Andrea E. Thode

Under recurring droughts, the southwestern U.S. loses a significant proportion of precipitation as evapotranspiration (ET), suggesting an opportunity to reduce ET via forest thinning. To better understand the potential impacts of thinning on the forest hydrologic cycle, we used sap flow sensors and Bowen ratio stations to measure ET in thinned and non-thinned ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Douglas ex C. Lawson) stands in northern Arizona during the wet year of 2023, where thinning removed 42% of overstory basal area. Although our study site had experienced prolonged drought in previous years, heavy winter snowfall made 2023 a wet year. We correlated sap flow with environmental variables and used principal component analysis to identify the primary drivers of ponderosa pine water use in thinned and non-thinned stands. Results showed that after accounting for tree size, thinned stands had ~20% (~5 L day⁻¹) higher individual-tree water use at daily and weekly temporal scales than non-thinned stands. At the stand level, thinning decreased overstory ET (OET) but increased understory ET (UET), indicating a reallocation of outgoing water fluxes in the water balance. As a result, total ET (sum of OET and UET) decreased from 584 to 516 mm year⁻¹. In the semi-arid forest, this decrease in total ET of 68 mm year⁻¹ (~12% reduction) indicates an ecohydrologically meaningful outcome of forest thinning. In both stands, tree water use was strongly regulated by environmental variables, primarily atmospheric variables such as air temperature and vapor pressure deficit. Overall, our results suggest that thinning can still promote an improved stand-level forest water balance during a wet year and thus may enhance forest resilience under projected increases in heat and aridity in the southwestern U.S.

After more than a century of low fire activity in the western United States, wildfires are now becoming more common. Reburns, which are areas burned in two or more fires, are also increasing. How fires interact over time is of interest ecologically as well as for management. Wildfires may act as fuel treatments, reducing subsequent fire severity, or they may increase subsequent fire severity by leaving high fuel loads behind. Our goal was to assess whether previous wildfire severity influenced subsequent fire severity across vegetation types and over time in the Southwest U.S. using remotely sensed fire severity data in 2275 fires that burned between 1984 and 2019. Points that reburned tended to be those that burned with lower severity initially. Shrublands burned predominantly at moderate to high severity in initial fires and in reburns. Pinyon-juniper-oak systems burned with mixed severity, and fire severity was consistent from fire to fire. In ponderosa pine and aspen-mixed conifer, fire severity tended to decrease with each fire. Initial and subsequent fire severity was lower in points that reburned after a short interval. These remotely sensed observations of reburn severity need verification through field work to understand specific effects caused by reburns in different ecosystems. However, in ponderosa pine and aspen-mixed conifer forests, it may be beneficial to consider wildfires as fuel treatments and work to maintain the fuel reduction effects they have on forested ecosystems.

Managed wildfires, i.e., naturally ignited wildfires that are managed for resource benefits, have the potential to reduce fuel loads, minimize the effects of future wildfires, and restore critical natural processes across many forest landscapes. In the United States, the 2009 federal wildland fire policy guidance was designed to provide greater flexibility in the use of managed wildfires, but the effects of this policy on wildfires in the western US are not yet fully understood. Our goal was to compare managed and full suppression wildfires and to also analyze the differences between managed wildfires across space (Arizona/New Mexico and California) and time (before and after 2009) using four metrics for each wildfire: (1) distance to wilderness, (2) distance to the wildland–urban interface (WUI), (3) the percentage of area burned with high severity, and (4) the number of land management agencies. Across the study area, we found that managed wildfires were significantly closer to wilderness areas, were farther from the WUI, had a lower percentage of area that was burned at high severity, and had fewer agencies involved in managing the fire compared to full suppression wildfires. In California, managed wildfires occurred closer to wilderness and had a larger percentage of high-severity burn area compared to those in the southwest US (Arizona and New Mexico). Within each region, however, there were no significant geographic differences between managed wildfires before and after the implementation of the 2009 policy guidance. Despite the greater flexibility of the 2009 policy guidance, the basic geographic properties of managed wildfires in these two regions have not changed. As the climate warms and droughts intensify, the use of managed wildfires will need to expand during favorable weather conditions in order to address the threat of large and uncharacteristic wildfires to people and ecosystems.

As the effects of climate change accumulate and intensify, resource managers juggle existing goals and new mandates to operationalize adaptation. Fire managers contend with the direct effects of climate change on resources in addition to climate-induced disruptions to fire regimes and subsequent ecosystem effects. In systems stressed by warming and drying, increased fire activity amplifies the pace of change and scale of severe disturbance events, heightening the urgency for management action. Fire managers are asked to integrate information on climate impacts with their professional expertise to determine how to achieve management objectives in a changing climate with altered fire regimes. This is a difficult task, and managers need support as they incorporate climate adaptation into planning and operations. We present a list of adaptation strategies and approaches specific to fire and climate based on co-produced knowledge from a science–management partnership and pilot-tested in a two-day workshop with natural resource managers and regional stakeholders. This “menu” is a flexible and useful tool for fire managers who need to connect the dots between fire ecology, climate science, adaptation intent, and management implementation. It was created and tested as part of an adaptation framework used widely across the United States and should be applicable and useful in many fire-prone forest ecosystems.

