Sorry for the extra post.. Cheers, Ken Hanly WILDFIRE EFFECTS Wildfires can damage lands and resources. Timber is burned, although some may be salvageable. Existing forage, for livestock and wildlife, is destroyed. The reduced vegetation can increase erosion; in severe situations, such as southern California, the result can be mudslides when the wet season returns. And burned areas are not pretty. The damages of wildfires on lands and resources are often overstated, for two reasons. First, fires are patchy, leaving unburned areas within the fire perimeter. Thus, reports of acres burned, typically calculated from the perimeter, overstate the actual acres burned by 10 to 50 percent, depending on the local vegetative, weather, and other conditions. Damages are also usually overstated, because fires do not destroy every living thing within the burned areas. Mature conifers often survive even when their entire crowns are scorched; a few species, notably lodgepole pine and jack pine, are serotinous -- their cones will only open and spread their seeds when they have been exposed to the heat of a wildfire. Grasses and other plants are often benefitted by wildfire, because fire quickly decomposes organic matter into its mineral components (a process that, in the arid West, may require years or decades without fire), and the flush of nutrients accelerates plant growth for a few growing seasons. Few animals are killed by even the most severe wildfires; rather, many animals seek out burned sites for the newly available minerals and for the flush of plant growth. And erosion is typically far worse along the fire control lines than from the broad burned areas. The recognition of these ecological benefits from fire was a major factor in the end of the 10-acre and 10:00 a.m. policies and their replacement with fuel management and prescribed fire (natural and otherwise). Nonetheless, the net damages from wildfires are generally greater when fires burn more intensely. Thus, lower fuel loadings may reduce the net damages caused by wildfires. Proponents argue that forest health activities to reduce fuel loadings also reduce wildfire damages. Again, this assertion is logical, and is supported by some anecdotal evidence, but there appears to be very little research documenting widespread reduction in wildfire damages from fuel treatment. Such evidence is critical, however, to justify of forest health activities from lower fire damages. Finally, it should be noted that emergency rehabilitation occurs on many of the large, severe wildfires. While emergency activities can prove beneficial, especially for erosion control, they may inhibit the restoration of natural ecological processes. In particular, grasses are often seeded in severely burned areas. However, the quick-growing grasses typically used may not be native to the area, and some grasses suppress tree seedling establishment and growth. Thus, while solving some environmental problems, emergency rehabilitation may cause other problems.
