has the potential to damage these resources in a variety of ways. Cultural resources can be directly scorched, altered, or consumed by prescribed fire. The potential for damage depends on the type of material, whether it is above or below ground, and the intensity of the fire. For example, organic materials have much less capacity to retain heat than stone or ceramic materials. Stone is subject to damage at temperatures above 700 0 F while ceramic is subject to damage at temperatures above 925 0 F (Hanes 1994). Pictographs are especially vulnerable to damage from prescribed fire. However, prescribed fire is not likely to reach temperatures that would result in damage to artifacts that are buried below the surface. In general, higher fire intensity will increase the potential for damage to cultural and historic resources. Accurate dating of prehistoric sites and artifacts can also be compromised by prescribed fire. For example, carbon dating of charcoal remains is often done to determine the approximate age of prehistoric sites. However, this process can be compromised if the charcoal is contaminated with ash and charcoal from more recent fires. Pollen preserved in prehistoric sites can be used in paleoenvironmental and dietary studies. However, pollen is generally destroyed when exposed to temperatures above 600 0 F (Hanes 1994). Similarly, dating of pottery fragments, obsidian, and other materials becomes highly inaccurate ifthese materials are subject to intense heat (Hanes 1994). Damage to cultural and historic resources from prescribed fire can be easily avoided by knowing the number, type, and distribution of cultural resources in a management area. However, extensive archeological surveys in proposed treatment areas can substantially increase the cost of fuel treatmerits (Scott Wagner pers. commun.). Sensitive materials can be removed from a site prior to burning. If this is not possible, sensitive areas can be avoided by prescribed burning efforts, fuel breaks can be constructed around sensitive areas or high fuels loads can be manually removed around sensitive areas. Use of prescribed fire can actually be used to protect sensitive areas that would otherwise be subject to much more extreme heat from a wildfire.
Thinning of trees
Soil resources When heavy equipment drives over the surface it leads to some degree of soil compaction or can physically displace soil. Increased soil compaction can make it harder for plants to extract water and nutrients from the soil and thus decrease the productivity of a site (Poff 1996). This effect can last years to decades. However, soil compaction is not a serious problem on all soil
53 - - types. For example, in soils high levels of organic matter, surface rock fragments, and sand or clay content are generally less susceptible to compaction (Lull 1959; Greacean and Sands 1980; Poff 1996). This may be why soil compaction on many sites in the southwest and the Front Range does not seem to be a significant problem (Kristy Berggren and Andy Perri pers. commun.; Melissa Savage pers. commun.). However, soil compaction can be highly variable. Thus, it is important to understand the potential for soil compaction and disturbance at a given site. Removal of soil also has long-term consequences for site productivity. Displaced soil can ultimately be deposited in lakes or streams and impair water quality. Soil disturbance and compaction can be easily avoided by using hand crews in lieu ofmachines to fell and process trees. This may be a valid choice in very sensitive areas or on smaller treatment units. However, in some cases use ofmechanical equipment may be justified. While some soil compaction and disturbance is inevitable when heavy equipment is used for thinning or understory biomass alteration/removal, certain procedures can minimize the amount of soil compaction across a site. For example, using equipment that has longer reach and more maneuverability reduces the percentage ofthe area that the equipment needs to traverse. If boom-mounted machines are not available, care should be taken to assure that machines stay in designated paths and paths should be designed to minimize machine movement across the site. Felling trees in the direction ofthe skid trail can also minimize soil disturbance and compaction by minimized skidding distance (Minard 2003). Smaller, more maneuverable machines apply less ground pressure and lead to less soil compaction than larger machines. However, the effects of large machines are not as severe ifthe ground pressure is applied over a larger area (poff 1996; Windell and Bradshaw 2000). Track-mounted machines tend to lead to less soil compaction than wheel-mounted machines as they allow the machine weight to be distributed over a larger area. Soil compaction can also be minimized by conducting treatments when the soil is frozen or extremely dry or by driving machines over protective layers of litter, slash, or snow (Poff 1996; Windell and Bradshaw 2000). Several agencies in northern Arizona limit damage to soil resources using a technique developed on the Mormon Lake Ranger District of the Coconico National Forest (Farsworth and Summerfelt 2001). With this method trees are directionally felled into a windrow and are then pushed into large piles by a dozer during a single pass. Few ruts are made because the dozer is not constantly spinning and turning. This results in fewer piles per acre that can be ignited under snowier and wetter conditions than traditional hand piles. This method is also more productive than hand piling.
Residual tree damage In the Colorado Front Range, damage to residual trees is a significant unintended consequence of mechanical treatments (Kristy Berggren and Andy Perri pers. commun.). This may increase the susceptibility of trees to insects and disease and increase the probability of mortality. Tree damage can be a function both of the equipment used and the experience ofthe operator. Foresters with the Colorado State Forest Service recommend being very specific in contracts about acceptaole residual tree damage and holding contractors responsible for unacceptable levels of damage. In general, negative results can be avoided by having a detailed contract. In some cases, the foresters will treat a test plot prior to treating the entire unit to assure the contractor understands the desired treatment effects.
Non-native species
54 -- -
Mechanical equipment and people can carry seeds from non-native species to treatment sites. Non-native plants can then flourish in treated environments where availability of light and nutrients is higher. This has been problematic for thinning treatments conducted by the Colorado State Forest Service (Kristy Berggren and Andy Perri pers. commun.). This problem can be partly avoided by required contractors to wash equipment prior to enter sites. This generally needs to be specified in a contract. Sites should also be monitored for non-native plants in the first few years after treatments so that newly established populations can be controlled before they spread. Care can also be taken to avoid areas with non-native plant populations for landings, fuel breaks, or briefings (Scott Spleiss pers. commun.). This may limit spread of seeds of non native plants.
Aesthetics Appearance of fuel treated areas is very important, especially in the wildland urban interface or in areas of high recreation demand, as this ultimately influences public acceptance of fuel treatments. In the San Juan National Forest, the public often doesn't like the look of thinning operations immediately following treatment when the look "rough" (Craig Goodell pers. commun.). However, a year or two years after treatment, once the slash as been treated and the understory species have recovered, the public tends to accept the look of treated forests (Craig Goodell pers. commun.). It is particularly important to be honest with the public about what a treatment will look like immediately after the treatment, one year later, two years later, etc. This can increase the trust the public has in agency officials and increase the likelihood that the public will be accepting of fuel treatments. Certain measure can be taken to increase the aesthetics of a stand, including retaining large trees removing slash.
Wildlife Thinning operations can cause stress and disrupt the populations of some wildlife species (Anderson and Crompton 2002; Larson et al. 1986). In the Black I-Ells, bird diversity has been found to be higher in thinned forests compared to untreated forests (Anderson and Crompton 2002). However, some species were conspicuously absent from thinned forests, indicating that certain species are either negatively impacted by thinning treatments or prefer dense canopy cover. Thus, when treating a landscape to reduce fire hazard, it is important to leave areas with high forest cover. Thinning treatments that result in a mosaic of forest cover types across the landscape are likely to be the most beneficial in providing habitat for a variety of species (Fiedler and Cully 1995; Sieg a~d Severson 1996; Shepperd and Battaglia 2002). For example, while many ungulates prefer open stands or small openings for feeding, they also need more dense stands for protective and thermal cover (Ffolliott 1997). Stands with a minimum basal area of 10 m2 per hectare are needed to provide adequate cover for deer and elk (Ffolliott 1997). Thinning activities are restricted in nest areas and in post fledging-family areas for northern goshawks during their breeding season (March - Sept.) (Reynolds et al. 1992) Salvage logging operations can also be conducted for the purposes of fire hazard reduction (McIver and Starr 2001). However, there has been some concern for the effects of salvage logging on wild.life species, particularly cavity nesting birds (McIver and Starr 2001). Some studies have shown that large diameter snags are preferred habitat for cavity nesting birds and they are less likely to fall and contribute to the surface fuel loading of a site (Chambers and Mast 2005). Thus, it has been suggested that salvage operations should focus on retaining large
55 - - diameter snags in a clumping distribution to minimize adverse effects on wildlife (Chambers and Mast 2005).
Understory biomass reduction/alteration
Soil resources When heavy equipment drives over the surface it leads to some degree of soil compaction or can physically displace soil. Increased soil compaction can make it harder for plants to extract water and nutrients from the soil and thus decrease the productivity of a site (Poff 1996). This effect can last years to decades. However, soil compaction is not a serious problem on all soil types. For example, in sbils high levels of organic matter, surface rock fragments, and sand or clay content are generally less susceptible to compaction (Lull 1959; Greacean and Sands 1980; Poff 1996). This may be why soil compaction on many sites in the southwest and the Front Range does not seem to be a significant problem (Kristy Berggren and Andy Perri pers. commun.; Melissa Savage pers. commun.). However, soil compaction can be highly variable. Thus, it is important to understand the potential for soil compaction and disturbance at a given site. Removal of soil also has long-term consequences for site productivity. Displaced soil can ultimately be deposited in lakes or streams and impair water quality. Soil disturbance and compaction can be easily avoided by using hand crews in lieu of machines to fell and process trees. This may be a valid choice in very sensitive areas or on smaller treatment units. However, in some cases use of mechanical equipment may be justified. While some soil compaction and disturbance is inevitable when heavy equipment is used for thinning or understory biomass alteration/removal, certain procedures can minimize the amount of soil compaction across a site. For example, using equipment that has longer reach and more maneuverability reduces the percentage ofthe area that the equipment needs to traverse. If boom-mounted machines are not available, care should be taken to assure that machines stay in designated paths and paths should be designed to minimize machine movement across the site. Smaller, more maneuverable machines apply less ground pressure and lead to less soil compaction than larger machines. However, the effects oflarge machines are not as severe if the ground pressure is applied over a larger area (Poff 1996; Windell and Bradshaw 2000). Track mounted machines tend to lead to less soil compaction than wheel-mounted machines as they allow the machine weight to be distributed over a larger area. Soil compaction can also be minimized by conducting treatments when the soil is frozen or extremely dry or by driving machines over protective layers of litter, slash, or snow (Poff 1996; Windell and Bradshaw 2000). . Mastication, chipping, and mowing all result in large increases in woody material on the soil surface. This increase in woody biomass has the potential to impact a variety ofecological attributes. For example, the availability of nitrogen in the system may initially decrease as nitrogen is tied up in decomposing organisms and a subsequent increase in nutrient availability once the material is completely decomposed (Resh et al. 2005). However, if the layer of material is excessively thick, decomposition may be slow and nutrients may be tied up for some time (Graham et al. 2004). T~is material often acts as a mulch, resulting in increases in soil moisture and decreases in daily temperature fluctuations (Resh et al. 2005). This material may also prevent establishment of tree seedlings and understory vegetation, particularly if material is left in a thick layer (Resh et al. 2005). There is some evidence to suggest that the wood material
56 - - provides habitat for insects and pathogens which may then impact standing trees (Resh et al. 2005). Often masticated fuels are subsequently burned to increase the rate of disposal. There is some concern that burning high loadings of masticated fuels can result in high fire intensity and thus adverse fire effects. on soils and vegetation. Burning particularly thick layers of masticated fuels often results in large heat pulses to the soil that can potentially kill soil organisms, seeds, and plant roots (Busse et al. 2005). Similar effects can be seen under burned slash piles (Korb et al. 2004; Massaman et al. 2003). The resultant conditions may provide ideal opportunities for establishment of invasive species (Korb et al. 2004; Wolfson et al. 2005). In addition, there is some concern that burning masticated material would smolder and created smoke management problems (Brenda Wasielewski pers. commun.). Some ofthese effects may be avoided by burning masticated fuels a little at a time. For example a first burn can be accomplished when the top layer of masticated fuel is dry but the bottom layers are wet and thus not readily ignited. Residual fuels can then be burned in subsequent burns, with two to three year rotations. This has been achieved with some success by managers on the San Juan National Forest (Craig Goodell and Scott Wagner pers. commun.). Adverse effects of burning slash piles can be avoided by keeping piles relatively small or burning larger piles when the soil is frozen or there is some snow on the ground (Farnsworth and Summerfelt 2001).
