4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Paleoecology and its application to fire and vegetation management in Kootenay National Park, British Columbia

Journal

JOURNAL OF PALEOLIMNOLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages 401-414

Publisher

KLUWER ACADEMIC PUBL
DOI: 10.1023/A:1008110804909

Keywords

charcoal analysis; pollen ratios; forest fire; natural variability; Neoglacial

Ask authors/readers for more resources

High-resolution analysis of macroscopic charcoal and pollen ratios were used to reconstruct a 10,000 yr history of fire and vegetation change around Dog Lake, now in the Montane Spruce biogeoclimatic zone of southeastern British Columbia. Lake sediment charcoal records suggest that fire was more frequent in the early Holocene from 10,000 to 8200 calendar yrs BP, when climate was warmer and drier than today and forest fuels were limited. Fire frequency increased and reached its maximum during the early to mid-Holocene from 8200 to 4000 calendar yrs BP, corresponding to the dry and warm Hypsithermal period in the Rocky Mountains. During the Hypsithermal period forests around Dog Lake were dominated by Pseudotsuga/Larix,Pinus and open meadows of Poaceae that were subject to frequent fire. From 4000 calendar yrs BP to present, fires became less frequent with the onset of cooler and wetter Neoglacial climate and an increase in wet-closed Picea and Abies forests in the valley. Changes in fire frequency are supported by dry-open/wet-closed pollen ratio data indicating that forest type and disturbance regimes vary with changing climate. The fire frequency and forest cover reconstructions from Dog Lake are a first attempt at defining a range of natural variability for Montane Spruce forests in southeastern British Columbia. Fire and vegetation management in Kootenay National Park can now use this century to millennial-scale range of variability to define the context of current forest conditions and potential changes under global warming scenarios.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available