4.6 Article

Cumulative Severity of Thinned and Unthinned Forests in a Large California Wildfire

Journal

LAND
Volume 11, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/land11030373

Keywords

fire severity; wildfire; mixed conifer; forests; commercial thinning

Funding

  1. Environment Now foundation [2021]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Studies have shown that commercial thinning, a fire management approach, is associated with higher overall tree mortality levels compared to unthinned forests. However, the tree mortality caused by thinning itself is often overlooked, leaving an important source of tree loss unreported.
Studies pertaining to fire severity in commercially thinned versus unthinned forests are based on a comparison of tree mortality between the two categories. Commercial thinning is widely conducted on public and private forestlands as a fire management approach designed to reduce fire severity and associated tree mortality. However, tree mortality from thinning itself, prior to the occurrence of the wildfire, is generally not taken into account, which leaves a potentially important source of tree loss, with its associated forest carbon loss and carbon emissions, unreported. This study investigated the cumulative severity of commercially thinned and unthinned forests in a large 2021 wildfire, the Antelope fire, occurring within mixed-conifer forests on public lands in northern California, USA. Using published data regarding the percent basal area mortality for each commercial thinning unit that burned in the Antelope fire, combined with percent basal area mortality due to the fire itself from post-fire satellite imagery, it was found that commercial thinning was associated with significantly higher overall tree mortality levels (cumulative severity). More research is needed, in other large forest fires, to determine whether the finding, that commercial thinning killed more trees than it prevented from being killed, is common elsewhere.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available