Residual tree damage In the Colorado Front Range, damage to residual trees is a significant unintended consequence of mechanical treatments (Kristy Berggren and Andy Perri pers. commun.). This can be a function both of the equipment used and the experience of the operator. Foresters with the Colorado State Forest Service recommend being very specific in contracts about acceptable residual tree damage and holding contractors responsible for unacceptable levels of damage. In general, negative results can be avoided by having a detailed contract. In some cases, the foresters will treat a test plot prior to treating the entire unit to assure the contractor understands the desired treatment effects.
Non-native species Mechanical equipment and people can carry seeds from non-native species to treatment sites. Non-native plants can then flourish in treated environments where availability of light and nutrients is higher. This has been problematic for thinning treatments conducted by the Colorado State Forest Service (Kristy Berggren and Andy Perri pers. commun.). This problem can be partly avoided by required contractors to wash equipment prior to enter sites. This generally needs to be specified in a contract. Sites should also be monitored for non-native plants in the first few years after treatments so that newly established populations can be controlled before they spread.
Aesthetics Most managers have found that the public is tolerable of the way treated areas look, especially one or two years after treatment if there is good understory regeneration (Kristy Breggren pers. commun.). However, the public does not seem to like the look of slash piles. Thus, some managers have recommended treating slash piles as soon as possible, especially in highly visible areas (Farnsworth and Summerfelt 2001). The public actually seems to like the look of chipped material spread over a treatment area (Brenda Wasielewski pers. commun.).
57 - -
Wildlife Understory biomass reduction/alteration treatments have the potential to reduce habitat for animals that rely on coarse woody debris. Slash created from logging operations can create habitat for small mammals (Larson et al. 1986; Smith et al. 1997). Treatments than masticate or remove this material will remove this potential habitat. Care should be taken such that treatments result in an appropriate balance between fire hazard reduction and wildlife habitat protection (Brown et al. 2003). Piling of slash with machines is generally restricted in nest areas of goshawks (Reynolds et al. 1992).
Biological treatments
The use ofbiological treatments, such as introduction ofbrowsing animals, has been little studied in ponderosa pine forests of the southwest, the Front Range and the Black Hills. Thus the potential for unintended treatment effects are largely unknown. While there exists some potential for use of biological treatments, particularly for control of dense brush, they should not be attempted without carefully designed monitoring program to assure unintended effects do not result. Some aspects to consider monitoring include soil compaction and disturbance, non-native species introduction, wildlife response, and water quality.
Chemical treatments
The use of chemical treatments to control fuel loading has been little studied in ponderosa pine forests of the southwest, the Front Range and the Black Hills. Thus the potential for unintended treatment effects are largely unknown. While there exist some potential for use of chemical treatments, particularly for control of dense brush, they should not be attempted without carefully designed monitoring program to assure unintended effects do not result. Some aspects to consider monitoring include wildlife response, water quality, soil contamination, native vegetation response, and non-native species introduction.
58 - -
Case Study 1: Monitoring protocols
An innovative funding program for restoration treatments in New Mexico, the Collaborative Forest Restoration Program (CFRP), includes multiparty monitoring as an integral component of the program. To assist grantees with monitoring protocols, simple guidelines have been established. These guidelines are also applicable to restoration and fuel treatment projects throughout the southwest, the Black Hills, and the Front Range. Monitoring protocols should be designed to determine if two primary goals are met, 1) the reduction in the potential for catastrophic fire spread; and 2) the restoration of ecosystem integrity. If monitoring data reveal that undesirable effects resulted from treatments, then treatment prescriptions should be altered to mitigate those effects. While numerous factors can be monitored to assess ecosystem integrity and hazardous fuel reduction, 18 variables are discussed in the manual for community monitoring for restoration projects (Savage 2003). Savage recommends monitoring a minimum of six variables before and after restoration treatments. These include landscape photo points, soil erosion photo points, tree basal area, t~ee canopy cover, understory plant cover, and percentage bare soil. Landscape photo points are advantageous in that the data is easy to collect and lots of information can be gained from them. For example, one can assess tree density, tree mortality, snag density, non-native species and understory cover, at least in a qualitative sense with photo points. It is imperative to keep good records of location and date of photos and to take repeated photos in the same location and same direction. Soil erosion photo points can similarly be used to qualitatively assess soil erosion following treatments in particularly sensitive areas. More quantitative measurements of trees, snags, surface fuels, and understory species cover and composition can be ass~ssed with square plot, belt, or line transects. For any monitoring program it is imperative to have an organized and systematic method for archiving collected data. Savage recommends collecting data before treatments are implemented, soon after treatments are implemented, and then once a year after treatments are implemented for at least three years (five years total). Variables that change more slowly, such as tree basal area, can be monitored with less frequency. Environmental changes associated with treatments can be distinguished from normal yearly fluctuations in variables by adding a control site to the monitoring protocol. Depending on objectives and resources available for monitoring, protocols can also be developed to assess the effects oftreatments on wildlife, social and economic values, and a host of other variables.
59 - -
Case study 2: Landscape fuel treatment planning
Even though most fuel treatments occur on a stand level, it is important to consider each treatment in a landscape context, especially since current wildfires dwarf the size ofindividual fuel treatment projects (Sisk et al. 2004). It is not likely that resources will be available to treat all areas of a management unit that could benefit from treatment. Thus, landscape scale strategies are needed to assure that fuel treatments are designed in such a way to maximize benefits. Several innovative approaches are underway in Arizona and New Mexico to develop strategies for landscape scale fuel treatments that reduce wildfire hazard and protect values at risk. These approaches could be applicable to ponderosa pine forests in other regions. One such approach is the Forest Ecological Restoration Analysis (ForestERA) project implemented by researchers at Northern Arizona University (Sisk et al. 2004). In a pilot project conducted in northern Arizona the researchers have amassed GIS spatial data layers that include vegetation composition, canopy cover, basal area, stem density, elevation, historical fires, ignition points, invasive plant locations, hydrography, and soil characteristics. These layers are used to develop models that predict risks (fire hazard, watershed effects, invasive plants, fire risk) and values (wildlife habitat, wilderness, recreation, infrastructure, etc.) on the forested landscape. A framework is then developed where landscape scale objectives and criteria for meeting objectives are defined, and then through an iterative modeling process, fuel treatment locations are optimized across the landscape to maximize protection of values at risk while achieving management objectives. The Wildfire Alternatives (WALTER) project is an approach developed at the University of Arizona and currently has assessments available for the Catalina Mountains, the Chiricahua Mountains, the Huachchuca Mountains in Arizona and the Jemez Mountains in northern New Mexico (University of Arizona 2002). This model assesses fire risk across these landscapes based on climate, fire history, vegetation, fuels, and societal values. This model also allows managers to assess fire risk in these landscapes under different climatic scenarios. Ultimately this should allow managers to develop strategies for optimizing placement of fuel treatments. While the above approaches are currently only available for specific landscapes in the southwest, another approach currently in progress in southern New Mexico utilizes spatial data layers developed from the LANDFIRE project. Since LANDFIRE data will eventually be available for all of North America, this process should be easily adapted to landscapes in other regions. The LANDFIRE project uses biophysical settings and simulation modeling to describe historical successional classes and estimates the proportion of the landscape that historically existed in each succession class. Simulation modeling, satellite imagery, and other factors are then used to determine existing vegetation and departure from historical conditions. With this process GIS spatial data layers are developed that can be directly imported into Farsite and Flammap. The data is easily accessible on the LANDFIRE website (www.landfire.gov). Managers and researchers on the Gila National Forest have used LANDFIRE data and spatial data on locations of values at risk, including wildland urban interface and threatened and endangered species habitat, to develop strategies for fuel treatment placement across the landscape (Cecilia McNicoll pers. commun.). Fuel treatment placement is prioritized adjacent to values at risk (i.e. wildland urban interface, Mexican spotted owl habitat) to minimize the threat ofdamage from severe wildfire and in areas where fire risk is greatest. Factors such as prevailing wind, dominant slope, and fuel condition, along with models like FlamMap and Farsite, are considered to determine the likelihood of severe fire occurrence and spread in any given area.
60 - -
Case Study 3: Wildland fire use
In addition to prescribed fire and mechanical treatments, wildland fire use in many cases is a viable option for reducing fuel loading and achieving other resource benefits in ponderosa pine forests. Wildland fire use (WFU) by definition is a naturally ignited wildfire that is intentionally not suppressed and allowed to burn to achieve resource benefit (USDA and USDI 2005). In order for WFU to be utilized on Federal lands, details on conditions under which WFU is suitable must be in the land management and fire management plans. This includes locations on the management units where WFU is acceptable and criteria for evaluating potential risks. WFU can be risky in that fires may burn in areas where fuel loading is high and unlike prescribed fire, mangers do not have a great deal of control over the fire behavior. However, there can be some great benefits to WFU. Since these events require little pre-fire planning, they can be achieved with very low costs per acre relative to prescribed fire or mechanical treatments. For example, WFU events on the Gila NF, where WFU is commonly used, cost an average of $25 per acre (Lolley et al. 2006). Burning under "natural" conditions also has many benefits, mosaics of burn severity are naturally created, and plants and animals are allowed to evolve with a more natural fire regime. The Gila National Forest has been actively practicing WFU since the 1970's (Webb and Henderson 1985) and currently they lead the region in number of acres burned in WFU each year. In 2005 alone, over 90,000 acres were burned in WFU (Toby Richards pers. commun.), far more than the number of acres treated with prescribed fire or mechanical treatments combined on other forests in the region. This extensive burning program has allowed managers to maintain forest conditions where tree density is low and to slowly change forest conditions in areas where tree density is high. Several areas ofthe Gila NF have burned in two or three WFU events and it often takes two or three ,burns to significantly reduce tree density (Toby Richards pers. commun.). These areas also seem to support other important features of the landscape such as snags and coarse woody debris (Holden et al. 2006). These fires can have adverse effects on wildlife habitat. For example, habitat of the Gila trout was significantly damaged in the Dry Creek Complex fires that burned as WFU events on the Gila NF in 2005 (Toby Richards pers. commun.). Such events have not shut down the WFU program though. Fire managers are successful because they work closely with wildlife biologists and "herd" and manage WFU events to avoid or achieve desired fire behavior in sensitive habitat (Toby Richards pers. commun.). For example" managers are able to allow WFU events in Mexican spotted owl habitat by working closely with wildlife biologists and managing fire behavior such that important habitat components aren't lost during the fire (Toby Richards pers. commun.). One of the reasons so the WFU program has been successful on the Gila National Forest is that the area is relatively remote, and there are few risks to personal property or smoke impacts from WFU events. The proximity of forested lands to values at risk in the wildland urban interface will limit WFU options in other parts of the southwest, the Front Range and the Black Hills. However, WFU has recently increased in certain areas, particularly on the Kaibab National Forest and Grand Canyon National Park. If important values in the wildland urban interface and other cultural or natural resources are adequately protected from catastrophic fire through mechanical or prescribed fire treatments, there may be more opportunities for WFU events in untreated areas. This seems to be an ultimate goal of managers even in more populated regions (Scott Spleiss pers. commun.).
