Benefits/Tradeoffs of Fuel Control Treatments

1. Benefits/tradeoffs of fuel control treatments
What we have learned from SageSTEP so far
FUNDED BY:
GNLCC
Bruce Roundy and Jim McIver

2. COLLABORATORS

3. Great Basin Biomes
Forest
SageSTEP: Two Experiments
Woodland
Sage-Cheat
Salt Desert
Shrub
4’’ 12’’ 24’’
Annual Precipitation

4. Wildfire is managing the
landscape
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
0
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Acres burned
Number of fires
National Interagency Fire Center data
Fires
Acres

5. Extensive and intensive research
Shred study

6. Treatments: Sagebrush Steppe
Sage-Cheat Experiment
Prescribed fire
Mowing
Herbicide –
Tebuthiuron (Spike
20P) applied aerially
Control
Plateau pre-emergence
herbicide (applied by
hand-spraying) crossed
with all four treatments for
cheatgrass control.

7. Treatments
Woodland Experiment
Prescribed fire Chainsaw Cutting
Bull Hog (in
Utah only)
Control

8. SageSTEP: Multivariate
Social Acceptance
Prescribed Fire
Economics
Soil Carbon
Runoff & Erosion
Sage-Obligate
Birds
Insect Biodiversity
Vegetation
Fuels, Fire Behavior

9. Initial 3-year results
Special open source issue- September 2014
• 13 articles
• Introduction and synopsis
• 4 vegetation response
• 3 soils, hydrology
• 1 butterflies
• 1 birds
• 1 remote sensing, image
analysis
• 1 social acceptance and
public trust

10. Sage-cheat fuels
• Fire and mowing reduced woody fuels
• Herb. fuels decreased then rebounded
Pyke et al. 2014 REM

11. Woodland fuels
Prescribed fire
Wildfire
Mechanical
Wildfire
Wildfire
Cut and drop
Shred
Courtesy Brad Jessop

12. Treatment fuel effects
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
1 hr 10 hr 100 hr 1000 hr
Woody tree fuels (kg/ha)
30% Pretreatment Tree Cover
Untreated or Cut
Burn
Shred
Young et al 2014 IJWLF
Fuel size
classes
Diameter (mm)
1 hr ≤ 6
10 hr 6-25
100 hr 26-76
1000 hr >76

13. Avoiding wildfire damage after
mechanical treatments may require
prescribed fire
Stansbury cover loss (%) 1 year after Big Pole fire
B
A
B
A
B
A
B
C
B
C
C
A
C
C
C
C
A
AB
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
BC
AB
A
AB
B
AB
B
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
Cover loss (%)
Control
Burn
Cut
Shred
Roundy unpublished

14. Sage-cheat vegetation response
• Fire reduced tall
grass biomass first
year, then recovered
• Imazapic decreased
cheatgrass and
perennial grass
cover for 3 years
• Sandy soil, lower
whc associated with
cheatgrass
• Concern for grass
under shrubs and
fire
Pyke et al. 2014 REM Rau et al. 2014 REM Reisner et al 2013 JAE

15. Resilience theory and practice-expanded
woodlands
From Briske et al. 2008.
http://jornada.nmsu.edu/sites/default/files/briskeSRM08.pdf

16. Pre-treatment vegetation
250
200
150
100
50
0
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Herbaceous biomass (kg/ha)
Relative cover (%)
0 20 40 60 80
Tree cover (%)
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Shrub biomass (kg/ha)
0 20 40 60 80
Tree cover (%)
0
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
Tree dominance index
Cheatgrass
Forb
Short
Tall
Shrub
Tree

17. Shrub cover
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
3 Years since treated
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Shrub cover (%)
Tree dominance index
Control
Burn
Cut
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
6 Years since treated
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Shrub cover (%)
Tree dominance index
Control
Burn
Cut
Roundy et al
2014 REM (3rd
year results)

18. Residual trees and sagebrush seedlings
Sagebrush
seedlings
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Sagebrush seedlings/m2
0 1 2 3
Years since treatment
Control
Burn
Cut
Miller et al. 2014 REM
(3rd year results)
Sagebrush seedlings/m2
Bybee et al submitted
B
A
A
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Untreated Shred Shred-seed

