4.5 Article

Developing an Adaptive Management approach to prescribed burning: a long-term heathland conservation experiment in north-west Italy

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF WILDLAND FIRE
卷 18, 期 6, 页码 727-735

出版社

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/WF07114

关键词

Calluna vulgaris; cultural landscape; fire behavior; fire effects; Vauda experiment

类别

资金

  1. Ente di Gestione dei Parchi e delle Riserve Naturali del Canavese, Regione Piemonte (Land Administrators of the MNR of Vauda)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Calluna vulgaris-dominated heathlands are globally important habitats and extremely scarce outside of northwest Europe. Rotational fire, grazing and cutting by local farmers were dominant features of past heathland management throughout Europe but have been abandoned, altering the historical fire regime and habitat structure. We briefly review research on Calluna heathland conservation management and provide the background and methodology for a long-term research project that will be used to define prescribed fire regimes in combination with grazing and cutting, for management of Calluna heathlands in north-west Italy. We outline the ecological and research issues that drive the fire experiment, making explicit the experimental design and the hypotheses that will be tested. We demonstrate how Adaptive Management can be used to inform decisions about the nature of fire prescriptions where little formal knowledge exists. Experimental plots ranging from 600 to 2500 m(2) are treated according to one of eight alternative treatments (various combinations of fire, grazing and cutting), each replicated four times. To date, all treatments have been applied for 4 years, from 2005 to 2008, and a continuation is planned. Detailed measurement of fire characteristics is made to help interpret ecological responses at a microplot scale. The results of the experiment will be fed back into the experimental design and used to inform heathland management practice in north-west Italy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据