61 - -
References
Agee, J.K. and C.N. Skinner. 2005. Basic principles of fuel reduction treatments. Forest Ecology and Management 211: 83-96. Alexander, M.E. and F.G. Hawksworth. 1976. Fire and dwarf mistletoes in North American coniferous forests. Journal ofForestry 74: 446-449. Alexander, R.R. 1987. Silvicultural systems, cutting methods, and cultural practices for Black Hills ponderosa pine. u.s. Department ofAgriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-139. Fort Collins, CO. 32p. Alexander, R.R. and C.B. Edminster. 1977. Regulation and control of cut under uneven-aged management. Res. Pap. RM-182. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department ofAgriculture Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 7 p. Allen, C.D. 1989. Change in the landscape of the Jemez Mountains, New Mexico. Berkeley, CA: University of California at Berkeley. Dissertation. Allen, C.D. 2002. Lots of lightning and plenty of people: An ecological history of fire in the upland southwest. In: T.R. Vale, ed. Fire, native peoples, and the natural landscape. Island Press, Washington D.C. Allen, C.D., M. Savage, D.A. Falk, K.F. Suckling, T.W. Swetnam, T. Schulke, P.B. Stacey, P. Morgan, M. Hoffman, and J.T. Klingel. 2002. Ecological restoration of southwestern ponderosa pine ecosystems: A broad perspective. Ecological Applications 12: 1418-1433. Allen, M.H., R.W. Berry, D. Gill, G.L. Hayes, P.S. Truesdell, M. Zwolinski, and J.M. Pierovich. 1968. Guide to prescribed fire in the southwest. Southwest interagency fire council. 58p. Anderson, L. 1994. Chapter VII - Terrestrial wildlife and habitat. In: M. Miller, ed. Fire effects guide, PMS 481, NFES 2395, National Interagency Fire Center, Boise, ID. Anderson, L.M., D.J. Levi, T.C. Daniel, and J.H. Dieterich. 1982. The esthetic effect of prescribed burning: A case study. Res. Note RM-413. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 5 p. Anderson, S.H. and B.J. Crompton. 2002. The effects of shelterwood logging on bird community composition in the Black Hills, Wyoming. Forest Science 48: 365-372. Aplet, G.H. and B. Wilmer. 2003. The wildfire challenge: Focus on reliable data, community protection, and ecological restoration. The Wilderness Society, Washington, D.C. 40 p. Arno, S.F. and C.E. Fiedler. 2005. Mimicking nature's fire: Restoring fire prone forests in the west. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Arno, S.F. and M.G. Harrington. 1997. The interior west: Managing fire-dependent forests by simulating natural disturbance regimes. In: Forest management into the next century: What will make it work? Nov. 19-21, Spokane, WA. Forest Products Society and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Arnold, J.F. 1950. Change in ponderosa pine bunchgrass in northern Arizona resulting from pine regeneration and grazing. Journal of Forestry 48: 118-126. Bachelet, D., J.M. Lenihan, C. Daly, and R.P. Neilson. 2000. Interactions between fire, grazing and climate change at Wind Cave National Park, SD. Ecological Modeling 134: 229-244. Baisan, C.H. and T.W. Swetnam. 1990. Fire history on a desert mountain range - Rincon Mountain Wilderness, Arizona, USA. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 20: 1559 1569.
62 - -
Baisan, C.H. and T.W. Swetnam. 1997. Interactions of fire regimes and land use in the central Rio Grande Valley. Res. Pap. RM-RP-330. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 20 p. Baker, W.L. 2002. Indians and fire in the Rocky Mountains: The wilderness hypothesis renewed. In: T.R. Vale ed: Fire, native peoples, and the natural landscape. Island Press, Washington, D. C. Baker, W.L. 2003. Fires and climate in forested landscapes of the U.S. Rocky Mountains. In: T.T. Veblen, W.L. Baker, G. Montenegro, and T.W. Swetnam, eds. Fire and climate change in temperate ecosystems of the western Americas. Springer, New York, NY. Baker, W.L. and D.S. Ehle. 2003. Uncertainty in fire history and restoration of ponderosa pine forests in western United States. In P.N. Omi and L.A. Joyce, eds. Fire, fuel treatments, and ecological restoration: Conference proceedings. Proc. RM-P-29. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Balda, R.P. 1975. The relationship of secondary cavity nesters and snag densities in western coniferous forests. Forest Wildlife Habitat Technical Bulletin 1. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agricultrue, Forest Service, Southwestern Region. Bastian, H. V. 2001. Effects of low intensity prescribed fires on ponderosa pine forests in wilderness areas of Zion National Park, Utah. In: R.K. Vance, c.B. Edminster, B. Carleton, W.W. Covington and J.A. Blake, eds. Ponderosa pine ecosystem restoration and conservation: Steps toward stewardship. Proc. RMRS-P-22. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Betancourt, J.L., J.S. Dean, and H.M. Hull. 1986. Prehistoric long-distance transport of construction beams, Chaco Canyon. American Antiquity 51: 370-375. Bevers, M., P.N. Omi, and J. Hof. 2004. Random location of fuel treatments in wildland community interfaces: a percolation approach. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 34: 164-173. Biswell, H.H., H.R. Kallander, R. Komarek, J. Vogle, and H. Weaver. 1973. Ponderosa fire management: A task force evaluation of controlled burning in ponderosa pine forests of central Arizona. ·Misc. Pub. No.2. Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, FL. Bock, J.H. and C.E. Bock. 1984. Effect of fire on woody vegetation in the pine-grassland ecotone of the southern Black Hills. American Midland Naturalist 112: 35-42. Bolding, M.C., B.L. Landford, and L.D. Kellogg. 2003. Forest fuel reduction: Current methods and future possibilities. In: Proceedings 26th Annual Council on Forest Engineering Meeting, Bar Harbor, ME. Boldt, C.E. and J.L. Van Deusen. 1974. Silviculture of ponderosa pine in the Black Hills: The status of our knowledge. Res. Pap. RM-124. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 45 p. Bonnet, V.H., A.W. Schoettle, and W.D. Shepperd. 2005. Postfire environmental conditions influence the spatial pattern of regeneration for Pinus ponderosa. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 35: 37-47. Bosworth, N. 1999. Dead and down fuel consumption resulting from prescribed burning in Black Hills ponderosa pine. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University. Thesis. Boucher, P.F., W.M. Block, G.V. Benavidez, and L.E. Wiebe. 1998. Implementing the expanded prescribed fire program on the Gila National Forest, New Mexico: implications for snag management. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference Proceedings 21: 104-113.
63 - -
Bradley, T., 1. Gibson, and W. Bunn. 2003. Fire severity and intensity in natural and manipulated fuels during spring burning in mixed shrub woodlands. Poster presentation at the 2nd International Wildland Fire Ecology and Management Congress, Nov 16-20, 2003, Orlando, FL. Breshears, D.D., N.S. Cobb, P.M. Rich, K.P. Price, C.D. Allen, R.G. Balice, W.H. Romme, 1.H. Kastens, M.L. Floyd, 1. Belnap, 1.1. Anderson, O.B. Myers, and C.W. Meyer. 2005. Regional vegetation die-off in response to global-change-type drought. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 102: 15144-15148. Brown A.A., and K.P. Davis, 1973. Forest fire control and use. McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, NY. Brown, 1.K. 1984. A process for designing fire prescriptions. In: R.W. Mutch ed. Proceedings: Prescribed fire by aerial ignition, Oct. 30 - Nov. 1, 1984, Missoula, MT. Intermountain Fire Council. Brown, 1.K., E.D. Reiru:ardt, and K.A. Kramer. 2003. Coarse woody debris: Managing benefits and fire hazard in the recovering forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-I05. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 16 p. Brown P.M. 2003. Fire, climate, and forest structure in ponderosa pine forests ofthe Black Hills. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University. Dissertation. Brown P.M. and B. Cook. 2006. Early settlement forest structure in the Black Hills ponderosa pine forests. Forest Ecology and Management 223: 284-290. Brown, P.M. and C.H. ~eig. 1996. Fire history in interior ponderosa pine communities of the Black Hills, South Dakota, USA. International 10urnal of Wildland Fire 6: 97-105. Brown, P.M. and C.H. Seig. 1999. Historical variability in fire and the ponderosa pine-northern Great Plains prairie ecotone, southeastern Black Hills, South Dakota. EcoScience 6: 539 547. Brown, P.M. and W.D. Shepperd. 2001. Fire history and fire climatology along a five degree gradient in latitude in Colorado and Wyoming, U.S.A. Paleobotanist 50: 133-140. Brown, P.M., D.R. D'Amico, A.T. Carpenter, and D. Andrews. 2001a. Restoration of montane ponderosa pine forests in the Colorado Front Range: A forest ecosystem management plan for the city of Boulder. Ecological Restoration 19: 19-26. Brown, P.M., M.R. Kaufmann, and W.D. Shepperd. 1999. Long-term, landscape patterns of past fire events in a montane ponderosa pine forest of central Colorado. Landscape Ecology 14: 513-532. Brown, P.M., M.W. Kaye, L.S. Huckaby, and C.H. Baisan. 2001b. Fire history along environmental gradients in the Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico: Influences of local patterns and regional processes. EcoScience 8: 115-126. Brown, P.M., M.G. Ryan, and T.G. Andrews. 2000. Historical surface fire frequency in ponderosa pine stands in research natural areas, central Rocky Mountains and Black Hills, USA. Natural Areas 10urna120: 133-139. Brown, R.T., 1.K. Agee, and 1.F. Franklin. 2004. Forest restoration and fire: Principles of context of place. Conservation Biology 18: 903-912. Buchholtz, C.W. 1983. Rocky Mountain National Park: A history. Colorado Associated University Press, Boulder, CO.
64 - -
Burgan, R.E. and R.C. Rothermel. 1984. BEHAVE: Fire behavior prediction and fuel modeling system - FUEL subsystem. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-167. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 126 p. Busse, M.D., K.R. Hubbert, G.O. Fiddler, C.J. Shestak, and R.F. Powers. 2005. Lethal soil temperatures during burning of masticated forest residues. International Journal of Wildland Fire 14: 267-276. Cammack, C.F. 1978. Grapples for forest residues concentration and removal. 7824 1210. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, San Dimas Equipment and Development Center. Chambers, C.L. 2002. Forest management and dead wood resources in ponderosa pine forests: effects on small mammals. In: W.L. Laudenslayer et al. eds. Proceedings ofthe symposium on the Ecology and Management of Dead Wood in Western Forests, Nov. 2 4, 1999, Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-181. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station. Chambers, C.L. and J.N. Mast. 2005. Ponderosa pine snag dynamics and cavity excavation following wildfire in northern Arizona. Forest Ecology and Management 216: 227-240. Chandler, C., P. Cheney, P. Thomas, L. Trabaud, and D. Williams. 1983. Fire in forestry: Volume II forest fire management and organization. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Choromanska, U. and T.H. DeLuca. 2001. Prescribed fire alters the impact of wildfire on soil biochemical properties in a ponderosa pine forest. Soil Science Society of America Journal 65: 232-238. City of Boulder, CO. 1999. Forest ecosystem management plan. Open space and mountain parks, Boulder, CO. Cleaves, D.A., J. Martinez, and T.K. Haines. 2000. Influences on prescribed burning activity costs in the national forest system. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-GTR-37. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 26 p. Colorado State Forest Service. 2004. Report on the health of Colorado's forests. Denver, CO: Colorado State Forest Service. 36 p. Conklin, D.A. and W.A. Armstrong. 2001. Effects of three prescribed fires on dwarf mistletoe infection in southwestern ponderosa pine. R3-01-02. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwest Region. Cooper, C.F. 1960. Changes in vegetation, structure, and growth of southwestern ponderosa pine forests since white settlement. Ecological Monographs 30: 130-164. Cooper C.F. 1961a. Pattern in ponderosa pine forests. Ecology 42: 493-497. Cooper C.F. 1961 b. Controlled burning and watershed condition in the White Mountains of Arizona. Journal of Forestry 59: 438-442. Covington, W.W. 2003. The evolutionary and historical context. In: P. Friederici, ed. Ecological restoration of southwestern ponderosa pine forests. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Covington, W.W. and M.M. Moore. 1994a. Postsettlement changes in natural fire regimes and forest structure: Ecological restoration of old-growth ponderosa pine forests. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 2: 153-181. Covington, W. W. and M.M. Moore. 1994b. Southwestern ponderosa pine forest structure changes since Euro-American settlement. Journal of Forestry 9: 39-47. Covington, W.W. and S.S. Sackett. 1984. The effect ofa prescribed burn in southwestern ponderosa pine on organic matter and nutrients in woody debris and forest floor. Forest Science 30: 183-192.
