4.5 Article

Evaluation of new methods for drought estimation in the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF WILDLAND FIRE
Volume 32, Issue 6, Pages 836-853

Publisher

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/WF22112

Keywords

boreal forest; Drought Code; fuel moisture; in situ; modelling; remote sensing; soil moisture probe; wildfire

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study conducted field studies in Alberta and Ontario provinces, aiming to determine if electronic soil moisture probes can be used to supplement the Drought Code (DC) in fire danger rating. The results show that the simple DC model can predict the moisture content of deeper organic layers well, even compared with the more sophisticated land surface model.
Background. Canadian fire management agencies track drought conditions using the Drought Code (DC) in the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System. The DC represents deep organic layer moisture. Aims. To determine if electronic soil moisture probes and land surface model estimates of soil moisture content can be used to supplement and/or improve our understanding of drought in fire danger rating. Methods. We carried out field studies in the provinces of Alberta and Ontario. We installed in situ soil moisture probes at two different depths in seven forest plots, from the surface through the organic layers, and in some cases into the mineral soil. Results. Our results indicated that the simple DC model predicted the moisture content of the deeper organic layers (10-18 cm depths) well, even compared with the more sophisticated land surface model. Conclusions. Electronic moisture probes can be used to supplement the DC. Land surface model estimates of moisture content consistently underpredicted organic layer moisture content. Implications. Calibration and validation of the land surface model to organic soils in addition to mineral soils is necessary for future use in fire danger prediction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available