Archival copy. For current version, see: https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu/sr1096 Synthesis of Knowledge on the Effects Synthesis of Knowledge on the Effects of Fire and Fire Surrogates on Wildlife in U.S. Dry Forests (SR 1096)—Oregon State University State 1096)—Oregon (SR Forests Dry U.S. in Wildlife on Surrogates Fire and Fire of Effects the on Knowledge of Synthesis of Fire and Fire Surrogates on Wildlife in U.S. Dry Forests Patricia L. Kennedy and Joseph B. Fontaine Special Report 1096 Archival copy. For current version, see: https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu/sr1096 Synthesis of Knowledge on the Effects of Fire and Fire Surrogates on Wildlife in U.S. Dry Forests Patricia L. Kennedy Professor Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Oregon State University Union, Oregon Joseph B. Fontaine Postdoctoral Researcher School of Environmental Science Murdoch University Perth, Australia Previously: Postdoctoral Researcher Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Oregon State University Union, Oregon Special Report 1096 September 2009 Archival copy. For current version, see: https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu/sr1096 Synthesis of Knowledge on the Effects of Fire and Fire Surrogates on Wildlife in U.S. Dry Forests Special Report 1096 September 2009 Extension and Experiment Station Communications Oregon State University 422 Kerr Administration Building Corvallis, OR 97331 http://extension.oregonstate.edu/ © 2009 by Oregon State University. This publication may be photocopied or reprinted in its entirety for noncommercial purposes. This publication was produced and distributed in furtherance of the Acts of Congress of May 8 and June 30, 1914. Extension work is a cooperative program of Oregon State University, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and Oregon counties. Oregon State University Extension Service offers educational programs, activities, and materials without discrimination based on age, color, disability, gender identity or expression, marital status, national origin, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, or veteran’s status. Oregon State University Extension Service is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Any mention of trade names does not constitute an endorsement. Acknowledgements This is contribution #87 of the National Fire and Fire Surrogate (FFS) Project, funded by the U.S. Joint Fire Science Program. We thank the the Program for funding this synthesis and Jim McIver for helping conceptualize the final product. Jim also provided us with all available Fire and Fire Surrogate Program information. We thank John Cissel, Tim Swedberg, Kim Verhelst, and Becky Jenison for administrative support. Anne Bartuszevige and Tim Swedberg provided invaluable support in organizing the scoping meeting. We also thank the meeting attendees: Shawn Cochran, Bob Csargo, Jim Gallagher, Robert Skorkowski, andAnne Sprague. They took time out of their impossible schedules to fly to Boise on short notice and share their expertise on wildlife and fire management. Their input was essential to the conceptual development of this project but they are not to blame for any shortcomings. Anne Bartuszevige, Shawn Cochran, Joan Hagar, Larry D. Hedrick, and Warren G. Montague reviewed this document. We also thank the faculty and staff of the School for Environmental Science at Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia, who provided an office and moral support during Prof. Kennedy’s sabbatical leave and spent many hours listening to her ideas about fire management. V. Cramer helped develop several graphics. A big thanks to Colette Coiner who assisted with all aspects of this document and who kept us organized across two hemispheres. Cover photos: Top left: Small herd of bison in a Yellowstone National Park meadow with ground fire in the background. (Jeff Henry, U.S. National Park Service) Top right: Pacific chorus frog using a pyrogenic structure in a patch of burned (4 years postfire) mixed conifer forest in the B&B Complex Fire, 2007, Oregon. (Garrett Meigs and Dan Donato) Bottom: Riparian areas are refugia for wildlife during wildland fires. East Fork of the Bitterroot River near Sula Montana, during the Bitterroot National Forest Fire, August 6, 2000. (John McColgan, Bureau of Land Managment, Alaska Fire Service) Archival copy. For current version, see: https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu/sr1096 Contents SUMMARY .............................................................................................................5 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................7 GOALS, ORGANIZATION, & SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT ...............11 Goals .........................................................................................................11 Organization .............................................................................................12 Scope ........................................................................................................12 FIRE AS A DISTURBANCE ..............................................................................12 DOES WILDFIRE DIRECTLY KILL WILDLIFE? ..........................................14 WILDLIFE RESPONSES TO POSTFIRE CONDITIONS ............................16 FACTORS INFLUENCING WILDLIFE RESPONSES .................................19 Prefire forest structure and composition...................................................19 Characteristics of individual fires .............................................................20 Fire history ................................................................................................25 Limited understanding of wildlife habitat requirements ..........................32 Variability in animal populations not related to fire ................................33 Sampling animal populations ..................................................................34 METHODS ............................................................................................................35 Scoping meetings .....................................................................................35 Literature search and criteria for inclusion ..............................................35 Database structure ....................................................................................36 Study categorization and quantitative comparisons ................................37 RESULTS ...............................................................................................................39 Overview ...................................................................................................39 Regional summaries .................................................................................41 Fire and Fire Surrogate Program .............................................................50 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................55 KNOWLEDGE GAPS .........................................................................................57 Mixed-severity fire ...................................................................................57 High-severity prescribed fire ....................................................................57 Long-term response to single and multiple fires .......................................58 Special Report 1096 3 Archival copy. For current version, see: https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu/sr1096 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................59 APPENDIX 1. SUMMARY AND DETAILS OF THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE .................................................................................................69 APPENDIX 2. SCIENTIFIC NAMES AND CONSERVATION STATUS (FEDERAL, REGIONAL, AND STATE) OF WILDLIFE TAXA ............77 APPENDIX 3. WILDLIFE RESPONSE TO FIRE AND FIRE SURROGATE TREATMENTS WITHIN EACH ECOREGION .......................................94 APPENDIX 4. WILDLIFE RESPONSE TO FIRE AND FIRE SURROGATE TREATMENTS ACROSS ECOREGIONS ...............................................119 Archival copy. For current version, see: https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu/sr1096 The Biscuit Fire in southern Oregon, in 2002. (Stephen Fitzgerald, Oregon State University Extension) SUMMARY ry forests throughout the United States are fire-dependent ecosystems, and much attention has been given to restoring their ecological function. DAs such, land managers often are tasked with reintroducing fire via prescribed fire, wildland fire use, and fire-surrogate treatments such as thinning and mastication. During planning, managers frequently are expected to anticipate effects of management actions on wildlife species. This document represents a synthesis of existing knowledge on wildlife responses to fire and fire-surrogate treatments, presented in a useful, management-relevant format. Based on scoping meetings and dialogue with public lands managers from throughout the United States, we provide detailed, species-level, summary tables for project biologists and fire managers trying to anticipate the effects of fire and fire-surrogate treatments on local wildlife species. We performed an extensive survey of the published, peer-reviewed scientific literature on wildlife response to fire and fire-surrogate treatments. In total,e w reviewed more than 150 articles, included 90 articles in our database, resulting in 4,937 records of 313 vertebrate