The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
The Interaction of Fire, Fuels, and Climate across Rocky Mountain Forests
Abstract
Understanding the relative influence of fuels and climate on wildfires across the Rocky Mountains is necessary to predict how fires may respond to a changing climate and to define effective fuel management approaches to controlling wildfire in this increasingly populated region. The idea that decades of fire suppression have promoted unnatural fuel accumulation and subsequent unprecedentedly large, severe wildfires across western forests has been developed primarily from studies of dry ponderosa pine forests. However, this model is being applied uncritically across Rocky Mountain forests (e.g., in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act). We synthesize current research and summarize lessons learned from recent large wildfires (the Yellowstone, Rodeo-Chediski, and Hayman fires), which represent case studies of the potential effectiveness of fuel reduction across a range of major forest types. A “one size fits all” approach to reducing wildfire hazards in the Rocky Mountain region is unlikely to be effective and may produce collateral damage in some places.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In crown-fire systems, the lessons learned concerning vegetative responses from other forest types may be misleading.
“In these crown-fire systems, the lessons learned concerning vegetative responses from other forest types may be misleading (Schoennagel et al. 2004).”
From The Effects of Forest Fuel-Reduction Treatments in the United States (2012) · cites this paper as Schoennagel et al. 2004
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 776
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Agee, 1998, Northwest Science, 72, 24
- Rollins, 2002, Landscape Ecology, 17, 539, 10.1023/A:1021584519109 · DOI
- Wakimoto, 1989, Western Wildlands, 15, 35
Metadata
- Authors
- SCHOENNAGEL, T., VEBLEN, T. T., & ROMME, W. H.
- Affiliations
- University of Colorado Boulder (US)
- Colorado State University (US)
- ORCID
- VEBLEN, THOMAS T.
- Venue
- BioScience
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 661
- ISSN
- 0006-3568 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2134886615
- Cited by
- 776
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 51 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 51 · 2015: 48 · 2014: 44 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 38
- FWCI
- 34.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- BioScience (publishedVersion)
- Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion)
- BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (0314305)
- U.S. Geological Survey
- U.S. Forest Service
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Forest Management and Policy
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
- Keywords
- forest fires, fuel management, climate change, Rocky Mountain forests, fire suppression, fuel accumulation, Hayman Fire, ponderosa pine forests, fire hazard reduction, forest restoration
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