Fuels & Fuel Treatments
View webinar recording.
Bear grass (Xerophyllum tenax) and California Hazelnut (Corylus cornuta var. californica) are two Nontimber Forest Products (NTFPs) harvested by American Indians for basket weaving in the Pacific Northwest. Good quality leaves and stems for basket weaving are reliant on the periodic burning of these plant species. In this webinar we will discuss how fire and other ecological variables affect the growth and quality of these species, the collaborative management of these plants by American Indians and public agencies, and what implications our findings have for the future management of these resources.
View report.
Spatial wildfire suppression costs regressions have been re-estimated at a more disaggregated level for the nine Geographic Area Coordination Center (GACC’s) regions using five years of data for fires involving National Forests. Results of these revised regression determined that only in the California GACCs did mechanical fuel treatment reduce wildfire suppression costs. However, the results of our second major hypothesis tests that fuel treatments, by making wildfires less damaging and easier to control, may reduce property damages (i.e., structures—barns, out buildings, etc. and residences lost) seems to be confirmed for acres treated with prescribed burning. In four out of the seven GACC regions prescribed burning lowered the number of structures damaged by wildfire. The results for mechanical fuel treatment were more mixed, with a significant negative effect in reducing property damages in two of the three regions with a significant coefficient on mechanical fuel treatment. These results are consistent with past research that suggests that for fuel treatments to reduce wildfire suppression costs it may be necessary to substantially increase the amount of area treated.
View fact sheet.
A review of fuel treatment findings from JFSP studies, suggests:
- Appropriately designed fuel treatments substantially reduce fire intensity and detrimental ecological effects. In forest ecosystems that are adapted to frequent, low intensity fires, the combination of tree thinning followed by the regular use of prescribed fire are most effective.
- Fuel treatments can improve wildlife habitat, increase biodiversity, and increase forage production when they are designed with these considerations in mind.
- Not all wildfires have negative impacts. A wildfire that burns under specific conditions can be an effective surrogate for a fuel treatment.
View article.
This study aimed to quantify a direct treatment to reduce or slow down woodland expansion in an experimental rangeland in central Oklahoma, United States under three treatments: 1) herbicide, 2) fire with herbicide, and 3) control (no fire, no herbicide) within areas classified as “open grassland” in 1979. Encroachment was greatest in the control treatments, followed by herbicide-only treatment application and lowest in the fire and herbicide treatment with minor differences in mean plant height (4.11 m ± 0.28). Encroached areas were mostly dominated by tall individuals (45 ± 3.5%), followed by the intermediate-height class (31.53 ± 1.10%) and the least recorded in the smallest-height class (23.46 ± 2.29%), suggesting expansion occurred during the initial phases of treatment application. The costly practice of herbicide application did not provide a feasible solution to control further woodland expansion. However, when using herbicide with fire, woodland expansion was reduced, highlighting the effectiveness of early intervention by fire in reducing encroachment. This further supports landscape-scale studies highlighting the effect of fire to reduce woodland expansion.
View report.
We examined the effect of livestock grazing and previous wildfire events on fuel load in southeastern Idaho as part of a wildfire risk-livestock interaction study. Fuel load was estimated using ordinal fuel load classes at 128 sample sites stratified by current livestock grazing and documented wildfire occurrence (1939-2000). Fifty-nine percent of previous wildfire sites had a documented fire within the past 2 years. Livestock grazing was the most effective means to reduce fuel load compared to recent wildfire and livestock grazing with previous wildfire. Livestock grazing provides a viable management tool for fuel load reduction prescriptions that avoids the negative effect of extreme fire intensity where fuel load is high.
View article.
Fire risk in western North America has increased with increasing cover of cheatgrass, an invasive alien annual grass. The relationship between cheatgrass cover and fire risk was determined in a historically burned shrub-steppe community where cheatgrass cover ranged from 5 to 75%. Fire risk ranged from about 46% with an average of 12% cheatgrass cover to 100% when cheatgrass cover was greater than 45% based on prediction confidence limits. Reflectance of the green and red bands of aerial photographs, were related to senescent cheatgrass cover to create fine resolution cheatgrass cover and fire risk maps. This assessment technique will allow land managers to prioritize lands for restoration to reduce fire risk in the shrub-steppe.
View report.
Much of the Murphy Wildland Fire Complex burned under extreme fuel and weather conditions that likely overshadowed livestock grazing as a factor influencing fire extent and fuel consumption in many areas where these fires burned. Differences and abrupt contrast lines in the level of fuels consumed were affected mostly by the plant communities that existed on a site before fire. A few abrupt contrasts in burn severity coincided with apparent differences in grazing patterns of livestock, observed as fence-line contrasts. Fire modeling revealed that grazing in grassland vegetation can reduce surface rate of spread and fire-line intensity to a greater extent than in shrubland types. Under extreme fire conditions (low fuel moisture, high temperatures, and gusty winds), grazing applied at moderate utilization levels has limited or negligible effects on fire behavior. However, when weather and fuel-moisture conditions are less extreme, grazing may reduce the rate of spread and intensity of fires allowing for patchy burns with low levels of fuel consumption.
View report.
Targeted livestock grazing must be carefully implemented and monitored to meet fuels management objectives on an annual and long-term basis. Grazing to reduce fuels on a landscape must be both strategic and surgical. Surgical means that targeted livestock grazing will be done to the level and limited to the minimum area needed to meet fuel and landscape or project management objectives within BLM’s regulatory framework. Therefore, sound project planning is essential.
View article.
Several wildfire prevention programs in southern Europe are currently using livestock grazing for the maintenance of fuelbreaks. This silvopastoral management is valued for being sustainable and effective in reducing fuel loads, but few studies have analyzed other impacts linked to fuelbreak grazing. This paper reports on an experiment performed within the wildfire prevention program in Andalusia (southern Spain) with the aim of clarifying and quantifying the effect of fuelbreak grazing on herbage biomass, ground cover, herbage species composition, and growth of holm oak saplings.
View article.
The experience Squaw Valley Ranch has had with fire, livestock grazing, and sage grouse centers on management strategy and flexibility. Squaw Valley Ranch and the BLM Elko District have a monitoring program that allows for year-to-year adaptations of the grazing plan, as well as long-term
planning for goals and assessment of goal achievement.