Knowledge coproduction is increasingly advocated as a way to address complex socioecological issues, such as catastrophic wildfires. In turn, attention has been paid to boundary organizations to foster knowledge coproduction. Despite this growing interest, little research has examined the interplay between knowledge coproduction, boundary organizations, and scientists. We interviewed scientists involved with the Southwest Fire Science Consortium (SWFSC) to examine (1) relationships between their engagement with SWFSC and knowledge coproduction in their own work and (2) SWFSC’s role in fostering participation in knowledge coproduction. Overall, scientists more engaged with SWFSC reported involvement in a wider variety of knowledge coproduction activities. However, some knowledge coproduction activities, especially those requiring greater time investment or facing institutional barriers (e.g., research collaboration) were less common among all participants. Most scientists involved in knowledge coproduction believed that SWFSC increased their participation in these activities outside the boundary organization context, in part because SWFSC provided opportunities to interact with and understand the needs of managers/practitioners, as well as build research collaborations. Findings indicate that boundary organizations, such as SWFSC, can foster knowledge coproduction, but that they may need to further explore ways to address challenges for knowledge coproduction activities that involve greater time commitment or institutional challenges.

Forests in the Southwestern United States are becoming increasingly susceptible to large wildfires. As a result, forest managers are conducting forest fuel reduction treatments for which spatial fuels and structure information are necessary. However, this information currently has coarse spatial resolution and variable accuracy. This study tested the feasibility of using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) imagery to estimate forest canopy fuels and structure in a southwestern ponderosa pine stand. UAV-based multispectral images and Structure-from-Motion point clouds were used to estimate canopy cover, canopy height, tree density, canopy base height, and canopy bulk density. Estimates were validated with field data from 57 plots and aerial photography from the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agriculture Imaging Program. Results indicate that UAV imagery can be used to accurately estimate forest canopy cover (correlation coefficient (R²) = 0.82, root mean square error (RMSE) = 8.9%). Tree density estimates correctly detected 74% of field-mapped trees with a 16% commission error rate. Individual tree height estimates were strongly correlated with field measurements (R² = 0.71, RMSE = 1.83 m), whereas canopy base height estimates had a weaker correlation (R² = 0.34, RMSE = 2.52 m). Estimates of canopy bulk density were not correlated to field measurements. UAV-derived inputs resulted in drastically different estimates of potential crown fire behavior when compared with coarse resolution LANDFIRE data. Methods from this study provide additional data to supplement, or potentially substitute, traditional estimates of canopy fuel.

Climate changes and associated shifts in ecosystems and fire regimes present enormous challenges for the management of landscapes in the Southwestern US. A central question is whether management strategies can maintain or promote desired ecological conditions under projected future climates. We modeled wildfire and forest responses to climate changes and management activities using two ecosystem process models: FireBGCv2, simulated for the Jemez Mountains, New Mexico, and LANDIS-II, simulated for the Kaibab Plateau, Arizona. We modeled contemporary and two future climates—“Warm-Dry” (CCSM4 RCP 4.5) and “Hot-Arid” (HadGEM2ES RCP 8.5)—and four levels of management including fire suppression alone, a current treatment strategy, and two intensified treatment strategies. We found that Hot-Arid future climate resulted in a fundamental, persistent reorganization of ecosystems in both study areas, including biomass reduction, compositional shifts, and altered forest structure. Climate changes increased the potential for high-severity fire in the Jemez study area, but did not impact fire regime characteristics in the Kaibab. Intensified management treatments somewhat reduced wildfire frequency and severity; however, management strategies did not prevent the reorganization of forest ecosystems in either landscape. Our results suggest that novel approaches may be required to manage future forests for desired conditions.

This paper quantifies current fire severity distributions for 19 different fire-regime types in Yosemite National Park, California, USA. Landsat Thematic Mapper remote sensing data are used to map burn severity for 99 fires (cumulatively over 97 000 ha) that burned in Yosemite over a 20-year period. These maps are used to quantify the frequency distributions of fire severity by fire-regime type. A classification is created for the resultant distributions and they are discussed within the context of four vegetation zones: the foothill shrub and woodland zone; the lower montane forest zone; the upper montane forest zone and the subalpine forest zone. The severity distributions can form a building block from which to discuss current fire regimes across the Sierra Nevada in California. This work establishes a framework for comparing the effects of current fires on our landscapes with our notions of how fires historically burned, and how current fire severity distributions differ from our desired future conditions. As this process is refined, a new set of information will be available to researchers and land managers to help understand how fire regimes have changed from the past and how we might attempt to manage them in the future.