Cited by 82Fire effects on ecosystemsArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesAmazonian Archaeology and Ethnohistory

Conservation implications of limited Native American impacts in pre-contact New England

Oswald, W. Wyatt, Foster, David R., Shuman, Bryan N., Chilton, Elizabeth S., Doucette, Dianna L., Duranleau, Deena L.·2020·Nature Sustainability

Abstract

An increasingly accepted paradigm in conservation attributes valued modern ecological conditions to past human activities. Disturbances, including prescribed fire, are therefore used by land managers to impede forest development in many potentially wooded landscapes under the interpretation that openland habitats were created and sustained by human-set fire for millennia. We test this paradigm using palaeoenvironmental and archaeological data from New England. Despite the region’s dense population, anthropogenic impacts on the landscape before European contact were limited, and fire activity was independent of changes in human populations. Whereas human populations reached maxima during the Late Archaic (5,000–3,000 yr bp ) and Middle–Late Woodland (1,500–500 yr bp ) periods, lake-sediment charcoal records indicate elevated fire activity only during the dry early Holocene (10,000–8,000 yr bp ) and after European colonization. Pollen data indicate closed forests from 8,000 yr bp to the onset of European deforestation, and archaeological evidence of pre-contact horticultural activity is sparse. Climate largely controlled fire severity in New England during the postglacial interval, and widespread openlands developed only after deforestation for European agriculture. Land managers seeking to emulate pre-contact conditions should de-emphasize human disturbance and focus on developing mature forests; those seeking to maintain openlands should apply the agricultural approaches that initiated them four centuries ago. Modern land management often assumes that past human activity shaped iconic landscapes. This study finds that climate, rather than indigenous activity, controlled fire severity in New England, with open landscapes developing after deforestation for European agriculture.

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 · 10.1038/s41893-019-0466-0

Cites

41 of 41 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

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. Dunwiddie, P. W. & Sferra, N. Loss of rare butterfly and plant species in coastal grasslands. Nat. Areas J. 11, 119–120 (1991).
  2. Marris, E. Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-wild World (Bloomsbury, 2011).
  3. Pyne, S. J. Fire in America (Princeton Univ. Press, 1982).
  4. Foster, D. R. A Meeting of Land and Sea: Nature and the Future of Martha’s Vineyard (Yale Univ. Press, 2017).
  5. Duranleau, D. L. Flexible Sedentism: The Subsistence and Settlement of Coastal New England and New York. PhD thesis, Harvard Univ. (2009).
  6. Chilton, E. S. & Hardy, M. D. in The Cambridge World Prehistory (eds Renfrew, C. & Bahn, P.) 1293–1308 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
  7. Doucette, D. L. Unraveling Middle Archaic Expressions: A Multidisciplinary Approach towards Feature and Material Culture Recognition in Southeastern New England. PhD thesis, Harvard Univ. (2003).
  8. Chilton, E. S. in Ancient Complexities: New Perspectives in Pre-Columbian North America (ed. Alt, S.) 96–103 (Univ. Utah Press, 2010).
  9. Foster, D. & Gould, E. Forest Change and Human Populations in New England 1600–2006 (2009); https://go.nature.com/2T3wyw3

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Oswald, W. W., Foster, D. R., Shuman, B. N., Chilton, E. S., Doucette, D. L., & Duranleau, D. L.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Wyoming (US)
  • Binghamton University (US)
Corresponding author
Oswald, W. Wyatt
Venue
Nature Sustainability
Published
2020-01-20
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
241-246
ISSN
2398-9629 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2999561218
Cited by
82
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 7
FWCI
3.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Sustainability (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Amazonian Archaeology and Ethnohistory
Keywords
Native American land use, fire history, prescribed burning, paleoenvironmental reconstruction, pollen record, Late Archaic period, Woodland period, European colonization, horticulture, forest development, conservation management, human impact on landscape

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