65 - -
Covington, W.W., R.L. Everett, R.W. Steele, L.1. Irwin, TA. Daer, and A.N.D. Auclair. 1994. Historical and anticipated changes in forest ecosystems of the inland west of the United States. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 2: 13-63. Covington, W.W., P.Z. Fule, M.M. Moore, S.C. Hart, T.E. Kolb, J.N. Mast, S.S. Sackett, and M.R. Wagner. 1997. Restoring ecosystem health in ponderosa pine forests of the southwest. Journal of Forestry 95: 23-29. Covington, W.W., A.E.M. Waltz, P.Z. Fule, and G. Verkamp. 2000. Restoration of ecosystem health in southwestern forests. Comprehensive report submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, Arizona Strip Office. 67 p. Cram, D.S., T.T. Baker, and lC. Boren. 2006. Wildland fire effects in silviculturally treated vs. untreated stands of New Mexico and Arizona. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-55. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 28 p. Crawford, J.S., C.H.A. Wahren, S. Kyle, and W.H. Moir. 2001. Response of exotic plant species to prescribed fire in ponderosa pine forests of northern Arizona. Journal of Vegetation Science 12: 261-268. Dahms, C.W. and B.W. Geils. 1997. An assessment of ecosystem health in the southwest. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-295. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 97 p. Davis, G.G., E.B. Lawrence, and C.W. Cook. 1975. Control of Gambel oak sprouts by goats. Journal of Range Management 28: 216-218. Davis, J.R., P.F. Ffolliott, and W.P. Clary. 1968. A prescription for consuming ponderosa pine duff. Res. Note RM-RN-115. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky rylountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 4 p. DeBano, L.F. 1991. The effects of fire on soil properties. In: Proceedings - Management and productivity of western montane forest soils. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-280. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. DeBano, L.F., D.G. Neary, and P.F. Ffolliott. 1998. Fire's effects on ecosystems. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. DellaSalla, D.A. and E. Frost. 2001. An ecologically based strategy for fire and fuels management in national forest roadless areas. Fire Management Today 61: 12-23. Denevan, W.M. 1967. Livestock numbers in 19th century New Mexico, and the problem of gullying in the southwest. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 57: 691 703. Dennis, F.C. 1999. Creating wildfire-defensible zones. Natural Resource Series no. 6.302. Colorado State University Cooperative Extension, Fort Collins, CO. 6 p. Deperno, C.S., J.A. Jenks, S.L. Griffin, L.A. Rice, and K.F. Higgins. 2002. White-tailed deer habitat in the central Black Hills. Journal of Range Management 55: 242-252. Dieterich, J.M. 1980. Chimney springs forest fire history. Res. Pap. RM-RP-220. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 8 p. Donnegan, J.A., TT Veblen, and J.S. Sibold. 2001. Climatic and human influences on fire history in Pike National Forest, central Colorado. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 31: 1526-1539. Dutton, W.L. 1953. Forest grazing in the United States. Journal of Forestry 51: 248-251.
66 - -
Edminster, C.B. and W.K. Olsen. 1996. Thinning as a tool in restoring and maintaining diverse structure in stands of southwestern ponderosa pine. In: W.W. Covington and P.K. Wagner, eds. Conference on adaptive ecosystem restoration and management: Restoration of Cordilleran conifer landscapes ofNorth America. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM GTR-278. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Ehle, D.S. and W.L. Baker. 2003. Disturbance and stand dynamics in ponderosa pine forests in Rocky Mountain National Park, U.S.A. Ecological Monographs 73: 543-566. Farnsworth, A. and P. Summerfelt. 2001. Flagstaff interface treatment prescription: Results in the wildland urban interface. Flagstaff Fire Department, Flagstaff, AZ. 14 p. Fernandes, P.M. and H.S. Botelho. 2003. A review ofprescribed fire effectiveness in fire hazard reduction. International Journal of Wildland Fire 12: 117-128. Ffolliott, P.F. 1997. Guidelines for manageing wildlife habitats in southwestern ponderosa pine forests of the United States. Journal of Forestry Research 8: 108-110. Ffolliott, P.F. and D.P. Guertin. 1988. Prescribed fire in Arizona pine forests: a 24-year case study. In: J.S. Krammes, ed. Effects of fire management of southwestern natural resources, proceedings ofthe symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-191. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Ffolliott, P.F. and B.B. Malchus. 2001. Stripcut-thinning of ponderosa pine stands: An Arizona case study. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-34. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 7 p. Ffolliott, P.F., W.P. Clary, and F.R. Larson. 1977. Effects of a prescribed fire in an Arizona ponderosa pine forest. Res. Note RM-RN-336. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 4 p. Fiedler, C.E. and J.F. Cully Jr. 1995. A silvicultural approach to develop Mexican spotted owl habitat in southwestern forests. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 10: 144-148. Fiedler, C.E. and C.E. Keegan. 2003. Reducing crown fire hazard in fire-adapted forests ofNew Mexico. In: P.N. Omi and L.N. Joyce, eds. Fire, fuel treatments, and ecological restoration: Conference proceedings. Proc. RMRS-P-29. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Fiedler, C.E., S.F. Arno, and M.G. Harrington. 1996. Flexible silvicultural and prescribed burning approaches for improving forest health of ponderosa pine forests. In: W.W. Covington and P .K. Wagner, eds. Conference of adaptive ecosystem restoration and management: Restoration of Cordilleran conifer landscapes ofNorth America. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-278. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Fiedler, C.E., C.E. Keegan, S.H. Robertson, T.A. Morgan, C.W. Woodall, and J.T. Chmelik. 2002. A strategic assessment offire hazard in New Mexico. Final report submitted to the Joint Fire Science Program. Fiedler, C.E., C.E. Keegan, D.P. Wichman, and S.F. Arno. 1999. Product and economic implications of ecological restoration. Forest Products Journal 49: 19-23. Right, R.D. and R.J. Barbour. 2005. Fuels planning: Science synthesis and integration. Economic uses fact sheet 4. My fuel treatment planner. Res. Note RMRS-RN-20-4-www-revised. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 2 p.
67 - -
Fight, RD., R.J. Barbour, G.A. Christensen, G.L. Pinjuv, and R.V. Nagubadi. 2004. Thinning and prescribed fire and projected trends in woody product potential, financial return, and fire hazard in New Mexico. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-605. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 17 p. Fight, R.D., A. Gicqueau, and B.R. Hartsough. 1999. Harvesting costs for management planning for ponderosa pine plantations. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-467. Portland, OR. U.S. Department of Agcirculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 8 p. Fight, R.D., Z. Xiaoshan, and B.R. Hartsough. 2003. Users guide for STHARVEST: Software to estimate the cost of harvesting small timber. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-582. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 12 p. Finney, M.A. 2001. Design of regular landscape fuel treatment patterns for modifying fire growth and behavior. Forest Science 47: 219-228. Finney, M.A., C.W. McHugh, and I.C. Grenfell. 2005. Stand- and landscape-level effects of prescribed burning on two Arizona wildfires. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 35: 1714-1722. Fisher, R.F., M.J. Jenkins, and W.F. Fisher. 1987. Fire and the prairie-forest mosaic of Devils Tower National Monument. American Midland Naturalist 117: 250-257. Flagstaff Fire Department. 2005. Hazard Mitigation Best Management Practices - Operational Guidelines. Flagstaff, AZ. 37 p. Friederici, P. 2003. The "Flagstaff model". In: P. Friederici, ed. Ecological restoration of southwestern ponderosa pine forests. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Fritts, H.C. and T.W. Swetnam. 1989. Dendroecology: A tool for evaluating variations in past and present forest environments. Advances in Ecological Research 19: 111-188. Froiland, S.G. 1990. Natural history ofthe Black Hills and Badlands. The Center for Western Studies, Sioux Falls, SD. Front Range Fuel Treatment Partnership. 2004. Annual Report. Fule, P.Z., A.E. Cocke, T.A. Heilein, and W.W. Covington. 2004. Effects of an intense prescribed fire: is it ecological restoration? Restoration Ecology 12: 220-230. Fule, P.Z., W.W. Covington, and M.M. Moore. 1997. Determining reference conditions for ecosystem management of southwestern ponderosa pine forests. Ecological Applications 7: 895-908. Fule, P.Z., W.W. Covington, M.M. Moore, T.A. Heinlein, and A.E.M. Waltz. 2002a. Natural variability in forests of the Grand Canyon, USA. Journal of Biogeography 29: 31-47. Fule, P.Z., W.W. Covington, H.B. Smith, JD. Springer, T.A. Heinlein, K.D. Huisinga and M.M. Moore. 2002b. Comparing ecological restoration alternatives: Grand Canyon, Arizona. Forest Ecology and Management 170: 19-41. Fule, P.Z., J.E. Crouse, T.A. Heilein, M.M. Moore, W.W. Covington, and G. VerKamp. 2003a. Mixed severity fire regime in a high elevation forest of Grand Canyon, Arizona, USA. Landscape Ecology 18: 465-485. Fule, P.Z., T.A. Heinlein, W.W. Covington, and M.M. Moore. 2003b. Assessing fire regimes on Grand Canyon landscapes with fire scar and fire record data. International Journal of Wildland Fire q: 129-145. Fule, P.Z., D.C. Laughlin, and W.W. Covington. 2005. Pine-oak forest dynamics five years after ecological restoration treatments, Arizona, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 218: 129-145.
68 - -
Fule, P.Z., G. Verkamp, A.E.M. Waltz, and W.W. Covington. 2002c. Burning under old-growth ponderosa pines on lava soils. Fire Management Today 62: 47-49. Fule, P.Z., A.E.M. Waltz, W.W. Covington, and T.A. Heilein. 2001. Measuring forest restoration effectiveness in reducing hazardous fuels. Journal of Forestry 99: 24-29. Fuller, M. 1991. Forest fires: An introduction to wildland fire behavior, management and prevention. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Gaines, E.M., H.R. Kallander, and J.A. Wagner. 1958. Controlled burning in southwestern ponderosa pine: Results from the Blue Mountain plots, Fort Apache Indian Reservation. Journal of Forestry 56: 323-327. Ganey, J.L. 1999. Snag density and composition of snag populations on two National Forests in northern Arizona. Forest Ecology and Management 117: 169-178. Gartner, F.R. and W.W. Thompson. 1973. Fire in the Black Hills forest-grass ecotone. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference Proceedings 12: 37-68. Gatewood, S. and P. Summerfelt. 2005. Community wildfire protection plan for Flagstaff and surrounding communities in the Coconino and Kaibab National Forests of Coconino County, Arizona. Greater Flagstaff Forest Partnership and Ponderosa Fire Advisory Council. 132 p. Germaine, H.L. and S.S. Germaine. 2002. Forest restoration treatment effects on the nesting success of Western Bluebirds (Siaiia mexicana). Restoration Ecology 10: 362-367. Goldblum, D. and T.T. Veblen. 1992. Fire history of a ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forest in the Colorado Front Range. Physical Geography 13: 133-148. Grafe, E. and P. Horsted. 2002. Exploring with Custer: The 1874 Black Hills expedition. Golden Valley Press, Custer, SD. Graham, R.T. [ed.] 2003. Hayman Fire Case Study. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 396 p. Graham, R.T, A.E. Harvey, TB. Jain, and lR. Tonn. 1999. The effects of thinning and similar stand treatments-on fire behavior in western forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-463. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 27 p. Graham, R.T., D.D. Huff, M.R. Kaufmann, W.D. Shepperd, and J. Sheehan. 1998. Bioenergy and watershed restoration in the mountainous region of the west: what are the environmental/community issues? In: Proceedings ofBioEnergy '98: Expanding bioenergy partnerships, Madison, WI, Oct. 4-8, 1998. Graham, R.T, S. McCaffrey, and T.B. Jain. 2004. Science basis for changing forest structure to modify wildfire behavior and severity. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-120. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 43 p. Graves, H.S. 1899. The Black Hills forest reserve. In: The nineteenth century annual report to the survey, 1897-1898. Part V. Forest Reserves. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey. Greacean, E.L. and R. Sands. 1980. Compaction of forest soils: A review. Australian Journal of Forest Soils 18: 163-189. Griffis, K.L., lA. Crawford, M.R. Wagner, and W.H. Moir. 2001. Understory response to management treatments in northern Arizona ponderosa pine forests. Forest Ecology and Management 146: 239-245.
