Cited by 19Fire effects on ecosystemsSoil erosion and sediment transportHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes

Effectiveness of post‐fire salvage logging stream buffer management for hillslope erosion in the U.S. Inland Northwest Mountains

Open access
Robichaud, Peter R., Bone, Edwin D., Lewis, Sarah A., Brooks, Erin S., Brown, Robert E.·2021·Hydrological Processes

Abstract

Active wildfire seasons in the western U.S. warrant the evaluation of post‐fire forest management strategies. Ground‐based salvage logging is often used to recover economic loss of burned timber. In unburned forests, ground‐based logging often follows best management practices by leaving undisturbed areas near streams called stream buffers. However, the effectiveness of these buffers has not been tested in a post‐wildfire setting. This experiment tested buffer width effectiveness with a novel field‐simulated rill experiment using sediment‐laden runoff (25 g/L) released over 40 min at evenly timed flow rates (50, 100 and 150 L/min) to measure surface runoff travel length and sediment concentration under unburned and high and low soil burn severity conditions at 2‐, 10‐ and 22‐month post‐fire. High severity areas 2‐month post‐fire had rill lengths of up to 100 m. Rill length significantly decreased over time as vegetation regrowth provided ground cover. Sediment concentration and sediment dropout rate also varied significantly by soil burn severity. Sediment concentrations were 19 g/L for the highest flow 2‐month post‐fire and reduced to 6.9–14 g/L 10‐month post‐fire due to abundant vegetation recovery. The amount of sediment dropping out of the flow consistently increased over the study period with the low burn severity rate of 1.15 g L −1 m −1 approaching the unburned rate of 1.29 g L −1 m −1 by 2‐year post‐fire. These results suggest that an often‐used standard, 15 m buffer, was sufficient to contain surface runoff and reduce sediment concentration on unburned sites, however buffers on high burn severity sites need to be eight times greater (120 m) immediately after wildfire and four times greater (60 m) 1‐year post‐fire. Low burn severity areas 1‐year post‐fire may need to be only twice the width of an unburned buffer (30 m), and 2‐year post‐fire these could return to unburned widths.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hyp.13943

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Bone, E. D. (2017). Effects of burn severity on stream buffer management for post-fire hillslope erosion in the inland Northwest Mountain ranges, USA. (master's thesis). Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. 75 pp.
  2. Brown, T. C., Brown, D., & Binkley, D. (1993). Laws and programs for con- trolling nonpoint source pollution in forest areas. Water Resources Research, 29(1), 1-13.
  3. 00472425002300050004x · DOI
  4. Foltz, R. B., & Elliot, W. J. (2001). Infiltration characteristics of forest road filter windrows. In J. C. Ascough, II & D. C. Flanagan (Eds.), Soil erosion for the 21 st century: Proceedings of the international symposium. St.
  5. Haupt, H. F., & Kidd, W. J. (1965). Good logging practices reduce sedimen- tation. Journal of Forestry, 63(9), 664-670.
  6. Lentile, L. B., Smith, A. M. S., Hudak, A. T., Morgan, P., Bobbitt, M. J., Lewis, S. A., & Robichaud, P. R. (2009). Remote sensing for prediction of 1-year post-fire ecosystem condition. International Journal of Wild- land Fire, 18, 594-608. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF07091 · DOI
  7. Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., Wolfinger, R. D., & Schabengerger, O. (2006). SAS for Mixed Models (2nd ed.). Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
  8. Pietraszek, J. H. (2006). Controls on post-fire erosion at the hillslope scale, Colorado Front Range. (M.S. thesis). Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University; 124 pp.
  9. Winters, B. (2013). Linear models and linear mixed effects models in R with linguistic applications (arXiv:1308.5499). Retrieved from http://arxiv. org/pdf/1308.5499.pdf · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robichaud, P. R., Bone, E. D., Lewis, S. A., Brooks, E. S., & Brown, R. E.
Affiliations
  • United States Department of Agriculture (US)
  • US Forest Service (US)
  • University of Idaho (US)
Venue
Hydrological Processes
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-11-26
Volume
35
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 0885-6087 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1085
OpenAlex
W3093126910
Cited by
19
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2
FWCI
0.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Hydrological Processes (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture
  • Washington State University
  • U.S. Forest Service
  • Rocky Mountain Research Station
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil erosion and sediment transport
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Hydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Keywords
post-fire salvage logging, hillslope erosion, forest fires, soil burn severity, sediment concentration, sediment yield, surface runoff, vegetation recovery

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review