To Save Money And Resources, Replanting Trees After Wildfires May Not Be Necessary
New research is offering a way to potentially save money and resources on forest recovery after wildfire.
After wildfire season ends each year, land managers start planning what comes next for the areas that burned. Often, the strategy used to ensure the forests return is to salvage log and then replant. But a recent study suggests that in some areas, it might be just as effective to leave the forest alone.
“If the burned patches aren’t too big, that is to say the seed sources aren’t too far away, then the forests do a good job of regenerating themselves,” said study contributor David Hibbs of Oregon State University.
The research provides a relatively clear picture of where forest managers could most benefit from spending the time and money needed to replant — at least in corner of the Pacific Northwest.
Hibbs says the results should be interpreted relatively narrowly, based on the forest type, elevation, tree species and the direction of the slope where the trees grow.
Researchers looked at tree growth in the Klamath-Siskiyou forests of southern Oregon and northern California. They examined more than 60 sites that had burned 20 years previously. Some of the sites were replanted after wildfire and others weren’t touched.
“Basically, if you do nothing – no human intervention at all – you get really high conifer regeneration by those Douglas Fir. So the unmanaged and managed sites were indistinguishable for conifer regeneration,” said Portland State University’s Melissa Lucash, a co-author of the paper.
The results were more mixed for ponderosa pine. In certain hotter and drier areas, replanting produced higher numbers of these drought-tolerant trees than natural regrowth.
Researchers say carefully targeting tree replanting projects to where they’re needed most could free up resources for projects to reduce high-severity wildfire in the first place.
The research was published in the journal Forest Ecology and Management.
Copyright 2018 EarthFix
In the decades since government restrictions reduced logging on federal lands, the timber industry has promoted the idea that private lands are less prone to wildfires, saying that forests thick with trees fuel bigger, more destructive blazes. But an analysis by OPB and ProPublica shows last month’s fires burned as intensely on private forests with large-scale logging operations as they did, on average, on federal lands that cut fewer trees. Continue Reading Despite What The Logging Industry Says, Cutting Down Trees Isn’t Stopping Catastrophic Wildfires
New research suggests that a U.S. Forest Service proposal to allow the cutting of larger trees on public lands east of the Cascades in Oregon and Washington will have an outsized impact on forest carbon storage in the Pacific Northwest. Continue Reading Inland Northwest Trees Are Playing An Outsized Role In Curbing Climate Change, Study Says
This latest rollback proposal, issued Tuesday, comes from the Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region. It would end a 25-year-old provision that prevents logging of trees that exceed 21 inches in diameter in six national forests across Eastern Oregon and Washington. Continue Reading Rule Protecting The Northwest’s Old-Growth Trees Is Under The Federal Government’s Ax