69 I' - -
Grissino-Mayer, H.D. and T.W. Swetnam. 2000. Century-scale climate forcing of fire regimes in the American southwest. Holocene 10: 213-220. Haase, S.M. 1986. Effects of prescribed burning on soil moisture and germination of southwestern ponderosa pine seed on basaltic soils. Res. Note. RM-462. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p. Hadley, K.S. 1994. The role of disturbance, topography, and forest structure in the development ofa montane forest landscape. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 121: 47-6l. Hadley, K.S. and T.T. Veblen. 1993. Stand response to western spruce budworm and Douglas fir bark beetle outbreaks, Colorado Front Range. Canadian Journal ofForest Research 23: 479-19l. Hanes, R.C. 1994. Chapter VIII - Cultural resources. In: M. Miller, ed. Fire effects guide. PMS 481, NFES 2395. National Interagency Fire Center, Boise, ID. Harper, K.T., F.J. Wagstaff, and L.M. Kunzler. 1985. Biology and management of Gambel oak vegetation type: A literature review. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-179. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 31 p. Harrington, M.G. 1981. Preliminary burning prescriptions for ponderosa pine fuel reductions in southeastern Arizona. Res. Note RM-RN-402. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 7 p. Harrington, M.G. 1985. The effect of spring, summer, and fall burning on gambel oak in a southwestern ponderosa pine stand. Forest Science 31: 156-163. Harrington, M.G. 1987. Ponderosa pine mortality from spring, summer, and fall crown scorching. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 2: 14-16. Harrington, M.G. and S.S. Sackett. 1990. Using fire as a management tool in southwestern ponderosa pine. In: J. S. Krammes, ed. Effects of fire management of southwestern natural resources, proceedings ofthe symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-191. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Harris, G.R. and W.W. Covington. 1983. The effect ofa prescribed fire on nutrient concentration and standing crop of understory vegetation in ponderosa pine. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 13: 501-507. Harrison, R.T. 1975. Slash: Equipment and methods for treatment and utilization. Report 7120-7. San Dimas, CA. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Equipment and Development Center. Hartsough, B.R., A. Gicqueau, and R.D. Fight. 1998. Productivity and cost relationships for harvesting ponderosa pine plantations. Forest Products Jouma148 (9): 87-93. Heidmann, L.J. 1968. Sllvicultural control ofdwarf mistletoe in heavily infested stands of ponderosa pine in the southwest. Res. Pap. RM-36. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 11 p. Hobbs, R.J. and Huenneke, L.F. 1992. Disturbance, diversity and invasion: implications for conservation. Conservation Biology 6: 324-337. Holden, Z.A., P. Morgan, M.G. Rollins, and R.G. Wright. 2006. Ponderosa pine snag densities following multiple fires in the Gila Wilderness, New Mexico. Forest Ecology and Mangement 221; 140-146.
70 -' --
Hollenstein, K., R.L. Graham, and W.D. Shepperd. 2001. Biomass flow in western forests: simulating the effects of fuel reduction and pre settlement restoration treatments. Journal of Forestry 99: 12-19. Holtzscher, M.A. and B.L. Lanford. 1997. Tree diameter effects on cost and productivity of cut to-length systems. Forest Products Journal 47 (3): 25-30. Horton, S.P. and R.W. Mann. 1988. Effects of prescribed fire on snags and cavity-nesting birds in southeastern Arizona pine forests. Wildlife Society Bulletin 16: 37-44. Huckaby, L.S., M.R. Kaufmann, P.J. Fornwalt, J.A. Stoker, and C. Dennis. 2003. Identification and ecology ofold ponderosa pine trees in the Colorado Front Range. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-II0. Fort Collins, CO: 110: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 47 p. Huckaby, L.S., M.R. Kaufmann, J.A. Stoker, and P.J. Fornwalt. 2001. Landscape patterns of montane forest age structure relative to fie history at Cheesman Lake in the Colorado Front Range. In R.K. Vance, C.B Edminster, W.W. Covington and J.A Blake, eds. Ponderosa pine ~cosystems restoration and conservation: Steps toward stewardship. Proc. RM-P-22. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Hunter, M.E., P.N. Omi, EJ. Martinson, and G.W. Chong. Establishment of nonnative plant species after wildfires: effects offuel treatments, abiotic and biotic factors, and post-fire grass seeding treatments. International Journal of Wildland Fire In press. Jerman, J.L., P.J. Gould, and P.Z. Fule. 2004. Slash compression treatment reduced tree mortality from prescribed fire in southwestern ponderosa pine. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 19: 149-153. Jones & Stokes. 2004. Nonburning alternatives to prescribed fire on wildlands in the western United States. Sacramento, CA. 55 p. Kallander, H.R. 1969. Controlled burning of the Fort Apache Indian Reservation. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference Proceedings 9: 241-249. Kaufman, N .M. 1995. Recovery plan for the Mexican Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis lucida) Vol. I. U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwestern Region, Albuquerque, NM. 172 p. Kaufmann, G.A. and W.W. Covington. 2001. Effects of prescribed burning on mortality of presettlement ponderosa pines in Grand Canyon National Park. In: R.K. Vance et aI., eds. Ponderosa pine ecosystem restoration and conservation: Steps toward stewardship. Proc. RMRS-P-22. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Kaufmann, M.R., P.J. Fornwalt, L.S. Huckaby, and lM. Stoker. 2001. Cheesman Lake - A historical ponderosa pine landscape guiding restoration in the South Platte watershed of the Colorado Front Range. In: R.K. Vance et aI., eds. Ponderosa pine ecosystems restoration and conservation: Steps toward stewardship. Proc. RMRS-P-22. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Kaufmann, M.R., P.Z. Fule, W.H. Romme, and K.C. Ryan. 2005. Restoration of ponderosa pine forests in the interior western U.S. after logging, grazing, and fire suppression. In: J.A. Stanturf and P. Madsen, eds. Restoration ofboreal and temperate forests. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Kaufmann, M.R., L.S. Huckaby, PJ. Fornwalt, J.M. Stoker, and W.H. Romme. 2003. Using tree recruitment patterns and fire history to guide restoration of an unlogged ponderosa
71 - .
pinelDouglas fir landscape in the southern Rocky Mountains after a century of fire suppression. Forestry 76: 231-24l. Kaufmann, M.R., L.S. Huckaby, C.M. Regan, and J. Popp. 1998. Forest reference conditions for ecosystem management in the Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-19. Fort Collins, co: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 87 p. Kaufmann, M.R., C.M. Regan, and P.M. Brown 2000. Heterogeneity in ponderosa pine/Douglas fir forests: age and size structure in unlogged and logged landscapes of central Colorado. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 30: 698-711. Kaye, M.W. and T.W. Swetnam. 1999. An assessment of fire, climate, and Apache history and Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico. Physical Geography 20: 305-330. Keane, R.E., K.C. Ryan, T.T. Veblen, C.D. Allen, J. Logan and B. Hawkes. 2002. Cascading effects of fire exclusion in Rocky Mountain ecosystems: A literature review. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-91. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 24 p. Keeley, J.E., D. Lubin, and C.l Fotheringham. 2003. Fire and grazing impacts on plant diversity and alien plant invasions in southern Sierra Nevada. Ecological Applications 13: 1355 1374. Kilgore, B.M. and G.A. Curtis. 1987. Guide to understory burning in ponderosa pinellarch-fir forests in the intermountain west. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-233. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 29 p. Kime, W.R. [ed.] 1996. The Black Hills journal of Colonel Richard Irving Dodge. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK. Knight, D.H. 1994. Mountains and plains: The ecology of Wyoming landscapes. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Korb, J.E., N.C. Johnson, and W.W. Covington. 2004. Slash pile burning effects on soil biotic and chemical properties and plant establishment: recommendations for amelioration. Restoration Ecology 12: 52-62. Korb, J.E., J.D. Springer, S.R. Powers, and M.M. Moore. 2005. Soil seed banks in Pinus ponderosa forests in Arizona: clues to site history and restoration potential. Applied Vegetation Science 8: 103-112. Kufeld, R.C. 1983. Response of elk, mule deer, cattle, and vegetation to burning, spraying, and chaining of Gambel oak rangeland. Technical pub. 34. Colorado Division of Wildlife Landers, P.B., P. Morgan, and F.J. Swanson. 1999. Overview ofthe use of natural variability concepts in managing ecological systems. Ecological Applications 9: 1179-1188. Landsberg, lD. and A.R. Tiedemann. 2000. Fire management. In: G.E. Dissmeyer, ed. Drinking water from forests and grasslands: A synthesis of the scientific literature. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-GTR-39. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. Larson, J. and R. Hallman. 1980. Equipment for reforestation and timber stand improvement. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Equipment and Development Center, Missoula, MT. Larson, F.R., P.F. Ffoilott, and W.P. Clary. 1986. Managing wildlife habitat. Journal of Forestry 84: 40-41.
72 Laughlin, D.C., J.D. Bakker, and P.Z. Fule. 2005. Understorey plant community structure in lower montane and subalpine forests, Grand Canyon National Park, USA. Journal of Biogeography 32: 2083-2102. Laughlin, D.C., JD. Bakker, M.T. Stoddard, M.L. Daniels, J.D. Springer, C.N. Gildar, A.M. Green, and W.W. Covington. 2004. Toward reference conditions: wildfire effects on flora in an old-growth ponderosa pine forest. Forest Ecology and Management 199: 137-152. Lauver, C.L., D.A. Jameson, and L.R. Rittenhouse. 1989. Management strategies for Gambel oak communities. Rangelands 11: 213-216. Laven, RD., P.N. Omi, lG. Wyant, and A.S. Pinkerton. 1980. Interpretation ofthe fire scar data from a ponderosa pine ecosystem in the central Rocky Mountains, Colorado. In M.A. Stokes and J.H. Dieterich, eds. Proceedings of the fire history workshop. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-81. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Le Van-Green, S.L. and J.M. Livingston. 2003. Uses for small diameter and low value forest thinnings. Ecological Restoration 21: 34-38. Lentile, L.B. 2004. Casual factors and consequences of mixed-severity fire in Black Hills ponderosa pine forests. Fort Collins, co: Colorado State University. Dissertation. Lindenmuth, A. W. 1960. A survey of the effects of intentional burning on fuels and timber stands of ponderosa pine in Arizona. Sta. Pap. No. 54. Fort Collins, co: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 22 p. Loehle, C. 2004. Applying landscape principles to fire hazard reduction. Forest Ecology and Management 198: 261-267. Lolley, M.R., C. McNicoll, J., Encinas, J. Monzingo, C. Koury, G. Partido, M. Levesque, A. Bradley, and P. ~cCarthy. 2006. Restoring the functionality of fire adapted ecosystems, Gila National Forest restoration needs and opportunity. Unpublished report. Gila National Forest. 130 p. Long, IN. 1995. Using stand density index to regulate stocking in uneven-aged stands. In: K.L. O'Harea, ed. Uneven-aged management opportunities, constraints, and methodologies. The University of Montana, Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station Msc. Pub. 56. Lull. H.W. 1959. Soil compaction on forest and range lands. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Misc. Pub. 768. Washington, D.C. 33 p. Lundquist, J.E. and IF. Negron. 2000. Endemic forest disturbances and stand structure of ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) in the Upper Creek Natural Area, South Dakota, USA. Natural Areas Journal 20: 126-132. Lynch, D.L. 2001. Financial results of ponderosa pine forest restoration in southwestern Colorado. In: R.K. Vance et aI., eds. Ponderosa pine ecosystem restoration and conservation: Steps toward stewardship. Proc. RMRS-P-22. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Lynch, D.L., W.H. Romme, and M.L. Floyd. 2000. Forest restoration in southwest ponderosa pine. Journal of Forestry 98: 17-24. Madany, M.H. and N.E. West. 1983. Livestock grazing and fire regime interactions within montane forests of Zion National Park, Utah. Ecology 64: 661-667. Mahaffey, L. and M. Miller. 1994. Chapter IV - Air quality. In: M. Miller ed. Fire effects guide .. PMS 481, NFES 2395. National Interagency Fire Center, Boise, ID.