19. Perennial herbaceous cover
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
3 Years since treated
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Perennial herbaceous cover (%)
Tree dominance index
Control
Burn
Cut
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
6 Years since treated
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Perennial herbaceous cover (%)
Tree dominance index
Control
Burn
Cut
Roundy et al 2014 REM
(3rd year results)

20. Cheatgrass cover
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
3 Years since treated
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Cheatgrass cover (%)
Tree dominance index
Control
Burn
Cut
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
6 Years since treated
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Cheatgrass cover (%)
Tree dominance index
Control
Burn
Cut
Roundy et al 2014 REM
(3rd year results)

21. Shredding increases cheatgrass
cover; seeding suppresses it
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Expansion woodlands
Untreated
Shredded
Shredded-seeded
0 20 40 60 80 100
Cheatgrass cover (%)
Tree cover (%)
Bybee et al submitted

22. Tree reduction increases soil
water, N and P resources
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
Spring wet days
Phase III
0 2 4 6 8
Years since treatment
Control
Burn
Cut
Shred
1300
1100
900
700
500
300
Spring wet degree days
Phase III
0 2 4 6 8
Years since treatment
Control
Burn
Cut
Shred
Roundy et al. 2014 REM 4th year results

23. Shredding increased:
• Time of soil water
availability and
temperatures
• Inorganic N
500
400
300
200
100
• Seedling biomass
0
Inorganic N (mg m-2 4 mo-
1)
* Untreated Masticated
*
*
*
Roundy et al. 2014
REM
Spring-Summer Summer-Fall Winter All Seasons
*
*
*
*
Young et al. 2013
FEM
Young et al. 2014
AESS
Young et al. 2013
REM

24. Treatment Effects on Available Nitrogen
Treeless Sagebrush Steppe
Rau et al. 2011. Transition from sagebrush steppe to annual influence on
belowground carbon and nitrogen. Rangeland Ecology and Management 64:139-147

25. Percent of Potential Tree Cover
Percent of Potential Tree Cover
Carbon Management:
Sequestration?
Tradeoff w/Vegetation?
Rau, B.M. et al. 2012. Journal of Arid Environments 76:97-104.

26. Hydrology
Pierson, F.B. et al. 2010. Rangeland Ecology and Management 63:614-629.
Pierson, F.B., et al. 2013. Rangeland Ecology and Management 66:274-289.
Williams, C.J., et al. 2013. Ecohydrology, doi: 10.1002/eco.1364

27. Hydrology
• Erosion was site-specific
• Shredded mulch
reduced erosion
• Interspace grass
recovery is key
Pierson et al. 2014 REM

28. Object-based image analysis
accurately estimates:
• Canopy fuels using
NAIP imagery
Hulet et al. 2014 REM
• Treated fuels using
high resolution 0.06-
m pixel color IR
Hulet et al 2014 EM

29. Knick et al 2014
REM
Mechanical tree reduction supported
Bird Community
Onaqui
sagebrush birds
Woodland Ecotone Sagebrush

30. Butterfly response
• Diversity
increased with
treatment
• Melissa blue
increase
associated with
increased nectar
for larvae
• Juniper hairstreak
declined
McIver and Macke 2014
REM

31. Public Acceptance and Trust
Shindler et al. 2011. Rangeland Ecology and Management 64:335–343.
Gordon et al. 2014. Public priorities for rangeland management: A
longitudinal panel study of residents in the Great Basin. Rangeland Ecology
and Management, in review.

32. Pre-Cut -- 2006 Post-Cut -- 2007
Onaqui CUT
Post-Cut -- 2009

33. Longer-term Effects? – Stay Tuned
Immediately Post-fire
Re-measurement
scheduled for 2015.
6 Yr Post-fire

34. Tradeoffs
• Imazapic reduces cheatgrass and p. grass
• Fire reduces fuels but increases cheatgrass and
erosion
• Mechanical treatments maintain shrubs,
increase perennial herbaceous, decrease
erosion (shredding), but keep fuels, future tree
reduction needed
• Near complete tree reduction supports
sagebrush birds near open sagebrush
• Perennial grasses are key to resilience
• What will site analyses tell us?

35. SageSTEP Outreach Coordinator:
Lael Gilbert, Utah State University
sagestep.org