4.5 Article

The predominance of post-wildfire erosion in the long-term denudation of the Valles Caldera, New Mexico

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-EARTH SURFACE
Volume 121, Issue 5, Pages 843-864

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2015JF003663

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NSF [EAR-0724958, EAR-1331408]
  2. Valles Caldera National Preserve
  3. GSA Graduate Student Research Grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Wildfires can dramatically increase erosion rates over time scales on the order of several years, yet few data firmly constrain the relative importance of post-wildfire erosion in the long-term denudation of landscapes. We tested the hypothesis that wildfire-affected erosion is responsible for a large majority of long-term denudation in the uplands of the Valles Caldera, New Mexico, by quantifying erosion rates in wildfire-affected and non-wildfire-affected watersheds over short (similar to 10(0)-10(1) years) time scales using suspended sediment loads, multitemporal terrestrial laser scanning, and airborne laser scanning and over long (similar to 10(3)-10(6) years) time scales using Be-10 inventories and incision into a dated paleosurface. We found that following the Las Conchas fire in 2011, mean watershed-averaged erosion rates were more than 1000 mu m yr(-1), i.e., similar to 10(3)-10(5) times higher than nearby unburned watersheds of similar area, relief, and lithology. Long-term denudation rates are on the order of 10-100 mu m yr(-1). Combining data for wildfire-affected and non-wildfire-affected erosion rates into a long-term denudation rate budget, we found that wildfire-affected erosion is responsible for at least 90% of denudation over geologic time scales in our study area despite the fact that such conditions occur only at a small fraction of the time. Monte Carlo analyses demonstrate that this conclusion is robust with respect to uncertainties in the rates and time scales used in the calculations.

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