73 - --
Marquiss, R.W. 1973. Gambel oak control studies in southwestern Colorado. Journal of Range Management 26: 57-58. Martinson, E.J. and P.N. Omi. 2003. Performance of fuel treatments subject to wildfires. In: P.N. Omi and J.A. Joyce, eds. Fire, fuel treatments, and ecological restoration. Proc. RMRS-P 29. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Martinson, E.J., P.N. Omi, and W.D. Shepperd. 2003. Part 3: Effects of fuel treatments on fire severity. In: R.L. Graham, ed. Hayman Fire case study. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR 114. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Massman, W.J., J.M. Frank, W.D. Shepperd, and M.J. Platten. 2003. In situ soil temperatures and heat flux measurements during controlled surface bums at a southern Colorado forest site. In: P.N. Omi and L.A. Joyce, eds. Fire, fuel treatments, and ecological restoration. Proc. RMRS-P-29. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. McAdams, A. G. 1995. Changes in ponderosa pine forest structure in the Black Hills, South Dakota, 1874-1995. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University. Thesis. McCambridge, W.F. and R.E. Stevens. 1982. Effectiveness of thinning ponderosa pine stands in reducing mountain pine beetle caused tree losses in the Black Hills - preliminary observations. Res. Note RM-414. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 3 p. McIver, J.D. and L. Starr. 2001. A literature review ofthe environmental effects ofpostfire logging. Western Journal ofApplied Forestry 16: 159-168. McKenzie, D. W. 1991. Precommercial thinning and slash treatment machine - a prospectus. 9124 1204. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Technology and Development Center. Missoula, MT. Meyer, C.L. and T.D. Sisko 2001. Butterfly response to microclimatic conditions following ponderosa pine restoration. Restoration Ecology 9: 453-461. Minard, A. 2003. Limiting damage to forest soils during restoration. Working papers in southwestern ponderosa pine forest restoration. No.5. Ecological Restoration Institute, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ. 5 p. Moore, M.M., W.W. Covington, and P.Z. Fule. 1999. Reference conditions and ecological restoration: A southwestern perspective. Ecological Applications 9: 1266-1277. Moore, M.M., D.W. Huffman, P.Z. Fule, and W.W. Covington. 2004. Comparison of historical and contemporary forest structure and composition on permanent plots in southwestern ponderosa pine forests. Forest Science 50: 162-176. Morris, W.G. and E.L. Mowat. 1958. Some effects of thinning a ponderosa pine thicket with a prescribed fire. Journal ofForestry 56: 203-209. Myers, C.A. 1974. Multipurpose silviculture in ponderosa pine stands ofthe montane zone of central Colorado. Res. Pap. RM-132. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 15 p. Nakamura, G. 2005. Biomass thinning for fuel reduction and forest restoration - issues and opportunities. University of California, Cooperative Extension. 9 p. National Interagency Fire Center. 2000. Cerro Grande Fire investigation report. Negron, J.F. and J.B. Popp. 2004. Probability of ponderosa pine infestation by mountain pine beetle in the Colorado Front Range. Forest Ecology and Management 191: 17-27.
74 - -
Nowicki, B. 2001. Protecting communities from forest fire: effectively treating the wildland urban interface. Southwest Forest Alliance, Flagstaff, AZ. 11 p. Omi, P.N., E.J. Martinson, M.E. Hunter, G.W. Chong, M.A. Kalkahn, and TJ. Stohlgren. 2005. Spatial interactions among fuels, wildfire, and non-native plants. Final Report submitted to the Joint Fire Science Program. 41 p. Orozoco, P. and R. Carrillo. 1992-93. Prescribed burning of ponderosa pine red slash on the Gila National Forest. Fire Management Notes 53-54: 3-8. Orr, H.K. 1975. Watershed management in the Black Hills: The status of our knowledge. Res. Pap. RM-RP-141. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 12 p. Parker, K.C. 2002. Fire in the pre-European lowlands of the American southwest. In: T.R. Vale, ed. Fire, native peoples, and the natural landscape. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Parrish, J.B., D.J. Herman, and D.J. Reyher. 1996. A century of change in the Black Hills forest and riparian ecosystems. USDA Forest Service, Agriculture Experiment Station, South Dakota State University. Passovoy, M.D. and P.Z. Fule. 2006. Snag and woody debris dynamics following severe wildfires in northern Arizona ponderosa pine forests. Forest Ecology and Management 223: 237-246. Patton, D .R.197 5. Abert squirrel cover requirements in southwestern ponderosa pine. Res. Pap. RM-145. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 12 p. Peet, R.K. 1981. Forest vegetation of the Colorado Front Range - composition and dynamics. Vegetatio 45: 3-75. Peterson, D.L., M.C. Johnson, J.K. Agee, T.B. Jain, D. McKenzie, and E.D. Reinhardt. 2005. Forest structure and fire hazard in dry forests of the western United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-628. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 38 p. Pollet, J. and P.N. Omi.·2002. Effect of thinning and prescribed burning on crown fire severity in ponderosa pine forests. International Journal of Wildland Fire 11: 1-10. Poff, R.J. 1996. Effects ofsilvicultural practices and wildfire on productivity of forest soils. In: Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final report to congress, Vol. II, assessments and scientific basis for management options. University of California, Davis, CA. Progulske, D.R. 1974. Yellow ore, yellow hair, and yellow pine: A photographic study of a century of forest ecology. Bull. 616. Brookings, SD: Agricultural Experiment Station, South Dakota State University. Pyne, S.J. 1997. America's fires: Management on wildlands and forests. Forest History Society, Durham, NC. Pyne, S.J. 2004. Tending fire: Coping with America's wildland fire. Island Press, Washington D.C. Pyne, S.J., P.L. Andrews, and R.D. Laven 1996. Introduction to wildland fire. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Randall-Parker, T. and R. Miller. 2002. Effects of prescribed fire in ponderosa pine on key wildlife habitat 75 - - 181. Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station. Raventon, E. 1994. Island in the plains: A Black Hills natural history. Johnson Printing Co., Boulder, CO. Reinhardt, E.D. and N.L. Crookston. 2003. The fire and fuels extension of the forest vegetation simulator. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-116. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 220 p. Reinhardt, E.D., R.E. Keane, and J.K. Brown. 1997. Eirst Order Eire .Effects Model: FOFEM 4.0 user's guide. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-344. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 65 p. Resh, S.G., M.G. Ryan, L.A. Joyce, and D. Binkley. 2005. Chipping and mastication in forested ecosystems - A synthesis. Unpublished report. Reynolds, R.T., W.M. Block, and D.A. Boyce. 1996. Using ecological relationships of wildlife as templates for restoring southwestern forests. In: W.W. Covington and P.K. Wagner, eds. Conference on adaptive ecosystem restoration and management: Restoration of Cordilleran conifer landscapes of North America. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-278. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Reynolds, R.T., R.T. Graham, M.H. Reiser, R.L. Bassett, P.L. Kennedy, D.A. Boyce, G. Goodwin, R. Smith, and E.L. Fisher. 1992. Management recommendations for the northern goshawk in the southwestern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-217. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 90 p. Riggs, R.A. and P.J. Urness. 1989. Effects of goat browsing on Gambel oak communities in northern Utah. Journal of Range Management 42: 354-360. Romme, W.H., R.L. Knight, W.L. Baker, F.W. Smith, and S.W. Buskirk. 2000. What have we learned about forest fragmentation in southern Rocky Mountains? In: R.L. Knight, F.W. Smith, S.W. Buskirk, W.H. Romme, and W.L. Baker, eds. Forest fragmentation in the southern Rocky Mountains. University of Colorado Press, Boulder, CO. Rosenstock, S.S. 1998. Influence of Gambel oak on breeding birds in ponderosa pine forests of northern Arizona. The Condor 100: 485-492. Rueth, H.M., J.S. Baron, and L.A. Joyce. 2002. Natural resource extraction: past, present and future. Pages 85-112 in: J.S. Baron, ed. Rocky Mountain futures: An ecological perspective. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Ryan, M.G. and W.W. Covington. 1986. Effect of a prescribed burn in ponderosa pine on inorganic nitrogen concentrations of mineral soil. Res. Note RM-464. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 5 p. Ryans, M. and D. Cormier. 1994. A review of mechanized brush-cutting equipment for forestry. Special Report SR-I01. Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada. Sackett, S.S. 1980. Reducing natural ponderosa pine fuels using prescribed fire: Two case studies. Res. Note RM-RN-392. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p. Sackett, S.S., S.M. Haase, and M.G. Harrington. 1996. Lessons learned from fire use for restoring southwestern ponderosa pine ecosystems. In: W.W. Covington and M.R. Wagner, eds. Conference on adaptive ecosystem restoration and management: 76 - - Restoration of Cordilleran conifer landscapes of North America. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM GTR-278. Fort Collins, CO:U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Savage, M. 1991. Structural dynamics of a southwestern ponderosa pine forest under chronic human influence. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 81: 271-289. Savage, M. 2003. Community monitoring for restoration projects in southwest ponderosa pine forests. Southwest region working paper 5, 2nd edition. Santa Fe, NM: National Community Forestry Center. 46 p. Savage, M. and T.W. Swetnam. 1990. Early 19th century fire decline following sheep pasturing in a Navajo ponderosa pine forest. Ecology 71: 2374-2378. Schmid, J.M. and S.A. Mata. 1996. Natural variability of specific forest insect populations and their associated effects in Colorado. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-275. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 14 p. Schmid, J.M., S.A. Mata, and R.A. Obedzinski. 1994. Hazard rating ponderosa pine stands for mountain pine beetles in the Black Hills. Res. Note RM-RN-529. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 4 p. Schumann, M. 2004. Fuel reduction projects in southwestern ponderosa pine forests: A description of sites and treatments. National Community Forestry Center, Southwest Region Working Paper No.9. 66 p. Scott, J.H. 1996. Restoring recreation and residential forests. In: C.C. Hardy and S.F. Arno (eds.) The use of fire in forest restoration. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-341. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. Scott, lH. 1998. Fuel reduction in residential and scenic forests: A comparison of three treatments in a western Montana ponderosa pine stand. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-S. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 19 p. Scott, J.H. 1999. NEXUS: A system for assessing crown fire hazard. Fire Management Notes 59: 20-24. Severson, K.E. and J.N. Rinne. 1990. Increasing habitat diversity in southwest forests and woodlands via prescribed fire. In: J.S. Krammes, ed. Effects of fire management of southwestern natural resources, proceedings of the symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-191. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Severson, K.E. and D. W. Uresk. 1988. Influence of ponderosa pine overstory on forage quality in the Black Hills, South Dakota. Great Basin Naturalist 48: 78-82. Shepperd, G. and A. Farnsworth. 1997. Fire effects and the use of fire in Mexican spotted owl habitat. In: J .M. Greelee, ed. Proceedings - Fire effects on rare and endangered species and habitats. Nov. 13-16, 1995, Coeur d' Alene, ID. International Association of Wildland Fire, Fairfield, W A. Shepperd, W.D. and M.A. Battaglia. 2002. Ecology, silviculture, and management of Black Hills ponderosa pine. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-97. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 112 p. 77 - - Shepperd, W.D., R.R. Alexander, and F. Ronco. 1983. Silviculture of ponderosa pine in the central and southern Rocky Mountains. RM-TT-4. Fort Collins, co: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 36 p. Shinneman, D.L. and W.L. Baker. 1997. Nonequilibrium dynamics between catastrophic disturbances and old-growth forests in ponderosa pine landscapes ofthe Black Hills. Conservation Biology 11: 1276-1288. Sieg, C.H. and K.E. Severson. 1996. Managing habitats for white-tailed deer: Black Hills and Bear Lodge MOl,mtains of South Dakota and Wyoming. