18.10.2014 Views

FIRE EFFECTS GUIDE - National Wildfire Coordinating Group

FIRE EFFECTS GUIDE - National Wildfire Coordinating Group

FIRE EFFECTS GUIDE - National Wildfire Coordinating Group

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Bunting et al. (1987) suggest that selection of area to be burned will dictate many<br />

of the economic variables such as fire prescription and characteristics and whether<br />

it achieves its objectives . . . the higher potential sites produce the highest benefit.<br />

He also states that burning during the spring with snow lines and increased fuel<br />

moisture on varying aspects adjacent to the proposed treatment area may aid in<br />

fire control and reduce overall cost. The limited burn size, however, may increase<br />

the amount of time and personnel required for ignition resulting in higher average<br />

costs per acre or not achieving the planned objectives. Bunting says that<br />

economics is also a factor in determining the size of fires. The costliest portion of<br />

conducting prescribed fires is establishing and burning out the fire lines. The<br />

smaller the size, the greater the perimeter per unit area. Without natural fuel<br />

breaks, an extensive system of fire lines may have to be established to restrict the<br />

fires to the desired size. This often makes the prescribed burns economically<br />

unfeasible.<br />

From an economic standpoint, spring burning is cheaper as it can be accomplished<br />

with fewer individuals and without firebreaks in some situations (Blaisdell et al.<br />

1982). West and Hassan (1985) state that the highest potential for prescribed<br />

burns is on sites in good condition. Haslem (1983) provides several guidelines to<br />

maximize returns from burning including realistic prescriptions, treating<br />

manageable units, using livestock use for controlling escapes, use of natural<br />

control barriers, and use of test burns. Smith (1981) states that followup<br />

management is essential in extending the fire's useful lifetime.<br />

Young and Evans (1978) state a general rule that one must be able to step from<br />

one bunch grass plant to another to have a reasonable chance of enhancing the<br />

site by recovery of existing plants. Bunting (1984) also notes the bluebunch<br />

wheatgrass response is from existing plants for the first 3 or 4 years after a fire.<br />

Dramatic increases in numbers of plants of exotic annual species can occur after<br />

fire, particularly if the existing bunchgrass community was in poor condition or<br />

many of the plants were killed by the fire. This potential for site invasion must be<br />

considered along with the above guidelines when deciding if a site can recover<br />

without artificial seeding.<br />

5. Examples of Different Intensities of Grazing Management. Many different<br />

grazing management strategies have been implemented after burns, however, few<br />

have been intensively monitored to determine their impacts on fire effects. Two<br />

prescribed burns in northwest Wyoming, which escaped into adjoining grazing<br />

allotments, were monitored during 1987 to provide data on effects of postfire<br />

grazing management on vegetative response.<br />

a. Blue Creek Coordinated Resource Management Plan (CRMP). In 1984, the<br />

operators agreed to a CRMP with the Wyoming Game and Fish Department and<br />

the Bureau of Land Management. The area is located south of Meeteetse,<br />

Wyoming, in the 15 to 19 inch (38 to 48 centimeters) precipitation zone at the 7,800<br />

foot (2,377 meters) elevation. The vegetation type is composed of limber pine<br />

(Pinus flexilis) and mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata vaseyana) on a<br />

shallow loamy range site. Key graminoid species include Idaho fescue (Festuca

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!