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-274. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 24 p. Sieg, C.H. and H.A. Wright. 1996. The role of prescribed burning in regenerating Quercus macrocarpa and associated woody plants in stringer woodlands in the Black Hills, South Dakota. International Journal of Wildland Fire 6: 21-29. Sisk, T.D., H.M. Hampton, J.W. Prather, E.N. Aumak, Y. Xu, M.R. Loeser, T. Munoz-Erikson, B. Dickson, and J. Palumbo. 2004. Forest Ecological Restoration Analysis (ForestERA) Project Report 2002-2004. Center for Environmental Sciences and Education, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ. 105 p. Skov, K.R., T.E. Kolb, and K.F. Wallin. 2005. Difference in radial growth response to restoration thinning and burning treatments between young and old ponderosa pine in Arizona. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 20: 36-43. Smith, D.M., B.C. Larson, M.J. Kelty, and P.M.S. Ashton. 1997. The practice of silviculture: Applied forest ecology 9th edition. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY. Snider, G.B., D.B. Wood, and P.l. Daugherty. 2003. Analysis of costs and benefits of restoration based hazardous. fuel reduction treatments: treatment vs. no treatment. Progress report no. 1. Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ. 14 p. Spiering, D.J. and R.L. Knight. 2005. Snag density and use by cavity nesting birds in managed stands of the Black Hills National Forest. Forest Ecology and Management 214: 40-52. Springer, J.D., A.E.M. Waltz, P.Z. Fule, M.M. Moore, and W.W. Covington. 2001. Seeding versus natural regeneration: A comparison of vegetation change following thinning and burning in ponderosa pine. In: Vance, R.K., C.B. Edminster, W.W. Covington, and J.A. Blake, comps. Ponderosa pine ecosystem restoration and conservation: Steps toward stewardship; 2000 April 25-27; Flagstaff, AZ. Proc. RMRS-P-22. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Stednick, J.D. 1996. Monitoring the effects of timber harvest on annual water yield. Journal of Hydrology 176: 79-95. Stephens, S.L. and J.J. Moghaddas. 2005a. Silvicultural and reserve impacts on potential fire behavior and forest conservation: twenty-five years ofexperience from Sierra Nevada mixed conifer forests. Biological Conservation 125: 369-379. Stephens, S.L. and J.J. Moghaddas. 2005b. Experimental fuel treatment impacts on forest structure, potential fire behavior, and predicted tree mortality in a California mixed conifer forest. Forest Ecology and Management 215: 21-36. Stokes, B.J. 1992. Harvesting small trees and forest residues. Biomass and Bioenergy 2: 131 147. Stratton, R.C. 2004. Assessing the effectiveness of landscape fuel treatments on fire growth and behavior. Journal of Forestry 102: 32-40. 78 - - Swetnam, T.W. 1990. Fire history and climate in the southwestern United States. In: J.S. Krammes, ed. Proceedings of the symposium on effects of fire management of southwestern United States natural resources. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-191. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Swetnam, T.W. and Baisan, C.H. 1996. Historical fire regime patterns in the southwestern United States since AD 1700. In: C.D. Allen, ed. Fire effects in southwestern forests: Proceedings of the La Mesa fire symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-286. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Swetnam, T.W. and Betancourt, J.L. 1998. Mesoscale disturbance and ecological response to decadal climate variability in the American southwest. Journal of Climate 11: 3128-3147. Swetnam, T.W. and J.H. Dieterich. 1985. Fire history of ponderosa pine forests in the Gila Wilderness, New Mexico. In: J.E. Lotan, B.M. Kilgore, W.C. Fischer, and R.W. Mutch, eds. Proceedings - symposium and workshop on wilderness fire. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT GTR-182, Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Swetnam, T.W. and A.M. Lynch. 1993. Multicentury, regional-scale patterns of western spruce budworm outbreaks. Ecological Monographs 63: 399-424. Swetnam, T.W., C.D. Allen, and J.L. Betancourt. 1999. Applied historical ecology: using the past to manage for the future. Ecological Applications 9: 1189-1206. Swezy, D.M. and J.K. Agee. 1991. Prescribed-fire effects on fine-root and tree mortality in old growth ponderosa pine. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 21: 626-634. Touchan, R., C.D. Allen, and T.W. Swetnam. 1996. Fire history and climatic patterns in ponderosa pine and mixed-conifer forests of the Jemez Mountains, northern New Mexico. In: C.D. Allen, ed. Fire effects in southwestern forests: Proceedings of the La Mesa fire symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-286, Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Trom bulak, S.c. and C.A. Frissell. 2000. Review of ecological effects ofroads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conservation Biology 14: 18-30. University of Arizona. WALTER: Wildfire Alternatives. 2002. http://walter.arizona.edu/. (cited 7112/06). Uresk, D.W. and K.E. Severson. 1989. Understory-overstory relationships in ponderosa pine forests, Black Hills, South Dakota. Journal of Range Management 42: 203-208. Uresk, D.W. and K.E. Severson. 1998. Responses of understory species to changes in ponderosa pine stocking levels in the Black I-Iills. Great Basin Naturalist 58: 312-327. Uresk, D.W., C.B. Edminster, and K.E. Severson. 2000. Wood and understory production under a range of ponderosa pine stocking levels, Black Hills, South Dakota. Western North American Naturalist 60: 93-97. USDA and USDI. 2005. Wildland fire use: Implementation and procedures guide. 75 p. USDA Forest Service. 1973. Fuel management planning and treatment guide - specific methods and procedures. Region 1. USDA Forest Service. 1994. Draft environmental impact statement for the Black Hills National Forest revised land and resource management plan (\vith appendices). 79 - - USDA Forest Service. 1995. Final environmental impact statement for amendment of forest plans. USDA Forest Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, NM. 262 p. USDA Forest Service. 1997. Revision ofthe land resource management plan, Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forest and Pawnee National Grassland, Rocky Mountain Region. USDA Forest Service. 2001. Black Hills National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, Phase I, Environmental Assessment, Black Hills National Forest, USDA Forest Service. 2003a. Black MountainlDevil's Hold fuels and watershed project environmental assessment, San Isabel National Forest, Canon City, Colorado. USDA Forest Service. 2003b. Fanny Project Area, Draft environmental assessment, Hell Canyon Ranger District, Black Hills National Forest, Custer County, South Dakota. USDA Forest Service. 2003c. A strategic assessment of forest biomass and fuel reduction treatments in western states. USDA Forest Service, Research and Development and the Western Forestry Leadership Coalition. http://www.fs.fed.us/researchlinfocenter.html USDA Forest Service. 2004a. Geranium project area draft environmental assessment, Black Hills National Forest. USDA Forest Service. 2004b. James Creek fuel reduction project environmental assessment, Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forest. USDA Forest Service. 2004c. Sugarloaf fuel reduction project environmental assessment, Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forest. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. Recovery plant for the Mexican spotted owl: Vol I. Albuquerque, New Mexico. 172 p. Van Epps, G.A. 1974. Control of Gambel oak with three herbicides. Journal of Range Management 27: 297-301. Veblen, T.T. 2000. Disturbance patterns in southern Rocky Mountain forests. In: R.L. Knight, F.W. Smith, S.W. Buskirk, W.H. Romme, and W.L. Baker, eds. Forest fragmentation in the southern Rocky Mountains. University of Colorado Press, Boulder, CO. Veblen, T.T. 2003. Key"issues in fire regime research for fuels management and ecological restoration. In: P.N. Omi and L.A. Joyce, eds. Fire, fuel treatments, and ecological restoration: Conference proceedings. Proc. RMRS-P-29, Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Veblen, T.T. and T. Kitzberger. 2002. Inter-hemispheric comparison offire history: The Colorado Front Range, U.S.A. and the northern Patagonian Andes, Argentina. Plant Ecology 163: 187-207. Veblen, T.T. and D.C. Lorenz. 1986. Anthropogenic disturbance and recovery patterns in montane forests; Colorado Front Range. Physical Geography 7: 1-23. Veblen, T.T. and D.C. Lorenz. 1991. The Colorado Front Range: A century of ecological change. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, UT. Veblen, T.T., T. Kitzberger, and J. Donnegan. 2000. Climatic and human influences on fire regimes in ponderosa pine forests in the Colorado Front Range. Ecological Applications 10: 1178-1195. Wagle, R.F. and T.W. Eakle. 1979. A controlled burn reduces the impact of subsequent wildfire in a ponderosa pine vegetation type. Forest Science 25: 123-129. Wallin, K.F., T.E. Kolb; K.R. Skov, and M.R. Wagner. 2003. Effects of crown scorch on ponderosa pine resistance to bark beetles in northern Arizona. Environmental Entomology 32: 652-661. 80 - - Wallin, K.F., T.E. Kolb, K.R. Skov, and M.R. Wagner. 2004. Seven-year results ofthinning and burning restoration treatments on old ponderosa pines and the Gus Pearson Natural Area. Restoration Ecology 12: 239-247. Wang, J., W.D. Greene,' and B.J. Stokes. 1998. Stand, harvest, and equipment interactions in simulated harvesting prescriptions. Forest Products Society 48: 81-85. Weaver, H. 1951. Fire as an ecological factor in southwestern ponderosa pine forests. Journal of Forestry 49: 93-98. Webb, D.R. and R.L. Henderson. 1985. Gila wilderness prescribed fire program. In: J.E. Lotan, B.M. Kilgore, W.C. Fischer, and R.W. Mutch, eds. Proceedings - symposium and workshop on wilderness fire. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-182. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. White, A.S. 1985. Presettlement regeneration patterns in a southwestern ponderosa pine stand. Ecology 66: 589-594. Wickman, T. and A. Acheson. 2005. Smoke Impact Spreadsheet (SIS) model; Environmental consequences factsheet: 11. Research Note RMRS-RN-23-11-www. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 1 p. Wieder, W.R. and N.W. Bower. 2004. Fire history of the Aiken Canyon grassland-woodland ecotone in the squthern foothills of the Colorado Front Range. Southwestern Naturalist 49: 239-243. Wienk, C.L., C.H. Sieg, and G.R. McPherson. 2004. Evaluating the role of cutting treatments, fire, and soil seed banks in an experimental framework in ponderosa pine forests of the Black Hills, South Dakota. Forest Ecology and Management 192: 375-393. Wilson, J.L. and B.M. Tkacz. 1994. Status of insects and disease in the southwest: Implications for forest health. In: W.W. Covington and L.F. DeBano, eds. Sustainable ecological systems: Implementing an ecological approach to land management. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-GTR-247. F.ort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Windell, K. and S. Bradshaw. 2000. Understory biomass reduction methods and equipment. 0051-2828-MTDC. USDA Forest Service, T~chnology and Development Program, Missoula, MT. Winter, G.J., C. Vogt, and J.S. Fried. 2002. Fuel treatments at the wildland urban interface common concerns in diverse regions. Journal of Forestry 100: 15-21. Wolfson, B.A.S., T.E. Kolb, C.H. Sieg, and K.M. Clancy. 2005. Effects of post-fire conditions on germination and seedling success of diffuse knapweed in northern Arizona. Forest Ecology and Management 216: 342-358. Wood, D.B. 1988. Costs of prescribed burning in southwestern ponderosa pine. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 3: 115-119. Woodridge, D.D. and H. Weaver. 1965. Some effects of thinning a ponderosa pine thicket with prescribed fire, II. Journal of Forestry 63: 92-95. Wyant, J.G., P.N. Omi, and R.D. Laven. 1986. Fire induced tree mortality in a Colorado ponderosa pine Douglas fir stand. Forest Science 32: 49-59. Young, D.L. and J.A. Baily. 1975. Effects offire and mechanical treatment on Cercocarpus montanus and Ribes cereum. Journal of Range Management 28: 495-497. 81 - -- Zauzen, G.L., T.E. Kolb, J.D. Baily, and M.R. Wagner. 2005. Long-term impacts of stand management on ponderosa pine physiology and bark beetle abundance in northern Arizona: A replicated landscape study. Forest Ecology and Management 218: 291-305. 82 - - Appendix A: Equipment used in fuel reduction operations including cutting and moving heads for attachment to prime movers, forwarders, skidders, loaders, delimbers, processors, chippers, and prime movers. Feller-buncher heads Head Prime mover Manufacturer Reference Feller-bundler head Prentice track boom Blount, Inc. www.blount-fied.com feller-buncher FS20, FS22, or FG18 700 series tracked feller Deere & Co. www.deere.com disc saws bunchers FS22, FS24, FG 18 or J series tracked feller Deere & Co. www.deere.com FG22 disc saws bunchers FB20 shear head, H series wheeled feller Deere & Co. www.deere.com FD22 or FD45 disc bunchers saw Franklin 16"-21" shear Hydrostatic wheeled Franklin www.franklin or disc saw feller-bunchers Equipment Co. tree farm er. com Hydro-Ax 16"-22" Hydro-Ax series 70 Blount, Inc. www.blount-fied.com shear or saws feller-buncher (wheeled) Barko 20" saw Barko 885C Feller Barko www.barko.com buncher Hydraulics, LLC 20" buncher saw head Morbark 6300XL tractor Morbark, Inc. www.morbark.com 20"-24" B series Swing to tree feller Quadco www.guadco.com cutting heads buncher Equipment, Inc. 20"-24" C series Drive to tree or swing to Quadco www.guadco.com cutting heads tree feller buncher Equipment, Inc. L series processors purpose built feller Quadco www.guadco.com buncher or excavator Equipment, Inc. Tigercat saws and Drive to tree or swing to Tigercat www.tigercat.com shears tree feller buncher Industries Feller-buncher head Caterpillar feller Caterpillar, Inc. w\vw.cat.com buncher 83 - - Tree harvester heads Head Prime mover Manufacturer Reference Keto Harvester Boom type excavator Forestry www.hakmet.com Equipment, Inc. HSG 140 and 160 single Mini excavator, 3- or Hahn www.hahnmachinery.com grip harvester 4-wheeled carrier, Machinery, Inc. large skid steer Fabek 18" and 24" fixed Fabek and Prentice Blount, Inc. www.blount-fied.com and dangle head track harvesters Rottne EGS 400 and 700 Rottne single grip Blondin, Inc. www.rottneusa.com harvesters Ultimate 5600/5660 Feller-buncher or Quado www.guadco.com harvester/processor excavator Equipment, Inc. Tigercat harvester Purpose built machine Tigercat www.tigercat.com Industries Arbro-stroke-harvester Tractor or log loader Hackmet, Ltd. www.hakment.com Caterpillar harvesting Caterpillar harvester Caterpillar, Inc. www.cat.com heads Brush cutting heads Head Prime mover Manufacturer Reference Horizontal shaft Excavator Pro Mac www·l2romac.ba.ca brush cutter Manufacturing, Inc. Rotary brush Excavator Pro Mac www·l2romac.ba.ca cutter Manufacturing, Inc. Flail brush cutter Excavator Pro Mac www·l2romac.ba.ca Manufacturing, Inc. Ammbusher Skid steer loader Ammbusher, Inc. www.ambusher.com brush cutter S lash buster Excavator D&MMachine www.slashbuster.com Division, Inc. Bull hog brush Excavator, tracked or Fecon, Inc. www.fecon.com cutter rubber tired carrier, skid steer 84 - Brush cutter 4-wheeled rubber tired Franklin Equipment www.frankilin machine Co. tree farmer. com Grapples and rakes Head Prime mover Manufacturer Reference Grapple wheeled loaders, skid steer New Dymax, Inc. www.dvmaxattachments.com rakes loaders, compact wheeled loaders, and backhoe loaders Stacking skid loaders and small New Dymax, Inc. www.dymaxattachments.com forks wheeled loaders Grapples John Deere G-III series Timberjack, Inc. \vww.timberjack.com grapple skidders Rakes, Dozer or loader Rockland www.rocklandmfg.com grapples Manufacturing Co. Rakes, Wheeled loaders Pemberton, Inc. www.pembcrtoninc.com grapples Forwarders Machine Manufacturer Reference Ranger forwarder and harvester Allied Systems Co. www.alliedsystems.com Tigercat forwarders Tigercat Industries, Inc. www.tigercat.com Forwarders Timberjack, Inc. www.timberjack.com Fabek forwarders Blount, Inc. www.blount-lied.com Forwarders Franklin Equipment Co. www.franklin-treefarmer.com Forwarders Caterpillar, Inc. www.caLcom Skidders Machine Manufacturer Reference Ranger skidder Allied Systems Co. www.allicdsystcms.com Tigercat skidders Tigercat Industries, Inc. www.tigcrcat.com GIll series cable skidders Timberjack, Inc. www.timberjack.com CTR skidders Blount, Inc. www.blount-fied.com Prentice skidder Blount, Inc. www.blount-fied.com Cable and grapple skidders Franklin Equipment Co. www.franklin-treefarmer.com Skidders Caterpillar, Inc. www.cat.COlll Loaders Machine Manufacturer Reference Tigercat loader Tigercat Industries, Inc. www.tigcrcat.com Knuckleboom log loaders Timberjack, Inc. www.timberjack.com Loaders Barko Hydraulics, LLC www.barko.com Prentice log loaders Blount, Inc. www.blount-fied.com 85 I ' -- ' Pete 33 loader Hakmet, Ltd. www.hakmet.com Knuckleboom log loaders Franklin Equipment Co. www.franklin-treefanner.com Knuckleboom log loaders Caterpillar. Inc. www.cat.com DelimberslProcesssors Machine Manufacturer Reference DT4100 series telescopic de limbers Denharco, Inc. www.denharco.com DHT650 series II processor Denharco, Inc. ww\v.denharco.com 2455 Delimber/debarker Morbark, Inc. www.morbark.com CTR pull-through de limber Blount, Inc. www.blount-fied.com Chippers Machine Manufacturer Reference Whole tree chippers Morbark, Inc. www.morbark.com Mountain goats Morbark, Inc. www.morbark.com Hand fed chippers Bandit Industries, Inc. www.banditchippers.com Whole tree chippers Bandit Industries, Inc. www.banditchippers.co11l Prime movers Machine Manufacturer Reference Mini excavator, crawler excavator, Schaeff of North www.schaefT.co11l compact and swing loaders America, Inc. Compact excavator, skid steer loaders, Bobcat Co. www.bobcat.com compact track loaders Compact track loaders, crawler dozers, Case Corp. \vw\v.casccorp.com compact and tracked excavators, skid steer loaders. wheeled loaders Dozers, tractors. excavators Bell Equipment www.bell.co.za N.A., Inc. Loaders, carriers, excav~tors, dozers Komatsu America www.KomatsuAmerica.com International Co. Tracked crawlers All Season Vehicles, www.aSVl.com Inc. Loaders, dozers, excavators Ranger Equipment www.rangerequipment.com Co. Multi-terrain loaders, skid steer loaders, Caterpillar, Inc. www.cat.cOl11 tracked loaders, dozers, wheeled loaders 86 - . Appendix B: Models used in fuel treatment planning and implementation BehavePlus BehavePlus uses inputs 'of fuel characteristics, weather and topography to predict surface fire and crown fire spread and intensity. This model has a variety of applications for wildland fire suppression and training. For prescribed fire it is typically used to develop prescription windows that will result in desired fire behavior. This model is available to download at www.fire.org. CONSUME CONSUME is a model that predicts fuel consumption and emission based on fuel and weather conditions. This model is available to download at http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/feralproducts/consume.html. Farsite Farsite uses spatial information on fuels and topography and weather indices to simulate fire spread across a landscape. This model is particularly useful for simulating spread of fires used for resource benefit and for landscape planning of fuel treatments. This model is available to download at \vww.fire.org. FFE-FVS The Fire and Fuels Extension of the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FFE-FVS) links growth and yield models of FVS with models that predict fire behavior, fire effects, fuel loading, and snag dynamics. This model is particularly useful for examining the potential short- and long-term effects of fuel treatments. This model is available to download at www.fs.fed.us/fmsc/fvslindex. shtml. FIREMON FIREMON is monitoring program designed to enable managers to develop a monitoring protocol, collect data, and store and analyze fire effects. This model is available to download at www.fire.org. FlamMap FlamMap computes potential fire behavior characteristics over a Farsite landscape. FlamMap is particularly useful for prioritizing fuel treatment areas across a landscape and assessing their effectiveness in preventing severe wildfire spread. This model is available to download at www.fire.org. FMAPlus Fuels Management Analyst (FMAPlus) is a model that can estimate loading of surface and canopy fuels and then predict surface and canopy fire behavior and fire effects. This model is available to purchase at http://www.fireps.com/fmanalyst3Iindex.htm. FOFEM The First Order Fire Effects Model (FOFEM) predicts the effects of fire on tree mortality, fuel consumption, smoke production and soil heating. This model is useful for assuring prescribed fires will result in desired fire effects. This model is available to download at www.fire.org. 87 -- FSVeg FSVeg is a program that can be used by managers in the Forest Service that contains data on trees, surface cover, down woody material, vegetation composition and fuel loading for stands on Forest Service land. FSVeg data can be used directly in the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) and the Integrated Forest Resource Management System (INFORMS). This program is very useful for fuel treatment planning. Information on this program is available at http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nris/products/fsveglindex.shtml. INFORMS The Integrated Forest Resource Management System (INFORMS) was designed for the Forest Service to support the entire NEP A process. This model is particularly useful in generating maps fire hazard for different 'treatment alternatives. It also generates Farsite ready data. This model is available to download at http://www.fs.fed.us/informslindex.php. MyFtp My fuel treatment planner (MyFtp) can be used to assess the cost associated with mechanical treatments and prescribed fire. It is available for downloading at hllJ]j/www.fs.fed.us/fireltechtransfer/svnthesis/economicutilizationteam/MvFTPhome.htm. Nexus Nexus links surface and crown fire behavior models to create indices of relative crown fire potential. This model can be used to examine the crown fire potential of stands treated for fuels reduction. This model is available to download at www.fire.org. 88 -- Appendix C: Species referenced in Best Management Practices Guide Plants Scientific Name Common Name Distribution Abies concolor White fir AZ,CO,NM Abies lasiocarpa Subalpine fir AZ, CO, NM Cercocarpus montanus Mountain mahogany AZ, CO, NM, SD Juniperus scopulorum Rocky Mountain juniper AZ, CO, NM, SD Picea engelmannii Engelmann spruce AZ. CO,NM Pinus ponderosa Ponderosa pine AZ, CO, NM, SD Populus tremuloides Quaking aspen AZ, CO, NM, SD Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir AZ, CO,NM Quercus gambellii Gambeloak AZ, CO, NM Quercus macrocarpa Bur oak NM,SD Birds Accipiter gentiles Northern goshawk AZ, CO, NM, SD Cervus canadensis Elk AZ, CO, NM, SD Odocoilells spp. Deer AZ, CO, NM, SD Strix occidentalis lucida Mexican Spotted Owl AZ,NM Mammals Antilocarpa Americana Pronghorn AZ, CO, NM, SD Bison bison American bison SD Cervus elaphus Elk AZ, CO, NM, SD Sciurus aberti Abert's squirrel AZ,CO,NM Insects Choristoneura occidentalis Spruce budworm AZ, CO, NM Dendroctol1l1S spp. Bark beetles AZ, CO, NM, SD Dendroctonus ponderosae Mountain pine beetle AZ, CO, NM, SD Ips spp. Ips beetles AZ, CO, NM, SD He::.peria leonardus montana Pawnee montane skipper CO Fish Oncorhynchus gilae Gila trout AZ,NM Diseases Arceuthobium spp. Dwarf mistletoe AZ, NM, CO 89 - - Appendix D: Managers interviewed Name Title Agency Craig Allen Research Ecologist USGS GoeffBell FMO Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest Kristy Berggren Forester Colorado State Forest Service Anne Bradley SW fire learning network The Nature Conservancy Russ Copp Forest Fuels Specialist Coconino National Forest Michael Creach Fuel Management Specialist Prescott National Forest Lawrence Garcia District FMO Santa Fe National Forest Steve Gatewood Program Director Greater Flagstaff Forests Partnership Craig Goodell Assistant FMO San Juan National Forest David Isackson ADFMO Santa Fe National Forest Tom Johnston Forest Fuels Specialist Santa Fe National Forest Gary Kemp FMO Bandelier NM Lowell Kendall AFMO Coconino National Forest Paul Langowski Branch Chief - Fuels/Fire ecology USFS - Rocky Mountain Region Randy Lewis Natural Resource Specialist Bureau of Land Management John Lissoway Wildland Fire Associates Cecilia McNicoll Forest Planner Gila National Forest Andy Perri Forester Colorado State Forest Service Toby Richards District FMO Gila National Forest Marla Rodgers AFMO Bandelier NM Orlando Romero Senior Forester Forest Guild Melissa Savage F our Comers Institute Paul Schmidtke Fire Staff Officer Lincoln National Forest T odd Schulke Center for Biological Diversity Martha Schumann SW NM field rep. The Nature Conservancy Scott Spleiss AFMO Prescott National Forest Paul Summerfelt Fuel Management Officer Flagstaff Fire Department Tracy Swenson ZoneFMO Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest Walker Thornton Fuels Specialist Coconino National Forest Jeff Thumm Natural Resource Specialist Coconino National Forest Russell Truman AFMO Kaibab National Forest Scott Wagner Forester San Juan National Forest Brenda Wasielewski Assistant District Forester Colorado State Forest Service RosWu Fire ecologist San Juan National Forest 90